that place to the Corinthes thus Wee haue borne the true Image of the earthly man that is of the sinner Adam because sinne cleaued in vs not putatiuely but in truth and in deed Therefore we beare also Christs true Image if iustice cleaue in vs not putatiuely but in truth and in deed Here Bellarmine deceitfully in stead of the word Imputation putteth as equall thereto the word Putation saying putatiuely for imputatiuely that he might note a certaine vaine opinion whereunto no matter subsisteth Yet in the meane while Bellarmine is not ignorant that not onely the sinne which dwelleth in man since the fall is deriued from Adam vnto his posteritie by generation but also that first sinne committed properly by Adam is imputed to his posteritie And by like reason not onely inherent iustice that is study of godlinesse in those that belong vnto Christ is wrought by Christ through regeneration of the holy Ghost but also that obedience of Christ whereby he satisfied for the sinnes of the elect is imputed vnto thē for the iustice whereby they stand before God Moreouer he concludeth not heere the question which is not whether wee shall beare Christes Image as touching inherent iustice for no professor of the Gospell denieth this but the question is whether by this iustice we can stand in the iudgement of God The 7. argument hee draweth from Rom. 6. where the Apostle teacheth saith he that we through Iustification 7. Argument whereby we die to sinne and rise againe to iustice do represent Christs death and resurrection And amongst other things saith He that is dead is iustified from sinne Which also the Apostle Peter signified in his first Epistle Chap. 4. when he saith Christ therefore hauing suffered in the flesh be ye also armed with the same minde For he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sinnes But Christ was not putatiuely but truly dead truly rose again therefore we also do not putatiuely but truly die to sinne and rise againe to iustice when wee are iustified by Baptisme I answere First it is false that the Apostle in Rom. 6. teacheth that wee by Iustification do represent Christs death and resurrection For hee treateth not there of Iustification hauing made an end of that dispute in in the 5. Chapter but he treateth of sanctification or regeneration Neither can it bee proued otherwise from those words He that is dead is iustified from sinne For the Apostle speaketh not there of mans Iustification before God but vseth the word Iustified for Freed by a synechdoche of the species For euery one that is iustified that is to say is quitted by the Iudge is freed to wit from punishment but euery one that is freed is not iustified for one may be freed from some other thing then from punishment as from sinne And of this freeing saith the Apostle He that is dead is iustified from sinne for because hee that is dead cannot worke eyther good or euill Therefore beleeuen in as much as they are dead to sinne as the Apostle there saith verse 11. so far forth they are freed from sinne Euen as a seruāt by death is freed from his maister that he serue him not any more hereafter as the Apostle saith in the words immediately going before That our old man is crucified with Christ that the body of sinne may be weakened that hereafter we serue so no more Then it is true that wee do truly die to sinne and rise againe to iustice but the question is not of this thing but it is whether by this spirituall death and resurrection that is to say inherent iustice we be iustified before God Finally Bellarmine comprehendeth more in the conclusion then followeth of the premisses where he saith When we are iustified by faith in which very thing hee beggeth the question For the Apostle sayth not in the place cited that we are iustified by Baptisme seeing hee handleth nothing there of Iustification but teacheth that Baptisme is a testimonie of our regeneration which is wrought by the holy Ghost in as much as it teacheth vs of Christs death and resurrection For it being taught by the holy Ghost we beleeue that Christ died for our sinnes and rose againe vnto heauenly life as our first fruites and head certainly wee will study to auoyde sinnes and will meditate an heauenlie and an holie life The 8. Argument hee taketh from Rom. 8. where the Apostle saith Bellarmine writeth 7. Argument That wee now by Christ haue receiued the spirit of adoption of sonnes of God as touching the soule which liueth as there is said because of Iustification though the body be dead that is be yet mortall because of sinne But by and by after hee addeth to wit the Apostle that we now hauing the first fruites of the spirit doo sigh in our selues expecting the adoption of the sonnes of God the redemption of our body For as the same Apostle saith Phil. 3. Wee expect a