that Judgment being according unto Works answered and the Impertinency of it declared Pag. 211. CHAP. VII Imputation and the nature of it The first express Record of Justification determineth it to be by Imputation Gen. 15.6 Reasons of it The Doctrine of Imputation cleared by Paul the occasion of it Maligned and opposed by many Weight of the Doctrine concerning Imputation of Righteousness on all hands acknowledged Judgment of the Reformed Churches herein particularly of the Church of England By whom opposed and on what Grounds Signification of the Word Difference between reputare and imputare Imputation of two kinds 1. Of what was ours antecedently unto that Imputation whether good or evil Instances in both kinds Nature of this Imputation The thing imputed by it imputed for what it is and nothing else 2. Of what is not ours antecedently unto that Imputation but is made so by it General nature of this Imputation Not judging of others to have done what they have not done Several distinct Grounds and Reasons of this Imputation 1. Ex Justitia 1. Propter Relationem foederalem 2. Propter Relationem Naturalem 2. Ex voluntaria sponsione Instances Philem. 17. Gen. 43.9 Voluntary sponsion the Ground of the Imputation of Sin to Christ. 3. Ex injuria 1 King 1.21 4. Ex mera Gratia Rom. 4. Difference between the Imputation of any Works of ours and of the Righteousness of God Imputation of Inherent Righteousness is Ex Justitia Inconsistency of it with that which is Ex mera Gratia Rom. 11.6 Agreement of both kinds of Imputation The true nature of the Imputation of Righteousness unto Justification explained Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. The thing it self imputed not the effect of it proved against the Socinians Pag. 226. CHAP. VIII Imputation of Sin unto Christ. Testimonies of the Antients unto that purpose Christ and the Church one Mystical Person Mistakes about that State and Relation Grounds and Reasons of the Vnion that is the foundation of this Imputation Christ the Surety of the New Covenant in what sense unto what ends Heb. 7.22 opened Mistakes about the Causes and Ends of the Death of Christ. The New Covenant in what sense alone procured and purchased thereby Inquiry whether the Guilt of our sins was imputed unto Christ. The meaning of the words Guilt and Guilty The Distinction of Reatus culpae and Reatus paenae examined Act of God in the Imputation of the Guilt of our Sins unto Christ. Objections against it answered The Truth confirmed Pag. 246. CHAP. IX Principal Controversies about Justification 1. Concerning the nature of Justification stated 2. Of the Formal Cause of it 3. Of the Way whereby we are made partakers of the Benefits of the Mediation of Christ. What intended by the Formal Cause of Justification declared The Righteousness on the account whereof Believers are justified before God alone inquired after under those Terms This the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto them Occasions of Exceptions and Objections against this Doctrine General Objections examined Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ consistent with the Free Pardon of Sin with the necessity of Evangelical Repentance Method of Gods Grace in our Justification Necessity of Faith unto Justification on supposition of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. Grounds of that Necessity Other Objections arising mostly from mistakes of the Truth asserted discussed and answered Pag. 289. CHAP. X. Arguments for Justification by the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. Our own Personal Righteousness not that on the account whereof we are justified in the sight of God Disclaimed in the Scripture as to any such end The truth and reality of it granted Manifold Imperfections accompanying it rendering it unmeet to be a Righteousness unto the Justification of Life Pag. 315. CHAP. XI Nature of the Obedience or Righteousness required unto Justification Original and Causes of the Law of Creation The Substance and End of that Law The Immutability or unchangeableness of it considered absolutely and as it was the Instrument of the Covenant between God and Man Arguments to prove it unchangeable and its Obligation unto the Righteousness first required perpetually in force Therefore not abrogated not dispensed withal not derogated from but accomplished This alone by Christ and the Imputation of his Righteousness unto us Pag. 340. CHAP. XII Imputation of the Obedience of Christ no less necessary then that of his suffering on the same Ground Objections against it 1. That it is impossible Management hereof by Socinus Ground of this Objection That the Lord Christ was for himself obliged unto all the Obedience he yielded unto God and performed it for himself answered The Obedience inquired after the Obedience of the Person of Christ the Son of God In his whole Person Christ was not under the Law He designed the Obedience he performed for us not for himself This Actual Obedience not necessary as a qualification of his Person unto the discharge of his Office The Foundation of this Obedience in his being made Man and of the Posterity of Abraham not for himself but for us Right of the Humane Nature unto Glory by virtue of Vnion Obedience necessary unto the Humane Nature as Christ in it was made under the Law This Obediencs properly for us Instances of that nature among Men. Christ obeyed as a publick Person and so not for himself Humane Nature of Christ subject unto the Law as an Eternal Rule of dependance on God and subjection to him not as prescribed unto us whilest we are in this World in order unto our future Blessedness or Reward Second Objection that it is useless answered He that is pardoned all his sins is not thereon esteemed to have done all that is required of him Not to be unrighteous Negatively not the same with being righteous Positively The Law obligeth both unto punishment and obedience how and in what sense Pardon of Sin gives no title to Eternal Life The Righteousness of Christ who is one imputed unto many Arguments proving the Imputation of the Obedience of Christ unto the Justification of Life Pag. 361. CHAP. XIII The Difference between the two Covenants stated Arguments from thence Pag. 396. CHAP. XIV All Works whatever expresly excluded from any interst in our Justification before God What intended by the Works of the Law Not those of the Ceremonial Law only Not perfect Works only as required by the Law of our Creation Not the outward Works of the Law performed without a principle of Faith Not Works of the Jewish Law Not Works with a conceit of Merit Not Works only wrought before believing in the strength of our own wills Works excluded absolutely from our Justification without respect unto a Distinction of a First and Second Justification The true sense of the Law in the Apostolical Assertion that none are justified by the Works thereof What the Jews understood by the Law Distribution of the Law under the Old Testament The whole Law a perfect
shadow of a dream a fancy a mummery an imagination say some among us An opinion foeda execranda pernitiosa detestanda saith Socinus And opposition ariseth unto it every day from great variety of principles For those by whom it is opposed and rejected can by no means agree what to set up in the place of it However the weight and importance of this Doctrine is on all hands acknowledged whether it be true or false It is not a dispute about Notions Terms and Speculations wherein Christian Practice is little or not at all concerned of which nature many are needlesly contended about but such as hath an immediate influence into our whole present Duty with our eternal Welfare or Ruine Those by whom this Imputation of Righteousness is rejected do affirm that the Faith and Doctrine of it do overthrow the necessity of Gospel Obedience of personal Righteousness and good Works bringing in Antinomianism and Libertinism in life Hereon it must of necessity be destructive of Salvation in those who believe it and conform their Practice thereunto And those on the other hand by whom it is believed seeing they judge it impossible that any man should be justified before God any other way but by the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ do accordingly judge that without it none can be saved Hence a Learned man of late concludes his Discourse concerning it Hactenus de Imputatione Justitiae Christi sine qua nemo unquam aut salvatus est aut salvari queat Justificat Paulin. cap. 8. Thus far of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ without which no man was ever saved nor can any so be They do not think nor judge that all those are excluded from salvation who cannot apprehend or to deny the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ as by them declared But they judge that they are so unto whom that Righteousness is not really imputed nor can they do otherwise whil'st they make it the foundation of all their own Acceptation with God and eternal salvation These things greatly differ To believe the Doctrine of it or not to believe it as thus or thus explained is one thing and to enjoy the thing or not enjoy it is another I no way doubt but that many men do receive more Grace from God than they understand or will own and have a greater efficacy of it in them than they will believe Men may be really saved by that Grace which Doctrinally they do deny and they may be justified by the Imputation of that Righteousness which in opinion they deny to be imputed For the Faith of it is included in that general Assent which they give unto the truth of the Gospel and such an Adherence unto Christ may ensue thereon as that their mistake of the way whereby they are saved by him shall not defraud them of a real Interest therein And for my part I must say that notwithstanding all the disputes that I see and read about Justification some whereof are full of offence and scandal I do not believe but that the Authors of them if they be not Socinians throughout denying the whole merit and satisfaction of Christ do really trust unto the mediation of Christ for the pardon of their Sins and Acceptance with God and not unto their own Works or Obedience Nor will I believe the contrary until they expresly declare it Of the Objection on the other hand concerning the danger of the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ in reference unto the necessity of Holiness and works of Righteousness we must treat afterwards The Judgment of the Reformed Churches herein is known unto all and must be confessed unless we intend by vain cavils to encrease and perpetuate contentions Especially the Church of England is in her Doctrine express as unto the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ both active and passive as it is usually distinguished This hath been of late so fully manifested out of her Authentick Writings that is the Articles of Religion and Books of Homilies and other Writings publickly authorized that it is altogether needless to give any farther Demonstration of it Those who pretend themselves to be otherwise minded are such as I will not contend withall For to what purpose is it to dispute with men who will deny the Sun to shine when they cannot bear the heat of its beams Wherefore in what I have to offer on this subject I shall not in the least depart from the ancient Doctrine of the Church of England yea I have no design but to declare and vindicate it as God shall enable There are indeed sundry differences among Persons Learned Sober and Orthodox if that term displease not in the way and manner of the Explication of the Doctrine of Justification by the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ who yet all of them agree in the substance of it in all those things wherein the Grace of God the Honour of Christ and the Peace of the Souls of men are principally concerned As far as it is possible for me I shall avoid the concerning of my self at present in these Differences For unto what purpose is it to contend about them whilst the substance of the Doctrine it self is openly opposed and rejected why should we debate about the order and beautifying of the Rooms in an House whilst Fire is set unto the whole when that is well quenched we may return to the consideration of the best means for the disposal and use of the several parts of it There are two grand Parties by whom the Doctrine of Justification by the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ is opposed namely the Papists and the Socinians But they proceed on different principles and unto different Ends. The design of the one is to exalt their own Merits of the other to destroy the merit of Christ. But besides these who trade in company we have many Interlopers who coming in on their hand do make bold to borrow from both as they see occasion We shall have to do with them all in our progress not with the Persons of any nor the way and manner of their expressing themselves but the Opinions of all of them so far as they are opposite unto the Truth For it is that which wise men despise and good men bewail to see persons pretending unto Religion and Piety to cavil at Expressions to contend about Words to endeavour the fastening of Opinions on men which they own not and thereon mutually to revile one another publishing all to the World as some great atchievement or victory This is not the way to teach them truths of the Gospel nor to promote the Edification of Church But in general the Importance of the cause to be pleaded the Greatness of the opposition that is made unto the Truth and the high concernment of the Souls of Believers to be rightly instructed in it do call for a renewed Declaration and Vindication of
alone others Faith and Works also and that in the same kind of necessity and use That whose consideration we at present undertake is the second thing proposed And indeed herein lies the substance of the whole controversie about our Justification before God upon the determination and stating whereof the determination of all other incident Questions doth depend This therefore is that which herein I affirm The Righteousness of Christ in his Obedience and Suffering for us imputed unto Believers as they are united unto him by his spirit is that Righteousness whereon they are justified before God on the Account whereof their sins are pardoned and a Right is granted them into the Heavenly Inheritance This Position is such as wherein the substance of that Doctrine in this important Article of Evangelical Truth which we plead for is plainly and fully expressed And I have chosen the rather thus to express it because it is that Thesis wherein the Learned Davenant laid down that common Doctrine of the Reformed Churches whose defence he undertook This is the shield of Truth in the whole cause of Justification which whilst it is preserved safe we need not trouble our selves about the Differences that are among Learned men about the most proper stating and declaration of some lesser concernments of it This is the Refuge the only Refuge of distressed Consciences wherein they may find Rest and Peace For the confirmation of this Assertion I shall do these three things 1 Reflect on what is needful unto the Explanation of it 2 Answer the most important general Objections against it 3 Prove the Truth of it by Arguments and Testimonies of the holy Scripture As to the first of these or what is necessary unto the Explanation of this Assertion it hath been sufficiently spoken unto in our foregoing Discourses The Heads of some things only shall at present be called over 1. The Foundation of the Imputation asserted is Union Hereof there are many Grounds and Causes as hath been declared But that which we have immediate respect unto as the Foundation of this Imputation is that whereby the Lord Christ and Believers do actually coalesce into one mystical Person This is by the Holy Spirit inhabiting in him as the Head of the Church in all fulness and in all Believers according to their measure whereby they became members of his mystical Body That there is such an Union between Christ and Believers is the Faith of the Catholick Church and hath been so in all Ages Those who seem in our days to deny it or question it either know not what they say or their minds are influenced by their Doctrine who deny the Divine Persons of the Son and of the Spirit Upon supposition of this Vnion Reason will grant the Imputation pleaded for to be reasonable at least that there is such a peculiar Ground for it as is not to be exemplified in any things natural or political among men 2. The Nature of Imputation hath been fully spoken unto before and thereunto I refer the Reader for the understanding of what is intended thereby 3. That which is imputed is the Righteousness of Christ and briefly I understand hereby his whole Obedience unto God in all that he did and suffered for the Church This I say is imputed unto Believers so as to become their only Righteousness before God unto the Justification of Life If beyond these things any Expressions