And the cause of Zacheus saluation is shewed in the words immediatly following for he sayth To day is saluation come to this house for that he also is the sonne of Abraham to wit infisting in the steps of Abrahams faith as Paul interpreteth this sonne-ship Rom. 4.12 For as touching the flesh many were Abrahams sonnes to whome notwithstanding saluation came not And king Ezechias which example Bellarmine addeth although he shewed his good works with a sincere hart yet he thought not that he was by them iust before the iudgement seate of God like as Paule sayd I know nothing by my selfe but I am not hereby iustified CHAP. VII The confirmation of the fourth part FOurthly that man is iustified by faith in as much as by faith he layeth hold on and applieth to himselfe Christes satisfaction may be perceiued by these sayings Rom. 3.24.25 They are iustified by the redemption made in Christ whome God hath set forth to be a reconciliation through faith in his bloud And chap. 4.24.25 It shal be imputed to vs to wit faith for iustice which beleeue in him that raised vp our Lord Iesus from the dead which was deliuered to death for our faults and raised vp for our iustification And chap. 10.6.7 The iustice which is of faith saith thus Say not in thy hart who shall go vp into heauen this is to bring Christ from aboue Or who shall go downe into the deepe this is to bring Christ againe from the dead Gal. 2.20 I liue by faith of the sonne of God who loued me and gaue himselfe for me c. Rom. 4.5 To him that worketh not but beleeneth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is imputed for iustice Where it is manifest that by the name faith by a metonymie of the adioynt is to be vnderstood any thing which is by faith imputed to a man for iustice For to speake properly that which is in a man is not said to be imputed to him but that which is without a man And faith is in a man but Christs satisfaction which faith apprehendeth is without a man whereby it cometh to passe that it is imputed vnto man by faith that is to say is accounted his so as man is esteemed in this place as if he had performed the satisfaction for himselfe CHAP. VIII The confirmation and clearing of the fift part FIftly that man is iustified by faith only that is for the onely satisfaction of Christ apprehended by faith and not partly by faith that is for Christs satisfaction imputed and partly by works that is for inherent iustice may be gathered by the sayings following which teach that a man is iustified without workes Rom. 3.27 Where is then the reioycing It is excluded By what law of workes no but by the law of faith And by and by verse 28. We conclude therfore that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law And Chap. 4.2 If Abraham our father were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God Gal. 2.16 Knowing that man is not iustified by the workes of the law but by the faith of Iesus Christ we also haue beleeued in Iesus Christ that wee might bee iustified by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the law Eph. 2.8.9 By grace ye are saued through faith not of workes Tit. 3.5 Not of iust workes which we had done but of his owne mercie he saued vs c. Phil. 3.9 That I may be foūd in him not hauing my own iustice which is of the lawe but that which is by faith of Christ Vnto those sayings wherein works are opposed to faith I. Booke of Iustification Chap. 19. Bellarmine excepteth first in generall or in commune that by works which are opposed to faith excluded from Iustification are vnderstood works which go before faith which are done by the only strength of free-will not all absolutely And this he saith may be proued frō Rom. 4. where we read saith he to him that worketh wages is imputed as by debt not as by grace In which place the Apostle openeth himselfe saith he what shuld be vnderstood by workes which are opposed to faith and saith that he calleth them works to which that which is giuen is wages not grace And such be not any but those that are done by the onely strength of freewill For that which is giuen to the works that be done of grace such as is the very act of faith and those that follow thereupon is not simply wages but also grace yea more grace then wages Thus saith Bellarmine I answere It is false that Pault should here say he calleth them works to which that which is giuen is wages not grace that is which are done by the onely strength of freewill For that he speaketh of works in generall whether they be done by the strength of freewill or by grace appeareth by this that he intreateth there of Abrahams workes those which he had done of grace and faith as that he was obedient to Gods commandement and trusting vpon his promise left his countrie of Chaldea and went into a land which God was to shew him also that he refused not to offer his onely sonne Isaak at Gods commandement for these are those workes wherein he might reioyce and boast with men And from these works doth Pault derogate Iustification before God by this argument which is taken from the generall for that to