at all that never had conflict with infidelity though this be true yet in doubtfulness simply none hath comfort because it is a fruit of infidelity The sense of unbelief is occasionally comfortably and striving against doubting is a sign of faith in this thou hast no comfort that thou doubtest but this is the comfort that thou seest thine unbelief bewailest it and strivest against it Mar. 9.24 Secondly It serves to admonish us to strive against doubtings and to pray with the Disciples Lord help our unbelief Luk. 17.6 The root is bitter out of which it grows the vice most dishonourable to God most discomfortable to our selves unbelief 2. This banes our prayers and makes them return empty from our God Iam. 1.7.3 Breeds wavering in Christian profession and practice vers 8.4 In a word makes all duties flow coldly from us whilest we question Gods power or will to reward them 5. Dishonours the promiser by questioning his ability or readiness to perform what he hath promised And that is it which in the contrary comes next to be treated From the signs of strength in Abrahams faith the Apostle passeth to the effect thereof He gave glory to God by such his believing Giving glory to God We may not so conceive as if any reall access of glory came to God by Abrahams believing he is for gloriousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and no reall addition or diminution comes to his glory from the creatures of himself and in himself he hath all perfection of glory before the worlds were his wisdome and power the truth were in him in the same infinite measure as now by his works he procures not glory but either manifests or communicates it to his Creatures But we are said to give him glory in way either of acknowledgement or publication so Abraham by believing gave glory to God inasmuch as thereby he acknowledged the power and truth of the Promiser The point to be observed is How glorious a thing it is to God firmly to believe and rest upon his word I know not whether by any one Duty God reap more honour then from this of believing His power his truth his goodness his mercy Attributes that the Lord counts most gloririous to himself and desires ratherest to be acknowledged amongst men by believing we acknowledge Yea if there be any other office and duty whereby Gods glory is published and occasionally acknowledged by others from faith it issues Profession Patience Love Mercy or if there be any other virtue by exercise whereof men are excited to glorifie God From Faith they all flow as from their fountain And I marvell not at the Lords so sore indignation against Moses his friend for not sanctifying him by believing read Deut. 32.51 Num. 20.12 and 27.14 and 11.21 22 23. a greater dishonour he could scarcely have done to the majesty of God Faith thinks highly of God Incredulity abaseth him By this we may take occasion to judge of that doctrine of Doubting so much commended by adversaries to Gods people as more honourable unto God then is ours of assurance That we may not seem to wrong them let us understand that Generall faith they allow to be undoubtfull Faith speciall they make the Lutherans dream having no ground at all in the word of God their meaning is that what is in generall taught touching the power and truth of God in fulfilling his promises must and may be believed with undoubtfull faith For our particular to believe that to us he will give Remission of sinnes perseverance and life eternall they teach the performance to be to the ordinary rate of Gods children impossible and groundless the attempt arrogant and presumptuous Hope it we may out of a probable conjecture believe it we may not as out of infallible evidence Hence are those often commendations given to a course holden betwixt doubtfull Hope and slavish Fear in our passage towards Gods kingdome Where First I demand Whether there may not or ought to be speciall Faith of Gods Power my meaning is whether a man be not bound to believe that God can pardon his personall sinnes and give him life eternall and whether the doubting thereof in respect of our Persons be not censurable of unbelief It is truly said Cain sinned more by despairing of Gods mercy and denying his power to forgive his sinne then in embruing his hands in his brothers bloud speciall Faith then there may and ought to be touching Gods power to perform his promise Let us see whether like faith ought not to be concerning Gods truth and Will to perform it 1. Commandment is given to pray for pardon of our own sinnes to pray for perseverance and life eternall and a requisite condition in available prayer to believe not onely that God can but that he will give what we pray for see Mark 11.23 Matth. 21.21 Jam. 1.6 7. How then is it a point of arrogancy to endeavour speciall faith 2. Besides this What dishonour is this to the spirit of God not to believe his testimony given in our hearts Rom. Bern. de Annunciat Ser. 1. Augustin Mannal c. 24. 8.16 shall we say It is of Generalls onely Hear Bernard Si credis peccata tua non posse deleri nisi ab eo cui soli peccâsti hene facis sed adde adhuc ut hoc credas quia per ipsum tibi peccata donantur hoc est Testimonium quod perhibet in corde nostro Spiritus Sanctus dicens Dimissa sunt tibi peccata tua More I add not upon this occasion onely I say If to rest on Gods word be a thing so Honourable to the Promiser to doubt of his promise is to derogate from his glory whether the doubt be of his Power or of his Will of the Generall or for our own Particular Let all Gods children to whom God hath given repentance take notice of their doubtings as things dishonourable to God and derogatory from the glory of his power and truth and mercy What when God proclaimeth pardon even to bloudy sinnes repented Isa 1.18 shall we question whether in mercy he can or will forgive the sins we have forsaken when he hath ratified all his promises in the bloud of his Sonne 2 Cor. 1.20 shall we question whether he mean sooth in promising his children pardon protection perseverance or life eternal God forbid I say not we can at all times free our selves of doubtings onely I advise to take notice of them as of sinnes not of lightest nature detracting so much from the glory of the power or truth or goodness of the promiser It follows now in the Text. And being fully assured or perswaded The strength of Abrahams faith the Apostle hath before declared by removing from him the effects and signes of weakness in believing the same he here shews positively setting down the property and nature of faith in her strength and ascribing it to Abraham In the words are two things 1. The measure of Abrahams perswasion He
unto them and taken notice of so far as that he was for it esteemed righteous We shall best understand the meaning by comparing the self-same phrase as it it is extant Psal 106.31 Phineas his executing judgment was counted to him for righteousness to all generations for evermore that is he for that fact or by means thereof had the esteem of a righteous man amongst men unto all posterity So Abrahams faith was counted to him for righteousness before God that is he for believing or by means of faith was esteemed or reckoned righteous before God This as far as I conceive is the proper meaning of the phrase If that hypallage seem harsh thus conceive it His believing was reckoned unto him to righteousness that is came into reckoning so far with God on his behalf or for his benefit that thereby he obtained righteousness Faith then is of that reckoning with God as that to Abraham yea to every man endued thrrewith he allowes the esteem of a righteous man understand faith as it s before described For the better understanding of this conclusion let us see a little how faith obtains this blessing of righteousness at Gods hands or what is the reason of the connexion of righteousness with believing Bellarm. de just if lib. 1. cap. 17. Divers are the explanations Papists impute it sometimes to the merit and worth of the very habit or act of faith as if it deserved at Gods hands justification and had the force of a proper efficient cause meritoriously to procure it Against it are these Reasons First Bernard Ser. 1. de Annunciat Hereof we may say as Bernard of other good works or as he terms them merits that it s not such as as that for it righteousness should be due to the believer of right or as though God should do us wrong except he gave to us believing righteousness for this as all other good qualities or actions is the gift of God and therefore man is rather a debtor to God for it then God to man Secondly Besides this how holds the difference assigned by the Apostle betwixt the worker and the believer in the manner of obtaining righteousness if righteousness belong to the believer as a reward of debt If righteousness belong to the believer of debt as a reward of believing then vainly doth the Apostle alledg this as a difference betwixt the believer and the worker that the one hath righteousness paid as of debt the other given as of grace but the difference is sure authenticall Ergo. Their arguments will be fitlyest answered when we come to set down the opinions of our own Divines Sometimes they thus conceive it that faith is the beginning of righteousness Bellarm. qua supra and the inchoate formall cause of righteousness that is part of that righteousness whereby we are made formally righteous and that they would prove out of this text because to him that believeth in him that justifyeth the ungodly his faith is counted to righteousness But they would deceive us with a false glosse for that is not the meaning that faith is counted our righteousness but that its taken notice of so far as that to the believer righteousness is imputed A mean therefore it is of obtaining righteousness not righteousness it self except by righteousness they will understand that of sanctification 1 Ioh. 3. Wherefore we acknowledg it to be a part but what is that to the righteousness of justification whereof the question is 2. After their own glosse its righteousness only aestimativè not therefore formally Sometimes again they make righteousness depend on faith as a preparation thereto in part necessary to dispose the subject to receive justification that is as they term it the infusion of charity and other graces whereby we are made formally righteous Versipelles Where may we finde you Is it the form of righteousness and yet but a preparation to righteousness Ob. The form inchoate not compleat Answ But I demand Is it before the other graces of God in time Or are they togethes with it infused If so how then make you yet a preparation only to righteousness when as together with it other gifts which make up righteousness compleate are infused Let us leave them and come to explications of our own Divines Some thus Righteousness or justification hath its connexion with faith by an order that God hath been pleased to set down in the Covenant of grace which is this that whosoever shall believe in Christ shall be justified and saved This condition now performed on our parts justification is ours and we are as righteous in Gods esteem as if we had all the righteousness of the Law performed by our selves Now this is an evident and clear truth that in the Evangelical Covenant faith is the condition of justification But first if faith justifies us as a condition performed by us fain I would know how we may maintain that doctrine of our Churches concerning sole faith and its being the only thing in us that avails to the attainment of justification for if we view the tenour of the Covenant of grace faith is not the only condition required of us to justification and remission of sins for repentance also is a condition required in that covenant to the same end Mar. 1.15 Repent and believe the Gospel Act. 2.38 Repent and be baptized for remission of sins but faith must so justifie that in that work no other thing may share with it no not repentance it self Ergo Besides this if the act of faith qua actus be that for which we are justified how doth the Apostle describe our righteousness to be without works vers 6. How sets he the worker and believer in direct opposition in the articles of justification Perhaps it will be said that works of the law only are excluded not this which is a worker of the Gospel Answ It should seem that not only works of the law but universally all works are excluded because whatsoever may occasion boasting in man is exclnded Rom. 3.27 Now as great occasion of boasting is left to man in the act of faith as in any work of the law whatsoever Nay may some mansay for faith is the gift of God and the exercise of faith meerly his work Answ The same may as truly be said of love patience c. These being also gifts infused of God and their actions even every act of them meerly his works in us even as meerly as the act of faith It remains then that we enquire whether in the other explanations of our Divines more likelihood may be found Usully it s thus conceived to justifie namely as it is an instrument to apprehend that righteousness for which we are justified even the * 1. Cor. 1.30 righteousness of Christ whether of this life or death or both it is not pertinent to this place to enquire but in this respect righteousness is ascribed unto it And here we are asked whether we
finde faith to have any such act or office as to apprehend and receive Christ and his righteousness Answ Amongst other places that is pregnant Rom. 5.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est oblatam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fidei videlicet manu Beza Where believers are deseribed to be such as receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness that receive to wit by faith as by a hand the gift of righteousness that is the righteousnes of Christ given unto us After this sentence we see how faith alone justifieth namely because faith only hath fitness to receive the gift of righteousness This laid also for a ground boasting is excluded in every respect which after all other explanations is left in some respect unto men Thus also is the comfort of conscience left provided for when Gods children shall be taught out of the word of God that the righteousness whereby they are justified before God is so absolute and every way perfect as is that of Christ and that it sufficeth them to justification that they receive it whether by strong or weak Faith the virtue of Righteousness being stil the same when it is received in what measure soever it be received As the alms given is of the same benefit whether the hand that receives it be steady or shaking so it be received The summe of all is this sith Faith is accepted to Justification neither in respect of the Worth of it to procure it nor yet as being the Form of righteousness nor as a Preparation nor as a Condition It remains that it justifieth Instrumentally onely or because it apprehends that for which we are justified namely the merit and Righteousness of Christ For Use of this point let it be this It affords Comfort to every weary soul groaning under the burthen of sinne and pressed with the Terrours of the Almighty and affrighted with the Curse of the Law due to Transgressions If thou believe in the Lord Jesus and hast received this grace by faith to receive his righteousness offered in the Gospel thy sins are forgiven and shall never be imputed to Condemnation Thou standest as just in Gods sight as if thou hadst in thine own person performed exactly the whole obedience that the Law requires And let no man say it is true if they could firmly believe as Abraham but their faith is so weak and wavering that even for it Condemnation is due them Answ For this Consider that it is not the strength of Faith that justifies not Faith as an Act wherein our Righteousness stands but it is that which Faith apprehends that justifies even the obedience and righteousness of Christ That apprehended truly in what measure soever covers all defects not onely of Legall obedience but even of Faith it self A second thing here observable is this That whereas to Abraham that had now long time been Regenerate and in state of grace had done many works of Piety and obedience Yet Faith is still counted to Righteousness it follows well that whole justification is absolved in Faith and that Faith is not onely the beginning of Righteousness but the very complement thereof And Bellarm. qua supra it is to be observed against that errour of Romanists that to evade the direct testimonies of Scripture against Justification by works and for that by Faith alone have devised a distinction of Justification It is say they Concil Trident Sess 6. of two sorts The First whereby a man of unjust is made just and that stands in two things 1. Remission of sins 2. Infusion of gracious habits whereby the heart of man is disposed and inclined to actuall justice The Second is that whereby a man of Righteous becomes more righteous encreasing the habits infused by exercise of them in doing good works The First of these is ascribed to Faith The Second to good works Now To omit that in this Doctrine they confound things to be distinguished namely Justification and Sanctification There is no ground for this distinction of justification in Scriptures nay grounds many against it For 1. If good works have this force to make us more justified in the sight of God how comes it to pass that Abrahams Iustification is still ascribed to faith For that the place Gen. 15.6 is to be understood de secunda justificatione Sasbout confesseth Sasbout ad locum Besides this the Apostle Phil. 3.9 apertly declares his whole justification both in his first Conversion Kemnit in Exam. in that time wherein he wrote yea at the day of Resurrection to be wholly and meerly absolved in Faith And surely if there were such virtue in the exercise of Good works as to make us more justified in the sight of God Saint Paul did fondly count so basely of them as to call them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dung and loss Add hereunto that the Apostle 1 Cor. 4.4 speaking of the righteousness wherein he lived after his Conversion yet plainly disclaims opinion of justification thereby he was privy to himself of no insincerity in his calling having since his calling lived in all good conscience yet saith he I am not hereby justified What shall we say he speaks of his first justification as if it could possibly be thought that the works not yet extant could be the means of that justification which he had before he had works More I adde not We will now proceed to that which followeth VERS 4. