were an utter deletion or abolition of sinne then in those that are justified there is no sinne But there is no mortall man though justified in whom there is no sinne Therefore in justification there is not a Totall deletion of sinne § XI Sixthly if remission of sin be an utter deletion of the corruption by infusion of righteousnesse and nothing else concurre to justification but infusion of righteousnesse expelling sin what then becommeth of the guilt of sinne and the punishment how is our debt satisfied The justice infused though it should utterly expell the corruption yet it neither doth nor can satisfie for the punishment as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Neither is there any other satisfaction or propitiation for our sinnes whereby Gods justice may be satisfied our debt discharged our selves freed from hell and damnation but onely the satisfaction of Christ without imputation whereof there is no justification nor salvation but none of this is done by righteousnesse infused expelling sinne Wherefore the Papists if they will bee saved must acknowledge besides the benefit of the infusion of righteousnesse expelling the corruption of sinne which they call justification but is indeed sanctification another greater benefit whereby we are both freed from hell and entituled to heaven by imputation of Christs satisfaction called in the Scriptures justification which they by their Antichristian doctrine have utterly abolished § XII Seventhly that which worketh no reall change in the party doth not really take away and expell all sin from him by infusion of righteousnesse for that cannot bee done without a reall yea and a great change in the party True remission of sinne doth not worke a reall change in the party Therefore the true remission of sinne doth not really take away and expell all sinne by infusion of righteousnesse The assumption is thus proved first the forgiving of a debt worketh no reall change in the debtor but relative The true remission of sinne is the forgiving of our debt therefore the true remission doth not worke a reall change in the party Secondly that which is imputative doth not worke a reall change in the party but is an act wrought without the party True remission of sinne is imputative as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 4. 6 7 8. consisting in the not imputing of sinne presupposing the imputing of righteousnesse without workes therefore it worketh not a reall change § XIII My eighth argument is from theabsurdities which follow upon this Popish Doctrine First Necessity of despairing not onely to the tender conscience labouring under the burden of sinne but also to all not cauterized consciences which have any sense of their owne estate For if remission of sinne bee the utter deletion of sinne then have not they neither can they have remission of sinne in whom any sinne remaineth and those that neither have nor can have remission of sinne in this life because sinne doth ever remaine in them what remaineth to them but despaire Secondly that there is no necessity of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse for justification because there is in them both a totall deletion of sinne and an infusion of perfect righteousnesse whereby sinne is wholly expelled And these as you shall heare hereafter are two of Bellarmines principall Arguments to prove the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to bee needlesse both because when our sinnes are remitted they are utterly abolished so that whosoever is justified is no longer a sinner in himselfe nor hath any sinne remaining in him and also because in justification there is an infusion of perfect righteousnesse The third that to remission of sinne there needeth no favour or indulgence for pardon or forgivenesse for if remission of sinne be a totall deletion of sinne by infusion of perfect righteousnesse then without any accession of favour the one contrary is necessarily expelled by the other And this doth Vasques professe in expresse termes Mihi semper necessarium visum fuit asserere maculam peccati ipsa justitia inherente tanquam forma contraria nullo accedente favore condo natione deleri § XIV These absurdities doe necessarily follow upon their Antichristian doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse For if a man be justified before God by inherent righteousnesse then is he not a sinner in himselfe and consequently hath no sinne in him And if by infusion of righteousnesse there be a totall deletion of sinne then must that righteousnesse which is infused be perfect For that which is unperfect cannot wholly expell sinne the imperfection being of it selfe a sinne and if upon infusion of perfect righteousnesse there doth necessarily and of its owne accord follow a totall deletion of sinne then to remission of sinne favour and condonation is needlesse And yet we have not done with their absurdities For to dreame that men who are but infants in Christianity yea infants in age before they have the use of reason or are capable of habits are endued and that ordinarily with perfect righteousnesse in their first imaginary justification which is inciptentium of such as be but incipients whereunto the best proficients doe not in this life attaine is a monstrous absurdity CAP. VIII Bellarmines dispute that remission of sinne is the utter deletion of it confuted § I. BVT how absurd soever their assertion is Bellarmine will maintaine it and set a good face upon it telling us first that wee may not deny it unlesse wee will deny the Scriptures For the Scripture saith he useth all manner of words to expresse the true remission of sinne so that if a man would of purpose seeke words to signifie the utter abolition of sinne hee could not devise any which the Scripture hath not already used And to this purpose citeth eighteene Testimonies nine out of the Old Testament viz. 1 Chron. 21. 8. Esai 44. 22. Ezek. 36. 25. Psalm 51. 7. Prov. 15. 27. alias 16. 6. Psalm 103. 12. Mic. 7. 19. Psalm 10. 15. Cant. 4. 7. And nine out of the New Ioh. 1. 29. Act. 3. 19. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Act. 22. 16. Heb. 1. 3. 9. 28. 1 Cor. 6. 11. Ephes. 5. 8. and 27. § II. Answ. These places are to be distinguished for either they are alleaged to prove the abolition of sinne or perfection of righteousnesse the former mention either the taking away of sinne or the wiping or blotting of it out or the purging of it or the not being of it For the taking away of sinne these are brought 1 Chron. 21. 8. Psalm 103. 12. Mic. 7. 19 Ioh. 1. 29. Heb. 9. 28. In 1 Chron. 21. 8. the word is Hahaber transire fac cause it to passe that is remove it out of thy sight not that it bee not at all but that it bee not punished or which is all one take away the guilt and so the word seemeth to be expounded 2 Sam. 12. 13. where Nathan saith to David the Lord hath taken away thy sinne thou shalt not
debt Matth. 6. 12. The subject where it remaineth are the bookes of Gods providence and of our own consciences The act of God in remitting our debts is the wiping them out of his remembrance as it were his debt-bookes The debt is the sinne it selfe which maketh us debtors unto God And therefore sinnes are called debts and sinners debtors Matth. 6. 12. cum Luk. 11. 4. Matth. 23. 16 18. Luk. 13. 4. cum 2. which also appeareth by the parables of the debtors Luk. 7. 41. Matth. 18. 23 35. and therefore sinners are called debtors because for their sinnes they owe punishment unto which by the just ordination of God they are obliged This obligation whereby sinners are bound over to punishment is called reatus that is guilt When as therefore God remitteth sins he forgiveth the debt hee remitteth or releaseth the punishment hee taketh away the guilt whereby we were bound over to punishment And è converso when God forgiveth the debt releaseth the punishment taketh away the guilt he is said to remit sinne Now sinnes are either habituall or actuall An habituall sinne God doth remit when hee doth take away the guilt of it and cover the Anomy of it not that it should not be at all but that it should not bee imputed as Augustine saith of concupiscence or originall sinne whereof all particular habituall â—… sinnes are members and branches Actuall sinnes God doth remit when he doth forgive the sinfull act it selfe and the guilt also which remaineth after the act is past and gone § VI. But here the Papists have found out a new devise to confirme their error in confounding justification and sanctification that whereas there are two things which as themselves doe teach remaine in the soule after the act of sinne hath been committed viz. reatus macula the guilt and the blemish or spot they teach against sense that it is properly the macula which is remitted in justification But then say I what becometh of the punishment the guilt binding over to punishment It is certaine that the infusion of righteousnesse doth not take away the guilt nor free us from punishment Neither can we be freed either â—…rom the one or the other but only by the satisfaction of Christ imputed unto us Hence therfore they should have learned to distinguish between justification and sanctification rather than to confound them that whereas there are two things remaining after sinne committed the guilt and the pollution the guilt is taken away by imputation of Christs righteousnesse in our justification the pollution is in some measure cleansed in our sanctification § VII And how soever that which they say of the macula or pollution remaining is true in respect of Originall sinne wherein upon the guilt of Adams transgression imputed there followeth an universall macula or corruption consisting of two parts the privation of Originall righteousnesse and an evill disposition and pronenesse to all manner of sinne by which twofold corruption all the parts and faculties of the soule are defiled yet it seemeth not to be altogether true in regard of mens