have been made use of in the Explanation of this Truth which have given occasion unto any Differences or Contests although they may be true and defensible against Objections yet shall not I concern my self in them The substance of the Truth as laid down is that whose Defence I have undertaken and where that is granted or consented unto I will not contend with any about their way and methods of its Declaration nor defend the Terms and Expressions that have by any been made use of therein For instance Some have said that what Christ did and suffered is so imputed unto us as that we are judged and esteemed in the sight of God to have done or suffered our selves in him This I shall not concern my self in For although it may have a sound sense given unto it and is used by some of the Antients yet because offence is taken at it and the substance of the Truth we plead for is better otherwise expressed it ought not to be contended about For we do not say that God judgeth or esteemeth that we did and suffered in our own persons what Christ did and suffered but only that he did it and suffered it in our stead Hereon God makes a Grant and Donation of it unto Believers upon their Believing unto their Justification before him And the like may be said of many other Expressions of the like nature These things being premised I proceed unto the consideration of the general objections that are urged against the Imputation we plead for And I shall insist only on some of the principal of them and whereinto all others may be resolved for it were endless to go over all that any mans Invention can suggest unto him of this kind And some general considerations we must take along with us herein As 1. The Doctrine of Justification is a part yea an eminent part of the mystery of the Gospel It is no marvel therefore if it be not so exposed unto the common notions of Reason as some would have it to be There is more required unto the true spiritual understanding of such mysteries yea unless we intend to renounce the Gospel it must be asserted that Reason as it is corrupted and the mind of man destitute of Divine supernatural Revelation do dislike every such Truth and rise up in Enmity against it So the Scripture directly affirms Rom. 8.7 1 Cor. 2.14 2. Hence are the Minds and Inventions of men wonderful fertile in coyning Objections against Evangelical Truths and raising cavils against them Seldom to this purpose do they want an endless number of sophistical Objections which because they know no better they themselves judge insoluble For carnal Reason being once set at liberty under the false notion of Truth to act it self freely and boldly against spiritual mysteries is subtile in its arguings and pregnant in its Invention of them How endless for instance are the Sophisms of the Socinians against the Doctrine of the Trinity and how do they triumph in them as unanswerable Under the shelter of them they despise the force of the most evident Testimonies of the Scripture and those multiplied on all occasions In like manner they deal with the Doctrine of the satisfaction of Christ as the Pelagians of old did with that of his Grace Wherefore he that will be startled at the Appearance of subtile or plausible Objections against any Gospel mysteries that are plainly revealed and sufficiently attested in the Scripture is not likely to come unto much stability in his Profession of them 3. The most of the
Protestant Divines that it is altogether needless to insist again upon them unless they had received some new inforcement which of late they have not done That which for the most part we have now to do withal are rather Sophistiacal cavils from supposed absurd consequences then real Theological arguments And some of those who would walk with most wariness between the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ and Justification by our own works either are in such a slippery place that they seem sometimes to be on the one side sometimes on the other or else to express themselves with so much caution as it is very difficult to apprehend their minds I shall not therefore for the future dare to say that this or that is any mans opinion though it appear unto me so to be as clear and evident as words can express it but that this or that opinion let it be maintained by whom it will I approve or disapprove this I shall dare to say And I will say also that the declination that hath been from the common Doctrine of Justification before God on the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ doth daily proceed towards a direct assertion of justification by works Nor indeed hath it where to rest until it comes unto that bottome And this is more clearly seen in the objections which they make against the truth then in what they plead in defence of their own opinions For herein they speak as yet warily and with a pretence of accuracy in avoiding extremes But in the other or their objections they make use of none but what are easily resolved into a supposition of Justification by Works in the grossest sense of it To insist on all particulars were endless and as was said most of those of any importance have already occasionally been spoken unto There are therefore only two things which are generally pleaded by all sorts of persons Papists Socinians and others with whom here we have to do that I shall take notice of The first and fountain of all other is that the Doctrine of Justification by the imputation of the Righteousness of Christ doth render our personal Righteousness needless and overthrows all necessity of an Holy life The other is that the Apostle James in his Epistle doth plainly ascribe our Justification unto Works and what he affirms there is inconsistent with that sense of those many other Testimonies of Scripture which we plead for For the first of these although those who oppose the truth we contend for do proceed on various different and contradictory principles among themselves as to what they exalt in opposition unto it yet do they all agree in a vehement urging of it For those of the Church of Rome who renewed this charge invented of old by others it must be acknowledged by all sober men that as managed by them it is an open calumny For the wisest of them and those of whom it is hard to conceive but that they knew the contrary as Bellarmine Vasquez Suarez do openly aver that Protestant Writers deny all inherent Righteousness Bellarmine excepts Bucer and Chemnitius that they maintain that men may be saved although they live in all manner of sin that there is no more required of them but that they believe that their sins are forgiven and that whilest they do so although they give themselves up unto the most sensual Vices and Abominations they may be assured of their Salvation Tantum Relligio potuit suadere malorum So will men out of a perverse zeal to promote their own interest in the Religion they profess wilfully give up themselves unto the worst of evils such as false accusation and open calumny and of no other nature are these assertions which none of the Writings or Preachings of those who are so charged did ever give the least countenance unto Whether the forging and promulgation of such impudent falshoods be an expedient to obtain Justification by Works in the sight of God they who continue in them had best to consider For my part I say again as I suppose I have said already that it is all one to me what Religion men are of who can justifie themselves in such courses and proceedings And for those among our selves who are pleased to make use of this Objection they either know what the Doctrine is which they would oppose or they do not If they do not the wise man tells them that he who answereth a matter before he hear it it is folly and shame unto him If they do understand it it is evident that they use not sincerity but artifices and false pretenses for advantage in their handling of Sacred things which is scandalous to Religion Socinus fiercely manageth this charge against the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches De servat par 4. cap. 1. And he made it the foundation whereon and the reason why he opposeth the Doctrine of the imputation of the satisfaction of Christ if any such satisfaction should be allowed which yet he peremptorily denies And he hath written a Treatise unto the same purpose defended by Schlictingius against Meisnerus And he takes the same honest course herein that others did before him For he chargeth it on the Divines of the Protestant Churches that they taught that God justifieth the ungodly not only those that are so and whilest they are so but although they continue so that they required no inherent Righteousness or Holiness in any nor could do so on their principles seeing the imputed Righteousness of Christ is sufficient for them although they live in sin are not washed nor cleansed nor do give up themselves unto the wayes of Duty and Obedience unto God whereby he may be pleased and so bring in Libertinisme and Antinomianisme into the Church And he thinks it a sufficient confutation of this Doctrine to alledge against it that neither Fornicators nor Idolaters nor Adulterers c. shall inherit the Kingdom of God And these are some of those ways which have rendred the management of controversies in Religion scandalous and abominable such as no wise or good man will meddle withal unless compelled for the necessary service of the Church For these things are openly false and made use of with a shameful dishonesty to promote a corrupt design and end When I find men at this kind of work I have very little concernment in what they say afterwards be it true or false Their rule and measure is what serves their own end or what may promote the design and interest wherein they are ingaged be it right or wrong And as for this man there is not any Article in Religion the principal whereof are rejected by him on whose account he doth with more confidence adjudge us unto eternal ruine than he doth on this of the satisfaction of Christ and the imputation of it unto them that do believe So much darkness is their remaining on the minds of the most of men so many inveterate prejudices on various
Justification Rom. 8.33 Isa. 43.25.45.23 Psal. 145.2 Rom. 3.20 What thoughts will be ingenerated hereby in the minds of Men. Isai. 33.14 Mic. 6.7 Isa. 6.5 The Plea of Job against his friends and before God not the same Job 40.3 4 5. Chap. 42.4 5 6. Directions for visiting the sick given of old Testimonies of Jerome and Ambrose Sense of Men in their Prayers Dan. 9.7 18. Psal. 143.2.130.3 4. Paraphrase of Austine on that place Prayer of Pelagius Publick Liturgies Pag. 8. § 3. A due sense of our Apostasie from God the Depravation of our Nature thereby with the power and guilt of Sin the holiness of Law necessary unto a right understanding of the Doctrine of Justification Method of the Apostle to this purpose Romans 1 2 3 4. Chap. Grounds of the antient and present Pelagianism in the denial of these things Instances thereof Boasting of Perfection from the same Ground Knowledge of Sin and Grace mutually promote each other Pag. 18. § 4. Opposition between Works and Grace as unto Justification Method of the Apostle in the Epistle to the Romans to manifest this opposition A Scheam of others contrary thereunto Testimonies witnessing this opposition Judgment to be made on them Distinctions whereby they are evaded The uselessness of them Resolution of the case in hand by Bellarmine Luk. 17.10 Dan. 9.18 Pag. 24. § 5. A Commutation as unto Sin and Righteousness by Imputation between Christ and Believers represented in the Scripture The Ordinance of the Scape Goat Levit. 16.21 22. The nature of Expiatory Sacrifices Levit. 4.29 Expiation of an uncertain Murther Deut. 21.1 2 3 4 5 6 7. The Commutation intended proved and vindicated Isa. 53.5 6. 2 Cor. 5.21 Rom. 8.3 4. Gal. 3.13 14. 1 Pet. 1.24 Deut. 21.23 Testimonies of Justin Martyr Gregory Nissen Austine Chrysostome Bernard Taulerus Pighius to that purpose The proper actings of Faith with respect thereunto Rom. 5.11 Matth. 11.28 Psa. 38.4 Gen. 4.13 Isa. 53.11 Gal. 3.1 Isa. 45.22 Joh. 3.14 15. A bold Calumny answered Pag. 38 39. § 6. Introduction of Grace by Jesus Christ into the whole of our Relation unto God and its respect unto all the parts of our Obedience No Mystery of Grace in the Covenant of Works All Religion originally commensurate unto Reason No notions of Natural Light concerning the Introduction of the Mediation of Christ and Mystery of Grace into our Relation to God Eph. 1.17 18 19. Reason as corrupted can have no notions of Religion but what are derived from its primitive state Hence the Mysteries of the Gospel esteemed folly Reason as corrupted repugnant unto the Mystery of Gâ—â—â—e Accommodation of Spiritual Mysteries unto Corrupt Reason wherefore acceptable unto many Reasons of it Two parts of corrupted Natures repugnancy unto the Mystery of the Gospel 1. That which would reduce it unto the private Reason of Men. Thence the Trinity denied And the Incarnation of the Son of God Without which the Doctrine of Justification cannot stand Rule of the Socinians in the Interpretation of the Scripture 2. Want of a due comprehension of the Harmony that is between all the parts of the Mystery of Grace This Harmomy proved Compared with the Harmony in the Works of Nature To be studied But is learned only of them who are taught of God and in experience Evil events of the want of a due comprehension hereof Instances of them All applied unto the Doctrine of Justification Pag. 53. § 7. General prejudices against the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. 1. That it is not in Terms found in the Scripture answered 2. That nothing is said of it in the writings of the Evangelists answered Joh. 20.30 31. Nature of Christs Personal Ministery Revelations by the holy Spirit immediately from Christ. Design of the writings of the Evangelists 3. Differences among Protestants themselves about this Doctrine answered Sense of the Antients herein What is of real Difference among Protestants considered Pag. 69. § 8. Influence of the Doctrine of Justification into the first Reformation Advantages unto the World by that Reformation State of the Consciences of Men under the Papacy with respect unto Justification before God Alterations made therein by the Light of this Doctrine though not received Alterations in the Pagan unbelieving World by the Introduction of Christianity Design and success of the first Reformer herein Attempts for Reconciliation with the Papists in this Doctrine and their success Remainders of the â—gnorance of the Truth in the Roman Church Vnavoidable consequences of the corruption of this Doctrine Pag. 83. CHAP. I. JVstification by Faith generally acknowledged The meaning of it perverted The nature and use of Faith in Justification proposed to consideration Distinctions about it waved A twofold Faith of the Gospel expressed in the Scripture Faith that is not justifying Acts 8.13 Joh. 2.23 24. Luk. 8.13 Matth. 22.28 Historical Faith whence it is so called and the nature of it Degrees of Assent in it Justification not ascribed unto any Degree of it A Calumny obviated The causes of true saving Faith Conviction of Sin previous unto it The nature of legal Conviction and its Effects Arguments to prove it antecedent unto Faith Without the consideration of it the true nature of Faith not to be understood The Order and Relation of the Law and Gospel Rom. 1.17 Instance of Adam Effects of Conviction internal Displicency and sorrow Fear of punishment Desire of Deliverance External Abstinence from Sin Performance of Duties Reformation of Life Not conditions of Justification not Formal Dispositions unto it not Moral Preparations for it The Order of God in Justification The proper object of justifying Faith Not all Divine Verity equally proved by sundry Arguments The pardon of our own sins whether the first object of Faith The Lord Christ in the Work of Mediation as the Ordinance of God for the Recovery of lost Sinners the proper object of justifying Faith The Position explained and proved Rom. 3.24 25. Ephes. 1.6 7 8. Acts 10.41 Chap. 16.13 Chap. 4.12 Luk. 24.25 26 27. Joh. 1.12.3.16 36.6.29.7.38 c. Col. 2.12 1 Cor. 2.1 31. 2 Cor. 5.19 20 21. Pag. 92 93 c. CHAP. II. The nature of justifying Faith in particular or of Faith in that exercise of it whereby we are justified The Hearts approbation of the way of the Justification and Salvation of Sinners by Christ with its acquiescency therein The description given explained and confirmed 1. From the nature of the Gospel 2. Exemplified in its contrary or the nature of unbelief Prov. 1.30 Heb. 2.3 1 Pet. 2.7 1 Cor. 1.23 24. 2 Cor. 4.3 4. What it is and wherein it doth consist 3. The Design of God in and by the Gospel His own Glory his utmost End in all things The Glory of his Righteousness Grace Love Wisdom c. The end of God in the Way of the Salvation of Sinners by Christ. Rom. 3.25 Joh. 3.16 1 Joh. 3.16 Eph. 1.5 6. 1 Cor. 1.24 Ephes. 3.10 Rom. 1.16.4.16 Ephes.