Sauiour which will reforme the body of our humilitie configured to the body of his glory But the adoption of sonnes which we expect in the redemption of our body shall be most true and inherent in the body that is immortalitie and impassibilitie not imputatiue but true Therefore the adoption which now we haue in the spirit by Iustification ought also to be true not putatiue Otherwise as we expect the redemption of the body so also we expect the redemption of the soule I answere First Bellarmine faulteth in a false exposition in as much as he taketh the name body simplie for the body of man and contrariwise the name spirit for the soule For the Apostle there by the name body vnderstandeth that which in that and other places hee calleth flesh that is the body together with the soule but such as it is by carnall generation and likewise by the name spirit he vnderstandeth the soule with the body but so far forth as the soule is regenerate by the holy Ghost Next he faulteth in false citation for the Apostle writeth not The soule liueth because of Iustification but The spirit is life because of Iustice Then againe he faulteth in false exposition in as much as he expoūdeth those words The body is dead to meane Is yet mortall when the Apotles meaning is that by the holy Ghost dwelling in the beleeuers it commeth to passe that their flesh is mortified as touching sinne to wit so as that it sinne not and the spirite is quickned as concerning iustice to wit so as that it endeuoureth for iustice and worketh it That this is the meaning of those words may plainly appeare to any that marketh by the words there next ensuing Moreouer Bellarmines sophisme from a like reason of the adoption of the body and the adoption of the soule is vtterly darke and farre from the Apostles words and meaning For neither doth the Apostle say the adoption to come in the body nor yet that wee now haue adoption in the
in that Chapter of renuing of nature but afterward in the Chapter following And the meaning of the place alleaged by comparing it vnto the former with which it agreeth may be perceiued to be this As Adams sinne reigned in his posterite vnto death because being imputed vnto thē it brought death that so the grace of God whereby he imputeth iustice to them that beleeue for Christs satisfaction reigneth in them vnto life eternall because iustice being imputed to them bringeth life eternall The third place is Rom. 6. Neither exhibit your members as weapons of iniquitie to sinne but exhibit your selues to God as liuing from the dead and your members weapons of iustice to God I answere This place speaketh not of Iustification the dispute whereof the Apostle ended in the 5. Chapter but treateth of sanctification Wherefore it maketh nothing to the matter The 4. place is Rom. 8. The spirit liueth for Iustification or as it is in the Greek the spirit of life for iustice Bellarmine addeth Iustification or iustice which maketh to liue and by this to worke cannot be for giuenesse of sinnes onely but some inward and inherent thing I answere Againe he bringeth a false exposition for neither speaketh he here of Iustification but of sanctification as is manifest by the things before and after And the meaning of the place is that the spirit of God dwelling in them that beleeue and are iustified by faith quickneth them as concerning study of iustice or good workes so that now they cease to giue themselues to sinne and contrariwise doo studie for iustice and good workes The 5. place is Gal. 3. If there had bene a law giuen that could haue giuen life surely iustice had bene by the law Here the Apostle sheweth openly saith Bellarmine that Iustice whereupon Iustification is called is something that giueth life to the soule and constituteth it in motion and action But I see not by what syllogisme Bellarmine gathereth this cōsequence from the Apostles words The meaning of the Apostle is If the law could giue life to man vnto whom it was giuē that is could giue him strength perfectly to fulfill or keep it then should mans iustice arise of the law that is man should be iust and counted of God for iust for the law by him obserued But by what force wil you conclude frō hence that iustification consisteth in that iustice which constituteth the soule in action that is in inherent iustice Yea the contrary may rather be frō hence concluded namely that iustification consisteth not in that iustice for that iustice which is required vnto iustification namely perfect obseruation of the law falleth not vnto man in this life The sixt place is 6. Place Ephes 4. Be renued in the spirit of your minde and put on the new man which according to God is created in iustice and holinesse of truth Where the Apostle calleth renuing iustice and holinesse I answere This place also maketh