in everlasting righteousnesse Dan. 9. 24. § VII Inst. III. If we bee justified by Christ his fulfilling of the Law then wee are justified by a legall righteousnesse but wee are not justified by a legall justice but by such a righteousnesse as without the Law is revealed in the Gospell Answ. The same righteousnesse by which we are justified is both legall and Evangelicall in divers respects Legall in respect of Christ who being made under the Law that hee might redeeme us who were under the Law perfectly fulfilled the Law for us Evangelicall in respect of us unto whom his fulfilling of the Law is imputed And herein standeth the maine both agreement and difference betweene the Law and the Gospell The agreement that both unto justification require the perfect fulfilling of the Law the difference that the Law requireth to justification perfect obedience to be performed in our owne persons The Gospell propoundeth to justification the righteousnesse of God that is the perfect righteousnesse of Christ who is God performed for us and accepted in the behalfe of them that beleeve as if it had been performed in their own persons § VIII Our second reason As by the disobedience of the first Adam by which he transgressed the Law men were made sinners his disobedience being imputed to them so by the obedience of the second Adam whereby hee fulfilled the Law men are made righteous his obedience being imputed to them In answer to this argument two novelties are broached the former that as wee were made sinners by one act of disobedience committed by one man and that but once so we are justified by one act of obedience performed by one and that but once which was that oblation of Christ whereby hee but once offered himselfe Whereunto I reply first that betweene sinne whereby the Law is broken and obedience whereby the Law is fulfilled there is great ods The Law is broken by any one act of sinne for hee that offendeth in any one is guilty of all But the Law is not fulfilled by any one act of obedience but by a totall perfect and perpetuall observation of the Law for by the sentence of the Law hee is accursed whosoever doth not continue in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them But in no one act of obedience there neither is nor can bee a continuance in doing all the things that are commanded Secondly that although the obedience by which we are justified was but of one man yet it was not one act but as the Apostle calleth it in the verse going before ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Now ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is all that the Law requireth to justification The second Novelty is that neither Adam in sinning transgressed the Law nor our Saviour in his obedience to death obeyed the Law For neitheâ⦠the commandement given to the first Adam concerning the forbidden fruit nor the commandement given to the second Adam concerning his suffering of death for us was any commandement of the Law no more than the commandement given to Abraham for the sacrificing of his sonne or to the Israelites for the spoiling of the Aegyptians but a speciall commandement Whereto I reply that although every thing which God commandeth in particular be not expressed in the Law yet wee have a generall commandement expressed in the Law that whatsoever God commandeth we must doe and if we doe it not we sinne and every sinne is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is a transgression of the Law § IX Our third reason If Christ by his conformity to the Law fulfilled the Law for us then his obedience in fulfilling of the Law is accepted of God in our behalfe as if wee had fulfilled it in our owne persons but Christ by his conformity to the Law fulfilled the Law for us therefore his obedience in fulfilling of the Law is accepted of God in our behalfe as if wee had fulfilled it in our owne persons that is to say both his habituall and actuall righteousnesse is imputed to us The consequence of the proposition is necessary for if hee performed obedience for us and in our behalfe he performed it in vaine if it be not accepted for us and in our behalfe The assumption also is of necessary truth for first that Christ did fulfill the Law it is evident for himselfe professeth that he came to fulfill the Law Matth. 5. 17. that it became him to fulfill all righteousnesse Matth. 3. 15. that he did alwayes those things which please God Ioh. 8. 29. and the Scripture testifieth that not for himselfe but for us hee fulfilled ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã whatsoever the Law requireth to justification that his whole life was a perpetuall course of obedience ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã even untill his death which he performed not for himselfe for as hee was incarnate not for himselfe but for us men and for our salvation for it was the exinanition of himselfe so being incarnate he sanctificed himselfe for us and was made under the Law not for himselfe for that was a farther degree of humiliation that being man hee humbled himselfe to bee obedient even untill his death and therein also humbled himselfe to undergoe the death of the crosse The Apostle Rom. 10. 4. teacheth that Christ is thâ⦠end that is the perfection ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as the Greeke Fathers speake that is complement of the Law to all that beleeve unto righteousnesse that is that hee hath fulfilled the Law for all beleevers in so much that all who truely beleeve have in Christ fulfilled the Law Upon which place Remigius writing saith Christus finââ¦ââ¦gis in completio legis Christ the end of the Law that is the fulfilling of the Law Theodoret. He that beleeveth in our Lord Christ hee hath fulfilled the scope of the Law and what that is Chrysostome sheweth For saith hee What did the Law intend To make a man just but it was not able for never any fulfilled it but this end our Saviour Christ hath more amply accomplished through faith if therefore thou beleevest in Christ thâ⦠hast not onely fulfilled the Law but much more than it commanded for thou hast received a farre greater righteousnesse and what can that be but the righteousnesse of Christ And Photias whosoever therefore saith the Apostle beleeveth in Christ hee fulfilleth the Law Sedulius likewise hee hath the perfection of the Law who beleeveth in Christ. This therefore doth plainely prove that Christs obedience in fulfilling the Law is imputed to all that beleeve unto righteousnesse as if themselves had fulfilled it And this is the conceived doctrine of the Church of England that Christ satisfied the justice of God and redeemed us not onely by the oblation of his body and shedding of his blood but also by the full and perfect fulfilling of the
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
which 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
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
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
his conversion he was touching the righteousnes which is in the Law blamelesse Phil. 3. 6. They were blamelesse before men but not faultles before God For Zacharias did use to sacrifice for his owne sinnes as well as for others as Augustine saith in his answere to this argument alleaged by the Pelagians And who knoweth not that for the sinne of incredulity hee was both deafe and dumbe for a time As touching the Apostles before the resurrection of Christ though our Saviour call them his friends and giveth them this testimony that they had kept his word yet who can bee ignorant how farre they were at that time from perfection and with how great imperfections they kept his word But it is strange that he should alleage the example of S. Paul Rom. 7. as one that had kept the Commandement forbidding concupiscence when in that chapter hee doth not onely confesse that by that Commandement hee was convicted to bee a sinner in that hee had concupiscence but also that that habituall concupiscence might appeare exceedingly sinnefull it did take occasion by the Law to worke in him all manner of actuall concupiscence § XIV But Bellarmines conceit is that concupiscence in the Apostle was no sinne because he did not consent to it Whereto I answere first that as he was carnall he did consent unto it but not as he was spirituall for so hee saith I delight in the Law of God after the inward man but I see another Law in my members warring against the Law of my mind and bringing me into captivity to the Law of sin which is in my members Whereupon he cryeth out v. 24. O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death meaning therby the flesh or the body of sin Secondly though the Apostle had not consented to concupiscence yet both the habituall concupiscence it self remainning in him after his regeneration and the actual concupiscences going before coââ¦sent arising from thence were sins The habituall is often called by the Apostle a sin and is noted to be the sinning sin which taking occasion by the Law to send forth evill concupiscences namely which the Law forbiddeth was exceedingly sinfull As for those ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or first motions of sinne in the thought or affections going before consent and arising from our owne concupiscence they are those very sinnes which are directly forbidden in the tenth Commandement for those which are joyned with consent are forbidden in the former Commandements Neither could Paul who had beene trayned up in the Law bee ignorant of that which the very heathen knew by the light of nature that evill concupiscence accompanyed with consent was a sinne But that which is forbidden in the tenth commandement the Apostle had not knowne to bee a sinne except the Law had said thou shalt not lust or thou shalt not have any evill concupiscence Hence Bellarmine concludeth that because the Law hath beene kept by many it is possible Neither doe we deny it to bee kept by the faithfull in respect of their upright walking in all the Commandements of God but wee deny it to be perfectly fulfilled by them Their new obedience which they performe with upright hearts and willing mindes hath the title of perfection given unto it and is a perfection begunne in respect of the parts for even an infant that is formed in the wombe is perfect in respect of his parts and is accepted of God in Christ the Lord not imputing to the faithfull their imperfections And it is a good saying of Augustine Oââ¦nia ergo mandata facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur All the Commandements are esteemed as done when that whââ¦ch is not done is pardoned § XV. But this answere concerning perfection of obedience begunne and the imperfections remitted will not serve the turne saith Yeaââ¦zechias ââ¦zechias professââ¦th that he had walked before the Lord in truth and with a perfect heart And if Ezechias walked before God with a perfââ¦ct heart who will deny it to Abraham to whom it was said walke before me and be perfect Answ. Wee doe read that the faithfull did keepe the Law but wee never read that they did abââ¦olutely fulfill it but that all of them had their imperfections and their sinnes And although many oâ⦠them abounded with good workes yet their justification consisted in the remission of their sinnes and Gods acceptation of them in Christ imputing righteousnesse unto them without workes And where as it is said that they obeyed God with their whole heart and with a perfect heart this is to be understood of an entire or upright heart The hebrew words Tham Thom Tââ¦min and Shalem which signifââ¦e perfect or perfection are synonyma or words of the same sence with ââ¦ashar Iosher and Emeth that is upright uprightnesse and truth or sincerity and are signified by the phrase of walking with God or be fore God and aââ¦e the same with the Greek words ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã all of them opposed not to imperfection but to hypocrisie For Thom Tham and Thamin consider these places Psal. 35. 21. where Thom and Iosher are used as synonima the latter being the exposition of the former Let perfection and ãâã preserve mee Iosh. 24. 14. Where Thamin and Emââ¦th are used promiscuously serve the Lord in perfection and in truth Psal. 37. 37. where Tham and Iashar are put for the same observe the perfect man and behold the upright for the end of that man is peace So Iob is commended to have been Ish Thâ⦠Vejashar a perfect and upright man The word Shalem which in the same speech of Ezechias 2 King 20. 3. is by the 72. translated ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã perfect is by them reââ¦dred Esay 38. 3. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a true heart as an upright heart is called Heb. 10. 22. § XVI The phrase of performing dueties with the whole heart Deut. 26. 16 as to seeke God with all the heart Deut. 4. 29. Psal. 119. â⦠10. to keepe his Commandements with all the heart and with all ââ¦he soule 2 King 23. 3. Psal. 119. 34 69. to turne unto the Lord with all the heart Ioââ¦l 2. 12. importeth nothing else where it is not legally understood but an entyre or upright heart that is not an heart and an heart as hypocrites use to speake Psal. 12. 2. 1 Chron. 12. 33. the phrase not with an heart and an heart is expounded vers 38. to be a perfect or upright heart Thus to serve the Lord in truth is to serve him with the whole heart 1 Sam. 12. 24. and to praise God with the whole heart Psal. 9. 1. 111. 1. is to praiââ¦e him with uprightnesse of heart Psal. 119. 7. Thus to walke with God or before God is to bee perfect or upright Gen. 17. 1. and to bee perfect or upright is to walke with God or before him for to
for the absolute possibility of fulfilling the Law but rather against it For those who are not at all times so willing as they ought to be to fulfill the Law they cannot allwaies fulfill it But no man is at all times so willing as he ought to be to fullfill the Law Augustine averreth Nââ¦minem esse qui tantum velit ãâã res exigit therfore no man is able allwaies to fulfill it For although perhaps he could if hee would which as even now I said is not generally true of the regenerate themselves yet whiles hee will not hee cannot For the will of obeying is the chiefe part of obedience The meaning therfore of those Fathers is that the impossibility of the Law is not to be ascribed to the Law as if it were not possible but to the will of man who will not obey it § XXII Now that the Fathers who deny the Law to be impossible doe not meane that it is absolutely possible to be perfectly fulfilled appeareth by these reasons First because they yeelded so farre to the objection of the Pelagians as not to deny it to be possible to the unregenerate as I noted before Secondly because they held that all men are sinners and that no man in this mortall life can live without sinne and consequently without transgressing the Law Now it is manifest that hee who transgresseth thâ⦠Law doth not fulfill it But when we thus argue Bellarmine saith we confound two questions which ought not to be confounded whether the Commandements may be kept and whether a man may live without sinne which questions are so different that to the former ââ¦gustine allwayes answered affirmatively to which purpose ââ¦ee citeth Dâ⦠peccat merit remiss lib. 2. cap. 3. 6. De Nââ¦tur gratia c. 69. De gratia lib. arbitr c. 16. in Psal. 56. And to the latter negatively to which purpose hee quoteth Lib. de Natur. gratia cap. 34. De spiritu litera cap. ult contr 2. Epistolas Pelag. c. 14. Epist. 89. 95. and the whole booke de perfectione justitiâ⦠Aââ¦sw This say I is a plaine evidence that Augustine when hee saith which wee also say that a man may keepe the Commandements meaneth not the perfect fulfilling of the Law For if the question be propounded concerning the perfect fulfilling of the Law it is the same in effect with the other For hee that perfectly fulfilleth the Law doth undoubtedly live without ââ¦nne and hee that doth not live without sinne doth not perfectly fulfill the Law Wherefore the affirmation of the one question understood of perfect fulfilling and the Negation of the other doth imply a contradiction Thirdly Because the fathers explane their meaning when they say that the Law is possible and that a man may keepe the commandements not in respect of the perfect fulfilling but partly in respect of the sinceââ¦e study and upright endevour to performe and partly in respect of Gods mercie in Christ pardoning what is wanting in their obedience So saith Augustine hîc studium pracepta servandi gratia Dei tribuit quâ⦠si quid etiam in eis prââ¦ceptis minus servââ¦tur ignoscit Here the grace of God bestoweth the study of keeping the precepts which also if any thing in those precepts be not kept it pardoneth which I cited before all the commandements are reputed to be done when whatsoever is not done is pardoned And elsewhere hee saith that our righteousââ¦esse in this life doth consist rather in remission of sins than in perfection of virtues For as touching perfection he saith Vââ¦rtutem quae nuâ⦠est in homine justo perfectam hactenus nominare ut ad ejus perfectionem pertineat etiam ipsius imperfectionis in veritate agnitio in humilitate confessio that the virtue which now is in a just man is ââ¦o farre forth called perfect that to the perfection thereof appertaineth both the acknowledgment of the imperfection there of in truth and the confââ¦ssion of it in humilily § XXIII But heââ¦e Bellarmine holdeth a strange paraââ¦oxe That although a man cannot live without sin yet he may perfectly fulfill the Law of God The absurdity whereof hee hopeth to salve with the distinction of sinnes into veniall and mortall because veniall sinnes without which none are in this life doe not hinder the fulfilling of the Law But this distinction will not serve his turne unlesse hee can prove that veniall sinnes are no sinnes For if they be sinnes they are transgressions of the Law And if they be transgââ¦essions of the Law as undoubtedly thââ¦y are or else they be no sinnes then hee that cannot live witââ¦out them cannot live without transgression of the Law and hee thââ¦t cannot live without transgression of the Law cannot perfectly fulfill it I will not enter into the full discussing of this question at this time because it is another controversy onely for the clearing of the point in hand I doe avouch according to the Sââ¦riptures that the wages of sinne or stipend Rom. 6. 23. the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the just recompence of reward Heb. 2. 2. is death and that the least sinne according to the sentence of the Law if it be a sinne maketh a man subjââ¦ct to the curse of God Gal. 3. 10. And that as every sinne deserveth death and therefore in it self is mortall so every sinne is punishââ¦d with death either with the death of the party who hath no part in Christ to whom all sinnes are mortall or with the death of Christ as the sinnes of those who are his members to whom their sinnes which in their owne nature are mortall become veniall as being allready punished in Christ and the justice of God satisfied for them by the satisfaction given by Christ whose bloud doth cleanse us from all our sinnes both great and small none being so small but that it is of sufficient weight to presse down the sinner to hell being of infinit guilt committed against infinite justice deserving infinite punishment for which the justice of God cannot be satisfyed but by a propitiation of infinite value Thus therefore I reason That sinnâ⦠which is punished with the death of Christ is in it selfe mortall all and every even ââ¦he least sinne of the faithfull is punished with the death of Christ therfore all and every even the least sinne of the faithfull is in it selfe mortall But Bellarmine hath a conceipt that veniall sinnes are not simply siââ¦nes nor against the Law but besides it I answere First that which is besides the Law is an aberration from it and a declination from it ââ¦ither to the right hand or to the left and that is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and is absolutely forbidden Secondly to doe that which is besides the Law is not to doe that which is commanded but hee that doth not the thing commanded that doth not all that doth not continue in doing all is subject to the
curse Thirdly Whatsoever is not agreeable or conformable to the Law is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is a sinne But that which is besides the Law is not conformable unto it therefore it is a sinne and a transgression of the Law which whosoever committeth hee doth not fulfill the Law Fourthly Things forbidden in the Law are against the Law Those which they call veniall sinnes are forbidden in the Law For either they are forbidden or commanded or neither forbidden nor commanded If they be commanded then are they duetyes and not sinners if neither commanded nor forbidden then are they ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã things indifferent it remayneth therefore that they are forbidden § XXIV Now because the proofe of this point that the fulfilling of the Law is not possible unto us is a matter of great consequence for thereby the popish doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse in generall and by workes in particular is evidently confuted I will to those arguments heretofore used adde the testimonies of antiquity in requitall of Bellarmines allegations out of the Fathers First Therefore Iustin Martyr saith that never any man did accurately performe all the things that are commanded ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Secondly Eusebius Caesariensis demonstrates that things required in ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to all men impossible Thirdly Ambrose Tanta mandata sunt ut impossibile sit servari ea so great things are commanded that it is impossible they should be kept whence Peter in the Acts of the Apostles saith why doe you impose a yoke upon the brethren which neither our fathers nor we were able to beare Fourthly Chrysostome what did the Law intend to make a man just but it was not able ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for no man did fulfill it 2. No man could be justified by the Law unlesse hee fulfilled all ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã But this was not possible to any man therfore that righteousnesse it self is quashit 3. That the Apostle by Testimony cited out of Deut. proveth ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that no man hath fulfilled the Law Hierome and Augustine in this point deliver the same things against the Pelagians which wee doe against the Papists Fifthly Quoniam a. saith Hierome nemo potest implere legem that no man can fulfill the Law and doe all things that are commanded the Apostle testifieth also elsewhere For that which was impossible of the Law in that it was weake through the flesh Rom. 8. 3. c. 2. This is the onely perfection of men if they know themselves to be unperfect And you saith hee when you have done all say wee are unprofitable servants wee have done what was our duety to doe If hee be unprofitable who hath done all what is to be said of him who was not able to fulfill 3. And againe thou saist the Commandements of God are easie tamen nullum proferre potes qui universa compleverit and yet canst bring forth none that hath fulfilled them all 4. God saith the Pelagian hath given possible Commandements and who denyeth this but how this sentence is to bee understood the vessell of election most plainely teacheth that which was impossible of the Law in that it was weak through the flesh c that is that the Law is not simply impossible but by reason of the flesh that which was possible before the fall is since the fall impossible by reason of mans coruption 5. When the Pelagians said that although no man bee without sinne yet he might be without sinne what kinde of arguing saith he is this posse esse quod nunquam fuerit that that may be which never was posse fieri quod nullum fecisse testeris that that may be done which your selfe testifie never any man did and to attribute that I know not to whom which you can never prove to have beene in the Patriarches or Prophets or Apostles 6. That which our Saviour Christ saith if thou wilt be perfect is said to him who could not yea would not and therefore could not 7. Then are we just when we confesse our selves to be sinners and our righteousnesse consisteth not of our owne merit but of Gods mercie 8. If wee doe not that which we would but worke that which wee would not how say ye that a man may be without sinne if he will Behold the Apostle and all beleevers are not able to accomplish what they would 9. Having cited many testimonies to prove that no man is justified by the workes of the Law all these saith he I runne through ut ostendam a nullo legem esse imââ¦letam that I might shew that the Law is fulfilled of none meaning by the Law all the Commandements which are contained in the Law 10. If you can shew the man who hath fulfilled all then may you shew a man who needeth not Gods mercie 11. The Law is made weake quoniam nemo potest iââ¦plere eam nisi Dominus because none but our Lord can fulfill it VI. Augustine saith that to that immortall life appertaineth that precept thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart with all thy soule and with all thy might but to this life let not sinne reigne in your mortall bodies to obey the lusts thereof to that life thou shalt not lust to this thou shalt not goe after thy lusts 2. God doth so worke righteousnesse in his Saints labouring under the temptation of this life that notwithstanding there remaineth both what he may largely adde to them when they aske and also what he may mercifully forgive when they confesse 3. In the same chapter hee had said that the two Commandements of loving God with all our heart and our neighbours as our selves wee shall fulfill when we shall see face to face But saith he the same is now commanded us ut admoneremur quid fide exposcere quò spem praemittere ut oblivisââ¦endo quaeretro sunt in quae anteriââ¦ra nos extendere debeamus that wee might be admonished what by faith to desire whether to send before our hope unto what things which are before we should preasse forward forgetting what is behind 4. That the virtue which now is in a just man is so farre to be called perfect that to the perfection thereof there belongeth the acknowledgment of its imperfection in verity and the confession thereof in humility for then this petite justice is according to its small measure infirmely perfect when it understandeth what is wanting to it selfe And therefore the Apostle saith both that he is unperfect and that hee is perfect unperfect considering how much he wanted unto justice the fulnesse whereof he did as yet hunger after and thirst perfect both because he is not ashaââ¦ed to confesse his imperfections and goeth forward well that he may attaine unto it 5. Surely hee that is renewed from day to day which is the cause
state of perfection or supererogation as that it is for the most part a sinnefull state and that in three respects First in respect of making the vow For it is sinne to vow that which a man doth not know to be lawfull or not in his owne power then doth hee sinne with an high hand not onely resolving but also vowing to sinne and to continue therein Secondly in respect of the performing the vow when the thing vowed viz. continencie in single life doth appeare not to be in their power and yet to performe their vow of single life live in incontinency and uncleanenesse Many times it falleth out that a man at the first doth not know the thing vowed to be either not lawfull or not in his power yet because he doth not know it to be lawfull and in his power he sinneth by rash vowing but when afterwards it doth appeare to be either unlawfull or not in his power he is not bound to keepe that vow which rashly he made but hee is bound to breake it for by performing it he addeth sinne to sinne and many times a greater sinne to a lesse that is to the rashnesse of his vow the incontinencie of his life And this is perpetuall among the Popish votaries who never dissolve their vow though the performance of it bee never so wicked Thirdly because the vowed single life among the Papists being for the most part so filthy and abominable that all the world cryeth shame upon them for their filthinesse yet by them is obtruded unto God as a matter not onely of religion and satisfaction but also of merit of perfection and supererogation And the like might be said of their vow of blinde obedience For simple and absolute obedience is onely to bee vowed and performed to God But to vow the like towards any sinfull man who either doth or at least may command that which is unlawfull as sometimes they doe to murther Princes or to attempt other traiterous practises c. and to thinke that in so doing he doth merit and supererogate it is to forsake God § VII His second reason If the Commandements were impossible they would binde no man And so the precepts should bee no precepts for it cannot bee imagined how any man should sinne in that which hee cannot avoid c. His reason is thus to be framed To that which is impossible no man is tyed To the Commandements all men are tyed Therefore the Commandements are not impossible The assumption which no man denyeth he proveth because if they did not binde they were no precepts neither were the transgression of them a sinne The proposition he proveth because it cannot bee imagined how a man should sinne in that which he cannot avoid I answere as heretofore by distinction That the Commandements are said to be impossible either simply or by accident If therefore the meaning of his conclusion be that the Commandements bee not simply and absolutely impossible then I grant all for wee never held that the Commandements are simply impossible for to man both before his fall and after his resurrection they were and shall be absolutely possible But since the fall they are impossible in respect of the perfect performance in and by our selves not simply but by reason of the flesh that is to say through our owne default For if wee would not have sinned in Adam the Law had beene possible unto us but by our voluntary sinne we lost both ãâã possibilitatis and also possibilitatem non peccandâ⦠Now it were absurd to imagine that our fault should free us from obedience Howbeit even after the fall there is a distinction to be held betweene men unregenerate in the corrupt state of nature and the regenerate in the state of grace To the unregenerate the Law is impossible through their owne default which doth not lessen their sinne for they sinne voluntarily and many times of malice as the devils also doe who though they have brought upon themselââ¦es a necessity of sinning so that they can doe no other but sinne yet this doth not as I said extenuate their sinne for they commit sinne with greedinesse but rather aggravate their finfulnesse Those that are habituated in sinne in whom custome is become as it were another nature they can no more of themselves ceasse from sinning than a Black-moore can wash away his blackenesse Ier. 13. 23. § VIII Yea but saith Bellarmine It cannot bee imagined how a man should sinne in that which hee cannot avoid Answ. That seemeth to be true in respect of the liberty of contradiction but not in respect of the liberty of contrariety In respect of a sinfull action a man hath liberty to doe it or not to doe it which wee call the liberty of contradiction But he hath not liberty to doe that which is good his naturall will enabling him onely to sinne So that although a naturall man may abstaine from this or that sinfull act yet he sinneth in whatsoever he doth neither can he doe any other but sinne If therefore they doe not sin who are not able to fulfill the Law then all Infidels yea all naturall men who cââ¦n doe nothing but sinne should be exempted from sinning which is absurd To the regenerate man as I said before the Law is possible both in respect of his faith For he that truely beleeveth in Christ hath fulfilled the Law in Christ. Secondly in regard of his new obedience and that in three respects For first his new obedience though it be not compleat yet it is obedientia inchoata and though it be not a fulfilling of the Law yet it is an acceptable keeping thereof Secondly though it be unperfect and stayned with the flesh yet being ââ¦ntyre that is sincere and upright it is in Christ accepted as perfect Thirdly because the imperfection thereof being covered with Christs perfect obedience and cured by his intercession is remitted Now all is esteemed done when that which is not done is remitted § IX His third reason If God should command things impossible he should be more cruell horresco referens and more foolish than any tyrant in exacting atribute from his owne friends which none were able to pay and making such Lawes which he knew none were able to performe But the Consequent is blasphemous therefore the antecedent To the proposition I answere as before by distinction That if God should command things simply impossible there would besome colour for his blasphemous consequence But the Lord commandeth nothing but what to man in his first creation was absolutely possible neither doth he exact any tribute which he did not make us able to pay nor make any law which we were not able to observe And although now wee cannot in our selves fulfill it yet God was not tyed to accommodate his Law like a Lesbian rule to our weakenesse contracted by our owne default but it became him to propound such Lawes as were answerable to our first integrity describing
the flesh but after the Spirit § XI As if the Apostle had said Although the body of sinne and death remaine in us who are both justified which made mee cry out chap. 7. 24 yet forasmuch as wee are delivered therefrom by Iesus Christ our Lord to whom all thanks is therefore due vers 25. I doe therfore now assure all the faithfull and true members of Christ who may be knowne by this marke that they live not after the flesh but after the Spirit that they are delivered from damnation and their salvation is sure Now there are 2. things whereby Christ hath delivered us from the law of sin and death that is from the power or guilt of sin and of death the former is the power and merit of Christs perfect obedience and holynes which is called the law of the Spirit of life in Christ the other his sufferings wherein he yeelded an all-sufficient satisfaction by bearing the punishment whereby sinne was condemned in our nature which had sinned which nature though ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã free from sinne as Chrysostââ¦me speaketh yet like to the sinfull flesh that is to say passible hee therefore tooke upon him that because by the observation of the law in our owne persons it was impossible by reason of our flesh to be justified all which the Law required to justification might ââ¦ee doth not say by us but in us that is in our nature be performed by Christ for it is Christ as Chrysostââ¦me saith that fulfilled ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in us and for us who are his true members and are to be knowne as I said by this marke that live not after the flesh but after the Spirit And therefore this place proveth that because it is impossible by reason of the flesh to bee justified by that righteousnesse which is prescribed in the Law therefore God in his mercy sent his Sonne to take our nature upon Him that therein he might performe for us whatsoever the Law it selfe required to justification Thus this place is expounded by Chrysostome ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã saith he is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã not to be subject to the curse and that Christ fulfilled it for us Oecumenius in like maner If any man should say what is this to us He saith these things Christ did that the scope of the Law for that is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã might be fulfilled in us And what is the scope of the Law That wee should not bee obnoxious to the curse Or as Chrysostome in another place the end of the Law is that a man might be justified For what did the Law intend To make a man just but it was not able because no man fulfilled it Theodoreâ⦠when the Law was not able to performe what it intended by reason of their weakenesse to whom it was given the onely begotten Word of God made man by the humane flesh overcame sinne having fulfilled all righteousnesse And being not infected with any blemish of sinne and having undergone the death of sinners as if hee had been a sinner c. And on those words that the righteousnesse of the law might bee in us hee paid our debt saith hee and performed the end and scope of the law What was that That he might declare them to be just that is that hee might justifie them to whom the law was given Ambrose Quando impletur in ââ¦bis justificatiâ⦠Legis nisâ⦠cum datur remissiâ⦠omnium peccatorum when is the justification of the law fulfilled in us but when the remission of all our sinnes is granted to us for as I have before alleaged out of Augustine All the Commandements are reputed done when that which is not done is pardoned If therefore this place were to bee understood of our fulfilling the righteousnesse of the law in or by our selves Christ had not obtained his end for so long as the flesh that is our inbred cotruption by reason whereof it is impossible for the law to justifie remaineth as in this life it alwayes doth even in the best so long it is not possible either to fulfill the law or to be justified by the observation of it § XII To the second place which is the third petition of the Lords Prayer I answere that wee pray not that we upon earth may in equality of obedience match the Angels in heaven but that we may imitate their obedience and bee like to them in doing the will of God willingly readily faithfully constantly For the particle ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as signifieth not parity but likenessâ⦠In the life to come wee shall indeed be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Matth. 22. 30. as the Angels but here wee may not dreame of Angelicall perfection To the third I answere that our Saviour is Authour of salvation to all that obey him which is to bee understood both of the obedience of faith which is the principall for this is the worke of God by which in Christ wee fulfill the law that wee beleeve in Christ and also of our new obedience But neither of both doth argue the perfect fulfilling of the law in our owne persons This threefold cord therefore is easily dissolved § XIII His fifth reason Whosoever have the holy Spirit they fulfill the Law All that are truely justified have the holy Spirit Rom. 5. 5. 8. 15. 1 Cor. 3. 16. Gal. 3. 2. Tit. 3. 6. Therefore all that are truely justified fulfill the Law The proposition hee proveth thus Whosoever have the fruits of the Spirit Gal. 5. they fulfill the Lawe All that have the Spirit have the fruits of the Spirit Therefore all that have the Spirit fulfill the Law This second proposition hee proveth because against those who produce the fruits of the Spirit as charity joy peace c. There is no Law that is the Law hath not whereof to accuse them as the breakers thereof Therefore whosoever is justified by the helpe of the Spirit he fulfilleth the Law and if he doe not fulfill the Law then hath he not received the Spirit neither is he truely justified To the proposition of the first syllogisme I answere that those who have received the Spirit doe keepe the Law But none fulfill the Law who have not the fulnesse of the Spirit and none have the fulnesse of the Spirit in whom the flesh remaineth lusting against the Spirit In whom this conflict is as it is in the best They cannot doe the things that they would Gal. 5. 17. And much lesse can they fulfill the Law from which they are so farre as that the good things they would they doe not and the evill things which they would not they doe Rom. 7. 19. And so to the proposition of the second syllogisme that those who have the Spirit have the fruits of the Spirit but not without measure nor in full measure but according to the measure of the gift of Christ Ephes. 4. 7.