way of handling sacred things But the Spiritual Amplitude of Divine Truths is restrained hereby whilst low mean Philosophical senses are imposed on them And not only so but endless Divisions and Contentions are occasioned and perpetuated Hence when any Difference in Religion is in the pursuit of Controversies about it brought into the field of Metaphysical Respects and Philosophical terms whereof there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sufficient provision for the supply of the Combatants on both sides the truth for the most part as unto any concernment of the souls of men therein is utterly lost and buried in the rubbish of senseless and unprofitable words And thus in particular those who seem to be well enough agreed in the whole Doctrine of Justification so far as the Scripture goeth before them and the Experience of Believers keeps them company when once they ingage into their Philosophical Definitions and Distinctions are at such an irreconcilable variance among themselves as if they were agreed on no one thing that doth concern it For as men have various apprehensions in coining such Definitions as may be defensible against Objections which most men aim at therein So no Proposition can be so plain at least in materia probabili but that a man ordinarily versed in Paedagogical Terms and Metaphysical Notions may multiply Distinctions on every word of it 8. Hence there hath been a pretence and appearance of twenty several Opinions among Protestants about Justification as Bellarmine and Vasquez and others of the Papists charge it against them out of Osiander when the Faith of them all was one and the same Bellar. lib. 5. cap. 1. Vasq. in 1.2 Quaest. 113. disp 202. whereof we shall speak elsewhere When men are once advanced into that field of Disputation which is all overgrown with thorns of subtilties perplexed notions and futilous terms of Art they consider principally how they may entangle others in it scarce at all how they may get out of it themselves And in this posture they oftentimes utterly forget the business which they are about especially in this matter of Justification namely how a guilty Sinner may come to obtain Favour and Acceptance with God And not only so but I doubt they oftentimes dispute themselves beyond what they can well abide by when they return home unto a sedate meditation of the state of things between God and their own souls And I cannot much value their notions and sentiments of this matter who object and answer themselves out of a sense of their own Appearance before God much less of theirs who evidence an open inconformity unto the Grace and truth of this Doctrine in their hearts and lives 9. Wherefore we do but trouble the faith of Christians and the peace of the true Church of God whilst we dispute about Expressions Terms and Notions when the substance of the Doctrine intended may be declared and believed without the knowledge understanding or use of any of them Such are all those in whose subtile management the captious Art of wrangling doth principally consist A diligent Attendance unto the Revelation made hereof in the Scripture and an examination of our own experience thereby is the Sum of what is required of us for the right understanding of the truth herein And every true Believer who is taught of God knows how to put his whole trust in Christ alone and the Grace of God by him for Mercy Righteousness and Glory and not at all concern himself with those loads of thorns and briars which under the names of Definitions Distinctions accurate Notions in a number of Exotick Paedagogical and Philosophical terms some pretend to accommodate them withall 10. The Holy Ghost in expressing the most eminent Acts in our Justification especially as unto our Believing or the acting of that faith whereby we are justified is pleased to make use of many Metaphorical Expressions For any to use them now in the same way and to the same purpose is esteemed rude undisciplinary and even ridiculous but on what Grounds He that shall deny that there is more spiritual sense and experience conveyed by them into the hearts and minds of Believers which is the life and soul of teaching things practical than in the most accurate Philosophical expressions is himself really ignorant of the whole Truth in this matter The Propriety of such Expressions belongs and is confined unto natural science but spiritual Truths are to be taught not in the words which mans wisdom teacheth but which the Holy Ghost teacheth comparing spiritual things with spiritual God is wiser then man and the Holy Ghost knows better what are the most expedient ways for the Illumination of our minds with that knowledge of Evangelical Truths which it is our Duty to have and attain then the wisest of us all And other knowledge of or skill in these things then what is required of us in a way of Duty is not to be valued It is therefore to no purpose to handle the mysteries of the Gospel as if Holcot and Bricot Thomas and Gabriel with all the Sententiarists Summists and Quodlibetarians of the old Roman Peripatetical School were to be raked out of their Graves to be our guides Especially will they be of no use unto us in this Doctrine of Justification For whereas they pertinaciously adhered unto the Philosophy of Aristotle who knew nothing of any Righteousness but what is an habit inherent in our selves and the Acts of it they wrested the whole Doctrine of Justification unto a compliance therewithall So Pighius himself complained of them Controv. 2. Dissimulare non possumus hanc vel primam doctrinae Christianae partem de Justificatione obscuratam magis quam illustratam a scholasticis spinosis plerisque quaestionibus definitionibus secundum quas nonnulli magno supercilio primam in omnibus autoritatem arrogantes c. Secondly A due consideration of him with whom in this matter we have to do and that immediately is necessary unto a right stating of our thoughts about it The Scripture expresseth it emphatically that it is God that justifieth Rom. 8. 33. And he assumes it unto himself as his Prerogative to do what belongs thereunto I even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake and will not remember thy sins Isa. 43.25 And it is hard in my Apprehension to suggest unto him any other reason or consideration of the pardon of our sins seeing he hath taken it on him to do it for his own sake that is for the Lords sake Dan. 9.17 in whom all the seed of Israel are justified Isa. 45.25 In his sight before his Tribunal it is that men are justified or condemned Psal. 143.2 Enter not into Judgement with thy servant for in THY SIGHT shall no man living be justified And the whole work of Justification with all that belongeth thereunto is represented after the manner of a Juridical proceeding before Gods Tribunal as we shall see afterwards Therefore saith the Apostle
pleased to observe that I am not debating these things argumentatively in such propriety of Expressions as are required in a Scholastical Disputation which shall be done afterwards so far as I judge it necessary But I am doing that which indeed is better and of more Importance namely declaring the Experience of Faith in the Expressions of the Scripture or such as are analogous unto them And I had rather be instrumental in the communication of light and knowledge unto the meanest Believer then to have the clearest success against prejudiced Disputers Wherefore by Faith thus acting are we justified and have peace with God Other Foundation in this matter can no man lay that will endure the Trial. Nor are we to be moved that men who are unacquainted with these things in their Reality and Power do reject the whole work of Faith herein as an easie effort of Fancy or Imagination For the preaching of the Cross is foolishness unto the best of the natural wisdom of men Neither can any understand them but by the spirit of God Those who know the Terrour of the Lord who have been really convinced and made sensible of the Guilt of their Apostasie from God and of their actual sins in that state and what a fearful thing it is to fall into the hands of the living God seeking thereon after a real solid Foundation whereon they may be accepted with him have other thoughts of these things and do find Believing a thing to be quite of another nature then such men suppose It is not a work of Fancy or Imagination unto men to deny and abhor themselves to subscribe unto the Righteousness of God in denouncing Death as due to their sins to renounce all hopes and expectations of Relief from any Righteousness of their own to mix the Word and Promise of God concerning Christ and Righteousness by him with Faith so as to receive the Attonement and therewithall to give up themselves unto an universal Obedience unto God And as for them unto whom through Pride and Self-conceit on the one hand or Ignorance on the other it is so we have in this matter no concernment with them For unto whom these things are only the work of Fancy the Gospel is a Fable Something unto this purpose I had written long since in a practical Discourse concerning Communion with God And whereas some men of an inferiour condition have found it useful for the strengthening themselves in their dependencies on some of their superiours or in compliance with their own Inclinationt to cavil at my Writings and revile their Author that Book hath been principally singled out to exercise their faculty and Good intentions upon This course is steered of late by one Mr. Hotchkisse in a Book about Justification wherein in particular he falls very severely on that Doctrine which for the substance of it is here again proposed pag. 81. And were it not that I hope it may be somewhat useful unto him to be a little warned of his Immoralities in that Discourse I should not in the least have taken notice of his other Impertinencies The Good man I perceive can be angry with Persons whom he never saw and about things which he cannot or will not understand so far as to revile them with most opprobious Language For my part although I have never written any thing designedly on this subject or the Doctrine of Justification before now yet he could not but discern by what was occasionally delivered in that Discourse that I maintain no other Doctrine herein but what is the common Faith of the most Learned men in all Protestant Churches And the Reasons why I am singled out for the object of his petulancy and spleen are too manifest to need Repetition But I shall yet inform him of what perhaps he is ignorant namely That I esteem it no small honour that the Reproaches wherewith the Doctrine opposed by him is reproached do fall upon me And the same I say concerning all the reviling and contemptuous Expressions that his ensuing pages are filled withall But as to the present occasion I beg his excuse if I believe him not that the reading of the passages which he mentions out of my Book filled him with Horrour and Indignation as he pretends For whereas he acknowledgeth that my words may have a sense which he approves of and which therefore must of necessity be good and sound what honest and sober person would not rather take them in that sense then wrest them unto another so to cast himself under the disquietment of a fit of horrible Indignation In this fit I suppose it was if such a fit indeed did befall him as one Evil begets another that he thought he might insinuate something of my denial of the necessity of our own personal Repentance and Obedience For no man who had read that Book only of all my Writings could with the least regard to Conscience or Honesty give countenance unto such a surmise unless his mind was much discomposed by the unexpected invasion of a fit of Horrour But such is his dealing with me from first to last nor do I know where to fix on any one instance of his Exceptions against me wherein I can suppose he had escaped his pretended fit and was returned unto himself that is unto honest and ingenuous thoughts wherewith I hope he is mostly conversant But though I cannot miss in the Justification of this charge by considering any Instance of his Reflections yet I shall at present take that which he insists longest upon and filleth his Discourse about it with most scurrility of Expressions And this is in the 164 th page of his Book and those that follow For there he disputeth fiercely against me for making this to be an undue End of our serving God namely that we may flee from the wrath to come And who would not take this for an inexpiable crime in any especially in him who hath written so much of the nature and use of Threatnings under the Gospel and the Fear that ought to be ingenerated by them in the hearts of men as I have done Wherefore so great a Crime being the object of them all his Revilings seem not only to be Excused but Hallowed But what if all this should prove a wilful prevarication not becoming a Good man much less a Minister of the Gospel my words as reported and transcribed by himself are these Some there are that do the Service of the House of God as the drudgery of their Lives the principle they yield Obedience upon is Spirit of Bondage unto fear the Rule they do it by is the Law in its dread and rigour exacting it of them to the utmost without mercy or mitigation the End they do it for is to fly from the Wrath to come to pacifie Conscience and to seek for Righteousness as it were by the works of the Law What follow unto the same purpose he omits and what he adds as my
the principal cause of all the Oppositions that are made unto it and all the Depravations of it that the Church is pestered withall Hence are the wits of men so fertile in Sophistical Cavils against it so ready to load it with seeming absurdities and I know not what unsuitableness unto their wonderous rational conceptions And no Objection can be made against it be it never so trivial but it is highly applauded by those who look on that Introduction of the mystery of Grace which is above their natural conceptions as unintelligible folly 2. That the necessary Relation of these things one unto the other namely of Justification by the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ and the necessity of our Personal Obedience will not be clearly understood nor duely improved but by and in the exercise of the Wisdom of Faith This we grant also and let who will make what advantage they can of this concession True Faith hath that spiritual Light in it or accompanying of it as that it is able to receive it and to conduct the Soul unto Obedience by it Wherefore reserving the particular consideration hereof unto its proper place I say in general 1. That this Relation is evident unto that spiritual Wisdom whereby we are enabled doctrinally and practically to comprehend the Harmony of the mystery of God and the consistency of all the parts of it one with another 2. That it is made evident by the Scripture wherein both these things Justification through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ and the Necessity of our Personal Obedience are plainly asserted and declared And we defie that Rule of the Socinians that seeing these things are inconsistent in their apprehension or unto their Reason therefore we must say that one of them is not taught in the Scripture For whatever it may appear unto their Reason it doth not so to ours and we have at least as Good Reason to trust unto our own Reason as unto theirs Yet we absolutely acquiesce in neither but in the Authority of God in the Scripture rejoycing only in this that we can set our seal unto his Revelations by our own Experience For 3. It is fully evident in the gracious conduct which the minds of them that believe are under even that of the Spirit of Truth and Grace and the Inclinations of that new Principle of the Divine Life whereby they are acted For although from the Remainders of Sin and Darkness that are in them Temptations may arise unto a continuation in sin because Grace hath abounded yet are their minds so formed and framed by the Doctrine of this Grace and the Grace of this Doctrine that the abounding of Grace herein is the principal motive unto their abounding in Holiness as we shall see afterwards And this we aver to be the spring of all those Objections which the Adversaries of this Doctrine do continually endeavour to entangle it withall As 1 If the Passive Righteousness as it is commonly called that is his Death and Suffering be imputed unto us there is no need nor can it be that his Active Righteousness or the Obedience of his Life should be imputed unto us and so on the contrary for both together are inconsistent 2 That if all sin be pardoned there is no need of the Righteousness and so on the contrary if the Righteousness of Christ be imputed unto us there is no room for or need of the pardon of sin 3 If we believe