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt The applying of these verses to the Apostles purpose see in the Analysis Sense To him that worketh That is say some that presumes of his works others that deservs by his works Thus rather To him that hath or brings works to God The wages or reward What is the wages here mentioned Paraeus Some take the Apostle to reason out of a principle in Civil life by similtude applyed to this purpose but the Antithesis bears it not Wages here understand Synecdechicè put for estimation of righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is say some is not imputed but the Catachresis is too hard and abhorrent from all custome of speech Cajetan Is notreckoned that is not paid saith Cajetan What if we say the speech is borrowed from the custome of Common life on this manner That the Lord should be imagined after the manner of men to keep his book of accounts wherein the records both the behaviours of men and the wages due unto them according to the same It s not much unlike that we fiud Mal. 3.16 Let us for the purpose imagine the Lord the great distributor of reward according to the double covenant of works and grace to have referred all men to two ranks viz. Workers and Believers to resolve with himself to crown both with a sentence of righteousness according as they bring to him either works such as the Law prescribes or
life How many incredulous yea opposites to faith hath he by his word brought to the obedience of the faith His hand is not shortned it is ever true of him He can quicken the dead and still by his word give being to things that erst had no subsistence This may serve to direct us in use of these marvellous effects of Gods power for stablishing of faith And of the first member of this Chapter thus far The second followeth from the 18th verse to the 23. VERS 18. Who against hope believed in hope that he might become the father of many nations according to that which was spoken so shall thy seed be IN this verse and the four that follow the Apostle digresseth a little from his principall conclusion to a commendation of Abrahams faith The scope whereof seems this To prescribe us a form of Believing and to direct us a course for the establishing of our faith required of us to justification both which we may learn from the example of Abraham the father and pattern of Believers The specialties commendable in Abrahams faith expressed in this verse are two 1. His courage 2. His prudence in Believing His courage in that against hope he believed in hope Sense Against hope in hope How reconcile we Against hope which naturall course could afford In hope by meditation of Gods power and truth conceived He had promise to be father not of children onely but of whole nations the course of nature contradicted it His body dead and unfit for generation with Sarah besides her wonted barrenness it ceased to be after the manner of women so that in respect of means naturall causes there were many of despairing none of hope yet believed he the promise in the largest extent knowing that Gods power transcends nature Observ From whose example we learn in the midst of despair still to hope where we have Gods promise for our warrant Besides Abrahams example we have like practice in Job a mirrour not of patience onely but of faith Who would rest on him for life whom he feels wounding even to Death Yet Though he kill me saith Job I will trust in him Job 13.15 To their practice let us add the consideration of defects in this kind severely punished in Moses Num. 11.13 20 21 22. The incredulous Prince 2 King 7.1 2 17. Zachary Luke 1.18 20 22. In a word In Believing there are four degrees one more excellent then another 1. That which is exercised in sufficiency of means 2. Where the means are weak and improportionate to the promise 3. In the want of means 4. Where are means strongly opposing the accomplishment of the promise this the highest degree of faith so commendable in Abraham Vse Brethren we all profess our selves the sonnes and daughters of Abraham Gal. 3.29 His children we are if we walk in the steps of his faith Iohn 8.39 and labour therein to resemble Let us be exhorted not onely in believing but in the very measure of faith to hold correspondence above hope yea against hope to believe in hope above sense yea against sense to believe what the Lord hath promised There fall out times with Gods children when if we shall make sense or naturall causes the measure of faith a thousand to one but we are swallowed up of despair The Lord sometimes writes bitter things against us and makes us possess the sinnes of our youth seems to surcharge Conscience with imputation of those sinnes the pardon whereof he commands us to believe What shall a poor soul do in this case to keep it self to the task of faith Surely what thou feelest God to impute believe he will pardon to thy repentance for so runs the promise There are times when we may feel decayes of grace and declinings in obedience yet sith it is his promise to give perseverence without interruption believe thou shalt stand even while thou thinkest thou art falling c. Helps to stablish faith in this kind are these 1. To rest on the naked promise of God 2. Consideration of the transcendency of Gods power able to work without above yea against nature Ephes 3.20 to do as * Paul speaks exceeding abundantly above all that we can ask or think 3. Observation of the Lords dealing with others or our selves accomplishing his promises beyond all expectation The second commendable specialty in Abrahams faith here mentioned is his prudence in believing according to that which was spoken Observ Whence learn we That the rule and measure of a wise mans faith is the word of God so that all the Lord speaks must be believed onely what he speaks must be believed And in this generall we and Papists accord The rule and object of Christian faith is Veritas prima and the adaequatum objectum of faith is the Word of God But that word say they is of two sorts Scriptum Traditum Written and Traditionary Both these together make us a perfect rule of faith Scripture without Tradition is regula but partialis Bellarm. de verb. Dei non scripto lib. 4. cap. 12. That which is taught for Gods truth in our Church is this That the Scripture contains doctrine and direction all-sufficient for faith and practice necessary to salvation so that there is no more to be believed or done upon pain of damnation then what is contained in the written word of God For explanation the contents of Scripture we conceive to be not only what is here immediately and in express terms taught but all whatsoever may thence be diduced by just and necessary consequence out of generalls causes equalls c. Our arguments are these 2 Tim. 3.14.15 The Scriptures saith Paul to Timothy are able to make thee wise to salvation to make the man of God perfect throughly furnished unto every good work Afford they us wisdome sufficient to salvation Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 11. ubi supra therefore they contain doctrine sufficient for faith and practice And that there may be no place for that idle evasion of our adversaries limitting the sufficiency of written doctrine to what is necessary for Laiques Both Timothy was a Bishop and him they they were able to make wise to salvation and generally saith the Apostle they completely furnish the man of God that is the Minister to every good work of his calling Our Second argument is this The written rule of practice we are sure is perfect both for that the Lord gives so strait charge to add nothing thereto Deut. 4.2 Prov. 30.6 Rev. 22.18 and because there cannot the duty be named which the Law of God prescribeth not nor the sin thought of which it forbids not May we think to evade this testimony with that Nicety of Bellarmine add not by depraving the sense nay as appears by the Lords own often reproof of doctrins of men in matter of his worship Isai 29.13 and his heavy judgments on those that altered but circumstances of his prescripts Levit. 10. additions as well
was fully assured 2. The matter subject of his perswasion or the Proposition to which Abraham thus fully assented That what God had promised he was able to perform where we may also conceive to be implyed the grounds of Abrahams so firm believing The promise and power of God Observ From the First we observe That faith in her strength Beza Paraeus ad loc Calvin Instit and perfection hath firmness yea fulness of assurance others otherwise conceive the note and thus collect That fulness of perswasion is of the nature and essence of Faith That none of Gods children erre to their discomfort thinking they have no truth of believing because they want fulness of perswasion thus much understand That in exact defining the custome is to consider virtues c. Abstractly from their subjects 2. In such abstraction to express their nature in terms importing their greatest excellency and perfection 3. Virtues morall and Theologicall they describe not as they are in our practice but as they ought to be by Gods prescript What now if faith in us be doubtfull yet in it self and according to its own nature it is a full perswasion What though in the disposition and beginnings it be wavering yet in the excellency and perfection it is of infallible certainty What if our practice of faith be weak yet God requires perfection of it and our striving must be to perfection prescribed Vse Thus let us use it As an occasion to humble our selves for our doubtings Augustin Epist 29. ad Hieron for that which Augustine saith of charity is as true of faith profectò illud quod minus est quà m debt ex vitio est yet thus much withall Let us not so far deject our selves as to think we have no truth of faith because we want perfection and fulness of assurance yet may faith be in truth where that measure is not attained See Annot. ad vers 20. as the truth of humane nature in an infant wanting the strength of grown men The matter of Abrahams perswasion followeth That what he had promised he was able also to perform The points observable are 1. That faith even justifying is an assent rather then affiance having for his object terminum complexum whereof see Annot. ad vers 3. 2. Take notice of two speciall grounds for faith to rest on the promise and power of God both joyntly considered establish faith sever either from other thou makest faith either phantasticall or wavering Hereof see Annot. ad ver 17. VERS 22. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness THe fruit of Abrahams faith is here expressed that is his justification The depravations of this Scripture by Adversaries are many Let us briefly take view of them The first is from the illation Therefore it was imputed c. Hence they collect that faith avails to justification virtuously and by way of merit Man is justified by faith not because it apprehends the promise but because it obteins remission of sinns suo quodam modo etiam mereatur how infer they the conclusion out of this Scripture The Apostle in this place saith Bellarmine Bellar. de just lib. 1. cap. 17. sets down the cause why Abrahams faith was reputed justice to wit because by believing he gave glory to God therefore for the merit of that faith he justified Abraham Where first let us weigh how they utterly crosse the intention of the Apostle in his whole discourse which is to exclude all merits of men from justification can we imagine he excludes the merit of other works to substitute the merit of faith 2. Besides that it is easily observable that the Apostle maintains a continuall opposition betwixt faith and merit as ver 4. To their argument thus we answer That the Apostles illation indeed implyes a sequel of justification upon the performance of faith yet none such as is caused by the merit and excellency of the gifs or work of faith above other works and this is that deceives them that they can conceive no connexion betwixt our offices and Gods benefits but what the worth and merit of our performances causeth Know we therefore 1. That there is an infallible connexion betwixt faith and justification so that every one believing is without faith justified But 2. If the reason of this connexion be demanded it is apparently Gods covenant and promise therefore shall every believer receive remission of sins because so runs the promise in the covenant of grace Believe and thy sins shall be forgiven August de verb. Apost Serm. 16. Augustines speech for the generall let be remembred Debitor factus est Deus non aliquid à nobis accipiendo sed quod ei placuit promittendo Abraham believed and was therefore justified the cause if we seek is the promise of God not the worth of his faith which 1. Is a duty 2. Gods gift 3. In us imperfect And if Abrahams faith were the meritorious cause of his justification I demand whether as faith or as such faith that is whether in respect that he believed or in respect that he believed in this full measure was he justified If in respect of his measure then methinks it will follow that only such measure of faith sufficeth to justification so the disciples of Christ so doubtfull and wavering in many main articles till after Christs ascension must be reputed for that time unjustified if faith simply in what measure soever then can it not be meritorious sith in the beginnings it is so ful of imperfection Thus I conclude Faith is an antecedent no cause properly of justification justification a consequent of believing no effect issuing out of the virtue and merit of faith Trelcat Instit de justific the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore notes not the cause of the consequent but of the sequel or consequence saith a learned Divine Their second collection is this Rhemens ad loc That faith justifying is a generall faith whereby we assent to the truth of Gods speeches in generall Bellarm. de justif lib. 1. cap. 11. and no such speciall faith or affiance as Protestants require to justification Their reason The faith whereby Abraham was justified was no other then this A general perswasion of Gods faithfulness and power at large Ergò Answ The question hath been largely handled ad vers 3. whither I refer the Reader To their argument thus I answer their antecedent is untrue Abrahams faith was not of Gods truth and power in generall onely but of both applyed to the particular promised From these generals he concluded the particular touching the seed in whom all nations should be blessed In his believing and the matter of it we must conceive something propounded and considered as a conclusion somthing as an argument or premisses inferring the conclusion to both which Abraham assented To the conclusion by virtue of the premisses The conclusion was particular I shall have a seed in whom all
