Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	faith_n	justify_v	work_n	69,048	5	7.2995	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56727	A brief vindication of free grace ... relating to several positions asserted by M. John Goodwin in his late book entituled, Redemption redeem'd, and in his former treatise of justification : delivered in a sermon before the Right Honourable, the Lord Mayor and aldermen of the city of London, at Pauls, May 30, 1652 / by John Pawson ...	Pawson, John, 1619 or 20-1654?	1652 (1652)	Wing P880; ESTC R13411	24,080	30

2 4. Being justified freely by his Grace c. Justified freely The word in the Original is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any price without any valuable consideration importing that we are justified gratis without any price without any valuable consideration on our own part from our selves For the vindicating of Free Grace in point of Justification I shall endeavour to clear this Proposition That nothing in our selves is of any valuable consideration in point of justifying us The Papists say our works are but that is an opinion now dead among us and therefore let it lye Others say our faith is What the Papists attribute to works these upon the matter attribute the like to faith to To credere They express themselves to this effect * In the same way that God required perfect obedience M. 1. Goodw. In putat of Faith part 1. page 14. in the first Covenant he now requires faith insteed of it in the second Covenant so that as works should have justified them before the fall so Faith now Christ in dying say they * did not Idem ibidem part 2. p. 33. bear the curse of the Law for us but only obtain that God should justifie us upon other terms then before i. e. by accepting faith for our righteousness In opposition hereunto I shall endeavour to prove that as faith of it self hath no such worth in it so Christ hath not purchased any such worth for it that it should be accounted or pass for righteousness How harmless soever this opinion seem at first view yet if we thorowly examine it and the consequences that attend it we shall find that it does in the issue attribute too much to self and too little to Christ and that it derogates from Free Grace and is contrary to the Gospel way of Justification I deny not but that Faith is a Gospel condition without which we cannot be justified yet not an immediate condition the very performance whereof is our righteousness but such a remote conditio as the performance thereof gives us interest in the righteousness of Christ the Lord our Righteousness 'T is not a condition so as works were before the Fall for the performance of works was that wherein righteousness before the Fall was to consist formally If faith succeed works in such a sense as being instead of works as some affirm then the performance of faith does make formally righteous if so then we may plead our faith at Gods Tribunal in the great day as Adam if he had not fallen might have pleaded his performance of works But this cannot be for 1. When we appear before God's judgement seat we must plead such a righteousness as will countervail and answer God's justice we cannot be justified but by a righteousness that will answer Justice for God is just in justifying Rom. 3. 26. therefore such a righteousness must be found out either inherent in us or imputed to us as is every way perfect that so God in justifying of us for such a righteousness may appear to be a just justifier Now the righteousness of Christ imputed to us is such a perfect righteousness as will fully answer the justice of God But for our faith 't is so far from being a perfect righteousness that it is not a perfect faith That is perfect to which nothing can be added but our best faith stands in need of addition and increase The Apostles pray'd Lord increase our Faith our faith therefore is not perfect much less a perfect righteousness To say it will find acceptation in mercy though not approbation in justice and so pass for righteousness upon that account is to make Gods mercy shut out his Justice whereas Gods great designe was to manifest both those attributes in the justification of man not only though chiefly his mercy but likewise his justice This appears by that fore alledged place Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth or appoynted c. That God would admit of any Redemption for us and that he would likewise provide and appoint a Redeemer herein was Grace and Mercy manifested But yet you shall see he had an Eye likewise to the manifestation of his Justice for it follows in the next words whom he set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his righteousness or his justice that he might be just This is quite contrary to that passage forecited out of the promoters of To credere Christ in dying say they did not bear the curse of the Law for us i. e. satisfie justice in our steed but only obtain'd that God should ust fie us upon other terms 1. e. accept of our faith for righteousness No says Paul Christ did satisfie justice for us God appointed him to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a propitiation which argues satisfaction and appeasment of Justice and God so ordered it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the declaration of his justice that he might be just or that he might appear to be just in justifying as Paroeus clears that place Should Christ only obtain of God to accept of imperfect faith in stead of perfect righteousnes how would there be any manifestation of justice in it yea consider wel whether there would be any truthherein if that should pass for righteousness which is not so indeed Rom. 2. 2. the judgement of God is according to truth that which is not righteousness cannot be judged and esteemed so before God Indeed there is in some sense a difference betwixt Gods judging according to justice and according to mercy But Gods judging according to mercy is not judging a person perfectly righteous for a righteousness which is imperfect but for a perfect righteousness which is not his own In this judgement there is both truth and mercy Truth in that God esteems us perfectly righteous for that righteousness which is every way perfect even the righteousness of Christ Mercy in that he esteems us righteous for that righteousness which is not our own only by imputation ours and of his providing for us When God judges declares or esteems us righteous 't is for some righteousness in us or imputed to us we cannot be righteous but by a righteousness faith is not a righteousness 2. If faith were a righteousness it would be a self righteousness for faith is mentioned in Scripture as a thing that is our own Mer. 10. 5. Thy faith says Christ to Bartimeus Col. 1. 4. I have heard of your faith When we believe it is not God believes in us though we do it by his sepcial assistance though it be done by grace in abling assisting not by strength of Nature yet it is we that do it and the act is properly ours and being so if we were justified by it there would be place for our boasting in it more or less If To credere deserve the name of a righteousness 't