him that worketh wages is giuen as by debt and is not imputed that is not giuen of grace but to Abraham iustice was imputed And whereas Bellarmine faith that which is giuen to workes which be done of grace is partly wages parly grace therein hee feigneth that things immediately aduerse may stand togither and that against the Apostles manifest sentence both in this place where he opposeth grace to debt and by consequence to wages as that cannot stand togither and also Chap. 11.6 where he saith If by grace to wit there be a reseruation of certaine Iewes that are iustified it is not now of workes that is deserts of workes otherwise were no more grace But if of workes then not now of grace otherwise workes were no more workes But Bellarmine hauing first set downe that generall answere Bellarmines exception against that place Ro. 3 27. maketh answere afterward vnto euery of those sayings And first vnto that place Rom. 3.27 he answereth that the reioycing of the Iewes is excluded by the law of of faith not by the law of deeds because man is iustified of grace which first of all inspireth faith then by faith leadeth vnto mercie and good works and is not iustified by the law of deeds that is by the only knowledge of the law strength of free will I answer Although Gods grace wherby a man is iustified leadeth him by faith vnto good works yet is not in that respect man said to be justified by faith as Bellarmine insinuateth because of
faith he doth good workes but he is said to be iustified by faith because by faith he leyeth holde on Christs satisfaction for which only he is iustified Moreouer it is false that the Apostle vnderstandeth those workes only which are done according to Gods law by the strength of free will For it is plain by Abrahams exāple which he presently addeth to this sentence by a prolepsis in the beginning of the chapter following that he speaketh of those workes that are done of grace and faith Against this answere Bellarmine excepteth that the Apostle saith not where is the reioycing but where is the reioycing that is where is the reioycing wherewith thou reioycest in thy selfe and not in the Lord And of workes done of faith and thereby of grace seeing faith is of grace none can reioyce but in the Lord. Which reioycing is not forbidden seeing the same Apostle saith Hee that reioyceth let him reioyce in the Lord. I answere That Pronowne thy is not in the Greeke Neuerthelesse by the very matter it appeareth that it must be vnderstood Then that there is no need the Pronowne should be so expounded as Bellarmine doth for reioycing is rightly said to be his that reioiceth whether he reioyce in himself or in an other Lastly that which is chiefly to be marked the Apostle speaketh of reioycing wherewith any may truly reioyce that he is iust by inherent iustice bred of perfect obseruation of the cōmandements of the law whether he performe this obseruation of naturall strength or of Gods singular grace And such reioycing no man hath because all haue transgressed the law and they which begin to obserue it by Gods singular grace yet can they not in this life obserue it perfectly so as for that obseruation they can be counted iust of God In the meane while it is true that it is lawfull for the godly to reioyce in the Lord but so farre forth as they reioyce not falsly and they should falsly reioyce if they should say that they can by Gods grace perfectly fulfill the law so as by fulfilling thereof they may be iust before God The second place from Rom. 3.28 Wee gather that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law Bellarmine passeth ouer in silence and answereth nothing to it in speciall But in the second place he answereth vnto that saying Rom. 4.2 of Abraham and withall vnto the rest of the places before recited He saith therefore Exception against the other places before recited that Abraham was iustified by faith not by workes that went before faith And the same he answereth vnto the places following Gal. 2. Eph. 2. Tit. 3. for in all those places are excluded onely workes done before faith I answere The Apostle derogateth Iustification not onely from those works which are done before faith but also from those which are done after faith For he speaketh of Abrahams workes which are mentioned in scripture for to shew his vprightnesse as that he obeyed God going out of his owne countrey and offering his sonne But the workes which Abraham did before faith are mentioned in the scripture not as such whereof hee might reioyce but as such whereof hee might worthily be ashamed namely that he serued strange gods Iosh 24.2 Also in Gal. 2. hee speaketh in generall of the workes of the law wherein the Iewes exercised themselues among whom were many regenerate and endued with faith of Christ as cannot be denied although they knew not that that Iesus of Nazareth was the Christ and that iustice should be imputed to them that beleeue in him Besides in this saying Gal. 2. is to be noted the want of that expounding particle tout'ésti 1. that is which being obserued it will be euident