nations and my self also shall be blessed The premisses these God that hath promised is faithfull and able to give it In respect of the premisses his faith is generall In respect of the conclusion particular as we see In like sort we conceive the faith of every justified man to proceed from generalls to their own particular and to the particular by virtue of the generals Assent they yield to generals but with reference still to particulars For example That which for comfort of conscience cast down by the Law they believe is this particular conclusion My sins are or shall be forgiven me How come they to believe this particular Answ By belief of generals The sins of all that believe in Christ are for Christs sake forgiven according to Gods promises in the Evangelical Covenant therefore my sins are forgiven me since I have received by grace to rest on Christ for the pardon of my sins so is faith justifying Generall in respect of the premisses Particular in respect of the conclusion Their third deduction Faith concurrs to justification not as an instrument but as the formal cause of our righteousness For Abrahams faith was imputed justice c. Bellarm. de justif l. 1. c. 2. Ipsa fides censetur esse justitia Answ Whether whole justice or justice in part They answer justice in part for it is only Initium justitiae according to their conceit The sense then must be this absurdly Faith is counted justice that is the beginning of justice And Abrahams faith must be his justice in part only whereas the Apostle ascribes to Abraham whole justification in respect of his faith or else forgets the state of the question For this Scripture the sense is this Sense Abrahams faith was imputed to righteousness that is set on his score or taken notice of so far that the Lord in respect of it allowed him the esteem of righteousness See supra ad vers 3 4 5. The substance of Doctrine conceived in this verse hath been already handled ad vers 3. Pass we from it therefore to the third member of the Chapter the applying of all that hath been said of Abrahams justification to us VERS 23 24 25. Now it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him But for us also to whom it shall be imputed if we believe on him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead Who was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our justification THe passage to this last member we may thus conceive The Apostle supposeth some weakling thus to enquire It is true Theophylact. ad loc quid nostra interest thou hast taught of Abraham that his faith was to him imputed to righteousness But what is that to us Answ It was not written for him only as matter of his glory and priviledg but for us also for our profit and comfort The points of the text are three First The use and comfort arising to us from the records of Abrahams justification Secondly The condition required of us to the end we may share with Abraham in the blessing of justification Thirdly The Reason brought to assure us of like favour in like faith c. for better confirming the comfort unto us It was not written for him only c. but for us also Where first observe we The method of conversing in the histories of the Saints let it still be with reference to our selves and our use They were written for us see Rom. 15.4 Heb. 11. and 12. Their favours for our comfort their chastisements for our terrour their vertues to our patterns their falls for our caution And it is idle to conceit them as encomiasticall narrations of their glory only Gods Spirit intended their records to our benefit A Second generall here observable is That Gods mercifull proceedings with his children are exemplary he justified Abraham believing he shall justifie us also performing like faith He pardoneth Paul repenting his blasphemies and made him a pattern to all that shall believe in him to eternall life 1 Tim. 1.16 He saved Noah from the deluge delivered Lot from the fire of Sodome Peters inference from these particulars is this generall God knows to deliver his out of temptation 2 Pet. 2.9 It is therefore a discomfortable misprision of Gods Children in temptations to conceive Gods favour as the priviledges of some eminent amongst his Saints and their great weakness to study differences betwixt themselves and others in points of necessary comforts For to yield that there were that had their speciall prerogatives in some particulars as Prophets to be taught by dreams and visions and immediate inspirations c. Yet in matter generally necessary for comfort of conscience and eternall salvation what was vouchsafed one may be expected of all 1. The Covenant is made with all without difference with the least as well as with the greatest Ier. 32.40 2. The mediation of Christ available for all 1 Tim. 2.4 of all sorts sexes nations and ranks of men God is he the God of Abraham only nay even of his seed also Christ is he the Mediatour for Apostles only nay even for all that the Lord hath given him out of the world Ioh. 17.9 Their is neither male nor female bond nor free weak nor strong but all are one in Christ Jesus The same blood of Christ redeemed all the same love of God embraced all the same spirit seals all to the day of redemption the impression in some is more evident then in others the image all one wherewith all are stamped and thereby sealed unto the day of redemption The only thing that concerns us is to provide we resemble in our behaviour the Lord we shall finde impartiall in his favours if we be not dissonant in our demeanure and that is the next thing the text leads unto To us it shall be imputed as to Abraham believing as Abraham in him that raised up Iesus from the dead Observ The generall instruction the text affords is this That a man desiring to partake the favours of the Saints must be carefull to resemble the practice of Saints Wouldest thou be justified as Abraham believe as Abraham pardoned as Paul repent as Paul delivered as Lot be righteous as Lot The same God is a like to all in his blessings that are alike to him in their obedience There is a generation of men enviously emulous of the priviledges of Gods Children dissolutely careless of their behaviour Let my soul dye the death of the righteous saith Balaam but the hellish wretch cares not to live the life of the righteous Bernard in Psal qui Habitat Ser. 7. life of the righteous Tantus est pietatis fructus saith Bernard tanta justitiae merces ut ne ab ipsis quidem non desiderari queat impiis injustis I would the conditions might seem as reasonable as the reward is glorious But the complaint of that Father who sees it not fitting the times quam
pauci post te o domine Iesu ire volunt cum tamen ad te pervenire Nemo sit qui nolit Lord Jesu How few are they that are willing to go after thee when as yet there is no man but desires to come unto thee as knowing that at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore Et propterea volunt omnes te frui at non ita imitari conregnare cupiunt sed non compati Hence is it that all men would enjoy thee but they like not so well to resemble thee fain they would raign with thee loath they are to suffer with thee Et mox mortem spiritualium optant sibi etiam carnales quorum tamen vitam abhorrent Brethren like rewards require like labours like favours like duties They fail not of Abrahams blessing that follow Abrahams faith and let them never expect his comforts that refuse to resemble his virtues That for the Generall View we now the Words wherein are two things First The duty it self required of us to the end we may share with Abraham in the blessing of justification believing in God Secondly The object thereof God set out here by a periphrasis who raised up Iesus from the dead Sense Sense Believing in God The words thought not delivered in that form yet import the condition required of us to justification and are therefore well rendred according to the sense by some translatours If we believe or so that we believe Some here conceive the Apostle to deliver us the nature of justifying faith and to resolve us that it is rather an affiance or putting trust in God then an assent or giving credit to the truth of his promise The question hath been largely discussed ad vers 3. Whether I remit the Reader We may better hence collect the necessity of putting trust in God for righteousness to justification then a description of the faith that justifieth And that is it the Apostle directly teacheth that to justification is necessary a relying upon God through Christ and putting confidence in him for justification and withall the infallible sequel of justification upon our confidence placed in God for that blessing As touching the nature of faith justifying the Apostle intends not here to teach us yet shall it not be amiss on this occasion to propound some arguments brought for that conclusion as I heard them lately in conference with a friend reverend for learning and piety Mr. J.D. His judgment was that faith justifying was rather an affiance and resting on Christ for righteousness then a perswasion of Gods love in Christ or an assent to the promises of the Gospel His arguments these First Faith that justifieth be it what it will be must needs go before justification it self so doth affiance so not particular faith For it must first be true that God justifieth me before I can believe it and in order of nature there is truth in the proposition before the assent is given to the truth of it Answ The propositions of the Gospel we may conceive to offer themselves to our minde either in terms of the future tense or sub verbis de praesenti or praeterito As thus God will pardon my sins and accept me to his favour for Christ or thus God hath pardoned my sins and doth accept me as righteous in Christ accordingly the assent thereto is either as to a thing that shall be or as to a thing already done In the first obtaining of justification the assent of faith is to the proposition De futuro and that we are sure had actual truth from everlasting concerning all those that shall be heirs of salvation The assent to the proposition de praesenti or praeterito is in order of nature after justification In time for all that they are simul the proposition de futuro is in nature before it so soon as I believe that God will pardon he pardons Before I believe that he hath pardoned he hath pardoned And that I think may suffice to assoyl that doubt so expertly and acutely contrived Besides this they should attend that the affiance they speak of issues out of the perswasion we have of Gods love to us in Christ for who can relye on God for righteousness and salvation that hath not some perswasion that God is a father to him in Christ So that what argument concludes the precedence of confidence to justification concluds much more a precedence of particular assent out of which as out of a fountain that affiance issueth And howsoever it be true that such assent as is spoken of receives strength from our affiance yet from it no otherwise then from other gifts of sanctification namely as from evidences and signes and as I may term them qualifications of our persons and dispositions as it were to entitle us to the Promises or rather to evidence the title we have according to the Covenant unto the merits and benefits of Christ The second argument was as I conceived it on this manner To faith justifying all men are bound To particular perswasion of Gods will to pardon sins all are not bound For God binds no man to believe an untruth there are some of whom it never was nor shall be true that God will pardon their sins as Reprobates Ergó Answ Zanch. de natura Dei lib. 5. c. 2. That which is ground of his Argument I confess I find amongst our Divines more resolutely determined then distinctly explained Their conclusion is that all men even Reprobates are bound to believe that they are in Christ Elected to Salvation These reasons seem to make against it First for that there are and ever have been many to whom the name of Christ or the benefits in him conveyed unto us were never known And Paul seems to say of such Rom. 2.12 as sin without the Law they shall perish without the Law By proportion we may say They that sin without the Gospel shall perish without the Gospel The not giving credit thereto shall not be imputed to their condemnation in as much as it was never revealed unto them By consequence therefore there was no bond upon their conscience to believe it Moreover particular assent riseth from that particular Testimony of Gods spirit with ours Rom. 8.16 Which who can say to be vouchsafed to Reprobates But yield ex abundanti that Reprobates at least in the Church are bound to believe it What then It follows thence that God binds them to believe an untruth Answ An untruth in the thing No untruth to them except by their own default because that howsoever God hath revealed that there are some Reprobates Yet reveals he to no man in this life his own Reprobation And as the rule of our actions is not Gods secret but revealed will so the rule and measure of Faith is not truth secretted but truth revealed St. August Enchirid ad Laurent Augustine sticks not to say that a man may will what is contrary to
the will of God He means his secret will and yet in so willing Not sinne For Example A child in the mortall disease of his father may desire the life of his father such desire the event proves contrary to the will of God yet is no sinne because Gods will revealed warrants such desire to us Let us see whether we may not find some semblance in the point of Believing In Hezekiah his sickness Isa 38. the Lord sends Isaiah with that message Thou must die An untruth in the event and according to Gods secret purpose yet can we doubt but Hezekiah therein was bound to give credit to the Prophet Similiter To make full the answer Thus let us conceive Look as Gods promises are propound to be believed of particulars so and no otherwise are we bound to believe them how are they propounded Hypothetically rather then Categorically with limitation rather then Absolutely For Example How am I bound my sinnes shall be forgiven To wit Hypothetically If I believe in Christ and repent my sinnes How to believe I shall be saved To wit Hypothetically if I keep precisely the way that leadeth unto life separate the Hypothesis either in mine understanding or practice I am not bound to believe the Remission of my sinnes nay I am bound not to believe it For there is no mandate in the word that tyes an impenitent sinner so continuing to believe that his sinnes are forgiven nay there is something equivalent to a mandate enjoyning in such case to believe the contrary inasmuch as God hath revealed that he will not be mercifull to such an one as goeth on still in his wickedness The summe is this Reprobates are bound to particular faith Hypothetically Absolutely they are not bound shall we say now their binding to such belief binds them to believe an untruth Nothing less For it is true of every particular If he repent His sinnes shall be forgiven him this is ever true and thus onely are the promises propounded to faith of particulars And it is never true that God will pardon any mans sinnes except he repent and believe the Gospel Thus farre by the way in answer to these Arguments rather wittily couched then soundly concluding the purpose Let us now return to the Apostle and from him learn 1. That Confidence in God for righteousness through Christ is necessary to justification 2. That justification belongs to all relying upon God in Christ for righteousness What should I belong it is the testimony of all the Prophets saith Peter given unto Christ that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sinnes Acts 10.41 and it is Christs own assertion that As Whosoever believeth on the sonne of God hath everlasting life So Whosoever believeth not in him shall never see life but the wrath of God abideth on him See John 3.15 16 18.36 Item 1 John 5.13 Where fitly falls in the question Whether any confidence may be placed in our works or gifts of righteousness for justification and salvation For better conceiving the truth in this kind know we that there is a main odds betwixt these two questions 1. Whether our confidence and settled hope of salvation rise from our works and 2. Whether confidence may be placed in our works The one for my part I yield to them in a sense professing my self herein of Lumbards minde Lumbard l. 3. dist 26. Bonavent ad Loc. Magist that our hope ariseth partly from precedent works though the term of merit I abhor Thus conceive it In hope and confidence we must consider 1. The habit 2. The act or exercise of it The habit is meerly of Gods grace infused the act ariseth in part from presence and view of our obedience Bellarm. de justifil 5. c. 7. The places are pregnant 2 Tim. 4. 