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
with which many come to baptisme and to shew that faith which justifieth is commanded by the will to note the difference of forced faith such as is in Devils and was in those men who beleeved in Christ compelled by the miracles but Christ did not concredit himselfe to them for such a faith doth not justifie For as science is begotten by virtue of demonstrative reason so faith is not demonstrated but is undertaken by the virtue or power of the will captivating the understanding unto the obedience of Christ who doth infuse it wherefore Augustine tract 26. in Ioan. other things saith hee a man may doe against his will but none can beleeve but he that is willing § VI. Thus have I proved against Bellarmine that to beleeve is an act of the will as well as of the understanding and that the seat of faith is neither the understanding alone nor the will alone but the mind which comprehendeth both Howbeit I cannot altogether subscribe to the judgement of the Schoole-men and other learned men whether Protestants or Papists who teach that the understanding is commanded by the will to assent unto divine truthes and that it doth credere ex imperio voluntatis For I doe not conceive how the will which is intellectus extensus and followeth the judgement of the practike understanding in so much that it willeth nothing but what the understanding approveth and judgeth to be willed how it I say should command the understanding Neither doth their reason satisfie which is this that the understanding of man in matters pertaining to Science is determined to one thing by the evidence of the thing or necessity of reason not by the Will but the understanding of man in matters belonging to faith which sometimes surpasse the capacity of humane reason cannot be determined to any particular either by the evidence of the thing or by necessity of reason both which are wanting in the objects of faith which are things hoped for and things not seene And therefore say they there can no assent bee given unlesse the understanding be commanded by the will to assent But I answere as the ground of knowing things by Science is the evidence of the thing or necessity of reason so the ground of beleeving things is the authority of God speaking in his word which is infallible and in certainty surpasseth the grounds of Science and by it the understanding is determined to such particulars as it conceiveth to be revealed of God As therefore in things of science which the understanding doth judge to bee evident and of necessary truth the will doth readily embrace them following therin the judgment of the understanding and so the mind which containeth both faculties doth willingly and yet necessarily assent therto moved therunto by the evidence of necessary truth so in matters of faith which the understanding though it comprehends them not yet doth judge infallibly true moved thereto by the authority of God revealing those truthes the Will as I conceive being captivated by the understanding and submitting it selfe to the judgement thereof the mind doth willingly and yet necessarily assent to such truthes revealed by God moved thereunto by the infallible authority of God speaking in his Word Which in certainty of truth doth farre surmount all grounds of science and doth captivate the understanding and it the Will Why therefore the assent to divine truthes which are grounded upon a most certaine and inâ—…allible soundation which perswadeth the understanding should more proceed from the Will than the assent to humane sciences I cannot conceive or why the Will should command the understanding in them more than in matters of science CAP. VI. Of the object of justifying faith § I. SO much of the subject now wee come to the object of justifying â—…aith where the question ought not to be made coneeming the object of faith at large but of that object which is proper to faith as it justifieth For we doe freely confesâ—…e that the object of faith is all and every truth revealed unto us by God and that the word of God is objectum fidei adaquatum the even object of â—…aith that is we are bound to beleeve whatsoever is contained in the word but what is not contained in the word of God we are not to beleeve it as a matter of â—…aith And that therefore by the â—…ame faith by which we are justified we beleeve whatsoever is contained in the written word of God whether expressely or by necessary consequence So that Bellarmine might have saved a great deale of labour idlely spent in proving that which we confesse that by faith we beleeve the creation and all other truths revealed in the word yea we professe him to have no true justifying faith who denieth credit to any thing which hee findeth revealed by God Howbeit the Papiâ—… extend this object not onely to the Canoâ—…icall Scriptures but also to those which we according to all almost antiquitieâ—… call Apocryphall and not onely to the written word but also to their unwritten verities as they call the traditions of the Church of Rome that is such doctrines and ordinances as that Church doth teach and observe having no ground nor warrant in the Scriptures The which notwithstanding whiles they doe not onely match but also preferre them before the written word doe evidently prove the Pope who by their doctrine is above the Church and the Church above the Scriptures to bee Antichrist But this is another controversie whereinto I may not now make an excuâ—…sion Onely I desire the Reader to take notice of this marke among others of the Catholike Apostaâ—…ie of the Romane Church which hath not onely departed from the ancient doctrine and rule of faith which is the Scriptures but also have set up a new rule the last resolution of their faith being into the infallible judgement and irrefragable authority of the Bishop of Rome and to this purpose let him consider these two testimonies of Saint Bâ—…sil it is a manifest falling away from the faith and conviction of pride either to reject any of those things that are written or to bring in any of those things that are not written The other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All that is without the Scripture inspired of God being not of faith is sinne § II. But howsoever by that faith which justifieth wee beleeve all and every truth revealed by God yet the proper and formall Object of justifying faith quatâ—…nus justificat and by beleeving whereof it doth justifie is not every truth but that onely which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called the Truth that is Christ with all his merits Ioh. 14. 6. or the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ or the Promises of the Gospell concerning justification and salvation by Christ which often times in the Scripture is called the Truth as Ioh. 1. 17. 5. 33. 8. 31 32. and as some thinke Ioh. 8. 44. and by Christâ—… owne