Having received but the first fruits of the Spirit Rom. 8. 23. As for his third prosyllogisme that against such there is no law the meaning is not that those which have the fruits of the Spirit doe never transgresse the law for in many things we offend all but the words are to be understood either of the fruites of the Spirit that against such there is no law but against the contrary fruites of the flesh or of the persons indued with the fruites of the Spirit and then the meaning is either as 1 Tim. 1. 9. That the law is not given to such or as Gal. 5. 18. That those who are led by the Spirit are not under the law that is they are neither under the curse not yet under the terrour and dominion of the law as if they needed thereby to bee forced to obedience but they are as it were a law unto themselves willingly performing obedience to that which the law prescribeth according to the measure of grace received not but that sometimes they faile the flesh prevailing against the Spirit Not under the curse nor subject to the accusation and condemnation of the Law because in Christ who hath freed them from the curse their sinnes are forgiven Who then shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods children seeing it is God that doth justifie who shall condemne seeing Christ who dyed for us maketh also intercession for us But this doth not prove that therefore the faithfull sinne not But this proveth that when having sinned they confesse their sinnes God is just to forgive them because wee have an Advocate with the Father Christ Iesus the righteous and hee is the propitiation for our sinnes In this forgivenesse of our sinnes and Gods acceptation of us in Christ and not in our obedience doth our justification consist But he that fulfilleth the Law needeth not remission of sinnes which all doe need And therefore desperate is Bellarmines conclusion that whosoever is justified fulfilleth the Law and whosoever doth not fulfill the Law which no man doth is not justified § XIV And such also is his last argument which may thus bee framed Whosoever sinneth not fulfilleth the Law Of every justified man it may be verified that he sinneth not Therefore every justified man fulfilleth the Law The proposition he proveth because he that sinneth not doth not transgresse the Law and he that doth not transgresse the Law doth fulfill it First I answere to the proposition and the proofe thereof that they are true if understood of continued acts as thus hee that sinneth not that is that never sinneth hee that transgresseth not the Law that is that never doth transgresse it doth fulfill it For none doe fulfill the Law but they who continue in all the things that are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them which is duely to bee marked For the Papists seeme to bee of this opinion that by any one act of obedience wherein a man sinneth not hee doth fulfill the Law And so they feare not to say that every worke of charity doth absolutely merit eternall life wherein they doe grievously erre imagining that as one act committed against charity doth absolutely deserve damnation so any one act proceeding from charity doth absolutely merit salvation But who knoweth not that the whole law of God is copulative and so to bee understood As therefore in a copulative proposition consisting of many suppose twenty parts if any one bee false though all the rest be true the whole proposition is false and to be denyed So if a man should keepe all the Commandements and transgresse any one though it were but once hee is a transgressor of the law and is as Saint Iames saith guilty of all and by the sentence of the law is subject to the curse because he hath not continued in all the things which are written in the Booke of the law to doe them Hee that would bee thought to fulfill the law must not onely abstaine from all the things forbidden but hee must also doe the things commanded hee must doe all hee must continue in doing all And thus if the proposition and the proofe thereof bee understood he that sinneth not he that transgresseth not the Law that is he that never sinneth he that never transgresseth the Law doth fulfill it are true but otherwise they are false and to be denyed § XV. I come to the assumption which Bellarmine proveth thus Whosoever is regenerate and borne of God sinneth not All that are justified are regenerate and that because no man denyethit he proveth by manifold testimonies Ioh. 1. 12 13. 3. 5. 1 Pet. 2. 1 1 Ioh. 4. 7. Rom. 8. 15. Therefore those that are justified sinne not The proposition he proveth out of 1 Ioh. 3. 9. Whosoever is borne of God sinneth not neither can he sinne because he is borne of God Yet I will not answere him as he answereth us viz. that there be five expositions of this place and never a one of them to the purpose and so dismisse it being indeed unanswerable but I answer that the Apostle doth not meane that the regenerate are ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or doe not sinne at all for to that erroneous sense both Iouin and Pelag. did abuse that place as Bellar. here doth but his meaning may be explained out of his own words in the same Epistle for as in the fifth chapter v. 18. When he saith whosoeveris borne of God sinneth not he meaneth as appeareth by the words going before that he sinneth not unto death that is committeth not that unpardonable sin for which we are not to pray v. 16. so here when hee saith whosoever is borne of God doth not commit sin his meaning may be collected out of the next verse going before vers 8. compared with Ioh. 8. 34. he that is borne of God worketh not sinne ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for hee that worketh sinne he that is a worker of iniquity is of the Devill as hee saith vers 8. He that worketh sinne saith our Saviour Ioh. 8. 34. is the servant of sinne and therefore in him sinne reigneth As therefore in the fifth chapter when hee saith he that is borne of God sinneth not he meaneth that he doth not so sinne as he had said vers 16. viz. unto death so here when it is said he cannot sinne his meaning is in that manner as a worker of iniquity as the child of the Devill as the servant of sinne in whom sinne reigneth And in this sense Augustine saith in quo peccatum non regnat non peccat in whom sinne reigneth not he sinneth not namely as those who in the scriptures are called sinners that is impenitent sinners servants of sinne in whom sinne reigneth workers of iniquity Luk. 13. 27. Matth. 7. 23. who shall bee condemned But although they who are borne of God are not such as the Scripture calleth sinners neither doe so sinne
causa siââ¦e qâ⦠nââ¦n For as the Apostle saith without holinesse no man shall see God Heb. 12. 14. And for this cause we seriously exhââ¦rtall men who professe themselves to beleeve and to be iustified by faith to be careful that they may be precedents of good works for these are good and profitable and necessary as I shewed before when I propounded those arguments which wee doe use to move men unto good workes So much of his first testimony § XIX To that place of Saint Iames he addeth sixe other testimonies to which a short answer will suffice To the first out of Eccles. 18. 21 I have fully answered in the first controversie 2. His second testimony is Rom. 6. 19. As you have exhibited your members to serve uncleannessâ⦠and iniquity unto iniquity so now exhibit your members to serve justice unto sanctification Where unto sanctification doth not signifie to get the first holinesse sor he speaketh to them who were holy and just but to increase sanctification But that by sanctification is meant justification and by sanctity justice it is plaine by the antithesis for he opposeth sanctification to iniquity His argument is thus framed Sanctification may and must bee increased by good workes which is proved by this text and not denyed by us Iustification is sanctification And that he proveth because what is opposed to iniquity is justification sanctification is here opposed to iniquity Therefore here sanctification signifieth justification Ans. That justification and sanctification are by no means to be confounded I proved at large in the first question for this is the source of all their errours in the doctrine of justification The Apostle doth carefully distinguish them For having in the former chapters treated of justification by faith without works that men should not abuse that doctrine to licentiousnesse of life in this and the next chapter he treateth of sanctification shewing in this chapter that sanctification is a necessary companion of justification And therefore exhorteth those that are justifiâ⦠to the dueties of sanctification The abuse he preventeth vers 1. and 15. for wheras he had taught in the doctrine of justification that where sinne abounded grace did superabound he maketh this objection what then shall we continue in sinne that grace may abound God forbid So againe by Iustification we are freed from the curse of the Law and from the rigour and terrour or dominion it what then shall we sin because wee are not under the Law but under Grace God forbid The unseparable conjunction of these two benefits is shewed by the Sacrament of Baptisme for as it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith unto us being baptized into the remission of sins so it is the laver of regeneration wherin as the Apostle saith we are baptized into Christs death and resurrection that as he dyed so we should dye unto sin and as he rose againe never to dye any more so wee should arise from the grave of sinne never to dye any more for how should they that are dead to sinne live any more therein And hereupon followeth his exhortation that we should not let sinne reigne in us nor give our members as instruments of unrighteousnes unto sin c. And as he doth dehort us from suffering sinne to relgne in us so he assureth the faithfull that sinne shall no more haue dominion over them because they are not under the Law but under grace and having prevented the abuse of that doctrine vers 15. he reneweth both his dehortation from suffering sinne to reigne in them because if it did reigne in them they must needes be the servants of it when as in their redemption they were freed from the bondage of sinne that they might become the servants of righteousnesse and also his exhortation vers 19. that they would yeeld their members as seruants to holinesse c. To his reason that by sanctification here is meant justification because it is opposed to iniquity I answere that both justification and sanctification are opposed to sinne and iniquity but with this difference In sin there are two things the guilt and the corruption or pollution By justification which is opposed to accusing and condemning Rom. 8. 33. wee are freed from the guilt of sin and damnation by our sanctification which is opposed to pollution wee are freed in some measure from the corruption that it is to say from the dominion of sinne § XX. His third testimony is 2 Cor. 7. 1. where the Apostle exhorteth that having these promises of our justification and adoption chap. 6. 16 28 wee should cleanse our selves from all pollution of the flesh and spirit perfecting or accomplishing our sanctification in the feare of God The Apostle doth not exhort us unto justification for that is never done in all the Scriptures but being justified and adopted wee are exhorted with our justification and adoption to joyne the dueties of sanctification and therein to grow and increase untill wee come to a perfect man in Christ. § XXI His fourth testimony 2 Cor. 9. 10. he will multiply your seed and will augment the increases of the fruits of our justice Where we are taught saith he that by almââ¦s-giving our wealth is diminished but our jââ¦stice is increased Answ. We answere that by the Christian practice of vertues our justice but not our justification is increased Howbeit the Apostle doth not speake of justice it selfe to be increased but of the fruites of justice by justice in this place meaning as vers 9. and Matth. 6. 1. liberalitie in almes-giving and by the fruites of righteousnesse almes Unto which that they might bee more and more enabled the Apostle prayeth that their seed may be multiplyed meaning thereby their store which in the faithfull is as it were the seed of almes that having alwayes all sufficiency in all things they might abound to every good worke being enriched in every thing to all bountifulnesse veââ¦s 8 11. so farre is the Apostle from signifying that by their almes-giving their wealth should be diminished § XXII His fifth testimony Ioh. 14. 23. If any love me hee will keepe my word and my Father will love him This new living after the fulfilling of the Commandements what is it sath he but the increase of love and thereby of righteousnesse which by observing the Law of God is required Answ. Wee confessè that by the observance of the Law of God our love of God is exercised and our righteousnesse increased though it be not proved out of this place For this love after the keeping of Christs word here mentioned is Gods love to us not ours to him § XXIII His sixth testimony is Apoc. 22. 11. hee that is just let him be justified yet Answ. The word yet or still doth not signifie increase but continuance or if increase were meant it could not bee understood of the righteousnesse of justification but of
arguments of Calvin and Chemnitius defended against Bellarm. The first because iustifying is opposed to condemning lib. 2. cap. 5. § 2. 3 4. Secondly that as the hebrew so the greeke signifieth § 5. Bellarmines proofes that the hebrew word signifieth to make iust by infusion of righteousnesse inherent § 6. 7 8 9 10. The third and fourth concerning the latine word iustificare § II. The use of the latine word in the Fathers § 12. The manifold differences betwixt instification and sanctification Litb 2. cap. 6. Their confounding of iustification and sanctification is the ground both of the Papists calumniations against us lib. 2. cap. 6. § 19. and of their errours in the doctrine of iustification which are pernicious § 20. 21 22. The Papists from iustification exclude remission of sinne lib. 2. cap. 7. § 1. 2. vid. remission The popish distinction of iustification into the first and second lib. 1. cap. 1. § 8. lib. 3. cap. 6. § 5. lib. 7. cap. 3. § 4. 5. cap. 8. § 4. Men are said to be iustified either before God in foro coelesti which properly is iustification or in the court of their owne conscience which is the assurance of iustification lib. 1. cap. 1. § 7. lib. 2. c. 2. § 8. L Law Law of faith and the Law of workes lib. 7. cap. 2. § 6. 7. The difference betweene the Law and the Gospell See Gospell Whether the faithfull doe or can fulfill the Law lib. 7. cap. 6. § 3. The Law not possible by reason of the flesh lib. 4. cap. 5. § 3 c. ad finem capitis Bellarmines proofes that the Law is absolutely possible lib. 4. cap. 5. § 5. lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4. First by Sciptures testimonies of three sorts I. That the Law is easie lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4. 7 6 7 8. II. That the law is kept by love lib. 7. cap. 6. § 9. 10 11 12. III. Examples of them that have fulfilled the law § 13. 14 15. iust that they kept the law with a perfect heart and with their whole heart § 15. 16. Secondly by fathers § 17. The difference betweene the Pelagians and Papists not great § 18. His testimonies examined § 19. 20 21. That the Fathers did not meane that the law is absolutely possible § 22. Bellarmines paradox that a man may fulfill the law though he cannot live without sinne § 23. Testimonies of Fathers that the fulfilling of the law is not possible to us § 24. Sixâ⦠reasons to the same effect lib. 4. cap. 5. § 6 c. Bellarmines sixe reasons answered lib. 7. cap. 7. I. Because a man may doe more than is commanded § 1. 2 3 4 5 6. II. If the precepts were not possible they would binde no man lib. 7. cap. 7. § 7. 8. III. Then God should bee cruell c. § 9. IV. Then Christ ââ¦isseth of his end § 10. 11 12. V. They who have the Spirit fulfill the law § 13. VI. Because they sinne not § 14 15. Liberty Christian liberty lib. 7. cap. 4. § 23. Life eternall Life eternall considered by Bellarmine as an inheritance and so due to due to the person by right of adoption and as a reward and so due to workes lib. 8. cap. 9. § 3. Eternall life promised in three respects lib. 7. cap. 4. § 6. 7 8. lib. 8. cap. 9. § 3. Love Bellarmines fourth disposition to justification lib. 6. cap. 12. M Matoriall The materiall cause of justification Christs righteousnesse lib. 1. cap. 3. Whether Christs passive righteousnesse onely lib. 1. cap. 4. Which is denyed I. Because by it alone the Law is not fulfilled § 2 3. and that is defended against divers exceptions 4. 5. 6 7. II. Because by Adams disobedience imputed to us we were made sinners § 8. III. Because Christs obedience is accepted for us § 9. that Christ obeyed the Law for us § 10. that he did not merit for himselfe § 11. Object If Christ obeyed the Law for us then wee need not § 13. Object 2. If we be justified by the obedience of Christ why needed hee to dye for us § 14. IV. To what end served Christs obedience if wee bee justified onely by his sufferings § 15. V. Because there are two distinct parts of justification § 16. Obiect Then two formall causes of iustification § 17. That instification doth not consist onely in remission of sinne § 18. Obiect Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission § 19. Obiect By it wee are made innocent § 20. Three arguments of I. P. § 21. the arguments of I. F. § 22. 23. Matter of iustification lib. 4. The state of the controversie betweene us and the Papists concerning it lib. 4. cap. 1. § 1. It is the principall question in the whole controversie of iustification wheron therest depend lib. 4. cap. 1. § 2. and is proved by the rest § 3. That we are iustified by Christs righteousnesse and not by inherent proved first ioyntly lib. 4. cap. 1. § 4. I. Because we are iustified by Gods righteousuesse and not by ours lib. 4. cap. 2 Christs righteousnesse is Gods righteousnesse § 2. 3. 4. inherent is ous § 5. the severall parts of inherent righteousnesse are called ours § 6. II. Because by Christs righteousnes we stand iust before God and not by ours § 7. III. Because Christs righteousnesse is perfect and so is not ours § 8. that the righteousnesse of all mortall men is unperfect because are at sinners proved by seven reasons § 9. The question concerning the imperfection of mans inherent righteousnesse further discussed cap. 3. 4. See righteousnesse inherent IV. VVe are iustified by that righteousnesse by which the Law is fully satisfied lib. 4. cap. 5. The righteousnesse of Christ hathfully satisfied the Law § 2. Our righteousnesse cannot satisfie the law § 3. 4. Bellarmines reasons that the law may be fulfilled § 5. V. Because by the righteousnesse of Christ and not by ours we are absolved redeemed reconciled and saved lib. 4. c. 6. VI. Because we are justified by the righteousnesse of faith and not of workes lib. 4. cap. 7. § 1. VII The righteousnesse by which we are iustified is not prescribed in the Law § 2. VIII The righteousnesse whereby wee are iustified satisfieth the iustice of God § 3. IX Because no man is iustified without remission of sinne § 4. X. The true doctrine of iustification ministreth comfort § 5. XI From experience lib. 4. cap. 7. § 6. Severally that we are not iustified by inherent righteousnesse proved by foureteene arguments I. Because it is prescribed in the Law lib. 4. cap. 8. § 1. 2 3 4. II. Because that doctrine confoundeth the Law and the Gospell and maketh void the covenaââ¦t of grace § 5. III. It depriveth men of the chiefe part of christian liberty § 6. IV. Because all men are sinners § 7. V. Because all meâ⦠ãâã by ãâã Law aââ¦cursed § 8. VI. Because none doe fulfill the Law § 9.
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.
Psalm 7. 4 9. c. § 3. III. Matth. 6. 22. § 4. IV. 1 Cor. 3. 12. § 5. V. Iam. 3. 2. § 6. VI. Psalm 4. 4. Esai 1. 16. Ioh. 5. 14. in which wee are exborted not to sinne § 7. VII From those places which teach that the workes of the faithfull doe please God § 8. VIII From these places which absolutely call them good § 9. Two Testimonies of Fathers § 10. Three Reasons I. If good workes are impure then either by reason of concupiscence l. 4. c. 4. § 12. or for want of charity § 13. or because of veniall sinnes concurring § 14. II. From six absurdities § 15 16. By righteousnesse inherent the Law is not fulfilled l. 4. c. 5. § 3. 4. 4. None are able to fulfill the Law first because all are transgressours § â⦠Secondly because none can be iustified by it § 7. Thirdly because none can fulfill the first and the last Commandements § 8. Fourthly out of Act. 15. 10. § 9. Fiftly out of Rom. 7. 18. § 10. Sixthly Rom. 8. 3 § 11. By righteousnesse inherent we are not iustified proved by foureteene reasons l. 4. c. 8. vid. matter of iustification S Sacraments They are seales of iustification l. â⦠c. 2. § 6. l. 6. c. 14. 8. Whether they iustifie ex opere operato l. 6. c. 10. § 3. The purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament Bellarmines sixââ¦h disposition to iustification l 6. c. 12. § 7. Satisfaction The imputation of Christs satisfaction acknowledged by the Papists l. 1. c. 3. § 8. Sanctification Not to be confounded with iustification l. 2. per totum How it is distinguished from iustification l. 2. c. 6. Sinners All men are sinners l. 4. c. 2. § 9. c. 8. § 7. l. 5. c. 2. § 2. Subject of faith Viz. the party to whom it belongeth lib. 6. c. 5. § 1. and the parts of the soule wherein it is sealed § 2. viz. the minde that is both the understanding and the will proved by Testimonies § 3. 4. 5. Whether the ââ¦nderstanding be commanded by the will to beleeve lib. 6. c. 5. § 6. T Truth The doctrine of iustification and Salvation by faith in Christ is called the Truth lib. 1 cap. 1. § 1. lib. 6. cap. 6. § 2. V Veniall Whether veniall sinnes doe contaminate the good works of the iust lib. 4. cap. 4. § 14. VVhether they doe ââ¦inder the fulfilling of the Law l. 7. c. 6. § 23. Whether they be onely besides the Law and not against it ibid. Vprightnesse It goeth under the name of perfection and upright men are called perfect lib. 4. c. 10. § 10. W. Word The word an instrumentall cause of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 5. Workes Good workââ¦s ââ¦re the fruites and effects not causes of ãâã l. 1. c. 6. § 7. The necessiâ⦠of gââ¦od works urged of us by better ãâã than the Popish doctrine doth ãâã c. 1. In what ãâã we deny good workes to iustifie l. 7. c. â⦠§ 1. That good workes doe noâ⦠iustifie men before God prove by all the five ãâã ãâã l. 7. â⦠2. § 2. by foure other reasons § 3. ãâã thââ¦se that are iustified by ãâã ãâã ãâã by their owne obedience of the Law § 4. ãâã ãâã it is ãâã to the Scriptures § 5. Bellarmines preamble to his answere in which hee considereth three things first what is meant by the Law of workes and by the Law of faith lib. 7. cap. 2. § 6 7. Secondly the differences betweene the iustice of the Law and in or by the Law § 8. Thirdly what is meant by workes which are excluded from iustification whether the workes of the Ceremoniall Law § 9. 10. or also of the morall and whether all or onely those which goe before faith § 11. Bellarmines proofes that those onely ãâã before or without faith are excluded l. 7. c. 2. § 13. Bellarmines dispute concerning the necessity of good workes l. 7. c. 4. his method § 1. He proveth them necessary not to iuâ⦠ãâã ãâã § 2. His first proofe is from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell § 3. c. ad 19. Eight differences by hire propounded l. 7. c. 4. § 19 20 21 22. His second proofe from the doctrine of Christian liberty l. 7. c. 4. § 23. That good workes are necessary by way of efficacie Bellarmine proveth by three sorts of arguments first from Scriptures I. Testimoniâ⦠Heb. 10. 36. lib. 7. c. 5. § 3. II. 1 Tim. 2. 14 15. l. 7. c. 5. § 4. III. Phil. 2. 12. § 5. IV. 2 Cor. 7. 10. § 6. V. 2 Cor. 4. 17. § 7. VI. Rom. 8. 13. § 8. VII Rom. 8. 16 17. § 9. VIII Rom. 10. 10. § 10. IX Matth. 25. 34 35. § 11. X. Iam. 1. 25. 2. 14. § 12. XI The Epistles of Peter Iames Iohn and Iude. l. 7. c. 5. § 13. Secondly from testimonies of Fathers § 14. Thirdly from reason § 19. because faith dââ¦th not save alone lib. 7. c. 5. § 16. 17. Of the verity of the ââ¦ustice of good workes l. 7. c. 6. § 1. VVhether they be sinnes l. 7. c. 7. § 17. That they be sinnes it followes upon the doctrine of the Papists lib. 4. c. 4. § 9. in fine 21. Bellarmines proofes that good workes doe iustifie l. 7. c. 8. The first Iam. 2. 24. lib. 7. c. 8. § 2. c. ad 19. Sixe other testimonies I. Eccl. 18. 21. § 19. vide l. 2. c. 4. § 2. 3. II. Rom. 6. 19. l. 7. c. 8. § 19. III. 2 Cor. 7. 1. l. 7. c. 8. § 20. IV. 2 Cor. 9. 10. § 21. V. Iohn 14. 23. § 22. VI. Apââ¦c 22. 11. § 23. The Papists high opinion of their works l. 8. c. 9. § 14. Our estimations of them § 15. Y Yoke Christs yoke easie lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4 5 6 7. FINIS Errata Page 2. line 20 even our juââ¦if p. 4. l. 9. ââ¦sadiq p. 6 â⦠antepen speciall p. 9. marg l. 2. â⦠ãâã 2. 1. 2. l. 15. justificaââ¦i p. 13. l. a fin 19. VIII ãâã second p 15 l â⦠ãâã 6. concur l. penulâ⦠standeth ãâã p. 16. marg l. 6. lib 1 cap. 2 p. 17. l. af 11. herâ⦠l. ãâã 7. men p. 18 l. 25. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã l. 28. ãâã is p. 19 l 1. breake l. 15 16. dele So the righteousnesse of our Meââ¦iator who is God p. 21 marg l 2. Ier 23 6. l af 5. dele sect p. 22. l. af 14. then he intendeth p 24. l. 6 ãâã l. 11 partam l. 18. nothing else p. 26. l af 8 we are p. 27. l af ãâã ãâã no p. 28. l. 20 and sââ¦condly l. af 13. id eââ¦t compl p. 29. l. 1. receivââ¦d l. af 4. in us p. 31. l. 3. ãâã a ãâã l. af 12. yââ¦t we p. 32 l. 26. ad ãâã p. 38. l. 17 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã l. 18. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã l. 22. scales p. 43. l. antep upon Christ ãâã
For all they who have true faith are borne of God 1 Iohn 5. 1. Iohn 1. 12 13. And those who are once borne of God are never unborne againe but being made sonnes by faith as all the faithfull are Gal. 3. 26. they are also made heires of God and coheires with Christ Rom. 8. 17. As faith therefore is never utterly lost no more is justification For so long as wee have faith so long wee are justified But the habit of faith wee never lose though perhaps some act of faith may sometimes bee interrupted Therefore our justification is but one continued act and in that sense we are justified but once § VIII Now whereas we have defined and defended according to the Scriptures that justification is an action of God and such an action as is without us and a continued act hence we may conclude against the Papists first that neither their first nor second justification is that justification which is taught in the Scriptures Not the second for that is not Gods action but their owne who being justified before by habituall righteousnesse infused from God doe themselves as they ââ¦each by practising of good workes increase their righteousnesse that is justifie themselves by actuall righteousnesse as the merit of their second justification Not that wee deny that inherent righteousnesse is by practise of good workes increased but that wee hold that justification is not our owne act neither that we are justified by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves nor that the righteousnesse of justification which is indeed the righteousnesse of Christ can be increased and therefore no degrees of justification Not the first which they make to bee an action of God within us working in us a reall change or positive mutation by infusion of the habits of grace and specially of charitie and confound it with habituall sanctification from which notwithstanding it is necessarily to be distinguished Secondly justification being an action of God is not to bee confounded with justification passively understood and much lesse with justice it selfe But the Papists not onely understand it passively but also confound it with inherent Iustice. Thirdly they doe not hold justification to bee one continued act from our vocation to our glorification But such an act as may not onely be interrupted ostentimes and lost for a time as they say it is by every mortall sinne and againe be renewed so oft as they goe to shrift but also that it may totally and finally bee lost Which error I have confuted at large in my Treatise of perseverance CAP. II. The efficient causes of Iustification § I. BUt in this definition besides the Genus not onely all the causes of Iustification but also the essentiall parts thereof are briefly comprised which I will now distinctly propound The causes because in the knowledge of them standeth the science of every thing the essentiall parts because in them justification it selfe consisteth The causes of justification as of all other things are foure The Efficient the Matter the Forme the End The Efficieââ¦t causes are of two sorts either principall or instrumentall The principall is God which I noted in the definition when I said it is an action of God For it is God that justifieth as the Scriptures in many places doe testifie as namely Rom. 3. 26 30. 4. 5 6. 8. 30 33. Gal. 3. 8. God I say the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost For it being an outward action of God or as the Schoolemen speake ad extra respecting the Creatures it is the common action of the whole Trinity And thus God alone as the Iudge doth justifie For he alone is the Lawgiver who hath power over our soules against whom wee sinne and by our sinne become his debtours when we transgresse his law And therefore he alone properly forgiveth sinnes as himselfe professeth Esay 43. 25. and as the Scribes and Pharisees confesse as a received truth Luk. 5. 21. For who may take upon him to remit those debts which wee owe to God It is he who reconcileth us unto himselfe in Christ not imputing our sinnes 2 Cor. 5. 19. and accepting of us in his beloved Ephes. 1. 6. It is he alone that forgiving our sinnes freeth us from hell and giveth us right to his heaveââ¦ly kingdome Which doctrine serveth first for our direction and instruction where to seeke and to sue for justification and remission of sinnes Not to any creature but to God alone in the name and mediation of Christ to whom alone our Saviour directeth us to sue for pardon Secondly it ministreth strong consolation to all the faithfull For seeing it is God that justifieth them who shall lay any thing to their charge Who shall condemne c Thirdly it sââ¦rveth for the confutation or rather condemnation of the Pope and all popish priests who take upon them power not as Ministers of the Gospell to declare and pronounce remission of sinnes but as Iudges to remit them it being a proper attribute of God Exod. 34. 7. which he appropriateth to himselfe Esay 43. 25. and which no meere man can without blasphemy arrogate to himselfe Mark 2. 7. § II. With the principall cause we are to joyne the consideration of the motives or moving causes both without God which of some are called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and also within himselfe which are called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which are indeed principia agendi The former are mans misery which though it be not properly a cause but the object of mercy yet is said to bee a motive and is used as a reason to move to mercy and thence misericordia hath its name and Christs merits which properly are the procatarcticke cause of our justification besides which there is no other merit The moving causes within God are his Mercy and his Iustice which I signified in the definition when I said that justification is a most grââ¦cious and rightâ⦠action os God For as in many if not in all the workes of God his mercy and justice meet together so especially in the worke of our Iustification and redemption which Cardinall Cââ¦jetan e well observed The holy Scripture saith he doth not say that we are justified by grace alone but by grace and justice together but both of God that is by the grace of God and by the justice of God and not by the righteousnesse of men By grace I understand the gracious love and favour of God in Christ vouchsafed unto us in him before all secular times 2 Tim. 1. 9. in which he hath graciously accepted us in his beloved by which as we are elected and called and shall be saved so by the same we are justified and that freely without any cause in us Rom. 3. 24. Now the Lord is said to justifie us by his grace first because of his free-grace hee gave his owne Sonne to
us This righteousnesse of Christ that I may speake more distinctly of it is either negative if I may so speake or positive By the negative I understand an absence of all sinnes and vices forbidden in the Law By the positive I meane both a presence of all vertues and duties required to the perfect fulfilling of the Commandements and also of the voluntary suffering of the penalty to satisfie the commination and curse of the Law The Negative is that which wee call the innocencie of Christ whereof the Scriptures speake in many places signifying that he was not onely blamelesse free in himselfe from all imputation of sinne being ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã unreproveable ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã unblameable Iohn 8. 46. 1 Pet. 1. 19. but also spotlesse free from all infection of sinne as being ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã without spot 1 Pet. 1. 19. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã harmelesse and undefiled Heb. 7. 26. one who never did nor spââ¦ke evill 1 Pet. 2. 22 23. nor ever offended in thought but was absolutely and in all respects ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã without sinne Heb. 4. 15. as one who knew no sinne § IV. The positive righteousnesse of Christ is twofold his perfect fulfilling of all things commanded in the Law and his perfect satisfaction in respect of the punishment threatned The former is the holinesse of Christ which the Apostle calleth the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Rom. 8. 2. which is also twofold the holinesse of his nature which is his habituall righteousnesse the holinesse of his life and conversation which is his actuall obedience The holinesse of his Nature in that being conceived of the holy Ghost and sanctified by him Matth. 1. 22. Luk. 1. 35. hee was also adorned with all vertues and graces and that without measure Iohn 3. 34. In respect whereof hee was said to be annointed with the oyle of gladnesse above his fellowes Psalm 45. 7. for he was full of the Spirit Esai 11. 2. full of grace and truth Iohn 1. 14. full I say not plenitudine vasis in which sense fome of the faithfull have beene said to have beene full of the holy Ghost and full of grace but plenitudine fontis for of his fulnesse wee receive even grace for grace Iohn 1. 16. according to the measure of the donation of Christ Ephes. 4. 7. The holinesse of Christs life was that whereby he continued in all the things which were written in the booke of the Law to doe them and that for us For he came not to breake the Law but to fulfill it Matth. 5. 17. He fulfilled all righteousnesse Matth 3. 15. and alwayes did those things which please God Ioh. 8. 29. Hee performed in his flesh ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã whatsoever the Law requireth to justification Rom. 8. 4. and therefore most worthily is hee often called in the Scriptures not only righteous and holy as Esay 53. 11. Act. 4. 27. Heb. 7. 26. 1 Ioh. 2. 20. Apoc. 3. 7. but also the just and the holy Act. 3. 14. the just 1 Ioh. 2. 2. the holy one of God Act. 2. 27. the holy of holies Dan. 9. 24. The other part of Christs positive righteousnesse is his passive obedience which is called Obedientia Crucis the obedience of the Crosse wherein hee willingly submitted himselfe to endure those punishments for us which might satisfie the Iustice of God and the sentence of the Law for our sinnes as it is said Phil. 2. 8. Hee humbled himselfe and became obedient to the death even the death of the Crosse and Gal. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law himselfe being made a curse for us Now this passive obedience appeareth not onely in his death and passion though in that principally but also in all other his sufferings which hee voluntarily sustained for us in the whole course of his life as poverty shame sorrow c. The matter therefore of our justification is that whole righteousnesse which was either inherent in the man Christ or performed by him whether to fulfill the commandements or to satisfie the curse of the Law for us § V. This righteousnesse of Christ our Mediatour though inherent in the humane nature and performed by it yet is most truely and to us most comfortably called according to that kinde of phrase which is termed ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the communication of properties the righteousnesse of God because it is the righteousnesse of that Person which is God who though a branch of David according to the flesh is Iehovah our righteousnesse Ier. 23. 6. God above all blessed for evermore Rom. 9. 5. In this sense the Iewes are said to have killed the Author of life Act. 3. 15. and to have crucified the Lord of Glory 1 Cor. 2. 8. For as the blessed Virgin is said to be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Mother of God because she is the Mother of that Person who is God so the righteousnesse of our Mediator who is both God and man is called the righteousnesse of God because it is the righteousnesse of that Person who is perfect God Thus that blood by which wee are redeemed is called the blood of God Act. 20. 28. or which is all one the blood of the Sonne of God 1 Ioh. 1. 7. The life which was laid downe for us was the life of God 1 Ioh. 3. 16. the death by which wee are reconciled to God is the death of his Sonne Rom. 5. 10. the obedience by which wee are constituted just Rom. 5. 19. is the obedience of the same Sonne of God who being God coequall with his Father humbled himselfe and became obedient to his Father even unto death Phil. 2. 6 8. and being the Sonne of God was made subject to the Law that hee might redeeme those that were under the Law that we might receive the adoption of sonnes Gal. 4. 4. 5. § VI. This doctrine of the Gospell that the righteousnesse by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of God is the chiefe stay of our faith and the principall foundation of our comfort For hereby wee understand his sufferings to bee an all-sufficient satisfaction to redeeme us from hell and his obedience of all-sufficient merit to entitle us unto the kingdome of heaven And that wee might know undoubtedly that his sufferings were the sufferings of God and his obedience the obedience of God that is of him that is God therefore by his divine Spirit by which hee had offered himselfe to God he raised himselfe from death to life and to glory by which his resurrection hee was mightily declared to be the Sonne of God that our faith and hope might bee in God For had not Christ risen from the dead it had beene a plaine evidence of his not being God and then our faith were vaââ¦ne and
a man is justified without justice is as absurd as to conceive that a man is cloathed without apparell For they that are justified are clothed with righteousnesse as having put on Christ whose righteousnesse is their wedding garment signified by that white and shining linnen which are the justifications of the Saints But there is no perfect righteousnesse but that which fulfilleth the Law and is fully conformable unto it it being the perfect perpetuall and immutable rule of righteousnesse Matth. 5. 18. therefore without the fulfilling of the Law either by our selves or by another for us there is no justification Now to the full satisfying and fulfilling of the Law since the fall of Adam two things are required not onely a perfect and perpetuall conformity to the Law to satisfie the commandement and to fulfill the condition of the legall promise Doe this and live but also a full satisfaction to the sentence of the Law by bearing the penalty therein denounced in regard of sinnes already committed Againe faith or the true doctrine of justification by faith doth not abrogate the Law but establish it But if it should teach justification without Christs fulfilling of the Law for us it should abrogate the Law and not establish it § III. Of the assumption there are two parts the former affirmative that by the whole righteousnesse of Christ the Law is fully satisfied and fulfilled for by his sufferings the penalty of the Law is fully satisfied for us to free us from hell and by his righteousnes both habââ¦tuall and actuall the commandements were fulfilled for us to entitle us unto heaven Neither of which we were able to performe for our selves for neither could wee satisfie the penalty but by everlasting punishment neither could wee fulfill the commandement but by a totall perfect and perpetuall obedience which to us by reason of the flesh is unpossible And this was the miserable estate wherein the Law did hold us both to bee accursed if but once and that in the least degree wee did breake it which the best of us often doe and sometimes in an high degree and to be excluded from justification and salvation if wee did not fully and perfectly fulfill it which since the fall hath beene impossible Wherefore as without imputation of Christs sufferings we could not bee freed from hell so without his obedience and perfect conformity to the Law imputed unto us wee cannot be justified or saved By the former our blessed Saviour hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law himselfe being made a curse for us by the latter hee maketh us partakers of the promised blessednesse by performing for us that righteousnesse which was the condition of the promise Doe this and live The negative part is that by the onely passive righteousnesse of Christ the Law is not fulfilled The Law indeed is thereby fully satisfied in our behalfe for the avoiding of the penalty therein threatned but not fulfilled in respect of the commandement for the obtaining of the blessednesse therein promised For the righteousnesse which is of the Law is thus described that the man which doth those things which are commanded shall live therein § IIII. Against this assumption divers exceptions are taken First that the Law is satisfied either by doing that which is commanded or by bearing the punishment which is threatned Answ. It is true in respect of the penall statutes of men but not in respect of Gods commandements in which there is not onely a penalty threatned but blessednesse also promised If man had continued in his integrity the Law might have beene satisfied by obedience onely but being fallen into a state of disobedience two things are necessarily required to the fulfilling of the Law the bearing of the penalty in respect of sinne already committed to escape hell and the perfect performing of the commandements which is the condition of the covenant Doe this and live to attaine to the life promised but neither alone will suffice to justification For neither will our obedience satisfie for the punishment as Bellarmine confesseth nor the bearing of the punishment performe the condition of the promise But both must concurre § V. Inst. I. But it will be said that whosoever are freed from hell are also admitted into heaven Answ. The reason thereof is because our Saviour who did beare the punishment to free them from hell did also fulfill the commandements to bring them to heaven But howsoever these two benefits of Christ doe alwayes concurre in the party justified as the causes thereof concurre in Christ who not onely did both obey and suffer but in obeying suffered and in suffering obeyed yet both the causes betweene themselves and the effects are to be distinguished For as it is one thing to obey the commandement another to suffer the punishment so it is one thing to be freed from hell by Christ his suffering the penalty another to be entituled to heaven by his fulfilling the commandements § VI. Inst. II. Yea but God is a most free Agent and therefore may if he will justifie men by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely without fulfilling of the Law Answ. What God may doe if hee will I will not dispute but ââ¦ure I am that he justifieth men according to his will revealed in his word Wherein it is revealed first that God hath taken that course for the justifying and saving of sinners as serveth most for the illustration of the glory of his justice as well as of his mercy And therefore as in mercy he freeth none from hell for whom his justice is not satisfied so in mercy hee admitteth none to heaven for whom Christ hath not by his obedience merited the fame Secondly it is revealed that the judgement of God is according to the truth and therefore he justifieth none by his sentence but such as hee maketh just by imputation of Christs righteousnesse thereby not onely absolving them from their sinnes but also accepting yea constituting them righteous in CHRIST Thirdly that as wee are justified from our sinnes by the blood of Christ so we are made just by his obedience that as he was made finne for us so we were made the righteousnesse of God in him that as wee are reconciled unto God by the death of his Sonne so wee are justified and saved by his life by his life I say which he lived before his death in the dayes of his flesh and by the life which he lived and doth live after his death By the acts of his life before his death meritoriously by the acts of his life after his death as his resurrection his ascension his session at the right hand of his Father and intercession his comming againe to judgement hee saveth us effectually that Christ as hee was made unto us redemption so also righteousnesse that as hee came to deliver us from sinne so to bring