1 Ioh. 3.3 And Bellarmines reason is not to be condemned the obtaining of falvation depends chiefly on Gods fidelity but in part also on our works of obedience therefore as hope were not certain if we should do good works and God were not faithfull so neither can it be certain if God be faithfull and we neglect good works And from this doctrine our best Divines are not abhorrent all good works which are done in true faith Zanch. in praecept 1. cap. 13 De Spe. avail to confirm faith of the glory that shall be revealed saith Zanchius Non inficiamur c. We deny not but that by the gifts of God bestowed on us our hope of obtaining the good things to come and of having eternall life is confirmed And it is a truth that Thomas hath his term being mollified Spes dicitur ex operibus provenire quantum ad ipsam rem exspectatam For I demand from what evidence conclude we that we shall be saved but from our obedience In all the discourses tending to confirm our assurance whether of faith or hope see if the minor must not be framed out of presence of inherent righteousness For instance How conclude I that Christ is to me Author of salvation The proposition we have in Paul Christ is Author of salvation to all that obey him Heb. 5.9 The minor my conscience must yield me I obey him else can I not rightly conclude that to me Christ is author of salvation Nullus recte sperat beatitudinem nisi qui deo servivit vel proponit deo servire saith Bonaventure truely The difficulty is onely how our hope respects our obedience whether as a cause of salvation or as an evidence and signe onely of our having title to salvation Lumbard qua supra Thus I think we may truly resolve though obedience be a partiall cause of hope as hath now been said yet it is an evidence rather then in property of speech a cause of salvation And in that sense we may yield to Lumbard his description of Hope mitigating one term onely Hope is a certain expectation of future blessedness arising from Gods grace and works precedent and sine operibus bonis aliquid sperare non spes sed praesumptio dici potest Bern. fol. 31. It is infidelis fiducia saith Bernard cùm videlicet in spe peccamus The other question nearly concerns the place Whether confidence for salvation may be placed in our works Here our Adversaries thus mince it Bellarm. de justific lib. 5. cap. 7. The chiefety of our hope and confidence must be placed in God yet in bonis meritis quae verè talia esse compertum sit fiducia aliqua collocari potest modò superbia caveatur and again sithence hope may be placed in our merits if they be true merits sobriè id fiat handsome cautions and limits put to such a conclusion 1. If they be true merits 2. If it be done without pride and with moderation With such impossible and incompatible Hypotheses what conclusion so absurd but may be holden for true Yield we that Adams fall hath not hurt his posterity by depraving
would thus be understood not that it excludes beliefe of the rest of Gods word but that as it justifies it respects only the Gospel And further this assent they make of two sorts one generall whereby we believe the Gospel to be true another speciall whereby we believe it to be true to us A third sort there are that make it meerly an affiance or confidence in God and his Christ for pardon of sins and salvation The last is of them that make it partly an assent particular partly affiance of these let us enquire which comes nearest unto the truth As touching that of Papists making it only a generall assent to the truth of the whole word of God without any particularlizing either of the object or of the assent The reasons are forcible against it First For that by this means justification is extended to sundry reprobates yea after a sort to divells for if this be the faith that justifyeth namely whereby men assent to the truth of the word of God Iam. 2.19 then must all in whom such faith is be partakers of justification but only the * Rom. 8.30 predestinate are justified reprobates and divells not so Ergo. Secondly Our next reason is from the effects of faith justifying one speciall whereof is that it makes our service all * Heb. 11.6 acceptable to God through Iesus Christ Now how a generall assent to the truth of Gods word without a particular perswasion of his love to us in Christ should thus sweeten our services I would have them explain sith none pleaseth 1 Ioh. 4.19 but what issues from love of God and that again flowes from our perswasion of Gods love to us in Christ Add unto this those other gracious effects or faith justifying as that it breeds peace of conscience Rom. 5.1 Patience yea joy in afflictions under hope certain of glory boldness of appearing before God in prayers c. yea in the day of judgment Can these be imagined to flow from generall faith These and many the like reasons sufficiently overthrow that dream of generall faith Let us examine these Reasons the summe of them I will briefly propound The First lyes thus the faith described by the Apostle Heb. 11. is not a speciall perswasion of Gods speciall mercy or an affiance therein but only a generall assent to the truth of the whole word of God But the faith there described is justifying faith Ergò Justifying faith is not a perswasion of Gods speciall mercie or a confidence therein but a general assent to the truth of the whole word of God Answ To the minor I thus answer that its easily confessed that the Apostle in that whole Chapter describes that faith that justifies But whether he intend an exact definition of the nature of it as it justifieth or rather a setting out and commendation thereof by the effects and properties is the question And its apparent that the Apostles purpose is not so much to give us an exact definition of the nature of it as to exhort to continue therein by arguments drawn from the properties and wonderfull effects that were wrought by it in the Saints that have gone before us as appears there and in Hebr. 10. and 12.1.2 For first think we the Apostle so ill an Artist as to compose his definition of Terms amost all figurative as ver 1. if he desired exactly to set down the nature of it to our understanding Besides that some of the effects ascribed there to faith are particular and almost personally belonging to the Saints there mentioned and which we cannot but foolishly expect to be wrought by our faith Now had the Apostle there intended to describe that faith that justifieth so as to shew us the nature thereof as it justifieth impertinently had those works as miraculous and of personall obedience been there inserted To the Major it is denied Even the faith there described is a speciall perswasion of Gods speciall mercy and an affiance therein For what though there be no mention made of any such specialty either of the perswasion or of the object or of the affiance cannot it therefore be such because it s there described by effects and properties The Apostle 1. Cor. 13 describes unto us at large true Christian charity by Necessity Effects perpetuall endurance shall we now say that Charity is no benevolous or wel-wishing affection towards our neighbour because there is no express mention made thereof where it is purposely described Adde unto this That this speciall perswasion of Gods love in Christ and affiance in his mercy is there necessarily included it being impossible that any of these works of obedience could have been either so couragiously undertaken or so acceptably performed had they not had even such faith as we now enquire of Their second reason lies thus The faith which Christ required commended exhorted unto approved with miracles was onely a generall assent to the truth of the word of God as Matth. 9. and 16. Luke 7. Ioh. 1. c. But that faith which Christ so required and commended c. was faith justifying Ergò Justifying faith is onely a generall assent to the truth of the word of God or as Bellarmine himself inferrs the conclusion Kemnit qua suprà it hath for the object something else besides Gods speciall Mercy Answ If that be the conclusion it was never denied by our Divines but that the faith that justifieth hath for the object not speciall mercy onely but the whole word of God If that therefore be the conclusion the Adversary proves what is not denied For we grant if they will needs have it that its the same faith which believes both the History in generall and which receives and rests on the speciall mercie of God for justification But the questions be 1. Whether generall faith alone suffice to justification 2. Whether the object of faith justifying as it is justifying be the promises of the Gospel as they concern us The first of these we deny the second we avow and prove ut suprà there is none of us that ever denied but that its the same faith which assents to the truth of the word of God in generall and which justifieth us in the sight of God But if we speak of faith as its justifying so we say it respects particularly the promise of the Gospel I illustrate what I mean by this similitude It s the same soul whereby a man lives moves exerciseth sense and useth reason but yet if the question be What it is in the soul that forms a man to his particular nature We say it s the soul not as it gives life motion or sense but as it useth reason Even so c. Now to the proofs of the adverse part I answer that the Major is untrue The faith which Christ required was not onely a generall assent to the truth of the word of God concerning his person power offices c. but principally it was
particular assent and affiance also in him as the Messiah promised as by view of some of the principall obligations will appear For think we the acknowledgment of this proposition in generall That Jesus Christ is the Son of God is that See Joh. 20. and 1 Ioh. 5. that justifieth and saveth Then how fail Divells of justification yea and of eternall life that sensibly acknowledg him to be Jesus the Son of the living God Mark 2. Besides what means our Saviour so often to invite us unto him and propounding the condition of eternall life to utter it in a phrase importing affiance as Ioh. 6.40 yea particular acknowledgment of him to be a Saviour unto us Lastly Thus I reason A Pari other parts and conclusions of Scripture propounded generally are to be believed not only as they concern the generall but particularly as having their truth in us Why not then these that propound remission of sins righteousness and salvation to be obtained by Christ For instance when the Scripture teacheth that every one is accursed that keeps not the Law that the wages of sin is death c. Binds it not me also to believe that I also for my sins am by nature subject to the curse that the proper wages for my sins is death When it propounds promises of temporall blessings as it doth to them that seeks Gods Kingdome and his righteousness ought not I to acknowledg this promise to belong to me and to place confidence in God for the performance Why then when the promise of remission of sins is made to believers binds it no me and every believer to assume that my sins are pardoned when it teacheth Christ to be the Saviour of the world and Author of Righteousness to those that obey him should I not say that Christ requiring generall faith intends also a particular applying of this generall to my self for my comfort and salvation More I add not in this kinde Two paradoxes only of Bellarmine Bellarm. l. 1. de justific cap. 8. I will briefly propound and so leave them The first is that faith is justifying though it have no respect to Gods speciall mercy The Second That it is not justifying if perhaps it have respect thereto The proofes have in them the quintessence of Iesuitical acumen The Leprous mans faith Mark 1. was a justifying faith and yet had no respect to speciall mercy Ergò Faith not respecting speciall mercy is justifying Answ The proposition needs proof inasmuch as many had faith for obtaining Miracles that had none at all touching the person of the Messiah Luk. 17. 2. How proves he that he had no speciall faith concerning remission of sins by Christ What because he doubts of his will for his cure As who say there may not be speciall faith touching pardon of sins even where there is doubt of obtaining some remporall blessing the one having a promise for Gods children to rest on the other not so but with limitation to expediency But will you see how he proves that faith is not justifying if it have respect to speciall mercy The Pharisee having it even because he had it was not justified Ergò Answ And was the Pharisees affiance in Gods speciall mercy the Reason why he was not justified Nay rather the vain boasting of his own righteousness as appears by the drift of the parable expressed Luk. 18.9 Vacuus proindè rediit Bernard de Annuc Ser. 3. ad calcem quia plenitudinem simulavit as S. Bernard and therefore failed he of justification not because he trusted on Gods speciall mercy to obtain it but for that he trusted in himself that he had it Some Ancients let us hear in this point Bernard de Annuc Serm. 1. saith Bernard Si credis pecoata tua non posse deleri nisi ab eo cui soli peccâsti in quem peccatum non cadit benè facis Sed adde adhuc ut hoc credas quia per ipsum Tibi peccata donantur hoc est Testimonium quod perhibit in corde nostro spiritus sanctus dicens dimissa sunt tibi Poccata Tua The Second opinion touching the nature of saith justifying as it is justifying is this that justifying faith is an assent not so much to the truth of the whole word of God as to the promises of the Gospell and that as having their truth in us The difference betwixt this and the Popish opinion stands in two things First in the object which they make the whole word of God these only the Doctrine of the Gospel Secondly In the manner of assenting which they make generall without any particular applying to our selves these particulars They consent in this that it is an act of the understanding rather then of the will perswasion rather then considence assent rather then affiance And for this they have these Reasons First For that the faith that justifieth is so often expressed in a phrase importing assent or giving credit as in this Scripture Abraham believed God that is gave credit to God promising to be his reward c. Similia vide Mark 1.15 Their Second Reason is because the object thereof is usually made the propositions of the Gospel and that which they call Terminum complexum or as Thomas speaks something propounded per modum enuntiabilis or to speak more plainly and agreeably to the phrase of Scripture a testimony which God gives in the word and in the heart See Rom. 8.16 Gal. 2.20 A Third Reason Because it seems strange that faith justifying should have divers seats or subjects The understanding as an assent the will as an affiance From hence and the like reasons it is concluded that faith justifying is an assent rather then affiance Now that it hath not for the proper object the whole word of God but rather only the doctrine of the gospel as it is justifying these Reasons evince First For that our Saviour prescribing the act limits out also the object and makes it the Gospel rather then any other part of the Scripture Mark 1.15 Secondly Kemn it in Exam. part 1. de Fide justisic For that in other parts of the word of God faith findes not what it may lay hold on for reconciliation remission of sins and justification but only in the Gospel that is the word of reconciliation there is Christ the Mediatour propounded there remission of sins promised For the Third branch that its a particular assent particular I mean not only in respect of the Subject but of the Object Examples prove Gal. 2.20 Christ loved me gave himself for me The generalls of the Gospel thus particularized are that which faith justifying as it is justifying respects by this faith Paul lived Secondly In point of believing there can else be no difference betwixt faith of Reprobates and that of the Elect betwixt faith of Divells and of justified men For it s an idle tenant of theirs that they make charity the form of faith a