personall sinnes in respect of either part for as touching the former part which is the privation neither are the unregenerate by their actuall sinnes deprived of grace or righteousnesse infused which they had not before they sinned neither are the regenerate utterly deprived of grace by such sinnes as they commit as I have elsewhere proved and as touching the latter part which is the evill disposition this macula whereof they speake is no new evill disposition making him a sinner who before was not but an evill disposition remaining of the old man which by committing of actuall sinnes is increased Insomuch as where the same actuall sinne is often committed and reiterated that evill disposition groweth to bee an habit For all evill dispositions or habituall sinnes which are in men are either the reliquia or remnants of originall sinne in some measure mortified or the increments thereof when by the committing of actuall sinnes they receive increase And such a thing is that macula whereof they speake which remaining in the soule per modum habitus is to bee taken away as all other habituall sinnes are as they are pollutions by the mortification of them which is a part of sanctification and not of justification Neither is the mortification of sinne a totall deletion or abolition thereof in this life as if no sinne or corruption remained in the party justified or sanctified for though in the forgiving or remitting of originall sinne the guilt bee wholly taken away yet the corruption which is called concupiscence remaineth more or lesse mortified § VIII Now followeth the subject where that which is to bee remitted doth remaine and from whence when it is remitted it is wiped or blotted out that is Gods remembrance and our conscience which are as it were the Lords debt-bookes according to which bookes he will judge Apoc. 20. 12. the former is the booke of Gods providence Psalm 56. 8. 139. 15. wherein all offences are written and wherein they remaine upon record Hos. 7. 2. 8. 13. Ier. 17. 1. The other is the booke of our conscience which is as it were the Lords atturney indicting us of sinne In regard whereof David saith Psalm 51. 3. I doe know or am conscious to my transgressions and my sinne is ever before mee Out of the former booke the Lord doth wipe out sinnes when he justifieth us in the Court of Heaven out of the latter when we are justified in the Court of our owne Conscience § IX And hereby the third thing appeareth namely by what act of God our sinnes are remitted For if that which is remitted be a debt which is recorded in Gods booke then this debt is remitted not by any act of God within us either really wiping the pollution out of our soules or infusing grace into them both which are done in some measure after the debt is remitted in our sanctification but by an act of God without us wiping our sinnes out of his booke blotting them out of his remembrance Esai 43. 25. casting them behinde his backe Esai 38. 17. turning his face from them Psalm 51. 9. not remembring Ier. 31. 34. nor imputing them Rom. 4. 8. ex Psal. 32. 2. but forgiving and forgetting them and accepting of Christs satisfaction for them in the behalfe of all that truely beleeve in Christ Rom. 3. 24 25. § X. Our fifth argument may be this The utter deletion of sinne is not granted in this life Remission of sinne is granted to the faithfull in this life Therefore remission of sinne is not the utter deletion of it The proposition is certaine For during this life sinne remaineth in the best Rom. 7. 17. 20. 1 Ioh. 1. 8. The assumption is undeniable as being an Article of our faith testified in many places of Scripture Or thus If in justification there
dye Psalm 103. 12. how farre the East is distant from the West so farre hath hee made our sinnes to be distant from us which is not understood of the corruption extinguished but of the guilt removed or taken away Mic. 7. 19. thou wilt cast all their sinnes into the depth of the Sea that is hee will cast them out of his sight or remembrance hee will cast them behinde his backe he will bury them in oblivion that they should not be seene or remembred Ioh. 1. 29. The Lambe of God which taketh away or taketh upon him the sinne of the world 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the translation of Nose and the Verbe Nasa having reference to finnâ—… when it is attributed to God it signifieth to forgive as hath before beene shewed and likewise when it is attributed to men who have been offended Gen. 50. 17. 1 Sam. 15. 25. 25. 28. when it is attributed to Christ our redeemer as in the place alleaged it signifieth that he taketh away our sinnes by taking them upon him or bearing them as it is said of the scape Goat the figure of Christ Levit. 16. 22. and so that place Ioh. 1. 29. is to bee understood Nasa saith one sometimes doth signifie tollere that is to take up and to beare as when we are commanded tollere crucem to take up our crosse or to take upon him which Saint Iohn the Evangelist rendreth by the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and this is fully expressed by the Prophet Esay 53. 12. that Christ Nasa did beare the sinne of many as before verse 4. that hee hath borne the Verbe is Nasa our griefes and carried our forrowes and vers 11. hee shall beare their iniquities Heb. 9. 28. Christ was once offered ad multorum exhaurienda peccata that is as our Rhemists translate to exhaust the sinne of many The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to take up and to beare the meaning is that Christ was offered upon the crosse that he might takâ—… up and beare our sins even as S. Peter speaketh to the like effect 1 Epist. 2. 24. who himselfe did beare our sinnes in his owne body upon the tree that is the Crosse where the same Verbe is used and is by the Latine interpreted pertulit and by the Rhemists beare our sinnes § III. Other places are alleaged which mention the deletion that is the wiping or blotting out of sinne Psal. 51. 1. 9. Act. 3. 19. Esa. 44. 22. But I aske from whence Delere saith Vatablus est metaphora ab iis qui delent qui prius in rationes scripserant to wipe out is a metaphore from those who wipe out such things as before they had written upon their account or in their debt-bookes The booke is Gods remembrance out of which those things are wiped which are forgotten and thus deletion is often ascribed to oblivion For Gods wiping out of sins is his blotting them out of his remembrance and so it is expounded Es. 43. 25. his not remembring them Psal. 25. 7. 79. 8. Ier. 31. 34. as contrariwise his not blotting them out is his remembring of them his not forgiving them Ier. 18. 23. forgive not their iniquity neither blot out their sinne from thy sight Psal. 109. 14. Let the iniquity of his father be remembred with the Lord and let not the sinne of his mother be blotted out ne deleatur id est non tradatur oblivioni but let them be before the Lord continually verse 15. And thus David prayeth Psal. 51. 9. hide thy face from my sinnes and blot out all mine iniquities namely out of thy remembrance and no more can bee gathered out of Act. 3. 19. that your sinnes may be blotted out of Gods booke where Tremellius noteth it to bee a metaphore taken from those who keepe bookes of account c. Howsoever it is not to be doubted but that before the day of judgement whereof Saint Peter there speaketh there shall be a totall deletion of the sinnes of the faithfuâ—…l both in respect of the guilt and also of the pollution As for Es. 44. 22. the Lord professeth his reconciliation with Israel in taking away their sinnes which as a cloud yea as a thicke cloud had hid his face from them the guilt whereof being taken away the light of his countenance did shine upon them Howbeit Tremellius and Innius read Deleo ut densa nubes defectiones tuas according to which reading that place hath affinity with those which mention washing cleansing purging of which â—… am now to speake § IV. Of these some are to be understood of justification and taking away the guilt of sinne as all the first part of the 51. Psalme which is a prayer for the pardon of sinne out of which are cited verse 2. and 7. where David prayeth that God would wash him and cleanse him from his sinne namely by the bloud of Christ for that is it which cleanseth us from all our sinnes Purge me with hyssope which was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherewith they used to sprinkle the bloud upon those which were cleansed that is sprinkle me with the blood of that eternall sacrifice of Christ prefigured in the Law without which bloud being shed there was no remission And there is no doubt but the blood of Christ was shod for the remission of sinnes Mat. 26. 29. and that our consciencâ—…s the seat of guiltinesse might bee purged from dead workes The words following and I shall bee whiter than snow doe plainely argue the purity not of sanctification for to such a degree thereof we never attaine in this life but of justification in respect whereof our soules being perfectly just are whiter than snow Some are to be understood of sanctification as Ezek. 36. 25. Some of both as 1 Cor. 6. 11. Act. 22. 16. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Heb. 1. 3. but with this difference that we are cleansed and purged from the guilt of sin past wholly and at once but from the corruption in part and by degrees in this life wherin we are to be renewed in the inner man from day to day The Corinthians to whom the Apostle giveth this testimony that they were washed c. were farre from perfection of inherent righteousnesse as appeareth by that Epistle wherein he calleth them carnall and reproveth them both for their errours in judgement and for their misdemeanours in their conversation That which he citeth out of Pro. 15. per mifericordiam fidem purgantur peccata is found in the Latine v. 27. but not in the originall the like sentence is found Pro. 16. 6. but there the Verbe purgatur for which the Text is alleaged is not used in the Latine § V. For the not being of sinne he alleageth Psalm 10. 15. alià s 9. 35. quaeretur peccatum illius non inveniatur against the true meaning of the place it being not
