c. 4. § 15. c. 6. § 12. 19. 21. If thou wilt bee perfect goâ⦠sell all c. l. 7. â⦠7. § 3. 20. 1. ad 16. The parable of the workemen in the vineyard lib. 8. cap. 5. § 6 7. Matth. 25. 21. Well done thou good and faithfull servant c. lib. 8. cap. 5. § 15. 25. 34. 35. Come ye blessed of my Father inherit c. lib. 7. c. 4. § 12. and c. 5. § 11. and lib. 8. c. 5. § 14 15 16. Marke 7. 29. For this saying goe thy way â⦠6. c. 15. § 12. Luke 1. 6. Righteous before God c. lib. 2. cap. 3. § 1. 6. 38. VVith what measure you meet c. lib. 8. cap. 5. § 13. 7. 47. Her sinnes which are many are forgiven for she loved much lib. 6. cap. 12 § 2. 3. 7. 55. Thy faith hath saved thee lib. 6. cap. 15. § 11. 10. 7. The labourer is worthy of his hire lib. 8. cap. 5. § 22. 17. 5. Increase our faith l. 6. c. 3. § 3. 17. 7. 8 9 10. VVhen you have done all say that ye are unprofitable servants lib. 8. cap. 2. § 5. 6 c. 20. 35. They that shall be accounted worthy to obtaine that world c. lib. 8. cap. 5. § 22. Iohn 1. 12. To so many as beleeved he gave power to be the sonnes of God c. lib. 6. cap. 10. § 9. 1. 29. Behold the Lambe of God which takes away the sinne of the world lib. 2. cap. 8. § 2. 6. 64. Iesus knew from the beginning who beleeved not lib. 6. cap. 2 § 7. 12. 42 43. Many of the Rulers beleeved on him but did not confesse him c. lib. 6. cap. 3. § 8. 14. 23. If a man love me he will keep my words and my Father will love him lib. 7. cap. 6. § 22. 15. 13. Greater love hath no man than this that a man lay downe his life for his friends lib. 5. cap. 7. § 3. Acts of the Apostles 13. 38 39. Through this Man is preached unââ¦o you remission of sinnes and by him all that beleeve are justified c. Lib. 4. cap. 6. § 1. 2 c. ad 9. 15. 9. Purifying their hearts by faith Lib. 6. cap. 15. § 9. 15. 10. A yoke which neither we nor our Fathers were able to beare lib. 4. cap. 5. § 9. Epistle to the Romanes 1. 16 17. The Gospell the power of God c. in it is revealed the righteousnesse of God c. Lib. 1. cap. 1. § 1. 3. 24. Being justââ¦fied freely by his race through the redemption c. l. 3. c. 3. 4. 3. 27. Boasting exââ¦luded by what Law c. lib. 7. cap. 3. § 2. 4. 2. If Abraham were justified by workes he hath whereof to glory but not before God lib. 7. cap. 3. § 2. 4. 5 6. 11. The Lord imputeth righteousnesse lib. 1. cap. 3. § 10. 4 4. 5. To him that worketh the reward is not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that worketh not but beleeveth c lib. 1. cap. 3. § 6. lib. 6. cap. 15. § 7. 4. 20. 21 22. Abraham being strong in faith gave glory to God therfore it was imputed to him for righteousnes lib. 6. § 13. cap. 15. 4. 25. Who was delivered for our sins and rose againe for our justification lib. 4. cap. 12. § 2. 5. 3 4. Tribulation worketh patience and patience probation c. l. 7. c. 5. § 7. 5. 5. The love of God shed abroad in our hearts by his holy Spirit lib. 3. cap. 5. 5. 17 18 19. For as by one mans offence c. lib. 2. cap. 5. § 1. 2 c. lib. 4. cap. 10. § 1. 2 c. ad 7. 5. 19. As by the disobedience of one many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous lib. 1. cap. 4. § 8. lib. 2. cap. 5. § 1. 2. lib. 2. cap. 8. § 10. lib. 5. cap. 2. § 1. 5. 21. As sinne reigned unto death even so grace c. lib. 4. cap. 12. § 5. 6. 4 6. Wee are burââ¦ed with him by baptisme into death lib. 8. cap. 10. § 17. 6. 13. Neither yeeld your members as instruments of unrighteousnesse c. lib. 4. cap. 12. § 6. 6. 19. As ye have yeelded your members servants to uncleannes c. l. 7. § 19. c. 8. 6. 22. Ye have your fruit unto holines and the end everlasting life lib. 4. c. 12. § 11. 6. 23. For the wages of sinne is death but the gift of God is eternall life c. lib. 8. cap. 2. § 13 c. 7. 18. To will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I finde not lib. 4. cap. 5. § 10. 8. 3. The impossibility of the Law in that it was weake through the flesh c. lib. 4. cap. 5. § 11. 8. 4. That the justification of the Law might bee fulfilled in us lib. 7. cap. 7. § 10. 11. 8. 10. The body is dead by reason of sinne but the Spirit is life because of righteousnesse lib. 3. cap. 5. § 7. 8. lib. 4. cap. 12. § 7 8. 13. If through the Spirit you mortifie the deeds of the body ye shall live lib. 7. cap. 4. § 11. 16. cap. 5. § 8. 8. 10. 15. 23. Lib. 4. cap. 10. § 18. 8. 15. Ye have received the Spirit of adoption c. lib. 3. c. 5. § 6. 8. 17. If yee suffer with him that yee may be glorified with him lib. 7. cap. 4. § 11. 17. 8. 16. 17 18. lib. 7. cap. 5. § 9. 8. 18. The sufferings of this present time are not worthy the glory which shall bee revealed lib. 8. cap. 2. § 18 c. ad 22. 8. 29. Conformable to the image of his sonne lib. 4. cap. 10. § 12. 8. 30. Whom he hath called them hee hath justified lib. 2. cap. 3. § 5. 8. 33 34. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods children it is God that justifieth c. lib. 1. cap. 1. § 4. 10. 4. Christ the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth lib. 1. cap. 4. § 9. 10. 10. With the heart manbeleeveth unto righteousnesse c. lib. 7. cap. 5. § 10. 10. 13 14. Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall bee saved how then shall they call upon him in whom they have not beleeved c. lib. 6. cap. 10. § 8. cap. 15. § 14. The first to the Corinthians 1. 30. Christ made unto us righteousnesse lib. 4. cap. 9. § 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 2. 6. VVe speake wisdome among them that are perfect lib. 5. cap. 7. § 10. 3. 8. Every one shall receive his own reward according to his owne labour lib. 8. c. 5. § 13. 3. 11. Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid which is Iesus Christ. lib. 6. cap. 15. § 8. 3. 12. If any man build upon this foundation gold silver c.
Exposition Ioh. 17. 17. so Ioh. 18. 37. Rom. 2. 8. ââ¦al 3. 1. 5. 7. Eph. 4. 21. 2 Thess. 2. 10 12. 1 Tim. 2. 4. 4. 3. 2 Tim. 2. 18. cum 1 Tim. 1. 19. 2 Tim. 3. 8. Heb. 10. 26 1 Pet. 1. 22. 1 Ioh. 2. 21. 2 Iob. 1. 2. Sometimes the word of Truth or of the truth Eph. 1. 13. 2 Tim. 2. 15. Iam. 1. 18. sometimes the truth of the Gospell Gal. 2. 5. 14. or the word of the truth of the Gospell Col. 1. 5. The ãâã whereof is Christ crucified 1 Cor. 1. 23. 2. 2. For this cause justifying faith is called oftentimes the faith of Christ because he is the proper Object thereof as Rom. 3. 22 26. Gal. 2. 16. 20. 3. 22. Phil. 3. 9. and faith in Christ as Act. 20. 21. 24. 24. 26. 18. Gal. 3. 26. Faith in the blood of Christ Rom. 3. 25. that faith which is in Christ Iesus 2 Tiâ⦠3. 15. sometimes the faith of the Gospell Phil. 1. 27. and which is all one the faith of the truth 2 Thess. 2. 13. Thus therfore I reason That to the beliââ¦e whereof alone and not of other things remission of sinnes justification and salvation is promised that I say is the proper object of justifying faith But to the beliefe in Christ or in the Doctrine and promises of the Gospell concerning salvation by Christ remission of sins justification and salvation is promised and not to the beliefe of other things Therefore that is the proper object of justifying faith That the Promise is made to beliefe in Christ and in the Gospell the Scriptures every whââ¦re ââ¦each as Ioh. 3. 15 16. 18. 36. 8. 24. 11. 25 26. ââ¦2 46. 20. 31. Act. 10. 43. 13. 38 39. 16 31. 26. 18. Rom. 10. 9 11. c. But not to the beliefe of other things is the promise made as of the Law or of the story of the Bible or of predictions excepting those stories and propheââ¦ies which concerne Christ. For howsoever a man cannot have a justifying faith who denieth credit to any of those other things which he findeth to be revealed by God yet not by beleeving of them but by beleeving in Christ ââ¦hee is justified § III. But here it may be objected that the faith whereby Abraham was justified had no relation to the promise of salvation by Christ but to the promises of God concerning his seed Whereunto I answere First that Abraham and all the rest of the faithfull before Christ beleeved in the promised seed which was the Messias to come and by that faith as the Papists themselves confesse were justifyed Secondly the promises which concerned his seed were either the same with the promise of the Gospell or it was implyed in them The maine promise was that in Abraham that is in his seed all Nations that is the faithfull in all Nations should be blessed For Abraham did not conceive that in himselfe all Nations should be blessed as if himselfe should be the foundation of Happinesse unto All but in his seed And so the Lord himselfe explaneth in Gen. 22. 18. and in thy seed that is in Christ all the nations of the Earth shall be blessed And so Zacharie Luk. 1. 68. 69 73. and Peter Act. 3. 25. This promise made to Abraham is the very same with the promise of the Gospell For as the Apostle saith the Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the Heathen through faith ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã preached before the Gospell to Abraham saying in thee that is in thy seed shall all nations be blessed Which promise as it had beene formerly made to our first parents concerning the promised seed so was it after renewed to Isaac Gen. 26. 4. and to Iacob Gen. 28. 14. and in effect to David whose sonne according to the flesh Messias was to be who is therefore called the sonne of David and the branch of David In this promised seed Abraham and all other the faithfull beleeved and by beleeving in Him were justified § IV. The other promises concerning his seed are two The former concerning the multiplication of his seed that hee should bee Father of a multitude of Nations namely in Christ and that hee would be a God to him and his seed hee doth not say to seeds as of many but as of one and to thy seed which is Christ Gal. 3. 16. that is Christ mysticall 1 Cor. 12. 12. containing the multitude of the faithfull in all Nations both Iewes and Gentiles This promise therefore implyeth the former that in Christ the promised seed Abraham himselfe and his seed that is the faithfull of all nations should be blessed and in confirmation of this promise he was called Abraham because he was to be a Father of many nations that is of the faithfull of all nations for none but they are accounted Abrahams seed Rom. 9. 7 8. Gal. 3. 7. 29. and for the same cause hee received the Sacrament of Circumcision as a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith Rom. 4. 11. And that in this promise of the multiplication of his seed the promise of the Gospell was included appeareth because his faith in this promise was imputed to him for righteousnesse not for the the approbation or justifying of that act as it happened in the zealous act of Phineas Psal. 106. 30. but for the justification of his person which could not be justified but by faith in Christ. Which the Papists themselves cannot denie The chiefe thing which Abraham apprehended in the promise concerning his seed was that although he were an hundred yeere old and Sarah past child-bearing yet he should have seed by her and in that seed himselfe and all the faithfull of all Nations should be blessed § V. The latter is that they should possesse the land of promise by which as by a type was signified the heavenly Canaan under which to all the faithfull was promised the Kingdome of heaven which was the Countrey which they professing themselves Pilgrimes did seeke Heb. 11. 13 14 15 16. and into which eternall rest Iesus was to bring them who beleââ¦ve even as Ioshua the type of Christ who also is called Iesus brought the Israelites after their peregrinations into that land of rest So that in the latter Promises concerning his seed and the land of promise the former was implyed concerning the promised seed and blessednesse by him as the principall object of Abrahams faith for which chiefly hee did so much affect and desire seed Insomuch that when the Lord had promised him to bee his buckler and his exceeding great reward Abraham replied Lord God what wilt thou give mee seeing I goe childlesse As Abraham therefore who rejoyced to see our Saviour Christs day and as he and the rest of the faithfull having not received the promises concerning the promised seed but having seene them a farre off were perswaded of them
that is beleeved them and embraced them were justified by faith in Christ the promised seed so are we and by nothing else And further we are to note that before those words recorded Gen. 15. 6. Abraham had by faith embraced the maine promise of the Gospell Gen. 12. 3. in thee that is in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed and by that faith was justified by which also he obeyed God leaving his owne countrey and by the same faith sojourning in the land of promise as a Pilgrime sought a better countrey that is an heavenly Therefore as S. Iames saith when Abraham in his great triall had approved himselfe to be a faithfull man that then the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse Not that then Abraham first beleeved but that then by that notable fruit of faith hee approved the truth of his faith and manifested the truth of that oracle which then by good proofe was verified of him So by the like reason may that place Gen. 15. 6. be understood that Abraham beleeved in the Lord and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Not that then Abraham either first beleeved or was then first justified for hee had beleeved the grand promise of the Gospell before and by it was justified and before this time had brought forth excellent fruits of faith Gen. Chap. 12 13 14. but that by this new act of beleeving the Promises renewed which the Apostle amplifieth Rom. 4. 18. the truth of his faith was manifested And thus Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth those words Gen. 15. 6. affirming that as S. Iames applieth them to that act ââ¦en 22. so they may be applied to all notable acts of the faith of Abraham Againe justification or imputation of righteousnesse is actus continââ¦us which is not to be restrained to the instant of our first conversion and justification but continued to them that beleeve And therefore so long as they have faith God imputeth righteousnesse unto them § VI. But for the better clearing of this point we are to take notice that Christ and his benefits or the doctrine of salvation by Christ are the proper object of justifying faith in two respects both as it justifiââ¦th befoââ¦e God and as in the Court of our owne Conscience Before God when by a lively and effectuall assent or beleefe as hath beene said wee receive and embrace Christ our Saviour with all his merits or which is all one the promises of the Gospell concerning justification and salvation by him Such was the faith of Saint Peter Math. 16. 16. and of the rest of the Apostles Ioh. 6. 69. Of Nathaniel Ioh. 1. 49. Of Martha Ioh. 11. 27. Of the Samaritanes Ioh. 4. 42. Of the Eunuch Act. 8. 37. With which whosoever are endued are borne of God 1 Ioh. 5. 1. they dwell in God and God in them 1 Ioh. 4. 14. 15. they overcome the world 1 Ioh. 5. 5. and unto them blessednesse Mat. 16. 17. Ioh. 20. 29. justification Rom. 10. 9. 10. and salvation is promised Ioh. 20. 31. Act. 16. 31. In the Court of our owne Conscience it doth justifie when wee finding that wee have the former degree which is the condition of the promise doe soundly apply the promise to our selves For hee who knoweth that hee hath the condition not onely may but must apply the promise of the Gospell to himselfe otherwise he maketh God a lyar 1 Ioh. 5. 10. This application as hath been ââ¦aid is made by a practicall syllogisme the proposition whereof or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is this whosoever doth truely beleeve in Christ hee shall be saved the assumption or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but I saith the faithfull man do beleeve in Christ the conclusion or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã therefore I shall be saved This conclusion is the voice of speciall faith Such was the faââ¦th of Iob chap. 19. 25. Of David Psal. 103 3. Of Thomas Ioh. 20. 28. Of Saint Paul Gal. 2. 20. and of all the faithfull in the Scriptures who in many places have applyed and as it were appropriated to themselves the mercies of God in Christ. And such is and ought to be the faith of all that truely beleeve For the generall alwaies includeth the particular If therefore thou doest truely beleeve that Iesus is the Saviour of all that truely beleeve in him thou art then bound to beleeve that he is thy Saviour Of this point I have treated elsewhere and have answered the objections so many as I thought worth the answearing § VII Now I come to Bellarmines dispute concerning the object of faith wherein hee endevoureth to prove and to maintaine three things First that the object of faith is not Gods speciall favour in Christ but whatsoever God hath reveââ¦led Secondly that men may be justified without speciall faith Thirdly that men are not justified by speciall faith As touching the first wee doe freely confesse that by the justifying faith we doe beleeve whatsoever wee understand to bee revealed by God And further we professe that by the virtue of justifying faith all articles of Christian Religion become after a sort the objects of speciall faith For as he who hath the Philosophers stone is said by virtue thereof to turne other metals into Gold so it may more truely be said of him who is indued with that faith whereby we are justified before God that he may and ought to make all the Articles of the catholike or dogmaticall faith the precious objects of speciall faith by applying them to his owne good and comfort which being a matter of singular use and comfort I will a little insist upon it Doest thou then beleeve by a true and a lively assent as hath been said that Iesus the Sonne of the Blessed Virgin is the erernall Sonne of God and the Saviour of all those that truely beleeve in him Thou art then bound to beleeve that hee is thy Saviour Doest thou beleeve that Christ is thy Saviour then must thou beleeve that God the Father is thy gracious and mercifull Father in Christ that he is all sufficient to bestow upon thee all good things that hee is omnipotent to protect and defend thee from all evill riding upon the heavens for thy helpe and so of the other attributes that hee is eternall to Crowne thee with everlasting happinesse that he is immutable in his love towards thee that hee is omniscient and therefore knoweth thy wants omnipresent that thou maist powre thy requests into his bosome true and faithfull to performe all his promises to thee just to forgive thee thy sinnes when thou doest confesse them and to justifie thee seeing Christ hath satisfied his justice for thee good gracious and mercifull unto thee that hee hath loved thee in Christ with an everlasting love and in him hath adopted thee to bee his Sonne and if a Sonne then also an
lively effectuall faith which worketh by love and therefore I say againe this whole dispute of the seven dispositions is meerely impertinent § IV. But some will say doe you require no preparative dispositions going before justification I answer that in adult is we doe but that no way hindereth the truth of our assertion concerning justification by faith alone wee doe confesse that to the begetting of justifying faith preparative dispositions are ordinarily required in adultis in those who be of yeares wrought partly by private education and use of other private meanes as reading meditation conference c. and partly by the publicke ministery both of the Law and of the Gospell by which first our minds are illuminated to know God and our selves and what wee shall bee in Christ if wee beleeve in him Secondly hee mollifieth our hearts and humbleth our soules ordinarily by the ministery of the Law and extraordinarily by afflictions either outward or inward which are the terrours of a distressed conscience by which when the Word will not serve the Lord draweth men as it were with a strong hand that being thus humbled we may become fit auditours of the Gospell In which the Lord to the humbled and prepared soule revealeth his unspeakeable mercies in Christ stirreth us up by the ministers of reconciliation to accept of his mercie in Christ intreating and perswading us in the name of God and in Christs stead that wee would be reconciled unto God The holy Ghost having thus knocked at the doore of our hearts at length in his good time he himselfe openeth our hearts to receive Christ by faith working in our judgments a lively assent to the doctrine of salvation by Christ and by it both an earnest desire in our hearts to be made partakers of Christ which is the desire of application and also in our wils a setled resolution to acknowledge him to be our Saviour and to rest upon him alone for salvation which is the will and purpose of application Having thus received and embraced Christ by a lively assent or beliefe and so having the condition of the promise which is faith in the next place wee proceed to actuall application by speciall faith which is farther to be confirmed by the Sacraments which are the seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith and by the practise of piety or leading of a godly life whereby wee are to make as our election and calling so also our justification sure unto us § V. But come we to his argument drawne from the seven preparative dispositions And first for faith he saith he shall not need to prove that it doth justifie because we confesse it but that it doth not justifie alone Answ. That justifying saith which is a grace infused in our regeneration we deny to justifie by way of disposing that faith which goeth before regeneration and is not infused we deny to justifie at all And such is that faith whereof he speaketh and therefore hee reckoneth without his host From our assertion he should rather have concluded thus That which is but a preparative disposition to justification doth not justifie at all that faith which goeth before regeneration is but a preparative disposition to justification as Bellarmine teacheth therefore that faith which goeth before regeneration doth not justifie at all Or thus a preparative disposition to justification doth not justifie but faith as all confesse doth justifie therefore it is not a preparative disposition to justification § VI. Yea but he will prove by authority of Scriptures by testimonies of Fathers and by reason that faith doth not justifie alone because it is but the beginning of justification and therefore other things must accompany and follow it to perfect our justification Answ. That it is the beginning of sanctification and the root of all sanctifying graces I have already confessed But the concurrence both of other inward graces and of outward obedience unto sanctification doth not hinder but that faith doth justifie alone Neither doth faith justifie as the beginning of justification only first because there are no degrees of justification before God for in the first act it is perfect and to that act continued throughout this life faith as I shewed before out of divers of the Fathers sufficeth I say sufficeth to justification and therefore is not the beginning onely but also the continuance and consummation thereof for as in the first act it justifieth so also in the continuance of justification for by it we stand and by it we live and so long as we have faith it is imputed unto us for righteousnesse even from faith to faith as it was to Abraham after he had long continued in the faith § VII His first proofe is Heb. 11. 6. Hee that commeth to God must beleeve that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Therefore faith is the first motion of comming to God which wee willingly confesse But he should have done well to have told us what is meant by comming unto God For to come unto Christ is to beleeve in him Ioh. 6. 35 37 44 65. And if that bee the meaning of the holy Ghost in this place then to come unto God is to beleeve in him by speciall faith otherwise the Apostle should enunciate idem per idem And then the meaning is this hee that would beleeve that God is his God and that he will be gracious unto him must first beleeve that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Or thus wouldest thou beleeve that Christ is thy Saviour then must thou first beleeve that hee is the Saviour of all that truely beleeve in him Or it may be that the word come in this place is to bee expounded by the word seeking He that will come unto God that is hee that will seeke God must beleeve that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him For these words comming returning seeking which properly betoken the actions of the body are by a Metaphore translated to the actions of the soule whereby is meant sometimes our conversion and turning unto God Deut. 4. 29. 30. 2 Chron. 15. 4. Esa. 9. 13. Hos. 3. 5. 5. 15. cum 6. 1. 7. 10. And if that bee the meaning of this place then nothing else can bee gathered from it but that faith is the beginning of our repentance and turning unto God Sometimes the whole study of piety whereby wee endevour to know God and to serve him 1 Chro. 28. 9. If thou seeke him that is if thou endevour to know and to serve him with an upright heart and with a willing mind 2 Chron. 14. 4. 15. 12. 17. 4. Act. 17. 27. Psal. 119. 2 3. whereupon godly and religious men are said to bee seekers of the Lord Psal. 22. 26. 24. 6. 40. 16. Esa. 51. 1. And thus faith is the beginning of all piety
and by beleeving to receive and embrace Christ. The acts of faith in sanctifying and producing morall dueties are immediate acts or imperati which faith produceth by meanes of other virtues commanded by faith such are sperare confidere amare timere obedire pati c Of justification the man indued with faith is not the efficient but the subject and the patient who receiving by faith which is his onely act the righteousnesse of Christ is thereby justified God imputing to the beleever the righteousnesse of his Sonne and therefore though to beleeve bee his owne act yet hee is not said in the active to justifie himselfe by faith but in the passive to bee justified by faith Rom. 3. 24. 28. 5. 1. But in the duties of sanctification and in all morall duties the faithfull man is the efficient of them and his faith as it is said of arts other habits is the principium agendi the principle wherby he worketh and of them faith under God is the prime cause and as some call that which is principium agendi ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Such actions are the most of those which Heb. 11. are so highly commended which though they were the fruits of justifying faith yet were the acts of faith not as it justifieth but as it sanctifieth fortifieth or otherwise qualifieth them who are endued with it and this efficiencie of faith in Greeke and Latine is oftner signified without the prepositions than with As Heb. 11. though the sence be the same Of justification therefore faith is but the instrumentall cause justifying relatively that is in respect of the object which it doth receive being the onely instrument to receive that object which alone doth justifie But of the dueties of sanctification and other morall actions such as for the most part are mentioned Heb. 11. whereof the faithfull man is the efficient justifying faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love and other virtues as affiance c. is the prime cause working them not relatively by apprehending the object but effectually producing them as principium agendi wherby Bellarmines dispute out of Heb. 11. is confuted For there it is said saith hee that by faith the Saints overcame Kingdomes wrought righteousnesse obtained the promises stopped the mouths of Lyons c. Where the particle by doth not signifie apprehension but the true cause For faith was the cause of Abels religious offering of Noahs preparing the Arke of Abrahams obedience c. All this I confesse but that which he would inferre therupon that faith therefore doth not justifie relatively by way of apprehending the object I have already answered for that which hee spake before of apprehending relatively was idle and frivolus § VII The second part of his assumption was that saith is the beginning of justice and consequently the inchoated formall cause of justification So that now belike the seven dispositions shall be the inchoated formes of justification the entire forme being but one viz. charity and consequently the disposing faith and the disposing feare and so of the rest shall be inchoated charity which is ridiculous Bellarmine in this argument as allwayes by justification understandeth sanctification whereof and of all inherent righteousnesse wee acknowledge faith to bee the beginning and consequently the beginning of that righteousnesse by which we are formally just But of justification not the beginning only but the accomplishment and perfection is to be attributed unto faith because no sooner doe we by faith lay hold upon the righteousnesse of Christ which is most perfect but wee are perfectly justified thereby And therefore the Fathers as you heard before â⦠acknowledge faith alone to suffice unto justification So Origen in Rom. 3. lib. 3. Hierome and Sedulius in Rom. 10. 10. in Gal. 3. 6. Chrysost. in Gal. 3. 6. in Tit. 1. 13. Augustin de tempore Serm. 68. Chrysââ¦log serâ⦠34. Primasius in Gal. 2. Oecumen in Col. 2. Theophylact in Gal. 3. Anselm in Rom. 4. If faith alone sufficeth unto justification then doth it not onely begin but also perfect and accomplish it For Rom. 5. 1. Being justified by faith wee have peace with God But Bellarmine endeavoureth to prove his assertion by authority of Scriptures and testimonies of Fathers His first testimony out of the Scriptures is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Where saith he faith it selfe is counted righteousnesse and consequently faith doth not apprehend the righteousnesse of Christ but faith in Christ is it selfe justice And if it be lively and perfected by Charity it shall be perfect justice if not it shall at the least be unperfect and inchoated justice Answ. If the question were concerning the approbation or justification of the act of faith or the habit I would acknowledge that the Lord doth accept the same though unperfect in it selfe as righteous As the zealous act of Phinehas was counted unto him for righteousnesse throughout all generations But the Apostle speaketh of the justification of the person who cannot by one habit and much lesse by one act of faith be formally just But forasmuch as by faith in Christ the beleever receiveth the perfect righteousnesse of Christ this faith in respect of the object doth fully justifie the beleever and is therefore counted to him for righteousnesse not that it selfe is his righteousnesse nor that he is righteous in himselfe who still in himselfe remaineth a sinner but in Christ. And such was the faith of Abraham and of all the faithfull that not in themselves but in the promised seed all that beleeve in him should be blessed that is justified The Greeke word used sometimes by the Septuagint as Gen. 18. 18. 28. 14. and retained by the Apostle Gal. 3. 8. is very significant viz. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to signifie that not in themselves but in the promised seed they should be justified and blessed for so the Apostle Rom. 4. 5 6 7. useth these words promiscuously as also Gal. 3. 8. The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the heathen through faith preached before the Gospell unto Abraham saying in thee that is in thy seed shall all nations be blessed This blessednesse therefore this justification is obtained by faith and therefore is faith counted righteousnesse because it receiveth it As for faith it selfe absolutely considered without relation to its object we according to the Popish doctrine are justified by it neither in the act of justification nor before Not before for untill it be as they speake formed with Charity it cannot justifie nor in the act for charity alone is the formall cause of justification and then only are we formally justified when Charity is infused or else there are more formall causes of justification than one which Bellarmine according to the doctrine of the Councill of Trent doth utterly deny § VIII His second testimony 1 Corinthians 3. 11. another foundation can
that the eye of the body did cure those who were stung but the brasen Serpent which was a figure of Christ beheld with the eye Nor the eye of the soule which is faith doth absolutely and by it selfe justifie or save but relatively in respect of the object which it doth behold that is to say the Lord Iesus whom God hath propounded to be a Saviour to all that see him and receive him by faith § XII His second proofe is from the speech of Christ to the woman of Canaan who had earnestly prayed unto him and would take no repulse Matth. 15. 28. O woman great is thy faith and Mar. 7. 29. for this saying goe thy way the Devill is gone out of thy daughter for here plainely saith he the efficacie of obtayning health is attributed to faith Neither may it be answered that it is one thing to speake of justification and another to speake of the cure of a bodily disease For our Lord in the very same words attributeth to faith both the one and the other For as hee said to the woman which was a sinner Luk. 7. 50. thy faith hath saved thee so in like manner to the woman whom hee cured of a bloudy issue Matth. 9. 2â⦠and to the blind man whom hee restored to sight Mark 10. 52. Answer Though the woman of Canaan and the blind man by prayer obtained their desires yet it was the prayer of faith as Saint Iames calleth it which was effectuall and prevailed with Christ Iam. 5. 16. and therefore to faith I confesse the efficacie is to be ascribed And although it may well be thought that our Saviour when hee used the same words thy faith hath saved thee to the woman which had the issue of bloud and to the blind man which hee used to the sinner whose sins he had forgiven that he being the Physitian of the soule used them in the same sence to assure them of a greater blessing than the bodily cure Matth. 9. 2. yet I doe not deny but that by faith and by the prayer of faith the health both of the body and soule is obtained for as by beleeving or apprehending by faith the righteousnesse of Christ which hee had and performed for us wee are justified so by beleeving the divine power and goodnesse of Christ many were cured of their bodily diseases And yet as it was not their faith apprehending the power and goodnes of Christ which did heale them but the power and goodnesse of Christ which by faith they apprehended as it is said Act. 3. 16. his Name by faith in his name hath made this man strong so is it not our faith absolutely whereby wee apprehend the righteousnesse of Christ which doth justifie us but the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith And whereas Bellarmine will have the like efficacie to be ascribed in justifying unto faith as in obtaining bodily health I take him at his word for hereby it is evidently proved that faith alone doth justifie for our Saviour for the obtaining of bodily health required faith onely Luk. 8. 50. Mar. 5. 36. Bee not affraid Only beleeve and the like may bee gathered out of Matth. 9. 28 29. Mark 9. 23. Iohn 11. 40. § XIII His third proofe is from the example of Abraham Rom. 4. 20 21 22. In the promise also of God he staggered not by distrust but was strengthened in faith giving glory to God most fully knowing or being fully perswaded that whatsoever he promiââ¦ed he also is able to performe therefore it was also reputed to him for righteousnesse Here saith Bellarmine the Apostle rendreth tââ¦e cause why faith was reputed to Abraham for righteousnesse because by beleeving he gave glory to God Therefore that faith pleased God by which he was glorified and therefore by the mââ¦rit of that faith which notwithstanding was the gift and grace of God hee justified Abraham His reason may thus be framed Whatsoever pleaseth God meriteth justification Abrahams faith pleased God because he was glorified thereby Therefore Abrahams faith merited justification The proposition is to bee denyed for before men can please God they must bee reconciled unto him and justified by faith therefore our pleasing of God is not a cause but a fruit of our justification and it is evident that before that promise was either made to him by God or beleeved by him Abraham was justified and therefore not by the merit of that beleefe Againe where men or their actions doe please God not in and for themselves but in and for Christ in whom alone hee is well pleased there mercie is to bee ascribed unto God but not merit to them Yea but the Apostle inferreth therefore it was reputed to him for righteousnesse That argueth Gods acceptation not his merit Howbeit that place may bee understood as that Iam. 2. 23. that this was an evidence of the true faith of Abraham which was imputed to him for righteousnesse not that Abraham did then first beleeve or was then first justified and much lesse that he merited by that act of faith his justification which he had long before § XIV His fourth proofe is out of Rom. 10. 13 14. to which I answered before the thing which here hee would but doth not prove though indeed it needs no proofe is that faith by invocation obtaineth justification Howbeit the Apostle doth not there set downe the order of our justification but the series and order of the degrees of salvation beginning at our vocation unto which three degrees are referred viz. hearing of the word which presupposeth preaching and that sending upon which followeth faith and justification thereby faith bringeth forth the dueties of ââ¦anctification and namely invocation which sometimes and namely in that place of Ioel is put for the whole worship of God which is the forerunner of salvation but here is no snch thing either mentioned or meant that by invocation faith obtaineth justification and therefore little reason had he from thence to inferre that therfore faith doth not justifie relatively by receiving for sooth justification offered but by seeking knocking asââ¦ing and finally by invocating and impeââ¦rating it doth justifie but passing by the weakenesse of his argument I answere to that which hee inferreth that faith beggeth justification no otherwise but with relation to Christ and his merits by it received For as God forgiveth no sinnes for which Christ hath not satisfied nor accepteth any man to life for whom Christ hath not merited it so are not we to beg justification at the hands of God but in the name and mediation of Christ beseeching God for Christ his sake that forasmuch as Christ hath satisfied the justice of God for the sinnes of all that beleeve in him and hath merited salvation and all spirituall blessings in heavenly things for them that it would therefore please God to accept of Christs satisfaction and merits in our behalfe imputing unto us both his sufferings for the remission
of Christ through fââ¦ith then are we not justified by workes But the first I have demonstrated by many undeniable arguments therefore the second must be granted 4. If we be justified by imputative righteousnesse that is to say by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to them that beleeve the Lord imputing righteousnesse unto them without workes then it is evident that wee are not justified by workes but that is most true as hath plentifully beene proved therefore this 5. If we be justified by faith alone then not by workes But we are justified by faith alone as hath beene proved therefore not by workes The arguments reduced to these five heads which were very many and impregnable might satisfie any reasonable man who is not wilfully addicted to his owne erroneous conceits though I should adde no more but because wee have to deale with men unreasonable I will adde some § III. And first out of Rom. 4. 4 5 6. He that worketh not is not justified by workes he that beleeveth worketh not as the Apostle there sheweth And againe to whom faith is impured unto righteousnesse without workes they are not justified by workes to all the faithfull faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes therefore none of the faithfull are justified by workes The assumption is thus proved If to Abraham his faith was imputed for righteousnesse without works then are all the faithfull justified without workes for Abraham is by the Apostle propounded as a patterne therefore as he was justified so are we Rom. 4. 22 23. 24. But to Abraham his faith was imputed for righteousnesse as the Apo stle teacheth Rom. 4. 3 4 5. Therefore all the faithfull are justified without workes 2. The true doctrine of justification is taught in the Scriptures justification by workes is not taught in the Scriptures for the justification taught in the Scriptures is an action of God justifying a sinner but this by workes is neither an action of God neither is it the justification of a sinner but the action of the justitiary himselfe who by the exercise and practise of good workes increaseth his inherent justice or fanctification which hath no affinity with that justification which is taught in the Scriptures 3. None that are justified by faith are justified by workes all the faithfull are justified by faith therefore none of the faithfull are justified by workes The proposition is evidently proved by that opposition which the Apostle constantly maketh betweene faith and workes in the question of justification asfirming that men though abounding with works of grace are justified by faith without workes and saved by faith and not by workes Rom. 3. 28. 4. 3 4 5. Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. 4. If any be justified by workes then either the regenerate man or the unregenerate but neither the unregenerate as the Papists confesse nor the regenerate for they are justified already Neither doe the Scriptures acknowledge any sorts or degrees of justification before God § IV. 5. All that are justified by workes are justified by that obedience which they performe to the Law But none are justified by the obedience which they performe to the Law therefore none are justified by workes The proposition is manifest Because the Law being a perfect rule of all inherent righteousnes there neither are nor can be any good works which are not prescribed in the Law Yea whatsoever worke is not conmable to the Law is sinne The assumpââ¦ion may bee proved by many undeniable arguments First by all those places which plainely testifie that by the workes of the Law that is by obedience done to the Law no man living shall be justified Rom. 3. 20 28. Gal. 2. 16. For by the workes of the Law wee understand all duties prescibed and all that obedience which is required in the Law 2. Those that are accursed by the Law are not justified by their obedience of it For to bee justified is to bee blessed Rom. 4. 6. and therefore to be justified and to be accursed are things repugnant But all men whatsoever even those which seeke to bee justified by their obedience to the Law are by the Law accursed Therefore no man is justified by his obedience performed to the Law And this is the Apostles argument Gal. 3. 10. as I have shewed before All transgressours of the Law are by the Law accursed All men since the fall are transgressours of the Law Christ onely ãâã excepted this assumption the Apostle omitteth because hee taketh it for granted as being a truth received among the faithfull in those times though in these dayes denied by the justitiaries of Rome but elsewhere it is by the Apostle expressed as Rom. 3. 23. all have sinned Wherefore as God hath concluded all under sinne Rom. 11. 32. Gal. 3. 22. so the Law hath concluded them under the curse 3. All that are justified by their obedience to the Law doe perfectly fulfill it by a totall perfect and perpetuall obedience for he that doth not so fulfill it by doing the things commanded though he did nothing that is forbidden by doing all though he did the most by continuing in doing all and in that measure and degree which the Law requireth though he sinned but once in all his life and that either by omission or comming short of his duety is a transgressour of the Law and therefore subject to the curse of the Law because hee hath not continued in all things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them And he that offendeth in one is guilty of all Iam. 2. 10. To whom the perfect fulfilling of the Law is impossible by reason of the flesh they cannot be justified by their obedience performed to it To all even the most regenerate the perfect fulfilling of the Law is impossible by reason of the flesh Rom. 8. 3. Gal. 5. 17. as elsewhere I prove at large Therefore none though regenerate can bee justified by their obedience performed to the Law § V. Sixthly That Doctrine which is repugnant to the Scriptures is false The Doctrine of justification by workes is repugnant to the Scriptures Therefore it is false The assumption is thus proved because the Scriptures in all places where they treat of justification before God doe from the act of justification exclude workes The places of Scripture which we produce to this end Bellarmine reciteth at least some of them with purpose to answere them Rom. 3. 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what Law Of workes No but by the Law of faith Verse 28. Therefore wee conclude that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law to which hee might have added verse 20. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified Rom. 4. 2. If Abraham were justified by workes he hath whereof to glory but not before God To which he might have added vers 5. 6. To him that worketh not but
if hee spake of such as are not good or devised by men but of those good workes which God himselfe hath commanded and to the perfect performance whereof hee hath promised justification Rom. 2. 13. And life Gal. 2. 12. Rom. 10. 5. 4. The holy Ghost speaketh generally of all men whether regenerate or unregenerate and of all workes whether going before faith or folloââ¦ing it that a man that is every one who is justified is justified by faith without the workes of the law Rom. 3. 28. that a man is not justified that is that no man is justified by the workes of the Law but by the faith of Iesus Christ for by the workes of the Law no flesh that is as the Psalmist speaketh no man living shall be justified Gal. 2. 16. For as in the first act of justification wee are justified by faith without respect of workes so our justification is continued unto us without respect of our workes And this appeareth most plainely in the examples of Abraham of Iob of David of Paul c. as I shewed before who though they abounded with good works which they wrought by faith yet were not justified by them but by faith onely For that which Chrysostome saith of Abraham is also verified of all the godly for saith hee that a man having not workes should bee justified by faith it is no unlikely thing ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but this that a man flourishing in good workes should not thereby be justified but by faith it was wonderfull and very much setteth forth the force of faith 5. When the Apostle excludeth workes from justification hee cannot bee understood to exclude them from the first justification only of the Papists for that as themselves teach is meerely habituall consisting in the habits of grace Now it is a senselesse thing to imagine that the Apostle would so seriously labour to prove that habituall Iustice is not actuall or that good works are no part of habituall righteousnesse nor doe concurre to habituall justification § XII Notwithstanding Bellarmine will prove that good workes only going before faith are excluded first out of Rom. 4. 4. To him that worketh the reward is not reckoned of grace but of debt Nââ¦w saith hee such onely are those which are wrought by the strength of free-will for to works done by grace that which is given is not simply merces wages but grace also yea grace rather than wages Answ. First the meaning of the Apostle is this to him that fulfilleth the Law whether it bee by strength of nature or by helpe of grace if any such were to him the reward of justification and salvation would bee due by Gods covenant Doe this and live But to him that fulfilleth not the Law which was the case of Abraham and still is the case of the best but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly such as he doth judge himselfe to be in himself he is justified gratis or of grace his faith being imputed unto him for righteousnesse without workes this place therefore proveth justification by faith without workes Secondly this assertion of Bellarmine is confuted both by other Papists and by himselfe also in other places For first there is no rewards due to him that fulfilleth the condition of the covenant that is to him that fufilleth the whole Law for he that doth not fulfill the Law doth transgresse it and to him that transgresseth not reward but punishment is due But to hold that a man before or without grace is able to fulfill the Law is meere Pelagianismes Againe all men before or without grace are wicked sinners and to such no reward is due but punishment Mââ¦ritis impii saith Augustine non gratiâ⦠sed poena debetur Secondly the Papists and namely Bellarmine himselfe teach that to workes of grace proceeding from Charity the wages of eternall life is as due as the promised hire to the workeman and that by workes of Charity men doe merit and that condignely not onely ratione pacti by reason of the covenant sed etiam ipsius operis for the worth of the worke it selfe and yet forsooth the wages of their merit must be counted grace when the very place alleaged doth teach that the wages which is of debt is not of grace § XIII Secondly from the scope of the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians which was to perswade men that without the faith of Christ neither the Iewes by the Law nor the Gentiles by their Philosophie could bee justified or saved Which is untrue For the Apostle writeth not to unbeleeving either Iewes or Gentiles but to Christians who were already perswaded of that truth Neither was there ever any beleeving Iew who held that they might be justified by the works of the Law without faith neither any beleeving Gentiles who thought that by their morall works they might be saved without faith That question therefore the Apostle doth nowhere dispute But whereas many of the beleeving Iewes being zealous of the Law and many of the beleeving Gentiles being misse-led by the Iewes were perswaded that they were to be justified not onely by faith in Christ but also by the observation of the Law that is to say by a righteousnesse inherent in themselves and to bee performed by themselves The Apostle therefore sheweth that the righteousnesse whereby we are justified is the righteousnesse of God and that neither Iewes nor Gentiles are justified by inherent righteousnesse wich is prescribed in the Law to which end he proveth at large in the three first chapters of the Epistle to the Romanes that both Iewes and Gentiles were sinners and therefore were not to be justified by inherent righteousnesse which is the observation of the Law but were to be justified freely by the grace of God through the redemption which is in Christ by or through faith that is to say by the righteousnesse of Christ both active and passive apprehended by faith This righteousnesse of Christ is that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified which is revealed in the Gospell as being the principall argument thereof Rom. 1. 17. for so the Apostle saith that we are justified through the redemption that is in Christ that wee are justified by his bloud Rom. 5. 5. reconciled to God by his death vers 10. and constituted or made just by his obedience Rom. 5. 19. Of the scope of the Epistle to the Galatians I am shortly to speake But Bellarmine in his whole disputation impudently perverteth the Apostles scope as if the question which he disputeth were not this Whether faith doe justifie without workes which every where he affirmatively concludeth but whether workes doe justifie without faith which the Apostle never mentioned nor meant though Bellarmine makes him to conclude it negatively viz. that workes without faith doe not justifie And to this scope hee maketh the whole discourse of the Apostle to aime By this Sophisticall tricke Bellarmine seeketh to
these morall duties in the faithfull because they are not workes of the flesh must needs bee the fruits of the Spirit Gal. 5. 19. 21. and although perhaps performed to men yet are done in obedience to God 5. Neither doth the Apostle distinguish betwixt Abrahams workes as if hee were justified by some and not by others but in generall denieth him to have beene justified by any workes at all And that hee proveth because his faith was imputed for righteousnesse As if hee had said to whom faith is imputed for righteousnesse he is not justified by workes to Abraham faith was imputed for righteousnesse therefore Abraham was not justified by workes The proposition is thus proved to him that worketh that is to him that fulfilleth the Law righteousnesse is not imputed or reckoned of Grace but of debt But to him that worketh not that is that doth not fulfill the Law but beleeveth on him that justifieth a sinner as all are and as hee acknowledgeth himselfe to be who therefore can merit nothing but punishment his faith is counted or imputed for righteousnesse 6. By this example of Abraham Bellarmine is notably confounded in two other respects § IV. For first whereas justification before God is but one wherein the Lord by imputation of Christs righteousnesse to a beleeving sinner doth absolve him from his sinnes and also accepteth of him as righteous in Christ not onely in the first moment of justification wherein being a sinner in himselfe he was first constituted righteous in Christ but also in the continuance of justification wherein the beleever being still a sinner in himselfe is continued in the favour of God by the merits and intercession of Christ and though a sinner in himselfe yet beleeving in him that justifieth a sinner is made the righteousnesse of God in Christ. Bellarmine notwithstanding maketh two justifications the first wherein a sinner is made righteous by infusion of habituall righteousnes the second when a just man maketh himselfe more just by the practise of actuall righteousnesse that is to say of good works which two are degrees of sanctification and not of justification and saith that the Apostle in the Epistle to the Romans speaketh only of the former wherein workes going before faith are excluded from the act of justification So that in Bellarmines conceit when the Apostle saith that a man is justified by faith without workes his meaning is without workes going before justification But what the Apostle speaketh of other men hee affirmeth of faithfull Abraham at what time he was a man regenerate as Bellarmine consesseth and abounded with good workes which as the same Apostle testifieth Heb. 11. 8. c. he wrought by faith And yet of him the Apostle saith that he was justified by faith and not by works that the Lord imputed unto him righteousnesse without workes that hisâ⦠justification or blessednesse consisted in the remission of his sinnes and imputation of righteousnesse and being a sinner in himselfe as all mortall men are hee was in Christ the promised seed made blessed through faith By the example of Abraham therefore we learne first that that distinction of justification is forged For Abraham as when hee first beleeved was justified by faith without workes so afterwards when hee abounded with good workes hee was justified by faith and not by workes And undoubtedly if ever any man attained to the second justification which the Papists ascribe to workes Abraham had it then when the Apostle affirmeth that he was justified without workes Secondly that workes are excluded from justification not onely those which goe before faith but also those that follow and are wrought by it § V. The second respect when Bellarmine endeavoureth to reconcile the seeming difference betweene the Apostle Paul Rom. 3. 4. and Saint Iames Chap. 2. hee saith that Paul speaking of the first justification saith that a man is justified by faith without workes namely going before justification but Saint Iames speaking of the second justification saith that a man is justified by workes and not by faith onely But both the Apostle use the example of Abraham for the proofe of their assertion Paul proving that a man is justified before God by faith without workes demonstrateth his assertion by the example of Abraham who though hee were most fruitfull of good workes yet he was justified by faith without workes And as Abraham was justified so are all the faithfull Saint Iames concluding that a man is justified that is declared and knowne to be just by workes and not by profession of faith onely proveth also his assertion by the example of Abraham who demonstrated his faith by his workes By which though he were declared and knowne to be a just man as Saint Iames saith yet by them he was not justified before God but by faith only as Saint Paul teacheth This example therefore of Abraham doth prove that the Apostle Paul doth not speake of the first justification which is habituall nor of workes onely going before justification for Abraham was a man long before regenerated and justified and his workes were such as hee wrought by faith But that this is a false and counterfeit distinction of justification it may further be proved For if this be true that the Apostle excluding workes from justification speaketh of the first justification which they say is meerely habituall then the Apostle must bee thought toâ⦠have taken all these paines to prove that to habituall righteousnesse good workes doe not concurre or that habituall righteousnesse is not actuall which needeth no proofe And againe if onely workes going before grace be exculded from justification then the Apostle must be thought to have ââ¦boured seriously to prove that we are not justified by such workes as are not good which needeth no proofe for how should a man be justified by that which is not just This example therefore of Abraham is as Chrysostome speaketh ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã abundant matter of much victory wherein we may truely and seriously triumph § VI. Bellarmine second answere is that the Apostle speaketh with condition if Abraham was justified by workes not proceeding from the grace of faith as they thought who to their owne strength attributed righteousnesse then surely he had glory but not with God And because it is evident enough that Abraham had glory even with God thence hee gathereth that hee was not justified by workes without faith but by faith from which good workes truly proceed hee should have said by workes which proceed from faith if he meant to contradict us for we doe confesse that he was justified by faith from which good workes did proceed but withall we say that he was justified by his faith and not by his workes But in this senselesse answere of Bellarmine there are many absurdities for first by incredible impudencie hee taketh for granted that which the Apostle disputeth against namely that Abraham was justified by workes viz. such workes as proceeded
from faith secondly hee perverteth the question as if the Apostle disputed that Abraham was not justified by workes without faith or not proceeding from the grace of faith as they forsooth thought who to their owne strength attributed righteousnesse As though either Abraham had any good workes which did not proceed from grace or the Apostle would busie himselfe to prove that he was not justified by such as he had not or as if the justitiaries among the Iewes did attribute righteousnesse to their owne strength when the Pharisee himselfe Luk. 18. 11. gave thankes to God for it or as if they thought that Abrahams righteousnesse proceeded from his naturall strength when they knew that God did chuse Abraham and by his preventing grace called him out of Ur of the Caldeans where they served other gods Thirdly hee doth againe contradict the Apostle in saying that Abraham had glory with God which the Apostle plainely denieth the word in the originall is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which signifieth not glory but glorying or boasting If Abraham saith the Apostle was justified by works then had he wherof to glory or to boast but he had no cause to glory or to boast before God Fourthly his contradicting of the Apostle maketh against himselfe For if Abraham had beene justified by workes done without grace hee had more cause to glory and that before God than if his workes proceeded from grace For in that case it might have beene said to him what hast thou which thou hast not received And if thou hast received it why dost thou glory or boast as if thou hadst not received it wheras therfore the Apostle denyeth that Abraham had whereof to glory before God he is to be understood as speaking of his workes proceeding from grace by which if Abraham had beene justified he had whereof to glory but not before God But being justified by faith without workes all matter of glorying was taken away By what Law of workes No but by the Law of Faith Rom. 3. 27. For by grace we are justified and saved not by workes lest any man should boast Ephes. 2. 8 9. And that this contradiction maketh against himselfe appeareth further by that which himselfe saith in the same Chapter out of Rom. 4. 4. But unto him that worketh the reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Whence he proveth that by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification he meaneth such workes whereto not grace is given but wages rendred And such are onely those saith hee which are wrought by the onely strength of free-will For to the workes which are wrought by grace that which is rendred is not simply merces wages but it is also grace yea grace rather than wages If therefore Abraham had beene justified by workes done by the power of his owne free-will and not by grace hee might have gloried that he had made God a debtour unto him But to Abraham his faith was imputed unto righteousnesse and therefore his reward was of grace and not of debt For to him that worketh that is fulfilleth the Law of God the wages is not reckoned of grace but of debt as being due ratione pacti in respect of the covenant Doe this and thou shalt live But to him that worketh not that is that fulfilleth not the Law which the Apostle maketh to have beene Abrahams case but beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. § VII And this also confuteth the doctrine of the Papists concerning the merit of good workes proceeding from grace unto which Bellarmine here saith the reward is not rendred as of debt but onely to such as are wrought by strength of nature But he and his fellowes when they treat of merit ascribe to works of grace merit of condignity In respect whereof the reward of eternall life is due unto them in justice not onely in respect of Gods promise or covenant but even in respect of the workes themselves For every good worke proceeding from charity absolutely deserveth as they teach eternall life insomuch that heaven is no lesse due to the good workes of the faithfull than hell to the sinnes of the wicked § VIII As to the example of Abraham so to these three places Gal. 2. 16. Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. wherein all workes of all men are generally excluded from the act of justification Bellarmine answereth that in them all those workes onely are excluded which are done before faith But we will speake of them severally And first to that Gal. 2. 16. Bellarmine saith that in that Epistle there are two questions handled the former speciall whether the ceremonies of the Law doe belong to Christians so that without them they cannot be saved The other generall whether by the Law and strength of Nature justification can happen to any man without grace and without the faith of Iesus Christ. Vnto both which the Apostle answereth negatively And afterwards he saith that the state of the Question in that Epistle is whether workes doe justifie without faith Whereunto I reply that no such question is mentioned in that Epistle nor the contrary concluded as being altogether heterogeneous and besides the purpose of the Apostle which was to reclaime the Galathians from their errour who thought that besides faith the workes of the Law must concurre to justification For both the false teachers who seduced them were Christians who lest they should suffer persecution for the Crosse of Christ perswaded them to bee circumcised Gal. 6. 12. and the Galathians themselves who were seduced did not cease to bee Christians neither were they perswaded to renounce the faith of Christ but were made to beleeve that unto their faith in Christ they were necessarily to joyne the workes of the Law that by them both they might be justified Against this assertion the Apostle disputeth directly proving that a man is justified by faith and not by the workes of the Law But if he had disputed against the other that workes without faith in Christ doe justifie or that workes done by the knowledge of the Law only by the strength of nature doe justifie without faith in Christ his disputation had beene to no purpose For the Galathians and their Teachers would in their owne defence have answered that they did not from justification exclude faith in Christ God forbid but did adde unto faith the observation of the Law desiring as the Papists now doe to bee justified not by faith alone but both by faith and workes together And therefore as in the Epistle to the Romanes so here the question is not whether wee bee justified by workes without faith in Christ which asserââ¦ion never any Christian held but whether by faith without workes which the Galathians and their teachers would have with faith to concurre unto the act of justification To which purpose call to minde the words in the very place