that heere are contained exclusiue particles equiualent to that exclusiue particle onely For it is as if he should say Knowing that a man is not iustified by the workes of the law that is but by the faith of Iesus Christ c. And these are equiualent Not to be iustified but by faith and to be iustified by faith onely Besides although Eph. 2. and Tit. 3. hee taketh away iustification from workes done before faith yet by this hee dooth not ascribe it to workes done after faith Against this answere Bellarmine excepteth that the Apostle when hee saith Abraham was iustified by faith not by workes doth not reiect the workes done by faith but affirmeth them not to bee don without faith for if they had bin such they had neuer iustified him therefore he excludeth saith he the workes which Abraham could haue done not of faith But what is to mingle darknesse with the cleare light if this be not The Apostle openly denieth that Abrahā was iustified with God by works speaketh of works don by faith as we haue now twise shewed and yet Bellarmine dareth to say that the Apostle reiecteth not to wit from Abrahams iustificatiō works done of faith Then what meaneth Bellarmine when he saith the Apostle affirmeth that Abrahās works were not done without faith for if they had bin such they had neuer iustified him But where doth the Apostle affirme this And doth not now Bellarmine cōtradict himselfe which affirmeth here that the Apostle speaketh of Abrahams works done of faith when yet before hee said in al those places speech was of works done before faith Also dooth hee not straightway in the words following again cōtradict himselfe when he saith that the Apostle excludeth works which Abrahā could haue done not of faith Besides Bellarmine saith that the Apostle speaketh with conditiō namely thus If Abrahā 〈◊〉 iustified by works not proceding frō the grace of faith surely he had reioycing but not with god And because it is manifest inough saith he that Abraham had reioycing also with god therupon the Apostle gathereth that he was not iustified by works without faith but by faith wherof good workes truly proceed I answere Bellarmine peruerteth the meaning of the Apostles words in feigning vnto him such a syllogisme ye openly contradicteth the Apostles words For the Apostle denieth that Abraham had reioycing with God but Bellarmine affirmeth it And that Bellarmines syllogisme is feigned appeareth by coherence of sencences For when the Apostle had recited the obiection of the Iewes drawne from Abrahams example as if hee had obtained the praise of iustice by woorkes hee answereth by distinction graunting that Abraham got that praise with men but not with God Then if in this place there were an hypotheticall or connex syllogisme it shoulde bee such as this If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherof to reioyce with God But he hath not whereof to reioyce with God Therefore hee was not iustified by workes The assumption of which syllogisme plainely contradicteth the assumption of Bellarmines syllogisme and the conclusion is diuerse from the conclusion of Bellarmines syllogisme because it speaketh of workes in generall when Bellarmines speaketh onely of works done without faith Vnto the last
vnto that effect of AbrahaÌ„s faith to wit glorifying of God as vnto the truth of his faith which truth is signified by that effect For in applying Abrahams example hee doth not now mention strong faith such as that of AbrahaÌ„s was but simply true faith to wit wherby we beleeue that God gaue Iesus for our sinnes and raised him vp for our Iustification The place Rom. 10 speaketh not of Iustification but of saluation that is glorification Which although it be obtained by inuocation proceeding of faith yet is it not obtained by the merit of faith but by Gods grace and the way that he hath prescribed Lastly although out of Hebr. 11. it is manifest that faith is of great price with God yet hence it followeth not that wee by faith do merit Gods benefits For as other the benefites of God so faith it selfe also is Gods free gift as the Apostle witnesseth Eph. 2.8 The 5. prin cipal argumeÌ„t which hath 2. branches There remaineth the last argument which Bellarmine saith is taken from two principles of which the one is that the formal cause of Iustification is Iustice really inherent in vs the other that good works are necessarie to saluation Before wee see how Bellarmine dooth reason froÌ„ these principles it is meet first to put in minde that that first principle is false euen by Bellarmines owne testimonie 2. Booke of IustificatioÌ„ Chapt. 