nothing to the matter seeing it speaketh not of iustification but of sanctification neither of the iustice of faith but of the iustice of workes which although it be not perfect and euery way absolute in the regenerate so as to answer in euery part to the law of God yet is it true and sincere and not feigned Three reasons To these arguments Bellarmine addeth three reasons which he calleth naturall which also we will consider The first reason is 1. Iustification without doubt is a certaine motion from sinne vnto iustice and hath it name from the thing whereunto it leadeth as all other the like motiōs inlightning warning c. True iustification therefore cannot be vnderstood except some iustice be gottē besides forgiuenesse of sinnes euen as it can 〈◊〉 either be true inlightning nor true warming if when darknesse is driuen away or cold expelled there follow no light and no heate in the subiect the body I answere Iustification it is in deed a kind of motion from sinne to iustice but not such as Bellarmine feigneth to wit such as inlightning and warning be For it is not the motion of expelling sinne and infusing iustice for this motion in scripture is not called Iustification but Regeneratiō Renouation Sanctification But it is the motion of forgiuing or remitting sinne and imputing iustice Now forgiuenesse of sinne and imputing of iustice differ onely in name indeed they are the same as appeareth by the Apostles words Rom. 4.6.7 as we haue declared elswhere And what other thing it is to driue out darknesse but to bring in light also what els to expell cold but to put in warmth Vnaptly therfore doth Bellarmine feigne that darkenesse may be driuen away and cold expelled although there follow no light nor heate in the subiect body The second reason 2. Iustification saith Bellarmine is not therefore onely giuen vs of God that we may escape the paines of hell but also that we may get the rewards of heauenly life But surely onely forgiuenesse of sinnes deliuereth from paine doth not giue glorie Which thing we see daily in ciuil iudgements For they that are quitted by the iudge are deliuered from death but they get not new rewards for this alone that they are iudged not to haue bene or not to be guiltie I deny the assumption For remission of sinnes doth not onely deliuer from paine to wit eternall death but also bringeth glorie or eternall life The reason of which thing is this that remission of sinnes wherein mans iustification consisteth is remission of all sinnes and therefore not onely of sinnes of committing but also of sinnes of omitting whereby it commeth that he to whome God forgiueth sinnes is so accounted of as if he had not only committed nothing which God hath forbidden in his law but also omitted nothing of that which he hath commanded and therefore as if he had perfectly fulfilled the law of God Now where the perfect fulfilling of the law is there also is life according to that The man that doeth these thinges shall liue in them Moreouer the example of ciuil iudgement which Bellarmine bringeth proueth not his assumption because that absolution is vnlike to the absolution of God For this is vniuersall to wit from all sinnes against the law of God but that is particular or special to wit frō some certaine crime or crimes against the politick lawes Notwithstanding the ciuil Iudge giueth vnto him whome he hath quitted from certaine crimes those rewards which hee hath promised to the innocent namely preseruation in life and defence although hee giue him no new and singular rewards which hee hath promised onely to certaine vertuous exploits And so God giueth eternall life as a reward to those vnto whome he hath promised it to wit vnto those that keepe his law such as he accounteth all those whose sinnes he hath forgiuen The third reason Iustification of enemies maketh friends children 〈◊〉 citizens with Saints of the houshold of God heyres of his kingdome Onely for
and freeing of the second part SEcondly that man of himselfe and his owne nature vniust but now being endued with imputed iustice is pronounced Iust of God the truth of this sentence is plaine by these testimonies in which condemnation is opposed to iustification as Rom. 5.16 Iudgement verily of one vnto condemnation but grace of many offences vnto iustification And ver 8. As by the fall of one sinne entred vpon all men vnto condemnation so also by the iust-worke dicáioma of one iustice entred vpon all men vnto iustification of life And Chap. 8.33.34 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect It is God that iustifieth who is he that condemneth Against this proofe Bellarmine excepteth that the word Iustification doth not alwaies pertain to the iudgemēt place because it is opposed to condemnation For condemnation is sometime an effect of the fault