made just before God by workes and Iames affirme it how doe they not contradict one another § IV. Bellarm. hopeth to salve the matter with his new-found distinction of the first and second justification that Paul speaking of the justification wherein a man of a sinner is made just excludeth workes done by the strength of nature without faith and without grace and that Iames speaking of the second justification wherein a just man is made more just saith that by the workes of grace proceeding from faith a man is justified Answ. Such a distinction might be applyed to sanctification which is partly habituall the which they call their first justiââ¦cation consisting chiefly in charity and partly actuall which is their second justfication consisting in good workes but being applyed to justification it hath no ground either in the Scriptures or in the ancient fathers Neither can any such distinction possibly bee applied to that justification which the Scriptures teach as I have showed heretofore Secondly if there could be such a distinction I would say that Paul when hee denyeth Abraham to have been justified by workes did speake of the second justification wich Bellarmine himselfe confesseth For Abraham when he was said to be justified by faith without workes did abound which workes as Bellarmine confesseth and yet was not justifyed by them And that Iames when hee speaketh of Rahab the harlot whom hee affirmeth to have been justified by workes speaketh of the first justification as Bellarmine also affirmeth If therefore Paul say that in the first justification none are justified by workes and Iames affirme that some are as namely Rahab If the Apostle Iames say that Abraham in his second jââ¦stification was justified by workes and Paul doe as planiely deny it how are they reconciled Againe saith Bellarmine Paul from justification onely excludeth the workes done without grace Iames includeth onely the workes of grace I answeare that Paul excludeth from justification Abrahams workes which as else where hee testifieth he wrought by faith And Iames includeth the workes of Rahab the harlot which was done as Bellarmine saith without grace going before Where I desire the reader to observe what Bellarmine answeareth As Paul saith hee when he did speake of the first justification brought the example of Abraham which was indeed of the second that hee might prove as it were à majori from the greater that a sinner cannot bee justified by workes done without faith if righteous Abraham was not made more just by his workes done without faith even so Iames when hee did speake of the second justification brought the example of Rahab which is of the first justification that hee might prove à majori hee should say à minori if my logicke faile me not from the lesse that a just man is made more just by his workes and not onely by faith if Rahab of an harlot was made just by workes and not onely by faith Answ. Thus then hee maketh the Apostles to argue If Abrahams workes would not have justified him without faith much lesse would the good workes of the wicked And if Rahab by her worke of mercie was of an harlot made just how much more shall the good workes of the righteous make them more just § V. Where by the way you may note diverse absurdities which I have partly touched before First that the Apostle forsooth bringeth Abraham as an example of justification by workes when it is most evident that hee bringeth him as an example of justification by imputation of righteousnesse without workes and maketh his example the exemplar or patterne of all others who in like maner are justified by faith without workes or by imputation of righteousnes without workes Secondly That Paul produceth Abraham as an example to prove that a just man is more justified by his workes for which there is no colour praeter impudentiam asseverandi the contrary is proved that Paul speaking of the justification of a sinner applyeth what hee saith to Abraham For hee proveth that Abraham was not justified by workes because the Scripture saith Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt But to him that worketh not but beleeveth on him that iustifieth the ungodly which was Abrahams case his faith is counted for righteousnesse Thirdly the Apostle when he excludeth Abrahams workes from iustification doth not exclude his good and gracious workes but such as hee did or might have done without grace that is to say gracelesse workes But no doubt the Apostles intent in producing the example of Abraham which Chrysostome also hath observed was this If Abraham who did abound with so many notable works which hee wrought by faith was not iustified by them but onely by faith then it is certaine that none are iustified by workes though their workes be never so gracious Fourthly He supposeth that gracious Abraham might have done good workes without grace and that the Apostle denyeth him to have bene iustified by such workes as hee might have done but did not Fifthly By an impudent devise whereof there is no colour hee maketh the Apostle from the example of Abraham to argue à majori If Abrahams workes would not have iustified him unlesse they had proceeded from faith then much lesse can the workes of sinners and unregenerate men done without faith iustifie them Sixthly He shamefally inverteth the Apostles question and perverteth his whole disputation As if the Apostle disputed this question whether workes doe iustifie without faith which hee doth never so much as mention and not whether faith doth iustifie without workes which is indeed the question Seventhly Where hee saith that the Apostle excludeth workes onely from their imaginary first iustification which is meerely habituall hee conceiveth that the Apostle tooke all these paines to prove that workes are no part of habituall righteousnesse Eightly Where hee saith that the Apostle excludeth from iustification workes of nature and not of grace it is as much as if hee should have said that the Apostle doth so seriously labour to prove that men are not justified by such workes as are not good but evill To conclude it is evident that the Apostle Paul excludeth from the act of justification all workes in geââ¦all whether done before grace or after of all men whether unregenerate or regenerate even of Abraham himself Yea more specially the workes of the faithfull and regenerate First Because he speaketh of good workes even the workes of righteousnesse which wee the faithfull have done Tit. 3. 5. Secondly The question being whether faith doth justifie without workes or whether faith and workes together the Apostle must be understood to exclude those workes from the act of justification which with faith concurre in the party justified Even as Abraham though his faith was accompanied with store of good works yet he was justified and so are all the faithfull by
For the life of faith it self doth not depend upon workes as the cause but is thereby knowne as by the effects You see againe what the question is which hee will conclude namely that the faith which is without workes or which is in profession onely without workes is not a lively but a dead faith and consequently not a justifying faith For a justifying faith is like the faith of Abraham and of Rahab but that faith which is in profession onely and wanteth workes is not like the faith of Abraham and of Rabaâ⦠For though Abraham was iustified by faith without workes as the Apostle Paul proveth yea by faith alone as the Papists themselves confesse yet the faith by which hee was justified was not alone but was fruitfull of good workes by which both hee and his faith were justified that is knowne to be just and upright § IX Vers. 21. was not Abraham our Father saith hee justified by workes when hee had offered his sonne Isaack upon the Altar Of which wordes the meaning is not that Abraham by that worke was justified before God or made just for long before the holy Ghost gave him this testimony Gen. 15. Abraham believed God and it was imputed unto him for righteousnesse not that then hee first believed or was then first justified for when hee first left his countrey which hee left by faith Heb. 11. 8. hee had believed and his faith no doubt was imputed to him for righteousnesse but that by that speciall worke after hee was proved hee was approved and knowne to be a righteous man For upon Abrahams approbation of his faith and obedience when he was tryed the Lord gave him this testimony Gen. 22. 12. Now I know that thou fearest God c. Did not God know it before Yea no doubt but hee speaketh after the maner of men He had tempted Abraham that is by a commandement of tryall hee had proved his faith and obedience not that hee did not know but that he would make it knowne to Abraham and others As on the contray God is said 2. Chron. 32. 31. to have left Ezechias to try him that hee might know that is that hee might make knowne all that was in his heart when as therefore Abraham being tryed had by that act of offering his sonne approved his faith and obedience the Lord saith Now I know that is now by this tryall it is made knowne that thou art a just man and one that feareth God And in this sence as it is most manifest hee is said by his workes to have been justified that is knowne declared approved to be a just man § X. Hereupon St. Iames inferreth vers 22. Doe you not see how faith did co-operate to or with his workes The verbe ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã may be understood two wayes either that faith with other graces did co-operate to the bringing forth of this worke as namely with the feare of God and love of God Gen. 22. 12. though faith was the principall Heb. 11. 17. Or else that faith did co-operate with his workes not to justifie him before God but to manifest declare and approve his righteousnes In which sence we must understand the word Faith as in the proposition vers 24. for faith professed or the profession of faith which doth concurre together with workes to make a man truely justified to bee knowne And in this sence faith doth co-operate with works and may be said to justifie by declaring a man to be just though Bellarmine holdeth the contrary For that a man may bee acknowledged to be a man truely justified before God by faith two things must concurre the profession of the true faith and a Christian conversation neither of which alone is sufficient It followeth in the same verse and by workes was faith made perfect Which words saith Bellarmine cannot signifie any other but that his righteousnesse which was begunne by faith was perfected by good works Answ. But Iames doth not say that his righteousnesse but his faith was perfected and whereas hee saith the words cannot signifie otherwise I say they may be understood two other wayes First that faith by workes is perfected because by workes it is manifested and perfectly knowne in which sence Gods strength is perfected in our weakenesse 2. Cor. 12. 9. Secondly because workes bring the fruits and effects of faith to be perfected when it bringeth forth good fruits according to his kind For when any thing hath attayned to the end as it hath when it doth effectually produce those uses or fruits for which it was ordayned it is said ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to be perfect Now the end of our justification by faith is our sanctification For when faith was wrought in us that is to say in our regeneration we were the workemanship of God created unto good workes which God hath preordayned that wee should walke in them Eph. 2. 10. Faith therefore may then bee said to be perfected when it doth effectually bring forth the fruit of good workes whereby a man is not made but declared to be just § XI Vers. 23. And this appeareth yet more plainely by that which followeth And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse This Scripture was fulfilled Gen. 15. 6. above 30. yeares before his offering of Isaake and here againe it is said to have been fulfilled in this act that is the truth of that testimony which was given him so long before was then manifested when by this worke hee evidently declared that hee was indued with a true lively iustifying faith And to the like purpose the same sentence might as Bellarmine confesseth be applyed to Abraham in respect of any other notable fruit of his faith that then also that sentence was verified Abraham believed God c. For then it was declared and manifested that hee was indued with a true iustifying faith As for that conceipt of Bellarmine that if the Hebrew word be well scanned it will appeare that the meaning of the words is that Abrahams believing God was a ââ¦ust worke it is but a poore shift For Paul understandeth it of Abrahams person and maketh that text his principall ground of the iustification of the faithfull by imputation of righteousnesse without workes And Iames likewise understandeth it of Abrahams person shewing that by this act of offering his sonne the truth of that testimony was manifested that hee was indued with a true faith by which hee was iustified It followeth in the same verse and hee was called the friend of God 2. Chron. 20. 7. Esai 41. 8. that is by this act hee approved himselfe to bee such a one § XII Hereupon Saint Iames Verse 24. inferreth this consectary or conclusion you see then by this example of Abraham that a man who is justified before God by faith alone as Abraham was and that by imputation of righteousnesse without workes is also justified by workes as
a De justif b In Rom. 10. 10. c Ioh. 2. 23. Whether the Vnderstanding be commanded by the Will a De justif l. 1. c. 8. 9. b Heb. 1ââ¦3 c Basil. Ascet. de fide ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã d Ethic. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 80. The proper object of justifying faith Obj. concerning the object of Abrahams faith e Gen. 3. 15. f Psal. 72. 17. The two other promises He beleeved in the Lord and it was imputed unto him for righteousnesse that is because he beleeved in the Lord he was reputed a righteous mââ¦n ââ¦nd so Vatablus iâ⦠Gen. 15. 6. Rom. 4. 10. The latter g Heb. 4. 9. h Ioh. 8. 56. i Heb. 11. 13. k Heb. 11. 8 9 14 16. Iam. 2. 23. m De justiâ⦠l. 4. ca. 18. Possunt enim illa verba applicari adomneâ⦠insignes actus fidei ejusdem Patriarchae Christ the proper object of faith in two respects n Covenant of grace Bellarmines objections De iustif l 1â⦠c. 8 c. The first that the obiect of faith is whatsoever is revealed by God Father Almighty n Deut. 33. 26. Eternall Immutable Omniscient Omnipresent True and faithfull ââ¦ust Good and Gracious Loving Creatour and Provisour o Psal. 119. 75. p Deut. 8. 16. Christ God and Man Conceived of the holy Ghost borne c. Suffered Was crucified Dead Buried Descended to hell Rose againe Ascended Sitteth at Gods right hand He shall come againe to judgment The Holy Ghost The holy Ca. tholike Church Communion of Saints Forgivenesse of sinnes The Resurrection Life Eternall Whether every man bee bound to beleeve that hee is elected c. Ioh 3. 18. Whether a man may be justified without speciall faith Whether a man is justified by speciall faith r 2 Pet. 1. 10. s Covenant of Grace Whether justifying faith doth onely dispose a man to justification a Sess. 6. c. 6. Seven dispositions required before justification of which vide infra ca. 10 11 12. b Conc. Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 7. c Sess. 6. ca. 7. d In Rom. 10. 4. e Conc. Trid. sess 6. cap. 4. Secondly whether faith doth justifie formally f Lib. 4. g Lib. 4. 5. h Supr cap. 4. §. 6. The Papists cavill that we debate faith i Bellar. De justif l. 1. c. 12. §. Itaque sensum The state of the Controversie What wee meane by faith What is meant by the word justifie Of the exclusive particle alone That the object of faith doth justifie properly That nothing in that kind doth justifie but the righteousnesse of Christ as the matter and Faith as the onely instrument on our part Our prooses a In Gal. 2. 16. b De justif l 1. cap. 20. c §. Consirmat d Mat. 15. 28. Mar. 7. 29. e Act. 3. 16. his name through faith in his name Reasons 1. Rom. 8. 28. Gal. 2. 16. Eph. 2. 8. The second Reason containing a threesold argument The third reason because faith is the condition of the Covenant f Ioh. 3 16. Act. 10. 43. Gal. 3. 9. g Rom. 3. 27. The fourth reason because faith only in the question of justification is mentioned in the Scriptures h De justif l. 1. c. 20. §. Quod attinet i L. 6. c. lz § 2 â⦠a AdDiogNetum Iustin. Martyr Ann. Dom 160. b Ibid. c Advers Iulian. lib. 1. c. 2. Irenaeus An. 180 lib. 4. ca. 5. Clemens Alex. An. 200. d Paedag. l. 1. c. 6. e Stromat l. 5. Origen An. 230 f In Rom. 3. l. 3. g De justif lib. 1. cap. 25. h Luk. 23. 40 41 42. i Luk. 7. 37. Cyprian An. 250 k Ad Quirinum l. 3. c. 42. l De eccl Theol. l. 1. ca. 12. m Hilar. An. 360 In Mat. can 8. n Can. 21. o De Trinit li. 6. Basil. An. 370. p Serm. De humilitaââ¦e q ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Aââ¦brosc A. 370. Greg. Nazianz. A. 370. r Bââ¦bliothec lib. 4. De consecrat dist 4. c. 99. Hieronymus A. 380. s De scriptorib in Hieronymo t Alitââ¦r ut Hieronymus exponiâ⦠Chrysostome A. 390. u Homil. 2. * Homil. 7. x Homil. 8. y Homil. 14. z Homil 5. a ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã b Homil. 3. c In Rom. 3. 28. d Tom. 6. p. 838. c Lib. 4. ââ¦n c. 14. Hesycbiusa 400 f De civit D. August an 400. g Grat de poenitenââ¦iâ dist c. 14. h Initio i Tract 42. k Lib. 1. cap. 21. l Quââ¦st 76. m in ââ¦oan l. 10. c. 18. Cyrill Alexandr An. 430. n Lib. 9. c. 30. o Sedulius in Collectanes p in Rom. i. 17. Theodââ¦ret An. 430. q De Curand Grac affectib lib. 7. r Epigram 8. De doctrina Evangelica r In Gen. lib. 3. Prosper An. 440. Cl. Mar. Victor t Pet. Chrys. An 440. sââ¦rm 34. Primisius An. 440. Theodulus Gennadius A. 490. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Venantius A. 570. Beda A. 720. Haymo A. 840. Photius A. 860 Smaragdus A. 950. Oecumenius A. 1050. Thââ¦ophylact A. 1070. Anselmus A. 1080. Rupertus an 1120. Bernard an 1130. Tho Aquinas an 1209. Bonaventure an 1260. Nic. Gorrham Cour. Clingius Car. Contarenus ââ¦n 1541. u Sess. 6. Can. 9. * De Sacrament lib. 2. cap. 3. in fine x Rom. 4. 23 24. y Ambrose in Gal. 3. 18. qui sorma jus rei est z Rom. 4. 11 Bellarmine disputeth the question three waies De justis l. 1. c. 12 Bellarmines dispute impertinent That faith doth not iustifie alone by way of disposing Bellarmines proveth by five sorts of arguments First from the seven dispositions which discourse is idle and impertinent Preparative dispositions to justifying faith The first disposition Faith Bellarmines argument faith doth but begin justification and therefore doth not justifie alone a Rom 5. 2. b Hab. 2. 4. Gal. 2. 20. c Rom. 1. 17. d Gen. 15 6. His first testimony Heb. 11. 6. c Esa. 21. 12. His second testimonie Rom. 10. 13. 14. f Esa. 56. 7. g Concord Evang. capâ⦠h Strom. lib. 2. i Catech. 1. k Homil. 2. de symb l De fide spe charit m Lib. 4. in Ioan. cap. 9. n De sacramentis lib. 1 o In Eph. 3. p August in Gal. 3. q De praedestin S. c. 7. r De bono persever c 2. s De spiritu litera c. 30. t De verb. Apostoli serm 2. u Prosper de vita contempl l. 3. c. 21. * Respons ad dub 8. Gen. x Moral l. 2. c. 33 y 1 Pet. 1. 5. Bellarmines reasons De iustif l. 1. c. 13. § secunda a Luk. 18. 14. Bellarmines allegations impertinent The first Eccl. 1. 28. b Eccl. 1. 14. 16 1â⦠c Iam. 1 20 d Prov. 14. 26. Bellarmines proofes from Scripture His Testimonies and Reason His third disposition Hope e 1 Cor. 9. 10. Testimonies of Scripture The three first f Prov. 28. 25. g Vers. 26. Psal. 37. 40. h Psal. 2. ult i Bellarmine in Psal. 90. 14. Testimonies of Fathers k Ambros. de poenit l. 1. c.
conscience of the faithfull in the assumption according to Gods Word contained in the proposition therefore I have remission of sinnes therefore I shall be saved And in this sense Ministers are said to remit sinnes Ioh. 20. 23. and consequently to justifie when they doe pronounce remission of sinnes to them that beleeve and repent And whatsoever they doe in this behalfe upon earth according to the Word is ratified in heaven § VI. As touching the Sacraments in them first the benefit of the Messias is represented before our eyes by the outward signes whereupon the Sacrament is called Verbum visibile Secondly such is the Sacramentall union betweene the signe and the thing signified that together with the signe the thing signified that is Christ with all his merits is offered in the lawfull use of the Sacrament Thirdly the benefit of the Messias is not only offered in the lawfull use together with the signe but also conferd and given to every faithfull and worthy receiver And hereof the Sacrament is a pledge given to the beleever to assure him that as the Minister doth give unto him the signe so the Lord doth give unto him the thing signified And in this sense every Sacrament is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith Rom. 4. 11. annexed to the promise of the Gospell which by delivery of the Sacrament is particularly applyed to every faithfull receiver to assure him in particular of his justification and salvation by Christ. Thus the ministery of the Gospell is the meanes to beget faith and the Sacraments the instruments to confirme the same But the Papists deny both for that faith is begotten in the ministery of the Word and that so men attaine to remission of sinnes and justification they say it is a fiction of the heretikes of these times Neither doe they grant that Sacraments are seales of righteousnesse or that they were ordained to seale the promises unto us But they hold them to bee such effectuall instruments as doe by vertue inherent in themselves conferre justifying grace which they call gratiam gratum facientem ex opere operatâ⦠By which doctrine a they have turned Religion into a meere outward formality according to the prophecy of them 2 Tim. 3. 5. ascribing all the degrees of salvation to be atchieved in this life viz. Vocation Iustification Sanctification to the externall use of the Sacraments so they have made their doctrine of justification to bee an idle speculation whereof in their practice there is little or no use For to what purpose doe they dispute of justification by vertuous preparations and gracious dispositions when they teach that the Sacraments doe ex opere operato that is by the very performance of the outward act justifie the receiver requiring in him neither any vertuous preparation or gracious disposition for without them hee is justified Onely this caution they doe interpose that hee doe not ponere obicem mortalis peccati that hee put not the obstacle of mortall sinne For if those things should necessarily be required then the Sacraments should conferre grace not ex opere operato as they stifly hold but ex opere operantis So much of the hand of the giver § VII The instrument on our part which is as it were manus accipientis the hand of the receiver is the grace of justifying faith which I noted in the definition when I said that the Lord imputeth the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner Now as touching saith divers things are to be considered For first it is said to justifie not as it is a qualitie or habite in us as the Papists teach ipsa fides saith g Bellarmine censetur esse justitia faith it selfe is accounted to be justice and it ââ¦elfe is imputed unto righteousnesse Rom. 4. 5. for so it is a part of sanctification but as it is the instrument and as it were the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse For if we should be justified by faith as it is an habit in us properly then we should be justified by habituall and inherent righteousnesse which hereafter I shall fully disproveAnd if we be not justified by it as it is an habit then much lesse as it is an act as ãâã and his followers teach as though ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ipsum credere did properly justifie Which opinion is worse than the other For faith doth justifie as hereaster shall be proved as the instrument only but it is the instrument not as it is an act but as it is an habit producing that act and therefore it is said that we are justified by faith and that faith is imputed unto righteousnesse But if wee should bee justified by it as it is an act then we should be justified by our owne workes which hereafter is also to be confuted and further if we were justified by it as it is an act then we should be no longer justified actually than we doe actually beleeve ãâã so there should bee an intercision of justification which I proved before to be a continued act so ost as there is an intermission of the act of faith which is ridiculous Againe if wee should be justified by faith either as it is an habit or an act in sensu proprio as they speake and not relatively or metonymically then should we be justified by one habit alone or by the act of one habit and consequently by a partiall and most unperfect righteousnesse When it is certaine that all the habits and acts of grace which are in the best concurring together are not sufficient to justifie a man before God for the reasons hereafter to be delivered lib. 4. 7. It is true that faith is imputed for righteousnesse and is accepted of God as the perfect performance of the whole law but this is to bee understood relatively in respect of the object received by faith that is Christ who is the end and complement of the Law to all that beleeve insomuch that whosoever truly beleeveth in Christ hath fulfilled the Law § VIII 2. is the consequent of the former For if faith doth justifie onely as it is an hand or instrument to apprehend and receive Christ then justifying faith must be such a faith as doth apprehend receive and embrace Christ which is not done neither by the implicite nor the unformed nor the bare historical and generall faith of the Papists but it is done first by a lively and effectuall assent to the speciall doctrine concerning justification and salvation by Christ which is the condition of the Evangelicall promise and then by a sound application of the promise to our selves as having that condition For by a lively and effectuall beleefe we receive and embrace Christ not only in our judgements by a willing and firme assent being undoubtedly perswaded and assured thathe is the Saviour of all that truly beleeve in him but also in our hearts by an hungring desire
according to charity sanctified from the corruption of sinne and justified from the guilt of the same therefore they should take heed lest they should againe bee polluted with those sinnes from which they were sanctified or made guilty of those crimes from which they were justified § V. His second testimony is Rom. 8. 30. Whom he hath called them hee hath justified Answ. The Context doth shew that the word in the 30. verse is used in the same sense as verse 33. For having shewed that whom the Lord calleth hee doth justifie and whom he doth justifie them also hee doth glorifie from thence hee inferreth this consolation who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect It is God that justifieth as was said verse 30. who shall condemne c. Where justifying most plainely is used as a judiciall word signifying by sentence to justifie as Chrysostome and Oââ¦cumenius on this place doe note as opposed to accusing and condemning and cannot with any shew of reason be drawne to signifie contrary to the perpetuall use of the word infusion of righteousnesse But heere it may bee objected that in this place where the Apostle setteth downe the degrees of salvation sanctification is either included in justification or left our Answ. It is left out for the Apostle setting downe the chaine of the causes of salvation in the degrees whereof every former being the cause of the latter left out sanctification as being no cause of salvation but the way unto it and the cognizance of them that are saved And these degrees are so set downe Act. 26. 18. where the end of the ministery is expressed first Vocation that men should bee called and thereby brought to beleeve secondly Iustification that by faith they may receive remission of sinnes thirdly Glorification that by faith they may receive the inheritance among them that are sanctified where sanctification is mentioned onely as the cognizance of them that are saved Againe sanctification is left out because it is included in respect of the beginning thereof which is our conversion or regeneration in vocation and in respect of the consummation in glorification for as sanctification is gloria inchoata so glorification is gratia consummata § VI. His third testimony is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him who justifieth the ungodly Ans. he should have done well to have made up the sentence his faith is imputed for righteousnesse which place is so farre srom favouring the Popish conceit that it plainely confutes it first it is called the justification of the ungodly that is of one who is a sinner in himselfe for he that is a sinner in himselfe by inherent sinne and so remaineth cannot be justified by righteousnesse inherent secondly because to him that beleeveth in Christ faith relatively understood that is the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith is imputed for righteousnesse thirdly because in this place justification is expressed by these termes not imputing sinne remitting or covering of sinne imputing righteousnesse without workes imputing faith for righteousnesse to him that worketh not that is that seeketh not to bee justified by his owne righteousnesse but beleeveth in him that justifieth a sinner CAP. IIII. The third and fourth signification of the word justification assigned by Bellarmine § I. THirdly saith Bellarmine justification is taken for increase of justice for even as he is said to be heated not only who of cold is mà de hot but also who of hot is made hotter even so he is said to be justified who not onely of a sinner is made just but also of just is made more just Ans. In this comparison of like there is a great unlikenesse for calefaction implyeth a reall mutation and a positive change in the subject from cold to hot but in justification the change is not reall but relative as before hath beene shewed Bellarmine therefore must prove that to justifie doth signifie to make righteous formally by righteousnesse inherent before he can prove that it signifieth the increase of inherent justice But if the former cannot be proved much lesse the latter But yet he bringeth three proofes such as they be § II. The first Ecclus. 18. 21. Ne verearis usque ad mortem justificari quââ¦niam merces Domini manet in aeternum feare not to be justified untill death for the reward of the Lord adideth for ever Answ. To omit that the booke is Apocryphall which ought not to bee alleaged in controversies of faith the testimonie it selfe is vilely depraved The words in the Originall are ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is stay not untill death to be justified or as their own interlinear translation readeth it ne expectes usque ad mortem justificari wait not untill death to be justified where it is evident that he speaketh of justification in our first conversion which he would not have differred untill the time of death and not of the continuance or increase of it for then the sentence would beare a contrary and indeed an ungodly sense ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã abide not or continue not to be justified or to be just untill thy death And the words untill death are not to be joyned with the last word justified but with the first stay not untill death And their translation of the words ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã whether as Bellarmine here readeth ne verearis or as some editions have ne vetéris hath no affinity with the Originall But our interpretation as it agreeth with the words of the Text so it is confirmed by the context Vse Physike before thou bee sicke before judgement prepare thy selfe humble thy selfe before thou bee sicke and in the time of sinnes that is whiles thou mai'st yet sinne shew thy conversion let nothing hinder thee to pay thy vowes in due season and deferre not untill death to be justified or to become just § III. But this testimony Bellarmine urgeth againe in another place shewing that the place is to bee understood of continuing and proceeding in justice and the words ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã are as much as cease not And this he would prove by that which goeth before be not hindred to pray alwayes where the wise man admonisheth us to increase our justice by continuall prayer and also by that which immediately followeth because the reward of the Lord endureth for ever for reward agreeth not to the first justification of the wicked but indulgence Answ. This interpretation of Bellarmine may then be admitted when it shal be proved first that ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signifieth to cease secondly ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to pray thirdly ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã alwaies fourthly that those words but the reward of the Lord endureth for ever are found in the Originall Text. But if Bellarmine knew that ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signifieth stay not or waite not and not cease not ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to render the vow and not to pray ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã
which cannot be understood of justification by inherent righteousnesse For it were very absurd to affirme which the Papists would faine father upon us that to justification by inherent righteousnesse nothing is required but faith only Againe Bellarmine objecteth which in the ninth Chapter where he confesseth justification to be often taken in the Scriptures for declaration of righteousnesse he more plainely expresseth although to justifie were every where taken for to pronounce just yet that were no advantage to us For a sinner cannot truely be pronounced just unlesse he who pronounceth him just doe withall make him just which God onely can doe And therefore hee alone is said to justifie a sinner and by absolving him to make him truely just Answere Whom God pronounceth just them hee maketh just but still the question is of the manner for to justifie by absolving is to make righteous by the not imputing of sinne and imputing of righteousnesse and not by infusion of righteousnesse for that is not to justifie but to sanctifie Howbeit wee freely confesse that whom God justifieth hee also sanctifieth and that whosoever is in CHRIST IESVS hee is a new Creature But howsoever these graces doe alwayes concurre insomuch that whosoever hath the one hath the other and whosoever hath not both hath neither yet notwithstanding they must carefully bee distinguished And that is it which hitherto I have endevoured to prove CAP. VI. Hââ¦w Iustification and Sanctification are to be distinguished § I. NOw let us consider how they are distinguished And first the difference of them may appeare by their contraries The contrary to justifying is condemning the contrary to sanctifying is polluting or defiling with sinne first therefore the word which signifieth to condemne if you respect the force of the word signifieth to make wicked even as the Verbe which signifieth to justifie doth if you respect the force of the word it signifieth to make just As God therefore when hee condemneth is said to make wicked not by infusion of wickednesse but by his sentence pronouncing the party guilty and deputing him to punishment so when hee justifieth he maketh just by his sentence not by infusion of righteousnesse quatenus justificat but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse he absolveth the party from guilt and punishment and accepteth of him as righteous in Christ and as an heire of eternall life secondly the contrary to sanctifying which is to make holy is polluting or defiling with sinne which is to make unholy and uncleane What difference therefore is betweene condemning and polluting the like is betweene justifying and sanctifying And as condemning and polluting are by no meanes to bee confounded no more can justifying and sanctifying § II. In justification wee are freed from the guilt of sinne in sanctification from the corruption or pollution of sinne For God is then said to justifie us when he absolveth us from the guilt of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse and hee is then said to sanctifie us when by his Spirit he mortifieth sinne in us and freeth us in some measure from the corruption thereof § II. Iustification is an action of God without us as also are redemption reconciliation and adoption which three benefits in substance differ not from justification but are all comprehended under it the second first being the same in effect with the former part of justification viz. remission of sinnes and the last being all one with the second part of justification which is acceptation of the beleever as righteousnesse in Christ and as an heire of eternall life as I have shewed heretofore for then are wee said to have redemption when wee have remission of sinnes then is God said to reconcile us unto himselfe when hee doth not impute our sinnes unto us then hee is said to adopt us when hee accepteth of us in Christ as righteous and as heires of eternall life None of these actions doth worke a Reall change in the party but importeth a new relation betweene God and them as hath beene shewed But sanctification is an action of Gods Spirit within us working in us a reall change by mortification of sinne within us and infusion of Grace and righteousnesse into us § IV. Of justification the matter is the righteousnesse of Christ which is in him as the subject but imputed to us the matter of sanctification is a righteousnesse derived from Christ but inherent in us The matter therefore of our justification is perfect but not inherent to wit the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him The matter of our sanctification is inherent but not perfect to wit justitia inchoata a righteousnesse which is but begun in us and that new obedience which though it be sincere and unfained is with great infirmity performed by us recta forsan sed non pura justitia as Bernard saith § V. Hereupon it followeth that of justification it selfe whereby wee are justified before God there are no degrees though óf the assurance thereof there bee which are the degrees of speciall faith because to the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ by which we are even in our first conversion justified nothing can be added and therefore as I have said the faith of all the faithfull though different in degrees is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of equall worth in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ even as the hands of divers men though unequall in strength yet are of equall efficacie in respect of the almes received thereby But of sanctification there are degrees according to the measure of grace received § VI. The forme of justification considered as an action of God is imputation of Christs righteousnesse of sanctification the infusion of righteousnesse For God by imputation of Christs righteousnesse doth justifie us and he doth sanctifie by infusion of righteousnesse § VII The parts of justification are remission or not imputing of sinne unto condemnation and acceptation as righteous unto life both wrought by imputation of Christs righteousnesse unto us The parts of sanctification are mortification whereby wee dye unto sinne and vivification whereby wee live unto righteousnesse rising from the grave of sinne unto newnesse of life and is therefore called the first resurrection both wrought in us by the Spirit of sanctification § VIII Wee are justified by faith not as it is a grace or habit in us that is to say as it is a part of inherent righteousnesse but as the hand or instrument receiving the righteousnesse of Christ which is imputed to them that beleeve but wee are sanctified by faith as it is a part of that righteousnesse which is inherent in us And therefore wee are justified by faith alone because no other grace doth concurre with it to the act of justification none of them serving to receive the righteousnesse of Christ but faith onely but we are not sanctified by faith alone
without the Law is revealed in the Gospell even the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith But all men without exception both Iewes and Gentiles are in themselves sinners and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore seeing all have sinned and are fallen short of the glory of God that is excluded from eternall glory they are not justified by righteousnesse inherent which is prescribed in the Law but they are justified by a righteousnesse which without the Law is revealed in the Gospel to wit the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith And that is it which is said in this text that those who have sinned and are fallen short of Gods glory and from their title to heaven are justified that is acquitted from their sinnes and entituled unto the Kingdome of heaven freely without respect of any grace or righteousnesse in themselves by the meere gracious favor of God when they had deserved the contrary through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whom God hath set forth to bee a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse c. To the same purpose the Apostle disputeth Gal. 3. as hereafter wee shall heare § III. Secondly it is proved by the words of the text alleaged the first wherof is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã being justified Now the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as I have proved heretofore doth never in al the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse and therfore here it is not meant that wee are justified by grace infused Neither doth justification import a reall or positive change in the subject but relative and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as hath beene shewed And wee must remember that as it is called so it is justificatio impii the justification of a sinner not onely because before justification men are sinners but also because being justified they still remaine sinners in themselves though in Christ they are made righteous And we are to conceive of justification as a continued act of God from our vocation to our glorification whereby hee doth accept of a beleeving sinner as righteous in Christ not onely at his first conversion but also afterwards whiles hee beleeveth in Christ though still in himselfe hee bee a sinner And to that end doth our Saviour make continuall intercession for us that the merit of his obedience may beâ⦠continually imputed unto us As for the Papists they being in their owne conceit justified as they all are after they have beene either baptized in their infancie or absolved when they come to yeares they are no sinners neither is there any thing in them which God hateth or which may properly bee called sinne But justification being of sinners and they being no sinners but ââ¦aying they have no sinne and avouching that hee onely is a just man in whom there is no sinne hereby it appeareth that neither are they justified neither is there any truth in them § IV. The next word is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which is an exclusive particle excluding the false causes of justification and signifying that wee are justified without any desert or worthinesse in our selves without works without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us which directly overthroweth the assertion of the Papists for proofe whereof this place was alleaged § V. The third word is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã by his grace that is by the gracious favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him as hath beene proved that is by his love of us and not by our love of him Neither is there any shew of reason why it should in this place above all others signifie as it never doth an habit of justifying grace inherent in us especially if that bee true which hereafter I shall plainely demonstrate that wee are not justified by that which is inherent And thus Saint Ambrose expoundeth these words gratia Dei gratis justificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei they are justified freely because neither working before their justification nor rendring any recompence after their justification they are by faith onely justified by the grace that is as he expoundeth it the gift of God And on those words by the redemption which is in Christ Iesu he testifieth saith hee that the grace of God is in Christ but not in us because by the will of God we were redeemed by Christ. Pererius likewise a learned Iesuit The name of Grace saith he when it is here said justified freely by his grace though it may signifie that supernaturall and divine quality infused into the soule of man and inherent therein yet rather it seemeth in this place to signifie gratuitam Dei bââ¦nitatem benignitatem erga hominem the free or gracious goodnesse and bounty of God towards man Grace therefore doth not signifie either the matter or the forme but the efficient cause of our justification § VI. The fourth word is through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whereby is meant Christs whole satisfaction made to the Law both in respect of the precept and of the penalty by which being as the Papists themselves confesse imputed unto us we are redeemed and justified as being the matter and merit of justification § VII The fifth word is by faith whereby is noted the instrument by which we apprehend and receive that satisfaction or righteousnesse of Christ by which we are justified which is indeed out of us in him but imputed to those that beleeve The righteousnesse therefore by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of faith that is the righteousnesse of God or of Christ apprehended by faith § VIII The sixth and last is the end why God did give his Sonne to be a propitiation for our sinnes to shew forth his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes and that hee might bee just and the justifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus For in the worke of our redemption and justification Gods justice is declared to be such that he forgiveth no sinnes but those onely for which his justice is satisfied by Christ neither doth he justifie any but those whom by communication of Christs righteousnesse unto them he maketh just But how should the satisfaction of Christ that is his obedience and sufferings being transient and so long agoe performed bee communicated unto us for our justification otherwise but by imputation And if wee bee justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse then not by inherent grace or infused righteousnesse CAP. IV. Bellarmines dispute out of Rom. 3. 24. refuted § I. NOw let us see what Bellarmine inferreth upon this place Here saith he all the causes almost of justification are set forth together The efficient cause is noted in the word gratis freely importing the liberality of
because Christ is God who as ââ¦eremy prophecied should be called ââ¦ebovah our righteousnesse ââ¦er 23. 6. Now his righteousnesse is called Gods righteousnesse as hath beene said not because it is the righteousnesse of the Godhead but because it is the righteousnesse of him that is God For as the bloud of Christ by which we are redeemed is Gods bloud Act. 20 28. so the righteousnesse of Christ by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of God and is so called 2 Cor. 5. 21. Rom. 1. 17. 3. 21. 10. 3. and most plainely 2 Pet. 1. 1. where it is called the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ which is an excellent testimony to prove the Deity of our Savior like to that Tiâ⦠2. â⦠3. for it is not said of God of our Saviour as noting two persons but of God and our Saviour as betokening one Secondly because it is that very righteousnesse of God whereof the Apostle speaketh in the places even now mentioned where it is so called neither because it is the essentiall righteousnesse of God as I have shewed before against Osiander nor because it is a righteousnesse in us from God for that is perfectly described in the Law as this is not Rom. 3. 21. and because that as I shall shew in the proofe of the second part of the assumption is not called Gods but ours but because it is the righteousnesse of that person who is God which that wee should not thinke to bee any thing in us is called sometimes his bloud Rom. 5. 9. sometimes his obedienââ¦e that is both his passive and active righteousnesse by imputation whereof those that truely beleeve are made the righteousnesse of God not in themselves but in Christ even as hee by imputation of our sinnes was made sinne for us § III. 3. Because divers of the Fathers to whose judgment some of the popish Doctors subscribe by the righteousnesse of God mentioned in the first third and tenth chapters to the Romanes understand Christ and his righteousnesse Origen in Rom. 3. therefore this righteousnesse of God quae est Christus which is Christ is manifested without the Law and so in Rom. 10. 3. Ambrose in Rom. 10. 3. Not knowing the justice of God that is as hee expoundeth ignorantes ââ¦uncesse Christum the Iewes being ignorant that this is the Christ whom God had promised said another was to be expected preferring their owne righteousnes which they had by the Law before him who is the righteousnesse of God by faith justitia n. ipse est for hee himselfe is the righteousnesse which words wee finde also in Sedulius in Rom. 10. 3. Anselmus in Râ⦠10. 3. they are not subject Justiciae Dei id est Christo to the righteousnesse of God that is to Christ. Remigius in Ro. 10. 3. Ignorantes Dei justitiam non quo ipse justus est essentialiter sed Christm c. They being ignoranâ⦠of the justice of God not that whereby he is just essentially but Christ they would not submit their neckes justitiae Dei id est Christâ⦠to the justice of God that is to Christ and in Rom. 3. 21. possumus ipsam justitiam Dei Patris id est Filium intelligere we may understand the very righteousnesse of God the Father that is to say the Sonne from whom and by whom we are justified ipse Christus justitia nostra Christ himselfe our righteousnesse hath testimony from the Law and the Prophets Some to the same purpose understand the righteousnesse of faith Theophilact in Ro. â⦠10. 3. and Oecumenius likewise ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the faith in Christ hee calleth the righteousnesse of God Anselmus in Roman 1. 17. the righteousnesse of God is revealed in the Gospell that is the righteousnesse of faith which was covered in the Law for the righteousnesse of God is that by which hee freely justifieth a sinner through faith without the workes of the Law Sedulius in Rom. 1. 17. the righteousnesse of God because it was just that as Abraham beleeving was justified by faith onely so all others imitating his faith should be saved Augustine speaking of those words Rom. 3. 21. the righteousnesse of God is manifested hee did not say saith hee the righteousnesse of man or the righteousnesse of our owne will but the righteousnesse of God not whereby God himselfe is just sed qâ⦠induit hominem but wherewith hee endueth a man which is a metaphore taken from garments when he justifieth a sinner where if Augustine had by righteousnesse understood inherent he should have beene confuted out of the very place which saith this righteousnesse is revealed without the Law which cannot be verified of inherent righteousnesse And againe this is the righteousnesse of God quae testamento veteri velata in ãâã revelata which having beene covered in the Old Testament which cannot be said of righteousnes inherent for all that righteousnes which is from God in us whether it bee habituall consisting in the habit of charity or actuall which is obedience is exactly prescribed in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse is discovered in the New which is therefore called the righteousnesse of God because by imparting it he maketh men righteous § IV. But most agreeable to the words and meaning of the Apostle is the exposition of Theodoreâ⦠as it is related by Cardinall Tolet and Pererius the Iesuite That by the righteousnesse of God is meant the righteousnesse of Christ who is both God and man which he performed for the redemption of Mankinde thereby fully satisfying the justice of God for us I conclude with Pererius and Cardinall Cajetan The justice of God is a justice satisfactory to God for the sinnes of Mankinde by the death I adde and obedience of Christ. And this is called the justice of God the justice of faith or the justice which is by faââ¦th Rom. 10. 6. Cajetan in Rom. 10. 3. The justice of God is a justice of satisfaction to God for mankinde by the death of Christ and in 2 Cor. 5. 21. the righteousnesse of God in Christ is the merit of Christ sufficient even to satisfie for us and to justifie us which is called Gods both because it is the righteousnesse of God personally and also because before the tribunall of God it is true righteousnesse differing from our righteousnesse which before the judgement seate of God are as the cloth of a menstruous woman when therefore the merit of Christ is communicated unto us then are we made the righteousnesse of God in Christ because wee are made just not by our owne righteousnesse but by the righteousnesse of God communicated unto us in Christ for we are made just before God by the merit by the satisfaction by the reconciliation made by Christ and againe in Rom. 3. 24. The redemption wrought by Christ is Gods righteousnesse not ours because Iesus Christ himselfe
bee justified by his owne fulfilling of the Law for none can fulfill it therefore none are justified by inherent righteousnesse § X. Our eighth argument we are not justified before God both by faith and by workes by Gods righteousnesse and our owne by that righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ and by that which is inherent in our selves For the holy Ghost maketh such an opposition betweene these as that they cannot stand together Rom. 3. 28. 4. 4 5. 9. 30 31 32. 11. 5 6. Phil. 3. 9. Gal. 2. 16. 3. 11. Eph. 2. 8 9. But wee are justified by faith by the righteousnesse of God through faith by Christs righteousnesse which is out of us in him viz. by his sufferings and by his obedience as besides the places even now quoted appeareth Rom. 5. 9. 19. Therfore we are not justified by righteousnesse inherent in our selves § XI Our ninth argument Imputative righteousnesse is not inherent as being not ours nor in us but communicated to us by imputation The righteousnesse by which we are justified is imputative that I prove first by testimony Rom. 4. 6 7 8 23 24. for then is God said to justifie when not imputing sinne hee imputeth righteousnesse without workes Secondly by reason The personall righteousnesse of Christ is inherent in him and not in us being proper to his person though by imputation communicated unto us The righteousnesse of God by which we are justified is the personall righteousnesse of Christ 2 Pet. 11. viz. his passive and active righteousnesse Rom. 5. 9. 19. And that it is his personall righteousnesse appeareth evidently because it is the righteousnes and obedience of one onely wheras if it were a righteousnesse from him in us it would be the justice of so many as are justified so saith the Councell of Trent justitiam in nobis recipientes unusquisque suam § XII Our tenth argument That justification which the Scripture teacheth taketh away all matter of boasting Rom. 3. 27. Epbes. 2. 9. But justification by works or by inherent righteousnesse doth not take away all matter of boasting Rom. 3. 27. 4. 2. Eph. 2. 9. Therefore justification by workes or inherent righteousnesse is not that which the Scriptures teach we must therefore say with Ambrose that is profitable to me that we are not justified by the works of the Law wherefore I have not whereof to glory in my workes I have not whereof to boast And therefore I will glory in Christ. I will not glory because I am just but I will glory because I am redeemed I will glory not that I am without sinne but because my sinnes are forgiven mee I will not glory because I have beene profitable or because any other hath profited me but because Christ is an Advocate for me with the Father and because his bloud was shed for me § XIII Our eleventh argument If there be no justification but by righteousnes inherent and that also perfect and pure then is justification promised upon an impossible condition and so consequently the promise should be void and of none effect But farre be it from us to thinke that the promise of justification by Christ is void and of none effect Therefore wee are not justified by workes or by righteousnesse inherent but by faith that the promise might bee sure to all the seed as the Apostle reasoneth Rom. 4. 13 14 15 16. § XIV Our twelfth argument because unto justification concurreth remission of sinnes as a necessary part thereof from whence three arguments arise First true justification is not without remission of sinne The popish justification by infusion of perfect righteousnesse is without remission of sinne For although they pretend that to their justification concurreth remission of sinne yet by remission they not understanding the pardoning or forgiving but the extinction and abolition of sinne have utterly excluded from justification the forgivenesse of sinne as I have shewed before Secondly unto true justification necessarily concurreth remission of sinne And where is remission of sin there is imputation of righteousnesse without workes But in the popish justification there needeth no imputation of righteousnesse and that for two reasons which Bellarmine doth prosecute at large in his dispute against imputation The one because in justification by infusion of righteousnesse sinne is fully expelled and therefore no need of imputation And secondly because the righteousnesse which is infused is perfect of it selfe without imputation of any other righteousnesse Thirdly if our justification and blessednesse doth consist in the forgivenesse of our sinnes as it doth Rom. 4. 6 7. ex Psal. 32. 1. then not in perfect inherent righteousnesse for where is neede of the forgivenesse of sinne there is no perfect righteousnesse inherent And where perfect righteousnesse is infused there needeth not imputation of righteousnesse § XV. Our thirteenth argument If Abraham David and Paul were not justified by righteousnesse inherent then much lesse any of us who are so farre inferiour to any of them Not Abraham whose example was a samplar in this behalfe Rom. 4. 23 24. For as Abraham the father of the faithful was justified so are we Abraham though he were a mirrour of piety abounding with good workes yet was not justified thereby As the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. 3 4 5. For to whom righteousnesse is imputed of grace through faith he is not justified by workes before God And contrariwise whosoever is justified by workes to him the reward of righteousnesse is not imputed of grace but rendred as a due and deserved debt ver 4. To Abraham righteousnesse was imputed of grace through faith vers 3. and 5. and therefore though hee abounded with workes yet hee was not justified by workes verse 2. or inherent righteousnesse but by faith without workes Not David for hee though a man according to Gods owne heart walking before God in truth and righteousnesse and in uprightnesse of heart yet he desireth the Lord that he would not enter into judgement with him for if hee did not onely himselfe but no man living could be justified for himselfe he maketh this confession as Augustine understandeth him nam me invenies reum si in judicium intraveris mecum for thou shalt finde me guilty if thou shalt enter into judgement with me And therefore he places his blessednesse or justification in the not imputing of sinne and imputing of righteousnesse without workes Psal. 32. 1 2. Rom. 4. 6 7. and professeth Psal. 71. 16. I will remember thy righteousnesse onely Not Paul for he though he knew nothing by himselfe yet professeth that he was not thereby justified 1 Cor. 4. 4. though hee had lived after his conversion in all good conscience before God Act. 23. 1. though herein he did exercise himselfe to have alwayes his conscience ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã cleare and without offence towards God and man yet in the question of justification he renounceth all his righteousnesse