imputed as a full satisfaction for sinne the other by imputation of Christs perfect obedience as a sufficient merit of eternall life by the former we are freed from hell by the latter we are entituled to the kingdome of heaven Of them both the Apostle speaketh Rom. 5. that we are justified that is absolved from our sinne by the bloud of Christ. v. 9. and that wee are justified that is constituted just by his obedience vers 19. To this argument they answere by denying the antecedent saying that there are no parts of justification but that it wholly consisteth in remission of sinnes Indeed if it were the onely matter of justification as some of them teach and the entire formall cause of justification as others avouch of whom we shall speake in the next Chapter I say if both these opinions were true then I would confesse that the whole nature of justification doth consist in forgivenesse of sinne but whiles it is either but the matter as some say or but the forme as others or neither of both as I avouch it is a manifest errour to say that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinnes Againe in every mutation though it be but relative we must of necessity acknowledge two termes tââ¦rminum à quo terminum ad quem the denomination being taken commonly from the terminus ad quem As in justification there is a motion or mutation from sinne to justice from which terme justification hath its name from a state of death and damnation to a state of life and Salvation But if justification be nothing else but bare remission of sinne then is there in it onely a not imputing of sinne but no acceptation as righteous a freedome from hell but no title to heaven To this they answere that to whom sinne is not imputed righteousnesse is imputed and they who are freed from hell are admitted to heaven I doe grant that these things doe alwayes concurre but yet they are not to bee confounded for they differ in themselves and in their causes and in their effects in themselves for it is one thing to bee acquitted from the guilt of sinne another thing to be made righteous as wee see daily in the pardons of malefactors in their causes for remission of sinne is to be attributed to Christs satisfactory sufferings the acceptation as righteous unto life to Christs meritorious obedience In their effects for by remission of sinne wee are freed from hell and by imputation of Christs obedience we have right unto heaven § XVII If unto justification there be required besides remission of sinne Imputation of righteousnesse then there are two formall causes of justification Answ. It followeth not for although there bee two tââ¦rmini in this mutation yet there is but one action and this one action is the onely forme of justification viz. imputation of Christs righteousnesse of which are two effects which also be the two parts of justification remission of sinne and acceptation as righteous as I said in the definition that justification is an action of God wherein hee imputing the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner doth not onely absolve him from his sinnes but also accepteth of him as righteous and as an heire of eternall life § XVIII Notwithstanding this so evident truth some of the Divines of whom we spake when they would prove justification by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely take this position for granted that justification is nothing but remission of sinne and hereupon inferre that seeing wee have remission of sinne onely by the bloud of Christ we are justified by his bloud onely And to this purpose they alleage many testimonies of Scriptures affirming that by the bloud of Christ and by his death and passion wee have remission of sinne to all which we readily subscribe But if there be any other places that seeme to ascribe unto the sufferings of Christ more than remission of sinnes as entrance into heaven and salvation c. such places are to be understood by a Synecdoche putting the chieââ¦e and most eminent part of his obedience for the whole Others labour to prove this assertion that justification is nothing but remission of sinne by testimonies and by reasons and to this purpose collect a multitude of testimonies of Protestant Divines who against the Papists have maintained that justification confisteth in remission of sinnes onely But this assertion as hereafter I shall shew is to be understood as spoken in opposition to the Papists who unto justification besides remission of sinnes require inward renovation or sanctification and therefore their meaning was to exclude from justification not imputation of righteousnesse which alwayes concurreth in the same act with remission of sinne and without which there can be no remission for by the same act of imputation of Christs whole and entire righteousnesse we have both remission of sinnes and acceptation unto life but to exclude renovation à ratione justificationis from the proper nature of justification as if they had said wee are not justified both by remission and renovation as the Papists teach but by remission without renovation that is in their meaning by remission onely and this is acknowledged by Bellarmine himselfe as hereafter shall bee shewed And forasmuch as by remission of sinne wee have an imputative righteousnesse for to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne to him he imputeth righteousnesse without workes as the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. 6 7. therefore when it is said that we are justified by remission onely and not by renovation it is all one as if wee said that wee are justified by imputation onely and not by infusion of righteousnesse § XIX Their chiefe argument to prove their assertion is this Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission As therefore he whose sinnes of commission are remitted is reputed as if hee had done nothing forbidden so whose sinnes of omission are remitted is reputed as if hee had left undone nothing that is commanded Now hee that is reputed as if hee had neither done any thing forbidden nor left undone any thing that is commanded hee is reputed as if hee had fulfilled the whole Law I answer by distinction if they consider remission of sinnes barely without imputation of righteousnesse as they must if they will make good their assertion then hee that hath onely remission of the sins both of commission and omission is freed from the guilt of both but not from the fault For notwithstanding such remission of his sinnes he is a sinner as having both committed what is forbidden and also omitted what is commanded Yet by remission or not imputation of sinne hee is freed from the punishment and a rââ¦atu poenae from the guilt binding over to punishment as if hee had neither committed any thing forbidden nor omitted any thing commanded Hee therefore that hââ¦th remission is reputed as having neither committed any evill nor omitted any good not simply
or absolutely but in respect of the punishment and the guilt which bindeth over to punishment As for example a maleââ¦actour being convicted of Felony is by the Kings pardon acquitted both from the punishment and the guilt binding him over to punishment but yet notwithstanding his fault remaineth ââ¦nd for all his pardon hee is a theefe But if they conceive of remission of sinnâ⦠as having the imputation of righteousnesse concurring with it as alwaies it happeneth in Gods justification of a sinner then it is true that heâ⦠to whom his sinnes are remitted that is to whom sinne is not imputed and righteousnesse is imputed is reputed simply and absolutely as if he had neither committed any thing forbidden nor omitted any thing commanded but as if he had fulfilled the whole Law For it is not in Gods pardon as it is in mens A man by his pardon may remit the punishment and the guilt binding over to punishment but hee cannot take away the fault neither can hee by his pardon make the offendor just But whom God doth justifie hee maketh them righteous by imputation of Christs righteousnesse whereby hee doth not onely free them from the guilt of sinne and damnation but also covering their fault he accepteth yeâ⦠constituteth them righteous and heires of eternall life For Gods judgement is according to truth and therefore hee justifieth none but such as are just though not by righteousnesse inherent for so none are or can bee justified yet by righteousnesse imputed Iustification therefore is not onely an acquiââ¦ing of a sinner from punishment by the not imputing of sinne but also an accââ¦pting of him to life by imputation of perfect righteousnesse not onely a freeing of a man from hell but also the entituling of him to ãâã not onely a forgiving of our debt which Christ our surety hath paid for us but also an enriching of us with the inestimablâ⦠ãâã of Christs most pââ¦fect righteousnesse § XX. To this argument some doe adde a second not unlike whosoever are innocent they are just by remission of sinnes men are innocent therefore by remission of sinnes men are just Answ. The proposition is not generally and necessarily true for wee may conceive a man to bee innocent who is not just for innocency is but an absence of sinne not importing a presence of righteousnesse Infants if they were cleare from originall sinne were innocent but not just To the assumption I answer that by the bare remission of sinnes without imputation of righteousnesse men are not innocent for bare remission is like to a Kings pardon which taketh away the punishment but not the fault But if they speake of remission of sinne accompanied with imputation of Christs righteousnesse then I will confesse that by remission of sinne men are made both innocent and just But that righteousnesse imputed which shall make a man just must not stand in suffering onely but in an universall conformity with the Law of God You have heard our arguments and their answers now let us examine their proofes § XXI The principall authour of this Novelty hath three arguments The first is this Whereby we have entrance into heaven thereby alone we are justified by the blood of Christ wee have entrance into heaven therefore by the blood of Christ alone wee are justified Answ. The proposition if it had beene propounded thus by what wee have entrance into heaven by that wee are justified or thus by what alone we have entrance into heaven by that alone wee are justified had been true but as it is propounded it is false for we have entrance into heaven by his resurrection ascension and intercession not to speake of his obedience by which notwithstanding wee are as the Apostle saith justified and entituled to heaven yet we are not justified by any of these alone If his meaning be that by the blood alone of Christ we have entrance into heaven the assumption also is false unlesse hee either by a Synecdoche doe under one principall include all the merits of Christ or exclude all other meanes out of Christ who is our onely Saviour His second argument Sablata privatione ponitur habitus therefore sinne being remitted and taken away justice followeth of its owne accord To which I answer briefly that neither the punishment nor the guilt which onely as themselves teach are taken away in justification are privations nor the justice which is acquired is an habit in the party justified and therefore that Logicall Axiome doth not serve his turne His third argument If we are justified onely by remission of sinnes then not by that righteousnesse which is in Christ but we are justified onely by remission of sinnes Answ. The consequence of the proposition is unsound for although wee were justified by remission of sinnes alone yet wee were justified by imputation of Christs passive obedience at the least unto remission of sinnes The assumption hee proveth first by this reason because otherwise our sinnes being remitted wee should still remaine accursed Answ. It followeth not for together with remission of sinnes by imputation of Christs sufferings concurreth acceptation unto life by imputation of Christs obedience without which we could not be said to have fulfilled the Law in Christ. Secondly by the authority of Calvin whom in this case these men abuse worse than the Papists For Bellarmine though he object against Calvin as these men doe that he placeth justification onely in remission of sinnes yet he consesseth that his meaning thereby was not to exclude imputation of Christs righteousnesse but renovation or sanctification And he citeth these words out of Calvins institutions that hee placeth justification in peccatorum remissione justitiae Christi imputatione in the remission of sinnes and imputation of Christs righteousnesse And againe that God when he doth justifie us he doth absolve us by imputation of righteousnesse that in Christ wee may be accepted as just who in our selves are not Wherefore saith hee when Calvin in the same Chapter § 21. and 22. and in his Antidote unto the Councell of Trent Sess. 6. doth contend that justification consisteth only in remission of sinnes he doth not exclude the imputation of Christs righteousnesse but inward renovation and sanctification The same Bellarmine confesseth that those whom he calleth Lutherans who indeed are very sound in this point doe all of them place justification in the imputation of Christs righteousnesse which assertion of theirs is most true because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse wee have not onely remission oâ⦠sinnes but also acceptation unto life as being righteous in Christ not onely freedome from hell but also right and title to the Kingdome of Heaven § XXII Another treating of this point affirmeth that Christ is the matter of our justification and is made righteousnesse unto us in his passive obedience onely and yet confesseth that both the holinesse of his person and the obedience of his life are
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
in regard of it selfe but relatively in respect of that righteousnesse which it doth apprehend If it be said that faith as the instrument receiveth remission of sinne because by it we are assured thereof I answer that by faith receiving Christ we have remission of sinnes and justification before we can by speciall faith be assured of it And it is a great absurdity as elsewhere I have shewed to teach that men must beleeve and be assured of the remission of their sinnes to the end that they may be remitted § XIII I shall not need therefore to say any more in this place unlesse it be to give a Caveat to all young Divines that they give no credit to these Novelties which either affirme that wee are justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely or deny that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ at all as the matter of our justification By Matter I understand that very thing which is imputed as our onely righteousnesse by which wee stand perfectly righteous before God by imputation whereof we are both freed from hell and also entituled to the kingdome of heaven And let all men take notice that these opinions howsoever to some they seeme matters of small importance are notwithstanding very dangerous if not pernicious seeing they concerne our very title to the kingdome of heaven and seeing alââ¦o I have proved in this Treatise that without imputation of Christs righteousnesse there can be no justification nor salvation For all will confesse that without Christs obedience and sufferings none can bee justified or saved and that they justifie or save none but them onely to whom they are communicated and applyed But they cannot be communicated otherwise than by imputation whereby God accepteth them in our behalfe as if we had in our owne persons performed them for our selves Againe these foure assertions I hold for undoubted truthes first that what Christ our blessed Saviour in the daies of his flesh did or suffered in obedience to God he did and suffered not for himselfe but for us secondly that whatsoever he did and suffered for us that beleeve that the Lord accepteth in the behalfe of all that beleeve thirdly that what he accepteth in our behalfe that he imputeth unto us for by imputation wee meane nothing else fourthly to say that what Christ did and suffered for us God doth not accept in our behalfe is both blasphemous against Christ the wisedome of his Father as if hee did and suffered those things which he did and suffered in vaine and also pernicious unto us for if Christs doings and sufferings for us bee in vaine as they are if they bee not imputed to us then is our faith vaine and wee remaine in our sinnes and in the wofull state of damnation § XIV But some will say it is sufficient to beleeve that by the merits of Christ we have remission of sinne and that having remission of sinnes we shall be saved by him Answ. Yea but God forgiveth no sinnes for which his justice is not fully satisfied For as he is mercifull so he is just in forgiving our sinnes But no such satisfaction can bee imagined but that of Christ. For we our selves are not able to satisfie for our sinnes but by eternall punishment And how shall we have remission by Christs satisfaction if it be not applyed and communicated unto us how can it be communicated and made ours but by imputation And that the very papists themselves are at length forced to confesse And where they say that having remission of sinnes they shall be saved I confesse it is true because with Gods remission of sinnes there doth alwayes concurre imputation of righteousnesse But the bare remission of sinne without imputation of righteousnesse which onely freeth a man from the guilt of sinne and damnation doth not entitle him or give him right to the kingdome of heaven It is one thing to have by faith remission of sinnes and another to have by faith inheritance among them that be sanctified Act. 26. 18. Eternall life is not to bee had without perfect fulfilling of the Law which is no where to bee found but onely in Christ. And therefore by the onely meritorious obedience of Christ by which he hath merited and purchased salvation for us wee are saved But how should we be saved by his obedience if it be not communicated unto us and made ours for our selves how can it bee made ours but by imputation wherefore no imputation of Christs obedience no salvation CAP. VI. The end or finall cause the essentiall parts the fruits and consequents of justification § I. THE finall cause or end for which God doth justifie a sinner by imputation of Christs righteousnesse is either supreme or subordinate The supreme is the manifestation of the glory both of his mercy and of his justice as is noted in the definition which as they doe concurre in all the worke of God Psalm 145. 17. so especially in the worke of redemption and justification For therein the mercy of God appeareth to be so great that rather than hee would suffer us most miserable sinners to perish in our sinnes he hath sent his owne and his only begotten Son that we might be justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein hee hath made us accepted in his beloved His justice also such that rather than hee would suffer the sinnes of his owne elect to goe unpunished or forgive them without due satisfaction hee hath punished them in his owne Sonne and exacted from him a full satisfaction for them having set him forth to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse through the forgivenesse of sinnes which are past by the sufferance of God to demonstrate I say his righteousnesse at this time that hee might be just and the justifier of him who beleeveth in Iesus Not unto us therefore not unto us as if we were justified by our owne righteousnesse or worthinesse but to the name of God all glory is due for his mercy and for his righteousnesse sake who doth justifie us not of workes lest wee should glory in our selves but of his grace freely without any desert or cause in our selves through the redemption wrought by Christ who is of God made righteousnesse unto us that he which gloryeth may glory in the Lord. § II. The subordinate end is our salvation and the way unto it which is our new obedience or sanctification Salvation though it bee our ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã our particular supreme end and chiefe good unto which both justification and sanctification is referred yet it is subordinate to the glory of God as to the soveraigne and universall end For such is Gods goodnesse towards his elect that hee hath subordinated our salvation to his owne glory as he hath
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
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
dye Psalm 103. 12. how farre the East is distant from the West so farre hath hee made our sinnes to be distant from us which is not understood of the corruption extinguished but of the guilt removed or taken away Mic. 7. 19. thou wilt cast all their sinnes into the depth of the Sea that is hee will cast them out of his sight or remembrance hee will cast them behinde his backe he will bury them in oblivion that they should not be seene or remembred Ioh. 1. 29. The Lambe of God which taketh away or taketh upon him the sinne of the world ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is the translation of Nose and the Verbe Nasa having reference to finnâ⦠when it is attributed to God it signifieth to forgive as hath before beene shewed and likewise when it is attributed to men who have been offended Gen. 50. 17. 1 Sam. 15. 25. 25. 28. when it is attributed to Christ our redeemer as in the place alleaged it signifieth that he taketh away our sinnes by taking them upon him or bearing them as it is said of the scape Goat the figure of Christ Levit. 16. 22. and so that place Ioh. 1. 29. is to bee understood Nasa saith one sometimes doth signifie tollere that is to take up and to beare as when we are commanded tollere crucem to take up our crosse or to take upon him which Saint Iohn the Evangelist rendreth by the Verbe ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and this is fully expressed by the Prophet Esay 53. 12. that Christ Nasa did beare the sinne of many as before verse 4. that hee hath borne the Verbe is Nasa our griefes and carried our forrowes and vers 11. hee shall beare their iniquities Heb. 9. 28. Christ was once offered ad multorum exhaurienda peccata that is as our Rhemists translate to exhaust the sinne of many The word is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to take up and to beare the meaning is that Christ was offered upon the crosse that he might takâ⦠up and beare our sins even as S. Peter speaketh to the like effect 1 Epist. 2. 24. who himselfe did beare our sinnes in his owne body upon the tree that is the Crosse where the same Verbe is used and is by the Latine interpreted pertulit and by the Rhemists beare our sinnes § III. Other places are alleaged which mention the deletion that is the wiping or blotting out of sinne Psal. 51. 1. 9. Act. 3. 19. Esa. 44. 22. But I aske from whence Delere saith Vatablus est metaphora ab iis qui delent qui prius in rationes scripserant to wipe out is a metaphore from those who wipe out such things as before they had written upon their account or in their debt-bookes The booke is Gods remembrance out of which those things are wiped which are forgotten and thus deletion is often ascribed to oblivion For Gods wiping out of sins is his blotting them out of his remembrance and so it is expounded Es. 43. 25. his not remembring them Psal. 25. 7. 79. 8. Ier. 31. 34. as contrariwise his not blotting them out is his remembring of them his not forgiving them Ier. 18. 23. forgive not their iniquity neither blot out their sinne from thy sight Psal. 109. 14. Let the iniquity of his father be remembred with the Lord and let not the sinne of his mother be blotted out ne deleatur id est non tradatur oblivioni but let them be before the Lord continually verse 15. And thus David prayeth Psal. 51. 9. hide thy face from my sinnes and blot out all mine iniquities namely out of thy remembrance and no more can bee gathered out of Act. 3. 19. that your sinnes may be blotted out of Gods booke where Tremellius noteth it to bee a metaphore taken from those who keepe bookes of account c. Howsoever it is not to be doubted but that before the day of judgement whereof Saint Peter there speaketh there shall be a totall deletion of the sinnes of the faithfuââ¦l both in respect of the guilt and also of the pollution As for Es. 44. 22. the Lord professeth his reconciliation with Israel in taking away their sinnes which as a cloud yea as a thicke cloud had hid his face from them the guilt whereof being taken away the light of his countenance did shine upon them Howbeit Tremellius and Innius read Deleo ut densa nubes defectiones tuas according to which reading that place hath affinity with those which mention washing cleansing purging of which â⦠am now to speake § IV. Of these some are to be understood of justification and taking away the guilt of sinne as all the first part of the 51. Psalme which is a prayer for the pardon of sinne out of which are cited verse 2. and 7. where David prayeth that God would wash him and cleanse him from his sinne namely by the bloud of Christ for that is it which cleanseth us from all our sinnes Purge me with hyssope which was the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã wherewith they used to sprinkle the bloud upon those which were cleansed that is sprinkle me with the blood of that eternall sacrifice of Christ prefigured in the Law without which bloud being shed there was no remission And there is no doubt but the blood of Christ was shod for the remission of sinnes Mat. 26. 29. and that our consciencââ¦s the seat of guiltinesse might bee purged from dead workes The words following and I shall bee whiter than snow doe plainely argue the purity not of sanctification for to such a degree thereof we never attaine in this life but of justification in respect whereof our soules being perfectly just are whiter than snow Some are to be understood of sanctification as Ezek. 36. 25. Some of both as 1 Cor. 6. 11. Act. 22. 16. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Heb. 1. 3. but with this difference that we are cleansed and purged from the guilt of sin past wholly and at once but from the corruption in part and by degrees in this life wherin we are to be renewed in the inner man from day to day The Corinthians to whom the Apostle giveth this testimony that they were washed c. were farre from perfection of inherent righteousnesse as appeareth by that Epistle wherein he calleth them carnall and reproveth them both for their errours in judgement and for their misdemeanours in their conversation That which he citeth out of Pro. 15. per mifericordiam fidem purgantur peccata is found in the Latine v. 27. but not in the originall the like sentence is found Pro. 16. 6. but there the Verbe purgatur for which the Text is alleaged is not used in the Latine § V. For the not being of sinne he alleageth Psalm 10. 15. alià s 9. 35. quaeretur peccatum illius non inveniatur against the true meaning of the place it being not
a prayer for the justification or sanctification of the wicked that his sinne may bee no more as Bellarmine absurdly expoundeth it dicet peccatum fuisse non esse but is a propheticall imprecation against the wicked that God would break their arme that is their power and strength and that when he as a judge should inquire into their wickednesse they should not be found according to that Prov. 10. 25. he shall be no more that is as Augustine expoundeth it that the wicked when he is judged shall perish for his sinne And so Vatabius make inquiry into his sinne thou shalt not finde him neither doth the Psalmist say non invenietur ipsum scil peccatum sed non invenietur ipse scilicet peccator not it but he shall not be found § VI. For the perfection of righteousnesse hee alleageth three places two out of Ephes. 5. vers 8. Yee were sometimes darkenesse but now light in the Lord where the abstract Light is put for the concrete Lightsome as being inlightned as the Children of Light not that they are that light in which there is no darkenesse Neither is it said that we are in our selves Light but notwithstanding that darkenesse which remaineth in us wee are Light in the Lord. The second place is Ephes. 5. 26 27. where it is said that Christ did give himselfe for his Church that he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word that hee might present it to himselfe a glorious Church not having spot or wrinckle or any such thing but that it should be Holy and without blemish In which words there is no mention of justification but of sanctification which in this life is begun and increased by the worke of the Spirit in the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments that at the Marriage of the Lambe it may bee presented unto him a glorious Church not having spot or wrinckle c. Wherefore Augustine That which I said saith he that God hath chosen unto himselfe a glorious Church I did not therefore speake it because now it is altogether such though no doubt she was chosen that she might be such when Christ who is her life shall appeare for ââ¦en she also with him shall appeare in glory for which glory she is called a glorious Church And againe wheresoever I mentioned the Church not having spot or wrinckle it is not so to bee taken as though now it were but because it is prepared to be such when she also shall appeare glorious And the same answer will serve for the third place cited out of the Canticles 4. 7. Tota pulchraes macula non est in te thou are all faire there is no spot in thee unlesse perhaps he speake of the beauty of the Spouse adorned in her justification with the perfect righteousnesse of Christ for of her Sanctification which is but begun in this life it is not true But the Papists are without shame who apply such texts of Scripture to the now Church of Rome § VII Besides these places of Scripture Bellarmine saith many other very weighty arguments might bee brought but hee hath already produced them in his first booke De Baptismo cap. 13. which when they shall call come to bee weighed will be found light enough For those places which speake of the efficacie of Baptisme in washing cleansing and taking away our sinnes prove not that in justification sinnes are utterly abolished For in Baptisme is sealed to them that are Baptized yea and conferred to the faithfull the benefits not onely of justification but also of sanctification And therefore as it is the Sacrament of remission of sinne and the seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith so it is called the Laver of regeneration wherein we are Baptized into the similitude of Christ his death and resurrection And therefore though in Baptisme sinne were wholly taken away as well in respect of the corruption as of the guilt yet it would not follow that in justification there is a Totall deletion of sinne But neither in Baptisme is there a totall abolition of sin seeing it is manifest that originall sinne which is called the flesh the old man and evill concupiscence remaineth in all the faithfull though in some measure mortified yet never fully and altogether extinguished in this life And although the Papists for maintenance of their severall errors viz. of justification by inherent righteousnesse of the perfect fulfilling of the Law of merit of works of supererogation doe maintaine that concupiscence remaining in the faithfull after Baptisme is not a sinne and the Councell of Trent hath denounced Anathemà against them that shall say it is a sinne yet it is manifest not onely by the testimony of antiquity and evident reasons which I could produce if I would runne into another controversie but also by the doctrine of the Apostle who doth not onely in many places expressely call it a sinne and describeth it as a sinne but also setteth it forth as the mother of sinne the sinning sinne which because it taketh occasion by the Commandement forbidding lust to worke in men all manner of evill concupiscence is not only convinced to be a sinne but also to be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã exceedingly sinnefull § VIII And not only habituall concupiscence in generall which is the body of sinne and the body of death in respect of which sinne the body of the faithfull is said to be dead Rom. 8. 10. is sinne but also the severall members and branches thereof which remaine even in the best are so many habituall sinnes as a spice at the least of pride selfe-love carnall security infidelity hypocrisie envy worldly and carnall love of pleasure profit preferment and glory in this world c. Which though they bee not imputed to the faithfull yet in themselves are sins as being ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã swervings from the Law of God not onely as defects of righteousnesse which were enough to make them sinnes but as positive vices Neither is it to be doubted but that as the acts of pride and other habituall vices remaining even in the best are sinnes so much more the vices themselves from which they proceed are sinnes and are by the same Commandement of the Law forbidden Now whatsoever is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is sinne For as every sinne is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã so every ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is a sin that being a perfect definition of sinne as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Non potuit rectius brevius definiri peccatum quà m ut à S. Ioanne fuit definitum illis verbis ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã But all evill concupiscence both habituall and actuall both in generall the body of sinne and in particular the severall branches being so many habituall sinnes in whomsoever they are found even in the most regenerate are ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã aberrations from the
law of God Therefore all evill concupiscence whatsoever in whomsoever remaining is a sinne § IX Yea but concupiscence is no sinne unlesse the Will consent unto it Then say I not a sinne in infants not baptized But the Law doth not say non consenties concupiscentiis sed omninò non concupisces thou shalt not consent to concupiscences but thou shalt not have any evill concupiscence at all And it is most evident that the concupiscence forbidden in the tenth Commandement is such as goeth before the consent of will For it is such as Saint Paul himselfe had not knowne to be sinne if the Law had not said Non concupisces thou shalt not covet But such concupiscences as have the consent of the will the very Heathen knew to bee sinnes And the Papists themselves must acknowledge them to be forbidden in the former Commandements unlesse they will deny the Law of God to be spirituall and preferre the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã corrupt interpretations of the Elders of the Iewes before the exposition of the Lawgiver himselfe Matth. 5. True therefore is that which some Writers cite out of Augustine that Originall sinne is remitted in Baptisme not that it be not but that it be not imputed unto sin Here Bellarmine takes on and saith that Luther first falsified this testimony of Augustine and that all who have followed him have continued the same fault though they have beene told of it A great accusation if true Augustines words in answere to an objection which the Papists cannot answer how can originall sinne bee transmitted from regenerate parents if in Baptisme it be wholly taken from them are these I answer saith he dimitti concupiscentiam in baptismo non ut non sit sed ut in peccatum non imputetur Where Augustine speaking of the traduction of originall sinne calleth it as his manner is Concupiscence in stead whereof some of our Writers have said sinne both Augustine and they meaning nothing else but originall Now that Augustine by that which he calleth Concupiscence meant sinne hereby appeareth first he saith it is remitted in Baptisme and remission is of debts onely and of sinnes as debts secondly because he saith it is remitted not that it should not bee any longer but that though it be a sinne yet it should not be imputed unto sinne for nothing is wont to be imputed unto sin by God but that which is sinne Where by the way wee may observe that in Augustines judgement remission of sinne is not the utter deletion of it that it bee no more but the not imputing of it For whereas the Papists for a poore shift and evasion say that Concupiscence is called sinne not because it is a sinne sed quia expeccato est ad peccatum inclinat this hindereth not its being a sinne but rather setteth forth the greatnesse of this evill as having all the respects of evill in it being both a sinne and a punishment of sinne and the cause of all other sinnes aâ⦠Augustine saith Concupiscentia carnis adversus quam bonus concupiscit Spiritus sc. in renatis peccatum est poena peccati causa peccaââ¦i § X. But howsoever Bellarmine letteth passe as well he might his other arguments alleaged in his Booke of Baptisme as impertinent to this present question yet one of them hee hath thought good not to omit as being in his conceit unanswerable which notwithstanding I have not onely answered elsewhere but also have used it as an invincible argument to prove justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse viz. the argument taken from the antithesis of Adam to Christ Rom. 5. 19. which Bellarmine here straineth beyond the extent of the antithesis made by the Apostle In other places Bellarmine hath thus argued As through Adams disobedience we were made sinners so through Christs obedience wee are made righteous but through Adams disobedience we were made truely sinners namely by unrighteousnesse inherent and not onely by imputation Therefore through the obedience of Christ we are made truly righteous namely by righteousnesse inherent But here to serve his present turne he altereth both the assumption and the conclusion The assumption for where before he said not onely by imputation here he saith not by imputation The conclusion for first in stead of concluding that wee are by the obedience of Christ made inherently just which we confesse though not intended by the Apostle in that place he concludeth that the obedience of Christ hath truly taken away and wiped out or abolished all our sinnes And secondly that he hath taken away our sinnes non imputaââ¦ivè sed verè not by imputation but truly His former argument I retorted after this manner As through Adams disobedience wee were made sinners that is guilty of death and damnation so by Christs obedience wee are made just that is absolved from that guilt and accepted as righteous unto eternall life But by imputation of Adams disobedience we were made sinners Therefore by imputation of Christs obedience wee are made righteous The assumption that we were made sinners by imputation of Adams disobedience I proved as by other arguments so by Bellarmines owne confession in other places Secondly I have acknowledged it to bee true that as we are made truely sinners through Adams disobedience not onely by imputation of Adams sinne but also by transfusion of both that privative and positive corruption which by that disobedi ence he contracted so we are made truly just through the obedience of Christ not onely by imputation of his obedience but also by infusion of righteousnesse from him But though we be truly made just by righteousnesse inherent yet it followeth not that we are in this life made perfectly just Neither doth it follow that because Christ doth free us from the dominion of sin we are therfore freed wholly from the being of sinne in us neither that if we be freed from sinne by imputation we are not freed truly For the Apostle useth these termes promiscuously remitting of sinne and not imputing of sinne justifying and imputing righteousnesse And as Christ was truly and really made a sacrifice for sinne in our behalfe so wee are truly and indeed made the righteousnesse of God in him Thus have I proved that neither remission of sinne is the abolishing of sinne nor justification all one with sanctification and that the Papists by confounding justification and sanctification and of these two making but one have utterly taken away and abolished out of their Divinity that great benefit of our justification A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE THIRD BOOKE Concerning Justification or saving Grace CAP. I. What is meant by the word Grace in the Question of Iustification § I. THE second Capitall errour of the Papists in the Article of justification is concerning justifying and saving grace For when as the holy Ghost would note unto us ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the first moving cause or
maketh 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