faith in Christ If a man have works his works are taken notice of and recorded and withall his reward is thus registred after the Covenant of the Law Righteousness of Debt If a man want works but have faith his faith is recorded and to him also is ascribed or imputed the same reward though out of another cause Righteousness by favour The thing we have in the word of God and perhaps it is Allegorically expressed by allusion to the customs of men This I am sure is truth in the Legal Covenant If a man do the Commandments he shall live in them and the doers of the Law shall be iustified This also is true in the Evangelicall Covenant He that believes shall be saved and if a man believes in Christ his faith shall be reckoned of to iustification The reward is all one that God intends to both they differ 1. In the condition 2. In the ground of payment Righteousness is ascribed to the Worker of Debt to the Believer of Grace God should do the worker wrong if he should not approve him as righteous that hath fulfilled the Laws But it s his mere grace that to a believer he will ascribe righteousness sith his righteousness is merely precaria performed by another and by him nothing brought but faith to receive it and tender it unto God and that faith also merely the work of God If I fail in expressing my self or explaining the Apostle yet let no man blame my desire of both but further my weakness with his help that the Apostle may be understood Sense The sense then is this as I conceive it To him that hath works such as the Law prescribes and brings them unto God righteousness is ascribed or set on his reckoning as wages belonging to him of debt and not of grace VERS 5. But to him that worketh not We must beware that we mistake not the Apoâ—â—e as if he promised righteousness to him that believes and neglected good works Jam. 2.26 For the Apostle James hath taught us that faith without works is dead and if a man say he hath faith and have no works can that faith save him And the Apostle describing faith justifying as it is in the justified man saith it worketh by love Gal. 5.6 What is then the sense To him that worketh not that is hath no such works to bring before God as for them to claim righteousness thereby or as Ambrose expounds Ambros ad loc Non operanti id est qui obnoxius est peccatis quia non operatur quod mandat Lex To him that hath no works because he is a transgressour of the Law But believeth in him See here say some how faith justifying is described To be rather an affiance in the Justifier then an assent to the Gospel Answ Rather see here affiance meeting with assent in the person of the believer they agree in the subject differ for all that in their nature In him that justifieth the ungodly Doth the Lord then justifie the wicked Answ Surely though he be God that forgiveth iniquity and sin yet will he in no case clear the wicked Exod. 34.7 and Prov. 17.15 He professeth that he is as abominable that justifieth the wicked as he that condemns the righteous Answ Hereto answers are diversely conceived according as the terms admit distinction First thus Wicked men are of two sorts some such as continue impenitently in their sinns some that by grace repent and believe in Christ Of the first sort its true God justifies them not that is acquits them not while they so continue and yet wicked men repenting and believing in Christ that is ceasing to be wicked God clears and holds innocent for to such he forgives iniquity transgression and sinne Paraeus ad loc Exod. 34.7 or thus Justifying of a wicked man is either against the orders of Justice without receiving sufficient satisfaction for the trespasse or else upon receit of sufficient satisfaction In the first sense God justifieth not the wicked in the second he mercifully justifieth us having received satisfaction in the death of his Son Lasâ—ly Justification hath divers significations sometimes it signifies to make just sometimes to declare just or to absolve In this last sense God justifies not the ungodly that is absolves him not whiles he so continues but yet he makes an ungodly man righteous Of the first kind of justification understand Moses of the second Paul His faith is counted for righteousness See explication ad vers 3. Observ The things out of this passage of Scripture observable are these First the direct opposition of Faith and Works in this Article of justification If it be by Faith it s not of Works If by Works not of Faith that howsoever it be true their concurrence is certain their agreement amiable in the life of the justified yet their contrariety irreconcileable in the procurement of justification Not to be long in the manifestation of it First the Apostles argument hath else no force in the case of Abraham except their opposition be such as is mentioned 2. Besides this view it in the contrary principles from which the two kinds of justification proceed The Worker is justified of debt the believer of grace that look what opposition there is betwixt favour and debt the same is betwixt justification by Works and justification by Faith Like see Rom. 11.6 Now were it not a point of acute Sophistry to teach us how to deny the Apostles argument and to tell him the consequence is not good because they are able to assigne a medium Witty I confesse but with such wit as S. James tells us to be * Jam. 3.15 devilish Such as it is let us hear it forsooth they point us to this medium of participation It is partly by Faith partly by Works I say not any man is so impudent as in plain terms to contradict the Apostle but surely this in the issue shall be found their answer howsoever with distinctions they colour the matter Let us hear them Justification by Faith and justification by Works indeed are opposite if ye understand in both the same justification but there is a first justification and a second the one is by Faith the other by Works Again works are of two sorts works of Nature works of Grace betwixt justification by works of Nature and that by Faith there is indeed an opposition not so in that by works of Grace For these distinctions and the vanity of them see suprà ad ver 2. Annotat. ad cap. 3. This once is evident out of this place that the Apostle imputes the justification of Abraham now regenerate unto his Faith and betwixt the justification that Abraham had being now in grace and that of works placeth the opposition Besides this what means the Apostle to befool the Galatians for expecting the perfection of this benefit by the Law which was begun by the Gospel Gal. 3.3 Would he not thereby teach us
that whole justification is perfected in Faith And for works of grace though as hath been said they agree with faith well in the heart of a Christian yet justification even by these works is opposite to that of Faith Phil. 3.9 More I adde not onely I advise them that labour to mingle Moses and Christ Faith and Works in this point of justification to remember what Paul hath pronounced Gal. 5.4 with a solemn protestation That as many as look for justification by works whether in whole or in part are fallen from grace and Christ shall nothing profit them This opposition also is to be remembred against all such as teach us to expect justification by faith as it is a work the opposition is none that I can conceive betwixt the justification by the work of faith and the work of love The next thing here offered to our notice is a distinction of rewards and it lies thus There is a reward paid as Debt there is another given of Favour And it is of some use in that grand question betwixt us and our Adversaries touching the merit of good works which from no ground they ofter infer then from this Because they shall be rewarded To this the answer is Not every work that hath a reward is by and by meritorious except the reward be paid as debt to the work Now the reward that is given to our obedience is given of favour not paid of debt and that we prove thus First because the same that is called the reward of obedience is said withall to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a free gift of God A reward and yet a free gift How if paid of Debt not given of grace besides saith Bernard Mans merits or good works are of no such quality or worth as that eternall life should be due to us for them of right or as if the Lord should do us wrong except he gave it us Nam ut taceam Bern. Serm. 1. ce Annunc quòd merita omnia Dei dona sunt ità homo magìs propter ipsa Deo debitor est quà m Deus homini quid sunt merita omnia ad tantam gloriam as S. Bernard His reasons are these Man is debtor to God for his good works because they are his gifts not God to man 2. The reward exceeds by many degrees the worth of the work Therefore is not a reward of debt but of favour If they shall reply and say God should wrong us except he thus rewarded us I answer Not us but himself the debt not growing from the worth of our works but from the grace and truth of the Promiser Debitor factus est Deus non aliquid a nobis accipiendo sed quòd ei placuit promittendo S. August De verb. Apost Serm. 16. To him that worketh not but believeth The sense see supra So then God hath not left sinfull man Observ without a means of justification though he want works such as the law required to righteousness for what through want of works we fail of he hath provided by faith shall be obtained even righteousness such as may stead us at the barr of Gods justice A point worthy of our attentive consideration for the magnifying of Gods mercy and furtherance of our comfort It was grace enough in God that he was pleased to create us in so excellent a condition only through desire to communicate himself unto us and for it he might justly claim obedience to any his commandements especially proportioned to our abilities even without any promise of farther recompence but loe that nothing should be wanting to our encouragement when he propounds a law to be obeyed he also covenants with him to crown his obedience with immortality This do and thou shalt live Lev. 18.15 Rom. 10.5 But see mans great unthankfulness to God and unmercifulness to himself not contented with the happiness presently enjoyed nor with the hope of immortality promised he affects not to be like God as he was but to be equall unto him in knowledg Gen. 3.5 He throws off the yoak of obedience and thereby deprives himself justly of all the happiness he had or could hope for plunges himself into misery endless easeless and remediless except God in mercy provide an escape Now behold the unsearchable riches of the mercy and love of God toward man loath that he should perish he enters another course for his recovery sends his own Son out of his bosome in the similitude of sinfull flesh by obedience unto death to satisfie justice that there might yet be a way for his mercy to overflow in the salvation of his chosen and in him enters a new league with man for restoring righteousness and salvation under a condition so reasonable as none more could be devised believe only in him that justifieth the ungodly thy sins are pardoned righteousness restored salvation recovered Lord what is man saith David considering a blessing far inferior that thou so reckonest on him or the son of man that thou so visitest him Psal 8.4 Our hearts must needs be dull and dead if these things work not in us more then acknowledgment even admiration of Gods endless mercy Well this was Gods mercy towards us Vse 1 Now sure I doubt not but those that have felt in any degree the misery to which the Law hath sentenced them and withall how impossible it is for the law to restore them inasmuch as its weak through the flesh can willingly say Amen to that thinksgiving of the Apostle Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift 2 Cor. 9.15 That our hearts may be yet more inflamed to this duty consider we I beseech you the preferment and property God hath given man in this mercy even above Angels creatures by naturall condition more excellent then he Heb. 2.16 Angels sinned God sent them no Mediator they fell by not obeying God hath made them no promise of rising by believing Man sinned God sent his Son to propitiate man fell by disobedience hath promise of restoring by believing Let them perish everlastingly with hellish Angells that acknowledg not this mercy or that renouncing the righteousness of faith seek to establish their own in works of the Law Vse 2 Now as this serves for the magnifying of Gods mercy so no less for the multiplying of our comfort and nourishing our hope of righteousness yea though we have no works such as the law prescribes to justification for behold another mean of righteousness provided for sinners even faith in him that justifies the ungodly And therefore what do we vexing and breaking our hearts for sins once committed now repented A mustard seed of faith commands a mountain of sin to the bottome of the sea What if Moses be so strict that none but exact justice will serve to justification One greater then Moses is here that tels us faith is available to righteousness And to the end the conscience of sins after faith received might not overthrow hope of
righteousness mark the description of him to whom faith is carried as to her proper object He is such an one as justifies the ungodly and from whom sinners great sinners believing in believing may expect justification For God justifieth the ungodly How may some men say by infusing righteousness saith Bellarmine by imputing righteousness say some of our Divines by remitting sins faith Cajetane and of our own Interpreters not a few Let us see whether hath more truth The two former have their agreements and their difference they agree in this First That to justifie in this place signifies to make righteous They differ in the manner how we are made righteous in this sense that the Apostle seems to mean whether by infusion or by imputation Papists especially Bellarmine will have it to be done only by infusing the habits of righteousness as faith charity c. whereby we are made formally and by inheritance righteous Now in handling this question we must remember that it s not denyed of us that God doth make us just by infusing righteousness For we confess God by his spirit doth sanctifie us throughout and infuse the habits of inherent righteousness as they call it whereby we are fitted to exercise morall justice 1 Ioh. 3. Neither deny we but that in the time when he justifieth us by imputation as some speak he also sanctifieth us and works a begun conformity to the law But this is that we enquire of whether this infused righteousness be that whereby we are made just so as according to the course and sentence of the law we stand just at the day of Gods justice This they affirm we all with one consent deny and that upon these grounds First For that Apostle 1 Cor. 4.4 that had his share herein as far as most yet professeth he had not nor expected justification thereby What is his meaning that he did not thereby stand just before God according to the sentence of the law In form thus Pauls righteousness inherent made not him stand just before God according to the tenour of the law Ergo No man is made so just by inherent righteousness as to stand just thereby before God according to the law Psal 143.2 David excellently endued with this righteousness yet deprecates tryall by judgment acording to the law upon this reason In Gods sight no man shall be justified The arguments are two First If David fear the tryall of Gods judgment by the law that had so great a measure of righteousness then is not that the righteousness whereby we stand just before God according to the law for a man having that righteousness which the law requires needeth not fear tryall by exactest justice but David deprecates judgment Ergò 2. View his reason No living