than of the Pope alone It is the Pope therefore alone that cannot erre who hath an heavenly and infallible judgement who is the supreame Iudge in all controversies the chiefe and onely authenticall interpreter of the Scriptures so that no point of religion is to be held for truth but what he determineth no text of Scripture to be held the word of God in any other sense than hee holdeth yea that a text of Scripture urged against them in another sense than he holdeth is not the word of God but rather of the devill By which meanes the Pope is stept into the roome of Christ and and is undoubtedly become Antichrist So that the implicite faith of the Papists whereby they professe themselves to beleeve what is propounded by the Church meaning especially the See of Rome that is to say the Pope to be beleeved and consequently whereby they professe themselves to beleeve in the Pope as the principall rule principle and foundation of their faith is the very character and marke of the Beast whereby men are branded to destruction § XVIII The which doth also prove the other point viz. how pernicious the doctrine of implicite faith is as tending to the perdition of the seduced people which I will also prove by other reasons For under the name of implicite faith they commend unto the Laity damnable ignorance that having blindfolded them they may lead them as it were by the nose whither it pleaseth them To them it is sufficient to beleeve what the Church beleeveth though they know little or nothing of the Churches beleefe If one of them be called before the Commissioners hee shall say enough and defend himselfe sufficiently when he answereth that he is a Catholike and that he will live and dye in that faith which the Catholike Church doth teach and that this Church can give them a reason of all those things which they demand And thus according to Christs promise Luk. 12. 12. the holy Ghost for sooth teacheth every unlearned Catholike to give sufficient reason of his faith But it is evident that those who live in ignorance doe live in a state of damnation or as the Scripture speaketh doe sit in darkenesse and in the shadow of death First because they live without God as it were Atheists in this world For they that know not God have not God Secondly because they are void of all grace whereby they might hope to be saved For knowledge being the first of all graces where that is wanting all the rest are absent Againe without faith there is no saving grace for faith is the mother and roote of all other graces and without knowledge there is no faith as I have already shewed For how can t they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard and by hearing knowne Knowledge is as it were the first step towards faith and all other graces and therefore he that hath not that in some measure hath not made one steppe in the way that leadeth to eternall life Thirdly because they are not Christs sheepe nor Gods children For I saith our Saviour know mine and I am knowne of mine Ioh. 10. 14. They shall know me every one of them saith the Lord from the greatest to the least of them Ier. 31. 34. All Gods children shall be taught of God Esai 54. 13. Ioh. 6. 45. every one therefore that hath heard and learned of the Father commeth to mee saith our Saviour and none else All Gods children have the unction from the holy One and they know all needfull things 1 Ioh. 2. 20. 27. Ioh. 16. 13. Fourthly because it hath all the respects of evill in it For it is not one ly a sinne but the cause of all sinne and errour a punishment and the cause of punishment both in this life and in the world to come A sinne repâ—…oved and condemned Ier. 4. 22. 9. 3. Hos. 4. 1. â—… Cor. 15. 34. For it a sacrifice was ordained Levit. 4. 2. yea all the sinnes for which sacrifices were offered were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—… that is ignorances Heb. 9. 7. The cause of sinne Errant qui operantur mulum They erre that sinne and none erre but by ignorance as Augustine saith Non erratur nisi per ignorantiam whence sinners are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as are ignorant and doe erre Heb. 5. 3. Ignorance is the mother of all errours Regnum ignorantiae saith Augustine regnum erroris Ignorance also is a fearefull punishmentâ—… when God doth punish men with blindenesse of heart Esai 6. 9 10. and sendeth upon them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the efficacy of errour 2 Thâ—…s 2. 11. It is also the cause of punishment for the people that understandeth not shall bee punished Hos. 4. 14. as of captivityâ—… Esai 5. 13. of destruction Hos. 4. 6. it maketh men subject to the curse of God Psal. 79. 6. Ier. 10. 25. and to eternall damnation 2. Thes. 1. 8. If our Gospell bee hid saith the Apostle it is hid to them that perish 2 Cor. 4. 3. For if it bee eternall life to know God and Christ our Saviour then not to know God and our Saviour is to misse of eternall life Qui ea quâ—… sunt Domini nesciunt a Domino nesciuntur saith Gregory Paulo attestante qui ait si quis autem ignorat ignorabitur The Councell of Rhemes denyeth that they can bee saved who doe not understand the Creed and the Lords Prayer And againe no man can bee saved without faith and no man can beleeve that which he doth not know nor hath heard Augustine ipsa ignorantia in ets qui intelligere noluerunt sine dubitatione peâ—…catum â—…st in eis autem qui non potuerunt pâ—…na pecâ—…ati Ergo in utrisque non â—…st justa excusatio sed justa damnatio Hierome Ignoratio Scripturarum ignoratio Christi Origen â—…aith the Devills possesse all those that live in ignorance § XIX All this notwithstanding the popish Impostors detaine the people in ignorance they have taken away the Key of knowledge and shut up the Kingdome of Heaven against their followers for neither they goe in themselves neither suffer them that faine would enter to goe in They forbid them to reade the Scriptures which are able to make them wise to salvation 2 Tim. 3. 15. which our Saviour therefore commandeth them to search Ioh. 5. 39. They suffer them not to heare them nor yet the divine service otherwise than in an unknowen tongue contrary to the rule of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. and wherefore all this partly that their errours and abominations should not be seene for he that evill doeth hateth the light and as theeves by night wish the light of Gods Word to bee put out or at least to bee hid under a Bushell and partly that they may bee Lords over the peoples faith and may make them beleeve what they list
those who have not Charity have not faith who as the same Apostle saith professe themselves to know God but in deeds deny him which also is against himselfe for how saith Chrysostome can such a man be said to beleeve that denieth God Therefore saith he the wicked deny the faith not in heart or mouth but indeed and of them saith he writeth Saint Gregory whose testimony he alleageth directly against himselfe Eos non veraciter credere non habere veram fidem quinon bene operantur that they doe not truely beleeve nor have a true faith who doe not worke well And therefore those that worke ill as those doe who are without Charity and namely those who provide not for their domesticks shew that they have no true faith But this he salveth with another testimony of the same Gregory that many enter into the Church because they have faith and yet want the wedding garment because they have not Charity Where by faith we are to understand the profession of faith which many make who have not Charity But by the wedding garment we are according to the Scriptures to understand rather Christ and his righteousnesse as I have shewed heretofore put on by a true and lively faith for he that was without the wedding garment wanted faith as well as charity The Authour of the unfinished Worke in Chrysostome faith Nuptiale vestimentum est fides vera quae est per Iesum Christum justitiam ejus the wedding garment is the true faith which is by Iesus Christ and his righteousnesse But will you heare one of their owne Writers upon Matth. 22. what is saith he that wedding garment to wit that whereof Paul speaketh when he saith put on the Lord Iesus Christ. This garment is inwardly put on by faith when thou puttest on Christs righteousnesse to cover thy sinnes c. § VII The second out of Ioh. 6. 64. Iudas though he professed the faith is yet said not to have beleeved because he wanted Charity and therefore they who want Charity want faith Bellarmine answereth that he is said not to beleeve because at that time he had lost his faith I reply Iudas though he professed the faith yet he never had true faith and therefore never lost it For from the beginning Iesus knew who they were that beleeved not and who should betray him for this cause saith he in the next verse I said unto you that no man can come to me that is beleeve in me vers 35. and 64. unlesse it be given unto him of my Father which hee insinuateth had not been given to Iudas whom from the beginning he knew to be no beleever § VIII Hee that saith hee knoweth God namely by faith and keepeth not his commandements is a lyar Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh of the knowledge of familiarity and friendship of which the Lord speaketh to the wicked Matth. 