which deserueth punishmēt And as Adam cōdemned vs not by iudging nor after the maner vsed in iudgement places but by imprinting originall blame but God hath condēned by iudging so Christ as the second Adam iustifieth vs by putting out our sinnes and infusing grace and secondly shal iustifie vs in the day of iudgment by declaring them iust whom he before hath made iust I answer First this exceptiō maketh nothing against the proofe brought from Rom. 8. For althogh the word condemning be not alwaies belonging to the iudgement place yet that it is so there is manifest by that which the Apostle saith Who shall accuse Gods elect Moreouer this exception corrupteth the place of the 5. Chapter both touching the words touching the sense For the Apostle saith not there either that Adam condemned vs or Christ iustifieth vs but saith by one offēce of Adam iudgemēt that is guiltinesse came vpon all men vnto cōdemnation likewise by the iust-work dicaloma that is satisfactiō of Christ the gift that is iustice came vpon all men vnto iustification of life Where both condēnation iustification are referred vnto god as Iudge who may with right cōdemne all Adams natural childrē for the sin that he cōmitted who iustifieth them to whom he hath giuen iustice for the satisfaction sake of Christ Furthermore Bellarmines reasoning from a contrary sense or from a like reason of contraries stayeth vpon a false supposition to wit a false opposition of contraries For these are not opposite one to an other to imprint originall blame and to put out sins to wit from nature and infuse grace that is inherent iustice But these are opposite to imprint originall blame and to put out originall blame likewise to obtaine imputation of iustice And indeed as Adam imprinted by his fall original blame in all his children so Christ for those that pertaine vnto him hath put out that blame and obtained imputation of iustice by his satisfaction Moreouer although as Adam did not onely imprint blame in his posteritie but also by generation infused into them the very force of sinne so Christ also hath not onely put out the blame of the elect and obtained imputation of iustice for them but also regenerateth them by his holy spirit and by that regeneratiō putteth out the force of sinne and infuseth iustice or studie of good workes yet in that place of the Apostle he speaketh not of this benefite of Christ but onely of the other And of the benefit of regeneration or sanctification he entreateth afterwards in the 6.7 8. Chapter CHAP. VI. The confirmation and clearing of the third part THirdly that man is accounted for iust and pronounced iust of God in as much as God forgiueth him his sins for the satisfaction of Christ and therefore that iustification is no other thing then forgiuenesse of sinnes these sayings teach vs. Rom. 4.6.7.8 Dauid saith That blessed is that man to whom God imputeth iustice without works saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sinne In these words it is certaine that the full definition of Iustification is contained for of this the Apostle manifestly there entreateth to wit minding to teach how man is iustified before God as appeareth by comparing togither those things which go before from the 17. verse of the 1. Chapter vnto this place And he defineth Iustification here by imputation of iustice or that which he taketh for the same for giuenesse of sinnes A gainst this proofe Bellarmine excepteth that Paul alleageth not this testimonie of the Psalme 2. Booke of iustification Chap. 9. perfectly to define Iustification but onely to proue that true Iustification is the gift of God and cannot be gotten by our owne strength He also saith it may be answered that in these words a perfect definition is contained but intricately For forgiuenesse of sinnes saith he cannot be except iustice be infused euen as darknesse is not driuen away except light come in place therof Also by not imputing of sins saith he the Apostle gathereth imputing of iustice and by this teacheth that these two cannot be separated forgiuenesse of sinnes and giuing of iustice to wit inherent for this Bellarmine vnderstandeth I aunswere that Paul alleageth the testimonie of this Psalme perfectly to define Iustification is plaine by his drift and comparing togither things that went before as euen now we warned Wherefore Bellarmine feigneth here a false drift Whereupon it followeth that it is also false that heere is contained a perfect definition intricately to wit infusion of inherent iustice beeing vnderstoode herewithall as the other and that the principall part of iustification And although it be true that with iustifying faith inherent iustice is togither infused not perfect but begunne yet is it not true neither followeth it that this iustice is a part of that iustice