away unlesse light come in place And this saith he The Apostle manifestly sheweth when he saith David explaineth the blessednesse of a man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes Blâ—…ssed are they whose sinnes are forgiven Vbi saith Bellarmine ex non imputatione peccatorum colligit imputationem justitiae where the Apostle from the not imputing of sin gathereth the imputing of justice which is very true and proveth that here is a full definition of justification containing these two parts the not imputing of sinne to the beleever and imputing of righteousnesse or accepting of him as righteous But where is either the popish deletion of sinne or infusion of righteousnesse unlesse as they have turned remission into deletion so also imputation bee converted into infusion § V. To the proposition also Bellarmine answereth in part and first to the word covering that although to cover and not to impute sinnes is not if you respect the force of the word to abolish or to extinguish sinne yet if they be referred to God the sense importeth so much For nothing can bee bid from God unlesse it bee â—…tterly taken away for all things are naked and open before his eyes Reply Nothing can bee hid from God which hee would not have hid But if it please God to cover our sinnes that hee will not behold them Psalm 85. 2. or to hide his face from them Psal. 51. 9. to cast them behinde his backe Esai 38. 17. not to marke what is done amisse Psalm 130. 3. then hee is said not to see them because he taketh no notice of them but passeth by them Mic. 7. 18. In which sense Charity is said to cover sinnes Prov. 10. 12. § VI. To the word not imputing he saith that God cannot but impute sinne to him that remaâ—…neth a sinner neither can hee repute him righteous unlesse he be made righteous therefore â—…he not imputing of sinne draweth with it veram peccati remissionem that is the extinction of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse Reply he should have said as he said before the not imputing of sinne draweth with it imputing of righteousnesse or the acceptation of a man as righteous both which alwayes goe together because both are wrought together by imputation of Christs righteousnesse whereas therefore hee saith that God cannot but impute sinne where sinne still remaineth it is true of unbeleevers and impenitent sinners who are out of Christ but for them that bee in Christ that is to say beleeving and repentant sinners for whose sinnes Christ hath fully satisfied and whom though in themselves sinners hee hath accepted as righteous in Christ and for whom our Saviour maketh intercession that their sinnes may not be imputed to them hee cannot truly be said to impute sinne unto them It is true also that the Lord reputeth none righteous but such as he maketh righteous both by imputation of Christs righteousnesse and also by regeneration by imputation perfectly and at once by regeneration in part and by degrâ—…s they being not onely Spirit but flesh also in regard whereof though they be righteous in Christ yet in themselves they are sinners by reason of sinne remaining in them though in some measure mortified and not at all imputed So that a regenerate man in divers respects is both a righteous man and a sinner righteous not onely in Christ by imputation of his perfect righteousnesse but also in himselfe by inherent righteousnesse begun in him from which as is from the better part 〈◊〉 hath his denomination in the Scriptures a sinner also in himselfe both in respect of habituall sinnes remaining in him as the remnants of originall sinne and also in respect of actuall transgressions both of commission and of omission whereinto hee doth dayly fall § VII And whereas he saith that these phrases almost alwaies goe together and to that purpose citeth Nehem. 4. 5. Psal. 51. 9 85. 2 and so Psal. 32. 1 2. I answere that deletion of sinne covering of sinne forgiving of sinne and the not imputing of it are used as synonima that is as words of the same signification and that in all such places deletion of sin doth signifie the blotting of them our of Gods remembrance which is as it were his record or debt booke Out of which when God forgiveth sinnes he blotteth or wipeth them out Thus to forgive sins is not to remember them Esai 43. 25. I even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine owne sake and wil not remember thy sinnes Ier. 31. 34. I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember their sinne no more And to remember them is not to forgive them Ps. 109. 14. Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembred with the Lord and let not the sinne of his Mother bee blotted out namely of remembrance that is let it not bee forgotten So Neh. 4. 5. Cover not their iniquity and let not their sin be blotted out before thee Ps 51. 9. hide thy face from my sins and blot out all mine iniquities and to the same purpose Psal. 85. 2. forgiving and covering are used in the same fence Thou hast forgiven the iniquity of thy people thou hast covered all theiâ—… sinne and so Psal. 32. 1. 2. forgiving covering not imputing Deletion therefore of sinnes according to the Scriptures is the blotting of them out of the Booke of Gods remembrance In this sense many things are said deleri to bee blotted out or wiped away by oblivion whose memory is wiped out as it is said of the Amalekites Exod. 17. 14. and according to the vulgar Latine translation Deut. 31. 21. nulla delebit oblivio Esth. 9. 28. Eccl. 6. 4. Ierem. 20. 11. 23. 40. 50. 5. So that non imputare is all one with ignoscere 2 Tim. 4. 16. So Iob 42. 8. according to the vulgar Latine 2 Cbro 30. 19. Ezek. 33. 16. § VIII Now if not to impute sinne bee as Bellarmine sâ—…ith to expell sinne by infusion of righteousnesse for according to his concelt infusion of righteousnesse is not a consequent of the expulsion of sinne as here for a poore evasion he saith but expulsion of sinne is a consequent of infusion of righteousnesse for according to his assertion by infusion of righteousnesse sinne is expelled as by accession of light and heat cold and darkenesse is expelled I say if not to impute sinne bee to expell sinne by infusion of justice then by the rule of contraries which is Contrariorum contraria sunt consequentia to impute sinne shall bee to expell righteousnesse by infusion of sinne as it was well objected by Chemnitius To him Bellarmine objecteth want of Logicke for calling those contraria which are contradicentia Where by Bellarmines Logick adversa onely are contraria whereof notwithstanding there are foure sorts for if contraries bee such opposits as are opposed one to one onely then besides adversa as Tully termeth those which Aristotle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there are three
that most miserable had beene our estate if God had not most mercifully fuccoured us in his Son nostrâ justitiâ vacuos ejus involvisset justitia and being void of our owne righteousnesse had inwrapped us in his righteousnesse and a little after nisi ipse sua impartiretur justitia qui nostra planè destituimur quae nostram iniquitatem injustitiam tegeret David doth not say the man is blessed who hath not committed sinne nor done iniquity but blessed are they whose iniquities are mercifully forgiven of God whose sinnes he doth cover and hide with his justice Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne which he can scarcely be without or at least never is without and againe In illo c. in Christ therefore wee are justified before God not in ourselves not with our righteousnesse but with his which now is imputed to us having communion with him wanting righteousnesse in our selves we are taught extra nos in illo justitiam quaerere to seeke for righteousnesse out of ourselves in him Now saith he that our righteousnesse standeth in Christs obedience hence it is because wee being incorporated into him it is accepted of God in our behalfe as if it were ours insomuch that by it selfe we are held just And even as Iacob when not being the first borne but hiding himselfe under the habit of his brother and clothed with his garment which sent forth a fragrant smell obtayned the blessing from his Father so we that we may obtaine the blessing of righteousnesse from our heavenly Father it behoveth us to lye hid under the pretious purity of our eldest Brother to smell sweet with his odour and to have our sinnes covered with his perfection And finally he saith that if wee speake formally and properly wee are justified neither by faith nor charity but by the onely righteousnesse of God in Christ by the onely righteousnesse of Christ communicated to us and by the onely mercie of God forgiving our sinnes which saith he I have before made evident 11. Conradus Clingius maketh justification to be either imputative which we call justification or active which we call sanctification the righteousnesse of the former being wholly in Christ of the latter in us so that he differeth but in termes from us 12. The Auâ—…hors of the Booke called Antididagm Coloniens say that the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to us is the principall and châ—…efe cause of our justification upon which chiefly we ought to rely and trust 13. To these we may adde the confession of our adversaries who cannot deny but that Christ his satisfaction is imputed to all that are justified or shall be saved as I have shewed before Yeâ—… this is the confession of all Christians who professe Christ to be our Saviour that the Lord accepteth the merits of Christ that is his obedience and sufferings in their behalfe as if they had performed the same in their owne persons And what is this but to impute the obedience of Christ and his sufferings unto us Doth not God accept