7. 25. I know you not whereunto I reply that if he speake of such knowledge it is the knowledge of faith and cannot be had but by faith and so the argument standeth in force Howbeit unfitly doth he alleage the Lords not knowing of the wicked to prove the meaning of our knowing of him If he speake not of the knowledge of faith the argument is the stronger for if he be a lyar that only saith that he knoweth God and keepeth not his commandements then much more is hee a lyar that saith hee knoweth God by faith and keepeth not his commandements Beda indeed expoundeth this knowledge of God of the love of God which is a fruit and consequent of our faith hocest Deum nosse quod amare but others of faith as Gregory speaking of this place notitia quippâ—… Dei ad fideâ—… pertinet Oecumenius maketh this verse to bee of the same signification with the sixth verse of the first Chapter If we say that we have fellowship with him and walke in darkenesse we are lyars and that which Saint Iohn there calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Communion here hee calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commixtion or conjunction Thus therefore hee saith Saint Iohn having said before that those which beleeve in the Lord have communion or fellowship with him here hee setteth downe evidences of our communion with him In this wee know that wee know him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that which hee had said before that wee have conjunction or communion with him if wee keepe his Commandements And this saith hee hee more fully sheweth by the contrary but hee that saith I know him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or I have communion with him and keepeth not his Commandements he is a lyar This then is â—…is meaning he that saith I know God that is I have Communion with him by faith and doth not keepe his Commandements hee is a lyar But whether wee understand the words of communion by faith or of faith according to the usuall pâ—…rase of the Scriptures puting knowledge for faith as I noted before or of knowledge it selfe the argument is unanswerable For if wee cannot truely bee said to know Christ that is to beleeve in him unlesse wee keepe his Commandements then it is evident that true faith cannot be severed from Charity For this is love if we keep his Commandements 1 Ioh. 5. 3. againe if hee that saith hee knoweth God and keepeth not his Commandemenes bee a lyar much more he that saith hee beleeveth in God and keepeth not his Commandements is a lyar as I said before To this adde Tit. 1. â—…6 which Bellarmine cited against himselfe those that professe themselves to know God but in workes deny him they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unbeleevers Ioh. 3. 36. or as the vulgar Latine incredibiles or as Thomas Aquinas non apti ad credendum § IX Fourthly 1 Ioh. 5. 1. Every one that bâ—…leeveth that Iesus is the Christ is borne of God and therefore undoubtedly hath charity Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh de fide formata as Saint Augustine expoundeth and so doe wee for whosoever truely beleeveth hath fidem formatam For the Apostle no doubt speaketh of a true lively saith and such there is none but that which the Papists call formatam which worketh by love And therefore the argument holdeth that whosoever hath a true lively iustifying faith is borne of God or regenerated by the Spirit of sanctification and therefore is undoubtedly endued with charity § Fifthly Iam. 2. That faith which iâ—… without workes is dead A true lively justifying faith is not dead Therefore â—… true livâ—…ly â—…ustifying faith is not without works Bellarmine saith he hath explaned this in his third argument that faith is said to be dead not as a mâ—… is said to bee dead who after death is not but as a body is said to bee dead which after death is but liveth not For saith he Life is not of the
sense given by the Church of Rome and therein by the Pope who is as they say the supreme and onely authenticall interpreter of the Word from whom it is not lawfull to dissent So that in his sense any portion of the Scriptures though obscure must bee acknowledged the word of God but urged in any other sense it is the word of the Devill rather than the Word of God Now it is the sense of the Scriptures which is the Word of God rather than the letter the sense being the soule and life of the letter Non enim in legendo Scripturae sed in intelligendo consistunt saith Hierome The words saith Bellarmine are as the sheath the sense is the sword of the Spirit Thus hath the Church of Rome revolted from the generall doctrine of faith which is the written word of God or the holy Canonicall Scriptures The speciall doctrines of faith are the severall articles taught in the Scriptures which are the speciall objects of faith either quae justificat onely or qua justificat The justifying faith beleeâ—…h all the articles and doctrines of faith which are taught in the Word of God but the peculiar object of faith quatenus justificat is the doctrine of the Gospell As touching the speciall doctrines of Christian faith there are divers bundreds of errors wherein the Church of Rome hath revolted from the faith not at once but at diveâ—…s times and by degrees The number whereof is so great as that Popery or the Catholicisme of Papiâ—…ts may justly bee called the Catholike Apostasie But from the peculiar doctrine of faith quatenus justificat which is the doctrine of the Gospell concerning justification by faith in Christ alone the Church of Rome chiefly erreth as I have shewed in this Treatise and by their Antichristian doctrine in this point they are revolted from the Gospell which is Verbum fidei the Word or Doctrine of faith they are fallen from the comfortable doctrine of this grace and to them Christ is made of none effect as I have proved This assertion concerning the Apostâ—…sie of the now Church of Rome I â—…ppose as an antidote against the poison of their impudently depraved article concerning the Catholike Church wherein there is a double imposture or poysoâ—… both in respect of the object and also of the act of faith which two in every article of the Creed are to be considered For first in respect of the object whereas the Apostles Creed hath The holy Catholike Church they understand the Catholike Romane Church the mother for soâ—…th and mistresse of all Churches which they call â—…atholike not as it is one particular Church as every Orthodox Church was wont to bee called as the Catholike Church of Smyrna c. but as it comprehendeth all particular Churches which live in Communion with and in subjection to the See of Rome all which are as they say but one Church because they are subject to one visible head the Pope of Rome And they adde that out of this communion with the See of Rome and without this subjection to the Pope of Rome as the universall Bishop there is no salvation With this one nâ—…t they coâ—…y-catch those seduced soules which either they draw to their side or detaine in Communion with them Howheit it is a most shamelesse imposture For first can it bee imagined that the Apostles by Catholike understood the Romane Church which when they composed the Creede was not extant nor for divers yeeres after No doubt the Apostles meant that Church which then had a being and whereof themselves were members which also had been from the beginning of the world and was to continue for ever viz. the universall company of the Elect and that is the meaning of the word Catholike Secondly for the first sixe