the pardon of our sins then are our sins pardoned before we believe or we are bound to believe that which is not so 4 If the Righteousness of Christ be imputed unto us then are we esteemed to have done and suffered what indeed we never did nor suffered and it is true that if we are esteemed our selves to have done it Imputation is overthrown 5 If Christs Righteousness be imputed unto us then are we as Righteous as was Christ himself 6 If our sins were imputed unto Christ then was he thought to have sinned and was a sinner subjectively 7 If Good Works be excluded from any interest in our Justification before God then are they of no use unto our Salvation 8 That it is ridiculous to think that where there is no sin there is not all the Righteousness that can be required 9 That Righteousness imputed is only a putative or imaginary Righteousness c. Now although all these and the like Objections however subtilly managed as Socinus boasts that he had used more then ordinary subtilty in this cause in quo si subtilius aliquanto quanto opus esse videretur quaedam a nobis disputata sunt De servat par 4. cap. 4. are capable of plain and clear solutions and we shall avoid the examination of none of them yet at present I shall only say that all the shades which they cast on the minds of men do vanish and disappear before the Light of express Scripture Testimonies and the Experience of them that do believe where there is a due comprehension of the mystery of Grace in any tolerable measure Seventhly There are some common prejudices that are usually pleaded against the Doctrine of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ which because they will not orderly fall under a particular consideration in our progress may be briefly examined in these general previous considerations 1. It is usually urged against it that this Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ is no where mentioned expresly in the Scripture This is the first Objection of Bellarmine against it Hactenus saith he nullum omnino locum invenire potuerunt ubi legeretur Christi Justitiam nobis imputari ad justitiam vel nos justos esse per Christi Justitiam nobis imputatam De Justificat lib. 2. cap. 7. An Objection doubtless unreasonably and immodestly urged by men of his perswasion For not only do they make profession of their whole Faith or their belief of all things in matters of Religion in Terms and Expressions no where used in the Scripture but believe many things also as they say with Faith divine not at all revealed or contained in the Scripture but drained by them out of the Traditions of the Church I do not therefore understand how such persons can modestly manage this as an Objection against any Doctrine that the Terms wherein some do express it are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 found in the Scripture just in that order of one word after another as by them they are used For this Rule may be much enlarged and yet be kept strait enough to exclude the principal concerns of their Church out of the confines of Christianity nor can I apprehend much more Equity in others who reflect with severity on this expression of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ as unscriptural as if those who make use thereof were criminal in no small degree when themselves immediately in the Declaration of their own judgment make use of such Terms Distinctions
Righteousness of God communicated unto us by Jesus Christ. And whereas he was opposed herein with some severity by the most learned persons of those days to countenance himself in his singularity he pretended that there were twenty different Opinions amongst the Protestants themselves about the formal cause of our Justification before God This was quickly laid hold on by them of the Roman Church and is urged as a prejudice against the whole Doctrine by Bellarmine Vasquez and others But the vanity of this pretence of his hath been sufficiently discovered and Bellarmine himself could fancy but four Opinions among them that seemed to be different from one another reckoning that of Osiander for one De Justificat lib. 2. cap. 1. But whereas he knew that the Imagination of Osiander was exploded by them all the other three that he mentions are indeed but distinct parts of the same entire Doctrine Wherefore until of late it might be truly said that the Faith and Doctrine of all Protestants was in this Article entirely the same For however they differed in the way manner and methods of its Declaration and too many private men were addicted unto Definitions and Descriptions of their own under pretence of Logical accuracy in Teaching which gave an appearance of some contradiction among them yet in this they generally agreed that it is the Righteousness of Christ and not our own on the account whereof we receive the pardon of sin acceptance with God are declared Righteous by the Gospel and have a Right and Title unto the Heavenly Inheritance Hereon I say they were generally agreed first against the Papists and afterwards against the Socinians and where this is granted I will not contend with any man about his way of declaring the Doctrine of it And that I may add it by the way we have herein the concurrence of the Fathers of the Primitive Church For although by Justification following the Etymology of the Latine word they understood the making us Righteous with internal personal Righteousness at least some of them did so as Austin in particular yet that we are pardoned and accepted with God on any other account but that of the Righteousness of Christ they believed not And whereas especially in their Controversie with the Pelagians after the rising of that Heresie they plead vehemently that we are made Righteous by the Grace of God changing our Hearts and Natures and creating in us a principle of spiritual Life and Holiness and not by the endeavours of our own free will or works performed in the strength thereof their words and expressions have been abused contrary to their Intention and Design For we wholly concur with them and subscribe unto all that they dispute about the making of us personally Righteous and holy by the effectual Grace of God against all merit of works and operations of our own free Will our Sanctification being every way as much of Grace as our Justification properly so called and that in opposition unto the common Doctrine of the Roman Church about the same matter only they call this our being made inherently and personally Righteous by Grace sometimes by the name of Justification which we do not And this is laid hold on as an Advantage by those of the Roman Church who do not concur with them in the way and manner whereby we are so made Righteous But whereas by our Justification before God we intend only that Righteousness whereon our sins are pardoned wherewith we are made Righteous in his sight or for which we are accepted as Righteous before him it will be hard to find any of them assigning of it unto any other causes then the Protestants do So it is fallen out that what they design to prove we entirely comply with them in but the way and manner whereby they prove it is made use of by the Papists unto another End which they intended not But as to the way and manner of the Declaration of this Doctrine among Protestants themselves there ever was some variety and Difference in Expressions Nor will it otherwise be whilst the Abilities and Capacities of men whether in the conceiving of things of this nature or in the expression of their conceptions are so various as they are And it is acknowledged that these Differences of late have had by some as much weight laid upon them as the substance of the Doctrine generally agreed in Hence some have composed entire Books consisting almost of nothing but impertinent Cavils at other Mens Words and Expressions But these things proceed from the weakness of some men and other vitious habits of their minds and do not belong unto the cause it self And such Persons as for me shall write as they do and fight on until they are weary Neither hath the multiplication of Questions and the curious discussion of them in the handling of this Doctrine wherein nothing ought to be diligently insisted on but what is directive of our practice been of much use unto the Truth it self though it hath not been directly opposed in them That which is of real Difference among Persons who agree in the substance of the Doctrine may be reduced unto a very few Heads As 1 There is something of this kind about the nature of Faith whereby we are justified with its proper Object in Justifying and its Use in Justification And an Instance we have herein not only of the weakness of our Intellects in the Apprehension of spiritual things but also of the remainders of confusion and disorder in our minds at least how true it is that we know only in part and prophesie only in part whilst we are in this life For whereas this Faith is an Act of our minds put forth in the way of Duty to God yet many by whom it is sincerely exercised and that continually are not agreed either in the nature or proper object of it Yet is there no doubt but that some of them who differ amongst themselves about these things have delivered their minds free from the prepossession of prejudices and notions derived from other artificial Reasonings imposed on them and do really express their own conceptions as to the best and utmost of their Experience And notwithstanding this Difference they do yet all of them please God in the exercise of Faith as it is their Duty and have that respect unto its proper Object as secures both their Justification and Salvation And if we cannot on this consideration bear with and forbear one another in our different conceptions and expressions of those conceptions about these things it is a sign we have a great mind to be contentious and that our confidences are built on very weak foundations For my part I had much rather my Lot should be found among them who do really believe with the heart unto Righteousness though they are not able to give a tolerable Definition of Faith unto others then among them who can endlesly dispute about it with seeming
Accuracy and Skill but are negligent in the exercise of it as their own Duty Wherefore some things shall be briefly spoken of in this matter to declare my own apprehensions concerning the things mentioned without the least design to contradict or oppose the conceptions of others 2. There hath been a Controversie more directly stated among some Learned Divines of the reformed Churches for the Lutherans are unanimous on the one side about the Righteousness of Christ that is said to be imputed unto us For some would have this to be only his suffering of Death and the satisfaction which he made for sin thereby and others include therein the Obedience of his life also The occasion original and progress of this controversie the persons by whom it hath been managed with the writings wherein it is so and the various ways that have been endeavoured for its Reconciliation are sufficiently known unto all who have enquired into these things Neither shall I immix my self herein in the way of controversie or in opposition unto others though I shall freely declare my own Judgement in it so far as the consideration of the Righteousness of Christ under this distinction is inseparable from the substance of the Truth it self which I plead for 3. Some Difference there hath been also whether the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto us or the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ may be said to be the formal cause of our Justification before God wherein there appears some variety of Expression among Learned men who have handled this subject in the way of controversie with the Papists The true Occasion of the Differences about this Expression hath been this and no other Those of the Roman Church do constantly assert that the Righteousness whereby we are Righteous before God is the formal cause of our Justification And this Righteousness they say is our own inherent Personal Righteousness and not the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto us Wherefore they treat of this whole controversie namely what is the Righteousness on the account whereof we are accepted with God or justified under the name of the formal cause of Justification which is the subject of the second Book of Bellarmine concerning Justification In opposition unto them some Protestants contending that the Righteousness wherewith we are esteemed Righteous before God and accepted with him is the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto us and not our own inherent imperfect Personal Righteousness they have done it under this enquiry namely what is the formal cause of our Justification which some have said to be the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ some the Righteousness of Christ imputed But what they designed herein was not to resolve this Controversie into a Philosophical enquiry about the nature of a formal cause but only to prove that that truly belonged unto the Righteousness of Christ in our Justification which the Papists ascribed unto our own under that name That there is an habitual infused habit of Grace which is the formal cause of our personal inherent Righteousness they grant But they all deny that God pardons our sins and justifies our persons with respect unto this Righteousness as the formal cause thereof Nay they deny that in the Justification of a sinner there either is or can be any inherent formal cause of it And what they mean by a formal cause in our Justification is only that which gives the denomination unto the subject as the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ doth to a person that he is justified Wherefore notwithstanding the differences that have been among some in the various expression of their conceptions the substance of the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches is by them agreed upon and retained entire For they all agree that God justifieth no sinner absolveth him not from Guilt nor declareth him Righteous so as to have a Title unto the Heavenly Inheritance but with respect unto a true and perfect Righteousness as also that this Righteousness is truly the Righteousness of him that is so justified That this Righteousness becometh ours by Gods free Grace and Donation the way on our part whereby we come to be really and effectually interested therein being Faith alone And that this is the perfect Obedience or Righteousness of Christ imputed unto us In these things as they shall be afterwards distinctly explained is contained the whole of that Truth whose Explanation and Confirmation is the Design of the ensuing Discourse And because those by whom this Doctrine in the substance of it is of late impugned derive more from the Socinians then the Papists and make a nearer approach unto their principles I shall chiefly insist on the examination of those Original Authors by whom their notions were first coined and whose weapons they make use of in their defence Eighthly To close these previous Discourses it is worthy our consideration what weight was laid on this Doctrine of Justification at the first Reformation and what Influence it had into the whole work thereof However the minds of men may be changed as unto sundry Doctrines of Faith among us yet none can justly own the name of Protestant but he must highly value the first Reformation And they cannot well do otherwise whose present even temporal Advantages are resolved thereinto However I intend none but such as own an especial presence and Guidance of God with them who were eminently and successfully employed therein Such persons cannot but grant that their Faith in this matter and the concurrence of their Thoughts about its Importance are worthy consideration Now it is known that the Doctrine of Justification gave the first occasion to the whole work of Reformation and was the main hinge whereon it turned This those mentioned declared to be Articulus stantis aut cadentis Ecclesiae and that the vindication thereof alone deserved all the pains that was taken in the whole endeavour of Reformation But things are now and that by virtue of their Doctrine herein much changed in the World though it be not so understood or acknowledged In general no small Benefit redounded unto the World by the Reformation even among them by whom it was not nor is received though many bluster with contrary pretensions For all the Evils which have accidentally ensued thereon arising most of them from the corrupt Passions and Interests of them by whom it hath been opposed are usually ascribed unto it and all the Light Liberty and Benefit of the Minds of men which it hath introduced are ascribed unto other causes But this may be signally observed with respect unto the Doctrine of Justification with the causes and effects of its Discovery and Vindication For the first Reformers found their own and the Consciences of other men so immersed in darkness so pressed and harrassed with fears terrours and disquietments under the power of it and so destitute of any steady Guidance into the ways of peace with God as that with all diligence like persons sensible