God in true holinesse and righteousnesse Of this grace of sanctification there is more frequent mention in the Fathers who wrote against the Pelagians than of the other Because the Pelagians acknowledging the grace of God in forgiving sinnes which is indeed the justifying and saving grace they had not the like occasion to insist upon the declaration and proofe thereof as they had of the other which the Pelagians denyed § II. Of whose errors in this point there were foure degrees For first they acknowledge no other inward grace of God but bonum naturae the possibility of nature and the power of free-will which because it is freely given of God without any precedent merits of ours they acknowledged to bee Gods grace In the second place they acknowledged the grace that is the gracious favour of God in forgiving sinnes but the inward vertue avoid sinnes and to walke in obedience they ascribed to the power of nature Thirdly for our direction and instruction how and what sinnes to avoid and how and what duties to performe they acknowledged Gods grace in teaching and instructing us by his word and by his law Fourthly they acknowledged after a sort the helpe of grace for the more easie performance of their duties but they denied the necessity thereof because without grace they being directed by the word were able of themselves though not so easily to fulfill the Law § III. These three latter degrees are condemned by so many decrees of the Councell of Milevis among which this is one denouncing Anathema against such as shall say that the grace of God whereby wee are justified through our Lord Iesus Christ doth availe onely to remission of sinnes which are already committed and not for a helpe that we may not commit them unto which rightly understood we doe subscribe acknowledging that by the same grace of God by which we were elected redeemed called reconciled adopted justified wee are also sanctified For wee professe that our blessed Saviour was given unto us of God not onely to bee our justification and redemption but also to be our Sanctification And we doe acknowledge that in the Covenant of grace the Lord hath not onely promised remission of sinnes to those that beleeve in Christ but hee hath also sworne that he will give us being redeemed and having remission of sinne to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the daies of our life And therefore we do also willingly subscribe to those sentences of Augustine which Gratian hath transcribed into the third part of his decree No man taketh away sinnes but Christ alone who is the Lambe of God taking away the sinnes of the world Now he taketh them away both by forgiving those that are already committed among which originall sinne is contained and also by helping that they bee not committed and by bringing us unto life where they cannot bee committed at all And againe the grace which by our Lord Iesus Christ is given is neither the knowledge of the divine Law neither nature nor remission of sinnes alone but it felfe also causeth that the Law be fulfilled that nature be freed that sinne raigne not And this I presume is as much as can truely bee alleaged out of the Fathers For seeing they doe hold as wee shall hereafter shew justification by faith onely it cannot bee imagined that they held justification properly understood by inherent graces unlesse wee can imagine that they thought there is no inherent grace but faith onely § IV. But howsoever the Fathers may be excused who opposing the errors of the Pelagians which oppugned the sanctifying grace did much insist upon the declaration the proofe and the amplification thereof oftner speaking of this gift of grace which was oppugned than of the gracious favour of God in forgiving of sinnes which the Pelagians did confesse yet the backsliding posterity cannot bee excused and that in three respects For first they leave out altogether the proper signification of grace which is most frequent in the holy Scriptures as if there were no other grace to bee acknowledged but that which is inherent Secondly they take away that grace of remission which the Pelagians did confesse and in the roome thereof they have brought in an utter deletion or abolition of sinne caused by the infusion of grace Thirdly that grace which they would seeme so much to magnifie is not much better acknowledged by them than it was by the Pelagians For first they doe not acknowledge it to be a quickning and reviving grace to them that are dead but an healing grace to the sicke and a helping grace to the weake And by how much they extoll the power of nature and lessen the foulenesse of originall sinne so much they extenuat the benefit of grace and are as well as the Pelagians worthily termed the enemies of Gods grace Secondly there seemeth to be little or no difference betweene the Pelagians bonum Naturae which they acknowledged to bee Gods grace and that sufficient grace which the Papists hold to be common to all Thirdly neither is there any great difference betweene them in respect of that grace whereby men are called For the Pelagians acknowledged the great grace of God in revealing his will unto us and in directing us what to doe and what to beleeve and withall confessed that God doth worke in us to will by revealing his will to us And what doe the Papists acknowldge more but that God having called us by his word and moved us to turne unto him it is in the power of our free-will either to accept Gods effectuall grace or to refuse it But this belongeth to another controversie A TREATISE OF IV STIFICATION THE FOVRTH BOOKE Of the Matter of Justification CAP. I. The state of the question concerning the matter of justification it being the principall point in controversie § I. THE third Capitall errour of the Papists in the question of justification is concerning that righteousnesse whereby we are justified where for prevention of Popish calumniations I must desire the Reader to remember three things First that the controversie is not concerning our Sanctification but concerning our Iustification For wee confesse that our habituall sanctification consisteth in our righteousnesse inherent and actuall in our new obedience Secondly that the question is not of our justification before men but before God For we acknowledge that we are justified that is declared and knowne to be just not onely by profession of the faith but also by good workes as Saint Iames teacheth Thirdly that wee doe not deny that there is a righteousnesse in the faithfull as Bellarmine falsly chargeth us For we professe that there is no faithfull or justified man in whom there is not inherent righteousnesse more or lesse according to the measure of grace received And further we professe that this righteousnesse which we have from God and is inherent in us is graciously both
by offering his sonne Isaac and Rahab by her entertaining and delivering of the Espies but no man can bee justified before God by his works who is guilty of any sinne For if Paul who was not conscious to himselfe of any sinne was not thereby justified how can he that is guilty of any or rather many sinnes be justified For whosoever is justified before God is blessed but cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them § IV. But if it shall evidently appeare that none of the workes of the faithfull are purely and perfectly good how farre then are the Papists from proving justification by workes And this I will prove by divers arguments which I will also maintaine against the cavils of the Papists And first out of Esa. 64. 6. We are all as an uncleane person or thing all our righteousnesses are as a menstruous cloth Where the Church doth freely confesse her selfe and all her members to bee uncleane and all their righteousnesses that is all their most righteous workes to bee as polluted clouts which though it be a most pregnant testimony wherein wee have just cause to triumph yet Bellarmine saith it is impertinent and that for three reasons First because without doubt the Prophet speaketh not of just men but of notorious sinners for whose sinnes the City of Ierusalem and people of the Iewes was to be delivered into the hands of the King of Babylon And that the prophet speaketh in the person of such wicked men he endeavoureth also to prove by three arguments First because he a little before had said because thou art angry and wee have sinned that is as Cyrill expoundeth it because thou art angry thou hast forsaken us But neither is God angry with the just neither doth hee forsake them I answere no lesse confidently but upon better grounds that without doubt the prophet speaketh in the person of the Church and namely of the faithfull who living after the desolation of Ierusalem in the captivity of Babylon should bewaile their owne sinnes and of the whole people of the Iewes which had drawne upon them those fearefull judgements For these words are part of that prayer of the Church of the Iewes which from the seventh verse of the 63. chapter is continued to the end of the 64. And in token of this continuation the latter part of the last verse of the former chapter in the hebrew is the beginning of this chapter in the Greeke Latine and other translations Now in the former chapter the same persons which here confesse their sinnes after they had magnified Gods mercies towards them verse 7. c. doe say unto God verse 16. doubtlesse thou art our Father though Abraham be ignorant of us and Israel know us not thou O Lord art our Father and our Redeemer And in this chapter as they bewaile in this verse their sinnefulnesse with aggravation so they desire the Lord whom they call their Father not to remember their iniquities because they are his people verse 8. 9. professing their hope of salvation verse 5. which is not the manner of notorious and impenitent sinners but of those that are penitent and faithfull And further that which Esay here foretelleth is accordingly performed First by Daniel chap. 9. from the fourth verse to the twentieth who in like manner in the name and behalfe of the desolate Church of the Iewes prayeth unto God confessing his owne sinnes and of the people of Israel as he speaketh verse 20. Secondly by the Church in captivity which send the like prayer written by Baruch to the priest and people who then were at Ierusalem Baruch 1. from the 15. verse of the first chapter to the end of the third § V. This then is the confession of the Church which according to Tertullians rule is to bee extended unto the faithfull in all times and so it is understood by Origen who saith that no man may glory of his owne righteousnesse seeing here it is said that all our righteousnesse is as the cloth of a menstruous woman by Hierome wee shall bee saved onely by thy mercie who of our selves are uncleane And what righteousnesse soever wee seeme to have is compared to a cloth of a menstruous woman By Augustine all our righteousnesse compared with divine justice is accounted like the cloth of a menstruous woman as the Prophet Esay saith c. and again whatsoever an uncleane person toucheth shall bee uncleane but all wee are as the cloth of a menstruous woman comming from a corrupt masse and uncleane we beare in our foreheads the spot of our uncleannesse which wee cannot conceale at least from thee who seest all things By Bernard in divers places First for our humble righteousnesse if wee have any is perhaps right but not pure unlesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to be better than our forefathers who no lesse truely than humbly said all our righteousnesse is like the cloth of a menstruous woman for how can there be pure justice where as yet fault cannot bee wanting And againe what can all our righteousnesse bee before God shall it not according to the Prophet be reputed as the cloth of a menstruous woman and all our righteousnesse if it bee straitly judged will it not be found unjust and defective What then will become of our sinnes seeing our righteousnesse cannot answere for it selfe wherefore crying earnestly with the Prophet Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord let us in all humility have recourse to mercie which alone can save our soules Thirdly if I shall bee just I will not lift up my head for all my righteousnesses before him are as the cloth of a menstruous woman Fourthly it is perfect and secure glorying when wee feare all our workes as blessed Iob testifieth of himselfe and when wee acknowledge with the prophet Esay that all our righteousnesses are to bee reputed no other than the cloth of a menstruous woman Fifthly surely if all our righteousnesses being viewed at the light of truth shall bee found like a menstruous cloth what then shall our unrighteousnesses bee found to bee And to the like purpose I might alleage Dionys. Carthus in Psal. 142. Gerson tom 3. de Consolat lib. 4. pros 1. tom 4. tr de sign Cajetan in 2 Cor. 5. 21. Iacob Clict in Canonem apud Cassandrum consult art 6. Stella in Luk. 17. Ferus in Matth. lib. 3. cap. ââ¦0 Andreas Vega opusc de justif qu. 1. propos 4. Adrianus de Traject afterwards Pope in quartum sentent Quasi pannus menstruatâ⦠sunt omnes justitiae nostrae jugiter igitur super pannum bonae vitae quem justitiae operibus teximus stillamus saniem diversorum criminum all our righteousnesses are like the cloath of a menstruous woman wherefore continually upon the cloth of a good life which
whole body shall bee lightsome where Bellarmine without any probability by the body understandeth a good worke and by the single eye a right intention for who knoweth not that many times workes are done with good intentions that are not good This place in Matthew is diversly expounded and may bee applied to many purposes But the proper true meaning may be gathered out of the coherence as I have shewed elsewhere for in the latter part of that Chapter our Saviour sheweth both what in our judgements wee should esteeme out chiefe good vers 19. c. and consequently what in our afflictions and endeavours wee should chiefly desire and labour for vers 25. c. 33. As touching the former he exhorteth us not to lay up our treasure upon earth but in heaven that is that we should place our happinesse not in earthly but in heavenly things For where our treasure is there will our heart bee also That is whatsoever wee esteeme our chiese good upon that our hearts and affections will be set This judgement concerning our chiefe good is by our Saviour compared to the eye whereunto whether it be right or wrong the whole corps or course of our conversation which he compareth to the body will be sutable If we repose our happinesse in heaven our conversation will bee religious and heavenly but if we place our paradise on earth our conversation will be answerable As for example if pleasure be our chiefe good our conversation will be voluptuous if profit it will bee covetous if honour it will be ambitious Such therefore as our judgement is concerning happinesse such will be our desires our endeavours and in a word such will bee our whole conversation But as his allegation is to no purpose so his conclusion is besides the question as if wee held that good workes were in their owne nature mortall sinnes when notwithstanding wee acknowledge them to be good per se and in their kinde as namely prayer and almes-giving but sinfull by accident as being stained with the flââ¦sh § V. His fourth testimony is 1 Cor. 3. 12. If any man build upon this foundation gold silver stones of price c. where he supposeth by gold and silver good workes are understood c. Answ. If they were they might be good and yet not purely good Even as a wedge of gold or of silver is truely called gold or silver though there bee some drosse therein But the Apostle speaketh not of workes but of doctrines for he comparing himselfe and other preachers of the Gospell to builders saith that he as a master-builder had laid the foundation whereon others did build either sound and profitable doctrines which he compareth to gold and silver c. or unsound and unprofitable compared to hay and stubble § VI. His fifth testimony is Iam. 3. 2. In many things we offend all Why I pray saith he doth he not say in all things wee offend all for if all the works of the righteous be sinnes then not onely in many things but in all we offend But Saint Iames knew what to say for in the second chapter hee had distinguished good workes from sinnes If you performe the royall Law according to the Scriptures thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe you doe well but if you accept persons you commit sinne and are reproved of the Law as transgressours Answ. The advise of Saint Iames in this place is that wee should not bee many Masters that is Censurers of our brethren knowing that by censuring and judging of others wee shall receive the greater judgement according to Matth. 7. 1. Rom. 2. 1. For he that will take upon him to censure other mens offences had need to be free from offence But we saith Saints Iames ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã we all of us offend many wayes we are subject to manifold sinnes and corruptions For the Apostle doth not speake of the singular individuall acts but of the divers sorts of sinne As sinnes against God our neighbour or our selves sinnes of omission and commission sinnes in deed in thought and in word which last kinde being the fault of Censurers is as hee noteth in the next words most hard to bee refrained when as the Apostle therefore speaking of all and including himselfe though hee were worthily called Iames the just saith that many wayes wee offend all hee signifieth that even the best of us are subject to manifold corruptions causing us many wayes to offend according tâ⦠the severall kinds thereof which is a manifest evidence that wee being sinners cannot bee justified by inherent righteousnesse especially if that bee added that as wee sinne many wayes according to the severall kinds of sinne so in our good workes which are good in their kind as in prayer almes giving c. wee offend by reason of the flesh which polluteth all our best actions But howsoever wee say that our righteousnesses are stained with the flesh yet wee distinguish them from our unrighteousnesses and with Saint Iames we distinguish good workes from sinnes things commanded from things forbidden things according to their kind good but by accident sinnefull from things which according to their kind are absolutely evill § VII His sixth testimony is from those places which exhort us not to sinne as Psalm 4. 4. Esa. 1. 16. Iohn 5. 14. 2 Pet. 1. 10. 1 Iohn 2. 1. For to what purpose serve these exhortations or admonitions if in every good worke wee cannot but sinne Answ. These exhortations doe not shew what wee are able to doe but what wee ought to doe Neither are they to no purpose for first they restraine men and especially the children of God from many particular sinnes Secondly though they exhort us to those things which in this corrupt estate wee are not able perfectly to performe as generally to abstaine from all manner of sin and to avoid all imperfectionsand defects which are incident unto our best actions yet they are to very good purpose For they serve to discover unto us our imperfections and to shew that perfection wherunto we ought to aspire to moveus not to performe our duties perfunctorily but to walke ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã accurately making conscience of all our waies to admonish us not to rely upon our owne righteousnesse which is so unperfect but to bewaile our imperfections and to crave pardon to teach us what need wee have of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and of his intercession for us and lastly to move us with an upright endevour to keepe all Gods Commandements with our whole heart and to strive towards that perfection which in this life wee cannot attaine unto which if wee doe our labour shall not bee vaine in the Lord. For the Lord in his children accepteth of the will for the deed and of their upright endeavours for perfect performance So long therefore as we are upright before God our imperfections
ought not too much to discourage us knowing that his grace is sufficient for us and that his strength is made perfect in our weakenesse § VIII His seventh testimony is taken from those places which teach that the workes of the righteous doe please God Mat. 3. 4. Sap. 9. 1. 2 Act. 10. 35. 1 Pet. 2. 5. Phil. 4. 18. But nothing can please God but that which is truly good and pure from all vice as Calvin himselfe confesseth Iust. l. 3. c. 12. § 1. Answ. As God hath made two covenants with men the one of works the other of grace so himselfe may bee considered either as a severe judge judging according to the Law which is the covenant of workes beholding men as they are in themselves or as a mercifull father in Christ dealing with us according to the covenant of Grace ââ¦eholding us in his beloved As he is a Iudge judging according to the Law no obedience can satisfie or please him but that which is pure and perfect as Calvin truely saith As hee is the father of the faithfull in Christ judging according to the covenant of Grace he dealeth with us as a loving father with his children Malach. 3. 17. Psalm 103. 13. accepting the upright though weake and unperfect endevours of his children in lieu of perfect performance Hence in the Scriptures to be upright or to walke with God is to please God Gen. 5. 24 cum Heb. 11. 5. and they who are upright are his delight Pro. 11. 20. Not that either they or their actions are perfect or accepted of God in and for themselves as being pure from sinne but that being covered with the righteousnesse of Christ they are accepted in him and not onely accepted but also graciously rewarded Then belike saith Bellarmine the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed not onely to the sinners themselves but to their sinnes also making them an acceptable sacrifice to God Answ. Wee speake not of the sinnes of the faithfull as hee maliciously cavilleth as if we made no difference betwixt their good workes and their sinnes but of their good workes which though unperfect and stained with the flesh the Lord accepteth in Christ as truly good not imputing to the faithfull their wants but covering them with the perfect obedience of Christ. § IX His eighth testimony is from those places which absolutely call the workes of the righteous good workes as Mat. 5. 16. 1 Tim 6. 17. Tit. 3. 8. Eph. 2. 10. Answ. where he saith that the workes of the faithfull are called absolutely good workes there is an ambiguity to bee cleared For though the Scriptures absolutely call the works of the righteous good workes yet they doe not say that they are absolutely good All good workes and vertues being considered in the abstract as they are in themselves according to their kinde and as they are prescribed in the word of God are absolutely good but considered as it were in the concrete as they bee in us or performed by us mixed with imperfections and stained with the flesh they are not absolutely purely and perfectly good Prayer in it selfe and ââ¦s it is prescribed in the word of God is a worke absolutely good but as it is performed by us it may bee truely good if performed in truth and with an upright heart but it is not absolutely and purely good by reason of those imperfections which concurre there with So faith and love and all other graces considered in the abstract are absolutely good but considered as they bee in us they are truly but not purely and absolutely good by reason of the impersections and defects which alwayes accompany them But saith Bellarmine out of Dionysiââ¦s Areopagita that worke is to be called evill in which there is any defect but it is not to be called good unlesse it be entirely and wholly good which is true according to the rigour of the Law from which our Saviour Christ hath freed the faithfull and in that sence all the good workes of the Papists themselves even their prayers in which they so much trust are sins Or if they deny any defect to be in their prayers or other their supposed good works they speake lyes in hypocââ¦isie having cauterized consciences But here againe let the Reader observe the desperate doctrine of the Papists who as they account no man justified in whom there is any sinne so they teach all workes to bee absolutely sinnes in which is any defect whereupon the accusation which they falsly lay to our charge will bee verified of them viz. that all the best workes of the faithfull are sinnes For wee deny them to bee sinnes though they have some defects but they affirme them absolutely to bee sinnes if there be any defect in them as undoubtedly there alwayes is as I have alrââ¦ady proved § X. These were his testimonies of holy Scriptures in the next place hee produceth other witnesses viz. Ambrose Hierome Augââ¦stine Gregory and Bernard who testifie nothing against our assertion but against the malicious misconceit of the Papists who conceive or at least report of us that wee put no difference betwixt good workes and sins From which wee are so farre that wee willingly subscribe to that conclusion which hee would prove out of the fathers and is the title of his chapter Opera bona non esse peccata sed verè bona that good workes are not sinnes but truly good § XI Now follow his reasons which if they served to prove no more than the same question which againe is propounded to bee proved wee would not gaine say But his first reason is brought to prove that the good workes of the righteous are no way vitiated corrupted or defiled and consequently that they are not onely truely but also purely good For if they were contaminated saith hee that would arise either from our inbred concupiscence or from the defect of love towards God or from the mixture of veniall sinnes concurring with them But from none of these For neither is that concupiscence a sinne in the regeneratâ⦠nor is the want of the love of God a sinne in them nor veniall sinnes such sinnes as are contrary to the Law of God or unto charity Thus for the confirmation of one error Bellarminâ⦠broacheth three more But if concupiscence bee a sinne if the want of Gods love bee a sinne if those which the Papists call veniall sinnes bee sinnes indeede then must it bee confessed that the good workes which are stayned with the flesh which proceed from a defective love of God and our brethren that are mixed with divers imperfections and corruptions are notpurely good § XII As for concupiscence of the flesh which remaineth in the regenerate it hath possessed and defiled all the parts and faculties of the soule which as they are in the regenerate partly spirit so they are also partly flesh And these two are opposite one to the other the Spirit lusting against the
Flesh and the Flesh lusting against the Spirit So that though Will be present with us that wee cannot doe what we would and much lesse after what manner wee would that is with our whole soules with our whole mind heart and affections For what good wee minde or will as wee are Spirit the same wee will as wee are Flesh. This concupiscence the Apostle had not knowne to bee a sinne had not the Law said non concupisces that is thou shalt have none evill concupiscence neither habituall nor actuall Neither is it onely a sinne as the Apostle oftentimes doth cal it but also it is the mother-sinne Iam. 1. 13 Rom. 7. 17. which taking occasion by the Law to produce ill concupiscences therein forbidden is convinced not onely to bee a sinne but exceedingly sinnefull Rom. 7. 13. But of this I have spoken before and proved by the testimony of Augustine that concupiscence against which the good Spirit lusteth viz. in the regenerate for in the unregenerate the Spirit is not is both a sinne and the cause of sin and a punishment sinne § XIII And as touching the second the summe of the Law is that we should love God with all our heart and with all our soule c. but where is any defect of love there God is not loved with all the heart c. it being legally understood and therefore every defect is an aberration from the Law and consequently a sinne I have also proved out of Augustine that it is a fault where love is lesse than it ought to bee from which fault it is that there is not a righteous man upon earth which doth good and sinneth not For which also though wee bee never so good proficients wee must of necessity say forgive us our debts Therefore every defect is a debt that is a sinne whereunto wee may adde that of the same Augustine It is a sinne either when there is not charity where it ought to bee or is lesse than it ought to bee whether this may or may not bee avoided by the Will § XIV And as to the third If those which the Papists call veniall sinnes bee not contrary to the Law then they are not forbidden in the Law and without doubt they are not commanded therein Now if neither they bee commanded nor forbidden then they are things indifferent but that is absurd yea but saith hee veniall sinnes hinder not justice And the Scripture absolutely calleth some men just and perfect notwithstanding their veniall sinnes I answere they hinder not imputative justice nor evangelicall perfection which is uprightenesse for to them that beleeve and repent they are not imputed Neither can it be denied but that the most upright men have their imperfections infirmities and slippes which though in themselves and according to the Law are mortall sinnes for if they should not bee forgiven they would as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth exclude men from heaven yet to them that are in Christ Iesus thââ¦y become veniall by the mercie of God through the merits and intercession of Christ. § XV. His second reason is taken from divers absurdities which hee conceiveth doe follow upon our assertion when as indeed they follow not upon our doctrine but upon his malicious misconceiving and misreport thereof as if wee held that all even the best workes of the righteous are mortall sinnes But wee acknowledge that the good workes of men regenerate are truly good and so to bee called notwithstanding the imperfection thereof Onely wee deny them to be purely good wherin we have the consent of holy Scriptures and of the ancient Fathers some whereof I before alleaged to whom I added Gregory and Bernard Gregory in the conclââ¦sion of his Moralls saith thus Mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos habere credimus pura bona esse uequaquaÌ possunt Our evill things are purely evill and the good things which we suppose our selves to have can by no meanes bee purely good Bernard t Our lowly justice if we have any is perhaps true but not pure Vnlesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to bee better than our fore-fathers who said no lesse truely than humbly all our righteousnesses are as it were the cloth of a menstruous woman wee doe not say that the good workes of the faithfull are sins and much lesse mortall sins For we hold that the sins of the faithful become to them venial But this we say with Salomon that there is not a righteous man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not which in effect is the same with that assertion of Luther Iustus in omni opere bono peccat § XVI Now let us examine the absurdities which hee absurdly upon his owne malitious misconceit objecteth against us In all which it is supposed that wee call the good workes of the righteous sinnes yea mortall sinnes The first if all the workes of the faithfull bee sinnes then the worke of faith whereby we are justified and that prayer whereby we begge remission of sinne should be sinnes Answ. The worke of faith and the act of prayer are good but not purely and perfectly good Neither are we justified by the worthinesse or by the worke of our faith but by the Object which it doth receive nor obtaine our desires by the merit of our prayer but by the mediation and intercession of Christ our Saviour Our faith is such that wee have need alwayes to pray Lord increase our faith Lord I beleeve help mine unbeleefe and our prayer such that when wee have performed it in the best manner we can wee have neede to pray that the wants and imperfections of our prayer may bee forgiven us § XVII The second If all the works of the righteous be sinnes with what face could the Apostle say that hâ⦠knew nothing by himselfe And what boldnesse was that for his good workes that is for his mortall sinnes to expect a Crowne of righteousnesse Answ. Though the Apostle had no doubt sometimes offended after his conversion yet he was not conscious to himselfe in particular of any actuall sinne or crime committed by him for as the Psalmist saith who can understand his errors No man saith Basil is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã free from sinne but God for of those many things wherein we offend the most wee understand not for which cause the Apostle saith I know nothing by my selfe but in that I am not justified ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is in many things I offend and doc not perceive whence also the Prophet saith who understandeth his trespasses But though hee was not conscious to himselfe of his slippes and oversights yet hee was not ignorent of his owne corruptious and infirmities against which when hee had prayed to God hee received this answere My grace is sufficient for thee and in weakenesse my power is made perfect Neither did the Apostle expect the reward for
the merit of his works but for the truth and fidelity of God who is just in keeping his promise made to the upright though unperfect indeavers of his servants And therefore the reward whereby God doth crowne his owne gifts in us is called a crowne of righteousnesse not of ours but of Gods righteousnesse as Bernard saith § XVIII The third If all the works of the righteous were mortall sinnes then God himselfe should sinne mortally because it is God that worketh in us when we doe any good works Phil. 1. and 2. Answ. If all good workes were absolutely sinnes yea mortall sinnes as they malitiously charge us to hold then indeed God who is the author of them might perhaps bee said though not to sinne and much lesse to sinne mortally for he is not subject to the precept of the Law and much lesse to the curse of it yet to be the author of sinne But wee hold that the good works of the faithfull are truly good though not purely good and that what goodnesse is in them is the worke of God and what impurity is in them it is from the flesh which staineth the workes of grace in us Neither are the defects of the secondary causes to be imputed to the first cause That which God worketh in us no doubt is good but this good worke hee hath but begun in us as in the place by him quoted Philippians 1. 6. for our in regeneration wee are not wholly renewed and at once for then wee should bee wholy spirit and no flesh Neither doth the leaven of grace season the whole lumpe at once but the inward man is renewed day by day And what is not yet renued is a remainer of the old man and what is not Spirit is flesh Now betweene these two there is a perpetuall conflict the spirit lusting against the flesh and the flesh lusting against the Spirit So that a man regenerate cannot with full consent of will doe either good or evill there being a reluctation of the Spirit against the evill which the flesh affecteth and a reÌluctation of the flesh against that good which is willed by the Spirit By reason of this conflict it comes to passe that as the sinnes of the faithfull are sinnes of infirmity more or lesse and not wilfull sinnes committed of meere malice so the good works of the faithfull are not purely good but stained with the flesh § XIX The 4. that our assertion is greatly injurious to our Redeemer who as the Apostle saith gave himselfe for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity might purge unto himselfe an acceptable people zealous of goodworks For neither should he truly have redemed us from any iniquity nor truly cleansed his people nor made them zealous of works truly good but of mortall sinnes namely if all their good works be mortall sinnes which we utterly deny But I answere Our Saviour Christ gave himselfe for us both that he might justifie us by redeeming us from all iniquity and also that hee might sanctifie or as the Apostle speaketh that hee might purifie unto himselfe a peculiar people zelous or studious of good works The iniquity from which he redeemeth us is not onely of those transgressions which are absolutely sinnes but also of those unperfect and defective workes which wee indevour to performe in obedience to God And herein as I have said the high Priest was a notable type of our Saviour Christ who did weare in the forefront of his Miter a plate of gold in which was ingraven this inscription Holinesse of the Lord meaning of Iehovah our righteousnesse which he was appointed to weare that he might beare the iniquity of the holy things which the Children of Israell should hallow in all their holy gifts that notwithstanding the iniquity of them they might be accepted before the Lord by imputation of his holinesse who is Iehovah our righteousnesse And the like is to be said of the incense of the Saints upon earth that is of their prayers and all other their good works which have need to bee perfumed with the odours of Christs sacrifice that so being defective in themselves they may be accepted of God in Christ. As for our sanctification it is true that Christ gave himselfe to sanctifie us But this sanctification is but begun and in part in this life and is to be perfected in the life to come So saith the Apostle Ephcs. 5. that Christ loved his Church and gave himselfe for it that hee might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word that he might present it to himselfe viz. at the mariage of the Lambe a glorious Church not having spot or wrinckle or any such thing but that it should be holy and without blemish which last words as I have shewed out of Augustine are to bee understood not of the Church militant on earth but of the Church triumphant in heaven The workes which we are to be studious of are workes not onely truly but also as much as is possible purely good For though wee cannot in this life attaine to full purity and perfection yet we must aspire towards it affecting and desiring to performe good works in a better manner and measure than wee can indeed attaine unto Howbeit we must say with the Apostle to will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I finde not for the good that I would I doe not but the evill which I would not that I doe and lest it should bee said that the Apostle speaketh all these things in the perof a carnall man he concludeth thus so then ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã even I my selfe with the minde that is the Spirit serve the Law of God but with the flesh the Law of sinne § XX. The fifth If all good workes are mortall sinnes then some mortall sinnes are good works and then we may conclude thus All good works are to be done some mortall sinnes are good works therefore some mortall sinnes are to be done Againe no mortall sinne is to bee done all good workes are mortall sinnes therefore no good worke is to bee done Conclusions worthy of the Lutherans that some mortall sinnes are to bee done and that no good worke is to be done Answ. we deny good workes to bee mortall sinnes though in every good worke the most righteous doe sinne The worke it selfe is good though the defect or imperfection which goeth with it is evill The good worke therefore is to bee done the defect we are to strive and to pray against and to crave pardon for it To which deprecation we are to expect this answeare or the like My grace is sufficient for thee and in thy weakenesse my power is perfected Againe wee must distinguish betwixt workes which are sinnes absolutely and per se and those which are onely by accident For those which are good per se are to be
performed as well as we can because commanded knowing that God will accept of our upright though weake indevour § XXI The sixth and the last who seeth not that these words good workes are mortall sinnes imply a contradiction for they shall be good and not good c. Answ. We doe not affirme that good workes are mortall sinnes neither doe we deny them to be truly good Onely we deny them to bee purely and perfectly good And we acknowledge the impurity and imperfection concurring with them to bee a sinne and consequently that the good workes of the faithfull are good per se as being commanded as being the fruits of the Spirit and of faith working by love but sinfull per accidens as being stained with the flesh yea but saith Bellarmine Bonum non existit nisi ex integra causa malum verò ex quolibet vitio that is that is not to bee accounted a good worke whereunto all things doe not concurre which are requisite but that is evill wherein there is any defect therefore if there be any defect or imperfection to bee found in any worke that worke is not to be accounted good but evill Answ. that rule of Diony sius is true according to the rigour of the Law which they call ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã from which our Saviour hath delivered us but it is not true according to the covenant of grace wherein the Lord accepteth the sincere and upright indevours of his children though defective and unperfect for perfect performance their wants being not imputed unto them but covered with the robe of Christs perfect righteousnesse As therefore their persons though in themselves sinners are in Christ accepted as righteous so their actions though in themselves defective are acceptable in Christ. Here therefore wee may justly retort both the accusation it selfe and all these absurdities upon the Papists who be necessary consequence are proved to hold that all the workes of the righteous are simply evill and so absolutely to be called sinnes Those works wherein is found any defect or imperfection are not good but absolutely they are to bee called sinnes as the Papists teach But in all even the best works of the righteous there is to be found some defect imperfection or blemish as being stained with the flesh This assumption is plainely taught in the holy Scriptures as I have proved heretofore Therefore all even the best actions of the righteous are absolutely to be called sinnes as the Papists teach Here then let all men againe take notice of the Popish pharisaisme or pharisaicall hypocrisie of Papists with whom no man is just or justified in whom is any sinne no action good but simply evill in which is any defect and yet their persons are just and their actions not onely good but also meritorious and that ex condigno and that ratione operis of eternall life CHAP. V. Our fourth Argument that the righteousnesse by which wee are justified satisfieth the Law so doth Christs righteousnesse so doth not that which is inherent in us § I. NOw I returne to our owne proofes The fourth argument therefore to prove joyntly that we are justified by Christs righteousnesse and not by ours may be this By that righteousnesse alone and by no other we are justified by which the Law is fully satisfied By the righteousnesse of Christ alone the Law is fully satisfied and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us For the proofe of the proposition three things are to be acknowledged first that whosoever is justified is made just by some righteousnesse for as I have shewed heretofore to thinke that a man should be justified without justice is as absurd as to imagine a man to be clothed without apparell secondly that all true righteousnesse is a conformity to the law of God which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse insomuch as what is not conformable to the Law is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is iniquity and sinne thirdly that there can be no justification without the Law be fulfilled either by our selves or by another for us For our Saviour when he came to justifie us and save us protested that hee came not to breake the Law but to fulfill it and professeth that not one jot or tittle of the Law should passe unfulfilled Matth. 5. 17 18. Saint Paul likewise avoucheth that by the doctrine of justification by faith the Law is not made void but established Rom. 3. 31. The proposition therefore is undenyable The assumption hath two parts the former affirmative that by the righteousnesse of Christ the Law is fully satisfied the other negative that by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us the Law neither is nor can be fully satisfied For the clearing of the assumption in both the parts wee are to understand that to the full satisfying of the Law since the fall of Adam two things are required the one in respect of the penalty unto the suffering whereof sinne hath made us debtours the other in respect of the precept to the doing wherof the Law doth bind us The former to free us from hell and damnation the other to entitle us to heaven and salvation according to the sanction of the Law If thou dost not that which is commanded thou art accursed if thoudoest it thou shalt be saved In respect of the former the Law cannot be satisfied in the behalf of him who hath oncetransgressed it but by eternal punishment or that which is equivalent in respect of the latter it is not satisfied but by a totall perfect and perpetuall obedience § II. Now our Saviour Christ hath fully satisfied the Law for all them that truly beleeve in him in both respects For hee hath superabundantly satisfied the penalty of the Law for us by his sufferings and by his death and he hath perfectly fulfilled the Law for us by performing all righteousnesse in obeying his Father in all things even unto death and by them both he hath justified us freeing us from hell by his sufferings and entituling of us unto heaven by his obedience And therefore the holy Ghost affirmeth that wee are justified by his bloud Rom. 5. 9. and by his obedience verse 19. For his sufferings were the sufferings of God in which respect they who put him to death are said to have killed the Author of life Act. 3. 15. and to have crucified the Lord of glory 1 Cor. 2. 8 and for the same cause the bloud by which we are redeemed is called the bloud of God Act. 20. 28. or which is all one the bloud of the Sonne of God 1 Iohn 17. His obedience likewise was the obedience of God For Iesus Christ the word that is the second person in Trinity being in the forme of God God coequall with his Father for our sakes