hundred yeares the Bishop of Rome did not challenge unto himsâ—…lse the Title or authority of universall Bishop but was onely the Archbishop or Patriarch of Rome unto whom the foure other Patriarches of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch and Ierusalem were no more subject than hee to them every one of them having the primacy within their severall Patriarchicall jurisdictions And although after the grant of the Tyrant Phocas in the yeare sixe hundred seven the Pope challenged for himselfe to be the universall Bishop and for his See to be the head of all Churches yet by the Greeke and other Churches which were and are the better and greater part of Christendome this claime never was nor is at this day acknowledged All which Churches notwithstanding wherein were innumerable Saints and Martyrs and the most holy Fatheâ—…s of the Church by this Romish article are most wicâ—…edly and schiâ—…matically excluded from Salvation because they acknowledged no subjection to the See of Rome But if the now Church of Rome be the Apostaticall Church having revolted from the ancient Religion of Christians by their idâ—…latry will-worship and supersâ—…ition and from the Ancienâ—… faith of Christians contained generally in the holy Canonicall Scriptures and more particularly in the Gospell as by other almost innumerable errours of Popery so more especially by those which I confute in this booke and if the head of this Catholike Apostasie that is to say the Pope be Antichrist then let all Christians who have any care of their soules consider whether it bee safe for them to live in the Communion of that Sect and in subjection to that See where they must have the apostaticall Church even the whore of Babylon to be their mother from whom they are commanded to separate Apoc. 18. 4. and the Antichrist to be their father their head their universall Bishop who prevaileth in them onely that perish 2 Thes. 2. 10. 2. As touching the act of faith their coozenage in respect thereof is worse if worse may be For where the Apostles Creed hath Credo sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam they understand this article as if the words were not Credo Ecclesiam I beleeve that there is a Catholike Church and that there is a Communion of Saints the members of that Church c but credo Ecclesiae or in Ecclesiam I give credit to the Church or I beleeve in the Church making the Church whereby they understand the now Church of Rome not onely the materiall but also formall object of faith in which they beleeve and for which they beleeve whatsoever it beleeveth or propoundeth to be beleeved And in this exposition they are growne so impudent as that they say that the Church Catholike meaning the now Romane Church is the very principle of our faith for which we are to beleeve the holy Scriptures and all other articles that it is the chiefe priâ—…ciple wheron the authority of the Scriptures dependeth and the last principle into which their faith is to bee resolved that in this article is summarily contained the whole Word of God not onely written but also unwritten that Christ propounded unto us the
VII Because no man is iustified by his owne fulfilling of the law Ibid. VIII Not both by faith and by works lib. 4. cap. 8. § 10. IX The righteousnesse by which 〈◊〉 are iustified is imputative § 11. X. The true doctrine taketh away boasting § 12. XI The popish doctrine maketh the promise of none effect § 13. XII Because remission of siâ—…ne is a part of instification which affordeth three arguments § 14. XIII From the examples of Abraham David and Paul § 15. XIV Because we are all iustified by the obedience of one § 16. Our assertion that wee are iustified by Christs righteousnesse proved by five arguments lib. 6. cap. 9. I. Because God accepteth of Christs righteousnesse in our behalfe § 1. II. Because it aloâ—…e is of infinite valow § 2. III. Because our righteousnesse is in Christ aud wee are righteous in him and he is our righteousnesse § 3. Bellarmines obiection First that Christ is called our righteousnesse because he is the authour of it § 4. Righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1. 30. to be distinguished from sanctification § 5. Bellarmines second obiection Christ is called our righteousnesse because he satisfied for us § 6. Bellarmines confession overthroweth the popish doctrine of iâ—…stification § 7. IV. Because we are iustified by the bloud of Christ and by his obedience § 8. V. Because by Christs righteousnesse our sinnes are covered § 9. Bellarmines two answeres refuted lib. 6. cap. 9. § 10. 11 12. Bellarmines eight allegations to prove justification by inherent righteousnesse answered lib. 4. cap. 10. The 1. out of Rom. 5. 17. 18 19. § 1. c. ad 7. II. and III. Rom. 3. 24. and 1. Cor. 6. 11. § 7. IV. Tit. 3. 5 6 7. § 8. V. Those plaoes which speake of men iust § 9. and perfect § 10. 11. VI. Rom. 8. 29. cum 1 Cor. 15. 49. § 12. 13 14. 15 16. VII Rom. 6. 4 6. § 17. VIII Rom. 8. 15. cum v. 10. 23. § 18. 19 20. Bellarmines oblique and indirect proofes for inherent righteousnesse First because faith is not the entire formall 〈◊〉 of iustification lib. 4. c. 11. Whether charity doth concurre with faith unto iustification § 2 c. ad finem capitis Secondly because iustification doth consist in renovation and not only in remission of sinnes lib. 4. cap. 12. for proofe whereof he produceth I. Sixe allegations of Scripture § 1 c. ad 9. II. The Testimony of Augustine § 9. III. Three reasons § 10. 11 12 13. IV. Testimonies of Fathers § 14. Merit lib. 8. The contrâ—…versie of merit is in a manner the same with that of the necessity of efficiencie of works lib. 8. cap. 1. § 1. The state of the controversie l. 8. c. 1. § 23. Merit ex congruo or ex solo pacto not truely and properly merit lib. 8. cap. 1 § 3. Of the word merlt § 4. The use of the word in the latiâ—…e Fathers § 5. The verbe mereri used sometimes in the generall sense of obtaining or finding favour ibid. Sometimes in a more speciall sense First Of impetrating by request § 6. Secondly Of doing a rewardable work ibid. n. 2. Of the nowne meritum lib. 8. cap. 1. § 7. Of the thing it selfe what mâ—…rit is § 8. Arguments against merits taken from the conditions of merits And 1. In respect of the parties God and man lib. 8. cap. 1. § 9. God § 9. 10. Man § 11. II. In respect of the thing meriting § 12. it must be our owne ibid. it musâ—… bee free § 13. it must be pure perfâ—…t § 14. III. Inrespect of the thing meritod that is the reward § 15. IV. In respect of the rule whereby the reward is to be rendred § 16. All these conditions of merit are found in the obedience of Christ. ibid. Testimonies of Scripture disproving morits lib. 8. cap. 2. I. Those which ascribe the reward to Gods mercy and not to our meritâ—… § 1. 2 3. II. Esa. 55. 1. Dan. 9. 18. § 4. III. Luk. 17. 7 8. 9 10. § 5. c. ad 9. 4. expositions of the Fathers brought by Bellarmine § 9. c. IV. Rom. 6. 23. § 13 c. V. Rom. 8. 18. § 18. VI. Three places allâ—…ged Pbil. 3. 8 9. Eph. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3 5 7. § 22. A new supply of arguments lib. 8. cap. 3. I. Thopopish doctrine of merit doth not take away boasting § 1. II. It derogateth from the merit of Christ. § 2. The exceptions of the Papists 1. Bellarminesâ—…re â—…re 〈◊〉 § 3. 4 4 6 7. 2. That they derogate no more than we § 8. 3. That we extennate Christs merit in denying our 〈◊〉 § 9. III. We cannot merit temporall blessings at the hands of God much lesse eternall blisse § 10. IV. Because we come to heaven by right of adoption § 11. V. Because works are not the causes of salvation § 12. VI. Because we cannot sully doe our duety and much lesse merit § 13. VII Because we are not saved by workes ibid. VIII The land of 〈◊〉 a land of promise and not merited ibid. Testimonies of fathers against merits lib. 8. cap. 4. First those which Bellarmine hath endevoured to answere § 1 c. ad 8. Then others which the Irish lesuite sought to answere § 8. c. Bellarmines dispute first concerning the name Merit which he would prove to be grounded on the Scriptures lib. 8. cap. 5. 