by some inherent gift The proposition which no man denieth he laboreth to prove by three arguments which he might very well have spared but that he would have the world to thinke that we deny sanctification to be inherent The assumption which do we deny he proveth by his own authority alleaging that in the fifth and the sixth verses The Apostle describeth justification which indeed he doth not to be regeneration and renââ¦vation wroughâ⦠in us out of the bounty of God by the laver of Baptisme and effusion of the holy Ghost This we deny first because the word justifie never in the whole Scriptures is used in that sense secondly here the Apostle in plaine termes saith that we are justified and saved not by works of righteousnesse whereby is excluded all justice inherent but by Gods grace How then doth he prove it because in these words vers 7 that being justified by his grace wee might bee heires in hope of eternall life the Apostle rendreth a reason why God by the laver and by the Holy Ghost did regenerate and renew us and saith the cause was that being justified that is saith he that being by that regeneration and renovation justified we might deserve to be made heires of the kingdome and of life everlasting Answ. This glosse maketh the Apostle not like himselfe but like a popish merit-monger corrupteth the text which indeed doth paralell that 1 Cor. 6. 11. shewing how men converted from Gentilisme to Christianity shuld be exhorted to the performance of Christian duties For howsoever whiles they were Gentiles they were addicted to many vices and sinnes yet after they were called which the Apostle expresseth thus after that the bounty and humanity of God was manifested viz. by the preaching of the Gospel God not out of any desert of theirs but out of his meere mercy saved them by Baptisme as Saint Peter also speaketh that is justified them for that is the salvation we have here to bee intitled to salvation or saved in hope that being justified by his grace that is as he said before by his undeserved mercy they should be made heires according to hope of eternall life that is they might be saved in hope Of this sentence therefore stripped of its amplifications as it were its garments the naked substance is this But after we were called God by Baptisme justified us that being justified by his grace we might be saved in hope The amplifications which are added are to set forth and describe Baptisme unto us which as hee had noted to be the seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith when he saith that God justified or saved us by it so he calleth it the laver of regeneration and of the renovation wrought by the Spirit which God hath plentifully bestowed upon us So that these words are not a description of justification as Bellarmine dreameth waking but of Baptisme And they are added according to the purpose of the Apostle in this place as arguments to move men to Christian duties Why Because Baptisme as it was a seale unto them of their justification so also a Sacrament of their regeneration and renovation of the Spirit which Spirit God hath poured forth plentifully upon the faithfull which he speaketh to this end that the faithfull which are Baptized should make this use of their Baptisme not onely as of a seale to assure them of their justification and salvation but also to be a Sacrament token memoriall of their regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit plentifully poured upon them To which purpose the Apostle telleth the Romans that so many as were baptized into Christ were baptized into the similitude of Christs death and resurrection whereupon the Apostle inferreth in the next words vers 8. this is a faithfull saying and these things I will thou shouldest affirme and confirme that they which have beleeved in God ought to bee carefull precedents of good workes The Aposââ¦le therefore doth not say as Bellarmine maketh him speake that we are justified or saved or made heires of salvation by regeneration or renovation and much lesse that thereby we merit our inheritance but that God hath justified or saved us Sacramentally by Baptisme which as it is the seale of our justification and salvation so it is also the laver of regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit that being justified by his grace we might according to hope bee made heires of eternall life For howsoever we are neither justified nor saved nor made heires of eternall life by our Sanctification yet Sanctification is both the way wherein from our justification wee are to walke unto glorification For God hath chosen us to salvation through the sanctification of the Spirit 2 Thes. 2. 13. and therefore sanctification as it is a necessary consequent of our justification so it is a necessary fore-runner of glorification a necessary marke and cognizance of all that are justified and to be saved And therefore ouâ⦠Saviour saith that by faith in him wee receive remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified and so the Apostle also Act. 20. 32. § IX His fifth testimony is Heb. 11. and some other places of the Scripture which doe give testimony to some men that they were truly and perfectly just and that not by an imputative justice but inherent his reason is because the Scriptures would not call them absolutely just if they were not absolutely just Answ. To omit that it is one thing to be absolutely called just and another to be just absolutely and perfectly I answere that the faithfull who are commended in the Scriptures for righteous were righteous by a twofold justice both imputative and inherent The former being the righteousnesse of justification the latter of sanctification the former absolute and perfect the latter inchoated and unperfect By the former they were justified before God in respect of the latter though they were also called just yet they were not justified thereby that is they were neither absolved thereby from their sinnes past nor intitled to the kingdome of heaven as may appeare by all those Arguments which before I produced against justification by inherent righteousnesse As for those examples which hee alleageth out of Heb. 11. which is the Chapter of saith namely of Abel vers 4. and Noah vers 7. c. it is evident that they were justified by the righteousnesse which is of faith as is expresly said of Noah vers 7. that is by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith and imputed to them that beleeve for the righteousnefse which is of faith is imputative Rom. 4. 5. And when it is said that without faith they could not possibly have pleased God it is plainely intimated that by faith they pleased God and that they being besore justified by faith brought forth the fruits of faith acceptable unto God by which their faith was approved But as they were just by imputation that
is to say justified so also by infusion that is sanctified For the justifying faith being a lively and effectuall faith purifieth the heart and worketh by love and may be demonstrated by good works And where is not inherent righteousnesse concurring with faith there is no justifying faith at all But although sanctification doe alwaies accompany justification yet wee are not justified by the righteousnesse of sanctification which is inherent because it is unperfect and wee are sanctified but in part whiles we have the flesh that is the body of sinne remaining in us Neither was there ever any man since the fall absolute or perfect in respect of inherent righteousnesse Christ onely excepted § X. Yea but saith Bellarmine the Scripture acknowledgeth some men to have beene perfect Gen. 6. 9. immaculate Psal. 119. 1. just before God Luke 1. 6. I answere that this perfection is not legall as being a perfect conformity with the Law which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse but evangelical as being one of the properties of our new obedience which is not to bee measured by the perfect performance but by the sincere and upright desire and purpose of the heart For this uprightnesse goeth under the name of perfection and what is done with an upright heart is said to be done with a perfect heart and with the whole that is entire heart And likewise those men who were upright are said to have been perfect And yet notwithstanding all those men who are said in the Scriptures to have been perfect and to have walked before God with a perfect heart as Noah Iacob Iob David Ezââ¦kias c. had their imperfections Ezekias is said to have been a perfect man and to have served God with a perfect heart notwithstanding when God left him a little to try him he discovered his imperfections 2 Chr. 32. 25. 31. Of Asa it is said 2 Chron. 15. 17. that his heart was perfect all the dayes of his life and yet in the very next chapter there are three faults of his recorded where Zachary is said to have beene just before God and to have walked in all the Commandements and Ordinances of God blamelesse in the same chapter his incredulity is registred for which hee was stricken with dumbnesse and deafnesse for the space of tenne moneths So that all that are sincere and upright that is to say no hypocrits are notwithstanding their imperfections called perfect and so the word which is translated immaculate Psal. 119. 1. signifieth upright and to be righteous before God is all one with upright Thus the holy Ghost teacheth us to expound the word which is translated perfect viz. thamin and tham that to be upright is to walke before God is to walke before God and to walke before God is to be perfect Gen. 17. 1. Let perfection and uprightnesse preserve me Psal. 25. 21. Psal. 37. 37. Observe the perfect man and behold the upright for the end of that man is peace § XI Yea but Bellarmine will prove that these men which are in the Scriptures called just were endued with inherent righteousnesse because they brought forth good workes which were the fruits and effects of their inward righteousnesse for he that doth righteousnesse is righteous whom doth he now confute wee doe not deny them who are commended in the Scriptures for righteous persons to have been endued with righteousnesse inherent but wee deny that they or any of them were justified before God thereby As for example Abraham who abounded with good workes was justified by faith without workes Rom. 4. 2 3. and as hee was justified so are all the faithfull Rom. 4. 23 24. David though a man according to Gods own heart walking before him in truth and righteousnes and uprightnesse of heart yet professeth that neither he nor any man living could be justified if God should enter into judgement with them and therefore placeth his happinesse and justification notin his vertues or good works but in the not imputing of sin and imputation of righteousnesse without workes Rom. 4. 6. Paul though hee knew nothing by himselfe yet professeth that hee was not thereby justified 1 Cor. 4. 4. Yea in the question of justification hee esteemeth his owne righteousnesse of no worth Phil. 3 8 9. But as wee doe not deny the faithfull to bee endued with inherent righteousnesse so we affirme that whosoever is justified by imputative righteousnesse is also sanctified in some measure with righteousnesse infused and inherent In respect whereof though they bee also sinnes in themselves by reason of their habituall corruptions and actuall transgressions being in part carnall and sold under sinne and by the Law which is in the members led captive to the Law of sinne yet they have their denomination from the better part Even as a wedge of metall wherein much drosse is mingled with Gold is called a wedge of Gold though not of pure Gold and an heape of Corne wherein is as much chaffe as Wheate is called an heape of Wheate though not of pure Wheate So the faithfull man in whom there is the flesh and body of sinne as well as the Spirit and regenerate part is called of the better part a righteous man though not perfectly absolutely purely just in respect of his righteousnesse inherent Indeed every true beleever so soone as he is indeed with a true justifying faith is perfectly just by righteousnesse imputed but at the best he is sanctified onely in part § XII His sixth testimony is taken out of Rom. 8. 29. and 1 Cor. 15. 49. where it is said that the just are conformable to the image of Christ and doe beare the image of the second Adam as they have borne the image of the first Adam from whence hee collecteth three reasons The first As Christ was just so are wee and as hee was not just so ââ¦re not we But Christ was just by inhââ¦rent rightââ¦ousnesse and not by imputatiââ¦n Therefore we are just by inherent righteââ¦usnesse and not by impââ¦tation The proposition he proveth by the places alleaged First I answer to the proofe of the proposition that the places alleaged are impertiââ¦ent For the question being of the righteousnesse of ââ¦ustification never any understood the Apostââ¦e in these places to speake thereof But either of filiation as Chrysostome and others understand the former plate because as Christ is the Sonne of God so also are wee or of afflictions because whom God hath predestinated to bee like his Sonne in glory they shall bee conformable to the image of his Sonne in bearing the Crosse which sence is given by our Writeââ¦s and is agreeable to the scope of the Apostle in that place to the Romans or of Glory that when he shall appeare wee shall bee like him in glory of which as Ambrose Sedulius and others understand Rom. 8. ââ¦9 fo the other place being read in the future as it ought to bee in
the punishment thereof be inflicted upon us which is both our originall corruption and death it selfe besides many other calamityes then is it to be presupposed that the sin it selfe is imputed to us For if the sin it selfe had not been imputed then as Bellarmine himselfe somewhere argues neither the guilt nor the corruption had belong'd unto us Again things that are transient when they are once past and gone cannot bee communicated otherwise than by imputation That transgression of Adam as all other actions was transient and therefore if it be demanded how it being so long past and gone can bee communicated to us Bellarmine truly answeareth it is communicated unto us by generation eo modo quo communicari potest id quod transiit nimirââ¦m per imputationem in that manner according to which that may be communicated which is transient and gone to wit by imputation If it be objected which was Bellarmiââ¦es prime argument for inherent righteousnesse that through the disobedience of the first Adam wee were made sinners by inherent unjustice and therefore by the like reason through the obedience of the second Adam wee are made just by righteousnesse inherent I answere that from Christ we have both justification and sanctification the former answering to the guilt of Adams transgression imputed the latter answerable to the originall corruption by generation derived but though wee have them both from Christ yet not after one manner the former wee have by imputation the latter by infusion But of this place I have spoken heretofore at large § II. Our seventh argument Whosoever is a sinner in himselfe and so continueth whiles he remaineth in this life cannot bee justified otherwise than by imputation This I take to bee a most certaine and undeniable truth But every many whatsoever Christ onely excepted is in himselfe a sinner and so continueth whiles hee remaineth in this life Therefore no man whatsoever can othervise bee justified but by imputation Or thus The justification of a sinner is imputative for to a sinner the Lord when hee justifieth him imputing not sinne imputeth righteousnesse without workes Rom. 4. 6. 8. The justification of every Christian is the justification of a sinner and so is called of all writers boââ¦h old and new both Protestants and Papists Therefore the justification of every Christian is imputative The assumption of the former syllogisme is denyed by the Papists but against the testimony of their owne Conscience and against the common experience of all men in all times and places But this I prove it briefly All that sometimes doe sinne or have sinne abiding in them are sinners all men sometimes do sinne and have sinne remaining in them therefore all men are sinners the assumption is proved by Iames the just and by the holy beloved Apostle including themselves in many things wee offend all of us and if wee say wee have no sinne wee deceive our selves and there is no truth in us But that all mortall men are sinners I have sufficiently proved before Vnlesse therefore the Papists will say they are no sinners and that in them there is no sinne which if they doe say wee may bee bold to tell them that there is no truth in them they must confesse justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § III. Our eigth argument To whom faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes hee is not justified by workes that is by righteousnesse inherent but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse To Abraham and all the faithfull faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes Therefore they are not justified by workes but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse The former part of the proposition is proved by opposition of faith to workes in the question of justificââ¦tion and by the testimony of the the Apostle Rom. 4. 3 4 5 6 7 8. The latter part is proved by the former for if not by inherent righteousnesse then by imputed and if by faith and yet not by inherent righteousnesse then not by faith in respect oâ⦠it selfe as it is an habit inherent in us but in respect of the object which it apprehendeth Of which that is verified properly which by a trope viz. a Metonimy is ascribed to faith namely that it justifieth and saveth that by it wee have remission of sinne and the inheritance c. that is Christ received by faith doth justifie and save c. The assumption in expââ¦esse termes is delivered Rom. 4. 3. 5 6. 22 23 Here Bellarmine confesseth that faith indeed is imputed unto righteousnesse and that is our righteousnesse which confession doth not well agree with his assertions elsewhere that faith doth but dispose unto justification and that our formall righteousnesse is our charity that faith is an habit of the Vnderstanding but justice is an habit of the Will But our glosse hee doth not allow when wee say by faith that is by Christs righteousnesse apprehended by faith because it is repugnant to the Apostle for two causes For first hee doth not say Christs righteousnesse but faith is imputed Now faith is not Christs righteousnesse but ours by Gods gift Which notwithstanding is the maine doctrine of the Gospell revealing the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God from faith to faith the righteousnesse of God by faith that is which is apprehended by faith For faith it selfe is not the righteousnesse of God which doth justifie or save us but the instrument to receive Gods righteousnesse and therefore doth not justifie or save properly but relatively in respect of the object which it doth receive that is to say the righteousnesse of Christ which doth justifie and save those which receive it by faith and therefore when it is said in the Gospell more than once thy faith hath saved thee the meaning is that Christ received by faith hath saved those which did beleeve in him Act. 3. 16 it is said that faith in Christ had cured the lame man but it is thus to be understood that the name of Christ by faith in his name did cure him For we are justified and saved by a perfect righteousnes which is of infinite value and merit which is not faith nor any other grace or graces inherent but onely the righteousnesse of Christ. And yet because by faith wee are united to Christ and by it are made partakers of his benefits therefore all the benefits which wee receive from Christ are attributed to faith as elsewhere I have shewed To faith metonimically but properly to Christ himself His second reason because the word imputare in this place doth not signifie a bare reputing but a reputing unto which the truth is answer able in the thing it selfe as is plaine by these words Ei qui operatur merces imputatur c. for it is certaine that to him that worketh not onely in opinion and conceipt but truely and indeed the reward is due Answ. This reason doth not
prove our glosse to bee repugnant to the Apostle unlesse he imagine that wee hold the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to a beleever to bee not reall but imaginary And then by the same reason let him say that the imputation of our sinnes to Christ for which he really suffered and the imputation of Adams transgression to his posterity for which they are really punished was but imaginary Howbeit there is a difference in the manner of imputing a reward to him that worketh and of righteousnesse to him that beleeveth for that is ex debito this ex gratia § IV. Our ninth argument Hee that is justified not by his owne righteousnesse but by the righteousnesse of another is justified by righteousnesse imputed But all the faithfull are justified not by their owne righteousnesse Phil. 3. 8 9. Rom. 10. 3. but by the righteousnesse of another this was fully proved and maintained in the whole third controversie for that which is but one mans righteousnesse cannot be every faithfull mans owne by inherencie but onely by imputation The righteousnesse by which wee are justified is but the righteousnesse of one Rom. 5. 18 19. § V. Our tenth argument There is the same matter whereby infants are justified and others But infants are not justified by righteousnesse inherent for neither have they habituall righteousnesse which consisteth in the habits of faith hope and charity of which they are not capable whiles they want the use of reason nor actuall as all confesse but by the righteousnesse of Christ and that imputed And therefore Berââ¦d saith they want no merits because they have the merits of Christ. § VI. Our eleventh argument As Abraham was justified so are wee Rom. 4. 23 24. Abraham was justified by imputation Rom. 4. 3. 22. and not by inherent righteousnesse though hee did excell therein Therefore wee are justified by imputation and not by inherent righteousnesse § VII Our twelfth argument To those that are justified by faith righteousnesse in their justification is imputed without workes that is without respect of righteousnesse inherââ¦nt Rom. 4. 5 6. All the faithfull are justified by faith Esai 53. 11. Rom. 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. Therefore to all the faithfull in their justification righteousnesse is imputed without respect of inherent righteousnesse § VIII Our thirteenth argument whose sinnes are remitted by imputation of Christs satisfaction unto them they are justified by imputation for to be absolved from sinne is to be justified Act. 13. 38 39. where to have remission of sinne is to bee justified from sinne So Rom. 4. 6 7 8. where the Apostle sheweth that whose iniquities are forgiven whoââ¦e sinnes are covered to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne to them hee imputeth righteousnesse without workes where the Apostle saith Bellarmine ex non imputatione peccatorum colligit imputationem justitiae from the not imputing of sinne hee gathereth the imputation of righteousnesse them he justifieth them he maketh blessed So Luk. 18. 13 14. when our Saviour would signifie that the Lord had heaââ¦d the prayer of the Publican who had prayed for the remission of his sinne hee saith he went home justified But the sinnes of the faithfull are remitted by imputation of Christs satisfaction to them This the Papists themselves cannot deny Or if they did the whole Doctrine of the Gospell would confute them which teacheth that Christ dyed for our sinnes that hee hath redeemed us from all our iniquities that hee gave himselfe ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a full price of ransome for us 1 Tim. 2. 6. that hee gave himself for us an offering and sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savor Ephes. 5. 2. that in him God is well pleased and reconciled unto us forgiving our sinnes 2 Cor. 5. 19. that hee is the propitiation for our sinnes 1 Iohn 2. 2. that hee bare our iniquities Esai 53. 12. that in his ownâ⦠body hee bare our sinnes upon the Tree 1 Pet. 2. 24. that by him wee have redemption that is remission of sinnes that we are justified by his bloud Rom. 5. 9. and by his obedience verse 19. that God is just in justifying a beleeving sinner and therefore forgiveth no sinne for which his justice is not satisfied And his justice cannot be satisfied for our sinnes being an infinite offence as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth but by a price or satisfaction of infinit valew which can be no other but the perfect and al-sufficient satisfaction of Christ which the Lord accepteth in behalfe of all those that beleeve in him which is nothing else but to impute it to them for if God should not accept of Christs satisfaction in the behalfe of those that beleeve then in vaine had Christ dyed or satisfied for us Therefore the faithfull are justified by imputation § IX Hereunto the Papists have nothing to oppose but their owne erroneous assertion which is hereby confuted that remission of sinne is an utter abolition extinction deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse But as in the Law two things are to bee considered the precept it selfe and the sanction thereof denouncing punishment to the transgressout so in sinne there are two things to be considered the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã it selfe which is the transgression of the precept and the guilt which bindeth over the sinner to punishment The ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is twofold for it is partly transient which is the sinfull act or transgression it selfe and partly immanent in the soule of the offendor which is that macula or labes the blemish spot or pollution which the act doth leave behind it in respect whereof as Bellarmine teacheth the transgressour after the act is gone remaineth formally a sinner The guilt also is twofold for it is either reatus culpae the guilt of offence or of offending God and reatus paenae which is the binding over of the sinner unto punishment Now God doth take away the sinnes of the faithfull both in respect of the fault and also of the guilt of punishment but not after one manner He taketh away the guilt by remission of sinne for in regard of the guilt our sinnes are debts which debts God doth forgive when hee remitteth the punishment and taketh away the guilt which did bind us over to punishment by imputation of Christs sufferings unto us who as our surety did pay our debts for us And because our Saviour fully satisfied our debt therefore our sinnes in respect of the guilt of death are in our justification wholly taken away and in that respect there is an utter deletion of them as there useth to be of debts ââ¦out of debt bookes when they are satisfied But when the Lord doth justifie a man he doth impute unto him not onely the suffering of Christ to free him a paena reatu paenae but also his obedience that he may be constituted righteous and so freed also a culpâ⦠reatu ãâã For as touching the fault whether you meane the sinfull act which is
transient or the sinfull blemish remaining in the soule which is a vicious disposition and pronenesse to sinne left as the remainder of originall sinne and increased by our owne actuall transgressions as it is a fault and the offence of God bringging with it reatum culpae to a beleever and is not imputed to whom Christs obedience is imputed but covered with the robe of Chrisââ¦s righteousnesse by imputation wherof he is not only freed from the guilt both of the punishment and of the fault but also accepted as righteous in Christ but as the maculâ⦠is an habituall sinne or sinfull disposition polluting the soule as a remainder of originall sinne increased by our actuall transgressions it is not wholly abolish'd in this life and much lesse at once but it is mortified by degrees in those that repent of their sinnes who day by day are renewed in the innerman As for those places which Bellarmine alleageth to prove remission of sinne to be the totall abolition of sinne I have fully answered heretofore in the second question of the first controversie shewing that divers of them are to be understood in respect of the guilt which in remission is totally abolished The other which are to bee expounded of the corruption are understood of the cleansing and purging of our soules from them either begunne in this life or finished at the end of this life For the death of the body bringeth with it in the children of God the death and utter extinction of sinne And therefore death which was brought in as a punishment of sinne becommeth a remedy to extinguish sinne For whiles we live in the mortall body sinne liveth in us but when the body dyeth sinne is extinguished CAP. III. Containing our two last Arguments § I. OVR foureteenth Argument If redemption reconciliation and adoption be imputative then justification also is by imputation For I have shewed heretofore that these three in substance differ not from justification for as all these three benefits are comprised under justification so in them the whole nature of justification doth consist For what is it to be redeemed and reconciled but to have our sins remitted or not imputed by the imputation of Christs sufferings which is the first part of justification and what is it to be adopted but to bee accepted in the beloved as righteous and as an heire of eternall life by imputation of Christs obedience which is the second part of justification But those three benefits are imputative all of them wrought by the not imputing of sinne which had made us the bond-slaves of sinne and Satan enemies to God and children of the devill and by the imputation of Christs merits whereby of the slaves of sinne and Satan wee are made Gods servants of enemies his favourites of the children of the devill the sonnes of God § II. Our fifteenth Argument out of Psalm 32. and Rom. 4. If the Holy Ghost describe justification to bee the forgiving of iniquities the covering of sinne the not imputing of sinne to the sinner the imputing of righteousnesse not to him that worketh but to him that beleeveth in Christ or imputing of righteousnesse without workes then justification standeth not in deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse but in imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which the sinner is both freed from his sinne and also accepted as righteous But the Holy Ghost doth so describe justification Rom. 4. 6 7 8. ââ¦x Psalm 32. 1 2. To both parts Bellarmine doth answere The assumption hee first denieth and then cavills with it For first whereas Calvin as he saith demandeth whether this bee a full definition of justification or but halfe he likewise demandeth when either the ãâã saith Blessed is the man that feareth the Lord and Blessed are they who f are upright in the way or when our Saviour saith Blessed are the poore in Spirit blessed are the meeke c. whether each of these bee a perfect definition For if it be where is then remission of sinne Secondly he saith that Paul alleageth this testimââ¦ny out of the Psalme not that hee might thereby define fully justification but onely to prove that true justification is the gift of God and not gotten by our owne strength And that hee fitly proveth from thence that David calleth him blessed whose sinnes God remitteth that is whâ⦠by the gift aââ¦d grace of God is justified § III. To the former I reply that there is not the like reason betweene these places cited by us and those alleaged by him For those containe but certaine notes and markes of Blessednesse though the Papists absurdly make eight beatitudes of the eight notes of one and the same blessednesse Matth. 5. But here the Apostle out of Psalm 32. sheweth that blessednesse it selfe whereby as appeareth by the former verse he meaneth justification which is the onely ãâã viae because by it we are intitled to the eternall happinesse which is beatitudo patriae all other ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã being but notes and signes of this is so defined or described For somuch those words import David doth describe the blessednesse as our translation fitly rendreth the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in this place The second is a meere depravation of the Apostles meaning and intenââ¦ion which was not to prove that justification is the gift of God which he had already taught to be a gracious action of God freely justifying by his grace those that beleeve in Christ but by a new supply of Arguments to prove the same question which in the former Chapters hee had disputed concluding that a man is justified by faith and not by workes which question here hee proveth by the example of Abraham and by the testimony of David The Argument drawne from Abrahââ¦ms example is an excellent proofe which Chrysostome well observed as Cardinall Tââ¦let doth acknowledge For Abraham had both faith and workes and yet he was justified not by his workes but by his faith If Abraham had had no workes or not such notable workes it might have beene said that he was justified by faith without workes because he wanted workes But seeing he abounded with store of excellent works and yet was not justified by them but onely by faith this is an invincible argument to prove that a man is justified by faith and not by workes For Abraham though hee had works yet was justified by faith without workes Likewise David describeth or if you will declareth the blessednesse of the man that is that a man is blessed that is to say justified to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes § IV. This was his denyall of the assumption But now he cavilleth that it may bee that in these words is contained the full definition of justification implicitè For there cannot be remission of sinne in Bellarmines sense that is deletion of sinne unlesse righteousnesse be infââ¦sed as darkenesse is not driven
childish things for now to wit by faith wee see and know as it were in or by a looking-glasse and as it were in a riddle or in a dââ¦rke speech but then wee shall see face to face Now I know in part but then I shall know even as also I am knowne If therefore faith shall bee perfected by vision the consequence of the proposition with the proofe thereof is to be denyed and the evacuating of it by vision is a pregnant proofe that in this life it is but in part As touching the assumption I say that faith which is the evidence of things not seene and the substance of things hoped for shall never bee perfected untill the things which are beleeved shall bee seene and the things hoped for shall be enjoyed § III. His second reason to prove that faith may be perfect in this life is this because that faith which hath bene tryed in the forââ¦ace of temptation is perfect whereto if hee assume that the faith which in justification is first infused either in infants when they are baptized or in others in their first justification hath beene tried in the Fornace of temptation hee shall be ridiculous for it must be before by tryall it bee approved but supposing him to speak of the faith of men being adulti and already justified his impertinent proofe standeth thus That faith which is more precious than gold tryed in the fire is perfect That faith which hath beene tryed and approved by temptation is more precious than gold tryed in the fire witnesse Saint Peter 1 Epist. 1. 7. therefore that faith is perfect Answ. The proposition is to bee denyed For temptations and afflictions are trialls not of the perfection but of the soundnesse and unfainednesse of faith All faith which is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is true and unfained though not perfect endureth temptations Heresies are trialls whereby ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã not the perfect but the sound and upright Christians may be knowne Affliction worketh patience and patience worketh ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã probation that is sheweth them to bee ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is sound and approved who patiently beare afflictions Wherefore blessed is the man that endureth temptation ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã because when hee shall be found ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is not a perfect but a sound and approved Christian hee shall receive the Crowne of life Temptation therefore is fitly called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the triall of our faith because it tryeth those who professe the faith whether they be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sound and upright Christians or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is hypocrites But not all that be not perfect are ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã nor any perfect though ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but all those that are not upright are ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is to say hypocrites § IV. His third reason whosoever beleeve with all their heart or their whole heart their faith is perfect some do beleeve with their whole heart as namely the Eunuch Act. 8. 37. therefore the faith of some is perfect To helpe him I will confesse that not onely some but all who have faith unfained beleeve with their whole heart But the proposition is to bee denyed For to beleeve with the whole heart being not legally but evangââ¦lically understood is to beleeve not with an heart and an heart that is an heart divided but with an entire and upright heart wherein there is no guile that is hypocrisie So that hee which beleeveth integro corde with an upright heart or with faith unfained is said according to the scriptures to beleeve with his whole heart which proveth not the perfection but the soundnesse of faith Neither is it credible either that Philip would require perfect faith in men before they be baptized for to such Baptisme were needelesse or that the faith of the Eunuch being a new convert not yet baptized was at that time perfect For what I pray you was his faith Was it not this I beleeve that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God which is the very first degree of justifying faith § V. His fourth reason because the faith of Abraham was altogether perfect What will hee from thence inferre Ergo the faith of all when they are first justified is perfect but hee commeth farre short of that conclusion All that can bee concluded if the premisses were true is this Abraham had perfect faith Abraham was justified therefore some justified person hath a perfect faith The proposition hee proveth out of Rom. 4. 19. 20. where it is said that hee was not weake in faith as many are who notwithstanding are justified neither staggered at the promise of God through unbeleefe as Zacharias did Luk. 1. 20. who notwithstanding his unperfect faith was a man justified but was strong in faith being fully perswaded and therefore had ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã fidei the full perswasion of faith which few or none have when they are first justified Now saith he this ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is the perfection of faith Answ. first to the proposition that Abrahams faith when hee was first justified was not perfect whatsoever it was afterwards secondly to the proofe of it out of Rom. 4. 20. 21. from which testimony it is indeed proved that the faith of Abraham after he had beene for a long time justified was strong but not perfect Neither is the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or full perswasion of this point that God is omnipotent which here is adscribed to Abraham the perfection of faith nor yet every full perswasion of the truth of God concerning Christ. For first there is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which is a full perswasion of assent to any truth of God but especially to the truth that Iesus the Sonne of the Virgin Mary is the eternall Sonne of God and the Saviour of all that truely beleeve in him which though it justifie if it be a lively and effectual assent joyned with an earnest desire and settled resolution of application yet is farre from the perfection of faith For there is also ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the full perswasion of speciall faith which goeth beyond the ordinary faith of all Papists when thou certainely beleevest not onely that Christ is the Saviour of all the faithfull but also that he is thy Saviour and that by him thou shalt be saved Now every assurance or assured perswasion is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of which there are many degrees through which we must strive proceeding from faith to faith towards a full assurance which yet is never so full but that still more and more may and ought to be added to it As for Abraham though his faith were strong and excellent yet was it not perfect which appeareth by many signes For if his faith had beene perfect then it had not needed to have beene strengthened and confirmed Why then did the
upon it be cured And although their eye could not properly bee said to cure them yet because it was the onely instrument to apprehend that object which God had ordained as the onely remedy to salve them it is truely said that by onely looking upon that object they were cured Even so our Saviour Christ was lifted up upon the Crosse it is his owne similitude Ioh. 3. 14 15. that whosoever being stung by the old serpent doth but looke upon him with the eye of faith Ioh. 6. 40. may be justified and saved for although this eye of the of the soule which is faith cannot be said properly to justifie them who are sinners yet because it is ââ¦he onely instrument to apprehend that object which God hath ordained as the onely remedy and propitiation for our sinne it is truely said that by beleeving onely in Christ we are Iustified § IV Secondly whereas faith it selfe doth not justifie properly but the object which it doth apprehend which is Christ and his righteousnesse our meaning therefore when wee say that faith alone doth justifie can be no other but this that the righteousnesse of Christ alone which is onely apprehended by faith doth justifie us And forasmuch as this is a necessary disjunction that wee are justified either by that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves or by that which is out of us in Christ for by some righteousnesse wee are justified and a third cannot be named it followeth therefore necessarily that if we be not justified by inherent righteousnesse then by Christs righteousnesse alone because a third righteousnesse by which we should bee justified cannot be named § V. Thirdly where wee say that Christs righteousnesse alone which is apprehended by faith alone doth justifie wee doe not meane absolutely that nothing else doth justifie but nothing in that kind viz. that the righteousnesse of Christ is the only matter of our justification and faith the onely instrument on our part by which wee are justified For otherwise as hath before beene shewed wee confesse that many things else doe justifie viz. God as the Author and principall efficient of our justification who imputethunto us the righteousnesse of his Son The holy Ghost also doth justifie us by working in us the grace of faith hy which he applyeth Christs righteousnesse unto us The Ministers also doe justifie as the instruments of the holy Ghost both by the ministry of the Gospell by which faith is begotten in us and of the Sacraments whereby the promises of the Gospell are sealed unto us And lastly good workes doe justifie as the signes and evidences whereby our faith and justification is manifested But as the matter nothing doth justifie but Christs righteousnesse and as the instrument on our part nothing but faith And in this sense wee doe constantly affirme that by Christs righteousnesse alone apprehended by faith alone wee are justified § VI. For the demonstration of our assertion I shall not need to bring many new proofes seeing that all those arguments which before I have produced but especially those which concerne the matter and forme of justification doe invincibly prove that wee are justified by the righteousnes of Christ alone being apprehended by faith alone and imputed to them that beleeve For if we be justified by the imputed righteousnesse of Christ alone and if in us there bee nothing which receiveth or maketh us partakers of Christs righteousnesse but faith onely then there is nothing in us by which we are justified but onely faith But because the Papists object heresie and novelty against us in this point I will besides some few places of Scripture and some other reasons briefly propounded produce the testimonies of the Fathers and others who have in all ages lived in the Church before these times § VII First therefore Rom. 3. 24. the word gratis freely being an exclusive particle doth import that we are justified by the grace of God and merits of Christ through faith without righteousnesse in us and therefore by faith alone Secondly Gal. 2. 16. We know that by the workes of the Law that is the righteousnesse and obedience prescribed in the Law in which all inherent righteousnesse is fully and perfectly described a man is not iustified ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã no otherwise but by faith non nisi per fidem as Bishop Iustinian or by faith onely as Henry Steven who well understood the Greek translateth it sed tantùm per fidem Thirdly Rom. 4. 5. the exclusive is implyed To him that worketh nor but hath beleeved that is hath onely beleeved in him who justifieth sinners his faith is imputed unto righteousnesse and so the Syriack Paraphrast readeth but hath onely beleeved Fourthly Mar. 5. 36. Luk. 8. 50. Onely beleeve To this Bellarmine answeareth That Christ speaketh of the miraculous raising of a dead body and not of the justification of a sinner for as for the obtaining of a miraculous cure he confesseth that faith doth suffice alone Thus Bellarmine in that place to serve his present tume But in the seventeenth Chapter of the same booke where hee would prove that faith doth justifie not relatively in respect of the Object but by its owne efficacie hee alleageth that the woman of Canaan procured her daughters health by the efficacie of her faith and rejecteth his owne answere in the other place Neither may it bee answered saith he that it is one thing to speake of justification and another of the curing of a bodily disease For our Lord by the very same words attributeth Vtramque sanitatem the health both of the body and the soule to faith For as he said to the woman who was a sinner Luk. 7. 50. thy faith hath saved thee so to the woman which had the bloudy issue Mat. 9. 22. thy faith hath saved thee and to the blinde man whom he restored to sight Mar. 10. 52. thy faith hath saved thee And further it is to bee thought that our Saviour when he telleth them whom he cured that their faith had saved them that is himselfe through faith had saved them looked higher than to the cure of their bodies as Mat. 9. 2. sonne be of good cheere thy sinnes are forgiven thee for sinne being the cause of their maladies the Lord to cure them tooke away the cause thereof which was the guilt of sinne § VIII All those places which exclude workes from justification doe by necessary consequence teach justification by faith alone For that we are justified by some righteousnesse is confessed of all This righteousnesse is either the righteousnesse of faith or of workes that is either the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith and that is the righteousnesse of God which without the Law is revealed in the Gospell or that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves prescribed in the Law For neither can a third righteousnesse bee named by which we should be justified neither can wee be justified by both
Twelfthly In his fortie five sermon which by some is attributed to Maximus who lived after him forty yeares to the penetent thiefe it sufficeth ad innocentiam Domino credidisse to make him innocent that he beleeved in the Lord. Thirteenthly Another testimony of Ambrose recorded by Gratian that the grace of God in baptisme requireth neither mourning nor any worke sed solam fidem omnia gratis condonat but faith alone and forgiveth all freely XI Hierome or what other Writer no lesse ancient was the Authour of the commentaries on Paul's Epistles in very many places teacheth justification by faith alone Bellarminâ⦠saith that Pelagius was the Authour of those Commentaries But this appeareth to be false by those places which S. Augustine citeth out of the commentaries of Pelagius in his three first chapters of his third booke De peccatorum meritis remissione I deny not but that divers sentences are found in those Commentaries rankely savouring of the Pelegian heresie as well as in the writings of other ancient Fathers either because before the Pelagian herââ¦sie was spred they wrote more caresly of those points or rather because the Pelagian hereticks did corrupt their writings which Possevin himselfe suspecteth might have happened to this author These Commentaries doe seeme to have been in great account in the Church above 1100 yeares agoe in that Sedââ¦lius in his Collectanea and sometimes by name as 1 Cor. 7. 37. And Primasius in his Commentaries on the Epistles were not ashamed to borrow store of annotations out of these Commentaries as in other points so in this which I have in hand as may appeare by collation of those which I shall cite out of them The Author of the ordinary glosse who lived eight hundred yeers ago every where citeth them under the name of Hierome For my part I suspect that Bââ¦llarmine and other Papists doe not so much distaste this Writer for comming too neere the Pelagians as for his too much departing from themselves I meane especially in this question of justification freely by the grace of God through faith alone in Christ to which purpose there are more frequent and more pregnant testimonies in these Commentaries than in any other work of the like quantity of any ancient writer whatsoever and although these Commentaries have beene interpolated by the Pelagian hereticks yet those testimonies which I shall alleage for Iustification by faith alone the Papists themselves will free from suspicion of Pelagianisme Thus therefore he writeth First in Ro. 1. 16. on those words Iudaeo c. sive quod justum fuerit ut quomodo Abraham credens ex Gentib per solam primum fidem salvatus est ita caeteri credentes salvarentur Sedulius hath the same but leaveth out the word primum Secondly In Rom. 4. 3 Tam magna fuit fides Abrahae ut pristinaââ¦i peccata donarentur sola pro omni justitia doceretur accepta Thirdly in Rom. 4. 5. Convertentem impium per solam fidem justificat Dââ¦us And upon those words which are there sound in the Latine edition secundum propositum gratiae Dei Fourthly Qui proposuit gratis per solam fidem peccata dimittere Fifthly In Rom. 4. 11. Vt omnes qui ex Gentibus credunt filii sint Abrahae dum illis sola fides ad justitiam reputatur Sixthly In Rom. 5. 1. Ostendit quod fides faciat filios Abrahae qui ex sola prima fide justificatus est Seventhly In Rom. 8. 28. secundum propositum secundum quod proposuit sola fide salvare quos praesciverat credituros Eighthly In Rom. 10. 3. Ignorantes quòd Deus ex sola fide justificat justos se ex legis operibus quam non custodiunt esse putantes noluerunt se remissioni subjicere peccatorum ne peccatores fuisse viderentur Et in Roman 10. 5. Ninthly Moses distinxit in Levitico inter utramque justitiam fidei scillicet atque factorum quòd altera operibus altera sola fidei credulitate accedente fiat Tenthly In Rom. 10. 10. Ergo si fides sufficit ad justitiam confessio ad salutem inter Iudaeum Gentilem credentes nulla discretio est 11. In 2 Cor. 5. 19. Non reputans illis delicta ipsorum hoc est per solam fidem cognoscens read ignoscens or as Primasius indulgens 12. In Gal. 1. 12. Neque a me confinxi neque ab ullo homine accepi quòd Gentes sola fide salvarentur 13. In Gal. 2. 14. Non ex operibus legis sed sola fide sicut Gentes vitam in Christo invenisse te nosti 14. In Gal. 2. 17. Si enim Gentes fides sola non salvat nec nos quia ex operibus nââ¦mo justificatur 15. In Gal. 2. 20. In fide viva filii Dei in sola fide quia nihil debeâ⦠legi antiquae 16. In Gal. 3. 6. Abraham credidit Deo reputatum est illi adjustitiam ita vobis ad justitiam sola sufficit Fides unto justice Faith only sufficeth 17. In Gal. 3. 11. In legeâ⦠nemo justificatur quia nemo illam serval Let the Papists note that point of Pelagianisme ideo dictum est quòd sola fide justificandi essent 18. In Gal. 3. 14. Vt sola fide Gentes benedicerentur in Christo sicut prââ¦missum fuerat Abrahae 19. In Gal. 3. 26. Aequaliter Iudaei Gentes per solam fidem filii Dei estis quia credidistis Christâ⦠20. In Eph. 2. 8. Gratia estis salvati per fidem non meritis prioris vitae sed sola fide 21. In Eph. 2. 15. Per solam fidem justificans 22. In Phil. 3. 9. Non habens meam justitiam hoc est meo labore quae sitam sed illam quae ex fide c. sed illam quae à Deo propriè sola fide collata est Christianis XII Chrysostome In Rom. 1. 17. thou obtainest righteousnesse not by sweat and labour but receivest it by gift from above ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã bringing one thing onely from within viz. to beleeve nothing therefore in us doth concurre to the act of justification but onely faith Secondly In Rom. 3. 27. What is the Law of faith to save by grace here he sheweth the power of God that he hath not onely saved but also justified and brought into glorying ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and that not requiring workes but seeking faith onely Thirdly In Rom. 4. 1. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã it is not possible to be saved otherwise than by faith Fourthly In Rom. 8. 24. This one gift have wee brought to God ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to beleeve him promising things to come ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and by this onely way we are saved Fifthly In Gal. 3. 6. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã faith sufficed Abraham to righteousnesse Sixthly In Gal. 3. 8. They the justitiaries said he that adhereth to faith alone is accursed but Paul sheweth
ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that he which adhereth to faith alone is blessed Seventhly In Ephes. 2. 15. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã by faith alone hee saved Eightly In Col. 1. 27. For at once to bring men more senselesse than stones to the dignity of Angels simply by bare words ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and by faith alone without all difficulty it is indeed the glory and riches of the mystery Ninthly In Tit. 1. 13. For if thou doest give credit to thy faith why doest thou bring in other things ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as if faith were not sufficient to justifie Bellarmine by other things understandeth the ceremonies of the Law When Chrysostome indeed rejecteth al other things because faith it selfe is sufficient to justifie Tenthly There is a notable testimony cited by Bishop Iustinian out of Chrysostome in Psal. 14. which doth not only conclude this question against the Papists but also putteth a manifest difference betwixt sanctification which consisteth of many virtues and justification unto which faith onely is required Iustitia conflatur ex multis virtutibus ââ¦na virtus activa non facit justitiaâ⦠quemadmodum nec una tabula perficit navigium nec unus lapis domum Vna sola virtus justificat fides quae est virtutum fastigium Righteousnesse is compounded of many virtues and one active virtue maketh not righteousnesse Even as one planke doth not make a ship nor one stone an house onely virtue justifieth namely faith which is the top of all virtues 11. Serm. de fide lege naturae Without faith no man hath aââ¦tained to life ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but the thiefe on the Crosse beleeving onely was justified and afterwards twice he affirmeth that ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã faith by it selfe saved Bellarmine answereth that Chrysostome teacheth that sometimes faith alone that is without externall workes doth suffice which cannot be applyed to the penitent thiefe who as I shewed before wanted not for the time externall workes and yet not by them but by faith alone he was justified XIII Hesychius in Leviticum Grace is given out of mercie and compassion and is apprehended by faith alone fide comprehenditur solâ⦠not out of works as the Apostle saith for then grace shall not be grace XIV Augustine Nam sine bonorum operum meritis per sidem justificatur impius quidem solam For without the merits of good workes a sinner is justified and that by faith alone 2. Apud Gratianum this is the faith which worketh by love huic duntaxat remissio delictorum promittitur to this onely remission of sins is promised cui soli venia promitoitu to which alone parââ¦on is promised quâ solâ peccata relaxantur by which alone sinnes are released 3 In Psal. 88. conc 2. sola fides Christi mundat The faith of Christ doth cleanse alone 4. Serm de tempore 68 Abraham beleeved God and it was accounted to him for righteousnesse Ecce sine opere justificatur exfide quicquid illi legali posset observatione conferri totum credulitas sola dââ¦navit Behold without workes he is justified by faith and whatsoever might bee conferred upon him by the observation of the Law all that faith alone bestowed 5. In Ioan. 8. On those words you heare not because you are not of God this was spoken to them who where not onely vicious by sinne but also foreknowne that they were not to beleeve ea fide qua solâ possent à peccatorum obligatione liberari with that faith by which alone they might be delivered from the bond of their sinnes 6. Out of his sermons De verbis Domini this testimony is usually cited Medicina animae omnium vulnerum una propitiatio pro delictââ¦s credere in Christum The medicine for all wounds of the soule and the onely propitiation for all sinnes is to beleeve in Christ. 7. Ad duas Epistolas Pelag. quantaelibet fuisse virtutis ââ¦ntiquos praedices justos non eos salvos fecit nisi fides mediatoris qui in remissionem peccatorum sanguine fudit Bellarmiââ¦e answereth that in this place are excluded onely Nature and the Law of Moses Reply But the place is plaine that though the virtue of the ancient Fathers were never so great yet neither it nor any thing else could save them but onely faith in Christ. 8. Lib. 83. quaest If any when hee hath beleeved shall presently depart out of this life the justification of faith abideth with him neither for his precedent good workes because not by merit but by grace hee came unto it nor for the subsequent because he is not suffered to remaine in this life And therefore say we by faith alone To this Bââ¦llrrmine answereth that Augustine speaketh of a lively faith as though wee spake of any other for Augustine there saith that a man is justified without workes going before faith but that justifying faith is such a faith as worketh by love Bellarmine then confesseth that a lively faith which worketh by love doth justifie alone As for that which is not lively nor accompanied with charity we teach that it justifieth neither alone nor at all Thus hath hee indevoured in vaine to answere some allegations out of six of the Fathers The rest either of the same Authors or of others either before named or now to bee cited remaine unanswered saving foure others which because he would have men thinke we want Testimonies of Antiquity hee hath afforded us out of his owne store Which wee will examine in their due place And in stead of the first which hee citââ¦th out of XV Cyrill of Alexandria being to no purpose and yet falsified by him for Cyrill doth not say hominem per solam fidem inhaerere Christo as Bellarmine citeth him and being also false in that sense for which indeed our prevaricator doth alleadge him that a man may abide in Christ by faith and yet want love and perish But in stead of this I will requite him with another of the same Authour in the same Commentaries upon Iohn on those words Ioh. 14. 1. Ye beleeve in God beleeve also in me per fidem namque saith he non aliter servamur by faith we are saved and not otherwise that is by faith alone XVI To Cyrill we adjoyne Sedulius as being of the same time as Bellarmine following Trithemius supposeth hee wrote saith Bellarmine an explanation upon all the Epistles of Saint Paul taken out of Origen Ambrose Hierome and Augustine meaning those Commentaries of Ambrose and Hierome which before I cited Whereby it may appeare that those Commentaries in the time of Sedulius were of good esteeme for out of those very Commentaries of Hierome he hath collected many briefe passages as in other matters so in this particular As Hierome therefore had said in Rom. 1. 16. so saith hee almost in the same words justiââ¦ia Dei est quod
avoid the force of the Apostles arguments as if he concluded not against them we conclude that a man is justified by faith without workes but thus wee conclude that a man is not justified by workes without faith neither the Iewes by the workes of the Law nor the Gentiles by their morall workes without faith as if with faith they did justifie And this he maketh to be the Apostles meaning that workes done before or without faith doe not justifie but proceeding from faith they doe justifie and so is not ashamed to make the Apostle to contradict himselfe But the Apostle doth constantly teach that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law by faith and not by workes and maketh such an opposition betweene faith and works in the question of justification that if we bee justified by the one we are not justified by the other for if by faith then of grace and if of grace then not by workes or if by workes then not of grace It is therefore a most shamelesse and Antichristian perverting of the Apostles doctrine to make him teach that works proceeding from faith doe justifie and that we are justified both by faith and by workes when hee plainely teacheth the contrary CHAP. III. Bellarmines answers to the forenamed places of Scripture refuted § I. FRom these three things thus premised Bellarmine saith it will bee easy to answere all those places which were alleaged And first to Rom. 3. 27. he shapeth an answere unto which I have sufficiently replyed before saving that here hee addeth that not all glorying is excluded but only that which ariseth from such workes as are only done by the strength of â⦠mans owne freewill And that hee proveth because the Apostle saith Ubi est gloriatio tua Where is thy boasting that is that boasting whereby thou gloriest in thy selfe and not in the Lord. Whereunto I reply that the word tua thine is not in the originall And if it were yet that glorying whereby thou dost glory though it bee in the Lord though in the grace and favour of God though in thy workes proceeding from grace is thy glorying As the Apostle saith this is our glorying even the testimony of our conscience c. 2 Cor. 1. 12. and 1 Cor. 9. 15. it were better for mâ⦠to dye than that any man should make my glorying void 1 Cor. 15. 31. By our rejoycing which I have in Christ Iesus our Lord. § II. The second testimony recited by Bellarminâ⦠was from the example of Abraham Rom. 4. For if Abraham who was a most excellent precedent of faith and obedience and is propounded as a patterne for the matter and forme of justification was not justified by his works which proceeded from his faith but notwithstanding that he abounded with workes of grace hee was justified by faith without workes then all the faithfull in like manner though abounding with workes of grace proceeding from faith are not justified by their workes of grace but are justified by faith without workes but the antecedent is evident by the testimony of the Apostle therefore the consequent is a certaine truth Bellarmine answereth that Abraham was justified by faith not by workes going before faith because they could not bee truely just unlesse it were in respect of externall righteousnesse and therefore if he had beene justified by them which he could not have beene unlesse they were truly just hee should have had glory but with men not with God But when we reply that Abraham at that time whereof the Apostle speaketh that he was justified by faith and not by workes and that righteousnesse was imputed unto him without workes was a man regenerate excelling in the grace of faith and abounding in good workes which he wrought by faith And therefore when hee denieth him to bee justified by workes he plainely teacheth that the faithfull are not justified by workes proceeding from faith but although they abound with workes of grace proceeding from their faith yet they are justified by faith without workes To this unanswerable argument taken from the example of Abraham Bellarmine frameth two answeres but such as men use to make when they are brought to a meere non-plus First he saith that Abraham indeed at that time whereof the Apostle speaketh was regenerate and through faith wrought many good workes Notwithstanding the Apostle when hee saith that hee was justified by faith and not by workes doth not reject his workes wrought by faith but affirmeth that they were not wrought without faith because if they had beene such they would not have justified him Therefore he excludeth the workes which Abraham might have wrought not by faith § III. Where Bellarmine first taketh that for granted which the Apostle professedly disputeth against and concludeth the contrary namely that Abraham was justified by workes As if the meaning of the Apostle when he argueth that Abraham was justified by faith without works had beene this that he was justified by workes but yet such as were not without faith Secondly he inverteth the question and perverteth the disputation of the Apostle for the mainetenance of his owne errour As if the question were not whether faith doe justifie without workes which the Apostle affirmatively concludeth but whether works doe justifie without faith which question the Apostle doth not once mention which I desire the readers to take notice of For if the question which the Apostle disputeth be not this whether works doe justifie without faith but this whetheâ⦠faith doth justifie without workes then are the Papists evidently confuted by the disputation of the Apostle 3. He supposeth that faithfull Abraham endued with abundant grace might doe good workes without faith and without grace and that the Apostle excludeth such workes not which Abraham did but such as the might have done but did not For it is certaine that the faithfull as when they sinne through infirmity doing that evill which they would not doe may say with the Apostle Rom. 7. 17. Not I but sinne that dwelleth in me so when they performe any good worke they may say with the same Apostle 1 Cor. 15. 10. Not I but the grace of God which is with me 4. It is against sense to make the Apostle dispute that Abraham was not justified by such works as he might have done but did not but more senselesse when he maketh the Apostle to dispute that Abraham was not justified by his sinnes For how doth he prove that they who have faith may worke sometimes without faith by two instances as namely first when they sinne As if the Apostle had said though Abraham were a faithfull man yet some workes he might doe not of faith as namely when he sinned for sinnes are not of faith and by such workes hee was not justified And the like is his second instance when they doe workes purely morall without relation to God for such if they be not of faith are sins But