that herein their Spiritual and Eternal Interest was concerned they made their Enquiries after the Truth in this matter which they knew must be the only means of their Deliverance All men in those days were either kept in Bondage under endless Fears and Anxieties of mind upon the convictions of sin or sent for Relief unto Indulgences Priestly Pardons Pennances Pilgrimages works satisfactory of their own and supererogatory of others or kept under Chains of Darkness for Purgatory unto the last day Now he is no way able to compare things past and present who fees not how great an Alteration is made in these things even in the Papal Church For before the Reformation whereby the Light of the Gospel especially in this Doctrine of Justification was diffused among men and shone even into their minds who never comprehended nor received it the whole almost of Religion among them was taken up with and confined unto these things And to instigate men unto an abounding sedulity in the observation of them their minds were stuffed with Traditions and Stories of Visions Apparitions frightful Spirits and other Imaginations that poor mortals are apt to be amazed withall and which their restless disquietments gave countenance unto Somnia terrores Magici miracula sagae Nocturni Lemures portentaque Thessala Were the principal objects of their Creed and matter of their Religious Conversation That very Church it self is comparatively at ease from these things unto what it was before the Reformation though so much of them is still retained as to blind the Eyes of men from discerning the Necessity as well as the Truth of the Evangelical Doctrine of Justification It is fallen out herein not much otherwise then it did at the first Entrance of Christianity into the world For there was an Emanation of Light and Truth from the Gospel which affected the minds of men by whom yet the whole of it in its general Design was opposed and persecuted For from thence the very vulgar sort of men became to have better apprehensions and notions of God and his properties or the Original and Rule of the Universe then they had arrived unto in the midnight of their Paganism And a sort of learned speculative men there were who by virtue of that Light of Truth which sprung from the Gospel and was now diffused into the minds of men reformed and improved the old Philosophy discarding many of those falshoods and impertinencies wherewith it had been encumbred But when this was done they still maintained their cause on the old principles of the Philosophers and indeed their opposition unto the Gospel was far more plausible and pleadable than it was before For after they had discarded the gross conceptions of the common sort about the divine Nature and Rule and had blended the Light of Truth which brake forth in Christian Religion with their own Philosophical notions they made a vigorous Attempt for the reinforcement of Heathenism against the main Design of the Gospel And things have not as I said fallen out much otherwise in the Reformation For as by the Light of Truth which therein brake forth the Consciences of even the vulgar sort are in some measure freed from those Childish Affrightments which they were before in Bondage unto so those who are Learned have been enabled to reduce the Opinions and Practices of their Church into a more defensible posture and make their Opposition unto the Truths of the Gospel more plausible than they formerly were Yea that Doctrine which in the way of its Teaching and Practice among them as also in its effects on the Consciences of men was so horrid as to drive innumerable persons from their Communion in that and other things also is now in the new Representation of it with the artificial covering provided for its former effects in practice thought an Argument meet to be pleaded for a return unto its entire Communion But to root out the Superstitions mentioned out of the minds of men to communicate unto them the knowledge of the Righteousness of God which is revealed from Faith to Faith and thereby to deliver them from their bondage fears and distress directing convinced sinners unto the only way of solid peace with God did the first Reformers labour so diligently in the Declaration and Vindication of the Evangelical Doctrine of Justification and God was with them And it is worth our consideration whether we should on every cavil and sophism of men not so taught not so employed not so tryed not so owned of God as they were and in whose Writings there are not appearing such Characters of Wisdom sound Judgment and deep Experience as in theirs easily part with that Doctrine of Truth wherein alone they found peace unto their own Souls and whereby they were instrumental to give liberty and peace with God unto the Souls and Consciences of others innumerable accompanied with the visible effects of Holiness of Life and fruitfulness in the works of Righteousness unto the praise of God by Jesus Christ. In my judgment Luther spake the truth when he said amisso Articulo Justificationis simul amissa est tota Doctrina Christiana And I wish he had not been a true Prophet when he foretold that in the following Ages the Doctrine hereof would be again obscured the Causes whereof I have elsewhere enquired into Some late Writers indeed among the Protestants have endeavoured to reduce the controversie about Justification with the Papists unto an Appearance of a far less real Difference then is usually judged to be in it And a good work it is no doubt to pare off all unnecessary occasions of Debate and Differences in Religion provided we go not so near the Quick as to let out any of its vital Spirits The way taken herein is to proceed upon some Concessions of the most sober among the Papists in their Ascriptions unto Grace and the Merit of Christ on the one side and the express judgment of the Protestants variously delivered of the necessity of good works to them that are justified Besides it appears that in different expressions which either party adhere unto as it were by Tradition the same things are indeed intended Among them who have laboured in this kind Ludovicus le Blanc for his perspicuity and plainness his moderation and freedom from a contentious frame of Spirit is pene solus legi dignus He is like the Ghost of Tiresias in this matter But I must needs say that I have not seen the effect that might be desired of any such undertaking For when each party comes unto the Interpretation of their own Concessions which is ex communi jure to be allowed unto them and which they will be sure to do in compliance with their Judgment in the substance of the Doctrine wherein the main stress of the Difference lies the distance and breach continue as Wide as ever they were Nor is there the least ground towards peace obtained by any of our condescensions or
only by works of Righteousness which men did themselves in Obedience unto the Commands of God but also by the strict observance of many Inventions of what they called the Church with an Ascription of a strange Efficacy to the same Ends unto missatical Sacrifices Sacramentals Absolutions Pennances Pilgrimages and other the like Superstitions Hereby they observed that the Consciences of men were kept in perpetual disquietments perplexities fears and bondage exclusive of that Rest Assurance and Peace with God through the Blood of Christ which the Gospel proclaims and tenders And when the Leaders of the People in that Church had observed this that indeed the ways and means which they proposed and presented would never bring the Souls of men to Rest nor give them the least Assurance of the pardon of sins they made it a part of their Doctrine that the belief of the pardon of our own sins and Assurance of the Love of God in Christ were false and pernicious For what should they else do when they knew well enough that in their way and by their propositions they were not to be attained Hence the principal Controversie in this matter which the Reformed Divines had with those of the Church of Rome was this whether there be according unto and by the Gospel a state of Rest and assured Peace with God to be attained in this life And having all Advantages imaginable for the proof hereof from the very nature use and end of the Gospel from the Grace Love and Design of God in Christ from the Efficacy of his Mediation in his Oblation and Intercession they assigned these things to be the especial Object of Justifying Faith and that Faith it self to be a fiduciary Trust in the especial Grace and Mercy of God through the blood of Christ as proposed in the Promises of the Gospel That is they directed the Souls of men to seek for peace with God the pardon of sin and a Right unto the Heavenly Inheritance by placing their sole Trust and Confidence in the mercy of God by Christ alone But yet withall I never read any of them I know not what others have done who affirmed that every true and sincere Believer always had a full Assurance of the Especial Love of God in Christ or of the pardon of his own sins though they plead that this the Scripture requires of them in a way of Duty and that this they ought to aim at the Attainment of And these things I shall leave as I find them unto the use of the Church For I shall not contend with any about the way and manner of expressing the Truth where the substance of it is retained That which in these things is aimed at is the Advancement and Glory of the Grace of God in Christ with the conduct of the Souls of men unto Rest and Peace with him Where this is attained or aimed at and that in the way of Truth for the substance of it variety of Apprehensions and Expressions concerning the same things may tend unto the useful exercise of the Faith and Edification of the Church Wherefore neither opposing nor rejecting what hath been delivered by others as their Judgments herein I shall propose my own thoughts concerning it not without some hopes that they may tend to communicate Light in the knowledge of the thing it self enquired into and the Reconciliation of some differences about it amongst Learned and Holy men I say therefore That the Lord Jesus Christ himself as the Ordinance of God in his work of Mediation for the Recovery and Salvation of lost sinners and as unto that End proposed in the Promise of the Gospel is the adequate proper Object of Justifying Faith or of saving Faith in its Work and Duty with respect unto our Justification The Reason why I thus state the Object of Justifying Faith is because it compleatly answers all that is ascribed unto it in the Scripture and all that the nature of it doth require What belongs unto it as Faith in general is here supposed and what is peculiar unto it as Justifying is fully expressed And a few things will serve for the Explication of the Thesis which shall afterwards be confirmed 1. The Lord Jesus Christ himself is asserted to be the proper Object of Justifying Faith For so it is required in all those Testimonies of Scripture where that Faith is declared to be our believing in him on his name our receiving of him or looking unto him whereunto the Promise of Justification and Eternal Life is annexed whereof afterwards See Joh. 1.12 chap. 3.16 36. chap. 6.29 47. chap. 7.38 chap. 15.25 Act. 10.41 Act. 13.38 39. Act. 16.31 Act. 26.18 c. 2. He is not proposed as the Object of our Faith unto the Justification of Life absolutely but as the Ordinance of God even the Father unto that end who therefore also is the immediate Object of Faith as Justifying in what respects we shall declare immediately So Justification is frequently ascribed unto Faith as peculiarly acted on him Joh. 5.24 He that believeth on him that sent me hath Everlasting Life and shall not come into Judgment but is passed from Death into Life And herein is comprized that Grace Love and Favour of God which is the principal moving cause of our Justification Rom. 3.23 24. Add hereunto Joh. 6.29 and the Object of Faith is compleat This is the Work of God that ye believe on him whom he hath sent God the Father as sending and the Son as sent that is Jesus Christ in the work of his Mediation as the Ordinance of God for the Recovery and Salvation of lost sinners is the Object of our Faith See 1 Pet. 1.21 3. That he may be the Object of our Faith whose general nature consisteth in Assent and which is the Foundation of all its other Acts He is proposed in the promises of the Gospel which I therefore place as concurring unto its compleat Object Yet do I not herein consider the Promises meerly as peculiar divine Revelations in which sense they belong unto the formal Object of Faith but as they contain propose and exhibit Christ as the Ordinance of God and the Benefits of his Mediation unto them that do believe There is an especial Assent unto the Promises of the Gospel wherein some place the nature and essence of Justifying Faith or of Faith in its Work and Duty with respect unto our Justification And so they make the Promises of the Gospel to be the proper Object of it And it cannot be but that in the Actings of Justifying Faith there is a peculiar Assent unto them Howbeit this being only an Act of the mind neither the whole nature nor the whole work of Faith can consist therein Wherefore so far as the Promises concur to the compleat Object of Faith they are considered materially also namely as they contain propose and exhibit Christ unto Believers And in that sense are they frequently affirmed in the Scripture to be the
33.24 Psal. 32.1 2. Rom. 3.23 24 25. Chap. 8.1 33 34. 2 Cor. 5.21 Gal. 3.13 14. Of what use the Declaration of this Process in the Justification of a Sinner may be hath been in some measure before declared And if many did seriously consider that all these things do concur and are required unto the Justification of every one that shall be saved it may be they would not have such slight thoughts of sin and the way of Deliverance from the guilt of it as they seem to have From this Consideration did the Apostle learn that Terror of the Lord which made him so earnest with men to seek after Reconciliation 2 Cor. 5.10 11. I had not so long insisted on the signification of the words in the Scripture but that a right understanding of it doth not only exclude the pretences of the Romanists about the infusion of an habit of Charity from being the formal cause of our Justification before God but may also give occasion unto some to take advice into what place or consideration they can dispose their own personal inherent Righteousness in their Justification before him CHAP. V. The Distinction of a first and second Justification Examined The Continuation of Justification whereon it doth depend BEfore we enquire immediately into the nature and causes of Justification there are some things yet previously to be considered that we may prevent all Ambiguity and misunderstanding about the Subject to be treated of I say therefore that the Evangelical Justification which alone we plead about is but one and is at once compleated About any other Justification before God but one we will not contend with any Those who can find out another may as they please ascribe what they will unto it or ascribe it unto what they will Let us therefore consider what is offered of this nature Those of the Roman Church do ground their whole Doctrine of Justification upon a distinction of a double Justification which they call the first and the second The first Justification they say is the infusion or the Communication unto us of an inherent principle or habit of Grace or Charity Hereby they say Original sin is extinguished and all habits of sin are expelled This Justification they say is by Faith the Obedience and Satisfaction of Christ being the only meritorious cause thereof Only they dispute many things about preparations for it and dispositions unto it Under those terms the Council of Trent included the Doctrine of the Schoolmen about meritum de congruo as both Hosius and Andradius confess in the defence of that Council And as they are explained they come much to one however the Council warily avoided the name of merit with respect unto this their first Justification And the use of Faith herein which with them is no more but a general assent unto Divine Revelation is to bear the principal part in these preparations So that to be Justified by Faith according unto them is to have the mind prepared by this kind of believing to