became flesh that is abased himselfe to become man which before hee was not but not ceasing to bee that which hee was before namely the true and the great God God above all blessed for evermore in our nature being perfect God and perfect man hee farther humbled himselfe and became obedient untill death even to the death of the crosââ¦e And therefore the righteousnesse of Christ both habituall inherent in his person and that which was performed by him both active and passive being the righteousnesse of God as it is often called Rom. cap. 1. 3. 10. the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour 2 Pet. 1. 1. who was given to us of God to be our righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1. 30. that wee beleeving in him might bee the righteousnesse of God in him 2 Cor. 5. 21 is therefore called Iehovah our righteousuesse Ier 23. 6. I say his passive righteousnesse being the righteousnesse of God the bloud of God it is a price of infinite valew and superabundantly sufficient to satisfie for the sinnes not onely of the faithfull but of all the world and not onely of this one world but of more if there were more And this habituall and actuall righteousnesse being the righteousnesse and obedience of God is of infinite and alââ¦-sufficient merit to entitle all those that beleeve in him were they never so many to the kingdome of heaven These things if the Papists should deny It would deny them to be Christians The former part therefore of the assumption is of undoubted truth § III. Come wee then to the other part Is there any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us that can fully satisfie the Law Nothing lesse For first in respect of the penalty which is due unto us for our sinnes wee cannot possibly fatisfie it but by enduring everlasting torment which though wee should endure for a million of millions of yeares yet wee could not bee said to have satisfied the Law which cannot be satisfied but by endlesse punishment or that which is equivalent but there is nothing equivalent but the precious death and sufferings of the eternall Son of God who gave himself to be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a full price of ransome countervailing in respect of the dignity of his person the eternall pains of hel which all the elect should have suffered Therefore there is no possibility for us to escape hell the just guerdon of our sinnes unlesse the Lord impute our siââ¦s to our Saviour Christ and his sufferings to us accepting them in our behalfe as if we had sustained them in our owne persons For although wee should for the time to come performe a totall and perfect obedience to the Law yet that would not free us from the punishment already deserved by us But the Law must be satisfied both in respect of the penalty to be borne and in respect of perpetuall and perfect obedience to bee performed through out our whole life Neither may we thinke by the payment of one debt to satisfie another The obedience which wee hope to performe for the time to come though it were totall and perfect is a debt and duty which wee owe unto God Luk. 17. 10. and therefore cannot discharge us of the penalty which is another debt which wee owe for our sinnes past for wee were sinners from the wombe yea in the wombe and to the guilt of Adams transgression in whom wee sinned and to that originall corruption which we have received from him for which though wee had no other sinnes wee were worthily subject to eternall damnation wee have added in the former part of our life innumerable personall transgressions all deserving death and damnation which if wee be not delivered therefrom by the death and merits of Christ wee must make account to suffer in our owne persons neither can our future intended obedience satisfie for our sinnes as Bellarmine confesseth God is just in forgiving sinnes neither doth he forgive any sinne for which his justice is not fully satisfied § IV. Neither can our righteousnesââ¦e ââ¦atisfie the Law in respect of the precept by fulfilling it for whosoever hath not continued in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them but hath at any time transgressed the Law hee hath not fulfilled it Therefore it is most certaine that we cannot satisfie the Law in respect of the precept because wee have already broken it and by our breach of it have made our selves subject to the curse of the Law so farre are we from being justified by it Neither are wee able by our obedience to satisfie the Law for the time to come § V. Against this branch of our argument which by us is added ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as over measure Bellarmine taketh exception alleaging that the faithfull and regenerate are able to fulfill the Law and entreth into a large dispute to prove that the Law is possible which disputation I have fully examined in his due place and confuted Here let the Reader take notice that Bellarmine disputeth sophistically in diverse respects for first hee will needs be actor when indeed hee is reus and that hee might get the better end of the staffe pretendeth to confute our errours when indeed he laboureth to defend his owne Secondly hee answereth but a piece of our argument and such a piece as might be spared as being added mantisae loco by way of advantage for thus we reason no man can satisfie the Law because hee hath already broken it yea hee is so farre from satisfying the Law in respect of the time past that for the time to come hee is not able to fullfill it Thirdly where hee should prove that all those who are to bee justified doe fulfill the Law for else how should they by fulfilling of the Law be justified all that he endevoureth to prove is that it is possible for them that are already justified to fullfill it disputing as wee say a posse ad esse Fourthly where hee should prove that all who are justified doe fulfill the Law for else how should they be justified by fulfilling it hee endeavoureth to prove that some rare men have fulfilled it not caring what becomes of the rest Fifthly where hee argueth that if men shall fulfill the Law they shall be justified his consequence doth not hold in respect of them who at any time heretofore have broken it as all meere men without exception have done though they should perfectly fulfill the Law for the time to come Sixthly he would prove that some doe fulfill the Law and yet cannot deny but that even those some doe sinne many times yea seven times a day and that they have need daily to pray for the forgivenesse of their sinnes and therefore faileth in the proofe of that also as I have made manifest in answering his arguments § VI. Now to make good this part of our reason
I will not content my selfe to have answered elsewhere all his objections againstit but I will here also briefly propound some of our arguments to prove that wee I meane all mortall men neither doe nor can by our righteousnesse and obedience fulfill and so even in that respect cannot satisfie the Law And first I prove it by this most plaine reason No transgressours of the Law doe fulfill it All men without exception of any but Christ are transgressours of the Law not onely the unregenerate but the regenerate also Therefore no man whatsoever Christ excepted doth fulfill it The proposition needeth no proofe the assumption I have proved before and every mans Conscience giveth testimony to it for himself Or thus Whosoever is a fulfiller of the Law is without sinne No mortall man is or can bee without sinne Therefore no mortall man is or can bee a fulfiller of the Law § VII Secondly If any man could fulfill the Law he might bee justified thereby Rom. 2. 13. Gal. 3. 12. But no man whatsoever can be justified by the Law Gal. 2. 16. 3. 10 11. Rom. 3. 20. Therefore no man can fulfill it § VIII Thirdly Those who cannot fulfill the first commandement of the two and the last of the ten cannot fulfill the whole Law But no mortall man is able to fulfill the first and last commandements Therefore no mortall man is able to fulfill the whole Law The first which is the great commandement injoyneth us to love the Lord our God with all our soules c. which being legally understood no mortall man is able to fulfill For whosoever are in all the parts and faculties of the soule partly flesh and but partly Spirit they cannot love God with all their soules The most regenerate in this life are partly flesh and but partly Spirit in all the parts and faculties of the soule Therefore the most regenerate in this life cannot love God with all their soules that phrase being legally understood The last commandement forbiddeth all evill concupiscence whether habituall with which all men generally are infected or actuall from which none are free and those not such as are joyned with consent of the wil which are passions of lust for those are forbidden in the former commandements but such as goe before consent which are called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã with which all men without exception doe abound Neither is the commandement thou shalt not consent to lust but thou shalt not lust that is thou shalt have no evill concupiscence which as Augustine saith ought not to be bridled onely but not to be for hee that hath concupiscences though he doth not goe after them doth not fulfill the Law thou shalt not coveâ⦠§ IX Fourthly by the testimony of Saint Peter Act. 15. 10. that the observation of the Law is not to be imposed upon Christians as necessary to justification as being a yoke which neither the Apostles nor their forefathers the Patriarches and Prophets were able to beare but that we are to be justified and saved by the grace of God through a lively faith which purifieth the heart Bellarmine answereth that the Apostle speaketh of the ceremoniall Law which wee doe not altogether deny But from hence wee argue as from the lesse If the ceremoniall Law were an unsupportable yoke how much more the morall For the ceremoniall Law in it selfe considered was not unsupportable nor required any thing exceeding the power of man For not onely the godly did performe it but hypocrites also who many times were more precise in observing the ceremonies than the godly themselves but as it was an appendice of the Law morall As for example Circumcision in it selfe though the most painefull ceremony might well bee borne But as by it men were made debtors to the whole Law in such sort as they could not be justified but were under the curse if they did not observe the whole Law it was a yoke unsupportable For in that sense the Apostle speaketh when he protesteth to the Galathians that if they were circumcised Christ should profit them nothing And in that sense as it seemeth it was urged by the beleeving Pharisees that it was needfull that the disciples meaning all the Christians of that time as well Gentiles as Iewes should bee circumcised and so required to keepe the Law otherwise they could not be justified nor saved And to that purpose tendeth Saint Peters speech That it was not needfull to require the beleeving Gentiles to be circumcised seeing it was well knowne that the Gentiles were first called by his ministery had truly beleeved and had received the holy Ghost who had purified their hearts by a lively faith by which without circumcision or other observations of the Law they were justified as well as the beleeving Iewes the Iewes also themselves expecting to bee justified and saved by the grace of the Lord Iesus Christ even as the Gentiles were without the workes of the Law as Paul also reasoneth Gal. 2. 15 16. § X. Fifthly by the testimony of Saint Paul and his experience in himselfe Rom. 7. 18. c. From whence I reason thus whosoever are not able to performe that which is good though by the grace of God they are willing to performe it they are not able to fulfill the Law But the faithfull and regenerate are not able to performe that which is good though by the grace of God ââ¦hey be willing thereunto Therefore they are not able to fulfill the Law The assumption is proved from the example of Saint Paul as it were an argument from the greater For if Saint Paul himselfe who in sanctity farre excelled any man now living did not finde in himselfe ability to performe that which was good but was so hindered by the flesh that the good which he would he did not how sholl those who are farre inferiour unto him bee able to doe it being the common condition of all the regenerate that by reason of the reluctation of the flesh they cannot doe those things they would Gal. 5. 17. § XI Sixthly the Apostle Rom. 8. 3. doth acknowledge ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the impossibility of the Law namely to justifie us The reason whereof is not any defect in the Law it selfe but our impotencie to fulfill it by reason of the flesh for if it were possible for us to fulfill the Law it were possible to the Law to justifie us but it is not possible to the Law to justifie us by reason of the flesh and therefore by reason of the flesh it is not possible for us to fulfill the Law whiles the flesh remaineth in us as it alwayes doth remaine even untill death To these arguments if you shall adde the testimonies of the Fathers which in handling the sixth question I doe plentifully alleage you will acknowledge that besides the authority of Scriptures and evidence of reason we have the consent of antiquity that no mortall man is
able to fulfill the Law of God CAP. VI. Our fiftâ⦠argument containing foure branches By that wââ¦e are justified by which we are absolved redeemed reconciled and for which wee shall be saved § I. THe fifth argument By what righteousnesse wee are justified by it wee are absolved from our sinnes redeemed from our iniquities reconciled unto God and for it we shall bee saved And againe by what righteousnesse wee are absolved redeemed reconciled and for which wee shall be saved by it we are justified By that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves wee are not absolved from our sinnes nor redeemed from our iniquities nor reconciled unto God nor for it shall bee saved But by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him wee are absolved from our sinnes redeemed from our iniquities c. Therefore we are not justified by that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves but by that righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ. The proposition in both the parts thereof containeth foure branches The first by what righteousnesse we are justified wee are by it absolved from our sinnes and a converso by what righteousnesse we are absolved from our sinnes by that we are justified This is proved from the signification of the word justifie as being a judiciall word opposed to condemnation which I have at large proved before For this doth invincibly demonstrate that by what wee are justified by that wee are acquitted and absolved and by what wee are absolved by that we are justified But more specially it may bee proved out of Act. 13. 38 39. where as I have shewed before not onely the word justification and remission of sinnes are promiscuously used but the phrase also of being justified from sinne signifieth plainely to be absolved from sinne where also the maine question itselfe is concluded Bee it knowne unto you saith S. Paul to his brethren the Iewes who feared God that through Iesus Christ is preached unto you forgivenesse of sinnes And by him all that beleeve are justified from all those things meaning sinnes from which yee could not be justified by the Law of Moses From our sinnes therefore we are justified or absolved by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith from which we could out be acquitted by any obedience which we could performe to the Law § II. But of this place we are further to speake in defence of Calvins allegation thereof against Bellarmines cavils Calvin prooving that God doth justifie us when hee absolveth us from our sinnes and accepteth of us in Christ alleageth this place Through this man that is Christ is preached unto you remission of sinnes and by him all that beleeve are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses You see saith Calvin that justification is here set after remission of sinnes by way of interpretation r you see plainely that it is taken for absolution you see that it is denied to the workes of the Law you see it is meerely the benefit of Christ you see that it is received by faith and finally you see that there is a satisfaction interposed where hee saith that through Christ wee are justified from our sinnes Bellarmine pretending to answere this argument relateth it thus as if Calvin had said First By this man that is by Christ we are justified and not by any vertues or qualities of ours Secondly is preached that signifyeth that the very preaching or declaring of the promise if it bee apprehended by faith doth justifie for so the Apostle presently expoundeth himselfe by him every one that beleeveth is justified Thirdly forgivenesse of sinnes that signifieth that justification consisteth in nothing else but in remission of sinnes wherefore tââ¦e inward renovation is not the other part of justication for that renovation is not so much justificaââ¦ion as an effect thereof And lastly these words from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses doe signifie that justification doth not consist in the observation of the Law but onely as hath beene said in remission of sinnes for or through the righteousnesse of Christ imputed Thus as you see hee maketh Calvin speake what hee pleaseth But because the things which he inforceth in Calvins name upon this place be for the most part our assertions it shall not bee amisse to weigh the answeres which he maketh to them And first where it is said per hunc by this man hee saith this doth not exclude our vertues or qualities infused of God For by Christ wee are justified as the efficient which is signified by the preposition per by vertues and qualities infused as the formall cause Now if Christ or his righteousnesse bee the efficient cause then it cannot be the formall cause for the forme is the effect of the efficient nor can the same thing be the cause and effect of the same thing Neither may they say as they are wont that this is a mystery of faith that reason cannot attaine unto For mysteries though they surmount reason yet are notrepugnant to reason Neither ought we to faine mysteries as the Papists use to doe where the Scriptures have an easie and perspicuous meaning Rââ¦ply This were a good caveat to the papists As for us we faineno such mysteries neither doe we say that Christ or his righteousnesse is both the efficient and formall cause of our justification But this we say that the righteousnesse of Christ is both the matter of our justification and also the merit both of our justification and salvation and that Christ himselfe as he is Mediatour is the secondary efficient of our justification affording unto it both the matter thereof and the merit § IV. That word is preached doth not signifie saith hee that by the onely preaching of Scriptures apprehended by faith men are justified For then Peter would not have said Act. 2. 38. Doe peââ¦ance and bee every one of you baptized for remission of sinnes But it signifieth that remission of sinnes is preached to all that beleeve in Christ as they ought that is in doing whatsoever he commaââ¦deth to be done according to that Mat. 28. 20. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you In this sence every one that bââ¦leeveth is justified that is whosoever beleeveth as he ought namely by fulfilling all things which faith doth declare ought to be fulfilled For not he that beleeveth a Physician though he be never so skilfull and one that infallibly curââ¦th is healed unlesse he receive such medicines as hee doth appoint Reply Wee doe not say that preaching alone apprehended by faith doth justifie but wee say that a true and a lively faith which is begotten by the preaching of the Word doth justifie a man before God and that wicked is that aphorisine collected out of Bellarmine that by the preaching of the Word of God faith is stirred up and so sinnes are forgiven is a
the other part of justification Reply we doubt not but the Scriptures make mention of both these benefits sometimes severally and sometimes joyntly which though in use and practice they alwayes goe together yet they must bee carefully distinguished And howsoever the Scriptures often make mention of Sanctification as well as of justification yet no where doe they make Sanctification a part of justification This Bellarmine should have proved and not have craved Neither is it to bee doubted but that if forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment concurre unto justification as a part thereof renovation or infusion of righteousnesse being the other part as Bellarmine here affirmeth theââ¦e are two actions and two formall causes of justification which themselves utterly deny And therefore they must bee forced to acknowledge these two actions having distinct formes to bee justification whose forme is imputation and sanctification whose forme is infusion of righteousnesse § VIII Finally saith he from which you could not be justified by the Law of Moses signifieth that the observation of the Law neither by the strength of nature nor by helpe of the Law alone presumed doth justifie not because the true observation of the Law is not righteousnesse but because before remission of sinne the Law cannot be kept Reply By the observation of Law is meant all obedience and righteousnesse inherent whatsoever prescribed in the Law whether it goe before faith and justification or follow after For before as Bellarmine truly saith the Law cannot be fulfilled neither can there be any true righteousnesse And that obedience which is performed after though it be a righteousnesse begun in us and be not onely accepted in Christ but also graciously rewarded yet it cannot satisfie for our former sinnes nor justifie us from them That which Bellarmine addeth I admit with some small qualification as making for us For God saith he when by the merits of Christ he reconcileth any man hee doth withall forgive his sinnes so saith the Apostle 2 Cor. 5. 19. which is all one as if Bellarmine had said when God justifieth a man not imputing his sinne and accepting of him as righteous in Christ then hee infuseth charity by which he may keepe the Law which is all one as if he had said when God hath justified a man he doth also Sanctifie him This saith he is that which Saint Augustine so often repeateth and wholly maketh for us opera non prââ¦cedere justificandum that workes goe not before as causes of justification sed sequi justificatum but follow after as effects and fruits thereof And this Augustine speaketh not of such workes as perfectly fulfill the Commandements for such there are none whiles they are stained with the flesh but of all good works which notwithstanding their defectivenesse are accepted of God in Christ that which he addeth out of Rom. 8. 4. I have discussed elsewhere § IX But to returne to the proofe of my proposition to that place of the Acts I adde for the further proofe of the first branch Rom. 4. vers 5 6 7 8. where the Apostle useth these words promiscuously justification and blessednesse and proveth out of Psal. 32. 1. that this blessednesse consisteth in remission of sin or as he also speaketh in the not imputing of sinne and imputation of righteousnesse without works from whence this is proved by what righteousnesse we have remission of sinne by that we are justified and by what wee are justified we have remission of sinne The second branch by what righteousnesse we are redeemed by that we are justified and è converso by what we are justified by that we are redeemed The benefit of redemption is explained by the Apostle Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. to bee remission of sinne and expressed by the phrase of redeeming from all iniquttie Tit. 2. 14. Psalm 133. 8. The third branch by what righteousnesse wee are reconciled to God by it we are justified and by what we are justified we are reconciled The Apostle Rom. 5. 9 10. useth these words promiscuously to bee justified by the bloud of Christ and to bee reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne and 2 Cor 5. 19. God is said to reconcile men unto him in Christ when hee doth not impute untio them their sinnes but imputeth unto them righteousnesse even the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ that they only may be made the righteousnesse of God in him vers 21. The fourth branch for what righteousnesse wee are saved by that wee are justified and è converso that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation for which cause justification and to be justified is many times expressed by salvation or to bee saved for they that are justified are saved in hope and by what they are justified by that they are intituled to salvation and by what we receive remission of sinnes by that also we receive our inheritance Iustification may bee compared to the institution of a Minister unto a benefice which giveth jus ad rem glorification to induction which giveth possession and jus in re § X. I come to the assumption the first branch whereof is that we are absolved from our sinnes by the righteousnesse of Christ and not by any righteousnesse inherent in usâ⦠both wich are plainely averred Act. 3. 38 39. The former also is every where testified that the bloud of Christ was shed for the remission of sinnes and that it doth cleanse us from all our sinnes that he is the propitiation for our sinnes c. The latter is also evident that we cannot be absolved from our sinnes by righteousnesse inherent first because it cannot satisfie for our sinnes secondly because it cannot stand in judgement If wee should plead it before God we could not be justified thereby Psal. 143. 2. Neither are we able to answere him one of a thousand Ioâ⦠9. 3. Thirdly because our obedience though it were totall as it is never in this life yet it were a debt and we cannot be absolved from one debt by the payment of another when ye shall have done all things which are commanded you say we are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to doe Luk. 17. 10. The second branch that we are redeemed by the merits of Christ and not by our owne righteousnesse needeth no proofe neither in respect of the affirmative that by his bloud we have redemption even the remission of our sinnes that he gave himselfe to bee ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a full price of ransome to redeeme us from all iniquity Nor in respect of the Negative unlesse it may be thought that we who were held captives under sinne and Satan to doe his will could deliver our selves which God doth sweare to bee his gift Luk. 1. 73 74. Neither could we be delivered out of the hands of the strong man but by him that is stronger than he The third branch also
remission of sinnes vouchsafing unto you righteousnesse and he made you holy and delivered from the tyranny of the Devill All these foure benefits are the fruits of Christs office of mediation as he is our Prophet our Priest and our King For as our Prophet in whom are all the treasures of wisedome and knowledge he calleth us by the Gospell his doctrine being our wisedome and making us wise unto salvation as our holy Priest hee justifieth us his sacrifice and his obedience being our righteousnesse as our gracious and glorious King being ascended on high to prepare a place for us he giveth the graces of his holy Spirit to his members whereby they being sanctified are fitted and prepared for his kingdome and being gone to prepare a place for us and us for it hee will come againe to bring us ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to the redemption of possession or our full redemption which is also called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 1 Thes. 5. 9. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 2 Thes. 2. 14. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Heb. 10. 39. the obtaining of salvation the obtaining of glory and the saving of the Soule and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the redemption of the body Rom. 8. 23. Christ therefore is of God made unto us wisedome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption or salvation because his wisedome is communicated unto us by instruction in our vocation his righteousnes is communicated unto us by imputation in our justification his sanctifying graces by infusion in our sanctification his glory by possession or fruition in our glorification § VI. In rendring the second cause he confesseth the truth whereof I desire the Reader to take speciall notice That Christ is called our righteousnesse because he satisfied his Father for us which his satisfaction he doth so give and communicate unto us when he doth justifie us that it may bee called our satisfaction and our righteousnesse For although by justice inherent in us we bee truly called and are righteous notwithstanding we doe not by it satisfie God for our faults and for eternall punishment And thus saith he it were not absurd to say that Christs righteousnesse and merits are imputed unto us when they are given and applied as if we our selves had satisfied God And to that purpose he citeth Bernard who saith that Christ died for all ut viz. satisfactio unius omnibus imputetur that the satisfaction of one may be imputed to all but addeth this needlesse caution modo non negetur saith Bellarmine esse in nobis preterea justitium inherentem ââ¦Ã¡mque veram so it be not denied that there is in us besides a justice inherent and that true which if Bellarmine would stay there we would yeeld unto For we doe not deny that there is a righteousnesse inherent in those that are justified and that also a true though not a pure a perfect and absolute righteousnesse onely wee deny that we are thereby justified Wee are indeed just but by Christs righteousnesse as Bernard saith in the same place justum me dixerim sed illius justitiâ § VII This confession of Bellarmine dissolveth the very frame of his owne doctrine of justification whereunto he hath taught that nothing concurreth but deletion of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse And these not as two acts but as one act viz. the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne As for imputation of Christs righteousnesse hee and his fellowes deride and scorne it But here hee confesseth which needs must be confessed that in justification the satisfaction of Christ is imputed unto us and accepted of God in our behalfe as if we our selves had satisfied God and that for that cause hee is truly called our righteousnesse And this imputation he acknowledgeth to be necessary because by righteousnesse inherent we doe not satisfie for our sinnes and eternall punishment We say the same onely wee adde that this satisfaction made by Christ in our behalfe is not onely his death and sufferings whereby he satisfied the penalty of the Law and delivered us from the curse himselfe being made a curse for us but also the holinesse of his person and the obedience of his life whereby he perfectly satisfied the justice of God infulfilling the commandements Now Gods acceptation of Christs satisfaction in our behalfe whereby he absolveth us from the guilt of sin and damnation by imputation of Christs sufferings and his acceptation of us as righteous in Christ by imputation of his most perfect righteousnesse and obedience is that very thing which wee according to the Scriptures doe call justification which distinct benefit of Christ not to be confounded with sanctification the Papists must learne to acknowledge if they would bee saved § VIII To these I adde other as plaine testimonies where it is said that wee are justified by the bloud of Christ and his obedience From whence I argue thus If we be justifiââ¦d by the bloud and obedience of Christ that is by his passive and active righteousnesse then are we justified by the personall righteousnesse of Christ which being proper to his person is out of us in him But we are justified by the bloud and by the obedience of Christ Rom. 5. 9. 19. therefore by his personall righteousnesse § IX Our fifth argument By what righteousnesse our sinnes are covered as with a garment and by which we being indued therewith appeare righteous before God that is the matter of our justification For he is justified whose sinnes are covered Psal. 32. 1. By the righteousnesse of Christ as a most pretious robe of righteousnesse and as our wedding garment our sinnes are covered For as Iustin Martyr truly saith ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for what other thing was able to cover our sinnes but his righteousnesse and wee being clothed therewith appeare righteous before God Therefore by the righteousnesse of Christ we are justified Bellarmine having as it were in our name objected to himselfe Eph. 4. 22. 24. which none of us that I know of doe object for wee acknowledge the place to be understood of sanctification which consisteââ¦h in the putting off the old man and putting on the new hee saith that wee argue from the similitude of a garment as more fitly resembling imputed justice than inherent and that we confirme it by the example of Iacob who being clothed with the rayment of his elder brother obtained the blessing § X. To this Bellarmine shapeth two answers First that the similitude of a garment may fitly agree to inherent righteousnesse which I wil not deny for in the Scriptures theterme of clothing or putting on is of a large extent so that he will confesse that the Hebrew Labash and the Greeke ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã properly signifying to cloth or to put on apparrell which is not inherent in the body but adherent is more fitly by a metaphore applyed to signifie outward than inward
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
instruments of justice to God where by righteousnesse saith hee is understood something that is inherent c. and that hee goeth about to prove which no man doubteth of when indeed hee should prove not that there is a righteousnesse inherent in the faithfull for that wee freely confesse but that the righteousnesse which is inherent is that by which wee are justified But it is evident that the Apostle speaketh not heere of the righteousnesse of justification but of the righteousnesse of sanctification whereunto in this Chapter hee doth exhort as to a necessary and unseparable consequent of justification Neither doth the Apostle heere or elsewhere as before I observed in setting downe the differences betweene justification and sanctification exhort us to the righteousnesse of justification or the parts thereof which bee not our duties but Gods gracious favours for that were to exhort us to remission of sinne and acceptation to life But to the righteousnesse of sanctification and the parts mortification and renovation and to the particular duties thereof hee doth both here and in many other places exhort as namely in his sixth testimony cited oââ¦t of Eph. 4. 23 24. from which hee would prove which no man doth deny that our renovaââ¦ion according to the image of God standeth in righteousnesse and holinesse inherent § VII His fourth allegation had need to be a good one for this is the third time that hee hath cited and recited and as it were recocted it out of Rom. 8. 10. The Spirit liveth because of justification or as it is in the Greeke the Spirit is life because of justice For justification or justice which maketh us to live and thereby to worke cannot be onely remission of sin but something inward inherent Answ. In this place vers 10. 11. as I shewed before the Apostle setteth down a double priviledge of those in whom Christ dwelleth by his Spirit freeing them from the Law of death The one in respect of the soule vers 10. that howsoever the body bee dead that is as Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth mortall or appointed to death by reason of sin which the first Adam brought in and by it death his sinne being imputed to all yet the soule for so the word Spirit is taken when it is opposed to the body is life that is as the Antithesis requireth designed unto life by reason of that righteousnes of the second Adam by imputation whereof all the faithfull are entituled unto everlasting life For as in the former part of the Antithesis is not meant the spirituall death of men dead in sinne for that is the death of the soule and not of the body and the Apostle speaketh of those in whom Christ dwelleth but the corporall death unto which they also in whom Christ dwelleth are subject so in the latter is meant not the life of grace or of righteousnesse but the life of glory The other priviledge respecteth the body vers 11. that after it hath beene dead and turned into dust the Spirit of him that raised up Christ from death dwelling in us shall raise unto life eternall our mortall bodies § VIII His fifth testimony Gal. 3. 21. where when the Apostle saith If there had been a Law given which could give life or justifie as the Rhemists translate the word vivificare then in very deed justice should be of Law hee doth plainely saith he demonstrate that justice from whence justification is named is something which giveth life to the soule and hee doth place the same in motion and action Answ. If from this proposition propounded by the Apostle Bellarmine could have assumed the antecedent that so hee might conclude the consequent then might hee strongly have concluded against us that wee are justified by inherent righteousnesse But seeing the Apostle doth tollere antecedenâ⦠that is intendeth to contradict that antecedent what reason hath Bellarmine to argue as hee doth It is very true that if the Law could have given us life that is as Chrysostome and Oââ¦umenius expound could have saved us according to that legall promise Hocfac vives doe this and thou shalt live or as the Rhemists translate could have justified us then undoubtedly wee might have beene justified by inherent righteousnesse But forasmuch as it was impossible for the Law to justifie and save us because it neither was noâ⦠is possible for us by reason of the flesh to performe the condition and forasmuch as God therefore sent his Sonne to performe ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã all that the Law requireth unto justification that wee who could not bee justified nor saved by any inherent righteousnesse of our owne prescribed in the Law and therefore not by a justice consisting in our actions or motions might bee justified and saved by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us what can Bellarmine gather from hence with any shew or colour of reason to prove justification by such a righteousnesse as is inherent and consisteth in motion and action § IX The sixth I have already answered with the third As for his testimonies collected out of Augustine a briefe anââ¦were may serve that hee not considering the force of the Hebrew and Greeke words which never in all the Scriptures are used in the signification of making righteous by inherent or infused righteousnesse but resting as it seemeth upon the notation and composition of the Latine word justificare as not differing in respect thereof from the Verbe sanctificare doth sometimes more largely extend the signification of the word justification than the Scriptures use it as including the benefit of sanctification But it is a most certaine truth that the word justificare being used in the Scriptures translated into Latine as the translation of the Hebrew Hitsdiq and of the Greeke ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã must be understood to signifie no other thing if it bee a true translation than what is meant by the Hebrew and the Greeke which as I have shewed before doe never in all the Scriptures signifie to make just by infusion of righteousnesse And therefore it cannot be denied but that it is and was an oversight in them who using the word as mentioned in the Scriptures and from thence borrowing it extend it to another signification than that of the originall wherof it is a translation I say againe as I have said before that the fotce of the Latine word in this controversie is no further to be respected than as it is a translation of the Hebrew and the Greek and as it is a true translation it must bee understood no otherwise than according to the meaning of the originall if it be understood otherwise then is it not a true translation neither is the sence of the word divine but humane Howbeit Augustine differeth from Bellarmine as touching the use of this word in two things first that hee doth not alwaies so use the word as for example when hee teacheth as hee and the rest of the Fathers often doe
surety hee voluntarily undertooke our debt so by and for his satisfaction which hee performed for us and which the Lord accepteth in our behalfe as if we had performed the same in our owne persons wee are justified And yet though our sinnes being imputed to him he was reputed and as it were made a sinner and though his righteousnesse being imputed to us wee are made righteous in him yet this hindreth not but that hee in himselfe was just and wee in our selves sinners Yea this argueth that hee in himselfe was just and we in our selves sinners § VII Now that Christ was made a sinner for us that is was condemned and crucified as if hee had beene a sinner the Greeke expositours with one consent doe teach Chrysostome him that knew no sin saith the Apostle him who was righteousnesse it selfe he made sin that is he suffer'd him to be condemn'd as a sinner and to dye as one accursed and againe more plainely for him that was righteous saith the Apostle he made a sinner that those which bee sinners he might make righteous But saith he the Apostle saith more him he made sinne and us hee made righteous The like have Decumenius his Sonne being righteousnesse and holinesse he made sinne that is hee suffered him to bee crucified as a sinner and as a guilty person and againe he made sinne that is to bee condemned as a sinner and elsewhere very plainely for now the father sent him making him sinne for Christ was very much a sinner as having ãâã upon him the sinnes ââ¦f the whole world and ââ¦ade them his owne for that Christ was a sinner here saith he him that knew no sinne ââ¦e made sinne for us that were in very deed sinne And also Theophylact his Sonne who knew not sinne that is who himselfe was righteousnesse he made to dye for us as if he had beene a sinner and malefactor For cursed saith he is he who hangeth on a tree and hee was numbred among the transgressours Theodoret likewise being free from sinne he did undergoe the death of sinners that hee might take away the sinne of men and being called that which we are that is a sinner he made us that which he was that is righteous To the like purpose Augustine interpreting those words of Psalme 22. vers 1. according to the translation of the Septuagints and the vulgar Latine verba delictorum meorum the words of my sinnes of what sinnes saith he of whom it is said that he did no sinne neither was any guile found in his mouth how then doth he say of my sinnes but that hee prayeth for our sinnes and our sinnes he hath made his owne sinnes that his righteousnesse he might make our righteousnesse Hierome upon the same words Verbâ⦠delictorum meorâ⦠quia nostra peccââ¦ta sua reputat he saith the words of my sinne because our sinnes hee reputeth to bee his owne and againe on those words Psalm 38. 7. because mine iniquity for ââ¦s he was made subject to the curse that he might deliver us from the curse of the Law so he professeth himselfe a sinner who bare our sinnes and on these words Cogitabâ⦠pro peccaâ⦠meo Christs sinnes are the sinnes of mankinde Peccata Christi humani delicta sunt generis VIII Thirdly Bishop and other Papists commonly by sinne in this place understand a sacrifice for sinne according to the interpretation of some of the ancient acknowledged by Oecumeniââ¦s in which sense not onely the word Ascham is often used as Leviâ⦠5. 6. 16. 18 19. 7. 1 2. Numb 5. 7. but also Chattath Exod. 30. 10. Levit. 7. 7. 37. Levit. 4. 3. 8. 14. 20. 24. 9. 7. Ezek. 44. 27. 45. 19. 23. Hos. 4. 8. they eate the sinne of my people Answere This exposition maketh wholly for us For if God did make Christ a sacrifice for sinne he imputed our sinnes unto him or as the Prophet Esay speaketh he laid on him the iniquity of us all Esai 53. 6. Neither can it bee conceived how he should be made a sacrifice for our sinne unlesse our sinne were imputed unto him In sacrifices for sinne all which were types of Christ his sacrifice the manner was that the party who offered the sacrifice for sinne should lay his hand upon the head of the sacrifice the meaning of which ceremony is fully explained Lev. 16. 21 22. Where Aaron is required in the name of all the Congregation to lay his hands upon the head of the Scape-Goat which the Hebrews call Azazel the Greekes ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Latines Emissarium and confesse over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel and all their transgressions in all their sins putting them upon the head of the Goate and the Goate shall beare upon him all their iniquities So it is said of our Saviour Christ that when his soule shall be made an offering for sinne the Lord would lay upon him the iniquities of us all and that he should beare our sinnes And as our sinnes are imputed to him so his sufferings are imputed to us and accepted for us and in our behalfe as a full satisfaction and propitiation for our sinnes Ephes. 5. 2. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. which is also said of those Sacrifices which were but types and figures of his sacrifice Levit. 1. 4. and whereas Bellarmine saith that we cannot by Christs satisfaction imputed to us bee accounted just that is saith he cleane and without spot if the spots and defilements of sinne be truely inherent in us I answere If none bee justified in whom remaine any spots of sinne then no mortall man is justified But as Christ was reputed a sinner and was punished as a sinner because our sinne that is our debt which hee as our surety undertooke was imputed to him though in him was no spot of sinne even so we are by Christs satisfaction imputed to us reputed and rewarded as just and that by such a justice in which as Chrysostome saith there is no spot or blemish and is therefore called Gods righteousnesse though in us doe remaine some spots and blemishes of sinne For here it is said not that wee are made righteous but righteousnesse yea Gods righteousnesse and that not in our selves but in him For that is Gods righteousnesse when we are not justified by workes that is by righteousnesse inherent seeing it is necessary that no spot bee found as Chrysostome saith The like have Oecumenius and Theophylact. Hee did not say that wee might be made righteous saith Oecumenius but righteousnesse it selfe which is more and the righteousnesse of God Now Gods righteousnesse is to bee justified not by workes ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but by indulgence in him and by him § IX Bellarmine having rejected our exposition which is indeed the exposition of the Fathers as hath been shewed he saith it may be expounded three waies first that by the