Christs righteousnes for us or did hee not thereby satisfie for us To what end then as Bellarmine well inferreth did Christ take upon him our nature to what end and purpose did he humble himselfe to doe and to suffer so great things for us For this confession I argue thus What righteousnesse and obedience of another the Lord accepteth for us that hee imputeth to us for righteousnesse for by imputation we meane nothing else But the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ the Lord accepteth for us otherwise he could not have been our Saviour Therefore the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ is imputed to us for righteousnesse CHAP. V. The objections of the Papists against imputation § I. FIrst they cavill at the word and that in divers respects for first they say it is new Secondly they deride it calliug it justitiam putatitiam an imaginary justice Thirdly they say this assertion that wee are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse is no where to bee found To the first concerning novelty I answere that the word is used tenne times Rom. 4. and in the same sence that wee doe use it for accepting a man as righteous who in himselfe is a sinner verse 5. or imputing to a man righteousnesse that worketh not vers 5. or without workes vers 6. that is without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in him or performed by him besides other places of the Scriptures both in the Old Testament and in the New where the Hebrew Chashab is read with Lamed or the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a dative of the person whether in the Greeke translation of the Old Testament or in the Greeke Text of the New Examples of the Old Testament both in the Hebrew text and in the Greeke translation may bee these Gen. 15. 6. Levit. 7. 18. 17. 4. Nâ—…m 18. 27. 30. 2 Sam. 19. 19. Hebr. Psal. 32. 2. 105. 31. Prov. 17. 28. Graec. Examples of the New Testament besides those in the Epistle to the Romanes 2 Cor. 5. 19. Gal. 3 6. 2 Tim. 4. 16. Iam. 2. 23. In the Latine vulgar translation not onely the Verbe imputare and imputari are used in the same sense as 2 Chron. 30. 19. Iob 42. 8. Psalm 32. 2. Sap. 12. 1â—… Eâ—…ek 33. 16. Rom. 4. 4. 8. 5. 13. 2 Tim. 4. 16. Philem. 18. but also reputure and râ—…putari construed with a dative as Gen. 15. 6. Numb 18. 27. 30. Deut. 21. 8. â—…bsque dativo Deut. 23. 21. 24. 15. Iud. 4. 9. 2 Sam. 19. 19. 1 Chron. 21. 3. Psal. 106. 31. 1 Mac. 2. 52. Rom. 4. 3. 5. 9. 10. 11. 22. 24. Galath 3. 6. Iam. 2. 23. But say they the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a simple Verbe and the Hebrew chashab doth signifie pâ—…rare not imputarâ—… to thinke esteeme or account not to impute I answer when the Hebrew Verbe is read with Lamed or the Greeke with the dative of the person it signifieth properly to impute as in the places even now quoted and is all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word also is used by the Apostle Rom. 5. 13. Phile. 18. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Variâ—…us doth expound it producing this example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sinnes of the children of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Fathers that is imputeth or layeth them to their charge and so the vulgar Latine translateth the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Latine imputare as Rom. 4 4. 8. or reputare with a dative as Rom. 4. 3. 5 c. or accepta ferre as Rom 4. 6. which are all one even in the opinion of that Latine interpeter Neither should this act of imputation seeme strange seeing the practise thereof is usuall among men For as when the debtour being not able to make payment if the surety shall pay the whole summe or satisfie for the
degree of heavenly happinesse but also the higher degrees of glory and finally which is a consequent of the premisses that they may trust in their workes as being true causes of salvation All which assertions are insolent and Antichristian § XV. But we being in our selves most miserable sinners say with Daâ—…iel To thee Lord belongeth mercie and Iustice but to us shame and confusion of face and therefore wee pray with David Enter not into judgement with thy servants O Lord for no man living can bee justified in thy sight namely if thou enter into judgement with him For if thou Lord marke iniquities who shall stand If we should argue with God we should not bee able to answere one of a thousand with Esay wee confesse that all our righteousnesses are as polluted clothes as being stayned with the flesh and therefore have cause to cry out with the Apostle wretched men that wee are who shall deliver us from this body of death But yet with the same Apostlc we thanke God through Iesus Christ our Lord with David we professe that with the Lord there is mercie and forgivenesse that he may bâ—… feared and with him there is plentifull redemption and hee shall redeeme the Israel of God from all their iniquities Wee beleeve that Christ by his death hath satisfied for our sinnes and by his obedience hath merited heaven for us that hee died for our sinnes and rose againe for our justification that wee are justified by his blood and by his obedience we are constituted just that hee is the end and complement of the Law for righteousnesse to all that beleeve in him that of God he is made unto us wisedome for our vocation righteousnesse for our justification holinesse for our sanctification and redemption for our glorification that according as it is written He that glorieth let him glory in the Lord. And howsoever we doe teach that those who are justified are also sanctified and that no man can bee assured of his justification without sanctification though wee seriously urge as our duety is the necessitie of good workes and of a godly life protesting with the Apostle that without holinesse no man shall see God though we teach that by our good workes wee are to make our Election our vocation our justification sure unto us though wee acknowledge that they are the evidence by which wee shall bee judged at the last day though finally in the doctrine of sanctification we urge the necessity and profit of good workes as much as ever any other Christians whether old or new yet in the question of justification if our workes or our inherent righteousnesse bee obtruded as the matter of our justification and merit of salvation then doe we loathe and abhorre them as polluted clouts wee renounce them as things of no value wee esteeme them or at least as Luther said the opinions of them as losse And contrariwise our whole affiance for our justification and all our hope of salvation we doe entirely repose in the onely mercies of God and merits of Christ ouâ—… most perfect and all-sufficient Saviour to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit be all praise and glory for evermore Amen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a In novissimis â—…emporib i. regâ—…ance Antichrist Anselâ—… in 1 Tim. 4. 1. Vid. Diatrib de Antiâ—…h part 1. l. 3. c. 1. §. 3. c 1 Tim. 4. 1. 3. d This distinction is propounded by S. Augustine de Trinit lib. 13. c. 2. and by the master of the sentences Sent. 3. dist 23. e Vid. Diatrib de Antichristo lib. 4. c. 6. 7. g Idem l. 3. 6. 49. h De â—…ont Rom. lib. 4. cap. 3. i Bellar. de Concil li. 2. c. 17. Conc. Trid. sess 4. Pari pietatis affectu reverentia suscipiunt ei venerantur k Cesteri Enchirid cap. 1. Hutus praestantia multis par tib â—…peral Scripturas l Cesler ibid. m Hosius de expresso Dei verbo n Contr. Luciferian in Gal. 1. neque enim in Scripturarum verbis Evangelium est sed in sensu o De verbo non scripto l. 4. c. 4. * Rom. 10. 8. p See lib. 7. c. 3. §. 9 10 11 12. q See the learned work called the Grand imposture r Apud Euseb. lib. 4 cap. 15. s Gerdon contrv 1. c. 27. t Ibid. u Ibid. â—… 3. * Hosius de authorit Scripturae lib. 3. x Vid. Diatrib de Antichristo part 1. lib. 6. c. 4. §. 9. The excellencie of this argument * Lib. 6. Cap. 6. §. 2. a Iohn 1. 17. b Gal. 2. 5. c Rom. 1. 16 17. d Gal. 1. 6. 8. e Iohn 8. 44. f Iude 6. g Gal. 5. 4. h Gal. 3. 17 18. i Rom. 4. 14. k Gal. 3. 10. l Gal. 5. 2 3 4. Gal. 2. 21. m Of this see more lib. 7. c. 3. §. 10 11 12. The definition of Justification The name â—… Justificarâ—… o Lib. 2. The definition of Justification explaned 1. That it is an action of God Rom. 8. 33. Esay 43. 25. p Rom. 9. 16. 2. An action of God without us q Verse 34. r Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Rom. 4. 5 7. s Sess. 6. cap. 4. Vt sit translatio ab eo statu in quo homo nascitur silius primi Adami in statum gratiâ—… adoptionis filiorum Dei per secun dum Adamum Jesum Christum salvatorem nostrum Justification though it alwaies concurreth with Gods gracious actions within us yet it is carefully to be distinguished from them Ephes. 1. 6. Justification an action of God continued t Heb. 7. 25. Rom. 3. 25. u The Covenant of Grace Chap. 8. pag. 109. Whether Justification bee wrought but once and at once * a Cor. 4. 16. 1 Iohn 5. 1. Iohn 1. 12 13. Gal. 3. 2â—… Rom. 8. 17. The Papists confuted who deny it either to be an action of God or an action without us or continued The Causes of Justification The principall efficient Rom. 3. 26 30. 4. 5 6. 8. 30 33. Gal. 3. 8. a Iaâ—… 4. 12. b Psalm 51. 4. Esay 43. 25. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Ephes. 1. 6. c 1 Iohn 21. 2. d Matth. 6. 12. Rom. 8. 33. Exod. 34. 7. Esay 43. 25. Marke â—… 7. The Motives * Psalm 6. 2. 123. 3. 31. 9. f In Rom. 3. 24. Scriptura sacra non dicit nos justificare per solam gratiam sed per gratiam simul iustitiam sed utramque Dei hocest per gratiam Dei per iustitiam Dei non per justitiam hominum 2 Tim. 1. 9. â—… Ephes. 1. 6. Rom. 11. 5. Eph. 1. 5 6. 2. 5. 8 2 Tim. 1. 9. g Ephes. 2. 8 The Lord is alsâ—… just in justisying a sinner Rom. 3. 25 26. The actions of the three persons distinguished The Father Rom. 3. 25. Iohn 3. 16. The Sonne Esay 53. 11. Rom. 8. 34. 1 Iohn 2. 2. Heb.