receive Gratiam gratum facientem an habit of Grace expelling sin and making us acceptable unto God For upon this believing with those other Duties of Contrition and Repentance which must accompany it it is meet and congruous unto Divine Wisdom Goodness and Faithfulness to give us that Grace whereby we are justified And this according unto them is that Justification whereof the Apostle Paul treats in his Epistles from the procurement whereof he excludes all the Works of the Lavv. The second Justification is an effect or consequent hereof And the proper formal cause thereof is Good Works proceeding from this Principle of Grace and Love Hence are they the Righteousness wherewith Believers are Righteous before God Whereby they merit eternal life The Righteousness of Works they call it and suppose it taught by the Apostle James This they constantly affirm to make us justos ex injustis wherein they are followed by others For this is the way that most of them take to salve the seeming repugnancy between the Apostle Paul and James Paul they say treats of the first Justification only whence he excludes all Works for it is by Faith in the manner before described But James treats of the second Justification which is by good Works So Bellar. lib. 2. cap. 16. and lib. 4. cap. 18. And it is the express Determination of those at Trent Sess. 6. cap. 10. This distinction was coyned unto no other end but to bring in Confusion into the whole Doctrine of the Gospel Justification through the free Grace of God by Faith in the Blood of Christ is evacuated by it Sanctification is turned into a Justification and corrupted by making the fruits of it meritorious The whole nature of Evangelical Justification consisting in the gratuitous pardon of Sin and the Imputation of Righteousness as the Apostle expresly affirms and the declaration of a Believing Sinner to be Righteous thereon as the Word alone signifies is utterly defeated by it Howbeit others have embraced this distinction also though not absolutely in their sense So do the Socinians Yea it must be allowed in some sense by all that hold our inherent Righteousness to be the cause of or to have any influence into our Justification before God For they do allow of a Justification which in order of nature is antecedent unto Works truly Gracious and Evangelical But consequential unto such Works there is a Justification differing at least in degree if not in nature and kind upon the difference of its formal cause which is our new Obedience from the former But they mostly say it is only the continuation of our Justification and the encrease of it as to degrees that they intend by it And if they may be allowed to turn Sanctification into Justification and to make a progress therein or an encrease thereof either in the root or fruit to be a new Justification they may make twenty Justifications as well as two for ought I know For therein the inward man is renewed day by day 2 Cor. 4.16 and Believers go from strength to strength are changed from Glory to Glory 2 Cor. 3.18 by the Addition of one Grace unto another in their exercise 2 Pet. 1.5 6 7 8. and increasing with the encrease of God Col. 2.19 do in all things grow up into him who is the Head Ephes. 4.15 And if their Justification consist herein they are justified anew every day I shall therefore do these two things 1 Shew that this distinction is both unscriptural and irrational 2 Declare what is the continuation of our Justification and whereon it doth depend Justification by Faith in the Blood of Christ may be considered either as to the nature and essence of it or as unto its Manifestation and Declaration The Manifestation of it is twofold 1 Initial in this life 2 Solemn and compleat at the day of Judgment whereof we shall treat afterwards The Manifestation of it in this life respects either
unto the ultimate manifestation of Divine Glory in the Creation and Guidance of all things are sufficiently manifest And whence it appears how little force there is in that Argument which some pretend to be of so great weight in this cause As every one they say shall be judged of God at the last day in the same way and manner or on the same Ground is he justified of God in this life But by Works and not by Faith alone every one shall be judged at the last day Wherefore by Works and not by Faith alone every one is justified before God in this life For 1. It is no where said that we shall be judged at the last day ex operibus but only that God will render unto men secundum opera But God doth not justifie any in this life secundum opera Being justified freely by his Grace And not according to the Works of Righteousness which we have done And we are every where said to be justified in this life ex fide per fidem but no where propter fidem or that God justifieth us secundum fidem by Faith but not for our Faith nor according unto our Faith And we are not to depart from the expressions of the Scripture where such a difference is constantly observed 2. It is somewhat strange that a man should be judged at the last day and justified in this life just in the same way and manner that is with respect unto Faith and Works when the Scripture doth constantly ascribe our Justification before God unto Faith without Works and the Judgment at the last day is said to be according unto Works without any mention of Faith 3. If Justification and eternal Judgment proceed absolute-on the same Grounds Reasons and Causes then if men had not done what they shall be condemned for doing at the last day they should have been justified in this life But many shall be condemned only for sins against the light of nature Rom. 2.12 as never having the written Law or Gospel made known unto them Wherefore unto such persons to abstain from sins against the light of nature would be sufficient unto their Justification without any knowledge of Christ or the Gospel 4. This Proposition that God pardons men their Sins gives them the Adoption of Children with a right unto the Heavenly Inheritance according to their Works is not only foraign to the Gospel but contradictory unto it and destructive of it as contrary unto all express Testimonies of the Scripture both in the old Testament and the new where these things are spoken of But that God judgeth all men and rendreth unto all men at the last Judgment according unto their Works is true and affirmed in the Scripture 5. In our Justification in this life by Faith Christ is considered as our Propitiation and Advocate as he who hath made Atonement for sin and brought in everlasting Righteousness But at the last day and in the last Judgment he is considered only as the Judge 6. The end of God in our Justification is the Glory of his Grace Eph. 1.6 But the end of God in the last Judgment is the Glory of his remunerative Righteousness 2 Tim. 4.8 7. The Representation that is made of the final Judgment Math. 7. and Chap. 25. is only of the visible Church And therein the plea of Faith as to the profession of it is common unto all and is equally made by all Upon that plea of Faith it is put unto the trial whether it were sincere true Faith or no or only that which was dead and barren And this trial is made solely by the fruits and effects of it and otherwise in the publick declaration of things unto all it cannot be made Otherwise the Faith whereby we are justified comes not into Judgment at the last day See Joh. 5.24 with Mark 16.16 CHAP. VII Imputation and the Nature of it with the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ in particular THe first express Record of the Justification of any sinner is of Abraham Others were justified before him from the Beginning and there is that affirmed of them which sufficiently evidenceth them so to have been But this Prerogative was reserved for the Father of the Faithful that his Justification and the express way and manner of it should be first entered on the Sacred Record So it is Gen. 15.6 He believed in the Lord and it was counted unto him for Righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was accounted unto him or imputed unto him for Righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was counted reckoned imputed And it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed unto him but for us also unto whom it shall be imputed if we believe Rom. 4.23 24. Wherefore the first express Declaration of the nature of Justification in the Scripture affirms it to be by Imputation The Imputation of somewhat unto Righteousness And this done in that place and instance which is Recorded on purpose as the president and example of all those that shall be justified As he was justified so are we and no otherwise Under the new Testament there was a necessity of a more full and clear Declaration of the Doctrine of it For it is among the first and most principal parts of that Heavenly mystery of Truth which was to be brought to light by the Gospel And besides there was from the first a strong and Dangerous Opposition made unto it For this matter of Justification the Doctrine of it and what necessarily belongs thereunto was that whereon the Jewish Church broke off from God refused Christ and the Gospel perishing in their sins as is expresly declared Rom. 9.31 10.3 4. And in like manner a dislike of it an Opposition unto it ever was and ever will be a principle and cause of the Apostasie of any professing Church from Christ and the Gospel that falls under the power and deceit of them as it fell out afterwards in the Churches of the Galatians But in this state the Doctrine of Justification was fully declared stated and vindicated by the Apostle Paul in a peculiar manner And he doth it especially by affirming and proving that we have the Righteousness whereby and wherewith we are justified by Imputation or that our Justification consists in the non-Imputation of sin and the Imputation of Righteousness But yet although the first Recorded instance of Justification and which was so recorded that it might be an example and represent the Justification of all that should be justified unto the end of the World is expressed by Imputation and Righteousness imputed and the Doctrine of it in that great case wherein the eternal welfare of the Church of the Jews or their ruine was concerned is so expressed by the Apostle yet is it so fallen out in our days that nothing in Religion is more maligned more reproached more despised then the Imputation of Righteousness unto us or an Imputed Righteousness A putative Righteousness the
shall not farther here insist on this Testimony Many others also unto the same purpose I shall wholly omit namely all those wherein the Saints of God or the Church in an humble acknowledgment and confession of their own sins do betake themselves unto the Mercy and Grace of God alone as dispensed through the Mediation and Blood of Christ and all those wherein God promiseth to pardon and blot out our Iniquities for his own sake for his names sake to bless the people not for any good that was in them nor for their Righteousness nor for their Works the consideration whereof he excludes from having any influence into any actings of his Grace towards them And all those wherein God expresseth his Delight in them alone and his Approbation of them who hope in his mercy trust in his name betaking themselves unto him as their only Refuge pronouncing them accursed who trust in any thing else or glory in themselves such as contain singular promises unto them that betake themselves unto God as Fatherless Hopeless and lost in themselves There is none of the Testimonies which are multiplied unto this purpose but they sufficiently prove that the best of Gods Saints have not a Righteousness of their own whereon they can in any sense be justified before God For they do all of them in the places referred unto renounce any such Righteousness of their own all that is in them all that they have done or can do and betake themselves unto Grace and Mercy alone And whereas as we have before proved God in the Justification of any doth exercise Grace towards them with respect unto a Righteousness whereon he declares them Righteous and accepted before him they do all of them respect a Righteousness which is not inherent in us but imputed us Herein lies the substance of all that we enquire into in this matter of Justification All other disputes about qualifications conditions causes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any kind of Interest for own Works and Obedience in our Justification before God are but the speculations of men at ease The Conscience of a convinced sinner who presents himself in the presence of God finds all practically reduced unto this one point namely whether he will trust unto his own personal inherent Righteousness or in a full Renuntiation of it betake himself unto the Grace of God and the Righteousness of Christ alone In other things he is not concerned And let men phrase his own Righteousness unto him as they please let them pretend it meritorious or only Evangelical not legal only an accomplishment of the condition of the new Covenant a cause without which he cannot be justified it will not be easie to frame his mind unto any confidence in it as unto Justification before God So as not to deceive him in the Issue The second part of the present Argument is taken from the nature of the thing it self or the consideration of this personal inherent Righteousness of our own what it is and wherein it doth consist and of what use it may be in our Justification And unto this purpose it may be observed 1. That we grant an inherent Righteousness in all that do believe as hath been before declared For the fruit of the Spirit is in all Goodness and Righteousness and Truth Ephes. 5.9 Being made free from sin we become the Servants of Righteousness Rom. 6.20 And our Duty it is to follow after Righteousness Godliness Faith Love Meekness 1 Tim. 2.22 And although Righteousness be mostly taken for an especial Grace or Duty distinct from other Graces and Duties yet we acknowledge that it may be taken for the whole of our Obedience before God and the word is so used in the Scripture where our own Righteousness is opposed unto the Righteousness of God And it is either Habitual or Actual There is an Habitual Righteousness inherent in Believers as they have put on the new man which after God is created in Righteousness and true Holiness Ephes. 4.24 As they are the Workmanship of God created in Jesus Christ unto good Works Chap. 2.8 And there is an Actual Righteousness consisting in those good Works whereunto we are so created or the fruits of Righteousness which are to the praise of God by Jesus Christ. And concerning this Righteousness it may be observed 1 That men are said in the Scripture to be just or righteous by it but no one is said to be justified by it before God 2 That it is not ascribed unto or found in any but those that are actually justified in order of nature antecedent thereunto This being the constant Doctrine of all the reformed Churches and Divines it is an open Calumny whereby the contrary is ascribed unto them or any of those who believe the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto our Justification before God So Bellarmine affirms that no Protestant Writers acknowledge an inherent Righteousness but only Bucer and Chemnitius when there is no one of them by whom either the thing it self or the necessity of it is denied But some excuse may be made for him from the manner whereby they expressed themselves wherein they always carefully distinguished between inherent Holiness and that Righteousness whereby we are justified But we are now told by one that if we should affirm it an Hundred times he could scarce believe us This is somewhat severe for although he speaks but to one yet the charge falls equally upon all who maintain that Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ which he denies who being at least the generality of all Protestant Divines they are represented either as so foolish as not to know what they say or so dishonest as to say one thing and believe another But he endeavours to justifie his censure by sundry Reasons And first he says that inherent Righteousness can on no other account be said to be ours than that by it we are made Righteous that is that it is the condition of our Justification required in the new Covenant This being denied all inherent Righteousness is denied But how is this proved what if one should say that every Believer is inherently Righteous but yet that this inherent Righteousness was not the condition of his Justification but rather the consequent of it and that it is no where required in the new Covenant as the condition of our Justification how shall the contrary be made to appear The Scripture plainly affirms that there is such an inherent Righteousness in all that believe and yet as plainly that we are justified before God by Faith without works Wherefore that it is the condition of our Justification and so antecedent unto it is expresly contrary unto that of the Apostle unto him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his Faith is counted unto him for Righteousness Rom. 4.5 Nor is it the condition of the Covenant it self as that whereon the whole Grace of the Covenant is suspended For as it is