also purely and perfectly good which is impossible to be proved he cannot possibly conclude that they are justified by them will you then know to what end serveth this discourse The subtile Sophister because hee would seeme to have the better end of the staffe chooseth rather to confute our pretended errours than to defend his owne § II. But indeed this whole dispute is defensive serving to answeare a piece of one of our arguments against justification by inherent righteousnesse because our obedience is neither totall nor perfect nor perpetuall Not totall because wee neither doe nor can fulfill the whole Law of God Not perfect nor pure because it is stayned with the flesh Not perpetuall because interrupted either by omission of duetyes or commission of sinnes To the two former Bellarmine answereth the third being unanswerable and maintayneth the contrary assertions setting downe the state of the question thus Whether men justified may by the helpe of Gods grace so fulfill the Law of God that their workes are not onely not to be called sinnes but also deserve truely and properly to be called just But this question commeth short of that which hee ought to prove in two respects For first if the just meaning all the just are justified by their workes hee must proove that not onely some choice men may by the speciall help of Gods grace fulfill the Law but that all doe or else hee must confesse that they are not justified by their obedience Neither is it sufficient that their workes be not sinnes or truely just unlesse their workes not some but all be not onely truely but also purely good But of this question so propounded by him he saith that we whom hee calleth heretickes hold the negative The Papists who are no heretikes hold the affirmative whose assertion hee setteth downe in three articles First that the Law of God to just men is absolutely possible not indeed by the onely strength of nature but by the help of divine grace Secondly That the workes of the righteous are simply and absolutely just and after their maner prefect Thirdly That a man is truely justified by workes Thus you see how as it were by chance hee stumbleth upon the maine question where unto his whole dispute ought to be referred bringing it in as a proofe of the verity of the justice of good workes wherâ⦠by it self ought to be either proved or defended otherwise all this discourse of the verity of good workes is impertinent These three he saith hee will prove in order And in all three I must have the patience to followe him § III. And first of the possibility or impossibility of fulfilling the Law Concerning which what wee doe hold may appeare by these distinctions for first wee doe not hold that it is absolutely impossible for God if it so please him can enable man perfectly to fulfill the Law as hee did in our first creation and as hee will doe at our full redemption But in this estate since the fall to a man living in the flesh it is not possible And thus Augustine if the question bee whether God bee able to make a man to live without sinne doth freely confesse it but if the question bee whether God ever enabled any man to be without sinne that he denyeth The second distinction is concerning the regenerate and the unregenerate For unto the unregenerate being fallen in Adam the Law through their owne fault is impossible But the regenerate may bee said to keepe the whole Law and that in three respects First in regard of their faith for hee ithat truely beleeveth in Christ hath fulfilled the Law for Christ is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the end and complement of the Law to every one that beleeveth his obedience being imputed to them Qui credit in Christum saith Theodoret scopum Legis adimplet he that beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the scope of the Law and Photius ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Apostle therefore saith that hee which beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the law Ambrose likewise on those words not the hearers of the law but the doers shall be justified Hoc dicit saith hee quia non hi justi sunt qui audiunt legem sed qui credunt in Christum quem tex promisit hoc est facere legem This hee saith because not they are jââ¦st who heare the Law but they who beleeve in Christ whom the law promised and this is to performe the law and againe Qui credit in Christum hic fecisse legem dicitur whosoever beleeveth in Christ hee is said to have performed the law The like hath Sedulius that faith standeth for the perfection of the whole law in Rom. 10. 4. Secondly in respect of our new obedience Thirdly in respect of Gods acceptation accepting of our syncere though weake endevour and pardoning our defectivenesse therein which being forgiven our obedience is reputed as if wee had performed all For as Augustine saith Omnia ergo mandata facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur All the Commandements are esteemed as done when that which is not done is pardoned But the question is properly understood of our new obedience in regard whereof another distinction is to bee acknowledged betweene the keeping or observing of the law and the fulfilling of it which the Papists feeme to confound For all the faithfull by their new obedience keepe the law according to the measure of grace received but none fulfill it Their new obedience consisting In studio pretatis justitia in the study of piety and righteousnesse whereby they are studious of good workes This study standeth in a syneere desire an unfained purpose an upright endevour to walke in the obedience of all Gods Commandements And this study and practise of piety though accompanied with manifold ãâã yea with many slippes both of omission and commission happening contrary to their generall desire and purpose through humane infirmity the Lord who in his children accepteth of the will k for the deed esteemeth so highly of that those things which are done with an upright heart and syncere endevour are said in the Scriptures to bee done with the whole soule and with a perfect heart which must be evangelically and not legally understood this perfection standing not in the perfect performance but in the uprightnesse of the heart striving towards perfection Thus all the faithfull keepe the law who have a syncere desire purpose and endevour to obey it but none doe or can fulfill it unlesse they continue in all the things which are written in the Booke of the law to doe them Which never any since the fall Christ onely excepted were able to doe for the law is kept with the heart Psal. 119. 34. 69. 129. but not fulfilled but by the whole man I say the whole man performing the whole law alwaies § IV. But that the law is possible to the faithfull Bellarmine endevoureth to prove by
truely beleeve Secondly it is one and the same objectivè in respect of the same object it being the vision or fruition of the same God who is the chiefe good Thirdly in respect of continuance in regard whereof it is called eternall life which is one and the same to all being the same everlasting inheritance and the same ââ¦ternall fruition of God and Fellowship which we shall ever have with Christ and by him with the whole Trinity But however eternall life in respect of the substance be onâ⦠and the same equally procured by the merit of Christ yet it is not to be doubted that there are divers degrees of glory where with God doth crowne the divers degrees of grace which he hath bestowed on his children in this life For although all that shall bee saved shall have fulnesse of felicity so much as they are capable of yet some are more capable than others Even as vessels of divers measures being put into the sea will all be fââ¦ll of liquor according to their capacity yet some will containe a greater quantity than others So all the Saints though all full of happinesse yet shall not all bee endued with the same measure of glory but according to their capacity This is that which heretofore I alleaged out of S. Ambrose that god doth give to all that are saved aequalem mercedem vitâ⦠non gloriae equall reward of life not of glory These things thus premised I answere first by denying his proposition For although according to the proportion both of habituall grace and of actuall obedience which we call good workes the degrees of glory in the life to come shall bee bestowed yet these degrees are not thereby merited but God doth graciously crowne his greater graces which hee freely bestowed in this life with a greater measure of glory in the life to come Besides Bellarminâ⦠and other Papists doe teach that God crowneth our good workes supra condignum therefore those crownes cannot be merited ex condigno Secondly I deny his assumption averting that eternall life it selfe is not bestowed according to the proportion of our workes but as it is wholly merited by the obedience of Christ so is it equally bestowed upon all the faithfull who are equally justified by the merits of Christ. § XII But here Bellarmine cavilleth with two answeres given as he saith by our Divines the former that divers rewards are given to good workes both in this life and in the world to come but not eternall life it selfe against which he proveth that good workes are rewarded with eternall life and that there are no rewards in the world to come which doe not belong to eternall life Whereas no doubt the meaning of those who gave that answere was this that there are divers degrees of rewards given both in this life and in the world to come as namely the divers degrees of glory but there are not divers degrees of eternall life that is one and the same to all that are saved We doe not deny but eternall life is the reward of good workes and therefore Bellarmine might have spared his paynes in proving that which we doe not deny but we deny it to be given in divers degrees according to the proportion of mens workes The other answere that etââ¦rnall life is to bâ⦠given to good workes no otherwise bââ¦t as they are signes of faith which also hee solemnely disputeth against utterly mistaking the matter For first wee say that God doth graciously reward the virtues and obedience of his owne children not as their merits but as his graces Secondly we say indeed that in the Gospell eternall life is promised to those that beleeve without respect of workes and damnation denounced ââ¦gainst those that beleeve not but because both faith and infidelity are inward and hidden and many deceive themselves with an inward opinion and an outward profession of faith therefore the Lord at the last day will proceed in judgement according to the evidence of mens workes So that the Lord pronounceth the sentence according to workes as the signes and evidence of faith but rewardeth both faith and them as his owne gifts and graces Howbeit more properly eternall life it selfe is rendred to the righteousnesse of faith which is the righteousnesse and merits of Christ imputed to them that beleeve by which the faithfull are equally justified and equally entituled to the kingdome of heaven but the degrees of glory are given according to the degrees of our sanctification that is to the degrees both of the habits of faith and other graces and of the acts and exercise thereof which wee call good workes All which being Gods owne free gifts hee doth freely reward crowning his greater graces with greater glory § XIII As for the places of Scripture which testifie that God will reward men according to their workes I answere that secundum opera according to workes doth not signifie the proportion but the quality of workes as I have shewed before out of Gregorie that is as in some of the places it is expressed good workes are to be rewarded with glory evill with punishment Rom. 2. 6 7 8. 2 Cor. 5. 10. c. And so is that Gal. 6. 7. to be understood as the Apostle explaineth himselfe vers 8. that as every man doth sowe so he shall reape viz. he that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reape corruption but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reape everlasting life The allegation out of Luk. 6. 38. is impertinent as appeareth by his paralell Mat. 7. 1 2. Iudge not that you be not judgââ¦d for with what judgement ye judge ye shall be judged and with what measure you mete it shall be measured to you againe For first it seemeth to speake of humane judgement that as wee judge others so we shall be judged of others according to the law of like for like Secondly it speaketh of active judging in the worse sense which is therefore forbidden and the reason is from the like judging passive as an evill though just reward thereof so farre is it from speaking of the reward of eternall life Or if the place should be generally understood of mens judging well or ill and of their being judged according either by God or man nothing else can necessarily be gathered but the like judgement in quality that is either good or bad And the like is to be said of 1 Cor. 3. 8. where the Apostle doth not spââ¦ake of the eternall reward either of life or death rendred to good or evill workes according to the proportion thereof but of the blessing of increase which God giveth to those that are planters or waterers in his garden as a reward of their labours By planters he understandeth himselfe and other Apostles who were the planters of the Church by waterers Apollo and other Evangelists and Preachers who fed the Church with their doctrine The
lib. 4. cap. 4. § 5. 4. 4. I know nothing by my selfe yet am I not thereby justified lib. 4. cap. 4. § 17. 6. 11. But ye are washed but yee are sanctified but ye are justified c. lib. 2. cap. 3. § 4 lib. 4. cap. 10. § 7. 12. 9. To another faith lib. 6. cap. 1. § 6. 13. 2 Lib. 6. cap. 1. § 6. cap. 3. § 2. 3 4. 13. 13. Now abideth faith hope and charity c. lib. 6. cap. 3. § 4. 15. 49. We shall also beare the image of the heavenly lib. 4. cap. 10. § 12. 16. The second to the Corinthians 4. 17. Lib. 7. cap. 5. § 7. lib. 8. cap. 2. § 21. 5. 21. Him that knew no sinne hee made sinne for us that we might bee made the righteousnesse of God in him lib. 1. cap. 3. § 10. lib. 5. cap. 1. § 4. c. ad finem capitis 7. 1. Perfecting holinesse in the feare of God lib. 7. cap. 8. § 20. 7. 10. Godly sorrow worketh repentance c. lib. 7. cap. 5. § 6. 9. 10. He that ministreth seed multiply your seed and increase the fruits of your righteousnesse lib. 7. cap. 8. § 21. The Epistle to the Galatians 1. 8 9. If we or an Angell from heaven preach any other Gospeââ¦l c. lib. 1. cap. 1. § 1. 2. 16. Knowing that a man is noâ⦠justified by the workes of the Law but by the faith of Iesus Christ c. lib. 7. cap. 3. § 8 c. ad 13. 3. 21. If there had beene a Law given which could have given life verily righteousnesse should have beene by the Law lib. 4. cap. 12. § 8. 5. 5. 6. We waite for the hope of righteousnesse by faith which workââ¦th by lo ve lib. 4. cap. 11. § 2 3 4. cap. 12. § 3. in fine lib. 6 cap. 12. § 3. â⦠4. 6. 7. Whatsoever a man soweth that he shall reape lib. 8. cap. 5. § 13. The Epistle to the Ephesians 2. 8. 9. By grace ye are saved through faith not of workes c. lib. 7. cap. 3. § 13. 5. 8. Now we are light in the Lord. lib. 2. cap. 8. § 6. 5. 26 27. That hee might sanctifie and cleanse it that hee might present it unto himselfe c. lib. 2. cap. 8. § 6. The Epistle to the Philippians 1. 9. VVherefore God hath exalted him lib. 1. cap. 4. § 11. 12. 2. 12. VVorke out your salvation in feare lib. 7. cap. 5. § 5. 3. 8 9. I account all things dung that I may winne Christ and may be found in him not having mine owne righteousnesse c. lib. 7. cap. 3. § 15. lib. 8. cap. 2. § 22. 3. 15. Let so many as perfect be thus minded lib. 5. cap. 7. § 10 The second to the Thessalonians 1. 5 6. That ye may be counted worthy of the Kingdome of God seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompence c. lib. 8. cap. 5. § 20. 22. The first to Timothie 2. 14 15. Notwithstanding sââ¦e shall be saved in child bearing if they continue in faith c. lib. 7. cap. 5 § 4. 5. 8. If any provide not for his owne he hath denyed the faith and is worse than an infidell lib. 6. cap. 2. § 6. The second to Timothy 2. 11 12. If wee bee dead with him we shââ¦ll also live with him if we suffer we shall also reigne l. 7. c. 4. § 11. 16. 2. 21. If a man purge himselfe from these he shall be a vessell unto honour sanctified and meetâ⦠for the Masters usâ⦠lib. 8. cap. 2. § 9. 4. 7 8. I have fought a good fight henceforth is laid up for me a crowne of righteousnesse c. lib. 8. cap. 5. § 20. To Titus 2. 14. That hee might redeeme us from all iniquity and might purge untâ⦠himselfe a peculiar people zelous of good workes lib. 4. cap. 4. § 19 3. 5 6 7. Not by workes of righteousnesse wââ¦n we have done but according to his mercie he saved us by the lââ¦ver of regeneration that being justified c. lib. 4. cap. 10. § 8. lib. 7. cap. 3. § 14. To the Hebrewes 5 9. He became the author of salvation eternall to them that obey him lib. 7. cap. 7. § 12. 6. 10. God is not unrighteous to forget your worke c. lib. 8. cap. 5. § ââ¦0 9. 28. Christ was once offered to beare the sinnââ¦s of many lib. 2. cap. 8. § 2. 10. 36. Ye have need of patience lib. 7. cap. 5. § 3. 11. 4. 7 c. lib. 4. cap. 10. § 9. 11. 6. He that commââ¦th to God must beleeve that God is and that he is a rewarder c. lib. 6. cap. 10. § 7. cap. 15. § 15. 13. 16. VVith such sacrificââ¦s God is well pleased lib. 8. cap. 5. § 2. Iames. 1. 25. Being a doer of the word this man shall be blessed in his deed lib. 7. cap. 5. § 12. 2. 14. 17. If a man say he hath faith and have not workes c. lib. 6. caâ⦠2. § 5. 10 c. cap. 3. § 5. lib. 7. cap. 5. § 12. 2. 24. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by faith onely lib. 2. cap. 4. § 4. 2. 14. c. ad finem capitis lib. 7. â⦠8. § 2 c. 2. 26. As the body without the Spirit is dead c. l. 4. c. 11. § 7. The second of Peter 1. 1. Who have obtained like precious faith with us in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour IESVS CHRIST lib. 4. c. 2. § 2. The first of Iohn 2. 4. He that saith I know him and keepeth not his Commandements is a lyar lib. 6. â⦠2. â⦠8. 2. 5. He that keepeth his word in him the love of God is perfected lib. 5. cap. 7. § 6. 3. 14. We know that wee are passed from death unto life because wee love the brethren l. 6. c. 12. § 3. 4. 19. Wee love him because he first loved us l. 6. c 12. § 5. 5. 1. Whosoever beleeveth that Iesus is the Christ is borne of God lib. 6. cap. 2. § 9. 5. 3. And his Commandements are not grievous l. 7. c. 6. § 8. The Revelation 7. 14 15. These are they that came out of great tribulation therefore are they before the throne of God lib. 8. cap. 5. § 16. 19. 8. The fine linnen is the righteousnesse of Saints lib. 2. c. 2. § 5. 22. 11. He that is righteous let him bee righteous still l. 2. c. 4. § 5. c. 5. § 10. l. 7. c. 8. § 23. 22. 12. I come quickly and my reward is with me to give to every man as his worke shall be The end of the Table of the places of Scriptures expounded in this Treatise A Table of things contained in this Treatise of Iustification A Abraham THough he abounded with good works yet he was justified by faith without workes lib. 4. cap 8. § 15. lib. 7. cap. 3. §
2 3. â⦠ad 8. As bee was justified so are we lib. 5. cap. 2. § 6. Adam Whether his sinne bee imputed lib. 4. cap. 10. § 1 2. Whether originall sinne bee traduced from ââ¦im l. 4. c. 10. § 3. Whether the transgression and the corruption bee communicated after the same manner ibid. § 4. The comparison betweene the first and the second Adam ibid. § 5. Adoption That it is true lib. 4. cap. 10. § 18. Such as is our adoption such is our justification ibid. § 19. Adoption according to Bellarmiââ¦es ãâã is twofold of the soulâ⦠and of the body ibid. § 20. No reall change in adoption but it is relative and imputative ibid. § 21. Affiance Whether it be faith lib. 6. cap. 4. § 9. 11. Assent It being firââ¦e lively and effectuall is faith l. 6. c. 1. 2. § c. 4. § 10. B Bellarmine His contradictions l. 3. c. 4. § 3. â⦠3. l. 4. c. 2. § 5. ad literam o l. 4. c. 9. § 7. l. 4. c. 10. § 1 2. l 5. c. 6. § 7. l. 5 c. 8. § 2. in fine l. 6. c. 3. § 7. â⦠6. c. 8. § 7. â⦠4. l. 6. c 9. sub finem ad literam * l. 6. c. 10. § 11 l. 6. c. 15. § 10. l. 8. c. 2. § 11. l. 8. c. 9. § 3. â⦠2. § 4. C Causall particles Not alwayes nor for the most part notes of causes l. 8. c. 5. § 14. 16. 17. Cause The Causes of iustification l. 1. c. 2. The Causes efficient principall God l. 1. c. 2. § 1. The Father § 4. the Sonne the holy Ghost ibid. The moving Causes l. 1. c. 2. § 2. The instrumentall Causes lib. 1. c. 2. § 5. c. The essentiall Causes l. 1. c. 3. The matter lib. 1. cap. 3. 1 c. ad 7. l. 4. The forme lib. 1. cap. 3. § 7 c. l. 5. The finall cause lib. 1. cap. 6. § 1 2 3 4. Charity That it doth not justifie as well as faith l. 4. c. 11. § 2 c. That it is not the forme of ââ¦aith lib. 4. cap. 11. § 5. Whether perfect in this life l. 5. cap. 7. CHRIST The mericorious cause of justification l. 1. â⦠2. § 4. Whether hee obeyed the Law for himselfe or for us l. 1. c. 4. § 10. Whether he merited for himselfe lib. 1. c. 4. § 11. Christs exaltation Phil. 2. 9. was his declaration to be the Sonne of God lib. 1. c. 4. § 11. 12. How many wayes hee is said to justifie us lib. 2. c 5. § 8. The righteousnesse of Christ is Gods righteousnesse l. 4. c. 2 § 2 3 4. Christs rightââ¦ousnesse the materiââ¦ll cause of justification l. 1. c. 3 4. vide Materiall and Matter Christs righteousnesse both the matter and merit of our iustification lib. 1. cap. 3. § 1. Concupiscence In the regenerate a sinne lib. 2. cap. 8. § 7 8. 9. lib. 4. cap. 4. § 12. lib. 7. cap. 6. § 14. Concupiscence going before consent a finnenne lib. 2. c. 8 9. Counsells The Counsell of voluntary poverty l. 7. c. 7. § 4. The counsell of single life lib. 7. cap. 7. § 5 6. D David Not iustified by inherent righteousnesse lib. 4. c. 8. § 15. Definition Of Iustification lib. 1. cap. 1. § 2. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The signification of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã lib. 2. cap. 2. § 1 2. The signification of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã § 3. The signification of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã § 4. The signification of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã § 5. The signification of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã § 6. Dispositions Seven alleaged by Bellarmine to disprove justification by faith alone lib. 6. cap. 10 11 12. Whether any dispositioââ¦s bee indeed required by the Papists lib. 6. c. 10. § 4. Whether faith hope love as they bee dispositions bee graces lib. 6. cap. 12. § 6 7. E Efficient The efficient principall of justification God lib. 1. c. 2. § 1. The motives grace and iustice ib. § 2. The actions of the Father the Sonne the holy Ghost distinguââ¦shed ibid. § 4. End The end or fiââ¦ll cause of iustification both supreme the glory of God lib. 1. c. 6. § 1. and also subordinate viz. salvation § 2. certainety of salvation § 2. sanctification § 4. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã How to be understood Gal. 5. 6. l. 4. c. 11. § 3. 4. F Faith The instrument on oââ¦r ãâã of iustification lib. 1. cap. 2. § 7. Concerning it seven things considered 1. Thâ⦠it iustifieth not as it is an habit or act in us but as the hand to receive Christs righteousnesse ibid. lib. 1. cap. 5. § 12. 2. It must therefore be such a faith as doth specially apprehend Christ. lib. 1. cap. 2. § 8. 3. It doth not prepare onely and dispose to iustification but it doth actually iustifie § 9. l. 6. c. 7. § 1 2. 4. It doth not iustifiâ⦠absolutely in respect of its ownâ⦠worth but relatively in respect of the object § 10. 5. The meaning of the question whether we be justified by faith or by workes § 11. 6. How faith is said to iustifie alone § 12. 7. That faith doth not sanctifie alone § 12. Whether the act of faith properly be imputed ââ¦torighteousnesse l. 1. cap. 2. § 7. cap. 5. § 12. That charity is not the formâ⦠of faith l. 4. cap. 11. § 5. Of the distinction of saith that it is either formata or informis § 6. That faith is perfect Bellarmine produceth sixe reasons which are answered l. 5. c. 6. The full discourse of faith l. 6. The Popish ãâã concerning faith l. 6. c. 1. § 1. What faith is cap. 1. § 2. That it is not without knowledge § 3. against implicite faith lib. 6. cap. 1. § 3. c. The doctrine of implicit faith both falsâ⦠for many reasons § 4. and absurd in that they say it may better bee defined by ignorance than by knowledge § 5. Bellarm. allegations out of the Scriptures for implicite faith § 6 of Fathers § 7. Testimonies of Fathers against it § 13. Bellarmines reason § 14. The doctrine of implicite faith wicked as being an egregious coozââ¦nage § 15 16 17. and pernicious to the people § 18. True justifying ââ¦aith cannot be severed from charity lib. 6. cap. 2. Our reasons I. Because hee that hath true faith is regenerate § 1. II. Because hee hath the Spirit of Christ dwelling in him § 2. III. Because hee is sanctified â⦠3. IV. Because hee is the true Disciple of Christ. § 4. V. Because true faith worketh by charity ibid. VI. Because true faith is formata ibid. VII Because if it be without charity it doth not iustifie VIII Because they who love not know not God ibid. 7. Other arguments out of Iames 2. § 5. 6. Other arguments defended against Bellarmine § 6. c. Testimonies of Fathers lib. 6. cap. 2. § 12. Bellarmines proofes that
Greeke Fathers § 2. and eleven of the Latine Fathers § 3. The authority of foure Councils § 4. Bellarmines reasons to prove merits § 5. Other questions concerning merits discussed l. 8. c. 7. whether trust is to bee reposed in merit § 2. De intuitu mercedis § 3 4 whether it bee lawfull to doe a good worke with intent to merit thereby lib. 8. cap. 7. § 5. The seven conditions required in merit l. 8. c. 8. whereof three are not contrââ¦verted § 1. The fourth that it bee liberum § 2. Fifthly that it be the worke of a man in state of grace § 3. Sixthly that it have the promise of God § 4. Seventhly that it proceed from charity § 5. All these conditions concurring doe not make a worke meritorious lib. 8. c. 8. § 6. Bellarmines dispute that good workes are condignely meritorious non solum ratione pacti but also ratione operis examined l. 8. c. 9. His seven arguments to prove condigne merits ratione operis l. 8. c. 9. § 5. c. What things may be merited l. 8. c. 9. § 13. N Necessity of good workes urged by us l. 7. c. 1. By Bellarmine c. 4. O Obiect of Faith Lib. 6. cap. 6. The proper obiect of iustifying faith is CHRIST § 2. The obiect of Abrahams faith § 3 4 5. Christ the proper obiect of faith in two respects § 6. Bellarmines dispute first that the obiect of faith is not speciall § 7. By virtue of the iustifying faith all other articles may become the obiect of speciall faith l. 6. c. 6. § 7. Whether every man is bound to beleeve that he is elected c. § 8. Secondly whether a man may be iustified without speciall faith § 9. Thirdly whether a man is iustified by speciall faith l. 6. c. 6. § 10. Osiander His errour that the righteousnesse of God by which we are iustified is the righteousnesse of the Godhead dwelling in us l. 1. c. 3. § 2. P Papists They take away iustification l. 1. c. 1. § 1. l. 2. c. 6. § 22. From iustification they exclude remission or forgivenesse of sinnes lib. 2. cap. 7. § 2. They confound the Law and the Gospell and make void the covenant of grace l. 4. c. 8. § 5. They deprive Christians of the chiefe part of their christian liberty § 6. They are fallen from grace lib. 7. c. 3. § 9 10 11 12. Their maine errours in the article of iustification l. 2. c. 1. § 1. Paritie Parity of righteousnesse l. 4. c. 13. Parts of iustification Lib. 1. c. 4. § 16 17. c. 6. § 5. Passive righteousnesse of Christ. Whether we be iustified by it onely l. 1. cap. 4. Paul Not iustified by inherent righteousnesse l. 4. c. 8. § 15. Pelagians Their errours concerning grace lib. 3. cap. 6. § 2. Perfect Whether any such lib. 4. c. 10. § 10 11. l. 7. c. 6. § 15. 16. Penitencie Bellarmines fifth disposition to iustification l. 6. c. 12. § 9 10. Purpose to receive the Sacrament Bellarmines sixth disposition to iustification l. 6. c. 12. § 11. Purpose of a new life Bellar. 7th disposition l. 6. c. 12. § 12. R. Remission of sinne is not that onely thing wherein iustification consisteth lib. 1. cap. 4. § 16. 17. 18 21. n. 3. Obiect It is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission lib. 1. cap. 4. § 19. Obiect 2. By it men are made innocent therefore iust § 20. Three arguments of I. P. § 21. of I. F. § 22. 23. Some make remission the entire forme of iustification lib. 1. cap. 5. § 1. 4. It is not that righteousnesse which is imputed lib. 1. cap. 4. § 1. cap. 5. § 5. 6. Remission of sinne and acceptation as righteous the two parts of iustification lib. 1. cap. 6. § 5. Remission of sinne is by the Papists excluded from iustification lib. 2. cap. 7. § 1. 2. Remission of sinne is not the utter extinction of it lib. 2. cap. 7. § 3. It is as the forgiving of a debt § 4. What it signifieth in the Scriptures ibid. Three questions I. What that is which is remitted § 5. whether the Macula § 6. 7. II. The bookes out of which God doth wipe or blot our sinnes § 8. III. By what act of God are our sins remitted § 9. The utter deletion or extinction not granted in this life § 10. The guilt and punishment not taken away by infusion of righteousnesse § 11. Remission doth not worke a reall change § 12. Absurdities which follow this assertion that remission is the utter extinction of sinne § 13. and are necessary consequents of their doctrine of iustification by inherent righteousnesse § 14. lib. 5. cap. 5. § 6. 7 8. Bellarmines proofes out of the Scripture that remission of sin is the utter abolition of it lib. 2. cap. 8. those places of Scripture mention either the taking away of sinne § 2. or the blotting out of sinne § 3. or the purging of sinne § 4. or the not being of it § 5. or the perfection of righteousnesse § 6. Other arguments from the efficacie of Baptisme § 7. 8. his unanswereable argument out of Rom. 5. 19. answered lib. 2. c. 8. § 10. See more of this question lib. 5. cap. 5. § 6 7 8. Reward Reward merces is either gratuita free or debita due l. 8. c. 5. § 3. 4. 5. The reward of eternall life equall but not of glory l 4. c. 13. § 2. How farre foorth good workes are rewarded l. 8. c. 9. § 12. VVhether good workes may bee done with an eye to the reward l. 8. c. 7. § 3. 4. VVhether they may bee done with intent to merit § 5. Righteousnesse The righteousnesse of God a moving cause of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 2 3. Righteousnesse of Christians twofold l. 1. c. 1. § 2. Bellarmines distinction of righteousnesse of the Law and in or by it l. 4. c. 8. § 2. 3 4. l 7. c. 2. § 8. The righteousnesse of God is the matter of iustification not the righteousnesse of the Godhead lib. 1. c. 3. § 2. But the righteousnesse of the Mediator the man CHRIST IESVS § 3. His whole righteousnââ¦sse both negative and also possitive § 3 4. Which is truely called the righteousnesse of God § 5. The comfort arising out of this doctrine § 6. Righteousnesse inherent Not perfect l. 4. c. 2. § 8 c. and c. 3. Reasons proving the works of the faithfull not to be purely and perfectly good I. Out of Esai 64. 6. Lib. 4. cap. 3. § 4 c. ad 11. II. Because there is a mixture in them of sinne out of Exod. 28. 36 38. § 11. Eccles. 7. 20. § 12. III. The fruââ¦t is as the tree § 13. IV. Actions purely good may stand in iudgââ¦ment § 14. an instance in prayer § 15. Testimonies of Fathers § 16. Bellarmines proofes I. Allegation of Scriptures And I. Iob 1. 22. l. 4. c. 4. § 1 2. II.
justifie not onely peââ¦petuall in the Scriptures but also ordinary in the speeches and writings of men Wherein God is said to justifie men and man is said to justifie God and one man is said to justifie another and one and the same man to justifie himselfe without any signification of infusing righteousnesse into him but by cleering him and pronouncing him just Secondly that there is no further respect to be had in this controversie to the notation of the Latine or English word than as it is a true translation of the Hebrew word in the old Testament and of the Greek in the new now I shall make it evident that the Hebrew hitsdiq and so the greeke ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is Verbum forensâ⦠a judiciall word taken from the courts of justice which being attributed to the Iudge is opposed to condemning and signifieth to absolve or to give sentence with the party questioned § III. In the definition we consider justification as an action of God whose alone worke it is and so the Scriptures consider it in many places as Rom. 8. 33. It is God that doth justifie for it is he only that forgiveth sinnes Esa. 43. 25. It is he onely that can by making us righteous in Christ give us right and title to the kingdome of heaven It is no action therefore of our owne or of any creature neither is it wrought by our owne preparations and dispositions For although every man is bound to use all meanes to attaine to justification yet it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy For if God bee the agent in justifying us then are wee the patients And for that cause we are never in the Scriptures exhorted to justification or to the parts thereof which are not our Officia or duties but Gods Beneficia as wee are to the duties of sanctification whereunto we being already justified and regenerated doe cooperate with the Spirââ¦t of grace § IIII. Secondly when we say it is an action of God Imputing the righteousnesse of Christ and absolving the beleeving sinner and accepting him c. wee consider it not as an action of God within us working a positive or reall change as in sanctification but as an action of God without us For it is a judiciall act of God as the Iudge oppoââ¦ed to condemning And therefore as by his sentence hee doth condemne that is make wicked so by his sentence hee doth justifie that is of guilty he maketh not guilty ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã by his sentence God doth justifie as Chrysostome and Oecumenius note upon Rom. 8. 33. where a judiciall proceeding in the businesse of justification is plainely described For there is mention of the accuser of Gods elect there is God that justifieth and none to condemne there is the advocate and intercessor to plead for us And as in condemning though the hebrew word Hirshiah opposed to justifying signifieth to make wicked for as Tsady is to be just and Hitsdiq to make just that is to justifie so Rashah to be wicked and Hirshiah to make wicked that is to condemne yet God by condemning doth not make a reall or positive change by infusion of wickednesse into the party whom by his sentence hee maketh wicked that is condemneth so in justifying though the word doe signifie to make righteous yet the Lord doth not Quatenus justificat as he justifieth worke a reall or positive mutation in the party whom by his sentence he maketh just that is justifieth in respect of any inward dispositions or qualities but onely a relative change or mutation in respect of his estate and condition before God and in respect of some relations to him It is true ââ¦hat in our justification we are of sinners made righteous but the righteousnesse which we have by justification standeth in remission of sinne and acceptation or constitution of us as righteous not in our selves but in Christ both which are wrought by imputation of his righteousnesse It is true also that whom God doth justifie he doth also sanctifie But in justification he doth not worke a reall change in the party as he doth in sanctification And this ãâã in the like actions of God viz. adoption redemption and reconciliation which three in substance differ not from justification For all agree in the not imputing of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse but are diversified by certaine relations all which concurre in justification that men having their sinnes forgiven whereby they had beene either the children of the devill by adoption are made the sonnes of God or the vassals and bondslaves of sinne and Satan are by redemption made the servants of God or enemies to God by their reconciliation become his favourites or guilty of sinne and damnation in their justification they are accepted as righteous in Christ and consequently become Gods servants Gods favourites Gods sonnes and if sonnes then also heires of eternall life As therefore in adoption redemption reconciliation there is no reall change made in the party but onely a new relation acquired of being a sonne and hââ¦ire to the adoptour a servant to the redeemer a favourite to the reconciler which before he was not so neither in justification is there a reall or positive change as the Papists would have it but ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã relative or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is in relation in respect of those relations even now mentioned and in respect of his estatâ⦠and condition before God being in his justification translated from the estate of damnation unto the state of salvation Even as the councell of Trent it selfe defineth justification to be a translation from that state wherein a man is borne the sonne of the first Adam into a state of grace and adoption of Gods sonnes through the second Adam Iesus Christ our Saviour which is done without any reall change wrought in the party as hee is justified For who before was guilty of sinne and damnation the same man remaining a sinner in himselfe and in himselfe worthy of damnation is in his justification absolved from the guilt of sinne and accepted as rââ¦teous in Christ in whom also hee is made a servant a favourite a sonne of God and consequently as I said in the definition an heire of eternall life § V. And yet we deny not but that those whom God reconcileth unto himselfe receiving them into his grace and ââ¦avour in Christ them also he endueth in some measure with the graces of his Spirit whom he adopteth to be his sonnes in Christ them also he regenerateth by his holy Spirit whom he redeemeth from the guilt of sinne he also freeth from the dominion of sinne and whom he justifieth by faith he also sanctifieth by his Spirit that is whom he maketh just by imputation them also he maketh just by infusion of righteousnesse to whom he imputeth the merit of Christ his death and
resurrection apprehended by faith to them also he applieth the vertue and efficacie of Christs death and resurrection both to mortifie sinne in them and to raise them up to newnesse of life By this doctrine we may trie our selves whether we be reconciled redeemed adopted justified For hereby it shall appeare that God hath received us into his grace if he hath also endued us with his grace Chasidim as they are called in the Scriptures the favourites of God are usually translated his holy ones and all the faithfull even in this life are termed Saints Hereby it will appeare that we are redeemed from the guilt of sinne if we be also freed from the dominion of sinne Hereby it will appeare that we are adopted if ãâã be also regeneratech Hereby it will appeare that we are justified if we ââ¦e also in some measure sanctified But yet howsoever these graces ââ¦waies goe together and cannot be severed yet must we carefully distinguish betwixt the grace of God which is in himselfe and his graces which are in us betwixt the actions of Gods grace without us and the actions of his grace within us Wherefore though adoption and regeneration though receiving into grace and enduing with grace though redeeming from the guilt and purging in some measure from the corruption of sinne though justification and sanctification are alwaies unseparable companions yet we may not with the Papists confound them and so place the matter of justification and merit of salvation in our selves as they wickedly doe but we are religiously to distinguish them as they are in themselves truly and really distinguished to the praise of the glory that is the glorious praise of his grace not of that which is in us but of that which is in himselfe whereby he hath graciously accepted us in his beloved Ephes. 1. 6. § VI. Thirdly when we say it is an action of God imputing to a beleeving sinner c. We consider it not as a suddaine and momentany action which is of no continuance as if all our sinnes both past present and to come are remitted in an instant but as an act of God continued from our vocation wherein the grace of faith is begotten in us to our glorification which is the end of our faith For as this action of God is called the justification of a sinner so whiles we continue sinners we have still need to be justified And as we alwaies have sinne in this life so that it may not be imputed we have need that Christs righteousnesse should be imputed unto us and that as we sinne daily so Christ our advocate should continually make intercession for us that notwithstanding our manifold slippes whereinto through humane frailety we fall and notwithstanding those manifold infirmities and corruptions which remaine in us as the relikes of originall sinne we may be continued in the grace and favour of God by the continued imputation of Christs righteousnesse obtained by his continuall intercession for us For therefore doth he continue his intercession for us that our justification may bee continued to us and that as wee sinne daily so wee may daily seeke and obtaine pardon But if justification should so be wrought once and at once as that after that act wrought in an instance we should no more be justified nor no more neede remission of sinne then must we erroniously conceive that the sinnes which after the first moment of our justification we doe commit are actually remitted before they bee committed whereas God forgiveth onely sinnes past Rom. 3. 25. So shall we not onely set open a gap to all licentiousnesse for who will so feare to commit sinne as he ought or when he hath committed it so sue for the pardon thereof who is perswaded beforehand that it is already remitted but also shall open the mouthes of our adversaries who will be ready to say that we Protestants ought not to pray for remission of sinne because in our opinion as they say we need it not but to this calumniation of the Papist I have elsewhere answered § VII If it be said that it is a received opinion among many that justificatio simul semel fit that justification is wrought at once and but once I answere that that assertion is not to be admitted without distinction nor without good caution The distinction is this that there is a justification of a sinner before God in ãâã coelesti which properly is called justification and is that which here I have defined and there is a justification whereby a man already justified before God is justified in foro conscientiâ⦠in the court of his owne conscience which is not properly justification it selfe but the assurance of it To this latter that assertion of but once and at once cannot in any good sense be applied For neither is the full assurance of our justification attained at once but by degrees wherein we are to labour and to give diligence to make as our election and calling so also our justification more and more sure unto us Neither is it given but once For by committing of any crime or any grievous sinne by spirituall desertions by the ââ¦orcible temptations of Satan this act of spirituall faith which we call assurance may be interrupted or lost for a time and yet by repentance by prayer and practise of pietie it may be recovered againe and therefore not given but once To the former indeed it may be applied in both parts but with a twofold caution first in respect of simul at once if it be understood as excluding degrees and not continuance Namely that we are not justified by degrees and as it were by little and little as though our justification were not perfect at the first For no sooner doth a man truly beleeve in Christ but the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed to him and in and by that righteousnesse he standeth righteous before God as well at the first as at the last that righteousnesse of Christ by which he is justified whether first or last being most perfect Therefore the righteousnesse of justification cannot be increased neither doth our justification before God admit degrees either in one and the same person or yet in diverse men howsoever the assurance of justification and the worke of sanctification whereby we are to be renewed in the inner man day by day have degrees according to the degrees of our faith and according to the measure of grace received Secondly when it is said that we are justified before God semel but once that also may be admitted if by once be meant one continuall act For as we are regenerated but once because ut semel nascimur ita semel renascimur so faith which is wrought in our regeneration is given but once For that which Saint Iude saith verse 3. of faith once given is no lesse true of the habit than of the doctrine of faith which habit being once had is never utterly lost
we should yet remaine in our sinnes But seeing Iesus Christ who is of God made unto us righteousnesse is God even Iehovah our righteousnesse hence wee learne that the righteousnesse by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of God and consequently of infinite price and merit For although the Godhead of Christ neither obeyed nor suffered any thing for us yet seeing the person which obeyed and suffered was and is not onely man but also God therefore the Godhead affordeth such dââ¦gnity vertue efficacy and merit to the obedience and sufferings of his Manhood as that his sufferings are an all-sufficient price of ransome and satisfaction for the sinnes of the whole world as being the sufferings of God and therefore of infinite value and his holinesse and obedience being the righteousnesse of God and therefore of infinite merit and farre surpassing the righteousnesse of all men and Angels maketh all those to whom it is imputed most perfectly righteous before God in Christ. Wherefore they who are clothed with this royall robe of Christs righteousnesse as all the faithfull are may with boldnesse appeare before the judgement seat of God because they stand just before him not in their owne righteousnesse which is unperfect but in the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ against which no just exception can be taken After this righteousnesse therefore of Christ wee ought to hunger and thirst after this righteousnesse of God wee ought principally to seeke to obtaine this most precious peââ¦rle we are to forgoe all that we have esteemimg our owne righteousnesse in the question of justification if it should be obtruded as the matter thereof and whatsoever else of ours might seeme to bee an advantage unto us or praise-worthy among men as polluted clouts as dung and the opinion of our owne worthinesse and righteousnesse as losse so we may obtaine that pearle and that wee gaining Christ may bee found in him not as having our owne righteousnesse which is that which is prescribed in the ââ¦aw but that which is by the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith that is the righteousnesse of Christ which is imputed of God being apprehended by faith Now that this righteousnesse of God is the matter of our justification before God and not any righteousnesse inherââ¦nt in us or performed by us I shall prove at large in my fourth and seventh Bookes Here onely I alleage the plaine testimonies of the holy Ghost that Christ is made unto us of God our righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1. 30 that hee is Iehovah our righteousnesse and that by his blood wee are justified and absolved from our sinnes Rom 5. 9. and by his obedience opposite to Adams disobedience wee are made or constituted just Rom. 5. 19. § VII The formall cause of justification is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse because by imputing it the Lord doth justifie which â⦠expressed in the definition And this necessarily followeth upon that which hath beene said of the matter For it cannot bee imagined how we should be justified by that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him otherwise than by imputation For even as wee were made sinners by Adams personall disobââ¦dience so wee aââ¦e made righteous by the obedience of Chââ¦ist But how could we either be made sinners by Adams disobedience or justified by the obedience of Christ whether active or passive unlesse they were communicated unto us How could they possibly bee communicated unto us being both transient and having now no being For true is that saying of a learned Philosopher Motus non est nisi dum fit postquam factus est non est A motion whether it be action or passion hath no beiââ¦g but whiles it is in doing or suffering after it is done it hath no being Adams tranl gression was transient and is past and gone so many thousand yeeres past the active obedience of Christ was transient and so was his passive obedience which had a being in rerum natura no longer than they were in doing and in susââ¦ring How then can either Adams disobedience or Christs obedience be communicated unto us I answer in respect of both as Bellarmine answereth in respect of the former Communicatur eo modo quo communicari potest id quod transââ¦it nimirum per imputationem It is communicated after that manner whereby that may be communicated which is transient and gone to wit by imputation § VIII The same Bellarmine with other Papists doth confesse that the satisfaction of Christ is imputed unto us but the imputation of his righteousnesse they deny when as indeed the imputation of Christs ââ¦atisfaction is the imputation of his righteousnesse for what is Christs satisfaction but that whereby hee ââ¦ully satisfied the Law and consequently the justice of God for us which he did both in respect of the penalty which he fully satisfied by bearing our iniquities and also of the commandements by fulfilling them the former is the obedience of the crosse or his passive righteousnesse the latter is his conformity to the Law which is both his habituall and actuall righteousnesse By the former he freeth us from hell by the latter he doth entitle us to the kingdome of heaven But the meaning of the Papists is that Christ by his satisfaction doth free us from hell but as for heaven we must attaine to it by our owne merits as if there needed not so great a price to purchase heaven as to redeeme from hell But it is certaine that there is required as infinite merit to purchase heaven as there is required infinite satisfaction to redeeme from hell In respect of both God accepteth of no righteousnesse to our justification that is either to free us from hell or to entitle us unto the Kingdome of Heaven but that which is of infinite value because the offence of sinne for which satisfaction is to be made is infinite and because the reward which is to be merited is of infinite worth But that righteousnesse may bee of infinite value it is not necessary as Bellarmine himselfe teacheth that it should be infinite in it selfe but it is sufficient that it bee the righteousnesse of an infinite person And such is the righteousnesse of Christ as being the righteousnesse of him that is God such is not the righteousnesse of any meere creature which is an invincible argument as hereafter shall bee shewed to prove that wee are justified not by any righteousnesse in our selves but onely by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § IX And yet this imputation of Christs righteousnesse without which there can be no salvation is denied not onely by the Papists but by some others hereafter to be mentioned in the fifth chapter of this booke who seeme to have beene drawne to this opinion by this argument of the Papists which I will therefore in this place answer for their satisfaction If
necessarily required that he might be meet to become our righteousnesse in his sufferings But this is frivolous because as I noted before he being perfect God as well as perfect man had beene in his sufferings an All-sufficient satisfaction for our sinnes though hee had never submitted himselfe to the obedience of the Law But the divine Nature of the Sonne of God and the dignity of his person as it made his sufferings all-sufficiently satisfactory for our sinnes to redeeme us from hell because they were the sufferings of God the blood of God c. so it made his obedience all-sufficiently meritorious to constitute and make us righteous and to make us Heires of Eternall life because it was the obedience or righteousnesse of God For the Sonne of God was made under the Law that he might not onely redeeme us who were under the Law by his sufferings but also that by his meritorious obedience we might receive the Adoption of sonnes But he proveth Christ to bee our righteousnesse onely in his passive obedience because it onely was both prefigured in the types and figures of the Law and also represented in the sacraments As touching the types and figures of the Law which prefigured Christ they were either figures of his person and office or they represented his benefits as namely and especially justification or ââ¦anctification And those which figured his benefit of justification either represented the remission of sinne by his sufferings or acceptation with God by his obedience or both The ceremony of changing their clothes when they were to come before God did import that those who desired to please God must be clothed with Christs righteousnesse which is also signified by the wedding garment and the holy attire wherein the Priests were to appeare before God The high Priests wearing of the golden plate with this inscription Holinesse of the Lord who is Iehovah our righteousnesse was to this end that the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israel should hallow in all their holy gifts being taken away they might bee accepted before the Lord. The high Priests offering of incense upon the golden Altar resembled the pleasing obedience of Christ in his life and death and his intercession for us The Arke of the Covenant was a Type of Christ the Mediator the cover upon it of his propitiation the tables of Covenant within it of his fulfilling the Law for us The sanctification of the first fruits which were a type of Christ who is the first fruits of all that shall bee saved 1 Cor. 15. 23. was imputed to the whole increase or store Rom. 11. 16. So ââ¦aith Athanasius ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã That the fulfilling of the Law performed by the first fruits so he calleth the flesh of Christ is imputed to the whole lumpe c. § XXIII But come we to the Sacraments which hee truely saith are the soules of that righteousnesse which is by Faith And yet saith he Baptisme signifieth onely the washing of the soule by the bloud of Christ the Eucharist representeth onely his body broken and his blood shed for our sinnes Answ. Though some parts onely of the benefits of Christ are represented in the severall Sacraments yet the substance of each Sacrament is the participation of Christ wholly with all his merits and benefits Thus in Baptisme we are incorporated into Christ and in it we put on Christ who is our righteousnesse And it is the Sacrament not only of remission of sinne and of justification but also of regeneration and sanctification we being therein conformed to his death and resurrection Rom. 6. 3 4 5. In the Lords Supper we have communion with Christ being not only united to him as bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh but also have communion with him both in his merits by imputation and in his graces by influence from him as our head Other arguments are used by the same authour but because in them he taketh two things for granted which hee cannot prove the one that justification consisteth onely in remission of sin the other that wee ascribe remission of sinne to Christs active obedience I will not trouble the Reader with them Onely let him call to minde the errours which the Authors of this opinion doe runne into for the defence thereof First that remission of sinnes is the matter of justification which is imputed to us Secondly that the Law is fully satisfied by bearing the penalty alone Thirdly that by one act of obedience we are made just as wee were by one act of disobedience made sinners Fourthly that neither by his disobedience Adââ¦m did transgresse the Law nor Christ by his obedience unto death obey it Fifthly that Christ obeyed the law not for us but for himselfe Sixthly that justification consisteth wholly and onely in remission of sinnes Which being for the most part consequents of this opinion doe prove the antecedent to be false CAP. V. That the formall cause of Iustification is the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse § I. YOu have heard the private opinions of some of our Divines concerning the matter of justification now let us examine the unsound opinions of some others concerning the forme For as the former made remission of sins the matter which is imputed to justification so these make it the forme And as the former teach that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinne so doe these And yet the former hold it to bee but the matter and these but the forme Indeed if it were both the matter and the forme they might well say that justification doth wholly consist therein But being according to their owne conceipt but the one or the other and according to the truth neither of both but an effect of the true forme for by imputation of righteousnesse we have remission of sinne their opinion must needs be unsound But the thing wherein chiefely they erre is that with Socinuâ⦠the heretike they deny the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse and consequently do hold that neither the active nor passive obedience of Christ is that which is imputed to us for righteousnesse What then forsooth the act of faith Of these mens errour I shall not need to say much in this place because besides that which hath already beene delivered in the third Chapter I have plentifully and fully proved in my whole fourth booke that the righteousnesse of Christ is the matter which is imputed to justification and in my whole fifth booke that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the forme of justification Only I will note their depravation of our Doctrine and point at their errours § II. As touching the former when we say that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the formall cause of justification because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse God doth justifie us they will needs with the Papists make us hold that we are formally righteous by