A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION BY GEORGE DOVVNAME DOCTOR OF DIVINITY and Bishop of Dery IEREMIAH 23. 5 6. I will raise unto David a righteous branch and this is his name wherby he shall be called Iehovah our righteousnesse 2 CORINTH 5. 21. Him that knew no sinne God made sinne for us that we might become the righteousnesse of God in him LONDON Printed by Felix Kyngston for Nicolas Bourne and are to be sold at his shop at the South Entrance of the Royall Exchange 1633. REVERENDISSIMO IN CHRISTO PATRI AC DOMINO D. GEORGIO ABBATO ARCHIEPISCOPO Cantuariensi dignissimo totius Angliae Primati ac Metropolitae amplissimo GEORGIVS DOVNAMVS EPISCOPVS DERENSIS HOC QVICQVID EST VOLVMINIS DE JVSTIFICATIONE Peccatoris ceu grati Animi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 summaeque observantiae amoris 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicat consecratque A Preface concerning the Apostasie of the now Church of Rome THis ensuing Treatise as it cleareth the Doctrine of the Gospell in that high point concerning our title to the Kingdome of Heaven so it helpeth to discover the Apostasie of the now Church of Rome from the faith For though the Papists doe vaunt that their Church meaning especially the See of Rome is so farre from falling away from the faith that it cannot fall into errours in matters of faith yet they cannot deny but that in the latter times and namely in the time of Antichrist there should be a great defection from the faith and as it were a Catholike Apostasie whereof Antichrist was to bee the head Of this Apostasie the holy Ghost hath prophesied in divers places of the Scriptures as 1 Tim. 4. 1. 2 Thess. 2. 3. Mat. 24. 24. Apoc. 13. 12 14 15 16. And hath also set downe the notes and markes whereby they may bee knowne who make this Apostasie from the faith As 1. to forbid marriage 2 To command abstinence from meates both of them for religion and conscience sake 3 Idolatry for that is by spirituall fornication to fall from God Psal. 73. 27. Hos. 1. 2. 9. 1. which by the Septuagint is thus expressed Hos. 4. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. Ostentation of miracles the proper badge of the Antichristian Apostasie in these latter times 2 Thess. 2. 9. Mar. 24. 24. Apoc. 13. 14. All which notes I have proved in my Latine Treatise of Antichrist properly to agree to the now Church of Rome the forbidding of marriage and commanding abstinence from meates part 1. lib. 3. cap. 2. 3. Idolatry ibid. cap. 3. § 5. Miracles lib. 6. cap. 1. § 5. whereby it is evident that the new Church of Rome hath made this Apostasie Now let us consider in what respects the Church of Rome is revolted from the faith By faith in this question we understand not the habit or grace of faith but the Doctrine of faith Non id quo creditur not that by which we beleeve sed illud quod creditur buâ—… that which we doe beleeve In which sense the word faith is often used both in the Scriptures and also in the monuments of Ecclesiasticall writers Now the Doctrine of faith is either generall or speciall The generall are the whole canonicall Scriptures or the written Word of God in generall which is objectum fidei adaequatum the even object the rule and foundation of faith so that whatsoever doctrine is contained in the Scriptures either expressely or by necessary consequence is to bee received as a doctrine of faith and whatsoever is not so contained in the Scriptures is not dogma fidei From the holy Scriptures which God hath propounded to be the only rule of faith they are revolted unto the doctrines devices of men by changing the rule of faith which they have done divers wayes For first whereas the rule the foundation and chiefe principle of faith whereinto it is last resolved is the authority of God speaking in the holy Scriptures they have set up another rule which is the authority of the Romane Church and therein of the Pope which they make the superiour rule from which the authority of the Scriptures themselves dependeth and into which their faith is last resolved For the Pope is as they say virtually the Church and what they say in this kinde to magnifie the authority of the Church is specially to bee under stood of the Pope who onely for sooth hath an infallible judgement and not subject to errour for if you will beleeve them a generall or oecumenicall Councell without the Pope may erre but the Pope alone without a Councell cannot erre yea the authority of the Pope and Councell together is no greater than the authority of the Pope alone from whom all Councels have their authority for ab arbiâ—… pontificis tota conciliorum authoritas pendet quae tantam habent quantam Papa indulget and thus Bellarmine denieth this assertion aliquid majus est concilium cum pontifice quam pontifex solus If therefore the authoritie of the Church be greater than that of the Scriptures as they teach and if the authority of the Pope be absolutely above the Church universall as they also teach then much more is the authoritie of the Pope above the Scriptures Now whosoever taketh upon him authority above the Scriptures which are the undoubted Word of God hee is undoubtedly Antichrist whose judgement to make as the Papists plainely doe the chiefe principle of faith into which their faith is last resolved is no better thâ—…n to revoli from Christ to Antichrist Secondly they change the rule of faith by making their traditions that is such doctrines and observations as are taught and observed in the Church of Rome having no ground nor warrant in the holy Scriptures to bee the Word of God the word unwritten and a rule of faith which also they doe not onâ—…ly match with the holy Scriptures but even in many respects preferre before them and acknowledge them to bee the more entire and perfect rule of faith Thirdly they have changed the rule of faith by making those bookes canonicall which all antiquity almost yea and all succeeding ages untill the Councell of Trent following therein the judgement of Hierome did hold Apochryphall or at the most but Eeclesiasticall which might bee read in the Church for morall instruction but not as rules of faith Fourthly they change the rule of faith when in stead of the originall Text of the old and new Testaments which were penned by the Prophets and Apostles themselves they make a corrupt and that sometimes a barbarous translation of I know not whom to be the authentike text and the rule of faith preferring the vulgar Latine translation before the originall text which the penmen of the holy Ghost did write Fifthly they change the rule of faith when in stead oâ—… the true sense and mâ—…aning of the holy Scriptures expounded by the Scriptures according to the analogâ—…e of faith they obtrude the
est si divinitùs districtè 〈◊〉 and in the conclusion of his worke lib. 35. cap. 26. wherein as hee professeth that hee sought chiefly to please God so hee confesseth that this intention was accompanied with other worse intentions and sinister respects as seeking to please men and affecting their praise whereupon hee inferreth Si autem de his divinitùs districtè discutimur quis inter ista remanet salutis locus quando mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos 〈◊〉 crediâ—…s pura bona esse nequaquam possunt the evill things saith he which we have are purely and meerely evill but the good things which we suppose our selves to have are not nor can in any wise be purely good and so said Bernard Nostra siquâ—… est humilis justitia recta forsan sed non pura whence it followeth necessarily that none of the workes of the faithfull are pure and consequently that their very best workes are impure This which hath been said may suffice to a conscience not cauterized neither shall I need to say any more in this needlesse argument For though it should bee granted that some of the works of the faithfull were purely good as they are not yet so long as any of their works are sinfull as in many things we faile all insomuch that the righteous as Bellarmine himselfe doth cite the place doth fall seven times a day they cannot be justified by their workes but are by the sentence of the Law in themselves accursed because they doe not continue in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them and because the breach of any one commandement maketh them guilty of all I conclude against the Papists as Epiphâ—…ius did censure the Catharists these men professing themselves pure by this supposition make themselves unpure for whosoever pronounceth himselfe to be pure therein he doth utterly condemne himselfe to be impure CAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments answered § I. THis was our third argument taken from the imperfection of our obedience and righteousnesse which I have defended against Bellarmines cavils before I proceed to the fourth I hold it needfull to answere his arguments in propounding whereof hee falleth short of his projects as I noted before for hee that would prove that men are justified by their workes had need to prove that all the workes of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good which is impossible to bee proved but hee neither concludeth of all works nor of all the faithfull And yet it is most certaine that if the faithfull be justified by their works then all the works of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good His proofes are of three sorts authority of Scriptures Testimonies of Fathers and other reasons Out of the Scripture he citeth eight testimonies The first out of Iob 1. 