whereby wee stand before the iudgement seate of GOD about which the Apostle dealeth in this place Besides Bellarmine maketh a false comparison For infusion of iustice is not so in respect of forgiuenesse of sinnes as infusion of light into the ayre to driue darkenesse out of the same but is so compared vnto the reall putting out of inhabiting sinne which the scripture calleth mortification of the flesh and of the olde man For how much as inherent iustice is infused that is how much as the spirit or new man is quickned so much is inhabiting sinne put out or the flesh and olde man mortified Moreouer Bellarmine falsly interpreteth the Apostles reasoning as thogh he gathered imputatiō of iustice by not imputing of sinnes as if it were some diuerse thing For the Apostle doth not gather here a diuerse thing frō a diuerse but proueth imputation of iustice by the testimonie of Dauid whereby appeareth that hee holdeth imputation of Iustice which he would prooue and not imputing of sinnes which is mentioned in the testimonie alleadged for one and the same thing For otherwise he should not proue his purpose For it were ready to except Thou art in hand
place Exception against the place Phil. 3.9 from Phil. 3. Bellarmine answereth that those workes are called the iustice of the law which are done through knowledge of the law by the onely strength of nature I answere By that which the Apostle signifieth that hee trusted not in the iustice of workes which hee had done by the onely strength of nature it cannot firmely be gathered that he trusted in the justice of workes which hee had done of faith Yea he openly signifieth that hee trusted in the onely iustice of faith And this is the iustice which is imputed to man by faith as he teacheth Rom. 4.5.6 and not the iustice of workes done of faith inherent in a man And in an other place speaking of this inherent iustice he saith I know nothing by my selfe but I am not hereby iustified CHAP. IX The confirmation and clearing of the sixt part HItherto of the fifth part of the sentence proposed now followeth of the sixt that man is iustified by the grace or free loue of God in as much as God hath of fauour to man ordained Christ for a Mediator or satisfactor according to these sayings Act 15.11 By the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ wee beleeue that we shall be saued euen as they Rom. 3.24 Are iustified freely by his grace by the redemptiō made in Iesus Christ Rom. 4.16 Therefore the inheritance is of faith that it may be by grace Rom. 5.15 If by the fal of that one many are dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace which is by one man Iesus Christ hath abounded vnto many And verse 17. they which receiue the abundance of grace and the gift of iustice shall raigne in life through one that is Iesus Christ. And vers 21. So grace might reigne by iustice vnto-eternall life through Iesus Christ our Lord. Rom. 11.5 Euen so at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace Gal. 2.21 I do not abrogate the grace of God For if iustice be by the law then Christ died in vaine Gal. 5.4 Yee are abolished from Grist whosoeuer are iustified by the Law ye are fallen from grace Eph. 1.5.6.7 Who hath predestinate vs to be adopted throgh Iesus Christ vnto himselfe according to the good pleasure of his wilt to the praise of the glorie of his grace wherewith he hath made vs accepted in his beloued by whom wee haue redemption through his bloud c. Eph. 2.8 By grace ye are saued c. Tit. 3.7 That wee beeing iustified by his grace should bee made heires according to the hope of eternall life In all these speeches the word Grace signifieth the fauour of God wherewith he accepteth his elect 2. Booke of iustification Chap. 3. Against this Bellarmine excepteth that iustifying grace is not onely the fauour of God but a gift inherent in the minde as may bee vnderstood saith he by the diuerse attributes and names thereof For it is called the gift which wee receiue Rom. 5.17 receiuing the abundance of the grace and gift Also it is said to be giuen by Christ Grace and truth is made by Iesus Christ. Ioh. 1. Now it is not rightly said that the good wil of God the Father is made by Christ Also it is said to be giuen of Christ by measure To euery one of vs is giuen grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ Eph 4. But the good will of God is not giuen by measure neither of Christ Also it is compared to the being which is giuen by creation For therof we are said to be Created in Christ Eph. 2. a new creature Gal. 5. But that whereby we are said to be creatures is inward and inherent Finally it is compared to the light 2. Cor. 6. What part hath iustice with iniquitie What fellowship hath light with darknesse Eph. 5. Ye were sometimes darknesse but now are light in the