1. Out of Eccl. 16. 14. § 1. 2. Out of Heb. 13. 16. 3. From the wordâ—… Dignity and Reward § 3. 2. Concerning the thing which he would prove first by testimonies of Scriptures which be reduceth to seven heads First those where eternall life is called merces lib. 8. cap. 5. § 4. 5. specially the parable of the labourers in the Uiâ—…e-yard Matth. 20. 1. c. ad 16. § 6. 7. Bellarmines cavils against Melancthon and Calvin answered § 8. Maldonats exposition § â—… 2. From those places where the reward is said to be given according to the measure and proportion of the works l. 8. cap. 5. § 10. 11. Bellarminesâ—…vill â—…vill at our answeres § 12. The places of Scripture 〈◊〉 and answered § 13. 3. From those which place the reason of the reward in workes lib. 8. cap. 5. § 14. The places of Scriptures examined l. 8. c. 5. § 15. that good workes be causes of salvation Bellarmine proveth by the causall particles § 16 17. 4. From those where the reward is said to be rendred in justice lib. 8. cap. 5. § 18. Gods iustice distinguished none proving merit § 19. 20. 5. From those plâ—…ces where eternall life is promised to good workes lib. 8. c. 5. § 21. 6. From those places where â—…ention is made of dignity or worthinesse l. 8. c. 5. § 22. 7. Because God is a righteous Iudge § 23. Bellarmines corollary that those who deny merits deny the future iudgement § 24. Two Testimonies of Fathers alleaged for merits answered l. 8. c. 6. viz. â—…ight of the
For all they who have true faith are borne of God 1 Iohn 5. 1. Iohn 1. 12 13. And those who are once borne of God are never unborne againe but being made sonnes by faith as all the faithfull are Gal. 3. 26. they are also made heires of God and coheires with Christ Rom. 8. 17. As faith therefore is never utterly lost no more is justification For so long as wee have faith so long wee are justified But the habit of faith wee never lose though perhaps some act of faith may sometimes bee interrupted Therefore our justification is but one continued act and in that sense we are justified but once § VIII Now whereas we have defined and defended according to the Scriptures that justification is an action of God and such an action as is without us and a continued act hence we may conclude against the Papists first that neither their first nor second justification is that justification which is taught in the Scriptures Not the second for that is not Gods action but their owne who being justified before by habituall righteousnesse infused from God doe themselves as they â—…each by practising of good workes increase their righteousnesse that is justifie themselves by actuall righteousnesse as the merit of their second justification Not that wee deny that inherent righteousnesse is by practise of good workes increased but that wee hold that justification is not our owne act neither that we are justified by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves nor that the righteousnesse of justification which is indeed the righteousnesse of Christ can be increased and therefore no degrees of justification Not the first which they make to bee an action of God within us working in us a reall change or positive mutation by infusion of the habits of grace and specially of charitie and confound it with habituall sanctification from which notwithstanding it is necessarily to be distinguished Secondly justification being an action of God is not to bee confounded with justification passively understood and much lesse with justice it selfe But the Papists not onely understand it passively but also confound it with inherent Iustice. Thirdly they doe not hold justification to bee one continued act from our vocation to our glorification But such an act as may not onely be interrupted ostentimes and lost for a time as they say it is by every mortall sinne and againe be renewed so oft as they goe to shrift but also that it may totally and finally bee lost Which error I have confuted at large in my Treatise of perseverance CAP. II. The efficient causes of Iustification § I. BUt in this definition besides the Genus not onely all the causes of Iustification but also the essentiall parts thereof are briefly comprised which I will now distinctly propound The causes because in the knowledge of them standeth the science of every thing the essentiall parts because in them justification it selfe consisteth The causes of justification as of all other things are foure The Efficient the Matter the Forme the End The Efficieâ—…t causes are of two sorts either principall or instrumentall The principall is God which I noted in the definition when I said it is an action of God For it is God that justifieth as the Scriptures in many places doe testifie as namely Rom. 3. 26 30. 4. 5 6. 8. 30 33. Gal. 3. 8. God I say the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost For it being an outward action of God or as the Schoolemen speake ad extra respecting the Creatures it is the common action of the whole Trinity And thus God alone as the Iudge doth justifie For he alone is the Lawgiver who hath power over our soules against whom wee sinne and by our sinne become his debtours when we transgresse his law And therefore he alone properly forgiveth sinnes as himselfe professeth Esay 43. 25. and as the Scribes and Pharisees confesse as a received truth Luk. 5. 21. For who may take upon him to remit those debts which wee owe to God It is he who reconcileth us unto himselfe in Christ not imputing our sinnes 2 Cor. 5. 19. and accepting of us in his beloved Ephes. 1. 6. It is he alone that forgiving our sinnes freeth us from hell and giveth us right to his heaveâ—…ly kingdome Which doctrine serveth first for our direction and instruction where to seeke and to sue for justification and remission of sinnes Not to any creature but to God alone in the name and mediation of Christ to whom alone our Saviour directeth us to sue for pardon Secondly it ministreth strong consolation to all the faithfull For seeing it is God that justifieth them who shall lay any thing to their charge Who shall condemne c Thirdly it sâ—…rveth for the confutation or rather condemnation of the Pope and all popish priests who take upon them power not as Ministers of the Gospell to declare and pronounce remission of sinnes but as Iudges to remit them it being a proper attribute of God Exod. 34. 7. which he appropriateth to himselfe Esay 43. 25. and which no meere man can without blasphemy arrogate to himselfe Mark 2. 7. § II. With the principall cause we are to joyne the consideration of the motives or moving causes both without God which of some are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also within himselfe which are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are indeed principia agendi The former are mans misery which though it be not properly a cause but the object of mercy yet is said to bee a motive and is used as a reason to move to mercy and thence misericordia hath its name and Christs merits which properly are the procatarcticke cause of our justification besides which there is no other merit The moving causes within God are his Mercy and his Iustice which I signified in the definition when I said that justification is a most grâ—…cious and rightâ—… action os God For as in many if not in all the workes of God his mercy and justice meet together so especially in the worke of our Iustification and redemption which Cardinall Câ—…jetan e well observed The holy Scripture saith he doth not say that we are justified by grace alone but by grace and justice together but both of God that is by the grace of God and by the justice of God and not by the righteousnesse of men By grace I understand the gracious love and favour of God in Christ vouchsafed unto us in him before all secular times 2 Tim. 1. 9. in which he hath graciously accepted us in his beloved by which as we are elected and called and shall be saved so by the same we are justified and that freely without any cause in us Rom. 3. 24. Now the Lord is said to justifie us by his grace first because of his free-grace hee gave his owne Sonne to