22. In all these things Iob sinned not with his lips And that we may not answere with some of the Rabbins that though he sinned not with his lips yet hee might sinne in his heart hee telleth us that in the next Chapter God giveth him this testimonie that still he retained his innocency and therefore sinned neither in his tongue nor in his heart Againe whereas Satan sought by so many temptations to bring Iob to sinne and God on the other side permitted all those temptations that the patience and vertue of that holy man should bee manifested if Iob should have sinned God should after a sort have beene over come by the devill wherfore it is certaine that that worke of Iobs patience was not stained with any sinne and that the Lutherans which say the contrary take part with the devill against God § II. Answ. Those temptations were permitted by God as tyrals of Iob not perfection but integrity For that is Gods end that they who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sound and upright may be knowne 1 Cor. 11. 19. and this end was atchieved Cap. 2. vers 3. for still Iob retained his integrity But Satans intention was to prove him to be an hypocrite and to move him not onely to fall but to fall away from God and to blaspheme him to his face and so much hee undertooke both Cap. 1. 11. and Cap. 2. 5. howbeit hee failed in his enterprize And so much is signified in both the places alleaged by Bellarmine that Iob was so farre either from blaspheming God to his face which Satan undertooke he should that he offended not with his lippes nor charged God foolishly or from being discovered to be an hypocrite that by Gods owne testimony he retained his integrity as that word signifieth which Bellarmine according to the vulgar Latine calleth innocencie But Iob though hee were upright and sincere yet he was not perfect nor without sinne as appeareth by his manifold imperfections which afterwards he discovered Cap. 3. c. and also by his free confession of his sinfulnesse Cap. 9. 20. 33. and lastly by his feare and jelousie which hee had over his best actions lest he had sinned in them for as Gregory writing on those words of Iob Verebar omnia opera mea understandeth it to be an humble confession as if he had said quae apertè egerim video sed quid in his latenter pertulerim ignoro what overtly I performed I see but what covertly I suffered therein I know not But here may be objected which Bellarmine in the next Chapter alleageth out of the said Gregory Bonarum mentium est ibi etiam aliquo modo culpam agnoscere ubi culpa non est it is the property of good minds even there to acknowledge a fault where nofault is wherto I answere that Gregory speaketh in regard of humane infirmities which were laid upon man after his fall and namely of the monthly infirmity of women which though they bee not inflicted upon a man for his personall offences yet it is the property of good minds to esteeme them as laid upon them for their sinnes Thus Iob though his afflictions were not inflicted upon him as corrections for his sinnes but as tryals of his vertue yet he imputeth them to his sinnes Iob 13. 26. § III. In the second place he allegeth diverse testimonies out of the Psalmes wherein David pleadeth his owne innocencie and appealeth unto God to be judged according to his owne righteousnesse Psalm 7. 4. 9. 16. 1 2 3. 18. 2. 1. 26. 1. 119. 121. Answ. In some of these places David pleadeth the justice of his particular cause against his adversaries not the absolute innocencie of his person The rest are to be understood of his uprighttnesse and integrity For otherwise no man was more forward to confesse and to deplore his manifold sinnes than David was none more ready to implore Gods mercy none more fearefull that God should enter into strict judgement with him § IV. His third testimony is Matth. 6. 22. If thine eye be single the
transient or the sinfull blemish remaining in the soule which is a vicious disposition and pronenesse to sinne left as the remainder of originall sinne and increased by our owne actuall transgressions as it is a fault and the offence of God bringging with it reatum culpae to a beleever and is not imputed to whom Christs obedience is imputed but covered with the robe of Chrisâ—…s righteousnesse by imputation wherof he is not only freed from the guilt both of the punishment and of the fault but also accepted as righteous in Christ but as the maculâ—… is an habituall sinne or sinfull disposition polluting the soule as a remainder of originall sinne increased by our actuall transgressions it is not wholly abolish'd in this life and much lesse at once but it is mortified by degrees in those that repent of their sinnes who day by day are renewed in the innerman As for those places which Bellarmine alleageth to prove remission of sinne to be the totall abolition of sinne I have fully answered heretofore in the second question of the first controversie shewing that divers of them are to be understood in respect of the guilt which in remission is totally abolished The other which are to bee expounded of the corruption are understood of the cleansing and purging of our soules from them either begunne in this life or finished at the end of this life For the death of the body bringeth with it in the children of God the death and utter extinction of sinne And therefore death which was brought in as a punishment of sinne becommeth a remedy to extinguish sinne For whiles we live in the mortall body sinne liveth in us but when the body dyeth sinne is extinguished CAP. III. Containing our two last Arguments § I. OVR foureteenth Argument If redemption reconciliation and adoption be imputative then justification also is by imputation For I have shewed heretofore that these three in substance differ not from justification for as all these three benefits are comprised under justification so in them the whole nature of justification doth consist For what is it to be redeemed and reconciled but to have our sins remitted or not imputed by the imputation of Christs sufferings which is the first part of justification and what is it to be adopted but to bee accepted in the beloved as righteous and as an heire of eternall life by imputation of Christs obedience which is the second part of justification But those three benefits are imputative all of them wrought by the not imputing of sinne which had made us the bond-slaves of sinne and Satan enemies to God and children of the devill and by the imputation of Christs merits whereby of the slaves of sinne and Satan wee are made Gods servants of enemies his favourites of the children of the devill the sonnes of God § II. Our fifteenth Argument out of Psalm 32. and Rom. 4. If the Holy Ghost describe justification to bee the forgiving of iniquities the covering of sinne the not imputing of sinne to the sinner the imputing of righteousnesse not to him that worketh but to him that beleeveth in Christ or imputing of righteousnesse without workes then justification standeth not in deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse but in imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which the sinner is both freed from his sinne and also accepted as righteous But the Holy Ghost doth so describe justification Rom. 4. 6 7 8. â—…x Psalm 32. 1 2. To both parts Bellarmine doth answere The assumption hee first denieth and then cavills with it For first whereas Calvin as he saith demandeth whether this bee a full definition of justification or but halfe he likewise demandeth when either the 〈◊〉 saith Blessed is the man that feareth the Lord and Blessed are they who f are upright in the way or when our Saviour saith Blessed are the poore in Spirit blessed are the meeke c. whether each of these bee a perfect definition For if it be where is then remission of sinne Secondly he saith that Paul alleageth this testimâ—…ny out of the Psalme not that hee might thereby define fully justification but onely to prove that true justification is the gift of God and not gotten by our owne strength And that hee fitly proveth from thence that David calleth him blessed whose sinnes God remitteth that is whâ—… by the gift aâ—…d grace of God is justified § III. To the former I reply that there is not the like reason betweene these places cited by us and those alleaged by him For those containe but certaine notes and markes of Blessednesse though the Papists absurdly make eight beatitudes of the eight notes of one and the same blessednesse Matth. 5. But here the Apostle out of Psalm 32. sheweth that blessednesse it selfe whereby as appeareth by the former verse he meaneth justification which is the onely 〈◊〉 viae because by it we are intitled to the eternall happinesse which is beatitudo patriae all other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being but notes and signes of this is so defined or described For somuch those words import David doth describe the blessednesse as our translation fitly rendreth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place The second is a meere depravation of the Apostles meaning and intenâ—…ion which was not to prove that justification is the gift of God which he had already taught to be a gracious action of God freely justifying by his grace those that beleeve in Christ but by a new supply of Arguments to prove the same question which in the former Chapters hee had disputed concluding that a man is justified by faith and not by workes which question here hee proveth by the example of Abraham and by the testimony of David The Argument drawne from Abrahâ—…ms example is an excellent proofe which Chrysostome well observed as Cardinall Tâ—…let doth acknowledge For Abraham had both faith and workes and yet he was justified not by his workes but by his faith If Abraham had had no workes or not such notable workes it might have beene said that he was justified by faith without workes because he wanted workes But seeing he abounded with store of excellent works and yet was not justified by them but onely by faith this is an invincible argument to prove that a man is justified by faith and not by workes For Abraham though hee had works yet was justified by faith without workes Likewise David describeth or if you will declareth the blessednesse of the man that is that a man is blessed that is to say justified to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes § IV. This was his denyall of the assumption But now he cavilleth that it may bee that in these words is contained the full definition of justification implicitè For there cannot be remission of sinne in Bellarmines sense that is deletion of sinne unlesse righteousnesse be infâ—…sed as darkenesse is not driven