is apparently our own righteousness but Paul in point of Justification utterly disclaims his own righteousness Phil. 3. 9. He desires to be found in Christ not having his own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith In which Text the Apostle does not distinguish self-righteousness into two sorts disclaiming only one of them but he distinguishes inter propriam justiciam alienam discaiming utterly all self-righteousness of what sort soever as a law-righteousness and laying hold upon anothers righteousness i. e. Christs This seems clear from the antithesis that I may be found in Christ not having mine own righteousness i. e. in Christ's righteousness not in mine own Not having mine own righteousness sayes the Apostle but that which is through the faith of Christ or what if we construe it thus Not having mine own righteousness but that of Christs through faith the Originall will bear such a construction though I will not ground upon it However this is clear from that latter part of the verse the righteousness which Paul rested upon is such a righteousness as comes in through faith and by faith therefore faith is neither it nor any part of it When faith is said to justifie or to be imputed for righteousness it is not meant faith of it self but faith in regard of its crucisied object That we do not speak this gratis but upon Scripture grounds we will instance in a chapter where the Apostle expresses himself fully and punctually to the very case in hand it is Gal. 3. one of the most pregnant places which the promoters of To credere make use of where indeed Paul affirms that we are justified by faith and that faith is imputed for righteousness But we shall find that Paul in that very chapter uses the word faith again and again for the object of faith so v. 23. before faith came we were kept under the law c. and again v. 25. after that faith is come we are no longer under a Schoolmaster By the coming of faith is here undeniably meant the coming of the object not the act of faith and so twice in that chapter v. 7. 9. they are said to be the children of Abraham who are of faith i. e. they who are of Christ by faith So that we see the Apostle in this very chapter wherein he speaks of justification by faith uses the word faith in a relative and metanimical sense as it imports Christ Now add hereunto that faith in a proper sense To cred●re the very act cannot be imputed for righteousness cannot justifie as the arguments before evince 'T is true faith in a proper sense is faith in Christ and so includes Christs righteousness as the object of it but yet we must distingnish betwixt the act and the object though the act cannot be without the object and so the adversaries themselves do when they say that To credere is imputed and not Christs righteousness they do in those very words distinguish betwixt the act and the object as we do Only the thing in question betwixt us is whether we be accepted righteous for that act of ours of which Christs righteousness is the object or for that righteousness of Christ upon which our act is terminated or for both taken together The first makes our act the thing for which we are righteous Christ only the object of it so establishes a self-righteousness wholy The last makes us to be accepted righteous for a righteousness from two distinct subjects our selves and Christ which cannot be and beside it establishes a self-righteousness in part which must not be The middle way only attributes all to Christ when we rely for justification not upon our own act but upon Christs righteousness the object of it To shun all ambiguity in terms we mean in plainer terms thus There is an apparent difference betwixt believing in Christ and Christ believed in We are not justifyed by our believing in Christ but by our Christ believed in even as we are not clothed by puting on the garments but by the garments put on nor cured by applying the plaister but by the plaister applyed Christs righteousness is not only the object of that act which is imputed to us for righteousness but it is the very thing the formal cause the formalis ratio that makes us righteous in point of justification To say that only the merit of Christs righteousness not the righteousness it self is imputed to us even as the demerit of Adams sin not his sin are both spoken gratis they tend to prove that Christ merited that faith might be accepted which is such another shift as that of the Papists Christ merited that we might merit and therefore there is subtlety enough in so saying but no truth in it For unless the sin of Apam and the righteoufnes of Christ be imputed the demerit or merit cannot one being the foundation of the other and inseparable Beside 't is contrary to that of the Apostle Rom. 5. 19. As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many righteous We are sinners by Adams disobedience not by the demerit of it only his very act of disobedience is imputed to us not only the demerit of it and so for Christs obedience and it stands with reason for Adam bare the person of all mankinde and therefore his act was ours Rom. 5. 12. In whom all have sinned says the Apostle speaking of Adam Our Translation renders it forasmuch but in the Original it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In whom all have sinned As a father selling or forseiting his estate his act is the act of all his posterity so it is in this case the very disobedience of Adam is imputed to us as our sin not only the demerit of it and likewise the very obedience of Christ is imputed to us for our righteousness not only the merit of it Rom. 4. 6 11. in both verses a righteousness is said to be imputed now there is no righteousness any where to be found but the righteousness of Christ Beside 't is said a righteousness is imputed now imputation properly is when something that is in another person is reckoned and accounted ours set upon our score our account though indeed not in us but in another person That this is the signification of the word appears from that of Paul to Philemon v. 18. If Onesimus ow thee any thing put that to my account 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same word which before and elsewhere is used and translated impute and so both Reza and the old translation render this Text if Onesimus owe thee any thing illud mihi imputato impute it to me or set it upon my account as we read it Thus the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us set upon our account reckoned upon our score though not a thing in us of our own If thus