because the hebrew word which signifieth to justifie doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse § I. HAving thus briefely set downe the true Doctrine of Iustification according to the Word of God we are now to confute the erroneous doctrine of of the Papists There are six maine and capitall errours which the Papists most obstinately hold and maintaine concerning justification and consequently so many principall heads of controversie betweene us whereunto divers other particular questions are to be reduced The first concerning the name whether justification and sanctification are to bee confounded The second concerning the moving cause which is the justifying and saving Grace of God which they call gratia gratum faciens The third concerning the matter of justification The fourth concerning the forme The fifth concerning the instrumentall cause which is Faith The sixth concerning the fruits of faith and consequents of justification which are good workes concerning which are two maine questions First whether they doe justifie a man before God Secondly whether they doe merit Eternall Life § II. The first capitall errour of the Papists is that they confound justification and sanctification and by confounding of them and of two benefits making but one they utterly abolish as shall be shewed the benefit of justification which notwithstanding is the principall benefit which we have by Christ in this life by which wee are freed from hell and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And this they doe in two respects for first they hold that to justifie in this question signifieth to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent or by infusion of righteousnesse that is to sanctifie Secondly they make remission of sinne not to be the pardoning and forgiving of sinne but the utter deletion or expulsion of sinne by infusion of righteousnèsse Thus they make justification wholly to consist in the parts of sanctification For whereas Sanctification is partly privative which is the taking away of sinne which we according to the Scriptures call mortification and partly positive which we call vivification and is partly inward or habituall consisting in the habits of Grace infused and partly actuall which is our new obedience and practice of good workes all these and onely these they make to concurre to justification which with them is partly privative which they call remission of sinne whereby they understand the utter deletion or extinction of sinne wrought by infusion of perfect righteousnesse which is an higher degree of mortification than we can attaine unto in this life and partly positive and that either habituall which they call their first justification wherein a man of a sinner is made righteous by infusion of the habits of Grace which is indeed regeneration and partly actuall which they call their second justification wherein a righteous man is made more just by the practice of good works whereby they merit not onely the increase of righteousnesse but also the Crowne of Eternall Life § III. Of this first controversie therefore are two questions First whether to justifie doth signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse which is to sanctifie Secondly whether remission of sinne be the utter deletion and abolition of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse In both the Papists hold the affirmative The former which is a most pernicious errour they ground upon the like notation of the Latine words to justifie and to sanctifie That as to sanctifie is to make holy by holinesse inherent so to justifie is to make just by infusion of righteousnesse But though the notation of the Latine words were to be respected yet no more could be inforced from thence but that to justifie is to make just And that is all which Bellarmine goeth about to prove Now God maketh men just two wayes by imputation as he justifieth by infusion as he sanctifieth them For if a man may bee made just not only inwardly by obtaining righteousnesse but also outwardly by declaration as Bellarmine himselfe saith then much more by imputation even as we were made sinners by Adams actuall transgression and as Christ was made sinne that is a sinner for us For even as by Adams disobedience wee were made sinners and guilty of damnation his transgression being imputed to us so are wee made just by the obedience of Christ imputed to us And as Christ who knew no sinne was made a sinner by imputation of our sinnes to him so we are made the righteousnesse of God in him that is righteous in him by the imputation of his righteousnesse who is God unto us But indeed the force of the Latine words is to be respected no further than as they are the true translation of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament and of the Greeke in the New § IV. The Hebrew root Tsadaq from whence those verbs do spring which signifie to justifie is by the Septuagint translated sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be just blamelesse or pure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be just as Iob 9. 2. 15. 20. 10. 15. 15. 14. 25. 4. 33. 12. 34. 5. 35. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be blamelesse as Iob 22. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be pure as Iob 4. 17. sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense to be just as being a translation not of a passive but of a Neuter as Gen. 38. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thamar is more just than I. So Psal. 19. 10. jâ—…dicia Dei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 51. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so Rom. 3. 4. Psal. 143. 2. Esai 43. 9. cum 41. 26. Ezek. 16. 52. In Ecclus. 18. 1. Deus solus justificabitur the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be reputed just as Iob 11. 2. 13. 18. 40. 3. Sometimes to be justified and absolved from sinne to bee pronounced and accepted as righteous as Esai 43. â—…6 Let us plead together declare thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first thine iniquities that thou maist bee justified Esai 45. 25. in the Lord all the seed of Israel shall be justified The passive is onely once used Dan. 8. 14. where it is said that the sanctuary after 2300. dayes shall bee justified that is expiated or purged In the second conjugation it signifieth to justifie but not as the word is used in the doctrine of justification but as it signifieth either to arrogate righteousnesse to a mans selfe as Iob 32. 2. or to attribute or ascribe it to others as Iobâ—…3 â—…3 32. or to shew himselfe or others righteous as Ier. 3. 11. Ezek. 16. 51 52. In the third conjugation it signifieth to justifie in that sense that the question of justification And it is verbum forense a judiciall word used in Courts of judgement which usually is opposed to condemning And it signifieth to absolve and to acquit from guilt and accepting a man as righteous to pronounce him just