man shall be justified in thy sight to wit if thou deal with him in judgment according to the law Theodoret paraphrasing the text expounds Novienim fieri non posse ut aliquis sine paenâ à tuo tribunali discedat si enim hominum vitae regulam legum â te latarum appones nemo secundum has vixisse videbitur And Augustine quantumlibet rectus mihi videar producis tu de thessauro tuo regulam coaptas me ad eam et pravus invenior To these testimonies so direct what answers give they Perhaps they will say they speak of actuall justice not of habituall and therefore are impertinently alledged to the purpose in hand Answ Not to examine that distinction we shall see they conclude as well against habituall as against actuall righteousnes For is our actuall righteousness such as may not endure the censure of the law then certainly it more then seems the habits whence they proceed are not so perfect as after the law they should be For what should let the perfect habit of faith to bring forth a perfect act of faith c. sith therefore the acts are imperfect so are the habits also But other answers they have many and variable First that the Prophet speaks only of justice which a man hath of himself not of God Bellarm. in Psal 143. lib. 4. cap. 20. de justific and that he denies a man to be justified thereby But howsoever or whensoever David had his righteousness if it were justice such as in the law is required why deprecates he judgment He needs not fear Gods Tribuniall that hath the iustice of the law to present unto God For it s written The man that doth them shall live in them Rom. 10 5. Their second Answer is this That David deprecates judgement because of his veniall sins and they forsooth though they deserve punishment in exact justice yet hinder not justification Answ Well then belike these lighter sinnes though a man have He may be justified according to the Law What is then become of that sentence of the Law cursing all men to the pit of Hell that continue not in all things little or great written in the Book of the Law to do them Gal. 3.10 2. And are these the sins onely for which David feared judgement then hear either veniall sins hinder justification or else David doth ill give this as a reason why he was so loath to have the Lord enter into judgement with him because no flesh should be justified in Gods sight In a word draw out the Prophets speech something largely after this Exposition The sense will be this Oh Lord I beseech thee spare calling me to reckoning for my veniall sins For in respect of them sith no man is free from them no flesh shall be justified in thy sight Their third answer No flesh shall be justified because our Righteousness though it be true and pure in it self yet compared to the infinite righteousness of Gods Nature it seems no righteousness as the light of a candle though it be light yet compared to that of the sunne is no light and this exposition hath the Authority of some Fathers annexed Answ With this distinction of righteousness I find no fault It hath the testimony of Fathers and the warrant of Scripture Job 4.18 But is this the reason why David so much feared to come to judgement because he wanted righteousness comparable to the Essential righteousness of God Who can think it it sufficeth to any man at the day of judgement to bring unto God the righteousness which the Law prescribes neither need he fear punishment because he wants righteousnes comparable to that Lev. 18.5 Rom. 10.5 which God hath as God and thus Theod. Aug. and others interpret that his desire to be free from judgement was because he answered not to the rule of righteousness Now is Gods Essentiall righteousness The Rule after which in judgement our righteousness must be squared Dic sodes I think rather the Law of God Saint Hierome in his time alleadged this Scripture against Pelagius to prove that no man ever was or could be so Holy as to live without sin what answer receives he saith
Hierome S. Hieron epist ad Ctesiph Hoc testimonium sub nomine pietatis novâ argumentatione deludunt aiunt enim ad comparationem Dei nullum esse Perfectum Perfectly righteous they might be according to that required in the Law not so in comparison to the Essentiall righteousness of God Hear Hieroms answer quasi hoc scriptura dixerit as who say this Scripture affirmed so much No saith Hierom but when it saith None shall be justified in thy sight hoc intelligi vult quòd etiam qui hominibus sancti videntur Dei scientiae atque notitiae nequaquam Sancti sunt Homo enim videt in facie Deus autem in corde That is This is the meaning That even they that seem to men Holy to Gods knowledge are not so For man looks on the face God on the heart One reason more I propound against their conclusion and so proceed The Righteousness whereby a man stands just before God according to the Law must be for the matter Right for the measure Pure for continuance Firm The terms are Bernards It must be Recta according to Rule Pura Bernard de verb. Esa ser 4. free from stain Firma without wavering or interruption He seems in fit terms to express the Apostle citing that testimony of Moses Gal. 3.10 and certainly if our Righteousness fail in any of these by sentence of the Law we are under the Curse The assumption let us hear out of Bernard Nostra si qua est humilis justitia recta forsitan est sed non pura nisi forte meliores nos esse credimus quà m patres nostros qui non minùs veraciter quà m humiliter aiebant omnis justitia nostrae tanquam pannus menstruatae mulieris quomodo enim pura justitia ubi adhuc non potest culpa deesse Ours 1. no better then our Fathers 2. Not free from fault therefore not pure or perfect And I wonder much how Papists sticking so close to their distinction of first and second justification can maintain the perfection of inherent righteousness For is there a second justification whereby we are made more righteous it is apparent therefore that inherent righteousness is never perfected in this life Perfectio viae Patriae It is idle when they distinguish perfection into that of the Way and the other of the Countrey For if by it we are justified in via according to the Law we must by it also be perfected in via inasmuch as no righteousness but perfect is approved by the Law I conclude therefore That the righteousness whereby we stand just according to the Law is not inherent righteousness Lastly If the righteousness whereby we are thus just stand in the habits of faith hope charity patience meekness c. How is it that the Lord when he justifies an ungodly man believing is said to count his faith to righteousness vers 3 4. perhaps because that is our righteousness Ex parte Apage Then when Paul concludes Abraham not to have been justified by works because he was justified by faith his meaning is this Abraham was justified by faith in some part ergò by works in no part How easie were it to denie his consequence Thus though in part of Faith yet he must be in part also of Works and so the Argument follows not And again The state of the question so largely disputed in this Epistle betwixt faith and works must be this Whether we be justified in part of Faith But these are absurd 2. If therefore faith be counted our righteousness because it is so In part Why I wonder Faith more then Chariey or Hope c. Why saith the Apostle so oft Faith is counted to Righteousness never so of Charitie perhaps Denominatio fit ex parte potiori Apage I dare say by their notes 1 Cor. 13. they will never abase Charity so farre as to give Faith the preheminence in this point of justification Perhaps now it will be exspected that I should answer their objections in this point but that hath been already in a great part done ad cap. 3. and besides the grounds now laid afford answer sufficient Proceed we therefore to the next explication God justifies the ungodly that is makes him righteous by imputing righteousness and if the question be What righteousness The Righteousness of Christ whether of his life or death it is not so pertinent here to enquire For we are now onely to dispute whether imputation be the means whereby we are made just in the sight of God and this also will fitliest be handled in the next verse thither therefore I refer it Onely it shall not be amiss to see upon what reason our Divines thus interpret the word of justifying by making righteous That acception of the word in Scripture being so rare that scarce in any other place it is found Their reason is this because the word when it is taken to acquit can in no wise fit this place because the Lord professeth so often He will not justifie the wicked in this sense so as to acquit him or hold him righteous whiles he continues wicked It should seem therefore that when Paul saith he justifieth the ungodly his meaning is He makes him righteous that he may acquit him But what if that sentence of Moses be understood with the exception of the Gospel Except he repent and believe the Gospel Surely though the Lord profess He will not clear the the wicked Exod. 34.7 that are impenitently such yet we know he testifieth in the same place that he will forgive transgression iniquity and sinne to the penitent and believing The last thus God justifieth the ungodly Cajetan by remitting his sins or in that that he forgiveth him his sinnes But Is this true doth God forgive the sins of the ungodly Answ Though not to an ungodly man continuing in his ungod liness yet to an ungodly man that ceaseth to be ungodly Isa 1.18 c. as they all do that believe in Christ for faith purifieth the heart not onely from the guilt but also from the power and practice of ungodliness Act. 15.9 Obiect But so doing God iustifies not the ungodly but the righteous Answ Distingue tempora concordabunt Scripturae No man saith that in the instant of iustification a man is in that sense ungodly but yet inasmuch as before faith he was ungodly it s no absurd speech to say That in remitting the sins of a believer he forgives the sins of the ungodly or thus He iustifieth him that is ungodly by Nature though when he iustifieth him he be altered by Grace Matthew the Apostle is called Matthew the Publican Matth. 10.3 not for that he was so then but because he had been a Publican Why not then the believer ungodly especially when as there are reliques of ungodliness sticking even after justisication Vse Now brethren how sweet is the comfort of this meditation that God who in his wrath is a * Hebr. 12.29 consuming fire
against unbelieving ungodly ones is yet so exceeding ready to forgive even the ungodly believing in him so that we may say as David every one to his own soul faith once received Psal 43.5 Why art thou so cast down O my soul and why art thou so disquieted within me Trust in God and thou shalt find him full of mercy and compassion exceeding ready to forgive the sins that he hath enabled thee to repent Hast thou sinned in seculo saith Bernard Bernard in die Pet. Pauli Serm. 30. Not more then Paul In religion and state of grace Not more then Peter and yet they obtained mercy and as Paul speaks It is for ever a * 2. Tim. 1.16 Beza Piscator pattern of Gods pardoning mercy to all such as shall hereafter believe in him to everlasting life Neither impieties in seculo nor infirmities in grace are imputed to such as believe in him for behold he justifies the ungodly believing in him that though all sins be damnable in their own nature yet may it be said in a sense The onely damning sin is infidelity insomuch as if infidelity were not no sin should be imputed to condemnation But thus far of the first argument against justification by Works drawn from the example of Abraham The rest of this Verse hath been already explained ad vers 3. VERS 6 7 8. 6. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works 7. Saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered 8. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sinne TO the example of Abraham taken from Moses is adjoyned the testimony of David amongst the Prophets And Theodorets reason of the choice is not to be contemned for Abraham lived before the Law and now he shews that David who lived under the Law gave Testimony to Faith The rendring differs Beza Piscator David describeth the blessedness of that man others had rather thus David saith Blessedness to be that mans unto whom c. In the issue is no great odds The summe of the argument is this If David say That blessednesse is that mans to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works Then is no man justified by works But David saith Blessedness is that mans to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works Ergò No man is justified by works The minor hath its proof ver 6 7 8. borrowed from Psalme 32. But may some say How follows the Proposition that if a man be blessed that hath righteousness without works imputed to him then no man is justified by works Answ Thus as I conceive prescribing to no man If blessedness be onely that mans that hath righteousness without works imputed then justification cannot be by works Inasmuch as blessedness is his onely that is justified justification being a part of blessedness If any Justiciary shall object That the exclusive particle onely is not extant in the Apostle and that though he be blessed that hath righteousness imputed without works yet may he be blessed also that hath righteousness purchased by works Let this suffice him for answer That there is one onely way of all mens justification for else how follows Pauls argument Abraham was not justified by Works but by Faith Ergò No other man After this conceit a man might mannerly deny the Apostles consequence and tell him that though Abraham were justified by Faith yet another man may be iustified by Works Now to make way to the particulars observable in this sixth verse It may be said that the words are no where extant in David and how then saith the Apostle that David saith The man is blessed to whom righteousness without works is imputed David indeed saith that he is blessed that hath not his sins imputed no where that righteousness without works is imputed Answ Though the words be no where extant in David yet the sense is and though he speak not in expresse words yet he speaks it in effect inasmuch as by iust and necessary consequence it may be deduced for he that saith A man is blessed that hath not his sins imputed saith in effect that he is blessed that hath righteousness without works imputed Observ Whence observe we that Gods Spirit in Scripture speaks as well what he implyeth as what he expresseth as well what by consequence is deduced as what in summe of words he uttereth Instances are frequent Iam. 4.5 Saith the Scripture in vain the spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth it after envy Now where finde we those words in all the Scripture By deduction we have them Num. 11.29 in express terms we no where finde them yet saith Iames the Scripture saith so Luk. 1.73 74. God sware to Abraham that we should be delivered out of the hands of our enemies that we might serve him without fear where finde we such an oath extant for words In no Scripture yet when God sware he would bless him Gen. 22.18 and that in his seed all nations should be blessed He sware in effect we should be delivered from our enemies and serve him without fear inasmuch as this blessedness stands in being delivered from our enemies and it s no small part thereof to serve God in holiness The Observation is of speciall use for maintaining the fulness of the Scripture and for helping us in sundry controversies Say Papists and Anabaptists where have we it taught that infants should be baptized in all the Scripture Answ Not in express terms but by just consequence we have it From the generall Mat. 28.19 From pâ—rity Gen. 17.12 From principles Act. 2.39 Where finde we that Christs Righteousness is imputed to us for justification saith Bellarmine Answ Bellarm. de justific l. 2. and lib. 1 cap. 16. In express terms we finde it not but virtually and by just consequence we have it 2 Cor. 5.21 In the equivalent we have it Rom. 5.17 18 19. The adversaries saith Bellarmine are wont to boast much of the express word of God and to reduce all their opinions to this one head But in the case of justification by faith only that help fails them For they were never yet able to shew in the Scripture that particle only where they intreate of justifiing faith Answ But we are taught that if we have it by consequence from the Scripture we have it in the Scripture The Scripture propounding but two means only of justification Faith and Works and denying all justifying vertue to works affords it us not the conclusion by consequence We are justified by faith only see Rom. 3.18 Again have we it not in the equivalent Gal. 2.16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Iesus Christ as much as if he had said by faith only In a word where we have the generall we have the particulars where principles and causes the effects where one equall there also the other By