for himself in a way of Duty And the truth is if the Obedience of Christ had respect unto himself only that is If he yielded it unto God on the necessity of his condition and did not do it for us I see no foundation left to assert his merit upon no more then I do for the Imputation of it unto them that believe That which we plead is That the Lord Christ fulfilled the whole Law for us he did not only undergo the penalty of it due unto our sins but also yielded that perfect Obedience which it did require And herein I shall not immix my self in the debate of the distinction between the Active and Passive Obedience of Christ. For he exercised the highest Active Obedience in his suffering when he offered himself to God through the Eternal Spirit And all his Obedience considering his Person was mixed with suffering as a part of his Exinanition and Humiliation whence it is said That though he were a Son yet learned he obedience by the things that he suffered And however doing and suffering are in various categories of things yet Scripture testimonies are not to be regulated by Philosophical artifices and terms And it must needs be said that the Sufferings of Christ as they were purely penal are imperfectly called His passive Righteousness For all Righteousness is either in habit or in action whereof suffering is neither nor is any Man righteous or so esteemed from what he suffereth Neither do sufferings give satisfaction unto the commands of the Law which require only Obedience And hence it will unavoidably follow that we have need of more then the meer sufferings of Christ whereby we may be justified before God if so be that any Righteousness be required thereunto But the whole of what I intend is That Christs fulfilling of the Law in Obedience unto its commands is no less imputed unto us for our Justification then his undergoing the Penalty of it is I cannot but judge it sounds ill in the ears of all Christians That the Obedience of our Lord Jesus Christ as our Mediator and Surety unto the whole Law of God was for himself alone and not for us or that what he did therein was not that he might be the end of the Law for Righteousness unto them that do believe nor a means of the fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law in us especially considering that the Faith of the Church is That he was given to us born to us that for us Men and for our salvation he came down from Heaven and did and suffered what was required of him But whereas some who deny the Imputation of the Obedience of Christ unto us for our Justification do insist principally on the second thing mentioned namely the unusefulness of it I shall under this first part of the charge consider only the Arguings of Socinus which is the whole of what some at present do indeavor to perplex the truth withal To this purpose is his discourse Part 3. cap. 5. de Servat Jam vero manifestum est Christum quia homo natus fuerat quidem ut inquit Paulus factus sub lege legi divinae inquam quae aeterna immutabilis est non minus quam caeteri homines obnoxium fuisse Alioqui potuisset Christus aeternam Dei legem negligere sive etiam universam si voluisset infringere quod impium est vel cogitare Immo ut supra alicubi explicatum fuit nisi ipse Christus legi divinae servandae obnoxius fuisset ut ex Pauli verbis colligitur non potuisset iis qui ei legi servandae obnoxii sunt opem ferre eos ad immortalitatis firmam spem traducere Non differebat igitur hac quidem ex parte Christus quando homo natus erat a caeteris hominibus Quocirca nec etiam pro aliis magis quam quilibet alius homo legem divinam conservando satisfacere potuit quippe qui ipse eam servare omnino debuit I have transcribed his words that it may appear with whose weapons some young Disputers among our selves do contend against the Truth The substance of his Plea is That our Lord Jesus Christ was for himself or on his own account obliged unto all that obedience which he performed And this he indeavors to prove with this Reason Because if it were otherwise then he might if he would have neglected the while Law of God and have broken it at his pleasure For he forgot to consider That if he were not obliged unto it upon his own account but was so on ours whose cause he had undertaken the obligation on him unto most perfect obedience was equal to what it would have been had he been originally obliged on his own account However hence he infers that what he did could not be for us because it was so for himself no more then what any other man is bound to do in a way of duty for himself can be esteemed to have been done also for another For he will allow of none of those considerations of the Person of Christ which makes what he did and suffered of another nature and efficacy then what can be done or suffered by any other Man All that he adds in the process of his discourse is That what ever Christ did that was not required by the Law in general was upon the especial command of God and so done for himself whence it cannot be imputed unto us And hereby he excludes the Church from any benefit by the Mediation of Christ but only what consists in his Doctrine Example and the Exercise of his Power in Heaven for our good which was the thing that he aimed at But we shall consider those also which make use of his Arguments though not as yet openly unto all his Ends. To clear the Truth herein the things insuing must be observed 1. The Obedience we treat of was the Obedience of Christ the Mediator But the Obedience of Christ as the Mediator of the Covenant was the Obedience of his Person For God redeemed his Church with his own Blood Acts 20.28 It was performed in the Humane Nature but the Person of Christ was he that performed it As in the Person of a Man some of his acts as to the immediate principle of operation are acts of the Body and some are so of the Soul yet in their performance and accomplishment are they the acts of the Person So the Acts of Christ in his Mediation as to their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or immediate operation were the actings of his distinct Natures some of the Divine and some of the Humane immediately But as unto their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the perfecting efficacy of them they were the Acts of his whole Person His Acts who was that Person and whose Power of Operation was a property of his Person Wherefore the Obedience of Christ which we plead to have been for us was the Obedience of the Son of God but
were necessary unto it And two things doth the Scripture testifie unto concerning this Law 1. That it was a perfect compleat Rule of all that internal spiritual and moral Obedience which God required of the Church The Law of the Lord is perfect converting the Soul the Testimony of the Lord is sure making Wise the Simple Psal. 19.7 And it was so of all the external Duties of Obedience for matter and manner time and season that in both the Church might walk acceptably before God Isa. 8.20 And although the Original Duties of the Moral Part of the Law are often preferred before the particular Instances of Obedience in Duties of outward Worship yet the whole Law was always the whole Rule of all the Obedience internal and external that God required of the Church and which he accepted in them that did believe 2. That this Law this Rule of Obedience as it was ordained of God to be the Instrument of his Rule of the Church and by Vertue of the Covenant made with Abraham unto whose Administration it was Adapted and which its Introduction on Sinai did not disanul was accompanied with a Power and Efficacy enabling unto Obedience The Law it self as meerly preceptive and commanding administred no Power or Ability unto those that were under its Authority to yield Obedience unto it no more do the meer Commands of the Gospel Moreover under the Old Testament it enforced Obedience on the Minds and Consciences of men by the manner of its first delivery and the severity of its Sanction so as to fill them with fear and bondage and was besides accompanied with such burthensom Rules of outward Worship as made it an heavy yoke unto the people But as it was Gods Doctrine Teaching Instruction in all acceptable Obedience unto himself and was adapted unto the Covenant of Abraham it was accompanied with an Administration of effectual Grace procuring and promoting Obedience in the Church And the Law is not to be looked on as separated from those Aids unto Obedience which God administred under the Old Testament whose effects are therefore ascribed unto the Law it self See Psal. 1. Psal. 19. Psal. 119. 2. This being the Law in the sense of the Apostle and those with whom he had to do our next enquiry is what was their sense of Works or Works of the Law And I say it is plain that they intended hereby the universal Sincere Obedience of the Church unto God according unto this Law And other Works the Law of God acknowledgeth not yea it expresly condemns all Works that have any such defect in them as to render them unacceptable unto God Hence notwithstanding all the Commands that God had positively given for the strict Observance of Sacrifices Offerings and the like yet when the people performed them without Faith and Love he expresly affirms that he Commanded them not that is to be observed in such a manner In these Works therefore consisted their personal Righteousness as they walked in all the Commandments and Ordinances of the Law blameless Luk. 1.6 wherein they did instantly serve God day and night Acts 26.7 And this they esteemed to be their own Righteousness their Righteousness according unto the Law as really it was Phil. 3.6 9. For although the Pharisees had greatly corrupted the Doctrine of the Law and put false glosses on sundry Precepts of it yet that the Church in those days did by the Works of the Law understand either Ceremonial Duties only or external Works or Works with a conceit of merit or Works wrought without an internal Principle of Faith and Love to God or any thing but their own personal sincere Obedience unto the whole Doctrine and Rule of the Law there is nothing that should give the least colour of Imagination For 1. All this is perfectly stated in the Suffrage which the Scribe gave unto the Declaration of the sense and design of the Law with the Nature of the Obedâ—ence which it doth require that was made at his request by our blessed Saviour Mark 12.28 29 30 31 32 33. And one of the Scribes came and having heard them reasoning together and perceiving that he had answered them well asked him which is the first Commandment of all or as it is Matth. 22.36 Which is the great Commandment in the Law And Jesus answered him the first of all the Commandments is Hear O Israel the Lord our God is One Lord and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind and with all thy strength this is the first Commandment and the second is like namely this Thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thy self And the Scribe said unto him Well Master thou hast said the Truth for there is one God and there is none but he And to love him with all the Heart and with all the Vnderstanding and with all the Soul and with all the Strength and to love his Neighbour as himself is more then all whole burnt Offerings and Sacrifices And this so expresly given by Moses as the Sum of the Law namely Faith and Love as the Principle of all our Obedience Deut. 6.4 5. that it is marvellous what should induce any learned sober Person to fix upon any other sense of it as that it respected ceremonial or external Works only or such as may be wrought without Faith or Love This is the Law concerning which the Apostle disputes and this the Obedience wherein the Works of it do consist And more then this in the way of Obedience God never did nor will require of any in this World Wherefore the Law and the Works thereof which the Apostle excludeth from Justification is that whereby we are obliged to believe in God as One God the only God and love him with all our Hearts and Souls and our Neighbours as our selves And what Works there are or can be in any Persons regenerate or not regenerate to be performed in the strength of Grace or without it that are acceptable unto God that may not be reduced unto these Heads I know not 2. The Apostle himself declareth that it is the Law and the Works of it in the sense we have expressed that he excludeth from our Justification For the Law he speaks of is the Law of Righteousness Rom 9.31 The Law whose Righteousness is to be fulfilled in us that we may be accepted with God and freed from Condemnation Chap. 8.3 That in Obedience whereunto our own personal Righteousness doth consist whether what we judg so before Conversion Rom. 10.3 or what is so after it Phil. 3.9 The Law which if a man observe he shall live and be justified before God Rom. 2.13 Gal. 3.12 Rom. 10.5 That Law which is Holy Just and Good which discovereth and condemneth all sin whatever Rom. 7.7 9. From what hath been discoursed these two things are evident in the Confirmation of our present Argument 1. That The Law intended by the Apostle
Holiness without which no man shall see God vehemently declaming against that Doctrine as destructive of Holiness which was so fruitful in it in former days 2. It doth not appear as yet in general that an attempt to introduce a Doctrine contrary unto it hath had any great success in the Reformation of the lives of men Nor hath personal Righteousness or Holiness as yet much thrived under the conduct of it as to what may be observed It will be time enough to seek countenance unto it by declaming against that which hath formerly had better effects when it hath a little more commended it self by its fruits 3. It were not amiss if this part of the controversie might amongst us all be issued in the advise of the Apostle James Chap. 2.18 Shew me thy Faith by thy works and I will shew thee my Faith by my works Let us all labour that fruits may thus far determine of Doctrines as unto their use unto the interest of Righteousness and Holiness For that Faith which doth not evidence it self by works that hath not this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Index which James calls for whereby it may be found out and examined is of no use nor consideration herein Secondly The same Objection was from the beginning laid against the Doctrine of the Apostle Paul the same charge was managed against it which sufficiently argues that it is the same Doctrine which is now assaulted with it This himself more than once takes notice of Rom. 3.31 Do we make void the Law through Faith It is an objection that he anticipates against his Doctrine of the free Justification of sinners through Faith in the blood of Christ. And the substance of the charge included in these words is that he destroyed the Law took off all Obligation unto Obedience and brought in Antinomianism So again Chap. 6.1 What shall we say then shall we continue in sin that grace may abound Some thought this the natural and genuine consequence of what he had largely discoursed concerning Justification which he had now fully closed and some think so still If what he taught concerning the grace of God in our Justification be true it will not only follow that there will be no need of any relinquishment of sin on our part but also a continuance in it must needs tend unto the exaltation of that grace which he had so extolled The same objection he repeats again v. 15. What then shall we sin because we are not under the Law but under Grace And in sundry other places doth he obviate the same objection where he doth not absolutely suppose it especially Ephes. 