that righteousnesse which is not in us but out of us in Christ which is absurd for as themselves expound the phrase Formall justice consisteth either in the qualities of the soule or in good actions that is it is either habituall or actuall so that it cannot stand in imputation by which wee can no more be just formally than wife rich alive by imputation of wisedome riches and life Wherefore I marvell how they could be so absurd as to conceive so absurdly of us But wee teach that Christs righteousnesse both habituall and actuall by which he was formally just is the matter and the imputation thereof is the forme of justification And so those very Authors upon whom they would father this assertion in expresse termes doe teach affirming that Christs obedience or fulfilling of the Law is the materiall cause of justification and the application or imputation thereof is the formall cause of justification We say then that the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe is not the formall cause of justification or that by which we are formally just but the imputation of it it selfe being the matter of justification that is to say that thing which unto justification is imputed Wherefore I shall not need to answere in defence of our assertion the arguments either of those Veteratores the Papists or these Novatores who both agree in this calumniation against us all tending to prove that wee are not formally juâ⦠by that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him which we doe not hold For the righteousnesse whereby a man is formaââ¦ly just is inherent in himselfe for what is more intrinsecall than the forme But Christs righteousnesse is not inherent in us no more than our sinne was inherent in him And yet as he was made sinne or a sinner by our sinnes not formally God forbid but by imputation so wee are made righteous by his righteousnesse not formally as we are justified or in our selves but in him viz. by imputation And againe as by Adams actuall transgrââ¦ssion which was transient and now hath no being we are made sinners that is guilty of sinne and damnation by imputation of his disobedience so likewise by Christs obedience which hee performed in the daies of his flesh and was proper to his owne person we are justified that is not onely freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation but also constituted just and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And yet we deny not but that as they to whom the guilt of Adams transgression is imputed are also by sinne inherent transfused from him by carnall generation formally made sinners so they to whom the obedience of Christ is imputed unto justification are also made formally just by an inchoated righteousnesse received by influence from Christ and infused by his spirit in their spirituall regeneration § III. In their opinion it selfe denying the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to justification they erre more dangerously than the Papists who are forced to confesse the imputation of Christs satisfaction for the maintenance of this maine errour they hold sixe others First that remission of sinne is the entire forme or formall cause of justification Secondly that justification is nothing else but remission of sinne Thirdly that no other righteousnesse concurreth to justification besides the remission of sinne no not the righteousnesse of Christ otherwise than it doth merit remission of sinne Fourthly that the righteousnesse by which we are justified is not the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe but a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ viz. remission of sinne Fifthly that not the obedience of Christ it selfe is imputed whether active or passive but the merit therof Sixthly that not the righteousnesse of Christ but the act of faith is imputed for righteousnesse All which before I saw the booke wherein these errours are broached I had plainely and fully confuted in this Treatise § IV. For as touching the two first and the maine errour it selfe I have proved both in the third Chapter of this booke briefly and in the whole fifth booke at large that the forme of justification is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which we are both absolved from our sinnes and also are in Christ accepted and made righteous and consequently that these two are the essentiall parts of justification viz. the not imputing or remission of sinne which God doth grant by imputation of Christs sufferings in respect whereof wee are said to be justified by his blood that is freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and the imputation of Christs obedience by which wee are made or constituted righteous and are entituled to the kingdome of Heaven So that remission of sinne is not the forme and much lesse the entire forme of justification considered as an action of God but an effect of the forme because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we have remission of sinne Neither is it the whole benefit of justification but a part thereof For although many of our Divines as hath beene said have taught that unto justification remission of sinnes is onely required yet their assertion as hath also beene shewed is to be understood as Bellarmine himselfe understandeth Calvin as spoken in opposition to the Papists who say that to justification concurre not onely remission of sinnes but also inward renovation or sanctification To contradict them our Divines have said that wee are justified by remission onely or not imputing of sinne wherewith alwayes concurreth imputation of righteousnesse and not by renovation or sanctification Their meaning therefore by the exclusive particle onely was to exclude not imputation of righteousnesse which unseparably accompanieth the not imputing of sinne as Saint Paul proveth Rom. 4. 6. 8. and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth but infusion of righteousnesse or renovation § V. The third is the same in effect with that which I fully confuted Cap. 4. and contradicteth their owne assertion who teach with us that we are justified by the whole course of Christs obedience for remission of sin is properly ascribed to Christs sufferings or his blood which cleanseth us from all our sinnes and not to his active obedience And justification is nothing as they say but remission of sinne whereupon it would follow that we are justified onely by Chriââ¦ts passive obedience which I have already disproved § VI. The fourth denying the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe to be our righteousnesse I have fully confuted in the fourth booke besides that which hath already beene alledged in the third chapter of this book that which is added concerning a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ is the same with that which I confuted Chap. 4. § 1. for our righteousnesse is not remission of sinne but that by which wee have remission not justification it selfe but that by which wee are justified For remission of sinne as well as justification it selfe is an action of God not imputing sinne and imputing righteousnesse
and therefore is not that righteousnesse which is imputed Thus therefore I argue By what we have remission of sinne by that wee are justified and by what we are justified that is our righteousnesse by the bloud of Christ we have remission of sinne and not by that righteousnesse which is purchased by his blood viz. remission of sinne for that to say were very ridiculous Wherefore by the blood of Christ we are justified and consequently that with the resâ⦠of his obedience is our righteousnesse § VII To the fifth I answer that the meritorious obedience of Christ both active and passive are the merits of Christ. If therefore the merit of Christ be imputed then his meritorious obedience Neither can the merit of Christs obedience be imputed to us unlesse the obedience it selfe be imputed and by imputation accepted of God for us as performed by our selves For as the guilt of Adams transgression could not be imputed to us unlesse the transgression it selfe were first imputed and made ours by imputation whereof wee are made sinners that is guilty of his sinne unto condemnation so the merit of Christs obedience cannot bee imputed unlesse the obedience it selfe be imputed and made ours by imputation whereof we are freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and are accepted as righteous and as heires of eternall life And as it may truely be said of them to whom Adams disobedience is imputed that they sinned in Adam so of them to whom Christs obedience is imputed it may no lesse truely be said that in Christ they have satisfied the justice of God in Christ they have fulfilled the Law the Lord accepting of the obedience of Christ in their behalfe as if they had performed it in their owne persons For Christ is the end the perfection and complement of the Law to all that beleeve So that whosoever truely beleeveth in Christ hath in him fulfilled the Law as the Greeke expositors expound that place Rom. 10. 4. § VIII But say they we were not so in Christ when he obeied as we were in Adam when he sinned Neither are wee members of Christ untill we actually beleeve And therefore neither could we be said to have satisfied the justice of God for our sinnes nor to have fulfilled the Law in him as we are truely said to have sinned in Adam Or if it could be said that in Christ we satisfied Gods justice for our sinnes then should we need no pardon Neither can punishment and pardon stand together if wee have borne the punishment then are we not pardoned Aââ¦sw The first Adam was a type of the second and both were heads and roots of mankinde Adam of those that shall bee condemned Christ of those that shall be saved For as in Adam all dye that dye eternally so in Christ all live that live eternally And as in Adam ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is all that shall be condemned were constituted sinners his disobedience being imputed to them because in him they sinned so in Christ ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã all that shall be saved shall be constituted just his obedience being imputed to them because in him as their head they have satisfied and fulfilled the Law Neither are wee more truely derived from Adam in respect of the life naturall than wee are from Christ in respect of the life spirituall Therefore if Adams disobedience were imputed to condemnation much more Christs obedience is imputed unto justification of life as the Apostle argueth Rom. 5. and from thence Bernard Cur non aliunde justitia cum aliunde reatus alius qui peccatorem constituit alius qui justificat à peccato Alter in semine alter in sanguine An peccatum in semine peccatoris non justitia in Christi sanguine § IX Yea but then say they when Christ obeyed we were not his members No more say I were we the branches of the first Adam when he disobeied Actually we are neither branches of the first Adam untill we partake the humane nature by generation nor members of the second Adam untill we be made partakers of the Divine nature by regeneration and yet it is most true which Bernard avoucheth in the place even now cited satisfecit ergo Caput pro membris c. the head therefore satisfied for his members c. § X. Yea but our faith relyeth upon Christ as having already redeemed us Ans. Christ is the Lambe of God slaine from the beginning of the world The vertue of whose obedience is extended not onely to them that come after Christ but also to all the faithfull that went before from the beginning of the world who were members of Christ as much as we are now And for them as well as for us Christ obeyed the Law and suffered death and to them so many as beleeved was the obedience of Christ imputed as well as to us They all did eate the same spirituall meat and did all drinke the same spirituall drinke For they dranke of that spirituall Rocke which followed and that Rocke was Christ. § XI But if in Christ say they we satisfied the punishment then we need no pardon Answ. When wee say that in Christ wee satisfied and fulfilled the Law our meaning is that his satisfaction and obedience is imputed to us that is it is accepted of God in our behalfe as if wee had performed the same in our owne persons Neither should it seeme strange that satisfaction and pardon may stand together seeing God pardoneth no sinne for which his justice is not satisfied But it is Christ that satisfied bare the punishment and we are they who are pardoned by imputation of his satisfaction unto us Here therefore especially mercy and justice met together justice executed upon Christs mercy exhibited to us who are justified by the grace of God freely in respect of us through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and therfore not freely in respect of him who paid so great a price For him God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes c. But that the righteousnesse of Christ is the onely thing which properly is imputed to justification I have at large disputed Lib. 4. 5. § XII The sixth I have already refuted Lib. 1. Cap. 2. § 7. Whereunto I now adde that these men confessing the truth with us that faith is the instrumentall cause of justification confute themselves For if it be the instrument to receive that which is imputed then is it not the thing it selfe which is imputed properly though relatively it may in respect of the object which it as the instrument or hand doth receive to justification and that is the righteousnesse of Christ. And for this cause as hereafter shall bee declared the same benefits which wee have from Christ properly are attributed to faith not absolutely
our justification and sanctification to both And therefore as we are first above all things to desire that God may bee glorified so that hee may bee glorified wee are first among those things which wee desire for our owne good to seeke his Kingdome and his righteousnesse that his Kingdome of glory and the Kingdome of Grace which consisteth in the righteousnesse of justification and the two companions thereof peace and joy in the holy Ghost may come upon us and next that his will may be done upon earth as it is in heaven by our new obedience for this is the will of God even our sanctification Salvation I say is the end both of our justification and sanctification for being made free from sinne and become servants to God we have our fruit unto holinesse and the end everlasting life The end of our faith by which we are justified is the salvation of our soules unto which by justification wee are entituled and saved in hope that being justified by his grace wee should bee made heires according to hope of eternall life for all that be justified shall be glorified And this also I noted in the definition when I said that those whom the Lord doth justifie by imputation of Christs righteousnesse he accepteth as righteous in Christ and as heires of eternall life for by faith we have remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified § III. But we are justified by faith not onely that in the end wee may be saved but also that in the meane time our salvation being of Grace might be certaine and sure and that being justified by faith we might have peace and joy in the holy Ghost Whereas if it depended upon our workes or worthinesse it would be uncertaine For the promise of this inheritance was not made to Abraham and his seed through the Law in respect of any righteousnesse therein prescribed but through the righteousnesse of Faith And therefore it is of faith that it might bee by grace to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed Rom. 4. 13. 16. § IV. The other end which is subordinate not onely to Gods glory but also to our Salvation is our sanctification as being the way to eternall life for though we be saved by grace through faith and not of workes yet we are the workmanship of God created in Christ Iesus unto good workes which God hath before ordained that we should walke in them We are therefore justified First that God may be glorified Secondly that wee may bee saved in the life to come Thirdly that in this world we may lead a godly life See Luk. 1. 74 75. 1 Pet. 2. 24. Tit. 2. 11 12 13. So much of the causes § V. There remaine the essentiall parts of justification which I expressed in the definition when I said that God doth justifie a beleeving sinner when imputing unto him the righteousnesse of Christ he doth absolve him from his sinnes and accepteth of him in Christ as righteous and as an Heire of Eternall Life The parts therefore of justification are two absolution from sinne and acceptation as righteous in Christ both which the Lord granteth by imputation of the full and perfect satisfaction of Christ whereby he fully satisfied the Law both in respect of the penalty which he satisfied by his sufferings and also in respect of the precept which he satisfied by his perfect righteousnesse both habituall and actuall As therefore there were two branches of the Law to be satisfied the commination and the Commandement and two parts of Christs satisfaction answerable thereunto so there are two parts of justification absolution from the curse of the Law by imputation of Christs sufferings wherein he became a curse for us and acceptation as righteous in Christ by imputation of Christs most perfect righteousnes both habituall actuall in respect of both which parts of his satisfaction Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnes that is doth justifie all that truly beleeve in him § VI. And hereby it may appeare that those three benefits of Redemption Reconciliation and Adoption are all comprehended under this maine benefit of justification the two former being all one in substance with the former part for as touching the former In Christ wee have Redemption through his bloud even remission of sinnes Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. And as touching the latter God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himselfe not imputing unto them or remitting their sinnes 2 Cor. 5. 19. and therefore all three Remission of sinnes Redemption and Reconciliation are ascribed to the bloud and to the death of Christ. The third is all one in substance with the second part For what is it to be adopted but to be accepted of God in his beloved as righteous and as an Heire of Eternall Life and this is ascribed to the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ both in his life and death For therefore was the Sonne of God made under the Law namely to obey and to fulfill and to satisfie it that hee redeeming us from the yoke of the Law requiring perfect obedience in us to justification we might receive the Adoption of sonnes § VII Now follow the consequents and fruits of justification which are the Grace of Sanctification and the parts therof consisting partly in righteousnesse inherent and partly in outward obedience called good workes which I doe the rather mention in this place because the Papists though they cannot deny that they are the effects and fruits of justification which as they use to alleage out of Augustine Non praecedunt justificandum sed sequuntur justificatum not goe before as causes but follow as effects yet notwithstanding most absurdly contend that they concurre with faith unto justification as the causes thereof wee acknowledge them to be necessary in the subject that is the party that is justified and to bee saved necessitate praesentiae as the necessary fruits and consequents of justification and as necessary antecedents to glorification but we deny their necessity of efficiencie as causes concurring to the act of justification or merit of salvation We acknowledge them as the necessary fruits of Redemption and Iustification as the markes and cognizances of them that shall be saved the necessary forerunners of glorification the onely true way to our heavenly countrey the evidence according to which wee shall be judged at the last day yet we are not justified by them nor saved for them as hereafter I shall plainely and plentifully prove but onely by and for the righteousnesse and merits of Christ apprehended by Faith A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE SECOND BOOKE That Justification and Sanctification are not to bee confounded CAP. I. Setting downe the heads of the Controversies the first whereof is that Iustification and Sanctification are not to be confounded The first proofe
writing in Greeke but also the holy Apostles and Evangelists have received the same And therefore these words are no otherwise to be understood than as the translations of the said Hebrew words signifying no other thing than what the Hebrew words import which as I have shewed doe never signifie to make or to be made righteous by inherent righteousnesse § II. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is used by the Apostle and by the Evangelist Luke sometimes as the translation of Tsiddiq in Piel as Luk. 7. 29. the people and Publicans ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã justified God The Lawyer Luk. 10. 29. willing to justifie himselfe The Pharisies Luk. 16. 15. justified themselves before men And so is the word used sometimes by the sonne of Sirach as Ecclus. 10. 29. who will justifie him that sinneth against his owne soule Cap. 13. 26. alias 22. A rich man speaketh things not to be spoken and yet men justifie him Sometimes the Apostle useth the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as the translation of Hitsdiq as alwaies he doth in the question of justification and alwayes as the action of God as Rom. 3. 26. who justifieth him that beleeveth in Iesus how vers 24. gratis without any cause or desert of justification in the party without workes that is without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in him or performed by him vers 28. who justifieth the Circumcision and uncircumcision that is both Iewes and Gentiles not of workes or by inherent justice but by and through faith vers 30. who justifieth the ungodly that is the beleeving sinner that worketh not Rom. 4. 5. and therefore not by inherent righteousnesse how then by imputing righteousnesse without workes vers 6. who Rom. 8. 30. whom he calleth he justifieth namely by faith and whom he justifieth hee also glorifieth using the word in the same sense vers 33. who can lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect it is God that justifieth who shall condemne where most manifestly the word is used as a judiciall word opposed to accusing and condemning Neither can any colour of reason be alleaged why the word in these places should signifie contrary to the perpetuall use both of it selfe and of the Hââ¦brew word whereof it is a translation to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent § III. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is used sometimes as the translation not of the passive verbe but as of the Neuter in Cal as I have shewed before out of the Greeke translation of the ãâã So Ecclus. 7. 5. bee not just before God not wise before the king or as it is usually translated doe not justifie thy selfe before God So also in the new Testament Rom. 3. 4. cited out of Psalm 51. 6. where the Hebrew word is not a passive but a neuter And so Apoc. 22. 11. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã let him that is just be just still As the translation of the passive it is often used But as it never signifieth to be made just by inherent justice as I will shew when I come to answere the objections of the Papists so it alwayes signifieth either to be declared or pronounced just or to bee absolved and made jusâ⦠by imputation In the former sense wisedome is said to bee justified of her Children Luk. 7. 37. who vers 29. justified God Christ who is God was manifested in the flesh justified in the Spirit 1 Tim. 3. 16. Thus by our words we shall bee justiââ¦ed not made just formally or by inherent righteousnesse but in the sense opposed to condemnation For as by thy words thou shalt bee justified so by thy words thou shalt be condemned Matth. 12. 37. Thus not the hearers alone but the doers of the Law shall bee justified that is pronounced just Rom. 2. 13. and in this sense the faithfull are justified by workes that is declared approved and knowne to bee just Iames 2. 21 23. 24 25. cum Genes 22. 12. ââ¦n the latter sense Ecclesiast 1. 28. alias 22. the famous man Chap. 31. 5. The lover of Gold Chap. 23. 14. alias 11. The rash swearer shall not bee justified that is as it is in the Commination of the third Commandement shall not bee held guitlesse but most plainely Chap. 26. the last verse the huckster shall not bee justified from sinne that is not absolved from sinne nor accepted as righteous So Act. 13. 38 39. where most plainely to be ââ¦ustified from sinne doth signifie to be absolved or freed from the guilt of sinne and is used promiscuously with remission of sinne And this sense oâ⦠freedome from the guilt is ââ¦ometimes extended to signifie a totall freedome as Rom. 6. 7. He that is dead is justified that iâ⦠as Chrysostome and Oââ¦umenius expound it ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is freed from sinne As these places are plainely repugnant to the Popish sense so none of the rest where ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is used doth favour it For either they import remission of sinnes and acceptation as righteoââ¦s as Luk. 18. 14. The Publican who had humbled himselfe and craved pardon went home justified that is obtained pardon and was accepted as righteous rather than the Pharisee who had justified himselfe or distinguish betweene justification and sanctification as 1 Cor. 6. 11. or exclude justification by inherent righteousnesse as Rom. 3. 20. Rom. 4. 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Gal. 5. 4. Or imply imputation as where we are said to be justified either by his blood as Rom. 5. 9. Or by faith as Rom. 5. 1. Gal. 3. 24. Or by grace as Tiâ⦠3. 7 Or both exclude the one and imply the other as Rom. 3. 24. 28. Gal. 2. 16 17. 3. 11. § IV. There remaine these two words which I mentioned before ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is used onely in two placââ¦s Rom. 4. 25. 5. 18. In the former it is said that Christ was delivered to death for our sinnes and was raised againe for our justificââ¦tion to whom as it is in the precedent verse righteousnesse shall bee imputed if wee beleeve on him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead for as our Saviour by his death and obedience untââ¦ll death merited for us remission of sinnes and the right to eternall life so by the acts of Christ restored to life as namely by his resurrection his merits are effectually applied and imputed to our justification For if Christ had not risen againe wee had beene still in our sinnes 1 Cor. 15. 17. In the latter place justification is in direct termes opposed to condemnation For as by the offence or transgression of one viz. the first Adam ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the guilt which is to be supplied out of the sixteenth verse came upon all men the offspring of the first Adam ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã unto condemnation so by the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã
ãâã of one whereby hee fulfilled the Law viz. the second Adam the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or free gift opposite to the guilt of damnation which is our title and right to the kingdome of heaven commeth to all men that belong to the second Adam unto justification of life § V. The word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is diversââ¦y used both in the plurall number and in the singular In the plurall it hath three significations for first it signifieth Iura the Lawes or Commandements of God either in generall and indefinitely as namely where no other word of the like signiââ¦cation is joyned with it as Psalm 119. 8 12. Rom. 2. 26. Or more particularly the precepts of the ceremoniall Law And this sense is most usuall when it is joyned with words signifying other lawes or precepts For the whole Law which is called mishmereth Iehovah the observation of the Lord that is all that the Lord requireth to bee observed is often distinguished into three parts Mitsvoth whiââ¦h the Septuagint translate ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Commandements of the morall Law Mishpatim which they translate ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the precepts of the judiciall Law Chuqqim which they translate sometimes ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and sometimes ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the statutes and ordinances of the Ceremoniall Law Insomuch that the vulgar Latine for Chuqqim rendreth many times even where the 72. have ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ceremonias as Gen. 26. 5. Deut. 4. 8 14 45. 5. 1 31. 6. 1. 17. 8. 11. 10. 13. 11. 1. c. The Apostle Rom. 9. 4. calleth the Morall Law ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Iudiciall ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Ceremoniall ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and accordingly the precepts of the Ceremoniall Law are called Heb. 9. 1. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The ordinances of divine service and because they were but externall observations vers 10. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã carnall ordinances Secondly it signifieth the judgements of God Apoc. 15. 4. which by the vulgar Latine and others is translated Iudicia And as ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sometimes signifieth the just workes of God which are the acts of his justice so in the last place some expound ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Apoc. 19. 8. to bee the just workes of the Saints and as the author of the Homilies in Saint Augustine justa facta or justè facta as the Greeke writers sometimes use the word which the Papists will needs translate justifications meaning thereby just workes and hoping thereby to prove that men are justified by them which we deny not in that sense wherein Saint Iames saith we are justified that is declared and knowne to bee just by them But if justifications bee the true translation of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in that place then we are thereby to understand the merits of Christ by which the Saints are justified which are more fitly resembled by a garment than either inherent righteousnesse or righteous workes And is indeed called Matth. 22. 11 12. the wedding garment which garment is put on by a true faith by which the faithfull as they are exhorted Rom. 13. 14. put on Christ. Whereof Baptisme is a seale Gal. 5. 27. And this is that white garment which is to bee had from Christ to cover our nakednesse Apoc. 3. 18. Sometimes indeed the white robes doe signifie the glorious and happy estate promised to the faithfull as Apoc. 3. 4. 6. 11. 7. 9. which is purchased by the merits of Christ for which cause their robes are said to bee made white in the blood of the Lambe But here the holy Ghost expoundeth the fine linnen wherewith the Saints are arrayed to bee the justifications of the Saints which as I said are the merits and obedience of Christ put on by a true faith which being without us as garments use to be and yet being applyed unto us and put on by faith doe cover our nakednesse and therefore are more fitly resembled by fine linnen pure and shining than our owne righteousnesse which neither is without us as a garment nor yet pure but Christs righteousnesse imputed is both as a garment pure and perfect in it selfe and shineth forth by the light of good works Mat. 5. 16. § VI. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is a verball derived from ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã either as ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signifieth to be just in which sense the precepts of God are said to bee ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Psalm 19. 10. or as it signifieth to be justified In the former sense ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signifieth that which is just either as the Law of God prescribing righteousnesse so the Law of nature written in the hearts of men is called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Rom. 1. 32. or as the whole righteousnesse which in the Law is prescribed and so it is used Rom. 5. 18. For as by the transgression of one viz. the first Adam whereby the whole Law was violated guilt came upon all men that were in him unto condemnation so by the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of one the second Adam whereby he fulfilled the whole Law the free gift which is our right and title to heaven came upon all men who are in him unto justification of life and Rom. 8. 4. God sent his Sonne the Law being impossible to be fulfilled by us in the likenesse of sinfull flesh that ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã all that the Law requireth to justification might in our nature bee performed and fulfilled In the latter sense it is once onely used viz. Rom. 5. 16. in the same signification with ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is justification vers 18. both of them being opposed to condemnation If therefore the words which the holy Ghost doth use to expresse the benefit of justification doe never signifie justification by inherent righteousnesse but the contrary as hath beene ââ¦hewed then that justification which the Papists teach is not that which is taught in the holy Scriptures but contrary to it § VII And the same is proved by these two reasons first because the Apostles when they expresse the benefit of justification in other termes they doe signifie the same not by such words as import infusion of righteousnesse but by such as plainely signifie either absolution from sinne which is the not imputing of sinne or imputation of righteousnesse Rom. 4. these phrases are used to signifie one and the same thing to justifie to impute righteousnesse without works vers 6. to remit sin to cover sins vers 7. not ââ¦o impute sin vers 8. to be justified and to be blessed and to be blessed is to have their sins remitted or covered vers 6. Rom. 5. 9 10. to bee justified by the blood of Christ and to be reconciled unto God by his death all one 2 Cor. 5. 19. to reconcile us unto himselfe not imputing our offences unto
condemnation and justification some where signifie the action of the Iudge as in the place cited Rom. 5. 16. yet notwithstanding when God doth justifie a sinner by dââ¦claring him just he doth also make him just because the judgement of God is according to the truth And therefore Christ whether he justifieth us by his obedience or by his judgement he alwayes maketh just And thus Augustine saith he understood this place Reply That God maketh just whom he pronounceth just we freely confesse but the question still is of the manner for in justification when he pronounceth a man just he maketh him just and that perfectly just not by infusion of inherent righteousnesse but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse And whom hee justifieth that is maketh just by imputation of righteousnesse them hee also sanctifieth that is maketh just in some measure by infusion of grace For to use Bellarmines owne words when God doth justifie a sinner by declaring him righteous it is plaine that in himselfe hee is a sinner who by God is declared to bee just and therefore that hee is not justified by inherent justice for in himselfe he is a sinner as wee all are How then shall the judgement of God bee according to the truth when hee declareth a sinner to bee just To a sinner beleeving in Christ the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith is imputed for righteousnesse Rom. 4. 5. and this we shall hereafter shew to be an argument unanswerable None remaining sinners in themselves can truely bee declared or pronounced just in respect of righteousnesse inherent All mortall men even the most righteous of them meraine sinners in themselves 1 Ioh. 1. 8. Ecclus 7. 20. Therefore No mortall man can truly be declared or pronounced just in respect of inherent righteousnesse and consequently none are or can bee justified by righteousnesse inherent § IIII. The testimony of Augustine is falsified For disputing against the errour of the Pelagians who imagined that originall sinne was not propagated from Adam but that imitation onely maketh sinners by Adam hee inferreth that then by the same reason onely imitation maketh just by Christ. As though either Adam had done no more against us or Christ for us than that they had been prime examples and precedents the one of sinne the other of righteousnesse But Augustine sheweth out of Rom. 5. that as those who are regenerated by the Spirit of Christ obtaine remission of sinnes and inward grace so those who come from Adam by naturall generation are made guilty of his sinne unto condemnation and also receive corruption from him by propagation all which we teach But that Augustine pleadeth not for justification by inherent justice appeareth by the antithesis which in that place hee maketh betwixt our condemnation by Adam and our justification by Christ. First that whereas to condemnation there concurres our owne voluntary transgression besides Adams sinne yet to our justification there doth not concurre any righteoufnesse besides Christ. Secondly which difference Saint Paul also noteth Rom. 5. 15 16 because in the carnall generation originall sinne onely is contracted but in the spirituall regeneration there is remission not onely of originall but also of voluntary sinnes § V. The second reason of Calvin and Chemnitius which Bellarmine taketh upon him to confute is this because the Apostle writing of justification did no doubt imitate the Hebrew phrase though he wrote in Greeke But the Hebrew word signifying to justifie hath the judiciall signification The argument may thus be propounded Such as is the signification of the Hebrew hitsdiq in the old Testament the same is the signification of the Greeke word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã both in the edition of the Septuagints as being the translation thereof and in the new Testament which in this point retaineth the translation of the Septuagints But the Hebrew hitsdiq is meerely a judiciall word opposed to condemnation as I have proved heretofore by induction of examples as Deut. 25. 1. 1 King 32. 8. Prov. 17. 15. Esai 5. 23. and never signifieth to make righteous by infusion or to endue with righteousnesse inherent Therefore the Greeke word also hath the same signification To the assumption Bellarmine answereth that the Hebrew word properly signifieth to make just but because a man may bee made just both inwardly by obtaining of justice and outwardly by declaration hence it is that the word admitteth these divers significations Reply In this answer we are to take his confession of the truth both that we may be made just outwardly by declaration and also that the Verbe sometimes doth signifie so much In vaine therefore doe the Papists urge against us the signification of the Latine word justificare as signifying justum facere seeing by our exposition it signifieth justum facere also not onely by declaration as Bellarmine heere speaketh but much more by imputation But though he confesseth the signification of the Verbe urged by us yet wee may not acknowledge the signification so much urged by the Papists yea wee confidently deny that the Hebrew hitsdiq doth any where in the Scriptures signifie to endùe with righteousnesse inherent § VI. This therefore hee endevoureth to prove by induction of examples and first out of Dan. 12. 3. Qui adjustitiam erudiunt multos who instruct many to righteousnesse The Hebrew word is matsdiqim where the Prophet speaking of the great glory which shall bee of Teachers who justifie many the vulgar Latine which is the onely authentique Text among the Papists doth not translate the word making righteous by infusion or enduing with righteousnesse inherent which is the worke of God alone and not of the Teacher but instructing unto righteousnesse or as Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth by teaching to bring men to righteousnesse which is done by bringing them to beleeve and therefore this allegation proveth not the Popish signification of the word Yea but it disproveth saith Bellarmine the judiciall signification so much urged by you For Teachers doe not justifie after the maner of ââ¦udges howbeit the Popish Priests dot in their absolutions as themselves doe teach Reply But this is nothing but a cavill For where wee say that to justifie in this doctrine of justification is verbum forense a word taken from Courts having a judiciall signification as namely to absolve from sinne or to give sentence with a man after the maner of a Iudge our meaning is that this word being attributed to God as it is God alone that justifieth and so wee consider justification as an action of God it alwaies hath this judiciall signification and never signifieth to endue with righteousnesse inherent But wee doe not say that it being attributed to any other as it is to divers others both perââ¦ons and things it is to bee expounded as the act of the Iudge though otherwise the justice implyed in the signification of the word bee after the judiciall sense not inherent but imputative Thus as I
Gospell the covenant of workes and the covenant of grace as if the Gospell did unto justification require inherent and that a more perfect righteousnesse than the Law requireth And consequently with the false Apostles and teachers of the Galatians doe teach another Gospell than that which the Apostle taught which whosoever doth hee is accursed Whrefore the samethings which the Apostle objecteth against the Galatians who were seduced by their false Teachers are verified of the Papists who seekng to be justified by the workes of the Law are under the curse they are fallen from grace to them the promise is of no effect to them Christ dyed in vaine then Christ profiteth nothing as hereafter I shall shew For whosoever seeketh to bee justified by the workes of the Law hee is a debtour to the whole Law and to him who is a debtour to the whole Law that is to bee subject to the curse if he transgresse it and to be excluded from justification and salvation if he doe not perfectly fulfill it Christ profiteth nothing For whereas they distinguish the workes which they make the condition of both the Covenants that the one are the workes of Nature the other of grace it is evident that all good workes and all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law which is the most perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse Secondly that inherent righteousnesse is not the condition of the covenant of grace but is the thing promised to all that truely beleeve For the better understanding whereof wee are to know that the covenant of workes was made with all mankinde in Adam the Covenant of Grace with the heires of promise in Christ. The former promiseth justification to these who in their owne persons performe perfect obedience that perfect obedience being the condition of the Covenant The latter that to us the sonnes of Abraham being redeemed and justified by faith the Lord will give grace to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him in which our new obedience consisteth which as I said is not the condition of the promise but the thing promised § XXI Secondly by confounding justification and sanctification they teach men to place the matter of justification and merit of salvation in themselves For the matter of sanctification is inherent and that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation Againe that which is inherent is both prescribed in the Law and is also our owne though received from God which the Pharisie himselfe confessed when he thanked God for it But the holy Ghost doth teach us that wee are neither justified by the obedience or righteousnesse which is taught in the Law nor by that which is ours And in regard of this very difference betwixt the Papists and us wee are not unworthily called Evangelici the professors of the Gospell and they the enemies thereof who seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse doe with scorne reject the righteousnesse of Christ imputed which is that righteousnesse of God revealed in the Gospell from faith to faith This being the maine doctrine of the Gospell that we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves but by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith § XXII By confounding justification and sanctification and so of two benefits making but one they doe abolish and take away that maine benefit of the Messias by which we are not onely freed from hell but also intituled unto the kingdome of heaven which the Scriptures distinctly call our justification without which there can bee no salvation For whom God doth justifie all them and onely them he doth glorifie And that they doe wholly take away the benefit of justification it shall further appeare in handling the second question of this first controverfie whereof I am now to speake CAP. VII That the Papists exclude remission of sinne from Iustification and in stead thereof have put expulsion and extinction of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse and that they fouly erre therein § I. BVT heare it will be objected that so long as the Papists acknowledge remission of sinne to concurre unto justification they cannot be said wholly to take away the benefit of justification but rather to follow the judgement of some of the Latine fathers who sometimes comprehending the benefit of sanctification under the name of justification seemed to make justification to consist in remission of sinne and sanctification Whereunto I answere that indeed the Papists pretend so much For the Councell of Trent in expresse termes saith that justification is not remission of sins alone but also sanctification and renovation of the inner man and to the like purpose Bellarmine disputeth that justification doth not consist in the remission of sinnes alone but also in inward renovation And yet all this is but a meere colourable pretence For as they exclude from justification the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which onely wee have remission of sinne so they doe indeed and in truth exclude remission it selfe And as in stead of imputation of righteousnesse they have brought in infusion of justice so in stead of remission of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse they have brought in the utter expulsion extinction deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse And for this they have some shew of reason For if they should hold that justification consisteth partly in remission that is in the forgivenesse or not imputation of sinne and partly in renovation or sanctification then they must confesse that there are two formall causes of justification which Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent and may truly bee objected against such of the Fathers as held justification to consist partly in remission and partly in renovation and consequently should bee forced to acknowledge two wayes of making men just by one and the same act of justification the one by imputation of that righteousnesse by which being without us we have remission of sinne the other by infusion of righteousnesse inherent by which sinne is expelled But the Councell of Trent doth stedfastly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is infusion of justice whereby sinne is expelled What then becometh of remission of sinne which according both to Scriptures and Fathers concurreth to justification I say of it as of justification the name is retained but the thing is taken away § II. Heere therefore I am to shew two things first that the Papists from justification exclude remission of sinne by putting into the roome thereof the expulsion and extinction of sinne which belongeth not to justification but to sanctification and consequently doe wholly abolish by their doctrine the benefit of justification Secondly that remission of sinne is not the utter extinction or deletion thereof As touching the former when Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent that it made two
in the question of justification betweene grace and workes as that if wee bee justified by the one wee cannot be justified by the other but they might as well stand together as the first justification of the Papists which is habituall consisting in the habits of grace infused with the second which is actuall consisting in works or rather the one would infer the other because we cannot be justified by the one I speak of adulti without the other for if wee bee justified by inherent righteousnesse that righteousnesse must be totall and perfect and therfore both habituall and actuall and both must concur unto justification for neither without the other is perfect Object Yea but the Apostle when hee saith that faith doth justifie without workes hee speaketh of the first juââ¦ification unto which works doe not concurre and when hee opposeth grace to workes hee meaneth the works of the Law done before faith without grace by the power of nature Answ. This is all that the Papists have to excuse themselves that they doe not openly contradict the Apostle who so often and so peremptorily concludeth that wee are justified by grace and not by workes by faith without the workes of the Law But it is evident that by the workes of the Law is meant all that obedience and righteousnesse that is prescribed in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse And therefore when the workes of the Law are rejected all inherent righteousnesse is excluded from justification It is also manifest that the holy Ghost speaketh generally of all men whether in the state of nature or in the state of grace and of all workes whether going before or following after faith insomuch that the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse Tit 3. 5. are excluded yea the workes of faithfull Abraham are denied to have justified him before God And therefore those who have both faith and works are justified by faith without workes But these objectiots I shall fully satisfie in their due place § X. Sixthly whereas the Papists say that justifying grace is the same with charity I argue thus Charity is the fulfilling of the Law in our owne persons But wee are not justified by our fulfilling of the Law in our owne persons Gal. 2. 16. 3. 10 11. Therefore we are not justified by our charity and consequently not by grace inherent § XI Seventhly that the Apostle by grace in the articles of justification and salvation understood the gracious favour of God in Christ and not inherent grace appeareth both by his assention Rom. 5. 20. that where sinne abounded Gods grace did much more abound and by his question Rom. 6. 1. shall wee continue in sinne that grace may abound for it were a strange conceit that where sinne aboundeth inherent righteousnesse should abound so much the more And to these we may adde those places which speake of going to the throne of grace that we may obtaine mercie and find grace Heb. 4. 16. of the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ for by grace we are saved Eph. 2. 7. 8. of the grace of God and the gift of grace distinguished one from the other Rom. 5. 15. of those that beleeve by the grace of God Act. 18. 27. of commending men to the grace of God Act. 14. 26. 15. 40. of the word of his grace Act. 14. 3. 20. 32. of the Gospell of his grace Act. 20. 24. of the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ who being rich became poore for us 2 Cor. 8. 9. of our predestination to the praise of the glory of his grace Eph. 1. 5 6. of the election of grace Rom. 11. 5. of the appearing of the grace of God which bringeth salvation Tit. 2. 11. of Christ his tasting of death for us by the grace of God Heb. 2. 9. of the reward not imputed of grace to him that worketh Rom. 4. 4. of turning the grace of God into wantonnesse Iud. 4. c. § XII Lastly so cleare is this truth which wee deliver according to the scriptures concerning justifying grace that Albertus Pighius a famous divine among the Papists doth confesse that what the Schoolemen teach concerning justifying grace that it is a quality in our soules infused of God and there remaining after the manner of an habit and that it is the same in substance with the habit of charity c. are meere devises of men having no warrant in the Scriptures Thomas Aquinas also writing on Tit. 2. 11. it is to bee knowne saith he that grace signifieth mercie and mercie alwayes was in God yet in respect of men in times past it lay hid but when Christ the Sonne of God appeared grace appeared and it may be said that in the Nativity of Christ grace appeared two wayes the former because by the greatest grace of God he was given unto us and upon this grace in the second place followed the instruction of mankind wherupon he saith teachingus c. Whereunto we may adde that those few places which Bellarmine alleageth for inherent grace are by some of their owne writers understood of the gracious favour of God as we shall shew in the particulars which now we are to examine CHAP. III. Bellarmines allegation for grace inherent out of Rom. 3. 24. proved to make against himselfe § I. BVt before I propound them I am to advertise the Reader that we do not deny that there are divers graces of sanctification and those also necessary to salvation as faith hope charity the feare of God c. inherent in the soules of the faithfull as divine qualities residing there per modum habitus So that Bellarmine in his booke de gratia lib. arbitr might well have spared his labour whereby he endeavoreth to prove such grace or graces to bee inherent in the soule which never any of us denyed But wee deny that gratia gratum faciens or justifying grace is inherent in us This therefore Bellarmine laboureth to prove lib. 2. de justif cap. 3. unto which in the other place hee doth referre us alleaging Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption which is in Christ Iesus c. Answ. It cannot bee denyed but that the popish cause in this particular is very desperate when for the defence thereof they are able to alleage one onely place where grace is mentioned and that such a one as is a most pregnant testimony to prove free justification by faith onely without respect of any righteousnesse or grace inherent in us § II. And this is proved first by the context or coherence of these words with those which goe before For thus the Apostle reasoneth Those that bee in themselves sinners and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God are not justified by righteousnesse inherent all which is prescribed in the Law but of necessity must be justified by a righteousnesse which
indowments And therefore that I may come to the proofe of my assumption those phrases of putting on Christ and his righteousnesse figured by Iacob his putting on of his elder brothers apparell Gen. 27. of the wedding garment Mat. 22. 11. of the first or chiefe robe Luke 15 22. of the white garment promised by Christ Apoc. 3. 18. of the fine linnen cleane and shining which is the righteousnesse of the Saints Apoc. 19. 8. of which place I have spoken before are most fitly understood of the righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us and put on as it were by faith § XI In his second answere Bellarmine confesseth that this similitude of garments and that example of the Patriarch Iacob may after a sound manner bee accommodated to righteousnesse imputed if it shall bee said that it behoueth us to put on or to be clothed with the merits of Christ that being after a sort covered with them we may aske of God pardon of our sinnes for as I have said before saith he Christ alone was able to satisfie for our sins and indeed in justice did satisfie and that satisfaction is given and applyed to us and reputed ours when weare reconciled unto God and justified That example therefore being referred to the righteousnesse of satisfaction for the fault it may be admitted But if it be referred to that righteousnesse whereby wee are formally justified when of sinners and wicked men we are made just and godly it is by all meanes to be rejected seeing it is manifestly repugnant to the Scriptures to the Fathers and to reason it selfe For that one man should satisfiâ⦠for another it may easily be conceived but that one man should be just because another is just was never heard of and is not onely above but also against reason § XII Here as you see Bellarmine maketh a distinction betwixt the righteousnesse of satisfaction and that by which wee are formally made just But what is that righteousnesse of satisfaction No doubt that whereby our Saviour satisfied the Law for us which he was to satisfie as I have shewed before not onely in respect of the penalty threatened by his sufferings but also in respect of the Commandement by his perfect obedience fulfilling the condition of the promise Doe this and live To this Bellarmine acknowledgeth the similitude of garments and the example of the Patriarch Iacob may fitly be applied which is as much as wee desire For this is the whole righteousnesse of justification wherein the Lord imputing to a beleever the sufferings of Christ covereth or not imputeth or forgiveth his sinnes and the punishment thereunto belonging and imputing unto him the perfect obedience of Christ accepteth of him as righteousnesse in Christ. For it is most certaine that to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne them hee accepteth as righteous and that hee imputeth righteousnesse to whom hee imputeth not sinne Rom. 4. 6 7. For as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth the not imputing of sinne bringeth with it the imputing of righteousnesse Neither is it to be doubted but that the Lord accepteth as well the merits of his obedience as of his sufferings And what is that justice whereby he saith we are formally made just no doubt inherent justice or the righteousnesse of sanctification by infusion where of sinne is expelled To this saith Bellarmine the similitude of apparell and the example of Iacob cannot be applyed For though one may satisfie for another yet one cannot be formally just by the righteousnesse of another which never any of us to my knowledge affirmed The more absurd was Bellarmine in thinking so absurdly of us For because hee confoundeth justification and sanctification hee would needs beare the world in hand that wee confounding them also doe teach that wee are formally made just by the righteousnesse of another which is out of us in him But if justification and sanctification are to be distinguished as I have proved they must of necessity bee distinguished then it will appeare manifestly that that which Bellarmine calleth the justice of satisfaction is the whole righteousnesse of justification and that by which hee saith wee are formally made righteous is the righteousnesse of sanctification Now wee are well content that the righteousnesse whereby wee are sanctified or formally made righteous should not be imputative so that they will confesse that the righteousnesse of Christs whole satisfaction whereby wee are justified before God is imputed unto us which they must confesse or else they cannot bee saved Here therefore we may sing the triumph and say Magna est veritas praevalet And thus have I aboundantly proved that the righteousnesse of God whereby wee are justified is not any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us but onely the righteousnesse of Christ our Saviour which is out of us in him as being proper to his person though by imputation communicated to all that truly beleeve in him CHAP. X. Bellarmines eight allegations to prove justification by inherent righteousnesse answered § I. NOw I am to examine Bellarmines proofes And first hee alleageth Rom. 5. 17 18 19. out of which place he would prove that to bee justified by Christ is not to be accounted or pronounced just but to be truly made and constituted just by obtaining inherent righteousnesse and that a righteousnesse not unperfect but absolute and perfect for that to justifie in this place is to makejust and not to pronounce just appeareth first out of those words verse 19. many shall be constituted or made just unto which allegation I have heretofore answered in his due place so much as concerneth the signification of the word and have maintained the exceptions of Calvin and Chemnitius against his cavils His second reason is from the Antithesis of Adam unto Christ. For thus saith he the Apostle writeth As we are made unjust through the disobedience of Adam so we are made just through the obedience of Christ. But it is certaine that through Adams disobedience we are made unjust by injustice inherent and not imputed Therefore through the obedience of Christ we are made just by righteousnesse inherent and not imputed Answ. Wee confesse that as from the first Adam we receive inherent corruption in our carnall generation so from the second Adam wee receive inherent grace in our spirituall regeneration but this is not our justification but our sanctification whereof the Apostle speaketh not in this place whereas therefore he assumeth that wee are made unjust through Adams disobedience by inherent injustice onely not imputed I deny the assumption and returne the argument upon the Adversary As we are made sinners that is guilty of sinne and damnation by Adams disobedience or transgression so wee are justified that is not onely absolved from the guilt of sinne and damnation but also accepted as righteous uââ¦to salvation by the obedience of Christ. But wee are made sinners that is guilty of sinne and damnation by imputation of
that wee are justified by faith alone as hereafter shall bee shewed they could not meane that wee are sanctified by faith alone Secondly remission of sinne which is the not imputing or forgiving of sinne is by Augustine included in the signification of the word which by Bellarmine is excluded who in stead of remission hath substituted the extinction and abolition of sinne So that although he retaine the name which hee confoundeth with sanctification yet the thing thereby signified which is the maine benefit which wee receive from Christ by which wee are both delivered from hell and entitled to heaven hee hath taken away as I have heretofore declared If this answere doe not content the Papists let them understand that when the use of any word in the Fathers borrowed from the Scriptures differeth from the perpetuall use thereof in the Scriptures wee are bound to follow the infallââ¦ble authority of Gods Word rather than the testimony of any man or men whatsoever And for this wee have Augustines owne warrant who challengeth liberty to reject in other mens writings though never so learned andholy what is not agreeable to the Scriptures Talis ego sum saith he in scriptis aliorum tales volo esse intellectorââ¦s meorum § X. I come to his reasons which are three The first in every motion or mutation there are two termini a quo and ad quem the name being taken from the latter as in illumination there is a change from darknesse to light in calesaction from cold to heate Iustistcation is a mutation or change Therefore in justification there are two termini a quo sc. peccatum ad quem justitia from which it hath his denomination and therefore besides remisston of sinne there must accrew righteousnesse I answer that mutations are either reall or relative If hee speake of reall mutations I deny the assumption for I have proved before that justification is no such mutation If hee speake of relative mutations I grant the syllogisme for even in such there are two termini as in liberation terminus a quo is bondage ad quem is freedome in marrying the change is from being a Batchelor to bee a Husband from being a Maid to bee a Wife so in Reconciliation Redemption Adoption and so also in justification there is a change from guilt of sinne to righteousnesse imputed from being guilty of sinne and damnation to bee accepted as righteous unto life from being the bondslave of sinne and Satan and obnoxious to hell and condemnation to bee not onely made a free-man but also a Citizen of Heaven In all these are great changes yet not reall or positive whereby any inherent forme either going before is abolished or new acquired but onely relative § XI His second reason may thus bee framed If justification bee given to us of God not onely that wee may escape the paines of hell but also that wee may obtaine the rewards of the heavenly life then justification doth not consist onely in the remission of sinnes which onely freeth from punishment but giveth not glory but the former is true therefore the latter Ans. All this wee freely confesse but first the thing principally intended that to justification besides remission of sinnes renovation concurreth hee doth not goe about to prove Onely hee proveth that justification doth not consist in remission onely in which wee agree with him though not in the other thing which is to bee added for wee adde making righteous by imputation hee by infusion or renovation Secondly the proofes of his assumption wee doe not approve The first Rom. 6. 22. yee have your fruit unto sanctification but the end everlasting life The whole verse is this But now being made free from sinne and become servants to God that is being redeemed or justified ye have your fruit unto holinesse that is the fruit of your justification is your sanctification and the end of both is glorification or everlasting life For this text doth neither prove that justification is not remission of sinne onely not that it is to bee confounded with sanctification which is here made the fruit of it nor that it conferreth everlasting life For if the holy Ghost speaking of justification had mentioned onely remission of sinne without mentioning any other thing concurring thereunto as sometimes hee doth Act. 13. 38 39. 26. 18. Rom. 4. 7 8. his meaning might be that being freed from sinne and mancipated to God that is redeemed for manu capti and servati are mancipia and servi and to bee redeemed is to have remission of sinnes Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. yee have the fruit of your redemption unto sanctification according to that Luk. 1. 73 74 75. and the end both of your redemption and sanctification everlasting life his second proofe is Rom 8. 30 whom hee hath justified hee hath glorified for so might I say to whom hee hath given remission of sinnes to them hee giveth the inheritance Act. 26. 18. them he maketh blessed Psal. 32. 1. them hee justifieth Rom. 4. 6 7. Act. 13. 38 39. and them hee glorifieth And whereas hee saith that in that order of causes set downe in that place every latter is the effect of the former as glorification of justification justification of vocation vocation of predestination that may bee a reason why in that serie causarum sanctification is left out because it is not the cause but the way to glorification Eph. 2. 10. and the cognizance and character of them that shal be glorified Act. 20. 32. 26. 18. his third proofe out of 2 Tim. 4. 8. there is a Crown of righteousnesse laid up for me is nothing to the purpose For as Augustine saith donando delicta fecit se Coronae debitorem by pardoning offences hee oweth the Crowne and Bernard there is a Crowne of righteousnesse which Paul expecteth sed justitiae Dei non suae but of Gods righteousnesse not of his for it is just he should render what hee oweth and hee oweth what hee hath promised § XII But the assumption though not proved by him is approved and granted by us as agreeing with that justification which wee teach and disagreeing from that which is taught by the Papists For wee teach that in justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse wee are both freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and also are in Christ accepted as righteous and as heires of eternall life And further wee teach that howsoever the parts of justification viz. remission of sinne and acceptation unto life in the faithfull and the causes thereof in Christ that is to say his bloud and his obedience doe alwayes concuââ¦re for whosoever hath remission of sinnes is also accepted unto life and contrariwise and our Saviour in his obeying suffered and in his sufferings obeyed yet the causes in Christ and effects unto the faithfull are to bee distinguished For by imputation of his sufferings properly wee are freed from punishment and