Lord. 1. Ioh. 2. He that saith he is in the light and hateth his brother is in darknesse But certes light maketh not a lucide body except it be inherent neither suffereth darkenesse with it Besides the grace by which the Apostle sayth wee are iustified is called also loue shead in our hearts by the holy Ghost Rom. 5. Also by iustifying grace wee are saide to liue Rom. 8. the spirit liueth for iustification But wee cannot bee rightly saide to liue by the outward fauour of God when nothing is more inward then life is I answere Rom. 5.17 the grace and the gift of iustice are openly distinguished therefore the gift is not there called the grace as Bellarmine saith Then there is there no speech of inherent iustice as Bellarmine would but of the iustice which God giueth of the grace or fauour hee imputeth for the Apostle speaketh of the same iustice that before Rom. 4.6 where he said iustice was imputed Ioh. 1. The name of Grace signifieth the benefite of redemption by a metonymie of the cause efficient but thereof it followeth not that it is taken after the same maner in the sayings rehearsed As neither from the saying Eph. 4. where the name Grace signifieth some spirituall gift profitable for the edifying of the Church Neither yet by the other speeches Eph. 2. Gal. 5.2 Cor. 6. where the name of Grace is not found neither is the speech of iustification but of regeneration And in that saying Rom. 5. Loue is shead c is not meant the loue which is inherent in vs and wherewith wee loue God but wherewith God loued vs as is plaine by comparing it with the 8. verse where it is said God commendeth his loue towards vs c. Finally Rom. 8.10 hee speaketh not of iustification but of sanctification neither is there the name Iustification as Bellarmine falsly alleageth but the name of Iustice whereby is there meant a iust and holy life as may appeare by the whole context and scope of that place and not that iustice whereby a man standeth before the iudgement seate of GOD the disputation of which matter the Apostle finished in the end of the sift Chapter CHAP. X. The confirmation of the seuenth part THere remaineth the seuenth part of the sentence propounded to wit that man is iustified by the iustice of God whereby he accepteth Christs satisfaction for the elect Of this Paule testifieth Rom. 3.25.26 Where he saith Whom to wit Christ God hath set forth to be are conciliation through faith in his bloud to declare his iustice by the forgiuenesse of the sinnes that are past through the patience of God to shew at this time his iustice that he might be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith of Iesus By which words the Apostle teacheth that God declareth his iustice in as much as he forgiueth sinnes to them for whom Christ hath satisfied namely the beleeuers For it is the part of iustice to be content if satisfaction bee made for the debt by a suretie and not to
spirit that is in the soule neither doth hee compare these two adoptions as like one to an other But hee sayth Wee expect the adoption of the sonnes of God that is to say that heauenly inheritance which wee are adopted to possesse and enioy in due time And this very thing hee calleth redemption of the body that is to say redemption whereby both the body shall be deliuered from the crosse whereto it is subiect in this life and the soule from inhabiting sinne wherein it is holden so long as it liueth in this mortall body Wherefore it is vnapt and not beseeming a Diuine that Bellarmine counteth this an absurd thing that we should looke for redemption of the soule For that lamentation of Paule Rom. 7.24 O wretched man that I am who shall deliuer me from this body of death doth it not pertaine to the ful deliuerance of the soule from inhabiting sinne Finally it is a true and not a putatiue adoption as Bellarmine cauelling speaketh wherewith God hath adopted vs and yet the adoption is the imputation of sonneship whereby wee are counted for the sonnes of God through grace when by nature wee were the children of wrath But in the meane time adoption is one thing the spirit of adoption an other thing By adoption we are receiued into grace and iustified by the spirit of adoption we are regenerate beeing already adopted CHAP. III. The proofe of the second part recited and refuted HItherto we haue disputed of the first part of the Papists opinion wherin they determine that Iustification is infusion of iustice It followeth that now wee treate of the second parte wherein they say That faith alone iustifieth not but * The I. principall Argument the proofes wherof do follow I. Argument I Booke of Iustificatiō Chap. 13. as the beginning and roote of Iustification To proue this Bellarmine first bringeth the place Heb. 11. Hee that commeth vnto God must beleeue that God is Where the