justifications of the Saints then they justifie the Saints So may I say if the precepts of the Law be the justifications of the Lord then belike they justifie him but neither are fitly called justifications though the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may not unfitly be given both to the Law of God as the rule of justice and to the judgements of God as the acts of justice and to the good deeds of the Saints as workes of justice and also to the merits of Christ which notwithstanding doe not justifie him but us unlesse they meane that as by good workes the faithfull so by righteous commandements and just judgements God is declared and manifested to bee just And farther the law of Nature knowne to the Gentiles is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which notwithstanding doth not justifie either him or them and is by the Latine interpreter unfitly translated the justice of God And moreover Bellarmine himselfe as we have heard noteth that the Law is called justification because it teacheth righteousnesse and yet not that righteousnesse by which we are justified for that without the Law is manifested in the Gospell being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets even the righteousnesse of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all that beleeve But to conclude Bellarmine had no reason to make this the first signification of the word in the Scriptures for the Hebrew word which the vulgar Latine translateth sometimes iustificationes and sometimes ceremonias in the same sense doth signifie no such matter and the Greeke which twice at the most in the Scriptures signifieth justification doth usually signifie the Law of God and his statutes and ordinances but more especially those of the ceremoniall Law which if they be any where called justifications it is to bee imputed to the corrupt translation and not to the originall truth § III. So much of the first signification The two next whereof there is no example in the Scriptures hee hath coined to fit their new-found distinction of justification it selfe which they distinguish into the first and the second The first when a man of a sinner is made just by infusion of habituall righteousnesse The second when a just man is made more just by practise of good workes Accordingly justification saith Bellarmine in the second place signifieth acquisition of righteousnesse viz. inherent which is their first justification and in the third place incrementum justitiae the encrease of justice which is their second justification which distinction if it were applied to sanctification were not to be rejected For that which they call their first justification is the first act of our sanctification which the Scriptures call â—…eration in which the holy Ghost doth ingenerate in the soule of the Elect the grace of faith and with it and by it other sanctifying graces wherein their justification which is habituall consisteth And that which they call their second justification being actuall is our new obedience by which our sanctification is continued and encreased But to justification it cannot truly be applyed for first justification is an action of God for it is God that doth justifie Their second justification is their owne act whereby they being just already make themselves more just Secondly justification as hath been said is an action of God without us not implying a reall mutation in us but relative such as is wrought by the sentence of a Iudge and is opposed to condemnation Thirdly because it is the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified which is a perfect righteousnesse whereunto nothing can bee added Therefore of justification it selfe there are no degrees though of the assurance thereof there are degrees according to the measure of our faith § IV. But let us see how Bellarmine proveth his second signification To that purpose he alledgeth three testimonies of Scripture which prove nothing else but that the Papists have no sound proofe for their erronious conceit The first is taken out of 1 Cor. 6. 11. And such were you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified Where indeed the word is used but in a sense distinguished from sanctification The scope and intendment the Apostle is to exhort the Corinthians being now Christians to abstaine from those sinnes whereunto they were addicted whiles they lived in Gentilisme Such you were then saith the Apostle but now since you gave your names to Christ you were baptized into his Name and in your Baptisme were washed from those sinnes being sanctified from the corruption of them by the Spirit of God and iustified from the guilt of them in the Name of Iesus Christ that is by faith in his Name Thus therefore these three words are to bee distinguished The washing of the soule which is represented by the washing of the body is the generall word whereby the purging of the soule from sinne is generally signified Act. 22. 16. But as in sinne there are two things from which we had need to be purged that is the guilt of sinne and the corruption thereof so this ablution or washing of the soule hath two parts ablution from the guilt of sinne which is our justification ablution from the corruption of sinne which is our sanctification Both which are represented and sealed in the Sacrament of Baptisme wherein as the outward washing of the body doth represent the inward washing of the soule both from the guilt and corruption of sinne so the Element of water whereby the body is washed or sprinckled is a signe of the water and blood which issued out of Christs side whereby the soule is washed that is to say the blood of redemption and the water of sanctification for by the blood that is the merits of Christ wee are freed from the guilt of sinne and by the water that is the Spirit of sanctification wee are freed in some measure from the corruption And both these as I said are signified in Baptisme For wee are baptized into the remission of sinnes Act. 2. 38. Mar. 1. 4. Our soules being washed with the blood of Christ according to that in the Nicene Creed I beleeve one Baptisme for the remission of sinnes and wee are baptized unto the mortification of sinne and rising unto holinesse of life Rom. 6. 3 4. our soules being washed by the water of the holy Ghost For wee are baptized into the death of Christ and similitude of his resurrection that as Christ dyed and rose againe so wee that are baptized should dye unto sinne and rise to newnesse of life for which cause Baptisme also is called the Laver of regeneration Tit. 3. 5. This then is the summe and effect of the Apostles exhortation that seeing they having given their names unto Christ had been baptized into his Name and were therefore Sacramentally at the least washed and consequently both in their owne profession and opinion of others judging
a propitiation for our sinnes 1 Ioh. 2. 2. and that Christ who was just and knew no sinne was made sinne for us that wee might bee the righteousnesse of God in him as the Apostle speaketh 2 Cor. 5. 21. and Esai 53. 5 6 6. § X. The third word is my servant which signifieth that Christ did serve his Father in the worke of justification and consequently did justifie men not by judging but by ministring as himselfe saith Matth. 20. 28. and is therefore called the Minister of Circumcision that is of the Iewes The fourth word and he shall beare their iniquities which signifieth the manner how Christ by ministring doth justifie that is by bearing the burden of our sinnes upon his shoulders that is by suffering the punishment due for our sinnes Answ. The thing which hee indevoureth to prove viz. that Christ as he performed the office of Mediation in the dayes of his flesh did not justifie us aâ—…ter the manner of a Iudge is true But his reasons are not sufficient Not the former for he might bee Gods Minister or servant as all Kings or Iudges are and yet our Iudge Not the second for although he were our Priest to offer himselfe for us and by his obedience and sufferings to justifie us yet is he also our King and our Iudge who by his sentence will justifie us at the last day But although Christ did not justifie us after the manner of a Iudge yet it followeth not either that the word doth signifie infusion of justice to which purpose Andradius alleaged this place or that it is not a judiciall word For it is a judicial word as it is attributed not only to Iudges but also to sureties and advocates Christ as our Advocate justifieth by pleading for us as asurety by bearing the punishment judicially imposed upon us And whereas Bellarmine would prove out of 1 Pet. 2. 