is For they professe that by inherent righteousnesse no man living can be justified in Gods sight as I have shewed in this third controversie and in the fifth and sixth CAP. XIII An appendice to this third controversie concerning the parity of justice § I. VPon this controversie concerning the matter of justification dependeth another which is scarce worth the mentioning but onely to shew the blinded malice of the Papists in propounding it and to vindicate our selves from their calumniations Bellarmine therefore de justif l. 3. c. 16. propoundeth the question de paritate justitia of the parity or equality of justice whether all just men be in justice equall among themselves For faine would hee have the world to thinke that we are like to Iovinian or the Stoiks calumniating us against the light of his owne conscience For he cannot be ignorant but that wee doe acknowledge degrees of righteousnesse inherent and of the graces of sanctification not onely in divers men according to the measure of grace bestowed upon them some being incipients some proficients and some growne men but also in the same men every man being bound to labour that they may grow in grace and proceed from Faith to Faith untill hee come to a perfect man in Christ. § II. Indeed if the question bee concerning righteousnesse imputed we doe teach that in respect thereof all the faithfull are equally just Because as they are justified they stand just before God in the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ by which the weake Christian is justified as well as the strong And in this regard the faith of Gods children though unequall in degrees in some weaker in some stronger in some more and in some lesse is said by the Apostle Peter to be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a like pretious ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ that is in that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified And as the merit of Christ is equally imputed to all that beleeve so the reward in respect of the substance which is eternall life shall be equally given to all that beleeve yet I doubt not but that whom God in this life hath adomed with greater graces he will in them crowne his greater graces with greater glory And therefore as Saint Ambrose faith he giveth ââ¦qualem mercedem vitae ââ¦on gloriae the equall reward of life but not of glory and ãâã unus denarius non est unum prââ¦mium sed una vita una de gââ¦enna liberââ¦tio and Gregory there be many mansions with the father and yet unequall labourers receive the same peny because unto all there shall bee one equall blesseduesse of joyfulnesse though the sublimity of life be not one and the same to all § III. But Bellarmine though he confesseth that we doe not hold that either vertues or sinnes are equall and that we doe not deny but that both the same men may and ought to increase in faith hope and charity and in other vertues and that also divers men may bee more just than others in respect of such vertues as be in them but that wee hold that men being not justified before God by these vertues but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith wee are in respect of this righteousnesse by which wee are justified equally just Yet all his proofes are to prove the inequality and degrees of sanctity or inherent righteousnesse as though we denyed the same or held that paradox which may in respect of habituall righteousnesse more justly be imputed to the Papists For if incipients in Religion yea infants in age be justified or made just as they teach with perfect righteousnesse infused what difference shall there bee betwixt Baptized infants and the greatest Proficients among them who dreame of perfection in regard of habituall righteousnesse saving that the infants justice may seeme to bee more pure from actuall concupiscences But of this question more hath beene said than enough A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE FIFTH BOOKE Concerning the formall cause of justification CAP. I. Containing five proofes that we are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § I. THE fourth grand errour of the Papists in the article of justification is concerning that which wee call the forme thereof For they denying and deriding the imputation of Christs righteousnesse without which notwithstanding no man can bee saved doe hold that men are justified by infusion and not by imputation of righteousnesse we on the contrary doe hold according to the Scriptures that we are justified before God onely by imputation of Christs righteousnesse and not by infusion And our meaning when wee say that God imputeth Christs righteousnesse unto us is nothing else but this that hee graciously accepteth for us and in our behalfe the righteousnesse of Christ both active that is his obedience which in the dayes of his flesh hee performed for us and passive that is his sufferings which he sustained for us as if we had in our owne persons both performed and suffered the same for our selves Howbeit we confesse that the Lord doth infuse righteousnesse into the faithfull yet not as he justifieth but as hee sanctifieth them and consequently wee acknowledge that in all the faithfull there is true righteousnesse inherent but we deny that they are justified by it How I am first to prove our assertion and to maintaine our proofs against the exceptions and cavils of the Papists And then will I answer their allegations § II. My three first proofes shall bee taken from those things which have already beene proved And first those reasons which before I alleaged to prove the formall cause of our justification to bee the imputation of Christs righteousnesse Secondly If to justifie in the Scriptures doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse or to make a man righteous formally by inherent righteousnesse then it is evident that the justification which the Scriptures teach is not by infusion of righteousnesse And if not by infusion then by imputation for a third thing cannot be named But the former I have most evidently proved therefore the latter cannot be denyed Thirdly If we be justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him and not by any righteousnesse infused or inherent in us then it is evident that we are justified not by infusion of righteousnesse but by imputation But the former I have fully demonstrated therefore the latter must be confessed For wee are justified either by inherent righteousnesse or imputed not by inherent as hath beene shewed therefore by righteousnesse imputed § III. My fourth proofe shall be taken from the confession of our Adversaries who doe confesse that Christ his satisfaction is imputed unto us which they understand but of the one halfe of his satisfaction and not all that viz. in respect onely of the everlasting
covered that is saith he quorum peccata in oblivioneÌ ducta sunt whose sins are brought into oblivion in the place quoted by Bellarmine he hath these words Blessed are they whose sins are covered he doth not say in whom no sins are found but whose sins are covered The sins are covered and hid they are abolished or blotted out by oblivion according to his owne former exposition even now alleaged If God covered sins he would not have an eye to them nor animadvert them if hee would not animadvert them neither would he punish them Noluit agnoscere maluit ignoscere he would not take notice of them he would rather pardon them Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered then follow the words cited by Bellarmine Ne sic intelligatis doe not sounderstand what he saith whose sins are covered as though they were there and lived unmortified and unrepented of For that they bee there still though mortified appeareth both by the words before that they may be found there though covered and by his next words tecta ergo peccata quare dixit ut non viderentur why then did he say that sins are covered not that they be not at all but that they may not be seene Quid enim erat Dei videre peccata nisi punire peccata for what is Gods seeing of sin but his punishing of sin and so on the other side what is his not seeing or covering of sin but his not punishing or pardoning it Afterwards making way for the exposition of verse 3. he saith that no man is without sin and that no man can boast that he is cleane from sins And that therefore men if they would have their sinnes cured they must not hide them like the Pharisee who be ing in the Temple as it were in statione medici did shew his sound parts and hid his wounds Deus ergo tegat vulnera noli tu let God therefore cover thy wounds do not thou For if thou being ashamed wilt cover thy wounds the Physician will not cure it then follow the words cited by Bellarmine in the second place Medicus tegat curet emplastro enim tegit Let the Physician cover and cure for with a plaister he covereth then followeth under the cover of the Physitian the wound is healed under the cover of him that is wounded the wound is concealed From whom doest thou conceale it from him that knoweth all things Therfore brethren see what he saith quum tacut c. because I held my peace my bones are waxen old c. where August doth not expound these words whose sins are covered but sheweth that if wee would have them healed wee should not cover them but confesse them to our Spirituall Physician that he covering them with an emplaister may cure them all which we confesse so that he needed not to quote the two Gregories to prove that God doth as it were with a plaister cover and cure our sinnes But withall we would know of Bellarmine what this plaister is Is it our inherent righteousnesse as the Papists teach or is it not the righteousnesse and satisfaction of Christ by whose stripes we are healed for as I shall shew presently out of Iustin Martyr whom here to no purpose Bellarmine did alleage in the first place nothing could cover our sinnes but onely the righteousnesse of Christ by whom the iniquity of many is hid or covered § XIV Diverse other arguments Bellarmine mentioneth as cited out of Calvins Institutions Lib. 3. c. 11. in answering wherof besides some of those which I have produced he spendeth six whole Chapters which notwithstanding for the most part are not there to be found but seeme at least some of them to have been devised of his own braine and by him framed and fitted to his owne strength that having overcome these counterfeit enemies hee might seeme to have refuted us But these arguments which I have produced are sufficient for the proofe of the point in question and them I have defended against his cavils If any man desire to see the defence of the rest that is to see Bellarmines objections devised for us maintained against himselfe he may have recourse to the answere of David Paraeus who hath in so many Chapters answered Bellarmines exceptions Lib. 2. de justif Cap. 9 10 11 12 13 14. Now I proceed to the testimonies of the Fathers and of other later Writers CAP. IV. Testimonies of Writers both Old and New proving justification by righteousnesse imputed § I. I Beginne as Bellarmine did with Iustin Martyr For what other thing saith he could hide or cover our sinnes but the righteousnesse of the Sonne of God In whom was it possible that wee sinners and ungodly should bee justified but in the onely Sonne of God O sweet commutation that the iniquity of many should be hid in one just person and that the righteousnesse of one should justifie many sinners 2. Athanasius affirmeth that the fulfilling of the Law wrought by the first fruits whereby he meaneth the flesh of Christ is imputed to the whole lumpe 3. Gregory Nyssene marvell not saith the Spouse that uprightnesse hath loved me but that being blacke by reason of my sinne and by my workes drawing neere to darkenesse hee hath made mee beautifull by his love making an exchange of his beauty with my blacknesse For having translated the filthinesse of my sinnes unto himselfe hee hath made me partaker of his purity communicating unto me his owne beauty 4. Chrysostome here the Apostle sheweth that there is but one righteousnesse and that that of the Law is recapitulated or reduced to this of faith And that he which hath gotten this which is by faith hath also fulfilled that but he that despiseth this he falleth from that together with this and a little after â⦠if thou beleevest in Christ thou hast fulfilled the Law and hast performed much more than the Law commanded For thou hast received a farre greater righteousnesse For as he had said in the words going before that Christ hath justified us by faith ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã more amply than we would have been justified by the Law This greater this more ample righteousnesse must needs be understood of Christs righteousnesse imputed unto us 5. Ambrose he that confesseth his sinnes to God is justified that is obtaineth remission of sinne which is also testified by S Iohn 1 Ioh. 1. 9. and is verified in David Psalm 32. 5. and in the Publican Luk. 18. 14. But he that is justified by remission of sinne is also justified by imputation of righteousnesse for as Bellarmine confesseth the not imputing of sinne bringeth with it imputation of righteousnesse 6. Hierome to the like purpose then are wee just when wee confesse our selves to bee sinners and our righteousnesse consisteth not in our owne merit but in Gods mercy 7. Augustine omnes qui per Christum
justificati jââ¦sti non in se sed in illo All that are justified by Christ are just not in themselves but in him And thereunto adde the testimonies before cited out of Hierome Augustine Sââ¦dulius and Anselmus who all have taught that wee when wee are justified are made righteous not in our selves but in Christ. Againe Augustine teacheth that our justice in this life doth stand rather in the remission of sinnes than in perfection of vertues That is as I understand him that our chiefe righteousnesse in this life is that of justification and not of sanctification for that is perfect and so is not this by that we are justified before God and intitled unto heaven so are we not by this Here Bellarmine would seeme to acknowledge that remission of sinne concurreth to justification but his constant and perpetuall doctrine is that justification consisteth wholly in the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne in so much that remission of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse are not two actions but one c. which assertion supposed how could Augustine say that our righteoufnesse is such in this life that it consisteth rather in the forgivenesse of sinne than in the perfection of vertues seeing vertue infused is the force of justification and expelleth sinne and is all in all and if that assertion of the utter deletion of sin when it is remitted were true most vaine were that boasting of Ambrose who saith gloriabor non quia vacuus peccati sum sed quia mihi remissa sunt peccata Maximus Taurinensis when God doth remit sinne indulgentia facit innocentem by his indulgence he maketh the party innocent 8. Among the latter Writers I will give the first place to Bernard who saith death by the death of Christ is put to flight Christi nobis justitia imputatur and the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed to us 2. What could man doe of himselfe to recover his righteousnââ¦sse once lost being the servant of sinne and the bondman of the devill Assignata est ei proinde aliena justitia qui caruit suâ therefore ââ¦nother mans righteousnesse was assigned unto him who wanted his owne 3. One dyed sor all ut viz. satisfactiounius omnibus imputetur that the satisfaction of one might be imputed to all 3. If he shall say thy father Adam made thee guilty I will answere that my brother hath redeemed meâ⦠Why not righteousnesse from another seeing guilt is from another 5. Hee will not condemne the just who had mercy on a sinner I may call my selfe just sed illius justitiâ but by his righteousnesse and what is that Christ the end of the Law unto righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth Finally who of God the Father was made righteousnesse unto us Is not that therefore my righteousnesse which was made righteousnesse unto me 6. Lord I will mention thy righteousnesse onely for that is mine also for thou of God was made righteousnesse to mee should I feare that it being but one should not suffice us both It is not a short cloake which is not able according to the Prophet to cover two Thy righteousnesse is an everlasting righteousnesse What is longer than Eternity Thy eternall and large righteousnesse it will cover largely both thee and me And in me truely it covereth a mulââ¦itude of sinnes but in thee Lord what doth it cover but the treasures of piety and riches of bounty which testimony doth plainely prove against Bellarmine that Bernard by Christs righteousnesse which he saith is made ours doth not meane that righteousnââ¦sse which is inheââ¦ent in us but that which is out of us in Christ And the same is evidently proved by those testimonies before alleaged that we are made the righteousnesse of God in Christ not ours but his not in our selves but in him even as Christ was made sinne not his but ours not in himselfe but in us 9. Cardinall Contarenus in a treatise of justification which he wrote Anno. 1541. testifieth that God with his Spirit giveth Christ unto us and doth freely of his mercie make all Christs righteousnesse to bee ours and imputeth it to us who put on Christ. That by faith wee doe attaine to a double righteousnesse the one inherent in us by which we begin to bee just and are made partakers of the divine nature and have charity diffused in our hearts the other not inherent but given unto us with Christ. I meane saith hee the righteousnesse of Christ and all his merits both which are in time given together Now saith he forasmuch as I have said that by faith we attaine to a twofold righteousnesse the one inherent in us viz. charity or that grace by which we are made partakers of the divine nature the other being the righteousnesse of Christ given and imputed to us because wee are ingrafted into Christ and have put on Christ It remaineth we should inquire on whether of them we ought to rely and to thinke our selves justified before God that is to beheld or esteemed holy and just I meane by such a righteousnesse which may beseeme Gods children and satisfie the eyes of God Ego prorsus existimo I doe utterly thinke that it may be godlily and Christianly said that we ought to rely I say to rely as upon a sure thing which doth assuredly sustaine us on the righteousnesse of Christ given unto us and not on that holinesse and grace which is inherent in us For this our righteousnesse is but begun and unperfect which cannot safegard us but that in many things we offend and daily doe offend and have need to pray daily that our debts may be forgiven us wherefore in the sight of God wee cannot for this justice be accounted just and good as it would become the sonnes of God to be good and holy But the righteousnesse of Christ which is given unto us is truâ⦠and perfect justice which is altogether pleasing in the eyes of God in which there is nothing which may offend God or which doth not highly please him upon this therefore being certaine and sure we are to rely and for it alone to beleeve that we are justified that is to bee held and pronounced just This is that pretious treasure of Christians who so findeth selleth all he hath that he may buy it This is that precious pearle which who findeth leaveth all that he may have it The Apostle Paul saith I esteemed all other things losse that I might gaine Christ not having mine owne righteousnesse but that which is by the faith of Christ And a little after he saith that the more holy any men are so much the more they understand themselves to stand in need of Christ and his righteousnesse vouchsafed to them and therefore forsaking themselves rest upon Christ alone c. Albertus Pighius having shewed that all men are sinners and subject to the Curse from thence inferreth
debt the sureties payment or satisfaction is imputed to the debtour and accepted in his behalfe as if himselfe had discharged the debt Even so wee being debtours to God both in respect of the penalty due for our sinnes past and also of obedience which we owe for the time to come and being altogether unable either to satisfie the one or performe the other Christ as our surety fatisfieth both these debts for us and his satisfaction is imputed unto us and accepted in our behalfe as if we in our owne persons had discharged our debt § II. Whereas in the second place they deride imputed justice calling it putatitiam as if it were an imaginary righteousnes only which also they say doth both derogate from the glory of God to whom it were more honourable to make a man truely righteous than to repute him righteous who in himselfe is wicked and also detract from the honour of Christs Spouse who is onely arraied with her Husbands righteousnesse as it were a Garment being in herselfe deformed I answere first whomâ⦠the Lord doth justifie hee doth indeed and in truth constitute and make them righteous by imputing unto them the righteousnesse of Christ no lesse truely and really than either Adams sinne was imputed to us or our sinnes to Christ for which hee really suffered Secondly whom God justifieth or maketh righteous by imputation them also he sanctifieth or maketh righteous by infusion of a righteousnesse begun in this life and to bee perfected when this mortall life is ended And further that it is much more for the glory both of Gods justice and of his mercie when hee justifieth sinners both to make them peââ¦fectly righteous by imputation of Christs righteousnesse and also having freed them from hell by the perfect sââ¦tisfaction of his Sonne and entitled them to the Kingdome of Heaven by his perfect obedience to prepare and to fit them for his owne Kingdome by beginning a righteousnesse inherent in them which by degrees groweth towards perfection in this life and shall bee fully perfected so soone as this life is ended rather than to justifie or to speake more properly to sanctifie them onely by a righteousnesse which is unperfect and but begun which in justice can neither satisfie for their sinnes nor merit eternall life And as for the Spouse of Christ as it is most honourable for her to stand righteous before God not in her owne unperfect righteousnesse but in the most perfect and absolute righteousnesse of Christ the eternal Son of God which far surpasseth the righteousnes of al men and Angels so it is both profitable to her and honorable to God whiles shee is to continue heâ⦠warfare and pilgrimage in this world to bee subject to insirmities and imperfections whereby shee being humbled in her selfe is taught to rely upon the power and goodnesse of God whose grace is sufficient for her and whose power is seene in her weakenesse especially considering that though her obedience bee unperfect yet it being upright it is not only accepted in Christ by whose perfect obedience imputed her wants are covered but also graciously rewarded and also considering that the remainders of sinne are left ad agonem that having maintained a spirituall warfare against them and the other enemies of her salvation and having overcome them she may receive the Crowne promised to them which overcome § III. As touching the third which is Bellarmines first objection in this place that it is no where read that Christs righteousnesse is imputed unto us or that wee are justified by Christs righteousnesse imputed I answer that as in many other controversies the assertion of neither part is in so many words and syllables expressed in the Scriptures so neither in this For where doe the Papists read either in Scriptures or Fathers that our righteousnesse inherent is the formall cause of our justification before God The contrary whereof in substance is so often read as it is said that wee are not justified by our workes or by our owne righteousnesse nor in our selves nor by a righteousnesse prescribed in the Law in which all inherent righteousnesse is fully and perfectly described But the substance of our assertion is often read as namely First that when God doth justifie a finner hee imputeth righteousnesse unto him without workes that is without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in or performed by himselfe Rom. 4. 4 5 6. Secondly that hee justifieth him not by the parties owne righteousnesse or by making him righteous in himselfe but by the righteoufnesse of another viz. Christ in whom hee is made righteous Thirdly that we are justified by the bloud and by the e obedience that is the personall righteousnesse of Christ which neither it selfe nor yet the merit thereof without communication wherof no man can be saved is or can be communicated unto us otherwise than by imputation From whence wee may argue thus The righteoufneffe whereby wee are justified is imputed for when God doth justifie a man hee imputeth righteousnesse unto him By the righteousnesse of Christ wee are justified Rom. 5. 9. 19. Therefore the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed unto us Fourthly that as by the disobedience of Adam wee were made ââ¦inners namely by the imputation thereof unto us for neither the guilt nor the corruption nor the punishment which is death had belonged to us if the sinne it selfe had not beene imputed unto us so by the obedience of Christ wee are justified which if it were not imputed to us we could by it neither be freed from hell nor entitled to heaven nor made inherently just by it Fifthly that wee are so made the righteousnesse of God in Christ as hee was made sinne for us that is by imputation Sixthly and lastly to omit other proofes when the Papists doe confesse that Christs satisfaction is imputed unto us they confesse as much as wee teach if it bee rightly understood For his satisfaction for us is either in respect of the penalty of the Law to free us from hell or in respect of the Commandement to entitle us to heaven The penalty hee hath satisfied by his sufferings which is obedientia crucis his obedience of the Crosse the Commandement by the perfect fulfilling therof which is obedientia Legis his obedience of the Law Now Bellarmine as I have heretofore shewed teacheth in his fifth chapter of his second booke that God accepteth in our behalfe the righteousnesse of Christ whereby he satisfied for us And in the tenth chapter that not ouâ⦠righteousnesse doth satisfie for our sinnes but the righteousnesse of Christ which is imputed to us and to that purpose citeth Bernard For if one faith he dyed for all then all were dead that the satisfaction of that one might bee imputed to all as hee bare the sinnes of all § IV. Bellarmine his second and third argument both tend to prove that for the justification of a sinner there is no need
Lord in every Chapter almost of his story renew and repeat his promises unto him Why did hee confirme them by oath Why did he seale them by the Sacrament of Circumcision which is the seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith How came it to passe if Abrahams faith was altogether perfect that twice he used that unlawfull shift which proceeded out of distrustfull feare calling his wife his sister whom to save his owne life he exposeth to danger for perfect faith expelleth feare and distrust § VI. His fifth reason is besides the purpose For whereas hee should prove that the faith of all the faithfull is in their justification perfect hee proveth that the faith of some speciall men who are highly commended in the Scriptures as rare examples of a strong faith was after they had beene justified not a weake and a languishing but a strong and valiant faith to which purpose hee alleadgeth Heb. 11. 33. 1 Iohn 5. 4. 1 Pet. 5. 9. Ephes. 6. 16. and thereupon inferreth Surely that faith which can overcome the world resist the Devill and repell all his fiery darts must not be a weake or languishing but a strong and valiant faith All which we grant But yet deny either that it was so strong when they were first justified thereby or that when it was at the strongest it was perfect But here by the way I would faine know of Bellarmine and his consorts whether this strong faith so much commended in the Scriptures bee onely a bare assent to the truth of the word and promises of God or rather an assurance which wee call speciall faith grounded on the word and promises applyed to our selves In his last reason he urgeth againe the force of the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã out of Heb. 10. 22. signifying as he saith with our consent a most full and most perfect perswasion We acknowledge that it signifieth a full perswasion which wee call assurance which is so farre from being in all the Papists when they are justified as that none of them have it at all without speciall revelation which they will confesse is very rare But yet of this assurance there are degrees all aspiring in this life but none attaining to perfection for when wee have attained to some assurance wee must still labour to increase it striving toward perfection So much of Faith § VII As touching Hope saith he the testimony of the Apostle Heb. 6. 19. may suffice for there he saith that our hope must be the anchor as it were of our soule safe and sure Answ. This argueth the assurance of Hope in some of Gods children after they have beene justified but not the perfection Sound Hope is safe and sure because it never confoundeth or maketh ashamed Rom. 5. 5. where by the way also I would gladly learne if there may be such a full assurance of Faith and Hope as here Bellarmine affirmeth and that without speciall revelation why there may not be the like assurance of Salvation and of perseverance to Salvation which elsewhere hee stoutly denieth and by his denyall confuteth his owne assertion in this place for if there cannot bee assurance of Salvation much lesse can there bee perfection of Faith and Hope CHAP. VII Bellarmines proofes that Chà rity is perfect disproved § I. THere remaineth Charity which he would prove to bee perfect not in all and that in their first justification which he ought to prove or else he proveth nothing but in som men in some part of their life after their first justification and this he proveth first by the testimonies of Augustine and after by authority of Scripture Out of Augustines booke de natura gratia hee citeth two testimonies the former in these words ipsa charitas est verissima plenissima perfectissimáque justitia which Augustine doth not speake of Charity when it is infused in the act of justification nor of Charity in generall but of that perfect Charity whereunto nothing may bee added which hee confesseth to bee the truest the fullest the perfectest justice The latter in these words perfecta Charitas perfecta justitia est perfect Charity is perfect righteousnesse which wee deny not But that no man in this life doth attaine to perfect Charity Augustine though he would not in that booke dispute of the possibility thereof because God if he please is able to bestow perfect justice and to make men free from all sinne yet in other places hee doth plainely and fully teach as first Charity in some is greater in some lesse and therefore not perfect in all that are jusââ¦ified in others none at all but the most full and compleat which now cannot be increased is in no man so long as hee liveth here Now so long as it may be increased assuredly that which is lesse than it ought to be is a fault By reason of which default there is not a righteous man upon the earth that doeth good and sinneth not for which default no man living shall be justified before God for which if we shall say that we have not sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us for which though we be never so good proficients we must of necessity say forgive us our debts And in another place In part there is liberty in part bondage as yet no entire no pure no full liberty And after let not sinne reigne in your mortall bodyes c. he doth not say let it not be but let it not reigne As long as thou livest sinne must needs be in thy members onely let the kingdome be taken from it § II. To this purpose a multitude of Testimonies might bee cited out his Booke De perfectione justitiae which hee wrote against Caelestius the Pelagian who held that men may attaine to perfection in this life I will content my self with a few Tunc erit plena justitia quando plena sanitas quando plena charitas plenitudo enim legis charitas Tunc autem plena charitas quando videbimus cum sicuiâ⦠est Charitas plena perfecta tunc erit cum videbimus facie ad faciem The righteousnesse which we have here in our pilgrimage is to hunger and thirst after righteousnesse that hereafter we may be filled Quotquot ergo perfecti hoc sapiamus id est quotquot perfectè currimus hoc sapiamus quòd nondum perfecti sumus ut illic perficiamur quo perfectè adhuc currimus ut cum venerit quod perfectum est quod ex parte est destruatur id est non jam ex parte sit sed toto quia fidei spei res ipsa non quae credatur speretur sed quae videatur teneaturque succedet charitas a. quae in his tribus major est non auferatur sed augeatur impleatur contemplata quod credebat quod sperabat indepta In qua plenitudine charitatis praeceptum illud implebitur Diliges
have true faith have the Spirit of Christ dwelling in them by which Christ dwelleth in them and those which have not the Spirit of Christ are none of his Rom. 8. 9 Faith is the proper worke of the Spirit who is therefore called the Spââ¦rit of faith 2 Cor. 4. 13. And therfore those who are endued with true faith have the Spirit by both which Christ dwelleth in us Againe all that are the sonnes of ââ¦od have the Spirit of Christ Gal. 4. 6. all that truly beleeve are the sonnes of God as hath been shewed All that be Christs they have his Spirit for those that have not his Spirit are none of his Rom. 8. 9. All that truely beleeve are Christs 1 Cor. 3. 23. both because God hath given them unto him Iohn 6. 37. 17. 9 24. and because he hath bought them with a great price 1 Cor. 6. 19. and because by faith they are engrafted and united unto him as his members Therefore all that have true faith are endued with Charity and other graces § III. Thirdly all that are sanctified are endued with Charity and other graces for in them our sanctification doth consist All that have true faith are sanctified For first by faith the heart is purified Acts 15. 9. and true faith worketh by love Galathians 5. 6. Secondly because all that are justified are also sanctified All that have a true faith are justified therefore all that have a true faith are sanctified The proposition can in no sort be denied by the Papists who confound justification and sanctification But though they must necessarily be distinguished yet they may not they cannot be severed They are such unseparablecompanions that whosoever hath the one hath the other and whosoever hath not both hath neither whosoever is in Christ as all the faithfull are is a new creature 2 Cor. 5. 17. he liveth not after the flesh but after the Spirit Rom. 8. 1. He crucifieââ¦h the flesh with the lusts thereof Gal. 5. 24. This truth is confirmed by the oth of God whereby he hath promised in the covenant of grace that to all the faithfull the sonnes of Abraham he will give them redemption and justification and being redeemed hee will give them grace to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the dayes of their life Those therefore whom God doth justifie by faith he doth sanctifie by his Spirit But all that have a true justifying faith are justified and by their justification have right or are entituled to the Kingdome of heaven Act. 13. 38 39. yea the Gospell teacheth not onely that they which truely beleeve shall bee saved but also that they are translated from death to life and that they have eternall life Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 47. 1 Ioh. 5. 11. 13. § IV. Fourthly all true disciples of Christ are endued with charity Ioh. 13. 35. All that truly beleeve in Christ are his true disciples therefore c. Fifthly that which worketh by Charity is not without it True faith worketh by Charity Gal. 5. 6. Sixthly The formed faith is not severed from Charity as the Papists themselves teach True justifying faith is the formed faith for that which is without forme is neither atrue nor justifying but a dead and counterfeit faith Seventhly If faith without Charity doe not justifie then a true justifying faith is not without Charity But the former is true for that faith which is without Charity profiteth nothing 1 Cor. 13. 2. therefore the later Eighthly out of 1 Iohn 4. 8. hee that beleeveth knoweth God they that love not know not God ergo they that love not beleeve not § V. To these eight arguments wee will adde seven more out of the Epistle of S. Iames Chapter 2. beginning at the 14. verse where he doth not goe about to prove that a true justifying faith doth not justifie alone but that that faith which is alone without Charity without good workes doth neither justifie alone nor at all And that hee proveth by these reasons First verse 14. True faith doth justifie and save a man that faith which is in profession onely being void of Charity or as Saint Iames speaketh when a man saith he hatâ⦠faith and hath not workes doth not justifie or save a man and therefore is not a true faith Secondly à pari verse 15 16 17. Charity which is onely in words and profession and not indeed and truth is unprofitable and vaine so pari ratione faith which is onely in profession being alone void of Charity and of good workes is dead Thirdly verse 18. True faith may be demonstrated by good workes but that faith which is in profession onely and void of Charity cannot be demonstrated by good workes therefore it is not a true faith Fourthly ver 19. that faith which is common to devils is no true justifying faith for they beleeve that which they abhorre whereupon Augustine saith Fides Christiani cum dilectione est daemonis autem sine dilectione Fifthly vers 20. the dead faith of a vaine man is not a justifying faith that faith which is without charity is the dead faith of a vaine man therefore not a justifying faith Sixthly ver 21. 22. 23. 24 25. True justifying faith is such a faith as was that of Abrââ¦ham or at least as was that of Rahab that is fruitfull of good workes but that which is without Charity and without good workes is not such a faith as that of Abraham or of Rahab Seventhly vers 26. â⦠simili as the body without spirit is dead so that faith which is without good workes is dead Vpon these arguments of Saint Iames it doth inevitably follow that seeing that faith which is severed from Charity and destitute of good workes is not a true justifying faith therefore a true justifying faith is not severed from Charity nor destitute of good workes § VI. These fifteene Arguments are as I suppose without exception Those which Bellarmine thought he could best answere hee hath propounded as our best Arguments and cavilled with them they are in number six the first out of 1 Tim. 5. 8. That for want whereof a man declareth himselfe to be without true faith and to be worse than an infidell cannot be separated from a true faith For want of Charity yea for want of one branch thereof which is to provide for a mans owne especially those of his owne house whom the very insidels are wont to provide for a man declareth himselfe to be without true faith that is in Saint Paules phrase hath denyed the faith and is worse than an infidell in that particular therefore Charity cannot be separated from true faith To this Bellarmine frameth an answere against himselfe that as Chrysostome and other interpreters doe witnesse the Apostle speaketh of such who are said to deny the faith because they doe not live as faith doth teach men to live as none doe who have not Charity and therefore
violence of fire Heb. 11. 33. 34. Answ. These examples recorded in the Scriptures were not wrought by the faithfull themselves but the Lord because they ââ¦id beleeve and trust in him sent his Angell to stoppe the mouths of Lions Dan. 6. 22. 23. and to quench the violence of fire Dan. 3. 17. 25. Howbeit if themselves had wrought these miracles it would prove no more but that some who had justifying faith had also the faith of working miracles Neither doth our Saviour Luk. 17. say that if a man had the justifying faith like a graine of mustard seed hee should be able to remoove mountaines for those who have had a great and a strong faith as namely Abraham have had no such power Yea but he speaketh of that faith which the disciples prââ¦ied him to increase Luk. 17. 5. But say I if you compare the place with his parallell Matth. 17. 20. it will appeare that both our Saviour and his Apostle speake of the faith of miracles For when our Saviour reproved them for their want of faith in that they were not able to cure the Lunaticke who notwithstanding were endued with justifying faith as many others are who though they have a strong faith yet are not able to worke such a cuââ¦e they desire our Saviour to increase or as the word is adde unto them faith Whereupon our Saviour returneth this answeare if you had faith as a graine of mustard seed c. doth hee meane justifying faith God forbid for then no man living could bee said to have so much of justifying faith as is a graine of mustard seed § IV. And whereas in the last place hee would prove by the conjunction of these three Faith Hope and Charity verse 13. that hee speaketh of the same faith whereof he had spoken verse 2. I answere first that it followeth not for here the Apostle maketh a new comparison of of Charity with Faith and Hope preferring it before them as greater both in respect of the breadth or ãâã for whereas the benefit of Faith and Hope respecteth habentem him that hath them Charity is extended to others and also in respect of the length or continuance For whereas Faith and Hope doe cease in the life to come faith being swallowed up in vision and hope in fruition love neverthelesse is continued with increase Secondly this place maketh rather against him Now saith the Apostle that is during this life these three abide none of them failing altogether in this life and therefore they alwayes goe together insomuch that whosoever hath any one of them hath alââ¦o the other two No man can have love or hope unlesse he have faith and no man hath true saith but he hath both love and hope and according to the measure of his faith such is the measure both of his love and of his hope For as that of Gregory is most true quantum credimus ââ¦antum amamus so it is no lesse true quantum credimus tantum speramus As for his allegation out of Augustine affirming that faith may be without charity I deny not but that the faith of hypocrites which beareth the name of faith as a carcase or counterfeit do of the man whose they are is without charity but profiteth not But that justifying faith may be without charity he saith not for how can it bee a justifying faith and not profit § V. His third testimony is Iaâ⦠2. 14. c. Where saith he Saint Iames not onely teacheth but also proveth that faith without workes doth not justific and that it may be without workes We answer that hee doth not speake of a true justifying faith but of faith professed onely or of the profession of faith which I proved before And this appeareth vers 14. where the question disputed in that discourse is propounded What doth it profit my brethren if a man shall say that hee hath faith or professeth himselfe to beleeve and hath not workes can ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that faith of his which is in profession onely and without workes save him or justifie him No by no meanes for this affirmative interrogation is a most emphaticall negation This place therfore prooveth the contrary viz. that faith which is wiââ¦hout workes is not a true justifying faith and therefore a true justifying faith cannot be without workes But that Saint Iames speaketh of a true faith Bellarmine endevoureth to prove by five reasons against the maine drift of the Apostle in that place which as I shewed before was to prove that such a faith as is without workes is not a true justifying faith His first reason is because Saint Iames calleth it absolutely faith which name in the Scriptures alwââ¦yes signifieth the true faith that is or else hee speaketh to no purpose the true justifying faith First I answer that Saint Iames verse 14. doth not absolutely call it faith for he doth not say if a man have faith meaning a true faith but if a man shall say that hee hath faith can that faith which is in profession only save him And so in the verses following the faith which hee impleadeth doth not signifie the habiâ⦠of true faith but the bare profession of faith But doth this word faith alwaies in the Scriptures fignifie the true justifying faith Nothing lesse for many times in the New Testament and almost alwayes in the Old faith is taken for fidelââ¦ty or faithfulnesse as Tit. 2. 10. sometimes for the doctrine of faith which is beleeved which the Papists themselves call the Catholike faith As Act. 6. 5. they obeyed the faith Act. 14. 27 the doore of faith Rom. 12. 6. the analogie of faith c. sometimes the profession of faith as Act. 14. 22. Rom. 1. 8. and so as hereafter I am to shew Iam. 2. 14. 24. And in this sence many are said to beleeve that is to have faith and are called fideles that is beleevers who onely professe the faith and are in their owne profession or opinion of others beleevers So Ioh. 2. 23. 8. 30 31. 33. Act. 8. 13. 21. and in this sence all that professe the name of Christ are called after his name Christians and are termed Fideles the faithfull not that all who are so called have the true justifying faith which is not of all nor yet of all that are called but onely of the elect For among those who are called the Faithfull there are many falsi fideles who are so falsly called as wee heard before out of Gregory sometimes for the faith of miracles as 1 Cor. 12. 9. 13. 2. Mat. 17. 20. Mar. 11. 22 23. Luk. 17. 5 6. Secondly hee saith that Saint Iames in the same chapter speaking of the sââ¦me faith saith that Abrahams faith wrought with his workes Ans. this is also contrary to the drift of Saint Iames who by this argument proveth the faith which is without workes to bee no true justifying faith because it is
not the faith of Abraham nor yet of Rabaâ⦠Thirdly Saint Iames there concludeth yee see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith only but a ãâã faith which Calvin calleth umbram fidei justifieth neither alone nor at all Ans. As I said before out of ver 14. by faith we are here to understand faith professed or the profession of faith And to be justified is here understood declarativè Now to declare a man before men to be justified before God two things are required the profession of the faith and a Christian life answerable to his profession and thus faith professed cooperateth with workes to declare a man to bee justified For neither works alone without the profession of the faith will doe it for workes without faith are dead nor the profession of the faith without workes for such a profession is also dead but both must goe together Fourthly saith he this is proved by two comparisons which hee calleth examples The former vers 15. 16. which hee doth very sorrily expresse first saith he he compareth a man having faith without workes to him who seeing the poore wanting food and rayment is content with that knowledge and giveth them no almes For even as it profiteth nothing the poore that the rich know their want although it be a most true knowledge unlesse according to that knowledge they bestow upon them necessaries so true faith ãâã nothing unlesse a man doe study and endeavour to live according to it Frigidè admodum dilutè For where doth Saint Iames compare true faith to these rich mens idle knowledge But the comparison plainely standeth thus As the profession of charity in giving good words to the poore that want food and raiment depart in peace be ye warmed and filled is vaine and unprofitable if men do not accordingly give them somewhat to supply their necessities so the profession of faith without workes is dead As therefore that charity which is in word and not in deed as Saint Iohn speaketh is counterfeit so that faith which is in profession only severed from good workes is counterfeit and dead Secondly saith he Saint Iames compareth faith without works to a body without Spirit which certainely is a true body though it be dead Answ. this also is contrary to the intendment of Saint Iames who therefore pââ¦oveth that faith which is without works to be no true justifying faith because it is dead For the profession of faith without workes is like to a mans body that is without Spirit yea but saith Bellarmine a dead body is a true body and a dead faith is a true faith I answere as before A dead carcase though it bee a true body in respect of his three dimensions and of his composition of the Elements yet it is not the true originall body of a man for a man is a living creature no more than a dead branch or bough is a true member of a living Tree § VI. His fourth argument is taken from those testimonies which teach that in the Church there are both good and bad in the floore both Wheate and chaffe in the net fishes both good and bad in the flocke sheepe and goats c. His reason standeth thus Some in the Church are wicked and void of Charity and other graces But all in the Church have faith Therefore some that have faith are void of Charity Answ. The assumption is most false for not all that professe faith who from thence are called fideles in opposition to Infidels are endued with true justifying faith which is not of all but of the Elect neither be all of the Church that be in it 1 Ioh. 2. 19. Non existimo quenquam ita desipere saith Augustine ut credat ad Eccesiae pertinere unitatem eum qui non habet charitatem But saith Bellarmine if the wicked who are in the Church did want trut faith then should they chiefly bee reprehended for their unbeleefe but they are reprehended non de amissione fidei sed de omissione operum not for the amission or losse of faith but for the omission of good workes Ans. when their want of faith doth appeare they are reprehended for it But because that is many times hidden and we are in the judgement of Charity to judg them faithfull who professe the faith untill the contrary appeare therfore hypocrites escape reprehension which open sinners do incur Bellarm. conclusion that true justifying faith may in the same party concur with sin and that it may be found in sinners none deny but pharisaicall Papists who hold themselves being after their fashion as namely by Baptisme or absolution justified to be no sinners professing that there is no sin in them nor any thing that God can hate And wheras Bellarmine taketh it for granted that all in the Church have faith and that none want it but such as have lost it as it is lost they say by every act of infidelity hereby is discovered the most pernicious doctrine of the Church of Rome whereby innumerable soules are nuzzled in ignorance infidelity and impenitencio to their utter ruine and perdition For they teach that all that are baptized are ex opere operato justified by infusion of Faith Hope and Charity in which estate they remaine untill they commit some mortall sinne then indeed they lose their charity and their justification but they retaine their faith which was infused in Baptisme and still are to be accounted faithfull men and women though they know nothing nor actually beleeve any thing unlesse to their Baptisme be added popish education by which for the most part they are taught to beleeve as their Church beleeveth that being the safest course which faith disposeth them to justification directing them after the losse of their charity wherein their justification consisted to seeke to the Sacrament of penance that thereby they may recover their justification Once a yeere therefore they goe to their priest to him they formally confesse their grosser sinnes formally they professe themselves sorry for them the priest absolveth them from eternall punishment enjoyning them some petite penance whereby they are to satisfie for the temporall penalty which remaineth after their absolution from the eternall by the priests absolution they all stand actually justified the priest refusing none though in truth they neither have knowledge nor faith nor Repentance or amendment of life nor any other Grace without which for all their sacramentall justifications and other they have none they live and die in a most wofull state of damnation § VII His fifth argument is taken from the proper nature of faith and charitie for saith he if faith and charitie cannot be disjoyned either it is because one is of the nature of the other or else because one necessarily ariseth or springeth from the other but neither of these may be said therfore faith and charitie may be severed Ans. First I deny the disjunctive
For if thou doest truely beleeve that Christ is the Saviour thou art bound to beleeve that hee is thy Saviour otherwise thou makest God a lyar That therefore thou mayest learne to apply Christ unto thy selfe God by his minister delivereth to thee in particular the Sacrament as it were a pledge to assure thee in particular that as the Minister doth deliver unto thee the outward signe so the Lord doth communicate unto thee that beleevest according to the first degree of faith the thing signified that is to say Christ with all his merits to thy justification sanctification and salvation § IV. This distinction of the degrees of faith as it is most comfortable for hereby we are taught how to attaine to assurance of salvation as elsewhere I have shewed for having the first degree which is the condition of the promise thou maiest apply the promise to thy selfe and by application attaine to assurance so it is most true and most necessary to bee held And first as touching the former degree which is the speciall apprehension and embracing of Christ by a lively assent accompanyed with the desire of the heart and resolution of the will as I have said that it is that faith which is the condition of the promise and by which wee are justified before God I have proved by plaine testimonies of Scriptures and other pregnant proofes The places of Scripture which I alleaged were these Mat. 16. 16. 17. Ioh. 20. 31. Act. 8. 37. 38. Rom. 10. 9. 10. 1 Ioh. 5. 1. 5. Whereunto may bee added 1 Ioh. 4. 15. Among the manifold proofes which I produced this is one that if there bee no other justifying faith but the speciall faith whereby wee are assured of the remission of our sinnes then two absurdities will follow The one that wee must apply the promises to our selves before wee have the condition thereof which as wee ought not to doe lest wee play the hypocrites so wee cannot doe unlesse wee will perniciously deceive our selves The promise is whosoever beleeveth in Christ hath remission of sinne whosoever beleeveth in Christ shall bee saved c. This promise is made to none but to those who truely beleeve and are endued with a justifying faith which is the condition of the promise It is evident therefore that a man must bee endued with justifying faith before hee can apply the promise and hee must apply the promise before hee can have any assurance by speciall faith The second absurdity is that a man must bee assured that his sinnes be forgiven before they be forgiven and so must beleeve a lie yea that a man must bee assured that they are forgiven to the end that they may be forgiven which is a great absurdity This therefore is an undeniable truth that before we can either apply the promises or attaine to assurance of remission of sinne we must be endued with true justifying faith which is the condition of the promise and the meanes to obtaine remission I must beleeve therefore by a justifying faith before I can have remission of sinnes I must have remission of sinnes before I can have any assurance thereof and I must ascend by many degrees of assurance before I come to full assurance which yet in this life is never so full but that still more may and ought to be added to it § V. As touching the second which by some is called speciall faith not onely in respect of the object which is Christ for so the former is also speciall but in respect of the effect which is by actuall application of the Promises to a mans selfe to assure him in particular of his justification and salvation It is by some both protestant and popish writers called fiducia that is affiance Howbeit the most of our Writers by it meant assurance But unproperly howsoever for neither is faith affiance nor affiance assurance This speciall apprehension application of Christ though scorn'd by the Papists yet is it of all graces the most comfortable most profitable most necessary Most comfortable for the very life of this life is the assurance of a better life Most necessary because without this speciall receiving of Christ first by apprehension and then by application we can have no other saving grace How can we love God or our neighbour for Gods sake how can we hope and trust in him how can we rejoyce in him or be thankefull to him if we be not perswaded of his love and bounty towards us and so of the rest Most profitable because from it all other graces proceed and according to the measure of it is the measure of all other graces as I have elsewhere shewed For if the love of God bee shed abroad in thy heart by the Holy Ghost that is if by faith thou art perswaded of Gods love towards thee thou wilt be moved to love the Lord and thy neighbour for his sake then wilt thou hope and trust in him then wilt thou rejoyce in him and bee thankefull unto him and so forth And the greater thy perswasion is of his love and goodnesse towards thee so much the greater will be thy love thy hope thy trust thy thankefulnesse thy rejoycing in him c. When as therefore the Papists detest and scorne our Doctrine concerning speciall faith they doe plainely bewray themselves to have no saving grace nor any truth or power of Religion in them § VI. But that this speciall receiving and embracing of Christ by faith is necessary to justification and that faith doth not justifie without it it doth evidently appeare by the third and fourth points before handled in the fourth and fifth Bookes For if we be justified only by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him then are we not justified by faith as it is an habit or quality inherent in us but as it is the hand and instrument whereby we receive Christ his righteousnesse which as it is imputed to us by God so we apprehend it by faith And because faith alone doth receive Christ and all his merits therefore the same benefits which we receive from Christ and are properly to bee ascribed unto him as the Authour of them are in the Scriptures attributed also to faith because by faith we receive Christ. By Christ we live Ioh. 6. 57. We live by faith Gal. 2. 20. Hab. 2. 4. By Christ we have remission of sinnes Eph. 1. 7. Act. 13. 38. By faith wee have remission of sinnes Act. 8. 39. 26. 18. By Christ wee are justified Esai 53. 11. Wee are justified by faith Rom. 3. 28. Gal. 3. 24. By Christ we have peace with God Col. 1. 20. We have peace with God by faith Rom. 5. 2. We have free accesse to God by Christ Eph. 2. 18. 3. 12. Heb. 10. 19. We have free accesse to God by Faith Rom. 5. 2. Eph. 3. 12. We are sanctified by Christ 1 Cor. 1. 30. Heb. 10. 14. We are sanctified
most worthy to be urged and beat upon as being that thing which above all other things in this world is to be desired and laboured for according to the ââ¦xhortation of the Apostle Peter Give diligence to make your calling and election sure But this speciall faith the Papists above all things deridâ⦠and detesâ⦠ââ¦thereby discovering themselves to bee as I have elsewhere shewed voide of all truth and power of Religion It being as I have said and proved a thing most profitable most comfortable most necessary without which no Christian can have any true pââ¦ce or sound comforâ⦠or ougâ⦠to have contentment in his present estate untill ââ¦e have ââ¦tained unto it in some measure And when hee ãâã attained to some measure he must endevour more and moââ¦e to increase it But hereof I have treated in another place wherââ¦unto I referre the Christian Reader CAP. VII Of the acts or effects of faith and first whether faith doth justifie or only dispose to justification Secondly whether it doth justifie formally § I. THe next controversie is concerning that act or effect of justifying faith in respect whereof it is called justifying faith Of this there are three Questions the first whether Faith doth indeed justifie or onely dispose a man to justification Secondly whether it justifie formally as part of inherent righteousnesse or instrumentally as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousââ¦esse Thirdly whether it justifie alone The assertions of the Papists in the two former questions doe not seeme to ââ¦ang well together For if faith goe before justification disposing a man thereto how doth it justifie formally as part of that righteousnesse whereby a man is as they speake formally just And if no dispositions bââ¦e required to justification to what purpose doe they tell us that a man must be disposed and prepared by faith and other virtues For howsoever in their speculations they require preparative dispositions to justification yet in their practise they seeme to require ãâã For their justification which is in fact and in deed is restrained to their Sacraments as namely to Bapâ⦠And their Sacraments justifie ex ãâã ãâã and therefore without necessity of any foregoing dispositions For if any virtuous or good disposition were required then should their Sacraments justifie not ex ãâã ãâã but ex ãâã ãâã Onely they require that he who is by the Sacrament to be justified doe not ãâã ãâã ââ¦lis ãâã that is interpose the obstacls of some mortall sinne And what be these dispositions which must goe before justification § II. Forsooth there are seven which according to the decree of the Councell of Trent Bellarmine reckoneth De justif lib. 1. ca. 13. to prove that faith doth not justifie alone because the other sixe also doe dispose men thereunto The seven are faith feare hope love penitencie a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament a purpose of amendment of life All which doe but prepare and dispose a man But it is the Sacrament as namely of Baptisme that doth actually justifie and without which no man is justified But I would gladly know whether these seven preparatives be fruits of grace or works of nature Not of grace for as they teach no man hath grace before Iustification What then they are the fruits of nature holpen I wot not by what grace which if it were true would not onely prove the maine assertion of the Pelagians Gratiam secundùm merita dari or as in other words it is expressed in the Councell of Trent Secundùm propriam cajusque dispositionem operationem For though according to their doctrine these preparations are not merits of condignity as they say yet they bee of congruity but also disprove the doctrine of the Apostle that we are justified freely by his grace But this seemeth to me absurd that men should have one justifying faith and so one hope and one love c. going before justification and another infused in our justification and that by the one justifying faith going before we should be prepared to justification and by the other infused in our justification we should in part be formally justified But this is certaine that that faith which in order of time goeth before justification is no true justifying faith For that which goeth before justification goeth also before regeneration and what goeth before regeneration is of nature and not of Grace But faith in order of time goeth not before justification though in order of nature it doth for so soone as a man beleeveth he is justified as Hierome saith Talis est ille qui in Christum credidit die qua credidit qualis ille qui universam legem implevit Such a one is hee that beleeveth in Christ the very day that hee beleeveth as hee that hath fulfilled the whole Law nor in order of nature before regeneration for in our regeneration it is wrought As therefore no man hath faith who is not regenerated so no man hath faith who is not thereby justified The Scripture is plaine that in Christ whosoever beleeveth ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is justified Act. 13. 39. He that beleeveth in Christ is passed from death to life Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 54. which passage from death to life is justification whereby as themselves teach a man is translated from the state of death and damnation into a state of Grace and Salvation Faith therefore actually justifieth and not disposeth onely to justification § III. The other question is whether faith doth justifie formally as they speake as being a part of inherent righteousnesse or instrumentally only as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse The Romane Catholikes hold ââ¦he former the true Catholikes the latter But the former I have sufficiently disproved before and proved the latter For if we be not justified by any grace or righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves which I have before by many undeniable arguments demonstrated then it followeth necessarily that we are not justified by faith as it is a gift or grace an act or habit or quality inherent in us or performed by us And if we be justified by the righteousnesse of Christ onely which being out of us in him is imputed to those who receive it by faith which also before I invincibly proved then also it followeth by necessary consequence that wee are justified by faith onely as it is the instrument or hand to apprehend or receive Christ who is our righteousnesse Wherefore where faith is said to justifie or to bee imputed to righteousnesse it must of necessity be understood relatively and in respect of the object to which purpose both justification and all other benefits which we receive by Christ are attributed to faith as I have shewed before Not that faith it selfe worketh these things but because by it wee receive Christ and with him all his merits and benefits And for the same cause the