the guilt and punishment thereof c. is onely removed the thing it self remaining still in us Manet pccatum sed jam non dominatur c. Bern. in Psal Qui habitat Serm. 10. evulsum quodammodo nondum tamen expulsum dejectum sed non prorsus ejectum saith Bernard of men regenerate A second question here usually discussed is Whether whole justification stands in remission of sins I shall not need to shew how fitly this place affords the question it is shewn plentifully by others In this question my purpose is not to deal at all against Papists but to handle it as it is now controverted among our own Divines The answer thereto by those that think iustification in this question to signifie nothing but acquitall and discharge from sin must needs be this That it stands onely in remission of sinns for what is it to acquit from sin but to remit sins And this seems strange to me that men urging that signification of the word to be proper to this question can seek for any other thing to make up the entirety of Justification Is it nothing to be justified but to be acquit from sin then sure to be justified implies no more but to have sins remitted Either therefore we must grant that to justifie in this question signifies somewhat more or else that whole justification stands in remission of sins And let that be the first argument Justification in Scripture signifies onely a quittal Ergò To this answer must be made if any be to purpose that to iustifie hath some other signification so some labour to shew That it signifies sometimes to make just as Rom. 4.5 sometimes to account or pronounce just or to give testimony of righteousness Luke 7.29 sometimes to give reward of righteousness 1. Kings 8.32 c. Whether these satisfie or no I had rather others judge then I determine Their second reason is from this place but diversly collected some thus David gives no where a full description of justification Ergò Whole justification is absolved in remission of sins Answ It cannot be shewed that either David or Paul intended here to describe much lesse perfectly to define justification For what though the Apostle doth purposely dispute of the means of justificatior must he needs therefore alledge this testimony of David to expresse the nature of it He proves by this testimony that justification is not by works because the justified man hath sins forgiven in his justification and so the argument follows well though justification be not here perfectly defined see suprà in Exposition nay consider that by this means his argument is as nothing for if remission of sins be whole justification will it follow thence that we are justified without works Excipiat quispiam Let justification stand in remission of sins that may yet be procured by works Others thus gather it To pronounce Blessed to impute righteousness to remit sins are all one with the Apostle Ergò Justification stands onely in remission of sins Answ The Antecedent is untrue Their third argument is that testimony Acts 13.39 and 2. Cor. 5.21 Paul in the first place tells us That by remission of sins he means justification from those things by which by Moses Law we could not be justified c. And in the other he shews we are reconciled by not having sins imputed Answ To the first the adverse part would answer that there is shewed Justification stands in remission of sins ex parte that being our part of justification but an other part there is and that is making us righteous with the righteousness of the Law which we have by imputation from Christ To the second the answer would be made that our reconciliation stands partly in not imputing sinne and it is usuall to declare the whole by some part as whole redemption by remission of sins Eph. 1. yet may we not say that redemption stands onely in remission of sinns Their chief reason is this for that justification is ascribed onely to the bloud of Christ now that bloud of Christ procured us nothing but remission of sins Answ It is answered that the bloud of Christ is there put synecdochicè for the whole obedience of Christ The other opinion is this That justification hath two parts 1. Our discharge from our sinns 2. Our furnishing with the righteousness of the Law Their reasons are these First for that we are said to be made righteous by the actuall obedience of Christ Rom. 5.19 as well as in other places to have remission of sins by his bloud Ob. By obedience may be understood his obedience in suffering 2. That the Law since the fall requires to justification not onely satisfaction for breaches by punishment but also that the obedience therein prescribed be performed else still the curse lies on us Answ It is answered 1. That we are not under the Law but under grace 2. That by remission of sins we have the righteousness of the Law for all sins as well of omission as of commission are cleared in the bloud of Christ 3. Because God in his word hath prescribed no other way to life but perfect obedience to the Law It is answered that in the Gospel another way is prescribed Believe and thou shalt be saved Acts 16. Mar. 16.4 Dan. 9.24 The Messiah is promised not onely to expiate sin but also to bring everlasting righteousness Answ What if that may be understood of that we perform in the studie of Sanctification Well whatever become of that controversie this conclusion we have evidently hence That in Justification we have perfect remission of sin See Acts 13.39 Papists themselves herein consent with us as we have seen before And will it not hence follow that therefore we are delivered from the whole guilt and punishment of our sins Here now they-begin to mince it for stablishing their doctrine of satisfaction to be made to Gods justice Sasbout ad loc Bellarm. ad Psal 31. and our release is they say onely from guilt of eternall punishment The question hath been largely discuffed ad cap. 3. Here onely I would have them reconcile their two opinions First that when sins are remitted they are utterly extinct and abolished so that there is nothing left that can be reputed sinne Secondly that there remains unto him that hath his sins thus remitted part of the guilt to be expiated by his own satisfaction Hear a subtile shift Remission of sins is either totall or partiall Totall when it is remitted quoad omnem poenam Partiall when it is remitted onely quoad culpam poenam aeternam Now where the remission is totall there is no reservation of any punishment where partiall onely in respect of eternal punishment there remaineth still reatus poenae temporalis Contra. But I demand whereon is that guilt founded Me thinks it must needs be on something that hath veram propriam rationem peccati Bellarm. de Justific l. 2. c. 7. ad Psal
l. 4. Homo non quaerit salutem â Sacramentis quasi ab eis sed per ea à Deo Haec enim praepositio A * Scotus ad lib 4. dist 1. denotat Causam agentem per verò notat causam instrumentalem Well let us yeild them to be organa whether Morall or Physicall It pleaseth not Bellarmine Bellarm de effect Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 11. that they should be causes Morall though he confesse a stream of their own Writers run current that way But they must be Physicall instruments that is such as properly and by inherent vertue work or cause justification And if any ask what that vertue is that God hath put in them to effect this grace He answers It is nothing but Gods moving or using of them to that purpose For by this that God useth the Sacramentall action to produce grace he doth elevate it above the nature and makes it reach to an effect supernaturall Now I might be long in shewing the contrary judgement of his own side some making them means or instruments of grace per modum continentiae because they contain the grace they signifie some by concomitance onely c. I will propound the sentence of Scotus onely whom ye shall find thus to resolve There is not saith he in Sacraments aliqua Causalitas activa propriè dicta respectu gratiae but they are said to be causes of grace improperly inasmuch as the receiving thereof is an immediate disposition to grace mox For thus hath God disposed and set down the order and hereof he hath certified the Church that to him that in due manner receives the Sacrament he will give the effect thereby signified This I trow is far from Bellarmines conceit But let us further examine his conclusion In all ordinary Physical instruments which God useth to effect his purposes by there is besides Gods use of them a vertue and power and fitness given them to produce what he useth them unto as meat to nourish clothes to warm Sun to cherish the earth c. and shall Sacraments be ordinary Physical instruments and yet lack this inherent vertue What Philosophy yea or Divinitie so teacheth Besides this Sacraments all suppose those habits wherein they make justifying grace to consist Acts 8. Matth. 28. to be in him that receives them they must have faith or at least 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Sacraments may be applied unto them and shall we think they are elevated by this use and motion they speak of to work what is already wrought Lastly if they wrought thus Physically as it were potions methinks then every one to whom they are applyed must needs receive their effect unavoidably and so Simon Magus must receive the grace of the Sacrament as well as Simon Peter which if it be absurd as absurd it is to make them Physicall instruments or Active causes of this grace which they call justifying To conclude this whole question May it not be granted that Sacraments are instruments or means of grace Answ No doubt yes but instruments morall onely that is such as whose vertue sticks not in them but onely because where they are duely used God is present by covenant to work grace supernaturall So Scotus ut suprá so some of our Divines Yet more nearly 1. Consider what grace they are ordained to work as means 2. How they concur to the working of it The grace they work is 1. Confirmation in perswasion of justification 2. Care and increase of sanctification c. How work they it Answ Occasionally onely quatenus they represent Gods actions Christs person and benefits our duty c. by which representations Gods spirit worketh in our hearts in these or the like discourses God hath in the Gospel promised remission of sins to all those that believe in Christ and for further assurance hath been pleased to ordain Sacraments as it were his seals set to his covenant wherein I see represented the death of Christ that procured pardon of sinns and in the Ministers action delivering the Sacrament to me Gods act in delivering Christ and his benefits to me is resembled Now his promise is that if I bring faith to the use of the Sacraments the things they signifie are mine How then assumes conscience I believe what God in the Gospel promiseth what in Sacraments he seals unto me and thence follows as a conclusion my faith confirmed c. Now what say our Adversaries to this manner of Sacraments efficacy Forsooth if in this manner onely they have their efficacy there shall then be no difference betwixt Sacraments of the Old Law and those of the New Testament Answ What none at all Bellarm. de effect Sacram. lib. 2. c. 8. They confesse elsewhere that we agree with them in the differences thus far 1. The signes are others 2. The number less 3. The facility more 4. Clearness of signification greater 5. Manner of signifying different 6. Endurance of new longer Object Yea but in the point of efficacy there is left no difference For thus theirs were effectuall by stirring up faith by their significations and by the devotion of the receiver which they call The work of the Worker Observ Is that the matter then hear what I think the Apostle here teacheth or at least warrants us to teach by collection That Sacraments of the Old Testament were the same with ours in matter signified in use ends and efficacie What is Baptisme unto us more then a signe of our initiation into the Covenant Gen. 17.7 Rom. 4.11 Deut. 30.6 A feal of the righteousness of faith An occasionall mean of sanctification The same was Circumcision to Abraham and to all his posterity in the ordinary measure of efficacy there might be some odds in efficacy and manner of it none at all that can be assigned For 1. In their Sacraments they had Communion with Christ They ate the same spirituall meat 1. Cor. 10.3 4. drank the same spirituall drink that we do though under other signes or elements Object Rhenenses ad loc Bellarm. de effect Sacram. lib. 2. c. 17. August de utilit Poenit. cap. 1.2 Nay rather say Papists the same amongst themselves not the same with us Answ Then let us hear Augustine Eundem inquit cibum spiritualem manducaverunt quid est eundem nisi quia eum quem etiam nos mox Eundem non invenio quomodo intelligam nisi eum quem manducamus nos Inst What Paul there speaks of were not Sacraments Answ How then fit they Pauls intention which is apparently this to take from this people vain confidence in Sacraments 2. What means Paul to say of their passage through the sea c. it was a baptizing of them Cyprian Epist 76. August in Psal 77. Hear ancients Cyprian Mare illud Sacramentum Baptismi fuisse declarat beatus Apostolus Paulus dicens Nolo vos ignorare fratres c. 1. Cor. 10. Augustine Per mare transitus
Baptismus est The same Augustine Cùm essent omnia communia Sacramenta non communis erat omnibus gratia quae Sacramentorum virtus est speaking of the very elements Inst The same let them be but in signification not in vertue or efficacy Answ They drank of the Rock which was Christ some of them I mean as Augustine expounds in Psalm 77. And if therein they had Communion with Christ how are they not the same in efficacy Will they say the effect was one the efficiency or manner of producing different It is easie to say any thing their proof we want and require Not to be long Scholast ad 4. senten Concerning the Sacrament of Circumcision their own Divines confess many of them that it had the same effect with Baptisme and in the same manner namely the work wrought Why may we not then conclude that their Sacraments were one with ours in Use Ends and Efficacy Forsooth their Sacraments had no absolute promise of grace ours have But before I answer their objections the Reader must be entreated to observe that they change the state of the question For the question is not betwixt them and us Whether their Sacraments conferred justification as ours For we maintain that neither confer justification though both equally confirm it in manner above-shewn But the question is whether theirs had the same efficacy that ours have to the uses and ends whereto they were designed And so we affirm that the same promises for spirituall things were made to both people in both Testaments and confirmed in both Sacraments The same promise that is made to us was made to Abraham yea first to Abraham and first to the seed of his loins walking in the steps of his faith Gen 17. How else reasons the Apostle from the example of Abraham the promise was given Abraham through faith Ergò It s ours through faith and not by the Law c. and again How makes he Abraham the father of believers in both people except that the Covenant was stablished in him as the father for his children of both people But have our Sacraments absolute promise of grace justifying to be conferred by them then what lets infants even of hereticks in baptisme of hereticks to receive justification And if justification may be had in the Conventicles of hereticks why not also salvation We will henceforth be of comfort in the Church of England and we will hope for our infants yet that they may go to heaven 2. Where have we such an absolute promise made to our Sacraments Mar. 16.16 this I read He that believes and is baptized shall be saved Acts 2.39 He that repents and is baptized shall