other sorts of contraries that is to say relata which Aristotle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privantia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as privation and habit contradicentia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as affirmation and negation which Tully calleth velde contraria Thus if Bellarmines Logick be good there are no opposits but contraries nor any contraries but adversa when it is acknowledged by better Logicians than himselfe that of all opposites the most contrary are those which are opposed as affirmation and negation which are called contradicentia as imputare non imputare which are so immediately opposed as the one of them is alwayes true quidlibet affirmare negare verum but cannot both bee true together for that implyeth a contradiction And therefore Chemnitius objection standeth still in force § IX Againe if the holy Ghost in this place had meant by remission of sinne the deletion or abolition of it hee would not have called it remitting covering or hiding or not imputing of it For nothing is either remitted covered or not imputed but that which is And things are hid not that they should not bee but that they should not bee seene Tecta ergo peccata quare dixit saith Augustine ut non viderentur As a prudent man hideth his knowledge Prov. 12. 23. and an hypocrite his sinne we know this saith Bellarmine but withall we know that somethings are covered that they may bee preserved and some things that they may be abolished As wounds are covered with a plaister the most ordinary end and perpetuall consequent of hiding any thing hee leaveth out which is that it may not be seene and so God hideth our sinnes when hee hideth his face from them § X. But for our learning Bellarmine will shew us the expositions of the Fathers that wee may know how farre we swarve from the meaning of the ancient and Orthodox Church And first hee citeth Iustin Martyr who alleadging Psal. 32. 2. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord doth not impute sinne that is saith he that a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repenting of his sinnes receiveth from God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the forgivenesse of his sinne where hee expounderh the not imputing of sinnes to bee the forgivenesse thereof But saith he not as you deceive your selves and others like you in this point who say that although they be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not those which have sinne but such as the Scripture calleth sinners that is to say impenitent sinners so that they know God the Lord will not impute sinne unto them though they doe not repent wherein we wholly agree with Iustin though the Papists doe not who deceive themselves and others whom they perswade though they live in sinne if they observe the outward formality of doing penance which all of them do once a yeare though they neither have faith nor repentance which very few if any of them have they have absolution from their sinne § XI In the next place he citeth Origen and Hierome both which doe make three degrees of the three phrases wherein as they conceive David ascendeth from the lesse to the greater when as notwithstanding it is apparant that if those phrases did signifie divers things the first were the greatest and the middle the least according to the variety of the words whereby sinne in this place is signified Origen setteth them downe not as the gifts of God as Bellarmine beareth us in hand but as a mans owne merits for because saith hee the beginning of the conversion of the soule is to forsake evill from this hee deserveth which the Papists themselves deny to receive remission of sinne But when hee shall beginne to doe good as it were covering over his former evils with new good things he is said to cover sinnes But when he shall come to a perfect man insomuch that from the soule the very roote of all wickednesse is cut off in so much that no footstep of wickednesse can bee found therein which never happeneth in this life for concupiscence which remayneth in all is both a footstep of sinne at the least and the very roote of all iniquity Iam. 1. 14. where now the summe of perfect blessednesse is promised then God cannot impute any sinne which was a private and unsound conceit as there are many more of Origen from which though we dissent wee cannot justly bee said to swarve from the doctrine of the Primitive Orthodox Church § XII Hierome if yet it be Hierome mentioneth three degrees but all of remission of sinne for so hee saith quibus modis remittuntur peccata tribus by what wayes are sinnes remitted by three They are remitted by Baptisme they are covered by Charity they are not imputed by Martyrdome which assertion also is unsound both because according to this conceipt to no man is sinne not imputed but onely to Martyrs and also because by Charity hee seemeth to understand not Gods love but ours when notwithstanding it is euident though our charity cover other mens sinnes Prov. 12. 10. yet our sinnes are to bee covered by the love and mercie of God in Christ. Howbeit in that which followeth he is moresound and agreeth with us quod tegitur non videtur quod non videtur non imputatur quod non imputatur nec punietur what is covered is not seene what is not seene is not imputed what is not imputed shall not be punished where he plainely sheweth that the covering and not imputing of sinne is the not punishing of it But this distinction of the words into three degrees is rejected by Saint Ambrose who saith that to remit cover and not impute are all of one sense and meaning Indeed hee saith that divers names of sinnes are here mentioned whereby wee may gather the variety of sinnes but the Verbes bee of one signification quia cum tegit remittit cum remittit non imputat because when hee covereth he remitteth and when hee remitteth hee doth not impute And this exposition is most agreeable â—…to that of Saint Paul who by all these three understandeth one and the same thing which is the imputation of righteousnesse without workes For it is the manner of the men of God in their Psalmes and Hymnes recorded in the Word of God for their greater comfort as it were by way of exultation to dwell upon those things wherein they rejoyce by expressing the same in divers and sundry â—…ermes whereby the selse same thing is repeated which Rhetoricians call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § XIII In the last place hee citeth two testimonies against us which he calleth out of Augustines exposition of these words which being intirely cited agreeth wholly with us For to omit his exposition of these words a little before set downe quorum tecta sunt peccata whose sins are
covered that is saith he quorum peccata in oblivioneÌ„ ducta sunt whose sins are brought into oblivion in the place quoted by Bellarmine he hath these words Blessed are they whose sins are covered he doth not say in whom no sins are found but whose sins are covered The sins are covered and hid they are abolished or blotted out by oblivion according to his owne former exposition even now alleaged If God covered sins he would not have an eye to them nor animadvert them if hee would not animadvert them neither would he punish them Noluit agnoscere maluit ignoscere he would not take notice of them he would rather pardon them Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered then follow the words cited by Bellarmine Ne sic intelligatis doe not sounderstand what he saith whose sins are covered as though they were there and lived unmortified and unrepented of For that they bee there still though mortified appeareth both by the words before that they may be found there though covered and by his next words tecta ergo peccata quare dixit ut non viderentur why then did he say that sins are covered not that they be not at all but that they may not be seene Quid enim erat Dei videre peccata nisi punire peccata for what is Gods seeing of sin but his punishing of sin and so on the other side what is his not seeing or covering of sin but his not punishing or pardoning it Afterwards making way for the exposition of verse 3. he saith that no man is without sin and that no man can boast that he is cleane from sins And that therefore men if they would have their sinnes cured they must not hide them like the Pharisee who be ing in the Temple as it were in statione medici did shew his sound parts and hid his wounds Deus ergo tegat vulnera noli tu let God therefore cover thy wounds do not thou For if thou being ashamed wilt cover thy wounds the Physician will not cure it then follow the words cited by Bellarmine in the second place Medicus tegat curet emplastro enim tegit Let the Physician cover and cure for with a plaister he covereth then followeth under the cover of the Physitian the wound is healed under the cover of him that is wounded the wound is concealed From whom doest thou conceale it from him that knoweth all things Therfore brethren see what he saith quum tacut c. because I held my peace my bones are waxen old c. where August doth not expound these words whose sins are covered but sheweth that if wee would have them healed wee should not cover them but confesse them to our Spirituall Physician that he covering them with an emplaister may cure them all which we confesse so that he needed not to quote the two Gregories to prove that God doth as it were with a plaister cover and cure our sinnes But withall we would know of Bellarmine what this plaister is Is it our inherent righteousnesse as the Papists teach or is it not the righteousnesse and satisfaction of Christ by whose stripes we are healed for as I shall shew presently out of Iustin Martyr whom here to no purpose Bellarmine did alleage in the first