first motion vnto God is giuen to faith by which he that was far off beginneth now to draw nigh I answere The Apostle here maketh no comparison betweene faith and other spirituall vertues but speaking simplie of faith alone affirmeth it to bee necessarie for him that commeth vnto God to wit to craue his helpe and aske any thing of him Wherfore it is a strange glosse that the first motion vnto God is here giuen to faith As though the motions that follow were not of faith but of other spiritual vertues And as though Iustification were done by I know not how many motions vnto God Nay Iustification is made by this onely motion wherby the mind through faith is so moued vnto God that it taketh hold of his good will reconciled by Christs satisfaction to all that beleeue in him Then hee bringeth the saying Rom. 2. Argument 10. Whosoeuer shall call vpon the name of the Lord shall be saued But how shall they call vpon him in whom they haue not beleeued how shall they beleeue without a Preacher how shall they preach except they bee sent Where the Apostle deseribeth this order of lustification that first there be a sending of Preachers secondly the preaching of the Gospell thirdly faith fourthly inuocation fiftly saluation that is Iustifications which is health of soule from the disease of sinne Of which sending and preaching are without vs and and to the first beginning of Iustification in vs is faith after which followeth inuocation and the rest in their order I answere Bellarmine faulteth fast in confusion of things diuerse in that be expoundeth the word Saluation by the word Iustification when as Saluation properly spoken is more large to wit comprehending iustification regeneration and glorification Then hee faulteth in a false definition when as hee defineth Iustification to bee health of soule from the disease of sinne that is to say regeneration Finally he goeth from the question in that hee numbreth certaine things which be needfull vnto saluation besides faith For when the professors of the Gospell teach that man is iustified by faith onely they exclude not those things that are here reckoned from the obtaining of saluation but only they exclude mans workes from obtaining that rustice which God may approoue as perfect Thirdly he bringeth the place Iohn I. So many as receiued him 3. Argument he gaue them power to be made the sons of God to those that beleeue in his name Here Iohn opēly teacheth saith Bellarmine that they which receiue Christ by faith are not yet the sons of God but may so be made if they go on further that they also begin to hope and loue For loue properly maketh the sonnes of God as as appeareth I. Iohn 2. I answere The meaning of Iohn words is not that which Bellarmine bringeth but he meaneth that God hath giuen to the beleeuers power or right exousian for to be made the sonnes of God that is to be the sonnes of God in this very respect that they are borne of God as be declareth in the verse following that is that they are regenerate and by consequence endued with faith Whence I draw this Argument As farre forth as the beleeuers are borne of God so farre forth is giuen vnto them the right of the children of God But the beleeuers as far foorth as they beleeue are borne of God Therefore to the beleeuers as far forth a they beleeue is giuen the right of the children of God and by consequence they are iustified as far foxth as they beleeue or by faith And whereas Bellarmine saith it is plaine by 1. Ioh. 2. that loue properly maketh the sonnes of God verily I find not this sentence in that Chapter neither expresly nor yet by collection But if perhaps through the Printers fault the number second crept in for the nūber third there is indeed in the third Chapter a certaine sentence of loue but not this That loue maketh the sonnes of God but that by loue the sonnes of God are knowne namely in the 10. verse By this are manifested the sonnes of God and the sonnes of the diuell Who so doth not iustice is not of God and he that loueth not his brother Neither can Bellarmines sentence be concluded as hee peraduenture thinketh from the 1. verse where it is said thus Behold what loue the father hath giuen to vs that we should be called the sonnes of God For by the name Loue there by a metonymie of the efficient cause he vnderstandeth a benefit proceeding from the loue wherewith God loueth vs and what that benefit is he declareth by opposition in those words that we should be called the sonnes of God namely the benefit of adoption Wherefore Bellarmine hath not yet shewed that we are adopted and iustified of GOD by loue and therefore not by faith onely To these Arguments Bellarmine addeth a naturall reason 4. Argument as hee calleth it in these words Some man may beleeue that which he hopeth not for neither loueth