2. For else-where he saith The formall cause of Iustification consisteth in the infusion of that inherent iustice But infusion of Iustice is not the inherent iustice it selfe But now let vs see how he reasoneth from these principles FroÌ„ the first principle he reasoneth thus Vnto the infusion of iustice are more actions required then the action of faith But Iustification is the infusion of iustice Therfore vnto Iustification are required moe actions then the action of faith And by consequence onely faith Iustifieth not after the manner of disposition I answere First Bellarmine here departeth froÌ„ the question not oppugning the opinion of the professors of the Gospell but a Popish fiction For the professors of the Gospel when they say that faith onely iustifieth do not meane that it iustifieth onely by way of disposition but by way of apprehension as hath already bâ—â— often declared Then the assumption is false as we haue shewed before Besides Bellarmine agreeth not with himself who now affirmeth that the action of faith is fore-required vnto Iustification also that it disposeth vnto IustificatioÌ„ wheÌ„ before he said 1 Booke of IustificatioÌ„ Chap. 13.2 Booke Chapt. 4. Of grace and free-will 1. Booke Chap. 6. The latter Branch that Faith iustifieth as the beginning and first roote of Iustification and afterward he maketh faith part of the formall cause of Iustification where he saith That faith is not the whole formal cause of Iustification And in an other place that the formall cause of Iustification consisteth in faith hope and charnie Is part of the forme therefore fore required for the obtaining of the forme Now froÌ„ the other principle he draweth this argument If faith only did iustifie it shuld only saue also But it doth not only saue because good works are also necessarie to saluation Therefore it onely doth not Iustifie I answere Although this argument at the first sight haue a great shew yet if it be throghly looked into it will be sound to be a * i. A false argument Paralogisme hauing foure terms by the homonyâ—â—â—â— or double signification of the argument or middle cerme For that Onely saue in the proposition is to be vnderstood specially of saluation which is by way of apprehension but in the assumption it is vnderstood generally of saluation which is any maner of way For faith onely saueth as the instrumentall apprehending cause to wit by apprehending Christes satisfaction for which God saueth the beleeuer but it doth not onely saue euery maner of way for Gods grace and Christs satisfaction also saueth but as the principall efficient causes also good workes saue but as the way by which God bringeth the beleeuers vnto saluation This double signification being obserued I answere to the assumption where it is said Faith saueth not onely If this be vnderstood generally it is true but then an other thing is assumed then was in the proposition For wheÌ„ it is said in the proposition Faith onely saueth that is not vnderstood generally but specially to wit by way of apprehension But if the assumption bee vnderstood specially as in the proposition namely that faith onely saueth not by laying hold on Christs satisfaction it is manifestly false CHAP. IIII. The proofe of the third part recited and refuted HItherto of the second part of the Papists sentence wherein they contend that faith onely iustifieth not Now followeth the third part wherein they dispute that Iustification standeth not onely in forgiuenesse of sins Which Bellarmine purposeth to proue thus I Booke of IustificatioÌ„ Chap. 6. Iustification consisteth also saith he in inward renuing Therefore not in forgiuenesse of sinnes onely Wee denie the antecedent But to proue that Bellarmine bringeth some places of scripture which wee will consider in order The first place is Rom. 4. Who was deliuered for our sinnes and rose againe for our iustification That is as Bellarmine interpreteth that we may walke in newnesse of life I answer This exposition of Bellarmines is false coÌ„fouÌ„ding those things which the Apostle distinguisheth For Paul beginneth in that Epistle to dispute of renning of nature or of sanctification at the sixt chapter hauing finished the disputation of iustification in the fift chapter And the sense of the place alleaged is That Christ was deliuered vnto death for our sinnes that is to purge our sinnes by satisfaction and was raised vp for our iustification that is to say that he might make knowen our iustification to wit that he hath obtained it by his death for vs. For if he had not risen from the dead we should yet be in our sinnes 1. Cor. 15. Wherefore seeing he is risen againe we know that we are no more in our sinnes but that forgiuenesse of sinnes or our iustification is gotten for vs by Christs death The second place is The 2. place Rom. 5. As sinne reigned vnto death so also grace reigneth by iustice vnto eternall life FroÌ„ hence Bellarmine reasoneth thus He opposeth iustice to sin and by iustice vnderstandeth renuing from which works proceed of life for that the opposition requireth For sinne is said to haue reigned vnto death because it wrought deadly workes contrariwise therfore the grace of God is said to reign by iustice vnto life because by iustice infused it worketh the works of life And if inward renuing which is the beginning of good works be rightly called rustice out of doubt Iustification must be constituted in that renuing and not in forgiuenesse of sinnes onely I answere A gaine Bellarmine bringeth a false exposition For the Apostle entreateth nothing