2.9 10. we have therefore no Reason to be surprized with nor much to be moved at this objection and charge for it is no other but what was insinuated or managed against the Doctrine of the Apostle himself whatever inforcements are now given it by subtilty of arguing or Rhetorical exaggerations However evident it is that there are naturally in the minds of men efficacious prejudices against this part of the Mystery of the Gospel which began betimes to manifest themselves and ceased not until they had corrupted the whole Doctrine of the Church herein And it were no hard matter to discover the principal of them were that our present business However it hath in part been done before 3. It is granted that this Doctrine both singly by it self or in conjunction with whatever else concerns the grace of God by Christ Jesus is liable unto abuse by them in whom darkness and the love of sin is predominant For hence from the very beginning of our Religion some fancied unto themselves that a bare assent unto the Gospel was that Faith whereby they should be saved and that they might be so however they continued to live in sin and a neglect of all Duties of Obedience This is evident from the Epistles of John James and Jude in an especial manner Against this pernicious evil we can give no relief whilest men will love darkness more than light because their deeds are evil And it would be a fond imagination in any to think that their modellings of this Doctrine after this manner will prevent future abuse If they will it is by rendring it no part of the Gospel for that which is so was ever liable to be abused by such persons as we speak of These general observations being premised which are sufficient of themselves to discard this Objection from any place in the minds of sober men I shall only add the consideration of what answers the Apostle Paul returns unto it with a brief application of them unto our purpose The objection made unto the Apostle was that he made void the Law that he rendred good works needless and that on the supposition of his Doctrine men might live in sin unto the advancement of Grace And as unto his sense hereof we may observe 1. That he never returns that answer unto it no not once which some think is the only answer whereby it may be satisfied and removed namely the necessity of our own personal Righteousness and Obedience or Works in order unto our Justification before God For that by Faith without Works he understandeth Faith and Works is an unreasonable supposition If any do yet pretend that he hath given any such answer let them produce it as yet it hath not been made to appear And is it not strange that if this indeed were his Doctrine and the contrary a mistake of it namely that our personal Righteousness Holiness and Works had an influence into our justification and were in any sort our Righteousness before God therein that he who in an eminent manner every where presseth the necessity of them sheweth their true nature and use both in general and in particular Duties of all sorts above any of the Writers of the new Testament should not make use of this truth in answer unto an objection wherein he was charged to render them all needless and useless His Doctrine was urged with this objection as himself acknowledged and on the account of it rejected by many Rom. 10.3 4. Gal. 2.3 He did see and know that the corrupt lusts and depraved affections of the minds of many would supply them with subtile arguings against it Yea he did foresee by the Holy Spirit as appeareth in many places of his Writings that it would be perverted and abused And surely it was highly incumbent on him to obviate what in him lay these evils and so state his Doctrine upon this objection that no countenance might ever be given unto it And is it not strange that he should not on this occasion once at least somewhere or other give an intimation that although he rejected the works of the Law yet he maintained the necessity of Evangelical Works in order unto our Justification before God as the condition of it or that whereby we are justified according unto the Gospel If this were indeed his
whilest we know but in part and Prophesie but in part yet I must say that in my Judgment the usual solution of this appearing difficulty securing the Doctrine of Justification by Faith through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ from any concernment or contradiction in the Discourse of St. James Chap. 2. v. 14. to the end hath not been in the least impeached not hath had any new difficulty put upon it in some late Discourses to that purpose I should therefore utterly forbear to speak any thing hereof but that I suppose it will be expected in a Discourse of this nature and do hope that I also may contribute some light unto the clearing and vindication of the Truth To this purpose it may be observed That 1. It is taken for granted on all hands that there is no real repugnancy or contradiction between what is delivered by these two Apostles For if that were so the writings of one of them must be Pseudepigrapha or falsly ascribed unto them whose names they bear and uncanonical as the Authority of the Epistle of James hath been by some both of old and of late highly but rashly questioned Wherefore their words are certainly capable of a just Reconciliation That we cannot any of us attain thereunto or that we do not agree therein is from the darkness of our own minds the weakness of our understandings and with too many from the power of prejudices 2. It is taken also for granted on all other occasions that when there is an appearance of Repugnancy or contradiction in any places of Scripture if some or any of them do treat directly designedly and largely about the matter concerning which there is a seeming repugnancy or contradiction and others or any other speak of the same things only Obiter occasionally transiently in order unto other ends the truth is to be learned stated and fixed from the former places Or the interpretation of those places where any truth is mentioned only occasionally with reference unto other things or ends is as unto that truth to be taken from and accommodated unto those other places wherein it is the design and purpose of the Holy Penman to declare it for its own sake and to guide the Faith of the Church therein And there is not a more rational and natural Rule of the interpretation of Scripture among all them which are by common consent agreed upon 3. According unto this Rule it is unquestionable that the Doctrine of Justification before God is to be learned from the writings of the Apostle Paul and from them is light to be taken into all other places of Scripture where it is occasionally mentioned Especially it is so considering how exactly this Doctrine represents the whole Scope of the Scripture and is witnessed unto by particular Testimonies occasionally given unto the same truth without number For it must be acknowledged that he wrote of this subject of our Justification before God on purpose to declare it for its own sake and its use in the Church and that he doth it fully largely and frequently in a constant Harmony of expressions And he owns those Reasons that pressed him unto fulness and accuracy herein 1 The importance of the Doctrine it self This he declares to be such as that thereon our Salvation doth immediately depend and that it was the hinge whereon the whole Doctrine of the Gospel did turn Articulus stantis aut cadentis-Ecelesiae Gal. 2.16 21. Chap. 5.4 5. 2 The plausible and dangerous opposition that was then made unto it This was so managed and that with such specious pretences as that very many were prevailed on and turned from the truth by it as it was with the Galatians and many detained from the Faith of the Gospel out of a dislike unto it Rom. 10.3 4. What care and diligence this requireth in the Declaration of any truth is sufficiently known unto them who are acquainted with these things What zeal care and circumspection it stirred up the Apostle unto is manifest in all his writings 3 The Abuse which the corrupt nature of man is apt to put upon this Doctrine of Grace and which some did actually pervert it unto This also himself takes notice of and througly vindicates it from giving the least countenance unto such wrestings and impositions Certainly never was there a greater necessity incumbent on any person fully and plainly to teach and declare a Doctrine of truth than was on him at that time in his circumstances considering the place and duty that he was called unto And no reason can be imagined why we should not principally and in the first place learn the truth herein from his declaration and vindication of it if withal we do indeed believe that he was Divinely inspired and Divinely guided to reveal the truth for the information of the Church As unto what is delivered by the Apostle James so far as our Justification is included therein things are quite otherwise He doth not undertake to declare the Doctrine of our Justification before God but having another design in hand as we shall see immediately he vindicates it from the abuse that some in those days had put it unto as other Doctrines of the Grace of God which they turn'd into licentiousness Wherefore it is from the writings of the Apostle Paul that we are principally to learn the truth in this matter and unto what is by him plainly declared is the interpretation of other places to be accommodated 4. Some of late are not of this mind They contend earnestly that Paul is to be interpreted by James and not on the contrary And unto this end they tell us that the Writings of Paul are obscure that sundry of the antients take notice thereof that many take occasion of errors from them with sundry things of an alike nature indeed scandalous to Christian Religion And that James writing after him is presumed to give an interpretation unto his sayings which are therefore to be expounded and understood according unto that interpretation Ans. 1 As to the vindication of the Writings of St. Paul which begin now to be frequently reflected on with much severity which is one effect of the secret prevalency of the Atheism of these days as there is no need of it so it is designed for a more proper place Only I know not how any person that can pretend the least acquaintance with Antiquity can plead a passage out of Irenaeus wherein he was evidently himself mistaken or a rash word of Origen or the like in derogation from the perspicuity of the Writings of this Apostle when they cannot but know how easie it were to overwhelm them with Testimonies unto the contrary from all the famous Writers of the Church in several ages And as for instance in one Chrysostome in forty places gives an account why some men understood not his Writings which in themselves were so gloriously evident and perspicuous so for their satisfaction I shall refer them only
unto the Preface unto his Exposition of his Epistles of which kind they will be directed unto more in due season But he needs not the Testimony of men nor of the whole Church together whose safety and security it is to be built on that Doctrine which he taught In the mean time it would not be unpleasant to consider but that the perverseness of the minds of men is rather a real occasion of sorrow how those who have the same design do agree in their conceptions about his Writings for some will have it that if not all yet the most of his Epistles were Written against the Gnosticks and in the confutation of their errour others that the Gnosticks took the occasion of their errours from his Writings So bold will men make with things Divine to satisfie a present interest Secondly This was not the judgment of the ancient Church for three or four hundred years For whereas the Epistles of Paul were always esteemed the principal treasure of the Church the great guide and rule of the Christian Faith this of James was scarce received as Canonical by many and doubted of by the most as both Eusebius and Hierome do testifie Thirdly The design of the Apostle James is not at all to explain the meaning of Paul in his Epistles as is pretended but only to vindicate the Doctrine of the Gospel from the abuse of such as used their liberty for a cloak of Maliciousness and turning the Grace of God into lasciviousness continued in sin under a pretence that Grace had abounded unto that end Fourthly The Apostle Paul doth himself as we have declared vindicate his own Doctrine from such exceptions and abuses as men either made at it or turned it unto Nor have we any other Doctrine in his Epistles than what he Preached all the World over and whereby he laid the foundation of Christian Religion especially among the Gentiles These things being premised I shall briefly evidence that there is not the least Repugnancy or contradiction between what is declared by these two Apostles as unto our Justification with the causes of it And this I shall do 1. By some general considerations of the nature and tendency of both their discourses 2 By a particular explication of the context in that of St. James And under the first head I shall manifest 1 That they have not the same scope design or end in their discourses That they do not consider the same question nor state the same case nor determine on the same enquiry and therefore not speaking ad idem unto the same thing do not contradict one another 2 That as Faith is a word of various signification in the Scripture and doth as we have proved before denote that which is of divers kinds they speak not of the same Faith or Faith of the same kind and therefore there can be no contradiction in what the one ascribes unto it and the other derogates from it seeing they speak not of the same Faith 3 That they do not speak of Justification in the same sense nor with respect unto the same ends 4 That as unto Works they both intend the same namely the Works of Obedience unto the moral Law As to the scope and design of the Apostle Paul the question which he answereth the case which he proposeth and determines upon are manifest in all his Writings especially his Epistles unto the Romans and Galatians The whole of his purpose is to declare how a guilty convinced sinner comes through Faith in the blood of Christ to have all his sins pardoned to be accepted with God and obtain a right unto the Heavenly inheritance that is be acquitted and justified in the sight of God And as the Doctrine hereof belonged eminently unto the Gospel whose Revelation and Declaration unto the Gentiles was in a peculiar manner committed unto him so as we have newly observed he had an especial reason to insist much upon it from the opposition that was made unto it by the Jews and Judaizing Christians who ascribed this priviledge unto the Law and our own Works of Obedience in compliance therewithal This is the case he states this the question he determines in all his Discourses about Justification and in the explication thereof declares the nature and causes of it as also vindicates it from all exceptions For whereas men of corrupt minds and willing to indulge unto their lusts as all men naturally desire nothing but what God hath made eternally inconsistent namely that they may live in sin here and come to blessedness hereafter might conclude that if it were so as he declared that we are justified freely through the Grace of God by the Imputation of a Righteousness that Originally and inherently is not our own then was there no more required of us no relinquishment of sin no attendance unto the duties of Righteousness and Holiness he obviates such impious suggestions and shews the inconsequence of them on the Doctrine that he taught But this he doth not do in any place by intimating or granting that our own Works of Obedience or Righteousness are necessary unto or have any causal influence into our Justification before God Had there been a Truth herein were not a supposition thereof really inconsistent with the whole of his Doctrine and destructive of it he would not have omitted the Plea of it nor ought so to have done as we have shewed And to suppose that there was need that any other should explain and vindicate his Doctrine from the same exceptions which he takes notice of by such a Plea as he himself would not make use of but rejects is foolish and impious The Apostle James on the other hand had no such scope or design or any such occasion for what he wrote in this matter He doth not enquire or give intimation of any such enquiry he doth not state the Case how a guilty convinced Sinner whose mouth is stopped as unto any plea or excuse for himself may come to be justified in the sight of God that is receive the Pardon of sins and the gift of Righteousness unto life To resolve this question into our own Works is to overthrow the whole Gospel But he had in hand a business quite of another nature For as we have said there were many in those days who professed the Christian Religion or Faith in the Gospel whereon they presumed that as they were already justified so that there was nothing more needful unto them that they might be saved A desirable estate they thought they had attained suited unto all the interest of the Flesh whereby they might live in Sin and neglect of all Duty of Obedience and yet be eternally saved Some suppose that this pernicious conceit was imbibed by them from the poysonous Opinions that some had then divulged according as the Apostle Paul foretold that it would come to pass 2 Tim. 4.1 2 3. For it is generally conceived that Simon Magus and his followers