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
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
about to prove imputation of righteousnesse as though by no other meanes we could bee simply and absolutely just I answere though in some part of our life after wee have beene good proficients in Christianity wee might seeme to attaine to that perfection whereof hee dreameth yet this would not prove that wee are justified by a perfect righteousnesse inherent For that which Papists call their first justification being the justification of a sinner whereof this question is to bee understood is of Incipients such as bee infants in age or at least in religion who are farre from the perfection of inherent justice But if in no part of this life wee cannot attaine to the perfection of justice then must the imputation of Christs righteousnesse bee acknowledged to bee so necessary to justification as that without it wee cannot bee justified CAP. VIII The rest of Bellarmines arguments against imputation of Christs righteousnesse answered § I. IN the fourth argument Bellarmine whiles hee fighteth with an idle fancie which like a man of straw hee hath set up against himselfe hee yeeldeth such is the force of ever-prevailing verity to the truth The man of straw is that Christs righteousnesse is so imputed to imputed to us as that thereby wee are formally righteous which never any of us for ought I know affirmed who hold it an absurdiââ¦y that the righteousnesse whereby we are formally and by consequent inherenââ¦ly just should be without us as indeed the imputed righteousnesse of Christ is out of us in him But against this larva Bellarmine fighteth that if we being formally unjust by inherent unrighteousnesse should also be formally just by Imputation of that righteousnesse which is without us there wee ought not to bee called just but unjust as an Ethiopian clothed with white is to be called blacke because the denomination is to be taken from the inward forme rather then from the outward I answere that so many as are justified are also sanctified and that so many as are justified and sanctified are neither to be termed formally unjust by the remnants of originall sinne remaining in us nor formally just by Christs righteousnesse imputed For though it be true that in respect of sinne remaining and inhabiting in us wee are according to the sentence and rigour of the Law sinners yet we are according to the doctrine of the Gospell to bee called just and that by a twofold justice First and principally by the perfect righteousnesse of Christ imputed by which we are justified and doe stand perfectly righteous before God in Christ being made as the Apostle speaketh the righteousnesse of God in him Secondly by a righteousnesse begun by which we are not justified but in some measure sanctified which though it be unperfect by reason of the flesh ever accompanying it for the best of us are but partly Spirit and partly flesh yet from it the denomination is to be taken as from the better part and so the Scriptures call Iob and others just who notwithstanding acknowledged themselves to be sinners And indeed the more righteous a man is the more doth he acknowledge and feele his owne sinfulnesse which is a truth confessed by some of the Papists themselves as I shewed before out of Cardinall Contarenus § II. Now let us see what Bellarmine yeeldeth If they did not hold saith he that we are formally righteous by Christs righteousnesse but their meaning onely were that Christs merits are imputed to us because they are given unto us of God and we may offer them to God for our sins because Christ tooke upon him the burden of satisfying for us and of reconciling us to God recta esset eorum sententia they should hold that which is right Now I assume but we doe not hold that wee are formally righteous by Christs righteousnesse imputed but our meaning only is that Christs merits as namely his sufferings and obedience are imputed unto us and that they are given and communicated unto us of God namely by imputation the Lord accepting of them in our behalfe as if we had performed the same in our owne persons c. I conclude therefore that by Bellarmines owne confession wee hold the right And yet this is that which he doth mainely oppugne in his whole disputation by all the rest of his arguments If the Papists would sincerely and constantly hold themselves to that which Bellarmine here yeeldeth there should not need to bee any controversie betweene us in this behalfe For as they would confesse that wee are justified by the merits of Christ imputed so wee would professe that by righteousnesse inherent received from Christ we are in some measure sanctified But what soever confession the truth hath expressed from Bellarmine here and in some other places yet hee and all the rest of them mainely oppose the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and wickedly deride it stifly maintaining that they are justified by righteousnesse inherent by which also they hope to merit eternall life § III. In this fifth argument he doth againe deprave our assertion as though wee held that Christs righteousnesse were so imputed to justification as if it were our inward and formall righteousnesse and thereupon inferreth that if that be true then ought we to be held and esteemed as righteous as Christ himselfe and therefore ãâã ought to be called redeemers and Saviours of the world and such like Answ. Wee doe not hold that we are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ as our formall justice neither doth it follow upon our assertion that we are as righteous as Christ hââ¦mselfe and much lesse that wee are redeemers and Saviours of the world For wee doe acknowledge a great difference and disproportion betweene the Head who is absolutely just of in and by himselfe and the members who are not just either of in or by themselves but by his righteousnesse freely and undeservedly communicated to them being sinners in themselves who being justified and redeemed by imputation of Christs righteousnesse are thereby proved not to be redeemers but the redeemed of the Lord. But of this argument I have spoken sufficiently heretofore § IV. His sixth argument is thus frââ¦med what we lost in Adam we receive in Christ which he proveth out of Iââ¦enaeus and Augustine Imputed righteousnesse wee did not lose in Adam but that inward righteousnesse in which we are created according to Gods image in holinesse and righteousnesse Therefore imputed righteouââ¦nesse wee doe not receive by Christ but righteousnesse inherent Answ. This Syllogisme is a meere Paralogisme the assumption thereof being negative in the firââ¦t figure as they call it As if I should argue thus Every good Logician is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a reasonable creature Bellarmine is not a good Logician because in the first figure hee assumeth negatively therefore hee is not a reasonable creature But if hee would argue thus what Adam lost wee receive in and by Christ and what Adam lost not
wee doe not receive by Christ Adam lost inherent righteousnesse and not imputed Therefore by Christ wee receive inherent righteousnesse and not imputed Then would I deny the latter part of the proposition for wee doe receive by Christ more than we lost ââ¦n Adam Adam was mutable and the graces which he had were not without repentance But Christ maketh the faithfull inseparabiles id est usque in finem perseverantes and the saving graces which wee receive by him are ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã hoc est saith Augustine sine mutatione stabiliter fixa Adam lost an earthly Paradise but by Christ we receive an inheritance in heaven Adam stood righteous before God in his owne righteoââ¦snesse but wee stand righteous before God in the righteousnesse of Christ which farre surpasseth the righteousnesse of Adam c. § V. Hââ¦s seventh argument If by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us we may truly be said to be just and the sonnes of God then by our sinne imputed to Christ hee may in like manner bee trââ¦ly called a sinner and which is horrible to thinke the sonne of the devill but the latter is blasphemous therefore the former Answ. The proposition containeth a double consequence which is to be distinguished The first if by the righteousnesse of Chââ¦ist imputed to us wee may truly bee said to bee righteous then Christ by imputation of our sinne may truly though not formally bee called a sinner but the consequent is falââ¦e therefore the antecedent This proposition I grant as being firmely grounded on 2 Cor. 5. 21. and I doe confesse that Christ was so made sinne that is a sinner for us as wee are made in him the righteousnesse of God that is righteous by the righteousnesse of him who is God that is to say by imputation But the assumption I doe deny For it is most trââ¦e and no dishonour to Christ our Blessed Saviour but that which wonderfully setteth forth his unspeakable goodnesse and love towards us that hee which knew no sinne but was in himselfe most holy and righteous and blessed for evermore by taking upon him our sinne and by undertaking as our surety our debt was content to bee reputed and by imputation made a sinner that is guilty of sinne and accursed and accordingly punished as a sinner that we might be made righteous and happy in him Thus the Hebrewes call them that are punished sinners 1 King 1. 21. and that those are freed from punishment innocent Gen. 44. 10. But the other part of the consequence if we by imputation of Christs righteousnesse become the sonnes God then which I abhorre to speake Christ by imputation of our sinnes should bee made the Sonne of the devill I utterly deny For though to bee made the childe of God is a consequent of being made righteous by imputation adoption going alwayes with justification yet to become the childe of the devill is no consequent of being made a sinner by imputation in respect of him who is most righteous and holy in himselfe For to undertake the burden of others mens sinnes and to bee willing to have them imputed to him being himselfe most righteous is the property of the immaculate Lambe of God who tooke upon him the sin of the world and for that cause is most worthy to be accounted just and to bee acknowledged the Sonne of God For hee that satisfieth for others is most just saith Bellarmine § VI. Vpon this Syllogisme Bellarmine inferreth another If therfore Christ saith he because in himselfe hee was holy was called not a sinner but just though our sinne was imputed to him then by the like reason we iâ⦠after our justification we were indeed sinners and uncleane in our selves should not be called just but unjust though Christs righteousnesse be imputed to us But the Scriptures after the lââ¦ver of regeneratiââ¦n hee might better have said after regeneration it selfe calleth us righteous and holy and the sonnââ¦s of God as appeareth by many places These are the premisses The conclusion should be this Therfore after our justification we are not indeed sinners and uncleane in our selves But in stead of that Pharisaicall conclusion he concludeth thus therefore we are not justified by imputation of Christs rightââ¦ousnesse but by that righteousnesse it selfe which is inherent and abiding in us which conclusion is neither it selfe deduced from these premisses neither is it a consectary of that which ought to have beene the conclusion For although after our justification wee be as before we were not righteous and that by righteousnesse inherent as Abraham was and all the faithfull are yet it doth not follow that wee are justified thereby For our inherent righteousnesse is a consequent of our justification and not a cause thereof not going before justificandos but following justificatos But to this Syllogisme first I returne the like If Christ though most righteous in himselfe was not onely accounted but really punished as a sinner yea made a sinner and a curse for us by taking upon him our sinne which as our debt was laid upon him as our surety and imputed to him then by the like reason wee though sinners in our selves are by imputation of his righteousnesse made righteous before God in him as before hath evidently beene proved out of 2 Cor. 5. 21. § VII Secondly as Christ though ouâ⦠sinnes were imputed to him was called holy and just because hee was so in himselfe So wee though Adams transgression was imputed unto us and the corruption which hee contracted was derived unto us and ever dwelleth in our mortall bodies yet being once justified by Christ are notwithstanding that habituall sinne inhabiting in us and these actuall transgââ¦essions which through humane frailty we daily commit in regard whereof we are by the verdict of the Law sinners we are I say termed just and that in two respects first and principally in respect of our justification wherââ¦in we were made just by imputation of Christs righteousnesse secondly in respect of our regeneration whereby inherent righteousnesse is begun in us And howsoever in the regenerate man there is both the flesh and the Spirit the Old man and the New in regard whereof he may in divers respects be termed either a sinner in respect of the flesh and the fruits thereof according to the sentence of the Law or a righteous man in respect of the Spirit and the fruits thereof according to the doctrine of the Gospell yet the denomination is taken from the better part as an heape of wheat and chaffe wherein perhaps is more chaffe than wheat is called an heape of wheat and a wedge of gold wherein perhaps there is more drosse than pure mettall is called a wedge of gold as I have said And whereas upon his premisses this conclusion is inferr'd therfore after the laver of regeneration we are not verè and indeed sinners nor uncleane in our selves you may see
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
justum fuerat ut quomodo Abraham credens ex Gentib per solam fidem justificatus est ita caeteri fidem ejus imitantes salvarentur 2. In Rom. 4. 5. Convertentem impium per solam fidem justificat Deus And on those words of the Latine Edition secundum propositam gratiam that is saith he as Hierome had said before quo gratis proposuit per solam fidem dimittere peccata 3. In Rom. 4. 6. the blessednesse of man he calleth remission of sins by faith It is a great blessednesse without the labour of the Law and penitence to obtaine the Grace of God by faith alone Which words are in part taken out of S. Ierome on the same place 4. In Rom. 8. 28. On those words secundum propositum secundum quod proposuit salvare sola fide according to which he purposed to save by faith alone those whom he foreknew should beleeve whom also he freely called to salvation Which word for word are taken out of Ierome 5. In Rom. 10. 5. Moses put a difference betweene either justice to wit of faith and of workes because the one by workes the other sola credulitate justificet accedentem by faith alone justifieth him that commeth and so Ierome on the same place out of whom also hee reciteth word for word that which before I cited out of him in Rom. 10. 16. Ergo si fides sufficit adjustitiam c. 7. In Gal. 2. 20. In fide vero filii Dei i. in sola fide quia nihil debeo legi so Ierome 8. In Gal. 3. 14. ex fide i. ut sola fide salvarentur credentes c. XVII Theodoret in Rom. 3. 24. sola enim fide allata peccatorum remissionem accepimus We have received remission of sinnes having brought faith onely 2. In Rom. 3. 25. Our Lord Christ is both God and the propitiatory and the high Priest and the Lambe and by his bloud he procured our salvation Solam à nobis fidem exigens requiring of us faith alone 3. In Eph. 2. 8. By grace c. for we brought onely faith Neither did we of our owne accord beleeve but being called we came and when we were come hee did not exact of us the purity and innocencie of life sed sola fide suscepta condona vit peccata but hee forgave our sinnes accepting of our faith alone 4. And in the seventh of his Therapeutickes after he had cited that of Esai 45. 23. I blot out your iniquities c. he addeth for not by any praise-worthy workes of ours ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but by faith alone wee have obtained the mysticall or spirituall good things XVIII Prosper Aquitanicus in his Epigrammes Inde i. ex doctrina Apostolica capit quisque vitam quam parit una fides From the Doctrine of the Apostles a man receiveth life which faith alone doth beget or procure XIX Claudius Marius Victor s At ille Abraham Credidit nuda fidei confessio sola Plenam adjustitiae et meriti reputata coronam est XX. Petrus Chrysologus Christus mulieris haemarrhoissae docuit exemplo quà m fides sola totam proficiat ad salutem The Testimonies which Bellarmine in the second place out of his owne store produceth for us out of Leo are impertinent for they speak of the work of faith not in justifying but in sanctifying of us XXI Primasius in Rom. 4. 3. Tam magna fuit donâ⦠Dei fides Abrahâ⦠ut pristina ei peccata donarentur sola ei pro omni justitia duceretur accepto The same had Ierome saving that here is a divers reading for that which we reade in Ierome prae omni justitia doceretur accepta reputatum est illi ad justitiam compensatum sola fides 2. In Rom. 4. 5. Impââ¦um per solam fidem justificat non per opera quae non habuit si enim secundum opera puniendââ¦s est non liberandus 3. In Rom. 4. 12. ut omnes qui ex Gentib credunt secundum fidem filii sint Abrahae dum illis sola fides adjustitiam repetatur the very same had Ierome 4. In Rom. 5. 1. Fides facit filios Abrahae qui ante circumââ¦isionem exsola credulitate justificatâ⦠est 5. In Rom. 8. 28. Propositum Dei est ut sine ââ¦peribus Legis vel quibuscunque aliis meritis per fidem solam justificaret impios 6. In â⦠Cor. 5. 19. Non reputans illis delicta ipsorum h. e. indulgens per solam fidem quae gratis donata est 7. In Gal. 1. 3. Sola fide salvati est is per gratiam Dei 8. In Gal. 2. 14. Non ex operib sed sola fide per gratiam vitam habere te nosti Hierome 9. In Gal. 2. 17. Si enim gentes fides sola non salvavit nec nos quia ex operibus nemo justificabitur Hierome 10. In Gal. 2. 20. In fide verò Filii Dei in sola fide Hier. 11. In Gal. 3. 6. Abraham credidit Deo c. ita vobis fides sola sufficit adjustitiam Hier. 12. In Gal. 3. 14. Vt in Geââ¦tib benedictio Abrahae fieret in Christo Iesu ut sola fide Gentes benedicerentur in Christo sicut promissum fuerat Abrahae Hierome ut pollicitationem Spiritus accipiamus per fidem solam 13. In Gal. 3. 22. Vt necesse esset sola fide per gratiam salvari credentes 14. In Gal. 3. 26. Omnes enim Filii Dei estis per fidem in Christo Iesu ââ¦nes enim ââ¦qualiter Iudai Gentes per fidem solam quae ãâã Dei creditis Christo. Hierome XXII Theodulus Caelo-Syriae presbyter in Rom. 4. 13. Lex ob quam gloriaris nihil profuit adpromissiones ipsi Abraham factas sed sola fides 2. In Rom. 5. 2. ad iââ¦narrabilia dona beneficia Dei in nos collata nos ãâã prââ¦er fidem attulimus XXIII Genââ¦dius apud Oecumen in Rom. 3. 24. freely that is without any good workes of thine thou art saved And againe as having brought with thee nothing but faith Wherefore all that beleeve in Christ are justified freely bringing with them onely to beleeve XXIV Venantius Fortunatus in expos-symboli in artic de remissione peccatorum Nobis in hoc sermone sola credââ¦litas sufficit XXV Venerabilis Beda in Psa. 77. 7. per justitiam factorum nullus salvabitur sed per solam justitiam fidei XXVI Haymo in Gal. 3. 12. Lex non complebatur fide sed opere Evangelium ââ¦utem completur fide magis quà m operibus quia sola fides salvat 2. In Rom. 1. Pluribus modis ostendit Paulus justitiam salutem non esse per legem sed per fidem in Christum ut a lege abducat in sola fide Christi eos constituat 3. In Evââ¦ngel de circumcisione Christi sola tantummodo fide salvabuntur gentââ¦s siout scriptum est justus exfide vivet XXVII
or the thing feared is not God but punishment or if it be of God it is not to feare him but to be affraid of him From which our Saviour hath redeemed those that beleeve that they may worship God in some measure ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã without this feare Neither doth it per se and in its owne nature tend to justification which is the exaltation of a sinner but rather to despaire which is the lowest dejection of a sinner Notwithstanding as the Law by working this feare is a Schoolemaster unto Christ for when ãâã by the paedagogie of the Law have learned to know their ãâã damnable estate in themselves for feare of damnation they are forced to seeke for salvation out of themselves so this feare which in it selfe tendeth to despaire and in it owne nature affrighteth men from God as we see in the example of our first parents Gen. 3. 10. is by God made a meanes to draw them unto him But to say that feare doth concurre unto justification in the same manner as faith doth is against reason and against common sence unlesse hee speaketh onely of the legall faith which as it is wrought by the Law so it worketh feare For feare driveth to the humiliation faith tendeth to the exaltation of the humbled soule and by it indeed the soule is exalted Therefore as humiliation goeth before exaltation so feare before faith Againe as feare goeth before faith so sinne goeth before feare For sinne maketh a man guilty the Conscience being by the Law convicted of guilt terrifieth the soule the soule terrified either sinketh in despaire being left to it selfe or prevented by God according to the purpose of his grace by which it was elected in Christ seeketh to God who is found of them that sought him not So that by this reason sinne it selfe may bee said to bee a necessary forerunner of justification disposing a man to ââ¦feare more than feare doth to justification for that is a cause this but an occasion § II. But as this discourse proving that feare is a disposition to justification is impertinent and affirming that feare concurreth to justification in the same manner that faith doth is false so are some of his allegations also impertinent Because they belong not to this servile feare which goeth before faith and and justification but to the Sonne-like feare which is a fruit both of faith and love and a consequent of justification As namely his first place iâ⦠it were rightly alleaged Eccl. 1. 28. hee that is without feare cannot be justified or reputed just For the feare of God which the Sonne of Syrach in that chapter from the tenth verse to the end doth so highly extoll is not this servile feare but the filiall feare by which is meant true piety it selfe which as he calleth it there the beginning so also the Crowne and fulnesse of Wisedome But the place is not rightly translated in the Latine which Bellarmine doth follow For the Greeke text is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the wrathfull man cannot be justified or as some editions doe read ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã unjust wrath cannot be justified according to that of S. Iames the wrath of man doth not worke the righteousnesse of God And that the former part of the vers speaketh of wrath is proved by the latter which is the reason of the former ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for the sway of his wrath is his ruine and by the words going before where the feare of the Lord is present it turneth away wrath and represseth anger § III. So his second Psal. 111. 10. and third Prov. 1. 7. where it is said that the feare of the Lord is the beginning of Wisedome and by Wisedome saith Bellarmine is meant perfect justification hee should say sanctification or godlinesse For as the wicked man is Salomons foole so the godly man is the onely wise man And in this sense Moses prayeth Psal. 90. 12. Teach us O Lord so to number our daies that wee may apply our hearts to Wisedome that is to true godlinesse and to the same purpose Iob speaketh c. 28. 28. the feare of the Lord it selfe is Wisedome and so Eccl. 1. 27. Now in these places the Hebrew word Reshith which is translated ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã beginning may fitly as in many other places bee translated the head that is a chiefe or principall part or the top and the meaning is that the feare of God is a principall part of godlinesse and as you heard even now Eccl. 2. 18. the Crowne of Wisedome Otherwise I cannot conceive how feare which is a fruit both of faith and of love should truely be said to bee the beginning of godlinesse which by consent of all is the prerogative of faith And yet faith it selfe doth not justifie as it is the beginning of inherent righteousnesse and much lesse feare which concurreth with it not to justification but onely to sanctification Now that servile feare is not meant in these places it is evident not onely because such commendations are given unto it as belong not to servile feare but also because they that are indued with this feare are pronounced blessed Psalm 112. 1. 128. 1. Prov. 28. 14. whereas those who have the greatest measure of servile feare are accursed and contrariewise they are happy who are most freed from it The blessednesse promised to Abraham and all the faithfull in his seed is by Zachary expounded Luk. 1. 73 74 75. to be this that being redeemed from the hand of our enemies wee should worship the Lord without feare And Saint Iohn testifieth that there is no feare in love but perfect love casteth out feare 1 Iohn 4. 18. Fourthly the feare mentioned Prov. 14. 27. where it is said The feare of the Lord is a well-spring of life to avoid the snares of death is the sonne-like feare of which Salomon speaketh in the words next going before In the feare of the Lord there is strong confidence Fifthly the feare of the Lord mentioned Eccl. 1. 21. is the son-like feare which in that Chapter from the tenth verse is highly commended Of this feare it is said among other things that it is gladnesse and a crowne of rejoycing that it maketh a merry heart and giveth joy and gladnesse verse 11 12. which are things repugnant to servile feare § IV. But let us see how he proveth his unlike likenesse that servile feare doth in a manner justifie as faith doth viz. by Scriptures by Fathers by Reason First because as it is said of faith Heb. 11. 6. so without feare we cannot please God Answ. This is true of the sonne-like feare which is an unseparable companion of justification though Bellarmines allegation of Eccles. 1. 22. proveth it not as I have shewed But of the servile feare it may be truly said that they who please God most have the least of it For the greater a mans love is the lesse is his feare
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
man could performe justitiam legis considered in the abstract as it is described in the doctrine of the Law and as Bellarmine himselfe De justif lib. 1. cap. 1. doth consider it would justifie him because it is perfect yet considered in the concrete for that righteousnesse which men attaine unto in or by the Law doth not justifie because it is unperfect And therefore that righteousnesse which men have in or by the Law doth not fulfill the righteousnes of the Law which the Apostle calleth ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã These two distinctions Bellarmine hath devised to shift off onely two of the places cited viz. Rom. 3. 27. and Phil. 3. 8 9. both which distinctions being rightly understood make against himselfe as I have shewed § IX Now he commeth to the third thing viz. what is meant by workes For saith he our adversaries by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification understand all works whether done before or after faith yea faith it selfe considered as a work which opinion to be most absurd and proceeding from the ignorance of the Scriptures Augustine saith hee teacheth Men not understanding what the Apostle saith we make account that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law have thought that hee had said that faith is sufficient to a man though he live wickedly and have no good workes which be it farre from that Vessell of Election to thinke And farre bee it also from us so to thinke But although faith alone doth not suffice unto the perfection of a Christian who is to bee saved yet it alone sufficeth unto justification wherein wee have had the consent of many of the Fathers And although to the act of justifying nothing in us concurreth with faith but it alone sufficeth yet in the party justified there must concur with faith both inward graces and also outward works But here the Papists are divided among themselves Some of them thinke that by the workes of the Law are excluded not the workes of the morall but of the ceremoniall Law others that the workes of the morall Law are also excluded not all but such as goe before faith such as are done by the strength of nature without grace and without faith I answere first to both joyntly that not onely the workes of the Law are expressely excluded but all workes whatsoever indefinitely Rom. 4. 2 6. 11. 6. Eph. 2. 9. and more specially the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse Tit. 3. 5. the workes which God hath prepared for the regenerate that they should walke in them Ephes. 2. 9 10. Againe in him that is said not to worke workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded but hee that is justified by faiââ¦h is said not to worke Rom. 4. 4 5. and to have righteousnesse imputed to him without workes verse 6. Therefore his workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded § X. To the former severally I answere first that when the holy Ghost nameth the Law indefinitely he meaneth either the whole Law which is called Mishmereth the observation of the Lord or his charge containing three branches the morall the ceremoniall and the judicial Law or the chiefe part which is the morall Law And that the Apostle meaneth it especially because he speaketh of that Law by which commeth the knowledge of sinne and which was common both to Iewes and Gentiles unto which the whole world was subject Rom. 3. 19 20. whatsoever the Law saith it saith to them who are under the Law that every mouth may bee stopped and all the world may become ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore by the deedes of the Law there shall no flesh that is neither Iew nor Gentile be justified in his sight for by the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne Moreover it is evident that the Apostle in that place speaketh of that Law which forbiddeth morall offences mentioned from the tenth verse to the ninteenth and by which all both Iewes and Gentiles are convicted to be under sin ver 9. 19. Secondly it is unreasonable to be thought that any man who was a transgressour of the morall Law should looke to bee justified by the observation of the ceremoniall Law which was but a by-law being but an appendice of the first table of the morall Law as the judiciall was an appendice of the second table And further the Apostle professeth that whosoever would be circumcised was bound to the performance of the whole Law Therefore the observer of the ceremoniall law could not be justified without the observation of the morall law Thirdly this answer which is given by some of the Pontificians is rejected by Bellarmine and the greater part of learned Papists who with us following the interpretation of Augustine and other of the ancient Fathers doe confesse that by the workes of the law which the Apostle excludeth from justification are meant the workes of the morall law as well as of the rest § XI But then say I all good workes whatsoever are excluded For in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse all good workes are prescribed and therefore those which proceed from faith For if charity which is the fulfilling of the law proceedeth from faith unfained 1 Tim. 1. 5. then doe those good workes which the law prescribeth proceed from faith also or else they are not such as the law requireth And therefore frivolous is the distinction of Bellarmine and other Papists who by the workes of the law excluded from justification underââ¦tand workes done before or without faith by the strength of nature not workes proceeding from faith or workes of grace The absurdity of whââ¦ch distinction being applyed to the question in hand may further appeare 1. If workes going before justification bee excluded from being any cause thereof then much more those workes which follow justification for causes doe not use to follow after but to goe before their effects at least in order of nature 2. The question concerning justification by workes must of necessity be understood of good workes for of those which are not good no question ought to be made But workes done before or without faith are not good For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne and without faith it is impossible to please God Neither can the fruit be good whiles the Tree is bad Neither can it be imagined that a man should bee justified by the workes of the law going before faith unlesse it bee presupposed that a man without faith and before grace is able to fulfill the law For hee that doth not fulfill the law transgresseth it and hee that transgresseth it is cursed not justified by it 3. When the Apostle termeth those workes which hee excludeth from the act of justification the workes of the Law the word Law is added not by way of extenuation as
to the liberty of justification the former in that they are to be subject to the fearefull curse of the Law if at any time they transgresse it though in the least degree as wee doe very often and sometimes in an high degree the other to be excluded from justification if they doe not ââ¦otally perfectly and perpetually fulfill it which by reason of the flesh is utterly impossible to us Now Christ came to free us from this double bondage of the Law himselfe being made a curse for us and performing all righteousnesse in our behalfe that by the imputation of his sufferings and of his obedience wee might not onely bee freed from the curse but also bee entituled to the Kingdome of heaven And therefore to him that remaineth under this double yoake of bondage Christ profiteth nothing I come to the assumption those that seeke to bee justified by the workes of the Law that is by righteousnesse inherent are debtours to the whole Law for neither are they free from the curse if they breake it as all doe And therefore the Apostle concludeth them who are of workes that is who seeke justification by righteousnesse inherent are under the curse Neither can they be justified unlesse they perfectly keepe it Therefore they who seeke to be justified by the workes of the Law that is by inherent righteousnesse whatsoever whether going before or following grace to them Christ is become of none effect to them he dyed in vaine to them the covenant of grace is disanulled to them the promise is of none effect c. So that whether you conceive of workes as going before or following grace the consequences of the Apostle are one and the same § XII Indeed if the popish doctrine were true that Christ hath merited for us the infusion of that righteousnesse by which we are justied as hee hath done that by which wee are sanctified and that hee hath merited for our workes to make them meritorious of eternall life then those consequences would not be so strong against the workes of grace as of nature But the Scriptures teach us that Christ doth justifie and save us by his blood and by his obedience that is by his owne personall righteousnesse and merits and not by any satisfaction of ours purchased by him nor by any merit of ours by him made meritorious For if his satisfaction and merits for us be full and perfect what need we to patch to them the ragges of our owne satisfactions and merits But if that were the end why Christ died for us that wee by his merits should obtaine both inherent justice whereby we should be justified and also merits of our owne whereby we should be saved as the Papists teach then either that righteousnesse and those workes wââ¦ich wee have by grace are sufficient to justifie and to save us or else Christ died in vaine for us But neither is that inherent righteousnesse which we have from Christ sufficient to justifie us nor those good workes of grace which wee performe sufficient to merit eternall life as I have in this treatise abundantly proved neither did Christ dye in vaine for that to imagine were blasphemy Therfore that was not the end why Christ our Saviour died for us I say againe if Christ dyed to this end that he might merit grace for us whereby we might in our owne persons satisfie the Law and so be justified thereby then he merited not onely that we should perfectly and perpetually without any omission or intermission in all our life fulfill the Law and be alwayes and altogether without sinne which by reason of our sinfulnesse is utterly impossible wee having beene sinners from the wombe yea in the wombe but also that wee should in our owne personâ⦠satisfie the penalty which cannot be done but by punishment eternall or that which is equivalent for where hath beene guilt of sinne as in all hath beene there the Law cannot be satisfied without the punishment threatned in the Law And therefore if this were the end of Christs death it must be confessed that he died in vaine but this consequent is Blasphemous and therefore the antecedent is Antichristian § XIII To the fourth place which is Ephesians 2. 8 9. Bellarmine vouchsafeth no severall answere but sleights it over with that common answere that it excludeth onely workes done before faith But this place ought not so to bee sleighted For it doth ex professo teach that salvation and all the degrees thereof as namely justification are to bee ascribed wholly to the grace of God in Christ through faith and not to any workes or deserts of ours whether going before or following justification For first it may seeme needlesse that the Apostle should tell the Ephesians whom before in the same Chapter hee had convicted to have beene before their conversion children of wrath as all are by nature dead in sinne bondslaves of Satan living according to to the course of this world in all manner of sinne untill God in his abundant mercies in Christ by whose grace they were saved quickned them together with Christ that hee I say should tell them that they were not justified by the workes which they had wrought before their conversion Secondly when the Apostle saith you are saved by grace and not by workes will they say hee excludeth onely workes going before salvation why then hee excludeth all And that distinction with which Bellarmine contenteth himfelfe as a sufficient answere cannot be fitted to this place If it be said that the Apostle by Salvation meaneth justification I confesse that among the degrees of Salvation hee doth specially meane justification whereby we receive the right to our inheritance and are intitled to the kingdome of heaven and saved in hope But from hence it is inevitably proved that by what wee are justified we are saved and by what we are saved we are justified But we are saved as the Apostle here saith by the free grace of God through faith not of any workes of ours whatsoever or whensoever performed therefore in the like manner we are justified What then will you say if we bee neither justified by good workes nor saved for them are they therefore to bee neglected I answere in the third place that good workes though they be excluded from the act of justification or merit of salvation yet they are not excluded from the conversation of the faithfull but are therein required as necessary fruits of our regeneration and consequents of our justification as also being the way wherein wee are to walke towards our glorification As the Apostle sheweth in the next words vers 10. for wee are saith he Gods woââ¦kemanship created in Christ Iesus unto good workes which God hath preordained not that wee should bee justified by them or saved for them but that wee should walke in them as the way to eternall life where we are to observe that those words being a prevention of a secret objection
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
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