theefe upon the crosse Repl. But it evident that as S. Paul so also Origen speaketh of workes in generall and that in the penitent theese and in that penitent woman good workes were not wanting For the theeââ¦e reproââ¦eth his fellow confesseth his sinne acknowledgeth Christs innocencie professeth Christ in his most despicable eââ¦ate when his owne Disciples ââ¦ed prayeth unto Christ to remember him when he should come to his Kingdome The woman brought an Alabaster box of ointment stood behinde Christ weeping washed his feeâ⦠with her teares wiped them with the haires of her head kissed his feet and anointed them with the ointment by which actions shee tââ¦tified her faith in Christ her repentance for her ââ¦innes her love to her Saviour acknowledged by Christ himselfe to have beene great Yet not by these good workes but onely by their faith were those two persons justified And no marvell For even Abraham himselfe though he abounded with good workes yet he was not justified by them but by faith onely Yea but saith Bellarmine Origen doth not exclude love and repenââ¦nce Repl. No mââ¦re doe we from the subject that is the partie justified but from the act of justification For although they doe not concurre with faith to the act of justification as any cause thereof yet they must eoncurre in the subject that is the partie justified as necessary fruits of faith and unseparable companions of justification V. Cyprian Fidem tantùm prodesse or as Pamelius will have it iâ⦠ãâã faith onely or whââ¦lly profitetâ⦠VI. Eusebius Casariensis ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã wherefore that faith doth suffice us to salvation which maketh us to know God the Father Almighty and to subscribe or assent that his onely begotten Sonne is the Saviour VII Hilariâ⦠it ãâã the Scribes that sinne should be forgiven by a man for they saw no more in Christ but a man and that to bee remitted by him which the law could not release for faith onely justifieth And againe Qââ¦ia ãâã sola justificat and yet againe Hac sola fides confessâ⦠Christum Dei filium omnium beatitudinââ¦m glââ¦riam merââ¦it in Petrâ⦠This faith alone confessed that Christ is the Sonne of God obtained in Peter the glory of all blessednesse To the first Bââ¦llarmine answereth that the particle alone excludeth onely the law which ãâã hath no place in the other two But if the law be excluded which iâ⦠the rule of all inherent righteousnesse it proveth justification only by faith For if men be justified either by the legall righteousnesse or by thâ⦠Evangelicall and a third cannot be named then it followeth that if men have not nor can have remission of sinnes and justification by the law that is by inherent righteousnesse which is prescribed in the law thââ¦n they must have it according to the Gospell that is by the righteousnesse of Christ received by faith onely but the former is true Act. 13. 38 39. therefore the latter VIII S. ââ¦asill This is perfect and entire glorying in God when a mââ¦n being not lifted up for his ownâ⦠righteousnesse knoweth indeed himselfe to want true justice ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but to bee justified by faith alonâ⦠in Christ. ãâã answereth that Basil excludeth onely workes done without faith or the grace of God Reply But Basill mentioneth not workes going before Grace but speaketh of a man already justified who then doth intirely glory in God when being not lifted up with a conceit of that righteousnesse which is in himselfe but being conscious to himselfe of his defectivenesse in respect of inherent righteousnesse acknowledgeth himselfe to be justified onely by faith in Christ. IX Gregory Nazianzene speaking of those words Rom. 10. 9. 10. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for it is righteousnesse to beleeve onely X. Saint Ambrose or whosoever else as ancient as he was the Authour of the Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul whom the Papists use to cite under the name of Saint Ambrose and of Bishop Ambrââ¦se when they meet with any thing that seemeth to make for them Sixââ¦us Senensis doth not only acknowledge them to be Ambrose his Commentaries but also commendeth them as being breves quidem in verbis sed sententiarum pondere graves He in very many places ascribeth justification to faith alone ââ¦ellarmine saith he excludeth the workes of the ceremââ¦niall Law or the necessity of externall workes which may serve perhaps for a poore shift to avoid some few places but not the most As first in Rom. 3. 24. They are justified saith he gratis that is freely because nihil operantes neque vicem redentes sola fide justificati sunt donâ⦠Dei that is without workes either going before or following after they are through the gift of God justified by faith only Secondly In Rom. 4. how can the Iewes who looke to be justified by the workes of the Law thinke that they are justified with the justification of Abraham cum videant Abraham non ex operibus legis sed sola fide justificatum when they see Abraham to have beene justified not by the workes of the Law but onely by faith Non ergââ¦ââ¦pus est lege quando impius per solam fidem justificatur apud Deum There is no need therefore of the Law seeing a sinner is justified before God by faith alone Thirdly and on those words of thâ⦠fifth ãâã according to the Latine secundum propositum ãâã sic decââ¦etum dicit à Deo ut cessante lege solam fidem ãâã Dei pââ¦sceret ad salââ¦tem Fourthly He pronounceth them blessed whom God hath ordained that without any labour or observation solâ⦠fide justificantur apud Deâ⦠they should be justified before God by faith alone Fifthly There being nothing required of them but onely that thââ¦y beleeve Sixthly In Rom. 9. Sola fides posita est ad salutem Seventhly in Rom. 10. Nullum opus dicit legis sed solam fidem ãâã in causa Chrââ¦sti Eighthly In 1 Cor. 1 this is ordained of God that whosoever beleeveth in Christ be safe or saved sine operâ⦠solâ⦠fide gratis recipiens remissionem peccatorum without worke receiving freely remission of sins by faith alone Ninthly In 2 Cor. 3. hac lex scil spiritus dââ¦t libertatem solam fidem poscens the Law of the Spirit which is the covenant of grace giveth ââ¦liberty requiring faith onely Tenthly In Gal. 3. 18. he noteth the improvident presumption of the Iewes who thought that men cannot be justified without the workes of the Law cum sciant Abraham qui forma ejus rei est sine operibus legis per solam fidem justificatum when themselves know that Abraham who is the patterne or samplar of that matter to have been justified by faith alone without the workes of the Law Eleventhly In Gal. 3. 22. that hee comming who was promised to Abraham fidem solam ab ijs posceret should require of them faith onely
Photius apud Occumenium in Rom. 4. 1. speaking of Abraham you see that he hath not so much as any footstep of works unto so great gifts from God whence then was he vouchsafed them ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of faith alone 2. In Gal. 3. 21. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã wherefore by faith alone they are able to obtaine the promises XXVIII Smaragdus In Gal. 3. Necesse est sola fide Christi salvari credentes XXIX Oecumenius in Gal. 3. 11. Because the righteous shall live by faith ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for there is but one way saith hee to justifie and that is by faith 2. In Col. 2. 14. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for it is fufficient saith he to beleeve onely XXX Theophylact in Rom. 4. 5. Doth he that is to be justified bring any thing Faith onely 2. In Rom. 9. ult Fides itaque sola est faith therefore is alone and not workes with it it worketh all things and it justifyeth 3. In Gal. 3. 11. Now hee doth plainely demonstrate that faith it selfe alone hath in it the power of justifying Bellarmine answereth for this is the third place which hee would seeme to afford us out of his owne store that his meaning is that without faith nothing doth justââ¦fie But the meaning is plaine not that other things cannot justifie without faith but that faith alone without the helpe of other things is able to justifie 4. In 2 Thes. 2. 17. that God pro sola fide for faith alone will give yea those eternall good things XXXI Anselmus Cantuariensis in Rom. 4. 5. but to him that doth not the workes of the Law but without any precedent worke doth come to faith sufficit ipsa fides adjustitiam faith it selfe sufficeth unto righteousnesse 2. In 1 Cor. 1. 4. For grace is given in Christ because this is ordained of God that he which beleeveth in Christ should be saved without worke sola fide gratis by faith alone and freely receiving remission of sinnes XXXII Rupertus Tuitiensis lib. 2. in libros Regum cap. 39. The obstinate Iew persisteth in contention and contemning the faith of Christ qua sola justificare potest which alone can justifie arrogateth to himselfe numerous justice out of his workes XXXIII Bernard out of whom Bellarmine in the fourth place produceth a twofold testimony in our behalfe the former in Canticles serm 22. Whosoever hauing compunction for his sinnes doth hunger and thirst after righteousnesse let him beleeve in Thee who dost justifie the sinner solam justificatus per fidem and being justified by faith alone he shall have peace with thee 2. The other Epist. 77. speaking of Mark. 16. 16. Courteously he did not repeate but he that is not baptized shall bee condemned but onely he that beleeveth not intimating that faith sometimes alone is sufficient to salvation but without it nothing doth suffice To the former hee answereth that Bernard speaketh de viva fide of a lively faith c. as though we spake of any other If hee confesse that a lively faith doth justifie alone it is all that wee seeke For as for the dead faith wee confesse that it justifieth neither alone nor at all And therfore attribute lesse unto it than the Papists themselves To the other hee answereth that the word solam excludeth onely the necessity of Baptisme in the case of necessity Reply if sometimes it doth suffice alone to salvation then much more to justification and if baptisme which is manus dantis bee excluded then by the like reason all other things which are in us are excluded from the act of justification XXXIV Thomas Aquinas in 1 Tim. 1. lect 3. there is not therefore any hope in the morall precepts sed in sola fide but in faith alone 2. In Gal. 3. 26. Sola fides faith alone maketh men the adoptive sons of God Now that which alone maketh men the sonnes of God by adoption that alone doth justifie them XXXV Boââ¦aventure in 4. Sent. dist 15. part 1. q. 1. because man could not satisfie for so great offence therefore God gave unto him a Mediatour who should satisfie for the offenee whereupon in sola fide in the only faith of his passion all fault is remitted and without faith therof none is justified XXXVI Nicholas Gorrham in Rom. 4. If hee beleeve onely in Christ though he doe not worke his faith alone is reputed for sufficient justice XXXVII Couradus Clingius loc commun lib. 5. cap. 42. Deuâ⦠justos nos reputat propter solum fidem in Christum and in the old edition cap. 117. sola fides bene sufficit adjustificationem XXXVIII The judgement of Cardinall Contarenus we heard before that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to those that beleeve whereupon it necessarily followeth that in us nothing is required unto justification before God but onely faith Thus in all ages of the Church justification by faith alone was a received Doctrine untill the accursed Councell of Trent which denounceth a curse against all those who shall say that a man is justified by faith alone And yet even since that Councell the force of this truth hath expressed from the professed enemies of the Gospell a confession thereof Ben. Iustinianus in his paraphrase on Gal. 2. 16. hee rendreth it thus And yet wee are not ignorant that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law sed per unum Iesu Christi fidem but by the only faith in Christ and in his explanation he giveth this sence because we who are by nature Iewes cannot be justified by the Law sed per solam fidem but by faith alone it followeth that no mortall man can obtaine righteousnesse by the workes of the Law sed solââ¦m ex Iesu Christi fide but only by the faith of Iesus Christ. Yea Bellarmine himselfe saith that to us the merits of Christ are applyed by the Sacraments Hebrââ¦is per solum fidem to the Hebrewes by faith alone But the faithfull among the Hebrewes were justified no otherwise than Abraham was justified And as Abraham the Father of all the faithfull who was the forme and samplar of this thing was justified so are wee But Abraham was justified by faith alone therefore wee also are justified by faith onely Neither is the justification by Sacraments repugnant to justification by faith alone the meaning of our assertion being this that in us nothing concurreth to the act of justification as any cause thereof but faith onely For being justified by faith alone as Abraham was the Sacraments are added as circumcision was to him as seales of that righteousnesse which we have by faith So that faith onely justifieth before God as the hand of the receiver but the Sacraments serve to justifie the faithfull in the court of their Conscience by sealing and assuring unto them their justification CHAP. X. Bellarmines arguments that faith
doth not justifie alone first because it doth not dispose alone to justification there being seven dispositions whereof faith is but one and namely the first § I. NOw let us see what arguments Bellarmine doth bring to prove that we are not justified by faith alone Which question in his opinion may bee disputed three wayes either with relation to the time going before justification or to the time of justification or to the time following our justification In respect of the first the question which he maketh is whether faith doth justifie alone by way of disposing unto justification In respect of the second whether faith be the onely formall cause of our justification In respect of the third whether for the retaining and preserving of righteousnesse good workes be not required but faith onely sufficeth The first he disputeth De justif l. 1. c. 12. and in the twelve chapters following to the end of that booke The second that faith is not the onely and entire formall cause of justification he disputeth in the second booke The third he disputeth in the fourth booke Chap. 18. 19. where he endevoureth to prove that good workes doe justifie But in mine opinion hee should rather have disputed this question whether faith doth justifie at all or not For whereas they make two justifications the first habituall whereby of a sinner a man is made just the second actuall whereby a man of just is made more just by their doctrine faith doth not justifie as a part either of the one or the other but is required as a necessary companion and as it were causa sine qua non which is no cause For they make the formall cause of their first justification which they say truely is but one to be charity and the meritorious cause of the second to be good workes Onely that charity and those good workes must not be without faith All which they ascribe to faith is that they make it the beginning of justification and a disposition to it Neither doe we deny but that true faith is the beginning and the root of sanctification and of all inherent righteousnesse insomuch that from it both charity it selfe 1 Tim. 1. 5. and all other both internall graces and externall obedience doe spring but the act of justification neither in the first nor second doe they ascribe to faith Onely unto the first justification they require it as a preparative disposition for the habit of grace to bee infused which doth not differ from Charity and when it is infused to be a companion thereof And to the second as causa sine qua non without which workes doe not justifie § II. But to come to Bellarmines large discourse the greatest part thereof seemeth to bee impertinent and besides the purpose But to make all seeme pertinent he maliciously calumniateth us as if we held all those assertions which hee with such eagernesse doth confute But if we doe hold that faith doth not justifie by way of disposing either alone or at all and that it is not the formall cause of justification either alone as the entire cause or at all as any part thereof and that it is not a consequent of justification at all as works indeed are to what end doth all this dispute serve unlesse it be to make their seduced Catholiks who never are permitted to read any of our writings to beleeve that he hath doughtily confuted us § III. And that faith doth not justifie alone by way of disposing he endeavoureth to prove by five sorts of arguments The first from those seven dispositions required by the Councell of Trent to justification among which he reckoneth faith for one Whereunto in generall I answere that this whole discourse besides that it is impertinent for wee doe not hold as I have said that faith doth justifie by way of disposition either alone or at all it is also an idle speculation disagreeing from their practicke theologie and that in two respects First to their speculative justification they require foregoing preparations and dispositions but to the obtayning of justification in deed and in practise no such things are required For the efficacie of justifying a sinner they ascribe to their Sacraments which they say doe conferre gratiam gratum facientem that is justifie ex opere operato requiring as I conceive no preceding preparation or disposition in the party to be justified so hee doe not interpose the obstacle of any mortall sinne For if foregoing dispositions were required before the Sacraments then they should not justifie as I have said before ex opere operato but ex opere operantis Secondly they doe teach that in their first justification Charity and with it Faith and Hope are infused whereby a man that before was a sinner is made righteous And that therefore a man is first justified when these are infused and that these are first infused when a man is justified and yet they tell us of a true Faith true Hope true Love going before justification Which by their doctrine though they goe together I meane Faith Hope and Charity accompanied with other good dispositions are neither graces nor gifts of grace infused For before or without the Sacrament there is no justification which they have tyed to the Sacrament and before justification as themselves say there is no grace For if they were graces indeed as no doubt but they are where they are true and goe together accompanied with other good dispositions then men might be justified before the receit of the Sacrament as Abraham was and then the Sacrament to men so qualified should not conserre grace but seale it Thus to mainetaine their pernicious errour concerning the efficacie of the Sacraments justifying ex opere operato whereby they have turned religion into an outward formality that Faith that Hope that Charity which goe before the Sacrament as namely in Cornelius before his baptisme should be no true graces because all true justifying and saving grace is insused in the administration of the Sacrament and this infusion of grace is that which they call justification By their doctrine therefore justifying faith is that which in the very act of justification is infused and being infused doth justifie not by way of disposing but formally it selfe being informed by Charity And therefore according to their owne doctrine that faith which disposeth to justification is not justifying Faith And consequently all this discourse concerning six other preparative dispositions concurring with faith to prove that we are not justified by faith alone is besides the purpose For that faith which they make their first preparative disposition is not justisying faith neither doth justifie otherwise by Bellarmines owne confession than its next companion viz servile feare doth But wee when we say that faith alone doth justifie speake not of a bare and naked assent which is common to the wicked which cannot justifie either alone or at all but of a true
which are a few testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers impertinentââ¦y alleaged His first testimony is Prov. 28. 25. qui sperat in Domino sanabitur The second Psal. 37. 40. Salvabit eos quia speraverunt in eo The third Psal. 91. 14. quoniam in me speravit liberabo eum Answ. None of these three places doe speake either of justification or preparation thereunto nor of hope otherwise than as it is included in affiance which as it hath reference to the future time is all one with hope nor of hope or affiance as it goeth before but as it followeth justifying faith what therefore could be more impertinently alleaged The first place according to the originall is but he that trusteth in the Lord ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã shall be made fat The Latine in the next verse translateth the same words thus qui confidit and the Septuagint ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The second Psalm 37. 40. the word chasah is translated sometimes confidere to trust sometimes and as I take it in that place onely sperare to hope in the same sense of affiance those that thus trust or hope in God he delivereth them from the wicked and saveth them But before they can either be saved or trust in God they must be justified by faith And therefore this hope or affââ¦ance is no forerunner of justification but a follower thereof The third Psalm 91. 14. the Hebrew chashak which by some is translated sperare by others valde or vehementer amare amore in aliquem propendere and might better have beene alleaged for love than for hope both which are consequents of justifying faith The words then are because he hath set his love upon me therefore I will deliver him he doth not say I will justifie him But let us heare Bellarmines commenting upon this place the Hebrew word saith he doth signifie to adhere to love to please therefore not every hope but that affiance which proceedeth out of a good conscience and out of Love and filiall adhering to God doth deliver a man c. § VIII His fourth testimony Matth. 9. 2. confide fili have a good heart sonne so the Rhemists translate thy sinnes are forgiven thee For our Lord faith Bellarmine did not as some falsely teach justifie the man who had the palsey before he said ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã be of good courage my sonne but contrariwise as the Councell of Trent very learnedly signifieth first he saith be confident my sonne and when he saw him raised up in hope of health hee added thy sinnes remittuntur tibi are forgiven thee Whereby Bellarmine would signifie that by this hope or affiance the man was prepared for justification Answ. First the party and those that brought him had faith as all the three Evangelists note Matth. 9. 2. Mark 2. 5. Luk. 5. 20. and therefore was justified before God for if they who brought him had faith much more he who no doubt desired them to bring him and had already his sins forgiven Secondly the Verbe is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in the time past and ought to be translated not as Bellarm. readeth remittuntur are now forgiven or in forgiving but remissasunt they are already forgiven And by that argument our Saviour putteth him in comfort that hee should be cured because his sinnes which were the meritorious cause of his sicknesse were forgiven By which glad tydings hee would have him to be assured by speciall saith of the remission of his sinnes and in that assurance to be confident So that although the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã be confident were uttered first yet the words following containe the cause of that confidence And therefore not onely remission of sinnes but assurance thereof by speciall revelation went before his confidence which therefore could be no preparative disposition thereunto And this is usuall in such consolations first to bid the party to be confident or not to feare and then to set downe the cause thereof as Genes 15. 1. Feare not Abraham I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward Esai 43. 1. Feare not Israel for I have redeemed thee In the same ninth of Matthew verse 22. Daughter be of good comfort thy faith hath made thee whole Luk. 1. 30. Feare not Mary for thou hast found grace or favour with God Luk. 2. 10. Feare not for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy and so in other places And these were his testimonies of Scriptures in which he hath found no releefe § IX Let us see what helpe the Fathers will afford him No man saith Ambrose can well repent him of his sinnes who doth not hope for pardon Answ. Hope of pardon is a motive to repentance and to the use of other good meanes whereby wee may through Gods grace attaine both to justification and to sanctification Howbeit repentance belongeth to sanctification and not to justification Augustine whatsoever thou declarest so declare it that hee to whom thou speakest by hearing may beleeve by beleeving may hope by hoping may love From whence nothing can be gathered but that as faith by which we are justified commeth by the hearing of the word as the Apostle also teacheth so from faith proceedeth hope and from both faith and hope love So that here hope which is a fruit of justifying faith and a consequent of justification is made a disposition not to justification but to love Cyprian to those who had fallen in time of persecution giveth this advice that they should acknowledge their grievous crime neither despairing of the Lords mercy nor as yet challenging pardon viz. untill they had truely repented thereof which was indeed wholesome counsell For no man can be assured of the pardon of any crime untill he have truly repented of it Vpon which words of Cyprian Bel. larmine though he can gather nothing out of them for his purpose but that those who desire pardon must not despaire of Gods mercy yet as a notable bragger he insulteth over us as if he had us at some advantage when God knoweth hee hath scarce brought any thing worth the answering By which words saith he our adversaries are plainely refuted who begin not to repent before they are fully assured that they are highly in Gods favour and are confident that they are to be ranked with the Cherubin and Seraphin which is an impudent and yet a witlesse slander as though wee were either so arrogant as the Papists who assume to themselves perfection which we doe not or so senselesse that we should teach that men are tyed to begin their repentance when they have attained to perfection and not till then If it be said that wee make repentance to be the fruit of faith which we define to be a full assurance of Gods favour c. I answere that that definition agreeth onely to speciall faith Not that all speciall faith is a full assurance but that every virtue is to be defined
that justified her but her faith our Saviour who had so highly commended her love doth in expresse termes testifie thy faith hath saved thee goe in peace upon which wordes of our Saviour shee who was formerly justified before God by a true justifying faith which our Saviour professeth and which shee testified by her love and by her repentance departed home justified in the Court of her owne conscience by speciall faith and being justified by faith had peace with God 4. As for his allegation out of Gal. 5. 6 that faith worketh by love it hath no colour of proofe that love disposeth unto justification but rather the contrary For he that is indued with faith working by love is already justified § IV. The Councell of Aurenge hee alleageth against himselfe For if God doe first inspire faith and love it speaketh of those who are adultâ⦠that wee may faithfully require the sacrament of Baptisme then are we first justified by faith and afterwards receive the sacrament as Abraham did circumcision as the sacââ¦ament and sealâ⦠of justification by faith And this is generally to be understood of Sacraments received by them who are come to yeares of discretion that they must be endued with justifying faith when they come to receive the Sacraments otherwise they receive no benefit by them For as touching Baptisme our Saviour saith hee that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved but hee that beleeveth not whether hee be baptized or not baptiââ¦ed he shall bee condemned And as touching the Eucharist it is certaine that no man can receive Christ therein without faith which is both the hand of the soule to receive him and as it were the mouth of the soule to eat his body and to drinke his bloud And further Sacraments are seales anneââ¦ed to the letters patents of Gods promises in the Gospell and therefore confirme or assure nothing but what is contained in the promise and upon the same conditions The condition is faith Obiect But you will say if a man must be justified before he receive the Sacrament to what end doth hee then receive it Answ. that hee who is justified before God by the former degree of faith may by speciall faith confirmed by the Sacrament bee justified in his owne conscience that is that hee may in some measure be assured thereof § V. Bellarmine having produced his owne arguments hee commeth now to answer such as he saith are ours The first out of 1 Ioh. 4. 19. wee love God because he first loved us Now God loveth no man actually whom hee doth not justifie and reconcile unto himselfe in Christ for untill then wee are in the state of enemies Neither doth any that is not justified nor reconciled to God in Christ love him or if hee doe then doth hee love God before God loveth him Gods love therefore goeth before our justification and our justification goeth before our love of God Neither is this onely true that God loveth us before wee love him but before wee can love him aright wee must bee perswaded of his love towards us which perswasion is faith from which love proceedeth 1 Tim. 1. 5. Bellarmine answereth that God indeed loveth men first and by loving them maketh them just but by little and little and by certaine meanes For whom hee loveth hee first calleth to faith then he inspireth into them hope and feare and love inchoated lastly he justifieth and infuseth perfect charity Reply First that which he speaketh of making just by little and little may agree to sanctification but to justification it agreeth not for thereof there are no degrees Secondly It would bee knowne whether this beginning of charity which he saith goeth before justification bee the same which in justification is infused differing only in degree If it be not the same how is it charitas inchoata and if it be not infused as well as that in the act of justification why doth he say it is inspired If it bee the same then gratia gratum faciens is inspired before regeneration before which wee are nothing but flesh and in our flesh there is no good thing And by this reason justification shall bee nothing else but the perfecting of that charity which before was begun neither can a man bee truely said to bee justified by charity who is not enduââ¦d with perfect charity perfectly and fully expelling all sin which in this life is never perfect much lesse in incipients nor ever doth so expell sinne but that allwayes whiles wee are in our mortall bodies sinne remaineth in us Wherefore the Papists doe never attaine to that which they call justification which indeed is not justification but the perfection of sanctification Or if they say they doe attaine unto it and that they have no sinne they are lyars and there is no truth in them § VI. Our second argument no man can love God in any acceptable measure unlesse hee have the Spirit of God dwelling in him for love is a fruit of the Spirit Gal. 5. 22. to this purpose hee citeth for us Rom. 5. 5. which allegation hee cannot answere because he understandeth the place of our love of God which is shed abroad into our harââ¦s by the holy Ghost Now no men have the Spirit of God but they who are regenerated and justified for the Spirit of truth the world cannot receive Ioh. 14. 27. Bellarmine saith this is true of perfect love but imperfect love and inchoated which even now out of the Counsel of Aureng he confessed to be inspired of the holy Spirit may be had without the Spirit but not without Gods speciall helpe Which words discover unto us one of the depthes of Satan in the mystery of iniquity For the Papists as they doe wonderfully extenuate originall sinne so doe they use to magnifie the strength of nature corrupted They doe not acknowledge that which the Scriptures plainely teach that by nature wee are dead in sinne onely they say that we are diseased with sinne and entangled and bound with the chaines of sinne so that if wee bee not holpen of God wee are not able to doe that which is good But if God doe afford uâ⦠his speciall helpe then we can have faith and feare and hope and love and the other preparations And further the privative corruption which they cannot deny to be in originall sinne they confesse by the halves or not so much for the privation which is in originall sinne is not onely of the act which they doe not wholly confesse but of the power and the habit it selfe So that in us by nature there is a meere impotencie to that which is spiritually good in respect whereof wee have lost bonum possibilitatis as Augustine teacheth Wherefore that wee may bee enabled to beleeve to hope to love to feare God to purpose amendment of life c. it is necessary that wee should bee not holpen or loosed but renewed regenerated created a new and raised from the
disposition is a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament by which as he conceiveth justification is conferd Answ. If we did hold with them as we doe not that the Sacraments doe conferre grace ex opere operato and that without them no man could be justified and therefore also that they who would be justified ought to desire and purpose to be made pertakers of the Sacrament yet what would this hinder the justification by faith alone which if Bellarmine disprove not all that hee saith is impertinent How much more if neither the Sacraments doe conferre grace according to the Popish conceit nor the desire of the Sacrament be a disposition to justification All that in this case can truely be said is that forasmuch as God in his great mercy hath ordained the Sacraments as effectuall meanes to confirme our faith and to seale unto us our justification that it is a signe of a prophane and unsanctified heart to neglect or to despise such holy ordinances of God § XII His seventh disposition is the purpose of a new life and of observing all the commandements of God without which wee ought not to be made pertakers of the Sacraments Answ. This purpose of a new life is that which the Scriptures call ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã repentance which is a fruit of justifying faith and a consequent of justification Seeing therefore those adulti which come to the Sacraments ought to bring with them this purpose it followeth that they ought first to be justified before God by faith as Abraham was and then to receive the Sacrament as a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith So that this purpose though it be necessary to salvation yet neither doth justifie nor dispose to justification The place which hee citeth out of Ezek. 18. 31. is an exhortation to both the parts of sanctification viz. mortification in those words cast from you all your transgressions vivification in those and make you a new heart and a new spirit But of justification he speaketh not Neither are we any where exhorted thereto or to the parts thereof which are not our acts but the actions of God himselfe who onely remitteth our sinnes and accepteth of us as righteous in Christ by imputation of his righteousnesse Thus much of his first principall argument taken from the seven dispositions CHAP. XIII Bellarmines second principall argument that faith doth not justifie alone because being severed from Love c. it cannot justifie § I. BELLARMINâ⦠second principall argument is this If Faith be severed from Hope and Love and other virtues without doubt it cannot justifie therefore faith alone doth not justifie Answ. If the meaning of his consequent be this therefore that faith which is alone doth not justifie I grant the whole for though faith doe justifie alone yet that which is alone sââ¦vered from Charity and other graces doth not justifie as heretofore hath beene shewed But though true justifying faith be never alone but is alwayes accompanied with other graces yet it justifieth alone though it never be without other graces yet it justifieth without them c. his consequence therefore I deny which hee laboureth to prove thus If the whole force of justifying were in faith alone insomuch that other virtues though present conferre nothing to justification then faith might justifie as well in the absence as in the presence of the rest but that it cannot doe therefore the force of justifying is not wholly in faith but partly in it and partly in the rest Answ. This consequence also I doe deny and doe referre you to the similitude of the eye heretofore propounded which though it be not alone yet doth see alone and though whiles it liveth it cannot be severed from the other parts of the body yet it seeth without them against which similitude Bellarmine might as well argue after this manner If the whole force of seeing were in the eye alone insomuch that the rest of the members being present conferre nothing to the act of sight then the eye might see as well in the absence as in the presence of the rest But every body knoweth the inconsequence of this proposition For though to the act of seeing other members doe not concurre with the eye as any causes thereof yet to the true being of the eye their presence is necessary for it cannot be a true living organicall eye and instrument of sight that hath not union with the other parts and is not animated by the same soule Even so I answere concerning faith that although to the act of justifying other graces doe not concurre with faith as any causes thereof yet to the true being of faith their presence is necessary For it cannot be a true lively justifying faith which is severed from all other graces of Sanctification and is not wrought and made effectuall by the Spirit of regeneration § II. Now he commeth to prove the antecedent of his argument viz. that conditionall proposition if faith may be separated from hope and love and the other virtues withoââ¦t doubt it cannot justifie But he unskilfully troubleth both himselfe and his reader with his conditionall proposition which as it is not fitly made the antecedent of an Enthymeme so is it not easily concluded An Enthymeme is an unperfect Syllogisme which is to be made up or perfected by adding that part of the Syllogisme which is wanting In this Enthymeme though the antecedent be a conditionall proposition yet the proposition or Major of the Syllogisme which also is conditionall is wanting and ought thus to be supplyed If faith alone doth justifie then it may justifie being severed from hope and love and other virtues But it cannot justifie being severed from hope and love and other virtues Therefore faith doth not justifie alone In stead of this simple or categoricall assumption he assumeth hypothetically if faith be severed from hope and love and other virtues then without doubt it cannot justifie This assumption he endevoureth to prove by three arguments but to no purpose For though wââ¦e doe constantly hold that faith doth justifie alone yet wee deny that faith being alone and severed from all other virtues doth justifie either alone or ââ¦t all and therefore to that faith which is alone we attribute lesse than the Papists themselves But he will needs prove it first because faith according to our doctrine doth justifie relatively and consequently faith and justice are relatives ther fore where faith is there must needs bâ⦠jââ¦stice he mââ¦neth justice inherent for one relative cannot be withoââ¦t the other This saith he oââ¦r adversaries will admit willingly who teach that by every sinâ⦠faith is lost § III. Answ. We doe indeed teach that faith doth not justifie as it is an habit or gift inherent in us or in respect of its owne worthinesse but relatively or in respect of the object which it doth receive As the hand which receiveth the almes releeveth the poore man in
respect of the almes which it doth receive And yet I doe not conceive that therefore the hand and the almes be relatives But we confesse that justifying faith is not without his object yet that object by apprehenââ¦ing wherof it ãâã justifie relââ¦tively is not righteousnesse inherent as here Bellarmine against his owne conscience doth suggest but the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified betweene which and faith there is such a relation that as justifying faith is called the faith of Christ or faith in Christ faith in his bloud so the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified is called the righteousnesse of faith And further I confesse that whosoever is justified by righteousnesse imputed is also in some measure just by righteousnesse inherent though he be not justified before God thereby But whereas he saith that wee will easily admit this argument that where faith is there is also inherent justice and consequently that justifying faith cannot be severed from other virtues because wee teach that by every sinne faith is lost I doe much marvell at his impudency for though he and his consorts doe wickedly teach that by every act of infidelity faith is lost yet wee are so farre from granting that faith is lost by every sinne that we confidently hold that true justifying faith is never totally or finally lost by any sinne whatsoever that is incident to the faithfull and regenerate man Some indeed have taught that by hainous offences which doe vastare conscientiam waste the conscience faith is lost yet that is farre from saying it is lost by every sinne Secondly againe saith he if faith doth justifie relatively then it cannot be in a mans minde but justice also must be there and without love there is no justice Answ. Without love there is no justice inherent but that is not it to which faith when it justifieth hath relation but that which faith having justified us bringeth forth in us as a consequent of justification Thirdly moreover saith he if faith severed from all other virtues doe justifie alone then it may also justifie being accompanied with those vices which are contrary to those virtues But this cannot be imagined that a man should be justified and yet remaine a wicked man Answ. If by vices he understand certaine vicious dispositions which though they doe not reigne in the faithfull yet remaine in them as their infirmities I confesse that justifying faith may and doth stand with such But if he meane the contrary habits of sinne which reigne in the hearts of the wicked and impenitent sinners I professe that justifying faith cannot stand with such For where these doe reigne the man is wholly unregenerate and where regeneration is not there faith which by regeneration is wrought cannot be It is therefore against the nature and being of a true justifying faith to harbour in a soule unregenerate § IV. To this argument he saith we answere that they assume that which is impossible viz. that faith may be alone which I beleeve not to have beene the answere of any of our Doctors for a man arguing ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã may suppose that which is impossible and yet the argument be of no lesse force But our assertion that faith cannot be alone which before I have made good in the second Chapter of this booke and defended against Bellarmines objections Chap. 3. hee laboureth here to take away by three reasons first by cavilling with Luther and Calvin First Luther saith that faith justifieth both before and without Charity I rejoyne it justifieth before because in order of nature it goeth before without because though Charity be present with it yet it justifieth without it even as the eye though the eare be with it yet seeth without it Secondly Calvin saith that the seed of faith remaineth in the greatest falles of the faithfull and therefore without Charity I rejoyne Calvin saith no more than S. Iohn doth that the seed of God doth alwaies remaine in those that are borne of God which seed of God is as well the seed of Charity as of Faith and both the one and the other remaine in the greatest fals of Gods children as wee see in Peter in whom though he fell most grievously in denying and sorswearing his Lord yet the seeds yea the habits of faith and love did remaine as I have proved elsewhere Secondly saith he because our argument assumeth not that faith may be alone but that if faith did justifie alone it would doe so though it were alonâ⦠this reason doth not confute our assertion that faith cannot be alone but taketh away that answere which he falsely I thinke assigneth to us But this consequence of his I have denied and disproved His third reason which is but the second to disprove our assertions if it bee true saith he that true faith is never alone then it is because faith begetteth those other graces even as a good Tree bringeth forth good fruit And if this were so then faith should goe before love and other graces if not in time yet in nature But faith cannot be conceived to be in nature before justification or justice infused or those graces wherein justification consisteth because these are relatives as they say God justifying and faith receiving justification for relatives are simulnatura c. Answ. The relatives that we meane are Christs righteousnesse imputed of God and faith apprehending or receiving it which though they bee simul natura in respect of the one to the other yet both of them are before the other graces in order of nature But if justifying faith be before charity and there be no righteousnesse without charity then saith he the same man may be just and not just at the same time Answ. It followeth not For though in order of nature faith be before love 1 Tim. 1. 5. yet in time they goe together Neither is that such an absurdity as he imagineth that the same man at the same time should be a sinner in himselfe and righteous in Christ a sinner according to the Law because he hath broken it but righteous according to the Gââ¦spell because in Christ he hath fulfilled the Law Christ being the end of the Law to every one that beleeveth Insomuch that every one that beleeveth in Christ is reputed as if he had fulfilled the Law Lastly because saith he it is false which they hold that faith cannot be severed from Charity and other virtues and this he taketh upon him to prove in the next Chapter unto which I have fully answered in the second question concerning the nature of faith CHAP. XIV Bellarmines third principall argument from the removall of those causes which may be given why faith doth justifie alone § I. HHis third principall argument is taken from the removall of those causes he meaneth reasons which may be given why faith alone doth justifie All which as he saith may be reduced
beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man unto whom God imputââ¦h righteousnesse without workes Gal. 2. 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law but by the faith of Iesus Christ to which adde the words following in the same verse for by the works of the Law shall no flesh bee justified adde also Chap. 3. vers 10. 11. as many as are of the works of the Law that is who seeke justification by the workes of the Law are under the curse For it is written cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them But that no man is justââ¦fied by the Law in the sight of God it is evident for the just shall live by faith Ephes. 2. 8 9. By grace are yee saved through faith not by workes lest any man should boast Phil. 3. 8 9. I account all things but losse and dung that I may gaine Christ and may be found in him not having mine owne righteousnesse which is of the Law as all inherent righteousnesse is but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by Faith Tit. 3. 5. Not by workes of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us § VI. Bellarmine before he maketh answere to these testimonies noteth three things First what the Apostle meaneth by the Law of workes and by the Law of Faith Secondly what difference there is betwixt the justice of the Law and the justice in the Law Thirdly what the Apostle meaneth by workes when he saith a man is justified without workes For the first he cavilleth with Calvin and Chemnitius and others as though they understood simply by the Law of workes that which requireth workes and by the Law of faith which requireth faith as if the Law of faith did not also require workes and the Law of workes did not also require faith whereas our writers distinguish the two covenants of God that is the Law and the Gospell whereof one is the covenant of workes the other the covenant of grace doe teach that the Law of workes is that which to justification requireth works as the condition thereof the Law of faith that which to justification requireth faith as the condition therof The former saith doe this and thou shalt live Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Mat. 19. 17. the latter beleeve in Christ and thou shalt be saved Iohn 3. 16. Act. 16. 31. But the Papists whiles they teach that in the Gospell perfect righteousnesse is required in us to justification and salvation as the condition thereof as much or rather more than in the Law they doe either confound the Law and the Gospell making either of them to be the Law of workes or else as the Apostle speaketh of the false teachers of the Galathians they teach another Gospell than that which Christ and his Apostles taught which whosoever doth though he were an Angell from heaven he ought to be held accursed But you will say is not obedience to the Law required in the Gospell I answere it is not required unto justification and salvation as the condition but the ability of performing obedience is the grace of the New Testament which is promised to those that beleeve And therefore our new obedience is required as the fruit of our redemption and as the way wherein wee being justified are to walke towards our glorification and as the cognizance of them that shall be saved § VII Bellarmine having rejected our exposition setteth downe his owne the summe and effect whereof in plaine termes is thus That the Law of workes is the letter or the doctrine whether of the Law or of the Gospell prescribing what is to be done but affording no helpe to performe the same And that the Law of faith is the Spirit or the grace of the New testament promised to those that beleeve whereby they are enabled to performe that which is commanded Which distinction betweene the letter and the Spirit as it is propounded by Saint Augustine is true but cannot bee applyed to this place Rom. 3. 27. where by Law on both parts is meant Doctrine according to the proper signification of the Hebrew word Thorah The Law of workes signifying the Morall Law which unto justification requireth workes the Law of faith signifying the Gospell which to justification requireth faith onely and is therefore called the word of faith and the Law of faith For although Bellarmine elsewhere seemeth to make this to be a principall difference betweene the Law and the Gospell that the Law is the letter commanding the Gospell is the Law of faith meaning thereby the grace of the New Testament which is the Law written in our hearts wherby we are enabled to performe obedience to the Law yet hee confesseth that the Gospell in the Scriptures doth ever signifie the doctrine of the Gospell and withall confesseth the doctrine of the Gospell as it commandeth any thing to be a Law of workes So that lex fidei the Law of faith according to this exposition is as well opposed to the Gospell as it signifieth the doctrine thereof as to the Law But the difference betweene the Law of workes which is the morall Law and the Law of faith which is the Gospell in the question of justification whereof the Apostle treateth is to bee fetched from that righteousnesse which either of them requireth to justification For both of them require righteousnesse therunto The Law requireth the righteousnesse of workes the Gospell in which without the Law is revealed the righteousnesse of God by which we are justified teacheth the righteousnesse of faith ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã saith Chrysostome upon this place ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã what is the Law of saith to be saved by grace And this explication fitly agreeth to the scope of the Apostle teaching that by the doctrine not of the Law but of the Gospell all boasting is excluded As if the Apostle had thus argued The true doctrine of justification excludeth all boasting See Ephes. 2. 8 9. but the Law of workes that is that doctrine which teacheth justification by workes doth not exclude all boasting See Rom. 4. 2. which the Law of faith doth teaching that wee are justified by remission of sinnes and saved by grace therfore that doctrine which teacheth justification by works is not the true doctrine but that which teacheth justification by faith without workes § VIII As touching the difference which hee putteth betweene the justice of the Law or that which is in it or by it I have spoken before in the third question of this controversie where I shewed that if it be admitted according to Augustines meaning who was the Author of it it maketh wholly against Bellarmine For though a
those words of the Apostle Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. To avoid this evident truth Bellarmine coyneth a twofold distinction First that the word gratis may bee understood as opposed to merits of condignity going before justification and so it excludeth not the dispositions and preparations which the Papists teach goe before justification which according to their doctrine are but merits of congruity But it is evident that not onely merits of condignity but all merit whatsoever yea and all respect of our owne worthinesse and well doing is excluded so that gratis is as much as without any cause in us or any desert of ours or worthines in our selves And thus the councill of Trent it selfe expoundeth this word We are therefore said to be justified gratis freely because none of those things which goe before justification whether faith for workes deserve the grace of justification for if it be grace then is it not of workes for iâ⦠it were of workes then grace were not grace as the same Apostle saith Secondly saith he it may bee understood as opposed to our owne merits or good workes done without grace for those that proceed from grace are not opposed to grace and therfore not excluded Whereunto I reply we cannot have any good thing but by gift from God and what good thing we have from God that is called ours as our faith our Charity our Hope our good ââ¦orkes Neither can wee without grace merit any thing but punishment It is therefore absurd to understand the Apostle as excluding merits without grace when as if we should doe all that is commanded which cannot be done without grace we must confesse that we deserve not so much as thanks because we have done but what was our duty to doe Neither can wee bee said to be justified gratis if there be any meritoriââ¦us cause of justification in our selves though received from God In regard of our selves indeed wee are justified gratis but it is not gratis in nor without paying a great price in respect of Christ. And therefore to those words justified freely by his grace is added through the redemption whiââ¦h is in or by Christ. By the word gratis therefore the Apostle signifieth thaâ⦠in us there is no materiall cause no merit of justification but onely in Christ. And where he saith that grace cannot bee opposed to grace I say it may as in that opposition which is of relatives as of the cause and the effect For the effect cannot be the cause of its owne cause and therfore works which are the fruits and effects of justification cannot bee the causes thereof The other argument is from the word grace For if our justification be of grace then not of workes as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 11. 6. and if of workes then not of grace So Ephes. 2. 8 9. you are saved by grace not of workes For to him that worketh the reward that is justification or salvation is not imputed of grace but it is rendred as of debt but to him that worketh not but onely beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed namely of grace to righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes verse 6. CHAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments proving the necessity of good workes and first from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell Secondly from the Doctrine of Christian liberty § I. NOW I come to Bellarmines arguments concerning good works which when he should prove they concurre to justification as causes thereof hee proveth them to be consequents thereof rather than causes And having little to say to the question it selfe he intermingleth many impertinent discourses Impertinent I say to the question though not to his purpose which was to calumniate us as though we held all those assertions which he laboureth to confute In his fourth booke therefore which is de justitia operum he propoundeth two maine questions to be disputed unto which divers others are coincident The former concerning the necessity of good workes the other concerning the truth of them As if we either denied that good workes are necessary or that they are truely good To the former hee referreth three questions the first whether the faithfull are bound to keepe the Law of God as though wee taught they were not the second concerning the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell as if we taught that the difference standeth in this that by the Law good workes are necessary by the Gospell not The third concerning Christian liberty as though we taught that the faithfull in their conscience and before God are subject to no Law Concerning the truth of the righââ¦eousnesse of good works after hee hath disputed the question whether the Law be possible whether the workes of the righteous bee sinnes he commeth at length to handle the controversie it selfe whether good workes doe justifie or not Concerning the former questions it shall suffice to shew what our tenet is in every of them and to defend our assertions against his cavils ââ¦o farre as concerneth this present controversie of justification by workes passing by the rest as impertinent As touching therefore the first principall question which concerneth the necessity of good works the Reader will beare me witnes by that which before I have delivered that we hold good workes necessary in many respects and that we urge the necessity of them by better arguments than the Romish doctrine doth afford we confesse that they are necessary necessitate presentiae for persons come to yeeres that are already justified and are to bee saved as necessary consequents of justification and as necessary forerunners of Salvation onely we deny them to be necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes either of justification or Salvation § II. That good workes are necessary to Salvation which we deny not Bellarmine greatly busied himselfe to prove but that they are necessary to justification as causes thereof which is the question betweene us for ought that I can discerne he goes not about to prove in his whole discourse of the necessity of good workes wherein he spendeth nine Chapters For after he had in the first Chapter calumniated us as if wee denied good workes to bee necessary to Salvation in the Chapters following hee proveth they bee necessary because as hee propoundeth his proofes in the Argument of his booke we are bound to keepe the Law of God And that he proveth by discussing the other two questions concerning the difference betwixt the Law and the Gospell and concerning Christian liberty But by these arguments Bellarmine neither proveth his owne assertion nor disproveth ours His assertion is that good workes doe concurre unto justification as a cause thereof which we deny He argueth they be causes why because they are necessary As if every thing that is necessary were a cause But whereto are they necessary to salvation saith Bellarmine Why