place nothing could cover our sinnes but onely the righteousnesse of Christ by whom the iniquity of many is hid or covered § XIV Diverse other arguments Bellarmine mentioneth as cited out of Calvins Institutions Lib. 3. c. 11. in answering wherof besides some of those which I have produced he spendeth six whole Chapters which notwithstanding for the most part are not there to be found but seeme at least some of them to have been devised of his own braine and by him framed and fitted to his owne strength that having overcome these counterfeit enemies hee might seeme to have refuted us But these arguments which I have produced are sufficient for the proofe of the point in question and them I have defended against his cavils If any man desire to see the defence of the rest that is to see Bellarmines objections devised for us maintained against himselfe he may have recourse to the answere of David Paraeus who hath in so many Chapters answered Bellarmines exceptions Lib. 2. de justif Cap. 9 10 11 12 13 14. Now I proceed to the testimonies of the Fathers and of other later Writers CAP. IV. Testimonies of Writers both Old and New proving justification by righteousnesse imputed § I. I Beginne as Bellarmine did with Iustin Martyr For what other thing saith he could hide or cover our sinnes but the righteousnesse of the Sonne of God In whom was it possible that wee sinners and ungodly should bee justified but in the onely Sonne of God O sweet commutation that the iniquity of many should be hid in one just person and that the righteousnesse of one should justifie many sinners 2. Athanasius affirmeth that the fulfilling of the Law wrought by the first fruits whereby he meaneth the flesh of Christ is imputed to the whole lumpe 3. Gregory Nyssene marvell not saith the Spouse that uprightnesse hath loved me but that being blacke by reason of my sinne and by my workes drawing neere to darkenesse hee hath made mee beautifull by his love making an exchange of his beauty with my blacknesse For having translated the filthinesse of my sinnes unto himselfe hee hath made me partaker of his purity communicating unto me his owne beauty 4. Chrysostome here the Apostle sheweth that there is but one righteousnesse and that that of the Law is recapitulated or reduced to this of faith And that he which hath gotten this which is by faith hath also fulfilled that but he that despiseth this he falleth from that together with this and a little after â—… if thou beleevest in Christ thou hast fulfilled the Law and hast performed much more than the Law commanded For thou hast received a farre greater righteousnesse For as he had said in the words going before that Christ hath justified us by faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more amply than we would have been justified by the Law This greater this more ample righteousnesse must needs be understood of Christs righteousnesse imputed unto us 5. Ambrose he that confesseth his sinnes to God is justified that is obtaineth remission of sinne which is also testified by S Iohn 1 Ioh. 1. 9. and is verified in David Psalm 32. 5. and in the Publican Luk. 18. 14. But he that is justified by remission of sinne is also justified by imputation of righteousnesse for as Bellarmine confesseth the not imputing of sinne bringeth with it imputation of righteousnesse 6. Hierome to the like purpose then are wee just when wee confesse our selves to bee sinners and our righteousnesse consisteth not in our owne merit but in Gods mercy 7. Augustine omnes qui per Christum
that which is lesse than it ought to be is faulty or vicious By reason of which vice there is not a righteous man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not By reason of which vice no man living shall be justified before God By reason of which vice if we shall say that we have no sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us And for which though we be never so good proficients we must of necessity say forgive us our debts c. § XI Secondly hee replyeth that the Law which prescribeth love requireth no more but that we should love with our whole heart But that this not onely may be done but also should be done in the new Testament the Scripture doth witnesse Deuâ—… 30. 6. Answ. The Phrase of loving with the whole heart being legally understood according to the perfection prescribed in the Law doth signifie as it soundeth neither can be performed by any mortall man though regenerate because he is partly flesh and partly Spirit Neither can more than the Law requireth in this behalfe be performed in our Country For as August saith in the life to come our love shal be not only above that which here we have but also far above that which we either aske or think Notwithstanding it can be no more than what the Law requireth with all our heart with all our soule and with all our minde For there doth not remaine in us any thing which may be added ad totum to that which is all for if any thing remaine which might bee added then it is not totum all But the phrase is many times Evangelically understood as in the place quoted to signifie not absolute or legall perfection but the integrity and uprightnesse of the heart which is the Evangelicall perfection as I have shewed elsewhere and shall againe ere long declare § XII Thirdly he replyeth that the Scriptures teach that men may bee perfect in this life And to this purpose alleâ—…geth Gen. 6. 9. 17. 1. Matth. 5. 48. 19. 17. Phil. 3. 15. 1 Iohâ—… 2. 5. The use of the word in these and some other places is to bee distinguished For in the most of them it is not opposed to imperfection and so many places are impertinently alleaged but either to hypocrisie and so it signifieth up right and sincere as Gen. 6. 9. 17. 1. Or to partiality when wee are good to some but not to others as Matth. 5. 48. Be you perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect doing good to men of all sorts both good and bad both friends and foes or to infancy and childhood and so it signifieth adultus a growne man and so it is used 1 Cor. 14. 20. Heb. 5. 14. and so in the place cited Phil. 3. 15. Where the Apostle acknowledging that he had not attained to perfection but still labouring to bee a good proficient exhorteth so many as are perfect to be of the same minde with him that is to strive towards perfection as having not yet attained to iâ—… In 1 Iohn 2. 5. the phrase is varied In him that keepeth Gods word the love of God is perfected that is perfectly knowne hereby we know that we are in him And so is the word used Iam. 2. 22. 2 Cor. 12. 9. There remaineth onely the answere of Christ to the justitiary Matth. 19. 17. If thou wilt bee perfect c. Which as I have shewed before our Saviour fitteth to the disposition of that justitiary whom having a great conceit of himselfe that he had kept all the commandements of God from his youth he thought good to discover and unmaske by a commandement of tryall If thou wilt saith hee bee perfect that is If thou wilt approve thy selfe to be a perfect observer of the Law as thou pretendest goe and sell that thou hast and give to the poore and thou shalt have treasure in heaven and come and follow mee For if thou refusest so to doe thou shalt bewray thy selfe to bee a meere wordling preferring the love of the world besore the love of God and desiring to retaine thy earthly wealth rather than to obtaine the heavenly treasure § XIII His third sort of testimonies is of such as doe testifie that some have kept the Commandements of God and namely those of loving with the whole heart and of not coveting And to to this purpose he alleageth the examples of David of Iosiah of Asa and his people of Iosuah and others whom hee doth but name of Zachary and Elizabeth of the Apostles and namely of Paul and in conclusion of Ezechias and of Abraham Answ. All these were sincere and upright keepers and observers of the Law but none of them were perfect and perpetuall fulfillers of it none of them wâ—…re wâ—…thout sinne David was a man according to Gods owne heart in respect of his uprightnesse and integrity 1 King 3. 6. and for that and not for any absolute perfection he is commended in the places alleaged Psal. 119. 10. 1 King 14. 8. Act. 13. 22. 1 King 15. 5. And yet for all this David was a sinner and in many of his Psalmes bewayleth his manifold sinnes desiring the Lord not to enter into judgement with him for if hee should neither he nor any other could be just in his sight placing his justification in the remission of his sinnes and in Gods acceptation of him imputing unto him righteousnesse without workes Iosias also was a godly and upright king but yet not without fault in that hee harkened not unto the Words of Necho from the mouth of God but presumptuously fought against him 2 Chron. 35. 22. Of the people under Asa no more can be gathered but that with upright hearts and willing minds they entred into a covenant to seeke the Lord in sincerity and truth Of Asa himselfe the Scripture indeed doth testifie that his heart was perfect that is upright before the Lord all his dayes Notwithstanding in the same place it is said that the high places were not taken away and in the next Chapter three sinnes of his are recorded that hee had relied on the King of Syria and not on the Lord that being reproved therefore by the Prophet Hanani he committed the Prophet to prison that in his sickenesse he sought not to the Lord but to the Physitians That which is said of 〈◊〉 doth not concerne the observation of the Morall Law but those politicke precepts which the Lord had given to Moses and Moses to Iosuâ—…h concerning the utter destruction of the Canaanites whom the Lord had delivered into his hands Of Zachary and Elizabeth it is said first that they were just before God that is upright and secondly that they walked in all the commandements and ordinances of the Lord blamelesse which latter they might doe and yet bee farre from that perfection which the Law requireth For Paul professeth of himselfe that even before