freely professe that by how much wee have received the greater favours from God in redeeming us and bringing us into the liberty of his children in freeing us from sinne and from the yoake of the Law by so much the more are we bound to obedience not to be justified or saved by it but to testifie our thankefulnesse and to glorifie God who hath beene so gracious unto us c. Much more might be said concerning Christian liberty but this is as much as is pertinent to the question in hand If any desire to bee better informed in this point I referre them to my treatise of Christian liberty which I published many yeaââ¦es agoe CAP. V. That good Workes are not necessary by necessity of Efficacie § I. ALL this while Bellarmine as we have seene hath wandred from the question but now he saith he will come neerer unto it For now hee will prove the necessity of good workes not onely by way of presence but by wââ¦y of efficacie But to what will he prove them necéssary to justification no such matter But yet that is the question which hee ought to prove if hee will disprove justification by faith alone that good workes doe concurre to justification as causes thereof For though they were as they are not causes of Salvation yet it is manifest that they are consequents and therefore no causes of justification So that Bellarmine though hee be come neerer the question yet he is not come home to it But perhaps it will be said that Bellarmine prevented this objection when he first propounded this as his fifth principall argument to prove that faith doth not justifie alone because good workes are necessary to Salvation His argument may thus be frarned If faith did justifie alone then it would save alone but faith doth not save alone without good workes which are necessary to Salvation in those that are come to yeares Therefore faith doth not justifie alone without good workes which are so necessary to Salvation etiam hominibus justificatis even to them that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save Answ. The proposition is denied first by Bellarmine himselfe who teacheth though falsely that not all who are justified shall bee saved when notwithstanding the Apostle saith ââ¦hom the Lord hath justified he also hath glorified And further he holdeth that they who are justified may utterly and finally lose their justification though they lose not their faith and farther that they may also lose their faith which as he absurdly teacheth is lost by any act of infidelity and consequently both their justification and Salvation Yea but saith Bellarmine their justice cannot be lost nor their Salvation whiles they have faith if they be justified by faith onely But Bellarmine himselfe saith though falsely that the faith of them who are justified may be lost and with it their Salvation and therefore by his doctrine a man bee justified by faith and yet not be saved by it Secondly it is denied by some of the Fathers who though they teach that faith alone sufficeth to justification as you have heard yet deny that it alone sufficeth to Salvation because some other things as namely good workes are thereunto required To the assumption that saith alone doth not save If such a faith be meant as is alone severed from Charity and void of workes I doe confesse that it neither saveth nor yet justifieth I doe not say alone but not at all But if he speake of a true lively faith in Christ which purifieth the heart and worketh by love of which onely we speake and understand it relatively as we doe then I constantly affirme that faith in Christ alone that is Christ alone received by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our Salvation and that neither workes nor any other graces are causes of salvation unlesse hee meane caussas sine quibus non which are no causes § II. But for the further proofe of his consequences Bellarmine saith that we cannot deny them because Luther teacheth that a Christian man cannot lose his salvation unlesse he will not beleeve and that the Lââ¦therans affirme that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone Answ. Wee can deny what either Luther or those that are called Lutherans doe affirme without warrant of Gods word therefore this was but a slender proofe Howbeit we doe not deny that assertion of Luther nor the like which though full of true comfort yet are most maliciously calumniated by the Papists as if hee taught men not to care what sinnes they commit so that they can say they have faith Whereas Luther delivereth speeches of that kinde to comfort the distressed consciences labouring under the burden of sinne assuring them that although their sinnes bee many and great yet they ought not to despaire if they can finde in their heart to beleeve in Christ. Which is most true For though our sinnes be many the mercies of God are more though great yet the merrits of Christ are greater And though the Lutherans doe say that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone yet that is no proofe of Bellarmines consequence but a flat deniall of his assumption which it behoveth him to prove Upon these things thus premised Bellarmine inferreth that all the testimonies which afterwards namely in his fourth Booke he was to alleage out of Scriptures and Fathers to prove that good workes are so necessary to salvation even to men that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save them doe also prove that faith alone doth not justifie which is the thing saith hee which wee have undertaken to prove which notwithstanding wee doe constantly deny protesting against this inference of Bellââ¦mine and affirming that although good workes be so necessary to salvation as that that faith which is without them doth not save a man yet that doth not hinder our assertion that faith doth justifie alone because they doe not concurre to the act of justification at all and much lesse as the causes thereof for they follow justification though ordinarily they goe before salvation and howsoever that faith which is alone severed from charity and destitute of good workes doth neither justifie as I have shewed heretofore nor save yet notwithstanding faith relatively understood that is Christ received by faith doth save alone § III. But to returne to his fourth Booke though Bellarmine still doe wander yet I must be content to follow him To prove therefore that good workes are necessary to salvation by necessity of efficiency as causes thereof hee useth three kindes of proofes testimonies of Scriptures sentences of Fathers and reason Out of the Scriptures hoe produceth tenne testimonies besides some whole Epistles The first testimony Heb. 10. 30. For patience is necessary for you that doing the will of God ye may receive the promise Here first saith he wee have the terme necessary and
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 Scriptures Fathers and Reason Out of the Scriptures he produceth three sorts of testimonies the first of these Which testifie that the law is not onely possible but also easie as first Mat. 11. 30. For my yoke is easie and my burden light Secondly 1 Ioh. 5. 3. And his Commandements are not grievous To the former I answere that by the yoke and burden of Christ wee are not to understand the yoke of the law exacting perfect obedience to bee performed by us unto justification or for default thereof subjecting us to the curse for this was the chiefe yoke of bondage which neither we nor our fathers were able to beare Act. 15. 10. From which our Saviour hath made us free but by the yoke and burden of Christ we are to understand his Law and Doctrine evangelicall which may bee reduced to two Heads the Law and Doctrine of faith the Law and Doctrine of obedience and that twofold the obedience of his precepts which is called our new obedience and Obedientia crucis which is the taking up and bearing our crosse The law of faith respââ¦cteth our justification the Doctrine of our new obedience respecteth our sanctification the obedience of the Crosse is Christian patience or Tolerantia crucis And these yokes or burdens Christ is it seemeth would have men comming unto him to take upon them by learning of him which argueth that by them Christs Doctrine or Discipline is meant that they might bee eased from those yokes under which they labour and those burdens under which they are wearied And these are of two sorts the guilt of sinne which is a most heavie yoke or burden under which the guilty conscience laboureth and the corruption of sin wherewith men being overladen are wearyed From the former men are freed in their justification by the law of faith which is easie and light Christ having taken our burden upon him For even as the Israelites in the wildernesse when they were bitten by the fiery serpents had no greater burden or taske laid upon them than to lift up their eyes towards the Brasen Serpent and were cured Even so wee when wee are stung by the old Serpent and labour under the guilt of sinne and desire to bee eased or cured thereof this charge our Saviour layeth upon us to lift up the eye of faith to him that was figured by the brasen Serpent and wee shall finde rest unto our soules From the second men are freed in their sanctification by Christs Law or doctrine of obedience both active and passive The active is our new obedience whereof as of sanctification there are two parts mortification whereby we dye to sinne and our vivification wherby we live to God both which the Doctrine of Christ doth teach Tit. 2. 11 12. The grace of God which bringeth salvation hath appeared to all teaching us that we should renounce all ungodlinesse and wordly lusts there is mortification and that wee should live soberly and justly and holily in this present world there is our vivification So Ephes. 4. 20 21 24. Those that have learned Christ have been taught to be put off the old man and to put on the new § V. This yoake also is easie to the faithfull and this burden light First because the faithfull being freed from the terrour and coaction of the Law are enabled to obey God with willing minds as not being under the Law but under grace Secondly because as the Lord promised in the Covenant of grace which is the doctrine of the Gospell to give grace to the heires of promise wherby they are enabled to serve him with upright hearts and with willing and constant minds so doth he assist them with his grace making them both able and willing to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse Thirdly because the new obedience required of us doth not consist in the perfect performance which the Lord doth not expect from such weakenesse as is in the best of us but in the sincere and upright desire purpose and endeavour to walke in obedience according to the measure of grace received Fourthly because our unperfect obedience is accepted of God in Christ and the wants thereof pardoned by the intercession of Christ who with the odours of his own sacrifice perfumeth the incense of our prayers and of other duties making them acceptable unto God And this was figured by that ceremony of the golden plate as I have shewed heretofore which the high priest who was a type of Christ was to weare in the foresront of the Miter with this inscription Holinesse of the Lord that is of the Messias who is IEHOVAH our righteousnesse to the end that Christ figured by the high priest might beare the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israell should hallow in all their holy gifts and it was alwaies to bee upon his forehead that they may be accepted before the Lord. Fifthly because if through humane frailty the flesh prevailing against the Spirit the faithfull doe at any time offend as in many things we all doe we have an Advocate with the Father Christ Iesus the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sinnes 1 Ioh. 2. 2. He sitting at the right hand of his Father maketh intercession for us Rom. 8. 34. Heb. 9. 24. § VI. Against the fourth reason Bellarmine taketh exception For whereas some of our Divines have taught as he saith that therefore it is called an easie yoake and light burden because of the remission of such offences as the faithfull commit he pusheth at them with this Dilemma That this remission or not imputation either taketh away the obligation of the Law so that the faithfull ââ¦hough they doe offend doe inââ¦urre no guilt or else doth not take away this obligation but that the faithfull contract the guilt which afterward is remitted If the former then saith hee it ceasseth to be a Law For it is no Law which doth not binde If the latter then it is a hard yââ¦ake and a heavy burden which cannot be borne To the former I answere that remission is of guilt contracted and therefore it is absurdly surmised that there should be remission where was no guilt To the latter that according to the Law of faith the guilt contracted is remitted to the faithfull returning unto God confessing their sinne and craving pardon in the name and mediation of Christ. Which proveth the Law of workes to bee an hard yoake and heavie burden but the Law of faith to be easie and light For by the Law of workes the guilt is contracted and by the Law of faith it is remitted § VII But the obedience of the Crosse also serveth to free us from the Corruption of sinne For hee that hath suffered in the flesh ceasseth from sinne And therefore David pronounced the man blessed whom the Lord chasteneth and teacheth out of his Law For ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã quae nocent docââ¦nt Wee learne
obedience by that which wee suffer David therefore professeth that it was good for him that hee had been afflicted that hee might learne the statutes of the Lord and confesseth that before hee was afflicted hee went astray but now saith hee I have kept thy word This also is a yoke which Ieremy saith it is good for a man to beare even in or from his youth Lam. 3. 27. For to the Godly it is made an easy yoke and light burden First In comparison of that superexcellent eternall weight of glory wherewith the Lord doth recompence our momentany and light afflictions which are no way comparable to the glory which shall be revealed Secondly because affliction worketh patience and patience probation and probation hope and hope of eternall glory makethus to swallow all the difficulties of this life and with patience and comfort to beare afflictions yea to rejoyce and to triumph in them Rom. 5. 3. 8. 37. Looking unto IESVS the author and finisher of our faith who for the joy that was set before him endured the crosse despising the shame and is set downe at the right hand of the throne of God Wherefore Saint Iames and Saint Peter in their Epistles doe teach it to be a matter of joy to the faithfull when they are afflicted Thirdly because the nature of afflictions to the faithfull is changed being not evill not punishments to them but rather blessings as being either fatherly chastisements or tryals for their good which proceeding from Gods love are so moderated by his mercy that they doe not exceed their strength 1 Cor. 10. 13. and are through Gods providence made to worke for their good Rom. 8. 28. and profit that they may be partakers of his holinesse Heb. 12. 10. Affliction therefore to the faithfull is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a commodious or easie yoake Fourthly because Christ by his Spirit doth minister such comfort to the faithfull in their afflictions that as their sufferings increase so their consolation aboundeth by Christ 2 Cor. 1. 4 5. § VIII So much of his first Testimony In the second place 1 Ioh. 5. 3. The Holy Ghost setteth downe two notes whereby wee may know that we love God For this saith he is the Love of God first that we keepe his commandements for this in other places also is made the proper note of his Love viz. to keepe his Commandements Exod. 20. 6. Iohn 14. 15. the second that his Commandements are not grievous for nihil difficile amanti Nothing is difficult to him that loveth And so Augustine answereth the Pelagian urging this place quis nesciat non esse grave quod diligendo fit non timendo So that if we truely love God we will out of love and not out of servile feare and constraint yeeld willing obedience to the Commandements of God So that this is the meaning to him that loveth God the Commandements of God are not grievous but he delighteth in them according to the inner Man yeelding voluntary and cheerefull obedience thereto not in perfection but according to the measure of grace received For when the Love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Spirit of God assuring us in some measure of Gods love towards us then are our hearts enlarged to love God againe and being enlarged we doe not onely walke but runne also in the way of Gods commandments that is willingly and cheerefully according to the measure of our faith and love wee obey them But though the faithfull doe willingly obey Gods commandements so according to their ability yet they cannot perfectly fulfill them § IX His second sort of testimonies is of such as teach that the Law is kept by them that Love Of this sort he citeth three testimonies the first concerning the Love of God Ioh. 14. 23. If a man love me he will keepe my word The other 2. concerning the love of our neighbor Rom. 13. 8. he that loveth his neighbour hath fulfilled the Law Gal. 5. 14. all the Law is fulfilled in one word thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe From hence he argueth thus They that are able to love God and their neighbour are also able to fulfill the Law the faithfull are able to love God and their neighbour therefore they are able to fulfill the Law The proposition hee proveth by these three testimonies of Scripture The assumption thus If we cannot love God and our neighbour then can wee not be the disciples or friends of Christ but it is absurd to say that none can be the disciples or friends of Christ therefore we are able to love God and our neighbour The proposition of this prosyllogisme he proveth out of Ioh. 15. 35. Hereby shall all men know that you are my disciples if you have love one to another and Iohn 15. 14. you shall be my friends if you doe the things that I command you Now the thing which he did command was that they should love one another To this long discourse a short answere may suffice we doe confesse that all they who love God and their neighbour doe keepe Gods commandements according to the measure of their love but wee deny that any can fulfill the Law of God who have not a full and perfect love and that to the perfection of love such as the Law requireth none can attaine in this life For our knowledge is but in part therefore our love our regeneration is but in part wee being but partly spirituall and partly carnall and therefore our love The Law is impossible by reason of the flesh therefore whiles the flesh remaineth in us the Law is not possible unto us § X. Bellarmine confesseth that our charity in this life is unperfect because it may be increased and because it shall bee greater in our country Notwithstanding he holdeth that it is so perfect as may suffice for the fulfilling of the Law But David saith that the Law of God is perfect and so perfect as nothing may be added thereto and therefore requireth perfect righteousnesse not onely in respect of the parts but also of the degrees unto which nothing can be added For if any thing can bee added to it then something is wanting which is required to perfection and what is wanting is a fault Peccatum est saith Augustine cum vel non est charitas quâ⦠esse debet vel minor est quà m debet It is a sin either when there is not Charity which ought to be or when it is lesse than it ought to be And no doubt but it is lesse than it ought to be when it is not so great as the Law requireth and it is not so great as the Law requireth whiles it may be increased For as Augustine saith quamdiâ⦠augeri potest charitas profectò illud quod minus est quam debet ex vitio est Whiles Charity may be increased assuredly
that which is lesse than it ought to be is faulty or vicious By reason of which vice there is not a righteous man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not By reason of which vice no man living shall be justified before God By reason of which vice if we shall say that we have no sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us And for which though we be never so good proficients we must of necessity say forgive us our debts c. § XI Secondly hee replyeth that the Law which prescribeth love requireth no more but that we should love with our whole heart But that this not onely may be done but also should be done in the new Testament the Scripture doth witnesse Deuâ⦠30. 6. Answ. The Phrase of loving with the whole heart being legally understood according to the perfection prescribed in the Law doth signifie as it soundeth neither can be performed by any mortall man though regenerate because he is partly flesh and partly Spirit Neither can more than the Law requireth in this behalfe be performed in our Country For as August saith in the life to come our love shal be not only above that which here we have but also far above that which we either aske or think Notwithstanding it can be no more than what the Law requireth with all our heart with all our soule and with all our minde For there doth not remaine in us any thing which may be added ad totum to that which is all for if any thing remaine which might bee added then it is not totum all But the phrase is many times Evangelically understood as in the place quoted to signifie not absolute or legall perfection but the integrity and uprightnesse of the heart which is the Evangelicall perfection as I have shewed elsewhere and shall againe ere long declare § XII Thirdly he replyeth that the Scriptures teach that men may bee perfect in this life And to this purpose alleââ¦geth Gen. 6. 9. 17. 1. Matth. 5. 48. 19. 17. Phil. 3. 15. 1 Iohâ⦠2. 5. The use of the word in these and some other places is to bee distinguished For in the most of them it is not opposed to imperfection and so many places are impertinently alleaged but either to hypocrisie and so it signifieth up right and sincere as Gen. 6. 9. 17. 1. Or to partiality when wee are good to some but not to others as Matth. 5. 48. Be you perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect doing good to men of all sorts both good and bad both friends and foes or to infancy and childhood and so it signifieth adultus a growne man and so it is used 1 Cor. 14. 20. Heb. 5. 14. and so in the place cited Phil. 3. 15. Where the Apostle acknowledging that he had not attained to perfection but still labouring to bee a good proficient exhorteth so many as are perfect to be of the same minde with him that is to strive towards perfection as having not yet attained to iâ⦠In 1 Iohn 2. 5. the phrase is varied In him that keepeth Gods word the love of God is perfected that is perfectly knowne hereby we know that we are in him And so is the word used Iam. 2. 22. 2 Cor. 12. 9. There remaineth onely the answere of Christ to the justitiary Matth. 19. 17. If thou wilt bee perfect c. Which as I have shewed before our Saviour fitteth to the disposition of that justitiary whom having a great conceit of himselfe that he had kept all the commandements of God from his youth he thought good to discover and unmaske by a commandement of tryall If thou wilt saith hee bee perfect that is If thou wilt approve thy selfe to be a perfect observer of the Law as thou pretendest goe and sell that thou hast and give to the poore and thou shalt have treasure in heaven and come and follow mee For if thou refusest so to doe thou shalt bewray thy selfe to bee a meere wordling preferring the love of the world besore the love of God and desiring to retaine thy earthly wealth rather than to obtaine the heavenly treasure § XIII His third sort of testimonies is of such as doe testifie that some have kept the Commandements of God and namely those of loving with the whole heart and of not coveting And to to this purpose he alleageth the examples of David of Iosiah of Asa and his people of Iosuah and others whom hee doth but name of Zachary and Elizabeth of the Apostles and namely of Paul and in conclusion of Ezechias and of Abraham Answ. All these were sincere and upright keepers and observers of the Law but none of them were perfect and perpetuall fulfillers of it none of them wââ¦re wââ¦thout sinne David was a man according to Gods owne heart in respect of his uprightnesse and integrity 1 King 3. 6. and for that and not for any absolute perfection he is commended in the places alleaged Psal. 119. 10. 1 King 14. 8. Act. 13. 22. 1 King 15. 5. And yet for all this David was a sinner and in many of his Psalmes bewayleth his manifold sinnes desiring the Lord not to enter into judgement with him for if hee should neither he nor any other could be just in his sight placing his justification in the remission of his sinnes and in Gods acceptation of him imputing unto him righteousnesse without workes Iosias also was a godly and upright king but yet not without fault in that hee harkened not unto the Words of Necho from the mouth of God but presumptuously fought against him 2 Chron. 35. 22. Of the people under Asa no more can be gathered but that with upright hearts and willing minds they entred into a covenant to seeke the Lord in sincerity and truth Of Asa himselfe the Scripture indeed doth testifie that his heart was perfect that is upright before the Lord all his dayes Notwithstanding in the same place it is said that the high places were not taken away and in the next Chapter three sinnes of his are recorded that hee had relied on the King of Syria and not on the Lord that being reproved therefore by the Prophet Hanani he committed the Prophet to prison that in his sickenesse he sought not to the Lord but to the Physitians That which is said of ãâã doth not concerne the observation of the Morall Law but those politicke precepts which the Lord had given to Moses and Moses to Iosuââ¦h concerning the utter destruction of the Canaanites whom the Lord had delivered into his hands Of Zachary and Elizabeth it is said first that they were just before God that is upright and secondly that they walked in all the commandements and ordinances of the Lord blamelesse which latter they might doe and yet bee farre from that perfection which the Law requireth For Paul professeth of himselfe that even before
walke with God is for a man to behave himselfe as in his pââ¦esence and to walke before God is to behave a mans selfe in his sight that is uprightly Thus Henââ¦ch Gen. 5. 22. 24. Noââ¦h Gen. 6. 9. Abraham and Isââ¦ack Gen. 48. 15. David and others are said to have walked before God Of David it is said that hee walked before God in truth and righteousnesse and uprightnesse of heart 1 Kin. 3. 6 of Ezekias 2 King 20. 3. that hee walked before God in truth with a perfect that is an upright heart For you are not so to understand it as if Ezekias had no imperfections For when the Lord left him a little unto himselfe that he might try him and know that is make knowne unto him what was in his heart he rendred not againe according to the benefits done to him but hââ¦s heart was lifted up with pride 2 Chron. 32. 24 25 31. From this example of Ezechias as it were from the lesse Bellarmine inferreth If Ezechias walked before God with a perfect heart who will deny it to Abraham to whom it was said walke before me and be perfââ¦ct Answ. I doubt not but Abraham did walke before God that is to say was perfect or upright For so much the Scriptures testifie of him Gen. 24. 40. 26. 5. 48. 15. and that hee was the friend of God 2 Chrâ⦠20. 7. Esai 41. 8. Iam. 2. 23. But Bellarmines proofe is very slender that Abraham was such because hee was required so to be For so the whole people of Israel which for the uprightnesse required in them was called Ieshââ¦run Deut. 32. 15. 33. 5 26. are exhorted Deut. 18. 13. thou shalt be perfect that is upright with the Lord thy God Ios. 24. 14. serve him in perfection and in truth 1 Sam. 12. 24. In truth with all your heart And thus it appeareth that the termes of perfect heart and whole heart in the places before mentioned doe not import any legall perfection but uprightnesse and integrity of hearâ⦠which though it be but a perfection inchoated or begun being only a perfection in respect of the parââ¦s and not of the degrees towards which notwithstanding it aspireth yet neverthelesse it is the Evangelicall the Christian and the best perfââ¦ction which we can attaine unto this life § XVII These were his proofes out of the Scriptures Now he will prââ¦ve out of the Fathers that the Law of God is not impossible he shoââ¦ld say for so he propounded the state of the question absolutely posââ¦ble But ââ¦he Fathers may be distinguished into two rankes For either they weâ⦠such as wrote before Pelagius spred his errour or after Those whââ¦h wrote before did as Augustine saith write more carelesly of thee things insomuch that ãâã would seeme to father his errours upâ⦠them Those who wrote after hee had broached his heresies as naââ¦ely Hierome in his latter dayes and Augustine had the like controvere though not altogether the same with Pelagius that we have with the ââ¦apists For both doe hold the same assertion that the Law is possiblâ⦠both doe use the like arguments and both doe abuse the same Testââ¦onies of Scripture to confirme their errour § XVIII There are I confesse two seeming differences betweene the Pââ¦agians and the Papists The one that the Pââ¦lagians held that a man ââ¦y strength of nature might fulfill the Commandements of God which ââ¦e Papists deny The other that a man might so fulfill the Law of God as that he might live without siâ⦠which the Papists also deny But if it ãâã considered that the Pelagiaââ¦s did call the power of nature Gods gracâ⦠and did acknowledge that the direction and instruction which men haââ¦e by the Word and Law of God was to bee ascribed to Gods grace aââ¦d that the grââ¦ce of God doth helpe men more easily to obey the Law oâ⦠God iâ⦠will appeare that there is no such great differencâ⦠in the foââ¦er respect as is pretendââ¦d Againe the ãâã betweene the Pelagians and Papists is not in respect of ãâã or impossibility but in respect of greater or lesse difficulty For the Papists doâ⦠not aââ¦knowledge that men by natââ¦re are dead in sinne ââ¦d utterly deprived of the Spirituall life but that they are sicke and weake and ââ¦yed with the bands of sinne so that they cannot fulfill the Law of God unlesse they ãâã ââ¦olpen and loosed by grace but being holpen by grace then the fulfilling of the Commandements is easie to them The Pelagians likewise confesse that by the grace of God which they call bonum naturae or the power or possibility of nature they were enabled by the grace of God vouchsafed in his Word and Law guided and directed by the justifying grace of God freed from the bond of their sinnes and by the Sanctifying grace of God holpen with more ease to fulfill the Commandements of God So that the Papists although they doe not with the Pelagians deny originall sinne or the necessity of saving grace yet they doe extenuate the originall corruption and so magnifie the strength of nature that they differ not much from them For whereas originall corruption is both a privation of the habit of originall righteousnesse and also an evill and wicked disposition and pronenesse to all manner oâ⦠sinne infecting all the parts and faculties of the soule they make the ââ¦rivation to be of the act onely and not of the habit or power as if it were not a meere impotencie to that which is spiritually good but a dfficulty the evill disposition either they altogether deny saying that ââ¦iginall sinne is onely carentia justitiae debit ae in esse the want of originall ââ¦ighteousnesse or else they so extenuate it that they make it to be lese than any veniall sinne and in the regenerate no sinne at all But Auââ¦ustine doth truly teach against both Pelagians and Papists that man by ââ¦nne lost both bonum possibilitatis and also possibilitatem non peccandi as I vill hereafter shew And as touching the other differenceâ⦠though the Papists hold ââ¦at a man cannot bee altogether without sinne for any long time thoââ¦h for some short time in which short time if he shall say he hath no sine he shall make Saint Ioââ¦n and not himselfe a lyar 1 Ioh. 1. 8. yet ââ¦ey say they may be without all siââ¦nes excepting those which they do ââ¦all veniall which they doe so extenuate that indeed they make theâ⦠no sinnes as being no anomies or transgressions of the Law comââ¦tted against the Law or repugnant to Charity but onely besides the ââ¦aw such as may well stand together with perfect inherent righteoââ¦esse For they say he onely is a righteous man in whom there is no siââ¦e and yet that there is no man so righteous as that he liveth without ââ¦ese veniall sinnes But if they be ãâã and not contrary to the Lw then they are neither commanded nor forbidden and so no sinnes ââ¦t
all but ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã things indifferent § XIX But let us examine his testimonies two whââ¦reof are scarce worth the examining the one out of Origââ¦n the othââ¦r out of Cyrill and yet both of them so little to his purpoâ⦠as theââ¦seeme to make against him rather than for him Origâ⦠compareth ââ¦to women such men as say they are not able to observe certaine pââ¦epts of Christ which the Papists doe not call precepts but Counèlls and therefore belong not at all as they teach but to those who would be thought to live in a state of perfection Besides which notorioââ¦s hypocrites all in the Church of Rome are by this testimony to be ââ¦ompared to women who not onely say they cannot but also thinke ââ¦hey need not to observe them as to sell all that a man hath and give it to the poore which indeed is neither a commandemenâ⦠nor counsell given by Christ unto all but a precept of tryall to that one wealthy justitiary to him that striketh thee on the one cheeke turne to him the other also blesse him that curseth thee pray for him that persecuteth thee and such like which are indeed precepts given to all the faithfull and not counsailes directed onely to such as are or would seeme to be perfect Cyrill saith hee affirmeth that the precept it self thou shalt not lust which is noted to be most difficââ¦lt may through grace be fulfilled Answ. That place of Cyrill as it is translated into Latine is in a maner without sence neither can any thing be soundly inferred from it Heâ⦠seemeth to say that Christ restoring mans nature to his originall perfection which is but begunne in this life said To them of old it was said thou shalt not commit adultery but I say unto you thou shalt not lust quamvis res sit ut ââ¦pinor ad quââ¦m pertingi nequeat though it be a thing as I suppose which cannot be attained unto namely in this life yet to this perfection Christ hath reformed or restored us viz. inchoative in this life and perfectly in the life to come § XX. The rest of the testimonyes are of ââ¦wo sorts for either they deny the commandements of God to be impossible as Bââ¦sil orat in illud attende tibi Deut. 15. 9. Hierââ¦e ââ¦dvers Pelag. lib. 3. in Matth. 5. ãâã de Natura gratia Cap 43. c. or else they affirme that they are possible if men would as Cââ¦ncil Arââ¦sican 2. Can. ult Hilââ¦ru in Psalm 118. Chrysââ¦stom in Matth ââ¦om 39. in Hebr. homil 16. c. Answ. To preserve these fathers from contradicting themselves certaine distinctions are to be admitted For the same men who deââ¦y the law to be impossible doe conââ¦esse that God commandeth some things which wee cannot doe aââ¦d that never any since the fall of Adam did or could fulfill the whole law of God and that there is no man that liveth without sinne Their meaning therfore is that although no man can fulfill the law yet it is not impossible The first distinction is that which I mentioneâ⦠before bââ¦twixt the perfect fulfilling and the upright keeping of Gods commandments for although they cannot in this life be fulfilled in thââ¦t pââ¦rfection which the law requireth yet they may and usually are kept of the faithfull in sincerity and uprightââ¦esse which the Lord in the covenant of grace acceptech The second is conserââ¦ing impossibility For when it is said that the law is impossible to be fulfilled pââ¦ctly it is either understood simply per se as the fathers understood it as it is impossible saith Basil for the eye of a man to see his owne backe or conditionally and per accidens in respect of mans condition or estate For the law was possible to man in his integrity when he was in the earth by Paradise before his fall and shall be possible againe when hee shall be fully renewed in the heavenly Paradise But to man being fallen into the state of disobedience the fulfilling of the law is impossible by accident For ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the fleshly disposition of our corrupt nature is not subject to the law of God neither can it be The third distinction is in respect of the persons for men are either ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã unregenerate or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã regenerate The regenerate man by the grace of God is both willing and able to keepe the law according to the measure of grace received The unregenerate man is not able to keepe the law because hee will not the very frame of his will being enmity against God Rom. 8. 7. Gen. 6. 5. 8. 21. And here it is to be observed that those fathers which had to doe with the Pelagians who held that men by strength of nature were able to fulfill the Law of God or else the Lord commandiug them unpossible things should be unjust neither should the fault be in men who cannot obey but in God who enjoyneth impossible things did grant unto them that God did not command impossibilityes yet they did hold which the Papists also confesse that no man without grace could performe them For indeed to an unregenerate man who is dead in sinne it is as unpossiââ¦le to fulfill the wââ¦ole law of God which is spirituall as it is for a dead man to perfââ¦rme the actions of the naturall life For as I said before out of Augustine man by his sinne hath lost not onely bonum possibilitatis so that ââ¦ee can doe no good but also possibilitatem non peccandi so that hee cannot but sinne though hee sinne most freely For this is the freedome of a man not regenerate quâ potest peccare non potest non peccare ãâã dam nabiliur saith the Master of the sentences whereby hee is able to sinne and can doe no other but sinne and that damnably § XXI And further to those testimonies which affirme that men may fulfill the commandements if they will I answeare that nothing can be inferred from thence uââ¦lesse it be proved that men at all times are willing to fulfill them For if they be not willing they are not able and much lesse doe they actually performe them Thus therefore they must argue To them that are allwaies willing to keepe the commandements the Law is not impossible But all men are alwaies willing to keepe the Commandements Therefore to no man is the Law impossible The proposition is not generally true in respect of the regenerate themselves unto whom to will is oftentimes present when how to performe that which is good they find not Rââ¦m 7. 18. For the good that they would they doe not and the evill which they would not that they doe v. 19. But the assumption is manifestly false and the contrary is generally true No man is allwaies willing c. And therefore from those Testimonyes wherein the condition of the will is interposed nothing can be concluded
what we were and not what we are that seeing from what wee are fallen we might seeke to bee repaired in Christ who is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. The covenant of workes God made with man in his state of integrity when he was able to keepe it But after the fall because it was not possible that man should performe that covenant in and by himselfe he in great mercie made with man the Covenant of grace in Christ. But lest any man should either through ignorance or pride neglect the benefit of the Messias it pleased God to renew the Covenant of workes not to that end that men should be justified or saved thereby but that it might bee a meanes to drive them unto Christ. And fo Bellarmine himselfe hath taught Lex non data erat ut justificaret sed ut morbum ââ¦stenderet ad quaerââ¦ndum medicum excitaret The Law was not given to that end that it should justifie but that it might shew the disease and stirte up men to seeke to the Physitian Againe a distinction is to be made as in the answere to the second reason of the parties to whom the law is given For to the wicked and reprobate who are Gods rebellious subjects the law is indeed impossible through their owne default and yet God exacteth most justly that righteousnesse in which hee did create them hee requireth most justly an accompt of those talents which hee committed to them though now they be not able to pay The debt is duely exacted of the debtour though through his own default hee bee not now able to make payment As for the elect whom the Lord hath before they were loved in Christ hee hath given his law to them not to this end that either by the observation thereof in their own persons they should bee justified or by the breach thereof they should bee condemned for then who could be saved But the use of the law to them before their conversion is that it might bee unto them a Schoolmaster unto Christ and after their conversion and justification it might bee a rule whereby to frame their lives and conversation aspiring alwaies towards that perfection which the law prescribeth though they cannot fully attaine unto it Why then saith Augustine should not this perfection bee enjoyned to man though no man in this life have it Non enim rectè curratur si quò currendum est nesciatur quomodo autem sciretur si nullis praeceptis ostenderetur For men cannot runne well if they know not whither they must runne and how should they know that if by precepts it be not made known to them And worthy is that saying of Bernard to be repeated againe and againe Neither was the commander ignorant that the weight of the commandement doth exceed the strength of men but hee judged it profitable that hereby they should be admonished of their owne unsufficiencie and that they might know to what end or perfection of righteousnesse they should aspire Therefore by commanding impossible things hee did not make men transgressors but humble that every mouth may bee stoppod and the whole world made obnoxious to God For by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified in his sight For receiving the commandement and feeling our defectivenes wee shall cry to heaven and God will have mercie on us And wee shall know in that day that not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done but according to his mercie hee hath saved us § X. His fourth reason is collected out of three places of scripture Rom. 8. 4. Mat. 6. 10. Heb. 5. 9. In the first it is said that Christ suffered that the justification of the Law might be fulfilled in us In the second we are taught to pray that Gods will may bee done upon earth as it is in heaven In the third that Christ is made to all that obey him the cause of eternall salvation But saith hee if we canââ¦t fulfill the Law then Christ misseth of his end For notwithstanding his sufferings the justification of the Law is not fulfilled in us neither is our prayer ever obtayned of fulfilling Gââ¦ds will and commandements on earth as in heaven neither is Christ the authour of salvation to any because none obey him Answ. As touching the first place because it is often alleaged by Bellarmine I will somewhat insist upon it The place is two wayes expounded either of sanctification or of justification Ifit be to be understood of sanctification as the Papists commonly expound it we acknowledge that our sanctification is the end and fruit of our redemption by Christ and that this end is atchieved iâ⦠all those who live not after the flesh but after the Spirit that is in all true believers I say it is archieved ãâã in this life and perfectly in the life to come But as I suppose it is rather to be understood of justification For the Apostle having assured the faithfull vers 1. that notwithstanding sinne and the body of sinne and of death wherof hee had complayned chap. 7. remayneth in them yet forasmuch as we are delivered from the same by Iesus Christ our Lord vers 25. there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ as his members whom hee describeth by this character that they walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit In the verses following he confirmeth the same conclusion showing how Christ hath delivered us For saith hee vers 2. the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Iesus hath delivered me from the law of sinne and of death Whereby the law of the Spirit of life we understand the virtue and power of holynes or sanctification not in us but in Christ Iesus for so hee saith though they doe not observe it who understand this place of sanctification and righteousnesse inherent who by his righteousnesse and merits hath delivered us from the power of sinne and of death But the Apostle as in the former chapter vers 24. so here in the singular number speaketh of himself teaching by his owne example every true Christian to apply the benefits of Christ to himself For that which was impossible for the law to doe that is to justifie us in that it was weake through the flesh God sending his owne sonne in the likenes of sinfull flesh that is in the humane nature subject to passions and infirmities and that for sinne that hee might take away the sinne of the world for so saith ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã condemned sinne in the flesh that is exacted the due punishment of sinne in his humane nature that the guilt of our sinnes being taken away by his alsufficient satisfaction ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that which the law requireth unto justification might by Christ bee fulfilled in us who are his members which walke not as also hee had said in the first verse not after