receive remission of sins Never He that is baptized shall have justification or salvation simply because he is baptized To omit all other their objections bewraying too foul ignorance in the matter of the Covenant of grace their last onely I will take notice of It lies thus Our Sacraments are said to save to regenerate to justifie and no such thing is read of theirs in the Scriptures Ergò They are not equal in efficacy Answ Many of the places alledged are to be understood of the Baptisme of the Spirit as that 1. Pet. 3.21 Tit. 3.5 Joh. 3.5 And what is that to the Sacrament 2 If in other places remission of sins be in shew of words ascribed to the Sacrament it must be understood significativè at most but concomitanter Vse Let us now leave a while these toilesome controversies and see what use of this conclusion redounds to us And it shall be the same that Paul once made to the people of Corinth 1 Cor. 10. upon this ground That none of us presume upon Sacraments as if they sealed up impunity to willfull transgressions there is no greater vertue in ours then was in Iewish Sacraments And their Murmurings Idolatry Fornication Tempting of God was severely punished even in those that partook Sacraments the same with ours in signification use and efficacy And why should any of us adventure the displeasure of God upon vain confidence of the work done of Sacraments Consider we that they are not only obsignations of favour but obligations to duty and so bined to dutifull carriage that they seal up pardon of no more sins then are repented and forsaken It is in this respect with Gods pardon as with like indulgence of Princes to Malefactours they binde for ever to good behaviour And I could wish our people thus perswaded of them But thus it fares with most through their ignorance as it is said of the Hart when he is wounded he runs to the herbe dittany known by naturall instinct to be soveraign So our people when they have wounded their souls even to death with the vilest abominations they post to Sacraments for medicine adding to their other sins this of profaning Gods sacred ordinances By the law of God given to the Iewes it was ordained that none that had contracted any legall pollution should on pain of death adventure on their Passeover till such time as his cleansing according to the law was accomplished The statute for the letter bindes not us but the signification thus far serves to instruct us that none of us renewing his sins should adventure on Sacraments without renewing repentance The last thing here observable is this That Sacraments are ordained not to confer justification but to confirm us in perswasion of it As to Abraham circumcision gave not righteousness but as a seal confirmed it unto him for what shall we say as Papists This Sacrament was so to Abraham only as his priviledg not so ours to us Thereto hath already been answered and the case is as plain for Baptisme in Cornelius as this for circumcision in Abraham Kemnit Exam. part 2. de sacram efficac Vsu or shall we say these instances were extraordinary and therefore afford no generall rule First How appears it of either that there was any thing extraordinary Secondly Whence should we fetch the rule to judg of the ordinary use of Sacraments save from their persons that first received them Let it stand therefore for a conclusion that the use of Sacraments is not to confer faith or justification but to confirm it For which cause we shall finde that ordinary faith is required as a pre-disposition necessary in all that are admitted to the Sacraments yea Act. 8. faith of the Messiah and confidence in him for justification between which faith and justification the connexion is inseparable Ob. If any shall say that they cannot have use in infants Answ To omit other answers though in infants while they are infants they have not actually that use yet to 〈◊〉 end they are ministred to infants that when in time to come they shall believe to righteousness their faith may receive confirmation by baptisme in infancy received August de Bapt. contra Donat. lib. 4. cap. 24. To this purpose saith Augustine In Abraham praecessit
an action best available for confidence in that respect to relye upon namely His raising of Jesus from the dead The like in sundry other places is observable Would they humble themselves for their sins they consider God as terrible and dreadfull in his judgments would they raise up themselves with comfort they consider him as a God that heepeth Covenant and promise as a father of mercies and God of all consolation would they stablish hope in expectation of things passing the course of nature they consider his endless power able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we can aske or think There is a confused apprehension of the deity for the most part liveless and ineffectuall when men ingross only and indistinctly mediate the Divine nature without reference to particulars concerning the present occasion And another as preposterous unseasonable and no less uncomfortable when men fit their faith with meditation of that that is most unseasonable for their present state God is merciful saith the presumer he is just saith the desperate distressed Both true he is just and mercifull saith the Psalmist but should not faith in wisdome contemplate what is fittest for the present necessity This wisdome pray we for The last thing in this period remains The Reason brought to assure us of like favour in like faith for better confirming the comfort unto us Vers 25 Who was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our justification The force of the argument thus conceive God the Father hath delivered his Son to death for expiation of our sins he hath raised him which was our surety to assure us of our justification doubt not therefore but he will justifie thee believing on him through Christ In the words the Apostle sends us to consider two things as pillars for faith to rest on for justification First is The cause meritorious Christ death Secondly The evidence of the value and worth of his humiliation His resurrection from the dead This text saith one is Brevis largus short in words large in sense Let us view the particulars In the first member are these 1. Who delivered 2. Who was delivered 3. Whereto 4. For what For the First Who delivered Pater filium Christus seipsum Iudas Dominum saith Austin The fact one the motives different which made Iudas his treason criminous Christs tradition of himself meritorious I point only at the heads Who was delivered Iesus our Lord A less price say some might have sufficed yea none at all had God been so pleased I think not considering the endless justice violated which God in our ransome intended to preserve and manifest Rom. 3. Delivered why saith he delivered rather then crucified To lead us by the hand to the first cause thereof the determinate councells of the Blessed Trinity Act. 4.27 28. I could command Legions of Angells for deliverance Mat. 26.35 saith our Saviour to Peter but how then should the Scripture be fulfilled how the Fathers purpose and councels accomplished VVhereto To death even the shamefull and cursed death of the cross Phil. 2.8 That so we might be delivered from the curse of the Law Gal. 3.13 Incomparable Benignity of the Father unmatcheable compassion and humility of our blessed Saviour For what For sins for our sins whether we conceive sin as the efficient cause procuring these things unto our Saviour or tropically intepret For sins that is for expiation of sins it is not greatly materiall This latter hath some Auncients approving it however Socinus laugh at the strangeness of it Theodoret He underwent his passion Theodoret. ad loc Vt nostrum debitum exsolveret not much unlike Ambrose And that of the Prophet cannot better be expounded Isai 53.10 His soul an offering for sin that is to expiate sin The senses are subordinate sins procured it by it sins were expiated and to expiated them Christ was delivered see Isai 53. 1 Pet. 2.24 For our sins Our in this case 2 Cor. 5.21 hath a threefold Antithesis 1. To Christ 2. To Angells 3. To Vnbelievers For ours not his own He was holy harmeless seperate from sinners knew not sin per experimentum as Augustine interprets see 1 Pet. 2.22 23 24. Heb. 7.26 Isai 53. Augustin de peccat Merit Remiss lib. 2. cap. 35. Sine peccato natus est in similitudine carnis peccati sine peceato vixit inter aliena peccata sine proccato mortuus est propter nostra peccata as Saint Augustine Ours not Angells Heb. 2.16 In no place he assumes the Angells but the seed of Abraham It may be there was something eminent in their sin that excludes them but let us take heed whiles we seek the reason of our preheminence in the quality of the sinners we forget the Lords 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the specialty of his love to man that only caused it Nunquid Angelo Bernard de Passione Domini sed ille non eguit Nunquid Diabolo sed ille non resurget as Bernard Ours that believe Ioh 3.16 Not for sins of unbelievers yes say some sufficiently for theirs that distinction I stand not to examine The question is this Whether intentionally for the sins of any but believers They shall never be able to prove that the intention is larger then the efficacy or that his death was not effectuall to procure remission for all unto whose benefit it was intended The heads of this first member we have seen let us with like brevity see to what use they serve us Vse First They direct us to a right estimate of our sins a point wherein alack how partially blind are the most of us The matter we think small wherein we offend the act and pleasure momentany transient in a moment should justice be so strict as for such triflles to load us with eternall cursing or rather should mans malice be so dissolute as for such trifles to violate the endless majesty that loadeth us daily with so many blessings Learn rather by consideration of the necessary remedy to esteem the quantity of thy perill whereout nothing could suffice to rid thee but the death of the Son of God Agnosce ô homo quà m gravia sunt vulnera Bern. in Natal Domin Ser. 3. pro quibus necesse est Dominum Christum vulnerari si non essent haec ad mortem mortem sempiternam nunquam pro eorum remedio dei filius moreretur saith Bernard sweetly Secondly As they teach us compunction so minister they unto us unspeakeable consolation sicut enim gravem agnosco morbum cuitanta apponitur medicina sic ex hoc ipso non incurabilem esse conjecto They know not the excellency of Christ person nor the worth of his bloud that question the availableness thereof to purchase redemption Let strictest justice ballance our sins with Christs satisfaction this shall be found infinitely to preponderate Some weakly perhaps will say of the valew he doubts not but of the avail for
him Hear the Apostle assuring us that for our sins not for his own he was delivered even for the sins of all that believe in his name Act. 10. For us he was born our sins he bear the chastisement of our peace was laid upon him It is no blasphemy to say he is more ours then his own our benefit we are fure more by him then his own by himself saith Bernard Bern. in Epiphan Ser. 1. Vtamur nostro in nostram utilitatem If we lack what to give for our sins we have Christs body to give it is of ours and it is ours And as Bernard so may every believer say De Te Domine suppleo quod minus habeâ— in me And of the first member the cause meritorious of our justification thus far Proceed we to the Second containing the evidence of the value that was in his humiliation for righteousness to wit his resurrection from death amplified by the end thereof our justification And was vaised for our Iustification How for our justification To work it say some to apply it say others to preserve us in it saith a third To declare and assure us of it say the most Iudicious It is good advise a Learned Interpreter here gives Not auxiously to dispute or enquire how the Apostle distinguisheth the effects of Christs Death and Resurrection ascribing to his death the expiation of sins to his resurrection our justification Touching the thing I will not be inquisitive but of the sense it will not be amise a little to enquire The first exposition is commonly received amongst our adversaries and thus they explain themselves Bellarm de Iustific l. 2. c. 6. Justification they here understand our internall renovation and regeneration by which we walk in newness of life and that they ascribe to Christs resurrection not as to a cause meritorious for Christ by his Resurrection merited nothing being then extra statum merendi How then say some As causa exemplaris Thomas par 3a quest 56. Art 2. Bellarm. quâ suprâ Cajetane ad loc quatenus he hath given us therein a forme of rising in our souls to newness of life as he in his flesh rose to the life of glory Say others His resurrection avails to our justification rather as an occasion and help or motive to faith for had he not risen from the dead who would have believed in him as Author of life These interpretations both of them contain truthes It is true that Christs Resurrection is a pattern for us to follow Rom. 6. True also that it is an enducement to believe in him as able to save us but impertinent to this place For 1. In what Scripture finde they Renovation to be called Justification And 2. The Apostle is not yet come to treate the point of sanctification And 3. How fits the Reason to the Apostles conclusion Faith shall be imputed to us for righteousness for Christ rose to give us a pattern of rising to new life dissolutae scopae To apply it â—rsin Kemnitius and to confer it upon us say others For it behoved the Mediator not only to merit but also to confer what he had merited upon us that also is a truth but these in explaining themselves make his resurrection availeable only as a cause sine quâ non to our justification except he had risen he could not have conferred his benesits upon us To preserve it unto us saith a third some such thing we finde after a sort ascribed to Christs Resurrection Rom. 8.34 But if we attend the place to his Resurrection it is assigned remotely our continuance in grace following rather from his session at his Fathers right hand and his intercession there made for us The last I rathest rest in conceiving Christs resurrection to avail to our justification as an evidence assuring us of it rather then as a cause in any sort procuring it unto us By raising Christ from the dead God the Father shewed that he accepted the obedience Keumit part 1. de Justificat Uâ—sin and satisfaction of his Son Christ for our reconciliation and atonement Christ was thrust into such a prison as out of which he could never have come forth except he had paid the utmost farthing The least sin unsatisfied had for ever detained him under the dominion of death but God raised him Ergo He hath satisfied or thus you may conceive it As when Christ our surety was condemned we in him and together with him were condemned So when he was discharged we in him and together with him received our discharge from the guilt and punishment of sin So that the point we have here is this That Christs Resurrection is to us a pledge of our Justification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amen FINIS Texts of Scripture explained in this Commentary GEn. 17.17 p. 155.156 Levit. 18.5 compared with Rom. 10.5 p. 106 107 112 113. Num. 23.10 P. 170. Nehem. 1.8 p. 180. Nehem. 13.22 p. 179.180 Psal 2.7 p. 92. Psal 32.1 p. 48 49 57. Psal 143.2 p. 38 39 40 41. Isa 38.3 p. 104. Isa 64.6 p. 123.124 Dan. 9.18 p. 178 179. Matth. 5.45 p. 92. Matth. 10.3 p. 44. and verse 37. p. 126. and vers 38. p. 125. Matth. 11.30 compared with 1 Joh. 3.5 p. 125 126. Matth. 16.18 p. 142. Matth. 19 1â— p. 128. Mar. 16.16 p. 70 89 97. Luk. 1.6 p. 126. Luk. 10.28 p. 115. Luk. 17.6 p. 157. Joh. 2.19 compared with Joh. 10.18 p. 182. Joh. 3.5 p. 72. Joh. 8.36 39. p. 97 98 99 141. Act. 13.39 p. 62 63. Rom. 5.19 p. 52. Rom. 6.23 p. 122. Rom. 7.14 p. 122. Verse 18. p. 120. Rom. 9.32 p. 51 52. Rom. 10.5 p. 106 107 112 113. 1 Cor. 3.21 22. p. 104 105. 1 Cor. 10. p. 90. Gal. 1.8 p. 150. Gal. 3.10 p. 121 122. vers 18. p. 103. Gal. 4.1 p. 104 105. vers 30. p. 115. Gal. 5 4. p. 116. Eph. 2.12 p. 96. 1 Tim. 4.8 p. 106 107. Heb. 8.6 p. 134. 1 Pet. 1.3 p. 183. vers 18. p. 153. 1 Joh. 2.2 p. 100. 1 Joh. 3.9 p. 127. 1 Joh. 5.3 p. 125 126.