but the question is of justification Now many things are required to salvation which doe not concurre to justification as namely confession holinesse of life patience perseverance c. which though they goe before salvation yet they follow after justification and therefore cannot be causes thereof In all this discourse therefore Bellarmine is farre from concluding the point in question Notwithstanding it will not be unprofitable if I shall make a short excursion to follow him in his discourse but not to answere every particular which is not worth the answering That therefore he may confute our most pernicious errour as he calleth it he saith he will prove three things first that in the Gospell is contained the doctrine of workes and divers Lawes and that the promises thereof require the condition of fulfilling the Law Secondly that the just are not free from the observation of the Law of God Thirdly that good workes are simply necessary to Salvation § III. His intent in the first is to disprove that difference which we make betweene the Law and the Gospell from whence he had collected in the former Chapter that we deny the necessity of good works The difference was this That the Law propoundeth justification and salvation upon the condition of our fulfilling the whole Law But the Gospell promiseth justification and salvation upon the condition of faith only excluding works as the causes by which we are justified or for which we be saved which difference if it be true as it is most true plainely proveth justification by faith only and disproveth justification by workes For the better understanding whereof wee are to distinguish the termes both of the Law and Gospell which are used sometimes more largely sometimes more strictly and properly More largely Thorah the Law signifieth the whole doctrine of the old Testament whether written and contained in the bookes of Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes or Preached Written thus it is said to have beene written in the Law Ioh. 10. 34. which is written Psalm 82. 6. so Ioh. 12. 34. which is written Psalm 110. 4. so Ioh. 15. 25. which is written Psalm 35. 19. The Law saith those things Rom. 3. 19. which are cited out of the Psalmes and out of the Prophet Esay vers 10 11 12. Thus 1 Cor 14. 21. out of Esai 28. 11. thus Gal. 4. 21. out of Gen. 21. 10. And thus by the Law in many places is understood the whole doctrine of God contained in the Scriptures of the old testament and is often used in the same sense promiscuously g with Gods word insomuch that the Septuagints sometime translate Dabar which signifieth the word by ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Preached as Esai 30. 9 10. Psalm 78. 1. Ier. 18. 18. Prov. 28. 9. 29. 18. In this large sense the Evangelicall promises made in the old testament are contained in the Law though properly belonging to the Gospell as Bellarmine confesseth the promises of remission of sinnes though they be in the Prophets they doe not belong to the Law but to the Gospell And so the covenant of grace it selfe which the Lord made with Abraham in making whereof he is said Gal. 3. 8. to have preached before the Gospell to Abraham Of the Doctrine of the Gospell which was to begin at Ierusalem Luk. 24. 47. it is said Esai 2. 3. Mic. 4. 2. out of Sion the Law shall goe foorth So more largely the Gospell is taken for the whole Doctrine of the new Testament whether written by the Apostles and Evangelists or preached Mark. 13. 10. Rom. 10. 16. Gal. 2. 5 14. Ephes. 6. 19. Col. 1. 5. Phil. 1. 27. 2 Thes. 1. 8. Thus the histories of the life and death of CHRIST are called Gospels Mark 1. 1. Mat. 26. 13. Preached Rom. 2. 16. 16. 25. 1 Cor. 4. 15. 9. 18. Gal. 2. 7. 1 Thes. 1. 5. 2. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 8. In respect of this large sense it is truely said that the Precepts Promises and Comminations of the Law are contained in the Gospell § IV More strictly and properly the Law signifieth the Covenant of workes which is also called the Law of workes Rom. 3. 27. which upon condition of perfect and perpetuall obedience promiseth justification and salvation to the observers thereof Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Levit 18. 5. Ezek. 20. 11. Act. 13. 38. Rom. 3. 20 28. Likewise ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Gospell which importeth good tydings signifieth more strictly and properly the Covenant of Grace which is also called the Law of faith Rom. 3. 27. and the word of faith Rom. 10. 8. which freely promiseth justification and right of salvation to all that beleeve in Christ Ioh. 3. 15 16 36. 6. 47. 11. 25. 20. 31. Act. 16. 31. Rom. 3. 24. 10. 6 9. Eph. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. 1 Ioh. 5 13. This doctrine of God concerning Salvation by Christ through faith which properly is the Gospell Luk. 4. 18. Matth. 11. 5. Rom. 1. 16 17. Act. 15. 7. Gal. 1. 6. 3. 8. Act. 10. 36. is called the Gospell of grace Act. 20. 24. the word of reconciliation 2 Cor. 5. 18. the Gospell of peace Ephes. 6. 15. the Gospell of salvation Ephes. 1. 13. the Gospell of glory 1 Tim. 1. 11. the Gospell of the glory of Christ that is the glorious Gospell of Christ 2 Cor. 4. 4. the Gospell of the Kingdome Matth. 4. 13. 24. 13. This doctrine teacheth us that our gracious God out of his meere grace having elected his children in Christ before all times did in the fulnesse of time send downe his Sonne to save us and that the benefit of the Messias might be applyed unto us vouchsafeth unto us the Gospell of grace by which according to the purpose of his grace given unto us in Christ before all secular times he calleth us working in us the grace of faith being endued with faith hee imputeth unto us the righteousnesse and merits of Christ making us partakers of redemption reconciliation justification and adoption and so freeing us from hell and from all the enemies of our salvation hee entituleth us unto the kingdome of heaven And that wee may be fitted and prepared for his Kingdome into which no unholy thing may enter Apoc. 21. 27. hee hath promised to them that beleeve that being redeemed reconciled justified adopted and so entituled to the kingdome of heaven hee will give them grace to worship him without feare in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the dayes of our life that is in the voluntary upright and constant obedience of his Law Luk. 1. 73 74 75. It is true that the things which God in this Covenant of grace hath promised to give as namely faith and new obedience are also required of us Deo dante quod jubet God giving to us what he requireth of us the one as the antecedent condition
have thereby not onely remission of sinnes but also the inheritance or at least the right and title to it in respect whereof it is said in the Scriptures of so many as truely beleeve that wee are saved Ephes. 3. 5 8. that we are passed from death to life and that we now have eternall life Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 47. 1 Ioh. 5. 12 13. And in this respect eternall life is our inheritance which Christ hath purchased ââ¦or us And according to this tenure Christ will put us in possession thereof at the last Day when hee shall say unto us Come yee blessed of my Father ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the beginning of the world Matth. 25. 34. for you I say who before the beginning of the world were in Christ elected to be heires of this kingdome which is not to he attained unto by any purchase or merits of ours but shall bee given us as an inheritance intended from the beginning and prepared for the elect for whom Christ by his merits hath purchased it § VIII Now to those who by Gods speciall grace doe beleeve in Christ and by faith receive him by whom so received they are justified and adopted and by their justification and adoption are in such ââ¦ort entituled to this kingdome as heires apparent thereof that they are allready said to bee saved and to be set in heavenly places with Christ to these I say that they might be fitted and prepared for this inheritance unto which no uncleane thing can come hââ¦e hath in the covenant of grace freely and out of his undeserved mercie promised the grace of sanctification by his holy Spirit whereby wee are enabled according to the measure of grace received to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him And to the end that we might be moved to performe the dueties of sanctification hee doth not onely in his word seconded and made effectuall by his Spirit invite by exhortations and precepts to these dueties but also that hee might encourage us thereunto in his redoubled and multiplied mercies he hath promised not only the blessings of this life unto us but also eternall life it selfe as a gracious reward of our piety and obedience Here therefore in admiration of Gods bounty towards us we have just cause to exclaime with Augustine O the great goodnesse of God to whom when in respect of our condition we ought to render unto him the duties of obedience as servants to our Lord and God as subjects to the Almighty as captives saved to our redeemer he doth promise unto us the rewards of friendship that hee might draw from us the dueties of service which wee doe owe unto him It was of Gods free grace that hee elected any of us that being elected hee called us that being called and endued with faith hee justifieth and adoptetâ⦠us and thereby giveth us right to his kingdome it was also of his free grace that to them whom hee redeemeth and justifieth hee hath promised to bestow his graces upon them whereby they are enabled to serve him in holinesse and righteousnesse and are fitted for his owne kingdome But this is a multiplication of his grace upon us that to encourage us to the Practice of Piety whereby wee are fitted for the kingdome of heaven he doth promise to reward our good works with everlasting happinesse and in the end doth crowne his owne blessings with blessednesse which though hee bee pleased for our encouragement to call a reward yet is it not deserved by us but freely bestowed by him as his free gift granted unto us in Christ before all times as our inheritance purchased by Christ as his bountifull reward of his owne gifts which as hee freely promiseth so in his good time hee freely bestoweth as his ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is free gift § IX To this purpose let us consider the Lords dealing with Abraham to whom the Lord at his first comming towards the Land of promise made divers gracious promises which afterwards hee often repeated But when upon that Commandement of tryall to offer up his onely sonne Abraham had by Gods speciall grace notably approved his faith and obedience hereupon the Lord doth sweare that he will bestow upon him the things which before hee had promised as the reward of that his obedience for so hee saith because thou hast done this thing and againe because thou hââ¦st obeyed my voice Can any man hereupon inferre that Abraham by his obedience had deserved these promises which God long before had made unto him and oftentimes repeated Nothing lesse so God in his eternall Counsell hath to the Elect designed eternall life as his free gift by Christ Christ by his merits hath purchased it to bee our inheritance God hath graciously promised to bestow freely this inheritance on them that beleeve in Christ when as therefore God doth promise to reward our piety with eternall life wee may not thinke that by our piety it is deserved which God long before had decreed and promised and Christ our Saviour had purchased for us But though it bee a reward yet it is a most free and undeserved reward § X. When the Papists therefore object that if eternall life be the reward of our obedience then our obedience doth deserve it I answere first thou canst deserve nothing at Gods hand by that which he hath freely given and much lesse that which hee freely bestoweth on thee Secondly if thou shouldest doe all that is required of thee thou couldest deserve nothing thereby for where is debt and duty there is no merit Luk. 17. 10. Thirdly we doe not all that is commanded but come short of our duty and that which we doe is unperfect and defective in respect of manner and measure and therefore in justice deserveth punishment rather than reward and consequently the reward when it is given is to bee ascribed to Gods undeserved mercie and not to our merit Fourthly Sanctification and the duties thereof are not causes of Salvation and therefore in serie causarum in the chaine of the causes of Salvation Rom. 8. 30. they are left out and where they are mentioned they are inserted not as a cause of Salvation but either as the way unto it Ephes. 2. 10. or as the markes and cognizances of them that shall be saved or as the evidences according to which God will judge As marks I say for they are occulta praedestinationis indicia futurae faelicitatis praesagia as Bernard speaketh Our Saviour setting downe the end of the ministery of the Gospell saith that a man being thereby called may by faith obtaine remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified Act. 26. 18. so also Act. 20. 32. § XI And thus are wee to expound many Testimonies of Scripture as speaking of notes which the Papists expound as speaking of causes Thus Rom. 8. 16 17. The
But faith that is Christ received by faith saveth alone Thus much may suffice to have answered his former Argument in defence of that difference which wee make according to the Scriptures betweene the Law and the Gospell in respect of justification § XIX His other argument to prove the necessity of good works which wee deny not is taken from his true pretended differences betwixt the Law and the Gospell whereof he setteth downe two principall and six secondary differences arising from the principall All of them impertinent to the matter in hand excepting the first and also the last which serveth to confute the first is that such is the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell as betweene a doctrine begunne and perfected for as in respect of the mysteryes to believed and the promises to be hoped for the Gospell excelleth the Law ãâã should have said the new Testament excelleth the old for of the the two Testaments that is of the Law and the Gospell largely and not strictly taken this difference is to be understood so also in respect of the precepts which are to be done For to omit the ceremoniall and judiciall Lawes which hee impertinently mentioneth hee saith that the Law and the Gospell have in a maner the same morall precepts but with this difference that in the Gospell some more heavy or weighty things are imposed upon Christians thaâ⦠were in the Law exacted of the Iewes as in the matter of polygamy and billes of divorce which not withstanding by the morall Law were as much forbidbed to them as now to us Secondly that Christ did perfect the moral Law prescribing a more perfect righteousnesse than the Law required Thirdly that to the precepts hee hath added Counselles tending to perfection Answ. This difference is suitable to the rest of their wicked and Antichristian doctrine which in this whole treatise I confute wherby as they confound justification and sanctification so also the Law and the Gospell saving that in the Gospell they say greater perfection is required of inherent righteousnes to justification than the Law prefcribeth and so make it a Law of workes as much or rather more than the Law it selfe § XX. This is confuted by the eigth or last difference wherin hee truely saith that the Law of Mose was most heavy and unportable but the Gospell of Christ is an easie yoake and a light burden If Petor therefore exclaimed against those which sought to impose the Law of Moses upon Christians Act. 15. 10. what shall wee thinke of our Popish Rabbins that impose an heavier yoake than the Law it selfe For whereas Bellarmine saith the Gospell is the easier because of the grace of the newe Testament accompanying it yet the difference is to be understood in respect of the doctrine it selfe and the letter which if it reqââ¦ire more perfect obedience is in it self the heavier burden II. This difference by confounding the Law and the Gospell doth make void the covenant of grace which God made with Abraham and performed in Christ which was concerning Iustification by faith which as it could not be disannulled by the Covenant of works so much lesse was it repealed but renewed and ratified in the Gospell But if in the Gospell were taught justification by works and not by Christs righteousnesse apperhended by faith the Covenant of grace made with Abraham should in the Gospell be repealed rather than renewed For the covenant of works promiseth justification and life upon condition of perfect and perpetuall obedience the covenant of grace upon condition of faith And these two in the Article of justification are ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã incompatible If therfore the Gospell doe teach justification by workes it maketh void the covenant of grace and thus the popish gospel overthroweth the Gospel of Christ. Thirdly This difference overthroweth a maine benefit which we have by Christ and without which we can neither be justified nor saved which is this that he hath freed us from the rigour of the Law which standeth in an exaction of perfect righteousnesse to be inherent in us and perfect obedience to be performed by us unto the acceptation either of our persons or actions which by reason of our corruption is impossible unto us And therfore miserable is their estcate who are in bondage to the Law either subjecting them to the curse if they offend in the least degree when in many things wee offend all or excluding them from justification and salvation if they yeeld not perfect and perpetuall obedience which by reason of the flesh is impossible From this curse Christ hath freed us in being made a curse for us bearing the punishment due for our sinnes and from this exaction of perfect righteousnesse to be performed by our selves hee hath freed us in being made unto us of God righteousnesse even Iehovah our righteousnesse performing perfect obedience to the Law for us But if the Gospell which they call the new Law require more perfect obedience than the old Law unto justification and salvation then doe wee continue in that miserable estate neither doth our blessed and most perfect Saviour availe us any thing Neither will this free us from this bondage that with the newe Law the grace of the new Testament whereby we should be enabled to obey the Law is conferred For first it is conferred onely to those who are already justified and secondly to whom it is conferred it is not given in such perfection in this life but that ever they are sinners in themselves sinne alwayes abiding in them So that still if wee must be justified by no righteousnesse but that which is inherent in us we remaine in that fearefull bondage seeing we have nothing either to free us from the curse in respect of our former sinnes or to entitle us to the kingdome of heaven our best righteousnesse being unperfect and stayned with the flesh Fourthly the righteousnes required in the new Law to justification is either the same with that which was prescribed in the old Law or more perfect If the same how then are we not justified by the works of the Law If more perfect then the Law of God was not perfect which the Scriptures testifie to be so perfect as nothing can bee added thereto Neither did our Saviour Christ perfect the Law by adding more perfection unto it in respect either of the precepts or the counsells which the Papists conceive to have bin added by Christ to the precepts For as touching the precepts he did but more perfectly explaine them freeing them from the depravations of the Scribes and Pharisees who rested in the outward letter as if the Law were not spirituall nor did forbid any more but the grosse sins which in the ãâã of the Law are expressed And as for the Counsells they are also morall duties for omission wherof men may according to the sentence of the Law be condemned as not to love our enemyes not to
mainetaine the contradictory of our assertion and maketh the question to be this whether by good workes men are justified that is to say made more just viz. in respect of righteousnesse inherent But we deny that there are any degrees of justification or that a man may be more justified or that justification doth ever signifie increase of righteousnesse wee reject their new found distinction of justification into the first and second and acknowledge no other justification but that which in the Scriptures and Fathers is called the justification of a sinner and thereby wee understand a continued act of God who as when we being sinners did first beleeve did justifie us so remaining sinners in our selves he doth still justifie us by imputation of Christs righteousnesse acquitting us from our sinnes and accepting of us as righteous in Christ. And this justification which is onely acknowledged by the Scriptures and Fathers is every where ascribed to faith Whereas the first justification of the Papists is ascribed to charity as the onely forme the second to workes as to the merit thereof But all this ariseth from their erroneous and wilfull confounding of justification and sanctification For their first justification is that which the Scriptures call regeneration and is the first act of Sanctification by which we are habitually sanctified for they make it to be nothing else but the infusion of the habits of grace Their second justification is their actuall fanctification or exercise of good workes whereby their inherent righteousnesse or sanctification is increased But the question is not of sanctification but of justification which the Papists by their wicked doctrine confounding it with sanctification have wholly abolished it being the maine benefit of the Messias by which we are both freed from hell and entitled to heaven Neither is the question understood of justification before men but before God For before men we doe confessâ⦠that by good workes men are justified that is declared and knownâ⦠to be just as by the fruits effects consequents and signes of justification by faith but before God we are not justified that is made or constituted just by workââ¦s as any cause thereof for good workes goe not before justification but follow after which is a plaine evidence that they are no cause of it § II. But let us examine his proofes the first and principall is out of Iames 2. which being the onely place of Scripture whereupon with any shew of probability they ground their doctrine of justification by workes I will not content my selfe to answere Bellarmines cavils alone but I will endevour to stop the mouthes of all the Papists who use to vaunt of this place especially of the 24. verse where they bragge that their assertion is expressed and ours confuted in plaine termes yee see then that a man is justified by workes and not by saith onely Which words are a consectary or conclusion deduced from the example of Abraham who though he were justified by faith without works as Saint Paul teacheth yet was hee also justified by workes and not by faith onely as Saint Iames affirmeth A conclusion therefore in shew of words contradictory to that of the Apostle Paul Rom. 3. 28. wee conclude that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law and Gal. 2. 16. we know that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is but onely by faith which no doubt was the Apostles meaning For as I have shewed heretofore if this be a good disjunction that we are justified either by faith or by works that is either by the righteousnes of Christ which is out of us in him apprehended by faith or by the works of the Law that is by righteousnes inherent in our selves all which is prescribed in the Law as undoubtedly it is for a third thing cannot be named whereby we might be justified and by both we cannot for if by faith then of grace and if of grace then not of works and contrary wise Rom. 4. 4 5. 11. 6. then it followeth necessarily that if we are not justified by workes we are justified by faith alone Hence ariseth this great controversie between the true Catholiks and the Papists we affirming that we are justified by faith without works or by faith alone The Papists contending that wee are justified by workes and not by faith only we alleaging the authority of Saint Paul in his Epistles to the ââ¦omanes Galatians Ephesians the Papists this Testimony of Saint Iames. § III. The way to determine this weighty Controversie is to reconcile the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles Some a when they were not able to untye this Gordian knot have sought with Alexander to cut it by questioning without just cause the authority of that Epistle of Saint Iames. But the Papists and wee are thus farre agreed First as they doe not deny those Epistles of S. Paul which were never questioned so we acknowledge this of Saint Iames though it hath beene questioned to bee canonicall Secondly that the two Apostles acted by the same Spirit of truth in penning their Epistles could not possibly deliver contrary assertions and consequently that they onely are to bee esteemed to hold the truth who fitly reconciling the seeming variance betweene the two Apostles doe teach that doctrine which is agreeable to both Here then I am to demonstrate both against the Papists and for our selves against the Papists three things First that the doctrine which they ground upon this place of Saint Iames is contrary to that of Saint Paul Secondly that their exposition of Saint Iames they make him contradict the Apostle Paul Thirdly that their doctrine cannot be grounded upon this Text. For our selves two things First that by our exposition the two Apostles are easily reconciled Secondly that the assertion of the two Apostles according to our doctrine not onely may well stand together but also of necessity must goe together For the first wee have the same controversie with the Papists as I have noted before which the Apostle maintayned against the justiciaryes of his time And their opposite doctrine to Saint Paul which they would gladly father upon Saint Iames standeth in those six maine errours which I have plainely and fully confuted in this treatise And namely in this particular they affirming that men are justified by workes which the Apostle every were constantly denyeth To the second whiles they understand the two Apostles to speake in the same sense of faith of workes of justifying as namely that both speake of a true justifying faith of workes as causes of justification of justifying as making just by righteousnesse inherent they make the one directly to contradict the other For if Paul affirme that men are justified by a true faith without workes and Iames deny it If Paul deny that we are justified by workes as the causes of justification and Iames affirme it If Paul deny that wee are
Abraham was that is by them as by fruites and effects hee is declared and approved to bee just and not by faith professed onely Hee doth not say a man is justified by workes as causes but as the effects For that and not the other is deduced from the example of Abraham § XIII The other example is of Rahab Verse 25. For though you may thinke that you need not compare with Abraham and yet have a true justifying faith yet you will bee ashamed to bee behinde Rahab the harlot who was no sooner justified before God by faith but she was also justifyed that is declared and knowne to bee just by her worke of charity towards the Espyes which shee wrought by faith Heb. 11. 31. Concerning this example of Rahab Bellarmine hath foure Assertions of which never an one agreeth with another First That Rahab was not declared to bee just because shee was an harlot which is false For though shee had beene an harlot yet now she beleeved and by her faith was justifyed before God and by her worke which shee wrought by faith was justified as Saint Iames saith that is declared to bee just Secondly That Iames briââ¦geth the example of Rahab to prove that by good workes a righteous person is made more righteous which also is false and contrary to his former Assertion Thirdly That by this worke of mercy shee was truely justified and of a sinner made just But Rahab as Bellarââ¦ine saith was an example of the first justification and therefore of a sinner not made just by her worke but by the habit of grace infused The trueth is by faith shee was justifyed before God and by her worke shee was declared to bee just before men Fourthly That by that worke as a disposition she was prepared unto justificaââ¦ion Which agreeth neither with his third where he said that by this worke shee was truely justifyed and of a sinner made just nor with Saint ââ¦mes whose meaning plainely is not that shee was prepared unto justification by this worke no more than Abraham was by his but that she was declared by this worke as a fruite of her faith and a consequent of her justification as Abraham was by his workes to be justifyed before God And thus much of the two examples § XIV There remaââ¦eth his fifth Argument which is a similitude Verse 26. For as the body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes or that faith which is without workes is dead which words also may bee two wayes expounded For either the Apostle Iames speaketh of the habit of faith or of the profession of it If of the habit then the comparison standeth thus As the body of man without the Spirit that is without breath which is the prime signification of the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã derived from ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to breathe in which sense it is called the spirit of the mouth and spirit of the nostrils I say as the body without breath is dead so that saith which is without workes which are as it were the breathing of a lively faith is judged to be dead For as Bernââ¦rd also saith As we discerne the life of this body by its motion so the life of faith by workes If therefore faith it selfe be here meant wee must by Spirit understand breath and not the soule For although the Papists absurdly make charity which is a fruite of faith 1 Tim. 1. 5. to be the forme of it yet me thinkes they cannot bee so absurd as to compare faith to the body and workes to the soule as though workes which are the fruites and effects both of faith and of charity were the forme and as it were the soule of faith If by faith we understand faith professed or the profession of faith as in this discouse hitherto it hath beene used and as it is used elsewhere as Act. 14. 22. Rââ¦m 1. 8. then you may understand the similiââ¦de thus As the body of man without the Spirit that is the ââ¦oule is dead so the profession of faith without a godly life which is as it were the life and ââ¦oule of our profeââ¦on is also dead For hypocrites whose life is not conformable to their profession though they have a ââ¦ame that they live yet they are dead Apââ¦c 3. 1. Thus by five arguments Saint Iââ¦mes hath proved that the faith which is alone and without workes is not a true and a lively but a dead and counterfeit faith and yet ãâã both here and Lib. 1. dâ⦠justif cap. 15. will needs have Saint ââ¦ames to speake of a true faith as if he supposed that a true faith might be without workes Therefore the Popish Doctrine of justification by workes as causes thereof cannot be grounded on this Tââ¦xt of Saint Iames. § XV. Yea but will some say the contradiction is not yet salved For Saint Paul affirmeth as you say that faith alone doth justify and Saint Iames in plaine termes denyeth that a man is justifyed by faith onely I answere when we say that faith onely doth justify we doe not meane absolutely that nothing doth justify but faith in no sense whatsoever For many things may truely bee said to justify aliâ⦠atque aliâ⦠sensu in divers senses as I have shewed heretofore God the Father as the prime efficient Christ as the meritorious cause God as the Iudge Christ as the Advocate God as the Creditour Christ as the Surety The grace of God as the moving cause the righteousnes of Christ as the matter the imputation thereof as the forme the holy Ghost as the applying cause the Word and Sacraments as the instruments of the holy Ghost Faith as the hand of the receiver works as testimonies and signes c. but our meaning is that we are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ onely which is apprehended by faith alone and that in us nothing doth concurre to the act of justification but faith alone it being the onely instrument whereby wee receive Christ. And thus have you heard what is to be alleaged against the Papists First that their doctrine concerning justification by workes which they would build upon this Text is repugnant to the Scriptures Secondly that by their exposition they make Saint Iââ¦mes to contradict Saint Paul Thirdly that their doctrine cannot bee grounded on this Text. § XVI Now for our selves I will shew that by our exposition the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles is manifestly reconciled and that by our Doctrine their Assertions not oââ¦ely may well stand together but also must necessarily goe together The reconciliation is easily made if we consider two things first the diversity of the Parties with whom the two Apostles had to deale For the Apostle Paul having to deale with Pharisaicall Iustitiaries who sought to bee justified by a righteousnesse inherent in themselves and by an obedience performed by themselves proveth by invincible arguments that a man is justified by faith without
Christ will judge And thus his reasoâ⦠standeth those who are blessed of God that is justified for whom this kingdome waâ⦠prepared and this iââ¦heritance purchased they are to inheriâ⦠this kingdome But you are such as appeareth by the fruits for your excercising the workes of charity and mercy towards my poore members and that for my sake is a plaine evidence of your election justification and redemption and accordiââ¦g to this evidence I judge of you come therefore inherit the kingdome c. But to this allegation I have answered twice before The second place is out of the same Chapter Verse 21. In which there is no causall particle eââ¦pressed in the originall neither is it any desert but duety of the servant to be faithfull neither any debt or duety of his Lord but his houââ¦y and largesse in rewarding of his fidelity in few things with making him ruler over many things The third place is Apoc. 7. 14. Thesâ⦠ãâã ââ¦hey who came out of great tribulation c. therefore they are ãâã the Throne of God In alleaging whereof Bellarmine leaveth out that which is most maââ¦riall that they had washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lambe ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã therefore they are before the Throne of God which sheweth that they stood before the Throne of God not in their owne merits but in the merits of Christ by which they were justified That which is said of their tribulation doth not insinuate their desert as though thereby they had deserved to bee before the Throne of God but the order of their afflictions going before their glorification and the consecution of eternall life following thereupon for as it is said of our Saviour Phil. 2. that hee having humbled himselfe unto death the Lord did therefore exalt him Verse 9. and Luke 24. 26. that hee was first to suffer those things and so to enter into his glory so of the faithfull it is likewise said that through much tribulation they must enter into the kingdome of God Act. 14. 22. And this is the answere which Calvin giveth to some of these places that they signifie ordinem consequentiae magis quam causam For whom God haââ¦h appointed to salvation for them he hath prepared the way of obââ¦dience and patience that therein they make walke towards their Countrey which is ââ¦eaven good workes therefore and afflictions are not the cause of salvation but the way to it § XVI But saith Bellarmine Christ could not more plaiââ¦ely have expressed that good workes are the causââ¦s of salvation than when hee said for when I was hungry you did c. especiââ¦lly seeing hee ââ¦seth the same forme of fpeech against the wicked for I was hungry and you did not c. In which the cause of damnation is noted I answere that our Saviour if hee had meant that good workes are the meriââ¦orious cause of salvation hee was able to have expressed it in as plaine termes as Bellarmine dothBut his intent in these reasons which hee giveth was not to set downe the causes of salvation or damnation but the notes and markes of them who are to bee saved or condemned as the evidence according to which hee pronounceth sentence Yea but Bellarmine will prove that the particles for and because are truely causall By what reason Forsooth by a circular augmentation becââ¦se good workes are causes And how did hee prove good workes to be causes Because these particles are causall To prove that workes be causes meaning meritorious causes he alleageth three Texts of Scripture 2 Cor. 4. 17. Gal. 6. 8. Phil. 2. 12. Two whereof I discussed before in their due place where he endevoured to prove that good workes aââ¦e necessary necessitate efficiââ¦tiae as causes of salvation viz. 2 Cor. 4. 17. lib. 7. cap. 5. § 7. and of this eighth booke cap. 2. § 21. and Phil. 2. 12. lib. 7. cap. 5. §5 That of Gal. 6. 8. he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reape life everlasting maketh against him rathâ⦠than for him For as in the naturall harvest the increase is not to be ascribed to the ploughing and sowing but to the blessing of God so much more in the spirituall § XVII But that these particles are not alwaies truely and properly causall Calvin sheweth by a notable instance God had promised Abraham when hee first called him out of Vr that in him that is in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed This promise the Lord often renewed as appeareth in his story which againe hee confirmeth by oath Gen. 22. 16. 18. When Abraham had upon tryall in an excellent manner and measure approved both his faith and obedience unto God By my selfe have I sworne saith the Lord that because thou hast done this thing and hast not withheld thy sonne thine onely sonne in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed becausâ⦠thou hast obeyed my voice Here both in the beginning of the oath and in the end the causall particle is used shall wee therefore say that Abrahââ¦ms obedience did merit that all the nations of the earth that is Abraham himselfe and all the faithfull in all nations should bee blessed in the promised seed God had long before made this gracious promise to Abraham without respect of this or any other his workes and had this act of obedience never beene the promise of the promised seed in his posterity would have beene performed so that the grace and love of God was the onely cause why hee promised to send his owne Sonne who should take on him the seed of Abraham and not Abrahams obedience All that can truely bee said is that upon this obedience God tooke occasion to renew his promise and to confirme it by oath for the further confirmation of Abrahams faith So that his obedience was so farre from being the cause of the thing promised as it was but the occasion of renewing the promise But Bellarmine in this example mentioneth onely that inferiour promise concerning the multiplication of Abrahams seed and saith that as God did promise it so he would have him to merit it by his good workes even so the Lord having predestinated all the Elect unto Glory yet his pleasure is that they should attaine unto it by their owne merits Which cleane overthroweth the grace of election which which was without respect of workes and also of salvation For if our election or salvation be of workes or merits then is it not of grace And if this answere of Bellarmine be good then may it in like manner bee applyed to that part of the Oath concerning the promised seed namely that Abraham by his obedience had merited that in the promised seede the faithfull of all nations should bee blessed which is no better than blasphemy It is true that God hath elected us that wee might bee holy and that by the
whereof he is just in justifying us Rom. 3. 25 26. and in remitting our sinnes Psal. 51. 14. 1 Ioh. 1. 9. and accepting of us as righteous in Christ unto eternall life and to this justice of Christ and not to ours doth the Lord in justice as a just Iudge render eternall life being no lesse just than mercifull in saving us And in this justice of God as well as his mercie are wee to repose our affiance both for our justification and salvation For if wee truely beleeve in Christ we have in him satisfied Gods justice in him we have fulfilled the Law and therefore remission of sinnes and eternall life is in justice due unto us not for any merits of ours but for the merits of Christ. There remaineth the remunerating or distributive justice of God as a just Iudge judging the world in righteousnesse Psal. 9. 4 8. and rendring to every one according to the quality of their works Psal. 62. 12. Rom. 2. 6. Ier. 32. 19. For it is just with God to reward the righteousnesse of the righteous and to punish the sinnes of the wicked as in the place alleaged 2 Thess. 1. 5 6. and Psal. 18. 20 24. Mat. 10. 41 42. 2 Tim. 4. 8. Exod. 34. 7. And this justice is distinguished according to the quaââ¦ity of the persons towards whom it is exercised for towards the godly it is justitia liberans beans of which Psa. 31. 1. 71. 2. deliver me in thy righteousnesse and towards the wicked vindicans or puniens Psal. 94. 1 2. Exod. 34. 7. ãâã 1. 2 3. The proposition therefore is not true unlesse it bee understood of commutative justice which belongeth not to God For the reward which God giveth to good workes if it bee according to his universall justice it is to bee ascribed not to our merits but to his goodnesse If according to his justice in word not to our merits but to his fidelity If according to his justice as he is absolute Lord not to our merits but to his good pleasure If according to his justice as he is Creator c. not to our merits but to his bounty If according to his justice as hee is the God of our righteousnesse not to our merits but to the merits of Christ. If according to his remunerating justice not to our merits but to his liberality Answ. 2. God may bee said in justice to render reward either in respect of the worthinesse or desert of the worke or in some other respect If not in that respect or if in any other respect it argueth not merit But not in that respect for all our workes are unperfect and stayned with the flesh and no way in worth comparable to the reward but in other respects as first in regard of his promise which it is just with him to performe secondly in regard of Christs merit applyed to us § XX. I come to the assumption which understood of commutative justice is not true of others it is to no purpose Let us then examine his proofes whereof not one doth prove the question For as touching the first viz. 2 Thes. 1. 6. we have said that it is just in respect of Gods remunerative justice by which hee rendreth to every one according to the quality of their workes to recompense tribulation to the wicked which persecute the Church and to the godly who are troubled rest with the Saints The second 2 Tim. 4. 7 8. It is just with God when the faithfull have fought a good fight have finished their course have kept the faith that he should render unto them the crowne of righteousnesse both according to his fidelity in performing his promise for it is just that the crowne which hee hath promised to the faithfull hee should give them having kept the faith and also according to that righteousnesse as he is the God of our righteousnesse that is the justifier and Saviour of all that beleeve For it is just that the righteous judge should give to the Apostle having kept the faith that crowne of righteousnesse which God hath promised and which Christ hath purchased and which in respect of Christ his merit and righteousnesse imputed is in justice due not onely to the Apostle but to all the faithfull who are described by this note that they love his comming If it bee demanded why it is called the crowne of righteousnesse Bernard shall informe us Est ergo quam Paulus expectat corona justiââ¦iae sed justitiae Dei non suae It is therefore a crowne of justice which Paul expecteth but of Gods justice not his owne For it is just that he should render what he oweth and he oweth what he hath promised And this is the justice whereof the Apostle presumeth the promise of God The third Heb. 6. 10. God having promised that he would be mindefull of his servants he is not unfaithfull to breake his promise nor unjust to forget them But what is this to the purpose or that which followeth Iam. 1. 12. that when a man is by bearing affliction found to be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã approved he shall receive the crowne of life which God hath promised to all that love him or that Apoc. 20. 10. where to him that is faithfull unto death the Lord promiseth to give out of his gracious bounty a crowne of life As touching those places which concerne loane the prize and the depositum in all three it is presupposed in the very nature of the contracts that a promise is made by the borrower by the master of the game by the depositary that the thing borowed is at the day of payment to be restored the prize is to bee given to him that winneth it and the depositum is to be rendred when the depositor doth demand it and therefore that it is just that the promise in every one should be performed And even so Paul in the last place as Bernard hath well observed Dei promissum suum appellat depositum quia credidit promittenti fidenââ¦er promissum repeââ¦it promissum quidem ex misericordia sed jam ex justitia persolvendum calleth Gods promise or that which he promised his deposââ¦um and because he beleeved the promiser he doth confidently call for the thing promised promised indeed in mercie but now in justice to be rendred § XXI His fifth argument is taken from those Testimonies wherein eternall life is promised to good workes as Maââ¦th 19. 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the Commandements and vers 29. Every one that shall leave house or father c. hee shall receive an hundred fold and shall possesse eternall life 1. Tim. 4. 8. Godlinesse is profitable for all things having the promise of this life and of that which is to come Iam. 1. 12. he shall receive the crowne of life which God hath promised to them that love him Now saith hee a promise made with the condition of a
9 10. c. 9. b Lib. 2. c Lib. 4. The fourth imputation of Christs satisfaction confessed by the Papists d Bellarm. de iustif l. 2. c. 7. §. quarto c. 10. §. Deinde c. 11. §. potest Stapleton de iustif c. e Ier. 23. 6. The fifth proofe out of 2 Cor. 5. 21. Popish eââ¦vils against the proposition g Reform catholâ⦠art 4. f. Anselm in locum h Qui non noverat peccatum per experinntiâ⦠licet nosset illud per ãâã ided fecit ââ¦um peccatum nos efficeratur iustitiâ⦠Dei in ipsâ⦠Ipse ergo peccatum ãâã nos iustitia nec nââ¦stra sed Dei nec in nobis sed in ipso sicut ipsâ⦠peccatum non suum sed nostra nec inse sed in ââ¦obis c. i ãâã ãâã Quaerent c. 41. â⦠Christ ãâã pro ãâã nostris ãâã peccati nomen accepâ⦠ãâã ãâã efficereâ⦠ãâã Dei in ipso non nostra nec in nobis l ãâã in Ioan. ãâã 3 Omnes qui per Christum iustisicati iusti non ââ¦n se sed in illo Their second cavill m De iustif l. â⦠c. 10. Testimonies of Fathers that Christ was made a sinner for us n ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã o ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã p ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã q ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã r In Heb. 9. vers vlt. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã s Deut. 21. 23. t Esai 53. 12. Mark 15. 28. u August in Psalm 21. Quorum delictorum de quo dictum est qui peccatum non fecit non inventus est do us in ore eius quomodo ergâ⦠dicit delictorum ââ¦eorum nisi quia pro delictis nostris ipse precatur delicta nostra sua delicta fecit ut iustitiam suââ¦m nostram iustitiam faceret * Hier. in Psal. 21 Idem in Psalm 37. 19. quem iniquitatem mââ¦m sicut n. maledictioni subiacent ut nos à maledicto legis erueret ita peccatorem se ãâã qui peccâ⦠nostra portavit The third cavill x Posuit in eo vulg lat y Levit. 1. 4. 4. 4. 15. 24. 29. Exod 29. 10. 15. z Esay 53. 6. 10 11 12. a 1 Pet. 2. 24. b Levit. 4. 20. 25. 35. c ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Bellarmines triple exposition of this place The first d 1 Tim. 2. 5. c Esai 53. 6. f Psvl. 22. 1. Bellarmines second exposition g 1 Thess 3. 6. h Lib. 4. cap. 2. §. 3. Bellormines third ââ¦position i Rom. 10. 3. Phil. 3. 8 9. Our sixth argument out of Rom. 5. 19. a De amiss gratiâ⦠statu pet l. 4. c. 10. l. 5. c. 17. 18. b Lib. 4. ãâã c De Amiss gr lib. 5. c. 18. d 1 Cor. 1. 30. Arg. 7. The iustification of a sinner is imputative c Rom. 4. 5. f Iam. 3. 2. g 1 Ioh. 1. 8. h Lib. 4. c. 2. §. 6. i 1 Ioh. 1. 8. 10. Arg 8. Because faith is imputed unto righteousnesse k Rom. 1. 17. l Rom. 3. 21 â⦠m Rom. 4. 4. n ââ¦n Cant sââ¦rm 58. o De iustis l. 2. c. 9. §. Potest p Eph. 1. 7. q Rom. 3. 25 26. r 2 Cor. 4. 16. s Lib. 2. c. 7. 14. Because redemption reconciliation adoption or imputive a Ephes. â⦠7. b 2 Cor. 5. 19. c 1 Cor. 6. 19 20. Argument 15. Psal. 32. 1 2. Rom. 4. 6 7. 8. d De iustif l. 2. 6. 9. §. Tertiâ⦠e Psal. 112. 1. f 1â⦠9. 1. g Matth. 5. 3. 5. Bââ¦llarmines answeres refuted The first h Pronounciations of blessednesse i In Rom. 4. annot 1. Bellarmines cavill with the assumption Bellarmines answere to the proposition and first to the word covering To the word not imputing Whether not imputing doe not signifie deletion Chemnitius his argument from the rule of contraries Imputing and covering are of things which be The expositions of Fathers obiected by Bellarmine k Dialog cum Tryphone Iudaeo sub finem l Origen in Rom. lib. 4. Pishal chataah havon m Hieromein Psal. 31. n in Rom. â⦠Augustiâ⦠testimony conâ⦠sen ãâã 2. in Psa. 31. o Luk. 18. * vers 3. o Esai 53. 5. 1 Pet. 2. 24. p Ad Diognetum q De iustif l. 2. c. 9. 10 11 12 13 14. a Ad diagnetum ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã b Athanas. tom 2. adv eos qui negant Christum ex natura nostra sumpsse primitias ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c In Cantic hom 2. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã d Chrysost. in Rom. 10. 4. bomil 17. and afterwardse ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã f In Psal. 119. conc 3. qui dicit iniquitates suas Deo iustificatur g Adv. Pelag l. 1. Tunc iusti sumus qââ¦avdo nos peccatores fatemur iustitia nostra non ex proprio merito sedex Dei consistis misericordia h In Ioan. tr 3. * Huius libri c. 1. §. 5. i In 2 Cor. 5. 21. k Enchirid. c. 41. l In 2 Cor. 5. 21. m De civit D. l. 19 c. 27. ut potius remissione peccatorum constet quà m perfectione virtutum n De iustif l. 2. cap. 13. o De Iacob vita beat l. 1. c. 6. * Homil de expos symboli p Ad milites temploserm 11. q Epist. 190. r Ibid. s Ibid. t Ibid. u In cant serm Domine bi memoâ⦠abor iustitiae tuae solius ipsa enim est mea c. * Supr l. 1. § 5. x De iustif p. 591. y Ego prorsus existimo piè Christiane dici quòd debemus niti niti inquam tanquam restabili quae certò nos sustentat iustitia Christi nobis donata non autem sanctitate gratia nobis inherente z Idcirco in conspectu Dei non possumus ob banc iustitiam nostram haberi iusti c. a Pigh de fide iustif cont 2. fol. 46. v. b Fol. 47. a. c Fol. 47. 6. d Loc. com l. 2. e Cap. de iustif f De iustif l. 2. c. 5. The Papists cavill at the word first because it is new a In voce ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Secondly they cavill at imputative iustice calling it putatitiam b 2 Cor. 12. 9. Thirdly that is no where to be found Bââ¦llar de iustif l. 2. c. 7. c Rom. 10. 3. Phil 3. 8 9. 2 Cor. 5. 21. d Rom. 5. 9. c 19. f Rom. 4. 6. h Epist. 190. His second and third aââ¦gument both prove imputation to bee needlesse Arg. 2. Imputation needlââ¦sse because remission is a totall deletion of sin That the remission of sinne is not the utter deletion of sinne the first reason Of this see more l. 2 c. 7. 8. i Esay 53. 5. Reason â⦠k Lib. 2. c. 7. §. 13. * 1 Ioh. 1. 8. 10. l Psal. 32. 1. 2. m Pro. 10. 1â⦠n Lib. 2. c. 8 o Pââ¦il 3. 14. De iustif lib. â⦠c. 7. §. tertiò Bellarmines third argument iustice infused is perfect therefore imputation of iustice is
needlesse a Mat. 8. 16. 14 l 31. 16. 8. Luk. 12. 28â⦠Bellarmines sixe proofes that faith is perfect First because it is perfect either here or never b Iohn 17. 3. c â⦠Cor. 13. 9. 10. 11 12. d Lib. de perfect justitiae His second reason because it is more precious than gold e 1 Cor. 11. 19. f Rom. 5. 3 4. g Iam. 1. 1â⦠h Iam. 1. 3. 1 Pet. 1. 7. His third reason because some beleeve with their whole heart i Psal. 12. 2. 1 Chro. 12. 33. 38 Hos. 10. 2. k Psal. 32. 2. Ioh. 1. 47. l Act. 8. 37 38. His fourth reason because Abrahams faith was perfect m Col. â⦠2. n Heb. 10. 22. His fifth and sixth reasons His sixth reason o 1 Thes. 1. 5. p Phil. 3. 14. Of hope De iustis l. 2. c. 7. § Denique de His first reason that chââ¦rity is perfect from the testimony of Augustine a Aug de Nat. Gr. cap. 42. b Ibid. cap. 70. c Epist. 29. ad Hieronym d Tract 41 in Ioan. Aug lââ¦b de perfectione iustitiae e Haec est nunc nostra iustitia qua currimus esurââ¦entes ad peââ¦fectionem plenitudmemque justitiae ut ea posteâ⦠saturemur Testimonies of Scripture alleadged by Bellarmine first Ioh. 15. 13. f in Ioan. 15. Christs love greater than that of Martyrs by way of appreciation g Tit. 2. 13. 14 h De recta fide ad Theodosiam i ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã dialog 3. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã k Advers haeres lib. 5. l De ãâã Do ââ¦nicae Sacram c. 6. Christs love greatet than that of Martyrs by way of intension m Luk 9. 51. n Luk. 22. 15. o Mat. 10. 39. 16. 25. Mar. 8. 35. Christs love greater than that of Martyrs in respect of extension His second proofe 1 Ioh. 2. 5 p 2 Cor. 12. 9. q 1 Iohn 2. 3 4. His third proofe Eccl. 47. 8. His fourth proofe Places which mention perfection Answer generall Answer particular to Mat. 5. 48. Answer to 1 Cor. 2. 6. Phil. 3. 15. Phil. 3. q v. 12. 13 14 15 r De perfect iustit s In paraphrasi Bellarmines conclusion De iustif l. 2. c. 7. §. Quartâ⦠Bellarmines fourth argument that we are not by Christs righteousnesse formally iust a See Lib. 1. c. 5. §. 2. b 2 Cor. 5. 21. c Rom. 7. 24. Bellarmines consession Bââ¦llarmines fifth argument that we should be as righteous as Christ himselfe d Lib. 1. c. 3. §. 9. Bellââ¦rmines sixth argument that in Adam we did not lose imputed righteousnesse e Prosper de voc beat l. â⦠c. 24. f Rom. 1â⦠29. g Depraedest 55. c. 16. Bellarmines seventh argument if by imtation we bee iust then Christ is a sinner h Vid. supr l. 5. c. 1. §. 4. c. i Joh. 1. ââ¦9 k Apoc 5. 12. l De iustif l. 2. c. 10. Bellarmines second syllogisme that after iustification we are called iust m 2 Cor. 5. 21. n Gal. 3. 13. o Supr c. 1. §. 4. c. How we are called iust His eighth argument out of the Canticles the S pouse of Christ beautifull in herselfe p Snpr. c. 4. n. 3. Bellarmines proofes that the Spouses beauty is her owne q Psal. 51. 6. 45. 11. 13 r Cant. 1. 5 His ninth ââ¦rgument ãâã the heart must be cleane before it can ice God tenthly because Christ redeemed us that we might be holy s Tit. 2. 14. t Luk. 1. 74. 75. The Papists errour concerning faith What fââ¦ith is how in generall it may be defined Faith is an assent The Greek fathers make assent ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the genus of faith Clemens Alex. Basâ⦠Theodoret. and Augustine saith that credere est cum assensu cogitare de praedestin 55. c. 2. a Act. 16. 14. b ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c Luk. 16. 31. 20. 6. Rom. 8. 38. 2 Tit. 1. 12. d ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c Iohn 3. 33. f Rom. 10. 17. g ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã h De utilit credendic 1. i Heb. 11. 1. k 1 Cor. 2. 9. Esai 64. 4. l Tit. 1. 2. Deut. 32. 4. Iob. 14. 6. m Stromat l. 2. n ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã o Heb. 11. 1. p ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Oââ¦cum § That justifying faith is not without knowledge q Bellarm. de ââ¦ustif l. â⦠c. 7. §. judicium Of Implicite Faith r Fides Carbonarii s Advers prolegom Brentii De authoritate Scripturae l. 3. The doctrine of implicit faith confuted first as false t Maldonet in Ioan. 17. 3. u In Ioan. 17. 3. * Gabr. Bicl in 3. Sentent dist 25. art 1. not 2. coroll 4. In tantum valet fides implicita ut dicunt aliqui quòd si habens eam faââ¦sòopinaretur Patrem majorem velpriorem filio c non peccat dummodo ââ¦unc errorem pertinaciter non defindit hoc ipsum credit quia credit ecclesiam sic credere Sic Innocent Hostiensis Ioan. Andreas Panormitanus in Rubric de summa Trinit fid Cathol Rosella fides nun 2. apud Azor. inftit moral lib. 8. c. 7. 8. Gabr. Biel. in 3. Sent. dist 25. art 3. dub 1. Si quis credit putans ecclesiam sic credere etiamsi erroneum fuerit non peccaâ⦠dummodo tamen pertin aciter non adââ¦aeret ui supra dictum notab 2. Imo quód amplius est haec fides meritum facit Nam talis non solùm non peccaret sed etiam sic creden do falsum mereretur The second absurdity that faith may be better defined by ignorance than by knowledge x 1 Cor. 2. 9. Bell. de justif l. 1 c. 7. Bellarmines proofes out of the Scriptures The first out of Esa. 7. 9. The second and third 1 Cor. 13. 2. and 1 Cor. 12. 9. y ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Chrysost. Oââ¦cum c. The fifth where obedience of faith is mentioned The testimonies of Fathers Iraen l. 2. c 45. Melius est nihil omninoscientem credere Deo perseverare in ejus dilectione quae hominem vivificat quam per quââ¦stionum subtilitates multiloquium in impietatem cadere Thus cited by Bellarmine z 1 Cor. 2. z Clemens Alexandrin Padagog l 3. c. 11. pag. 110. a Rom. 10. 17. Hilari l. 8. de Trinitate Augustine b Epist. 102. ad Evodium c Lib. 4 contr epist. fundamcap 4. d Tract 27. in Ioan. e Serm. de Temp. 189. qui est de Trinitate f De Agone Christiani c. 13. g Serm. de temp 189. Prosper De vita contempl l. 1. c. 19. h Heb. 4. 2. i Grègor Mor l. 2. c. 25. k De trinit l. 8. l Conââ¦r Luciferian m Homil. de bapt Christi n August in Psal. 118. conc 18. o Cyril Alex. in Ioan. l. 11 c. 16. p Athan. p. 248. q ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã r ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã s ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã t Fulgentius ââ¦ontr Arianos P. Lombard l 3. Sent. dist 24. C. Bellarm.
sinne not p Iam. 2. 10. q Gal. 3. 10. r De justif 3. 3. c. 15. s Expos in Gââ¦l c. 5. t Ioh. 9. 31. t 1 King 8. 46. u Eccl. 7. 20. * 1 Ioh. 1. 8 10. Our proofes that the Law is not possible were propounded before x Lib. 4. cap. 5. His discourse concerning the perfection of ãâã s was before refuted Lib. 4. y Lib. 4. c. 2. §. 8. 9. cap. 3. 4. Whether the best workes of the faithfull be sinnes z De justif l. 4. c. 15. 16. 17. * Lib 4. c. 2. 3. 4. De justif lib. 4. c. 18. The place of Jam. 2. 14. c. fully discussed and cleared A seeming difference bâ⦠tweene Saint Paul and Saint Iames. How it may be reconciled a Erasm. Cajetan Musculus c. Bellarmines reconciliation of Paul and Iames. b Lib. 1. c. 1. §. 8. l. 2. c. 6. §. 5. c Heb. 11. 8 9 17. Bellarmines absurdities noted d Rom. 4. 4 5. The Popish doctrine not grounded on Iam. 2. The Analysis of that passage beginning at the foureteenth verse That the faith which is with out workes is dead proved by five arguments e 1 Iââ¦hn 3. 7. f Jn Gal 3. lect 4. g Ibid. Verse 20. expounded The example of Abraham Verse 21. Verse 22. Verse 24. Verse 25. The example of Rahab The fifth argument â⦠similâ⦠verse 26. h De resurrect sermââ¦â⦠Object Concerning the contradiction of faith onely and not onely Our reconciliation of the two Apostles First from the diversity of the Partieâ⦠with whom they dealt Secondly from the divers acceptions of the words faââ¦th justifie wo kes By our doctrine the ââ¦ssertions of the two Apostles must goe together i Râ⦠10. 3. k Rom. 6. 1 c. ââ¦ph 2. 8 9 10. Tit. 3. 8. 1 Ioh. 1. 7 9. 2 1 2 3 4. l Act. 26. 1â⦠20. 32. m Tit. 3. â⦠Sixe oââ¦her testimonicââ¦ââ¦lleaged by Bellââ¦rmine n De justif l. 4. c. 19. o Lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 2. 3. Testimon 2. Rom. 6. 19. p Lib. 2. q Rom. 6 r Rom. 6. 3 4 c. s Vers. 18. His third tesââ¦imony 2 Cor 7. 1. His fourth tesââ¦mony 2 Cor. 9. 10 His fifââ¦h ââ¦estimony Ioh. 14. 23 His sixth testimony Apoc. 22. 11. Lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 5. cap. 5 §. 10. Bellarmines two Reasons This controversie in a manner the same with that of the necessity of efficiencie The state of the controversie a Concil Trident sess 6. cap. 16 can 32. b De justif l. 5. c. 10. Quolibet actu charitate informaââ¦o homo beatitudinem meretur Th. 1. q. 62. art 5. c. c Secundum propriam cuiusque dispositionem sess 6. cap. 8. d Mal. the Irish Iesuit pag. 699. e Conc. Trid. sââ¦ss 6. cap. ââ¦6 vitam aeternam verè promeruisse f Can. 32. verè mââ¦reri vitam aeternam g In Heb. 10. h Bellarm. de justif l. 5. c. 17. i Vasquez in prima secundae q. 114. disp 214. cap. â⦠Of this seâ⦠more in the answere to the challenge made by a Iesuit in Ireland pag. 520. Of the name merit k 2 Tim 1. 9. The use of the word in the Latine Fathers in a geââ¦erall sense of obtaining or finding ãâã l Sââ¦apleton in prââ¦mptuar ââ¦eria 5. post passionem Doââ¦ni Si aliquis veterum vocabulo promerendi usus est scilicet in illa historia Luk. 7. non aliter intellââ¦xit quà m consecutionem de ââ¦acto m Schol. in hymnum nocte surgentes 179. n Epist. ad Iubaââ¦anum o Consecutus sum p Adeptus sum q De Baptismo contra Donatist l. 4. c. 5. r Serm. 63. s De fide resurrect t De Cain Abel u De dignit sacerd cap. 5. * Presat in Abdinam x De fide operibus c. 14. y De tempore serm 49. z In Rom. 4. a Luk. 10. l. 22. b De prââ¦destin gratia c. 16. c De tempore serm 58. d Ibid. e De ââ¦ivit D. l. 5 c. 24. f In Psal. g Moral l. 9. c. 27. h In benedictione Cerei Salmeron in 1 Tim. 1. disp 3. pag. 421. The use of thâ⦠word in a more speciall sense i Epist. 105. ad Sixtum k In Levit. hom 3. l Advers Pelag. l. 2. 285. m De temporâ⦠serm 5â⦠n De justif l. 8. cop 8. o Ubi est nulla ratio meriti p De ââ¦ratia lib arb l. 1. c. 14. §. ââ¦anc esse Of the thing it selfe what merit is Arguments against merits q Viguerius r De quadruplici debitâ⦠s Serm de verbis Origeniâ⦠t Ethic. l. 8. c. 14. u In Gen. 6. 5. disput 5. * In Psal. 94. Whether God by his promise maketh himself a debtour x De verbis Apost serm 16. Rom. 4. 4. y 1 a. 2 ae q. 114. ad 3 um z Lib. 1. dist 43. dub 3. a Epist. 119. pag. 1110. b Durand The party meriting The thing meriting first must be our owne c 1 Cor. 15. 10. Esay 26. 12. d De justif lib. 5. cap. 10. § teââ¦iò e In Rom. 4. f Vigner cap. 9. §. 3. v. 1. g De annunciat sââ¦rm 1. h Quaest. 135. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã i Et illud quod sumus quââ¦d habââ¦mus sive sunt boni actus sive boni habituâ⦠seu usââ¦s totum est in nobis ex liberaliââ¦ate divina gratis danââ¦e conservante Et quia ex dono gratuito nullus obligatur ad dandum ampliââ¦s sed potius recipieââ¦s magis obligatur danti Idââ¦Ã² ex bonis habitibus ex bonis actibus seu usibus nobis à Deo dat is Deus non obligatur nobis ex aliquâ⦠debito justitiâ⦠ad ali quid amplius dandum ita quòd si non dederit sit injustus sed potiùs nos sumus Deo obligati Et sentire vel dicere oppââ¦situm est temerarium seu blaspemum Iâ⦠2 dist 27. qu. 2. §. 13. 14. Secondly that which doth merit must be free and not due k ââ¦lictov in Canonem missae l De justif lib. 5. cap. 10. m De quadruplici debito n De justif lib. 5. cap. 14. §. tertiò o Jbid. That worke which meriteth should be pure and perfect p Moral lib. 9. cap. 2. q Serm. 1. in annunciat r In Psal. 93. s ââ¦n Psal. 36. Conc. 2. t Euseb. Emiss ad Monach. serm 3. u ââ¦ulgent ad Mon. Lib. 1. * In Mat. 25. 46. Homil. 79 * So the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is sometimes used by approved Authours as Demââ¦stbenes Plutarch Gregory Nazianzen in which sence ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sometime signifieth ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã id munificientia liberalitate riclare cere See Hener Stephani Thesaurum Tom. 3. Col. 1559. A H ex Dudaeo The rule aââ¦cording to which the reward is rendred x August contr Pelag. Coelest l. 2. c. 24. y De Trin. l. 11. z De justif l. 5.