betweene God and their owne free will Secondly in respect of their justification for the first they ascribe after a sort to grace the second which is increase of justice to their owne merit Thirdly in respect of gooâ⦠workes which as they bee wholly Gods so be they wholly their owne as Bellarmine here saith § VI. His fourth Evasion That though wee be saved by our owne merits yet wee are no lesse beholden unto Christ than if wee were saved without them but rather more Because wee are not onely saved by his grace but are also by it saved after a most noble and ââ¦onourable maner that is to say by our owne merits which he hath merited for us that we by them might merit eternall life As if hee should say Christ hath saved us that is hath merited grace and good workes for us that wee by them may become our owne Saviours This soundeth well for mans praise who would faine have a share in his owne salvation But it becommeth uâ⦠to say Not unto us O Lord not unto us but to thy name give the praise For what glory we arrogate to our selves we derogate from God who will not give his glory to another If God is to have all the glory then are wee to have none If wee take any part to our selves we doe not ascribe it wholly to God It is very true that we are beholden and bound to Christ not onely for salvation it selfe but also for those graces and good workes unto which eternall life is rendred as a free reward But the more gifts and graces wee receive from Christ the more we owe unto him the lesse we can merit of him If we call his graces our merits and his gift and free reward our deserved hire as the Papists doe then doe we challenge unto our selves the praise both of the one and of the other But if Christ in his owne person and by himselfe hath merited for us both eternall life it selfe and those things also unto which it is promised as a free reward With what face can wee ascribe it to our owne merits Or if we doe ascribe it to our owne merits though but in part how doe we not part stakes with God § VII And whereas hee saith it is a most honourable way to be saved by our owne merits I aske whether more honourable to God or to us If to us the Scripture teacheth us to strippe our selves of all honour in the matter of our salvation and to ascribe all honour and glory to God It were indeed more honourable for man to need no Saviour than being utterly lost in himselfe to be saved by another It were more honourable for man to be free from all sinne and to bee indued with most perfect righteousnesse and if it were possible to merit his owne salvation than being by sinne fallen into the state of damnation to need a Saviour But now man having by his apostasie from God lost that honourable estate wherein hee was created and fallen into a state of misery his glory wherein hee is now to rejoyce is that God who gave no Redeemer to the Angels that fell gave his onely begotten Sonne to redeeme him his merit as Gods mercy his honour that of a child of Satan and of a firebrand of hell hee is by Christ made the Sonne of God and heire of eternall life And for Gods glory it is not to bee doubted but that it was most honourable to God for the illustration of the glory both of his mercy and also of his justice that man being fallen should bee saved by the merits of Christ that being redeemed and justified he should still bee subject both to inward infirmities and corruptions and also to outward temptations that in our weakenesse his strength might appeare that we should not trust to our owne merits or boast in our owne worthinesse but should rely wholly on the mercies of God and merits of Christ ascribing the whole glory of our salvation thereunto and not to our owne merits who can deserve ââ¦othing but punishment at the hands of God if hee should enter into judgement with us And these were Bellarmines Evasions § VIII Others say that their doctrine of merits nothing derogateth from the merits of Christ there being no great difference as they conceive betweââ¦ne our doctrine who teach that Christ our Saviour did himselfe and in his owne person both pay our debt and purchase heaven for us and theirs who hold that Christ indeed paid our debt but to purchase heaven hee himselfe did not lay downe the price but did as it were put money into our purses whereby wee might purchase and merit the same for our selves But as the paiment of our debt requireth a ransome of infinite value so the purchase of heaven is not to be procured at a lesse price Christ therefore gave himselfe to be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a full price of Redemption for us not only by himselfe purging our sinnes and paying our debt by satisfying the penalty of the Law but also by giving a sââ¦fficient price which is his merit to purchase the heavenly inheritance for us The benefit of this his merit Christ applyeth and communicateth to all that truly beleeve in him but the power of meriting is not communicable to the members who are meere creatures but is peculiar to our head who is both perfect man and perfect God also And therefore no obedience whether active or passive of any but of his person onely is meritorious § IX The more impudent is the recrimination of our English Iesuits who are not ashamed to affirme that wee who use justly to censure them for derogating from the merits of Christ that we I say extenuate the merit of Christ in denying that hee mââ¦rited for our good workes that they should condignely merit eternall life and that therein wee erre fundamentally The impudency whereof is much the greater because they are not able to alleage any Text of Scripture or testimony of any of the ancient Fathers testifying that Christ did merit for us the power of meriting For it was not the purpose of our Saviour to communicate that power to his members which is a peculiar prerogative of the Head neither was it his meaning to save us to that end that we should be our owne Saviours Neither is it credible that hee would give us money as it were to enable us in our owne persons either to pay our debt or to purchase our iââ¦heritance seeing himselfe in his owne person hath paid the full price of our redemption and by his owne personall merits hath fully and al sufficiently purchased ââ¦he heavenly inheritance for us For to what end should he give us wherewith to merit when he himselfe hath more than sufficiently merited for us so that no oââ¦her merit needeth But if other merits are required besides how his is merit acknowledged al-sufficient Againe if it had beene Christs
bountyof God then are they fooles who repose affiance in their owne workes And no doubt but they are fooles who trust in their owne heart as Salomon saith Prov. 28. 26. For as Adrian saith who after was Pope Our merits are like astaffe of reed which not onely breaketh when it is leaned upon but also pierceth the hand of him that leaneth on it To trust in a mans owne righteousnessâ⦠is the property of a proud Iustitiary and hypocrite Ezec. 33. 13. Luke 18. 9. and of one that is accursed because hee removeth his heart ââ¦rom God and putteth his trust in man that is to say hââ¦mselfe for as Bernard well faith for a man to trust in himselfe Non fidei sed per ââ¦dem est nec confidentiae sed diffidentiae magis in semetipso habere fiduciam But the true and upright Christian renouncing all confidence in his owne righteousnesse as being a beggar in spirit Matth. 5. 3. resteth wholly on the mercies of God and merits of Christ Psal. 130. 3 4. 143. 2. Dan. 9. 18. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Phil. 3. 8 9. according to the advice of our Saviour Luk. 17. 10. If it be objected that the godly in many places of Scripture doe alleage their owne innocency and integrity as seeming to put some affiance therein 2 King 20. 3. Nehem. 5. 19. Psal. 18. 21 24. 2 Tim. 4. 7 8. I answere first it is one thing to place affiance in our good works as causes of our salvation as merit-mongers use to doe another from our good workes as tokens and signes of our election vocation justification and as presages of our glorification to gather comfort assââ¦rance and hope to our selves of our justification and salvation which the faithfull use to doe and to that end are they commanded to practise good workes that they make their calling and election sure 2 Pââ¦t 1. 10. This distinction is acknowledged by Bellarmine Sciendum est saith hee aliud esse fidââ¦ciam nasci ex ãâã aliââ¦d fiduciam esse ponendam in meritis It is one thing out of our good workes to gather assurance and affiance in God which the faithfull doe as they are exhorted in the Scriptures 2 Pet. 1. 10. Iob 11. 15. Rom. 5. 4. Probation worketh hope 1 Ioh. 3. 21. If our heart condemne us not then have wee confidence towards God and it is another thing to place affiance in our merits which none but proud Iustitiaries and Pharisaicall Hypocrites use to doe Secondly we must distinguish betwixt the innocency and justice of a mans cause and the innocency and justice of his person For the same men in the Scripture who for the justification of their persons desire the Lord not to enter into judgement with them for the justification of their cause have not feared to appeale to Gods judgement § XIII Our sixth reason those who cannot fully discharge their duety much lesse can they merit For they that merit must doe more than their duety For they that doe but their duety though they doe all that is commanded must acknowledge themselves to be unprofitable servants But if they faile in their duety and come short of that which is commanded then can they merit nothing but punishment at the hands of God But no mortall man is able fully to satisfie his duety Our duety is to abstaine from all sinne yea to be ãâã from all sinne and to doe the things commanded to doe all and to continue in doing all and that in that manner and measure which the Law requireth But those things no mortall man is able to doe as hath beene proved heretofore So farre is every mortall man from meriting any thing but punishment at the hands of God Our seventh reason If good workes doe merit salvation then wee are saved by them but we are not saved by good workes Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. therefore they doe not merit salvation Eightly the last reason The heavenly Canaan is a land of promise as the earthly Canaan was which the Lord gave to the Israelites not because of their merits Deut. 9. 5. Nor for the merit of their forefathers Iosh. 24. 2. but because he loved them and that for no other cause but because hee loved them Deut. 7. 7 8. In which love as hee freely promised it so in the same undeââ¦erved love he did freely bestow it And yet hee was just in giving it because hee had promised it Nehem. 9. 8. The same wee are to conceive of the heavenly Canaan whereof the other was a Type that it is a land of promise and noâ⦠of merit freely promised and freely bestowed on the heires of promise CAP. IIII. Testimonies of Fathers disproving merits and first those which Bellarmine hath sought to answere and then others § I. TO the former testimonies and proofes I will adjoyne the testimonies of Fathers and other writers And first those which Bellarmine hath endeavoured to answere of which Hilarie is the first Spes in misericordia Dei in sââ¦culum in seculum seculi est Non enim illa ipsa justitiae opera sufficient ad perfectâ⦠beatitudinis meritum nisi misericordia Dei etiam in hac justiââ¦ae voluntate hââ¦manarum demutationum motuum vitia non reputet hinc illud Prophetae dictum est melior est misericordia tua super vitam In tantum misericordia Dei muneratur ut miserans justitia voluntatem aeternitatis quoque suae justum quemque tribuat esse participem His intendement is that the hope of salvation is to bee placed in Gods mercy which is better than our righteous life For the workes of righteousnesse without Gods mercy in forgiving of sinnes will not suffice to obtaine the reward of blessednesse which the mercy of God pitying our will of righteousnesse bestoweth on the just But Bellââ¦mine maketh him speake what pleaseth him for to omit that for sufficient hee readeth Sufficerent Hilary saith hee doth teach that with our goodworkes are mingled certaine sinnes which though they make not a man unjust as being light ââ¦nd veniââ¦ll yet they need pardon and mercy because nothing that is defiled can enter into the kingdome of heaven Bellarââ¦ines meaning is that at the day of judgement the faithfull shall need Gods mercy for the pardoning of veniall sinnes as heretofore ââ¦ee hath taught But there is no such matter in Hilary neither is it tââ¦ue as I have shewed beforâ⦠that at the day of ââ¦udgement the faithfull shall need remission of veniall or any other sinnes neither doth Hilary say that the sinnes which are forgiven by the mercy of God are light and such as the Papists call veniall Neither is it true that there bee any sinnes which doe not make them sinners in whom they are seeing Bellarmine here confesseth that men are so defiled by them that they being not remitted exclude them from heaven neither doth hee say with good merits are mingled sinââ¦es neither doth
reward of their labours who are Gods workemen vers 9. labouring for him and not for themselves is the blessing of increase which God giveth thereunto Even as the harvest is the reward of the earing not to be asscribed to the merit of earing but to the blessing of God And so it is here plainely said though the Planter and the Waterer shall have their owne rewards yet their reward is not to bee asscribed to the merit of their labour but to the blessing of God I have planted saith Paul and Apollâ⦠hath watered but God gave the increase So then neither he that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giveth the increase Or if the place should generally be understood oâ⦠all workes both good and bad the meaning would be that the reward would be answerable either good or bad That of the Psalmist Psal. 62. 12. To thee Lord mercie for thou rendrest to every man according to his worke is not generally to be understood of the workes of all men both good and bad for the bad works of the wicked hee doth not reward in mercie but judgement without mercie shall bee executed upon them but of the good workes of the godly onely which though they bee good and acceptable to God in Christ yet he rewardeth them not according to merit but according to his mercie The place Apââ¦c 22. 12. may be an exposition of the rest For whereas in the rest it is said that God will judge ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã according to their dââ¦eds here Christ saith he will render to every one ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as his worke shall be viz. good or bad But here the Papists would seeme to bring a reason à pari that as the wicked are damned prââ¦pter peccata for their evill workes so the godly are saved propter opera bona for their good workes And as ââ¦vill workes merit hell so good workes pari ratione merit heaven Answ. it is impar ratio there is no equality in the comparison For first the Scripture plainely teacheth that by and for their evill works men are condemned and as plainely denieth that by or for good workes men are saved Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. Secondly any one sinne meriteth death because it is a breach of the Law yea of the whole law Iam. 2. 10. but not any one good worke can merit heaven because it is not the fulfilling of the whole law for there must be a concurrence of all duties In so much that if a man should performe all the Commandements and faile in one the breach of that one maketh him guilty of all Thirdly evill workes are purely and perfectly evill and therefore absolutely deserve death but the good workes are not purely and perfectly good as I have heretofore prooved therefore death is the due stipend of sinne but eternall life is the free gift of God Fourthly sinne is absolutely meritorious of damnation but so is not our obedience of Salvation For though we could performe all the commandements by a totall perpetuall and perfect obedience yet wee must acknowledge our selves unprofitable servants and much lesse could we merit thereby because we have done but our duety and where is no more but duety there can bee no merit Debitum non est meritum § XIIII His third argument is taken from those places which do so testifie eternall life to be rendred to good workes that they place the very reason why eternall life is given in good workes The places bee these Matth. 25. 34 35. Come ye blessed of my Father possesse the kingdome prepared fââ¦r you from the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee meat c. and in the same chapter vers 21. because thou hast beene faithfull in few things c. Apoc. 7. 14. These are they who came out of great tribulation c. therefore they are before the Throne of God In which places the particles enim quia ideo for because therfore are all causall His reason standeth thus To what things the causall particles are applied they are causes of that to which they have relation as namely of Salvation To workes of charity the causall particles are applied Therefore workes of charity are causes of Salvation To the proposition I answere that causall particles doe not alwaies nor for the most part signifie causes so properly called For that is a grosse erââ¦our of the Papists as I noted before The word cause sometimes is used properly to signifie that argument which hath relation onely to its effect by virtue whereof the effect hath its being either as from the efficient or as of the matter or as by the forme or as for the end Sometimes it is used generally to signifie any argument or reason whatsoever which is not the cause of the thing or of the being of that whereof it is said to bee a cause but of the consequence or conclusion and thus the rendring of any reason is called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a rendring of the cause though perhaps it bee from the effect or any other argument And forasmuch as persons are discerned and knowne by their effects for as our Saviour saith By their fruits you shall know them therefore it is usuall in the Scriptures from the effect to argue and declare the cause As thus God is mercifull for hee rewardeth the godly according to their workes God is just for hee rewardeth the wicked according to their sinnes This man is elect because he truely beleeveth and repenteth this man truely beleeveth because hee is fruitfull of good workes This is a good tree for it bringeth forth good fruite To the woman that was a sinner much was forgiven for shee loved much In those and infinite more examples the cause or reason which is rendred is from the effect Therefore the proposition is false § XV. Now let us consider the places of Scriptnre which hee alleageth and first Matth. 25. 35. for when I was hungry c. This reason which is alleaged is not from the cause as if good workes were the meritorious cause of our inheriting the kingdome of heaven but from the effect to prove the cause which is expressed Verse 34. as I have shewed before For for what cause are men to be saved First because they are blessed of the Father that is justified and therefore entituled to this kingdome Secondly because they are elected and therefore this kingdome was prepared for them from the beginning Thirdly because they arâ⦠the heires of God for whom our Saviour purchased this inheritance noted in the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã iââ¦rit But how shall it appeare who they are that are blessed and justified for whom this kingdome is prepared for whom this inheritance is purchased By the fruits of justification election redemption and namely by the workes of mercy and chariââ¦y towards the poore members of Christ according to which as the evidence our Saviour
degree of heavenly happinesse but also the higher degrees of glory and finally which is a consequent of the premisses that they may trust in their workes as being true causes of salvation All which assertions are insolent and Antichristian § XV. But we being in our selves most miserable sinners say with Daââ¦iel To thee Lord belongeth mercie and Iustice but to us shame and confusion of face and therefore wee pray with David Enter not into judgement with thy servants O Lord for no man living can bee justified in thy sight namely if thou enter into judgement with him For if thou Lord marke iniquities who shall stand If we should argue with God we should not bee able to answere one of a thousand with Esay wee confesse that all our righteousnesses are as polluted clothes as being stayned with the flesh and therefore have cause to cry out with the Apostle wretched men that wee are who shall deliver us from this body of death But yet with the same Apostlc we thanke God through Iesus Christ our Lord with David we professe that with the Lord there is mercie and forgivenesse that he may bâ⦠feared and with him there is plentifull redemption and hee shall redeeme the Israel of God from all their iniquities Wee beleeve that Christ by his death hath satisfied for our sinnes and by his obedience hath merited heaven for us that hee died for our sinnes and rose againe for our justification that wee are justified by his blood and by his obedience we are constituted just that hee is the end and complement of the Law for righteousnesse to all that beleeve in him that of God he is made unto us wisedome for our vocation righteousnesse for our justification holinesse for our sanctification and redemption for our glorification that according as it is written He that glorieth let him glory in the Lord. And howsoever we doe teach that those who are justified are also sanctified and that no man can bee assured of his justification without sanctification though wee seriously urge as our duety is the necessitie of good workes and of a godly life protesting with the Apostle that without holinesse no man shall see God though we teach that by our good workes wee are to make our Election our vocation our justification sure unto us though wee acknowledge that they are the evidence by which wee shall bee judged at the last day though finally in the doctrine of sanctification we urge the necessity and profit of good workes as much as ever any other Christians whether old or new yet in the question of justification if our workes or our inherent righteousnesse bee obtruded as the matter of our justification and merit of salvation then doe we loathe and abhorre them as polluted clouts wee renounce them as things of no value wee esteeme them or at least as Luther said the opinions of them as losse And contrariwise our whole affiance for our justification and all our hope of salvation we doe entirely repose in the onely mercies of God and merits of Christ ouâ⦠most perfect and all-sufficient Saviour to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit be all praise and glory for evermore Amen ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a In novissimis ââ¦emporib i. regââ¦ance Antichrist Anselâ⦠in 1 Tim. 4. 1. Vid. Diatrib de Antiââ¦h part 1. l. 3. c. 1. §. 3. c 1 Tim. 4. 1. 3. d This distinction is propounded by S. Augustine de Trinit lib. 13. c. 2. and by the master of the sentences Sent. 3. dist 23. e Vid. Diatrib de Antichristo lib. 4. c. 6. 7. g Idem l. 3. 6. 49. h De ââ¦ont Rom. lib. 4. cap. 3. i Bellar. de Concil li. 2. c. 17. Conc. Trid. sess 4. Pari pietatis affectu reverentia suscipiunt ei venerantur k Cesteri Enchirid cap. 1. Hutus praestantia multis par tib ââ¦peral Scripturas l Cesler ibid. m Hosius de expresso Dei verbo n Contr. Luciferian in Gal. 1. neque enim in Scripturarum verbis Evangelium est sed in sensu o De verbo non scripto l. 4. c. 4. * Rom. 10. 8. p See lib. 7. c. 3. §. 9 10 11 12. q See the learned work called the Grand imposture r Apud Euseb. lib. 4 cap. 15. s Gerdon contrv 1. c. 27. t Ibid. u Ibid. â⦠3. * Hosius de authorit Scripturae lib. 3. x Vid. Diatrib de Antichristo part 1. lib. 6. c. 4. §. 9. The excellencie of this argument * Lib. 6. Cap. 6. §. 2. a Iohn 1. 17. b Gal. 2. 5. c Rom. 1. 16 17. d Gal. 1. 6. 8. e Iohn 8. 44. f Iude 6. g Gal. 5. 4. h Gal. 3. 17 18. i Rom. 4. 14. k Gal. 3. 10. l Gal. 5. 2 3 4. Gal. 2. 21. m Of this see more lib. 7. c. 3. §. 10 11 12. The definition of Justification The name â⦠Justificarâ⦠o Lib. 2. The definition of Justification explaned 1. That it is an action of God Rom. 8. 33. Esay 43. 25. p Rom. 9. 16. 2. An action of God without us q Verse 34. r Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Rom. 4. 5 7. s Sess. 6. cap. 4. Vt sit translatio ab eo statu in quo homo nascitur silius primi Adami in statum gratiâ⦠adoptionis filiorum Dei per secun dum Adamum Jesum Christum salvatorem nostrum Justification though it alwaies concurreth with Gods gracious actions within us yet it is carefully to be distinguished from them Ephes. 1. 6. Justification an action of God continued t Heb. 7. 25. Rom. 3. 25. u The Covenant of Grace Chap. 8. pag. 109. Whether Justification bee wrought but once and at once * a Cor. 4. 16. 1 Iohn 5. 1. Iohn 1. 12 13. Gal. 3. 2â⦠Rom. 8. 17. The Papists confuted who deny it either to be an action of God or an action without us or continued The Causes of Justification The principall efficient Rom. 3. 26 30. 4. 5 6. 8. 30 33. Gal. 3. 8. a Iaâ⦠4. 12. b Psalm 51. 4. Esay 43. 25. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Ephes. 1. 6. c 1 Iohn 21. 2. d Matth. 6. 12. Rom. 8. 33. Exod. 34. 7. Esay 43. 25. Marke â⦠7. The Motives * Psalm 6. 2. 123. 3. 31. 9. f In Rom. 3. 24. Scriptura sacra non dicit nos justificare per solam gratiam sed per gratiam simul iustitiam sed utramque Dei hocest per gratiam Dei per iustitiam Dei non per justitiam hominum 2 Tim. 1. 9. â⦠Ephes. 1. 6. Rom. 11. 5. Eph. 1. 5 6. 2. 5. 8 2 Tim. 1. 9. g Ephes. 2. 8 The Lord is alsâ⦠just in justisying a sinner Rom. 3. 25 26. The actions of the three persons distinguished The Father Rom. 3. 25. Iohn 3. 16. The Sonne Esay 53. 11. Rom. 8. 34. 1 Iohn 2. 2. Heb.
The fifth absurditie n 2 Cor. 12. 9. The sixth absurdity o 2 Cor. 5. 21. p 1 Pet. 2. 5. The fourth argument we are iustified only by that righteousnesse which fully satisfieth the Law of God The righteousnesse of Christ hath fully satisfied the Law for us 1 Iââ¦hn 3. 16. a Pââ¦il 2. 6 7 8. b Ioââ¦n 1. 14. c 1 Iohn 5. 20. d Tit. 2 13. e Rom. 9 5. Our righteousnesse cannot satisfie the Law neither in respect of the penaltie f 1 Tim. 2. 6. g Marcus Eremit de ââ¦is quid ex operibus se justificari putanââ¦es sent 42. Si quo ãâã que bona natura ãâã ãâã quotiaie ãâã ãâã quid reliqum pro an ãâã ãâã Dââ¦oretrionemus sent 43. quantum virââ¦utis augmentum bodie fecerimus ãâã negligentia argumentum est non conpensatio h Psal. 51. 5. i Rom. 3. 26. Nor in respect of the precept Bellarmines allegation that the Law may be fulfilled i De iustif l. 4. c. 11 c. k Lib. 7. cap. 6. 7. l Lib. 7. cap. 6. 7. Sixe reasons that men are not able to fulfill the Law First because all are trans gressours m Lib. 4. cap. 2. §. 6. n De persect iustitiae o Concupiscentia non ãâã sed omnino esse non debet De Nupt. concup l. 1. c. 29. Multum bââ¦ni facit qui facit quod scââ¦iptum est post concupi scentias tuas non eas sed non proficit quia non implet quod scriptum est non concupisces p Gal. 5. 3. q Gal. 5. 2. r Act. 15. â⦠5. s Act. 15. 7 8 9. t Lib. 7. c. 6. The fifth containing foure branches which are so many arguments doubled The first branch by what righteousnesse we are justified by that we are absolved c. a Lib. 2. Act. 13. 38 39. b Act. 13. 16. 26. Calvins allegation of Act. 13. 38 39 defââ¦nded against ãâã cavils De justis l. 2 c. 12. inââ¦titut 3. c. 11. §. 3. First per hunc by this man Secondly is preached c Tom. 2. in indice vocâ⦠predicatio Per predicationem verbi Dei excitari fidem sic remittâ⦠peccata figmentum est baereticoââ¦um nostri tââ¦m peris Rom. 10. 17. 1 Cor. 3. 5. The similitude ãâã the Physi. ãâã d ãâã 3. 14 15. Thirdly remission of sinnes e ãâã 6. cââ¦p 7. f De iustif l. 2. cap. 10. §. Deinde Fourthly iustification from sinnâ⦠Fifthly by the Law g Lib. 7. c. 7. §. 7. The foure branches of the proposition proved h Tit. 3. 7. i Act. 26. 18. The assumption proved in all the foure branches k Mat. 26. 28. Esai 5. 3. 510 11. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Ephes. 1. 7. Heb. 9. 14. Apoc. 1. 5. Rom. 3. 25. 1 Joh. 2. 2. l Ephes. 1. 7. m 1 Tim. 2. 5. n 2 Tim. 2. 26. o Mat. 12. 29. p Gen. 6. 5. q Ephes. 2. 8 9. r Tit. 3. 5. Arg. 6. by faith and not by workes a Rom. 3. 20. 28. 4. 6. Gal 2. 16. Eph. 2. 8. 9. Tit. 3. 5. 7. Arg 7. righteousnesse of iustisication not prescribed in the Law b Ro. 1. 17. 3. 21. c Phil 3. 8 9. d Gal. 1. 8 9. c Gal. 3. 17. Arg. 8 the righteousnesse of iustification satisfieth Gods iustice f Exod 34. 7. g De iustif l. 2. c. 5. §. 4 quarta ratio h Ibid. §. at longe Mat. 3. 17. 17. 5. i Col. 1. 20 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Rom. 3. 25. Ephes. 5. 2. k Deiustif l. 2. â⦠10. §. Deinde l De iustif l. 2. â⦠5. sine Arg. 9. no man iustified without remission of sinne The true doctrine of iustification is comfortable m In libello de Miseria hominis Argument eleven from experience o Questiones authore Anselmo morientibus proponisolit ae per universum christianum or bem D. Vssher de succiss pag. 194 respons ad Iesuit pag. 513. Chemnit exam part 1. pag. 143. Card. Hosii confess Petricovi ens c. 73. fol. 143. b. f. p Or do baptizandi cum modo visit andi impress venetâ⦠an 1575. fol. 34. q Impress Madriti apud Alphons Gemos. annâ⦠1584. The disproofe of the Negative The first argument because inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law Bellarmines distinction De iustif l. 1 c. 19. betweene the iustice of the Law and in the Law a In Rom. 10. disput 2. Answere refelling this distinction of ââ¦llarmine b Photius apud Occum in Ro. 10. c Primas in Rom. 10 3. d In Rom. 10. ââ¦om 17. Bellarmines obiect that this distinction is found in Augustin advers 2. epistolas Pelag. liv 3. c. 7. e De iustif 41. c. 1. f Rom. 8. 23. g Ephes. 4. 7. Arg. 2. the popish doctrine confoundeth the Law and the Gospell h Lib. 7 c. 3. Thirdly it depriveth men of the chiefe part of Christian liberty i Gal. 5. 1. Fourthly because all men are sinners k Supr c. 2. §. 9. Fifthly because all men by the Law are accursed Sixthly because none fulfill the Law l Supr c. 5. §. 3. Lib. 7. c. 6 7. m ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã hom 17 in Rom. 10. 5. Eigthly Not by faith and by workes Ninthly because it is imputative n Sess 6 Sess. 7. Tenthly iustification taketh away boasting o Ambr. de Iacob vitabeata l. 1. c. 6. Sed illud mihi prodest quod non iustificamur ex operibus legis Non babeo igitur unde gloriari in operibus meis possim non habeo unde me jactem Et idco gloriaboâ⦠in Christo. Non gloriabor quia iustus sum sed gloriabor quia redemptus sum gloriabor non quia vacuus pââ¦cati sum sed quia mihi remissa sunt peccata Non gloriabor quia profui nec quia profuit mibi quisquam sed quia pro me advocatus apud Patrem Christus est sed quia pro me Christi sanguis effusus est Twelfthly because remission of sinne is a necessary part of iustification Thirteenthly from the example of Abrahaâ⦠Of David p 1 King 3 6. q Psal. 143. 2. r De tempore serm 49. Of Paul s Act. 24. 16. t Phil. 3. 8 9. Of Iob Esay and Daniel 14 because it is not the righteousnesse of one Arg. 1. because God accepteââ¦h Christs righteousnesse in our behalfe a De iââ¦stif l. 2 c. 5. §. quartaratiâ⦠b De iustif l. 2. c. 5. §. quòd vero Arg. 2. God acceptââ¦th it alone as being of insinitâ⦠valâ⦠c Lib. â⦠c. 7. §. 3. d Dâ⦠ãâã l. 2. c. 10. Rââ¦ply to Bellarââ¦nesââ¦st ââ¦st answere that Christ is called ãâã ãâã bââ¦cause ãâã is the authour of it Righteousnesse here to be distinguished from Sanctification f Ephes. 1. 14. 4. 30. Rom. 8. 23. Luk. 21. 28. g 1 Cor. 1. 31. h In ââ¦ocum i ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã k Col. 2. 3. l 2 Thes. 2. 14. m Deut. 4 9. 1 Cor. 2. 6 7. n 2 Tim. 3. 15. o Rom.
Lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 11. q Lib. 8. c. 2. §. 18 c. His eighth testimony Rom. 10. 0. His ninth testimony Mat. 25 34 35. r Supr Cap 4. §. 12. His tenth testimony Iam. 1. 25. 2. 14. The Epistles by him vouched s Rom. 6. Tit. 3. 8. 14. Heb. 1â⦠14. Testimonies of Fathers De justif l. 4. c. 8. t See Lib. 6. c. 9. u Lib. 7. cap. 1. His reason De justif l 4 c. 9. * De justif l. 1. cap. 13. x De justif l. 1. c. 18. Bellarmiues reasons that faith doth not save alone y Iam. 214. z Iam. 2. 26. Bellarmine his unlike likenesses a Lib. 6. Cap. 2. 3. De justif lib. 4. cap. 10. Of the truth of the justice of good workes not denyed by us a Iam. 3. 2. b Iam. 2. 10. Bellarmines dispute is indeed defensive Whether the faithfull doe or can fulfill the Law c De peccator meritis remiss l. 2. c. 6. 7. d Rom. 10. 4. e in Rom. 10. f Apud Oecum in Rom. 10. g in Rom. 2. 13. h Retract Lib. i. cap. 13. i Ephes. 4. 7. 2 Cor. 8. 12. l Qui legem implet observat totus totam per totam vitam That the Law is possible Bel larmine proveth by ãâã Matth. 11. 30. m Gal. 5. 1. n Ioh. 3. 4 5. o Ioh. 6. 40. Christs yoke easie in respect of our new obedience p Apoc. 8. 4. q Exod. 28. ââ¦6 38. Bellarmines dilemma The obedience of the crosse is also the yoke of Christ. r Psal. 94 12. s Heb. 5. 8. t Psal. 119. 71. u Vers. 67. * 2 Cor. 4. 17. x Rom. 8. 18. y Heb. 12. 2 z Iam. 1. 2 12. a 1 Pet. 1. 8. 4. 13. p Psal. 94. 19â⦠His second place 1 Ioh. 5. 3. c Gen. 29. 20. d Lib. de perfectione justitiae e Rom. 5. 5. f Psal. 119. 3â⦠His second rank of testimonies Bellarmines reply g Psal. 19. 7. h De perfect justif ad 15. i Epist. 29. His second reply k De spiritu litera cap. 36. l Covenant of grace cââ¦ap 10. His third reply m Vers. 21. n Psal. 25. 7. 11. 38. 4 18. Psal. 51. 5 119. 17â⦠o Psal. 143. 2. 130. 3 4. p Psal. 32. 1. Rom. 4. 6. q 2 King 23. 25. r 2 Chro. 15. 15. s 2 Chro. 15. 17. t 2 Chro. 16. 7 10 12. u Iosh. 11. 14 15. * Deut. 7. 2. x Luk. 1 6. y Luk. 1. ââ¦0 62. z Luk. 12. 4. Ioh. 15. 15. Joh. 17. 6. a Rom. 7. 7 8. Whether concupiscence in the Apostle were a sinne b Rom. 7. ââ¦4 25. c Rom. 7. 23. d Mat. 5. 28. e Retract l. 1. cap. 19. Bellarmines instance that the godly before mentioned absolutely fulfilled the Law and were perfect f Gen. 17. 1. What is meant by a perfect heart What is meant by whole heart g De justif l. 4. cap. 12. His testimonies out of the Fathers g Contr. Iulian Pelag. lib. 1. c. 2. The difference betweene the Pelagianâ⦠and Papists not great * §. 20. h In Ios. hââ¦mil 9. in sin in c. 8. 35. i Mat 19. 21. k Cont. Iulian. lib. 3. To the rest of Fathers l Hier. adv Pelag. l. 3. Aug. de Nat. gr cap. 43. De Grat. lib. arb cap. 6. m Rom. 8. 7. n Hypognost l. 3. o De Nat. gra cap. 48. p Lib. 2. dist 25. F. G. Answ. to those testimonies which affirme that men may fulfill the law if they will q De pecââ¦at merit remiss Cap. 14. That the fathers did not meane that the Law is absolutely poââ¦ible r Contr. 2. Epist. Pelag. lib. 3. c. 7 s Retract l. c. 19. t De ãâã Dei l. ââ¦9 c 27 u Contr. 2 Episââ¦olas Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 7. Bââ¦llarminesââ¦paradox ââ¦paradox that a man may fulfill the Law though he cannot live without sinne * 1 Ioâ⦠3. 4. x 1 Ioh. 1. 7 8. Tit. 2. 14. y De justiâ⦠l. 4. c. 14. ad 4. z Deut. 5. 32. 28. 14. Testimonyes of the Fathers that the law is not possible to be fulfilled of us a Lib. 4 cap. 5. §. 5. c. b Dialog cum ãâã pag. 98. c Demonstr Evang. l. 1. d In Gal. 3. e In Rom. 10. 4. hom 17. f In vers 5. g In Gal 3. h Lib. 2. in Gal. 3. 10. i Ad Ctesiphââ¦nt advers Pelag. 254. k Ibid. 255. l Ibid. 256. m Contr. Pelag. lib 1. 264. inâ⦠llud Mââ¦t 19. si vis esse perse cius n Ibib. 265. o Lib. 2. advers Peââ¦ag 283. p Ibid. 284. f. q Lib. 3. 298. r In Psal. 67. s De spiritu litera c. 36. t Ibid. u Contr. 2. epistolas Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 7. * 2 Cor. 4. 16. x De peccat merit remiss l. 2. c. 7. y De temp serm 45. z Epist. 29. a In Rom. 10. b In Gal. 3. c In Cantic serm 50. d In vigil Nativit Dei serm 2. e Thâ⦠Aqui. in Gal. 3. f Exercit. l. 10. serm in parasceue pag. 664. g Sess. 6. can 18. De justif l. â⦠cap. 13. Reason 1. because a man may doe more than is commanded a Mat. 19. 21. b De panit hom 8. c De verbis Apestoli serm 18. d Deut. 4. 2 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6. e Apââ¦c 22. 18. f Matth. 15. 6. Whether in any morall duety more can be well performed than is commanded His first proofâ⦠Matth. 16. 21. g Matth. 5 20. h Matth. 19 24. Counsell of voluntary poverty i Matth. 6. 11 Luk. 11. 3. k Ephes. 4. 28. l Matth. 15. 4 5 6. Mark 7. 10 11 12 13. m Non facias tibi n Cor 2. 22 23. Of the ââ¦ounsell and vow of single life o Rom. 7. 14. p Matth. 5. 28. q 1 Thes. 4. 3 4 5. r Caââ¦titas ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã s 1 Cor. 7. 2. t 1 Pet. 2. 11. The vowed single life among the Papists a sinfull state His sââ¦cond reason if the precepts were not possible they would binde no man Bellarmines objectioââ¦s that a man doth not sinne in that which he cannot avoid His third reason God should be more cruell and more foolish than any tyrant c. u De iustif l 4. c 4. §. Sextum discrimen * De perfectione justitiâ⦠970. x InCantic serm 50. y Rom. 3. 19. 20. z Tâ⦠3. 5. His fourth reason collected out of three testimonies The 1. place Rom. 8. 4. a Rom. 8. The text Rom. 8. expounded b Oecum in Rom. 8. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c Homil. 13. in Rom. 8. 34. d In Rom. 8. 4. e In locum f In Rom. 10. Hom. 17. g In locum h In locum i Rââ¦tract Lib. â⦠cap. 19. Answ. To his second and third testimonies Mat. 6. 10. k Heb. 5. 9. l Ioâ⦠6. 29. His fifth reason m Gal. 5. 23. n Iam. 3. 2. o Rom. 8. 33 34. His sixth reason because the
to forbeare swearing in ordinary talke not to give a mans goods to the poore and to follow Christ when hee is thereunto required Mat. 19. 23. Mar. 10. 23. These things are so manifest that Bellarmine in the end of the next Chapter doth confesse them viz that our Saviour doth not say except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Law and the Prophets but of the Scribes and Pharisees to signisie that his meaning was not so much he should say not at all to adde to the burden of the precepts as to take away the corruptions of the Scribes Pharisees And again those things which seem to be most heavie in the new Law are to be found in the old as the loving of our enemyes the restrayning of concupiscence such like For proofe wherof he quotes Augustine lib. contr Adimant cap. 3. lib. 19. contr Faustum c. 28. In the former place Augustine saith Nulla in Evangelica atque Apostolica disciplina reperiuntur quamvis ardua divina precepta promissa quae illis etiam libris veterib desint In the latter Vel omnia vel penè omnia quia monuit sââ¦u praecepit Christus ubi adjungebat Ego a. dici vobis inveniuntur in illis veterib libris And so much of the first difference § XXI The second difference is that the Law commeth alone but the Gospell is accompanied with grace Which is not a difference of the doctrine and letter of the Gospell from the Law but of the covenant of grace from the covenant of works For in the covenant of grace as justification is promised to them that being called doe beleeve so sanctification to them that are justifyed Which as it proveth the concurrence of Good workes with faith in the party justified as consequents thereof so it excludeth them from being any causes of justification But as touching this second difference two popish errours are to bee avoided First in respect of the covenant of workes For though that covenant doth not promise nor afford the grace of sanctification wherby a man should be enabled to performe the covenant which grace is promised in the covenant of grace and given to them that beleeve yet wee are not so to conceive that they who lived in the time of the law were void of grace nor all that live under the Gospell are endued with grace For the covenant of grace hath alwayes bene in force from the beginning so that to the faithfull who beleeved in the Messias which was to come the grace of sanctification was given according to the covenant of grace so that in the old Testament even under the Law there were as excellent examples of holynesse as have bene in the time of the new under the Gospell So also the Law hath its use even among those that live under the Gospell insomuch that untill men doe beleeve they are under the Law and not under grace Secondly in respect of the grace of the new Testament that it is not promised in such perfection in this life where wee receive but the first fruits of the Spirit as that wee may expect to be justified by it or saved for it § XXII From these two difference the rest as hee saith arise viz. from the first arise the third the fourth and the fifth The third is this that the Law of Moses was given to one Nation the Law of Christ to all Nations The fourth that the Law of Moses for the most part contayned shadowes and figures of things to come the Gospell exhibiteth the body and truth The fifth that the Law of Moses because it was not perfect was to be changed by the Law of Christ but the Law of Christ was not to be changed by any succeeding Law These three differences of the Law doe not agree to the Law Morall which belongeth to all nations which did not consist of shadowes and figures which was not to be changed no not by addition because it was and is a perfect immutable and perpetuall rule of righteousnesse The other three viz. the sixth seventh and eigth arise as hee saith from the second The sixth that the Law of Moses had no power to justifie neither was it given that it might justifie but that it might shew the disease and stirre up men to seeke the physitian But the Law of Christ that is the Gospell hath power to justifie and was given to that end For as hee alleageth out of Rom. 1. 16. it is the power of God to salvation to every one that beleeveth he doth not say that worketh For therein is revealed the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith as it is written the just man shall live by faith This is a true difference of the Law of faith from the Law of workes but agreeth not to Bellarmines new Law which is a Law of workes as well as the old conteyning the very same morall precepts with the morall Law in the observation whereof not our justification but our sanctification consisteth prescribing also the same righteousnesse viz Charity which is the summe of the Law The seventh that the Law of Moses is a Law of fearefullnesse and bondage but the Gospell the Law of love and of liberty which is true For the obedience of men who are under the Law is forced by the terrour and coaction of the Law working servile feare in them But the obedience of men who are under grace that is of men justified is voluntary and cheerfull proceeding from faith and from some measure of assurance of Gods love and favour to them in Christ. Therfore this voluntary obedience is no cause but a consequent of justification not onely before God but also in the court of our owne conscience that is not onely of justification it selfe but also of the assurance thereof in some measure Of the eigth which confuteth the first I have already spoken § XXIII So much of the first thing which Bellarmine undertooke to demonstrate for the proofe of the necessity of good workes which we hold as well and urge as much as he Now followeth the second which is to prove that the justare not free from the observation of the Law of God For hee saith that we place Christian liberty in this that we are not subject in our conscience and before God to any Law and that the decalogue it selfe doth not belong unto us Which is a most devillish slander We professe that we so many as truly beleeve are by Christ freed from the curse of the Law from the rigour and exaction of the Law requiring perfect righteousnesse in us unto justification from the terrour and coaction of the Law from the irritation of the Law as I have shewed in my treatise of Christian liberty but not from the obedience of it For freedome from obedience is the servitude of sinne But wee being freed from sinne become the servants of righteousnesse And we doe