24. that inherent righteousnesse is an effect of Christs satisfaction or bearing our iniquities he proveth nothing but what we teach viz. that the fruits and end of our justification and redemption by Christ is our sanctification Luk. 1. 74 75. Rom. 6. 22. Tit. 2. 14. And consequently that our sanctification or inherent righteousnesse being the fruit and effect of our justification cannot bee the cause thereof no more than it is the cause of redemption For By what righteousnesse wee are redeemed by the same wee are justified for redemption and justification in substance differ not Rom. 4. 6. 7. 3. 24. 25. Col. 1. 14. Eph. 1. 7. By the righteousnesse of Christ wee are redeemed which is out of us in him and not by righteousnesse inherent Therefore By that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him wee are justified and not by righteousnesse inherent His third place is Apoc. 22. 11. which I have fully answered before and is here impertinently recited to prove the signification of the Hebrew word being not sufficient to cleare the Greeke Seeing their owne best editions in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have shewed before § II. The third and fourth reason which Bellarmine alleageth out of Calvin and Chemnitius and answereth them together are concerning the signification and composition of the Latine word justificare which indeed are not used as arguments to prove the true signification of the word in this controversie but as just exceptions against the arguments of the Papists who rely too much upon the signification and composition of the Latine word wherein they were justly reprooved by Chemnitius first because the controversie being what is the use and signification of the word in the Scriptures it is not materiall what the Latine word doth signifie in other authors but what is the signification of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament and of the Greeke in the New whereof the Latine is meerely a Translation And therefore the Latine if it be a right Translation must in this controversie bee understood to signifie the selfe same thing with the Hebrew and the Greeke the use and signification whereof in the Scriptures is judiciall and is neuer used in the Popish sense wherefore though the use of the word in other authors did favour the Popish conceipt yet would it not disadvantage us secondly though the Latine words do signific to make just which is all that can be enforced from the signification and composition thereof and be so expounded by Augustine whom Bellarmine to that purpose alleageth yet this maketh nothing against us Not onely because Bellarmine hath confessed men may be made just either inwardly by obtaining of righteousnesse inherent or outwardly after a judiciall manner but also because we freely professe that whom God doth justifie he maketh righteous by imputation of Christs righteousnesse It is true indeed that some of our Divines deny the word to signifie making righteous but their deniall is to be understood according to the meaning of the Papists viz. by infusion thirdly the Latine word justificare and so the English as in the translation of the Scriptures it hath alwayes the judiciall signification and never signifieth to endue with righteousnesse inherent no more than the Hebrew and the Greeke whereof it is a translation so oftentimes in the Fathers and many times in the Popish writers and alwayes almost in the common use of speech it signifieth to cleare from guilt to free from imputation of fault to approve to declare or pronounce just Or if at any time it be used in the sense of induing with righteousnesse inherent it is contrary to the use of the Scriptures which in the doctrine of justification is to be retained § XII Yea but the Fathers interpret justifying to be making righteous whom to refuse in an ecclesiasticall question and to appeale to the judgement of the Latine authors as Tully and Terence is a great importunity saith Bellarmine especially seeing the Apostle hath taught that to be justified is to be constituted or made just according to the composition of the word Answ. That which is said of the Authors of the Latine tongue is a meere calumniation for in them the word is not used at all The interpretation of the Fathers according to the doctrine of Saint Paul wee approve acknowledging that whom God doth justifie hee maketh them just by imputation of Christs righteousnesse Yea but say they the Fathers meane by inherent justice Answ. Though some of the Latine Fathers who were ignorant of the Hebrew and not skilfull in the Greeke sometimes under the terme of justification include the benefit also of sanctification being led thereunto by the notation of the Latine word yet sometimes they exclude it as first when they place justification in remission of sinnes as many times they doe secondly when according to the Scriptures they oppose it to condemnation thirdly and especially when with one consent they plainely teach that we are justified by faith alone as hereafter shall be shewed
because with it concurre not onely all other inward graces but also our outward obedience § IX The righteousnesse by which wee are justified is not prescribed in the Law but without the Law is revealed in the Gospell the righteousnesse of God that is to say of Christ who is God apprehended by faith For the Law to justification requireth perfect and perpetuall obedience to bee performed by him in his owne person that should bee justified thereby which fince the fall of Adam hath beene and is by reason of the flesh impossible to all men who are descended from Adam by ordinary generation But the Gospell assureth justification without respect of workes to all that truely beleeve in Christ teaching that wee are justified by faith that is by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith without the workes of the Law that is without respect of any obedience prescribed in the Law and performed by us But the righteousnesse by which wee are sanctified is prescribed in the Law which is a most perfect rule of all righteousnesse inherent § X. Unto the act of justification our owne righteousnesse and obedience doe not concurre as any cause thereof but follow in the subject that is the party justified as necessary fruits of our redemption and justification Yea in the question of justification wherein is considered what that is by which wee are justified and saved in hope our owne righteousnesse and obedience if it should bee obtruded as the matter of our justification is to be esteemed as dung that we may bee found in Christ not having our owne righteousnesse which is prescribed in the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ. But in the question of sanctification that righteousnesse which is inherent in us and that obedience which is performed by us is all in all as being both that habituall and also actuall righteousnesse and holinesse wherein our sanctification doth consist § XI By our justification wee are entituled to Gods kingdome that is saved in hope by our sanctification we are fitted and prepared for Gods kingdome into which no uncleane thing can enter Iustification therefore is the right of Gods children to their inheritance Sanctification is the cognizance and marke of those that shall bee saved wherefore our Saviour saith that by faith wee have remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified § XII The righteousnesse by which we are justified is the meritorious cause of our salvation But the righteousnesse by which we are sanctified is a fruit of our justification but no cause of our salvation unlesse you will call it causam sine quâ non which is no cause for we are neither saved by it nor for it but onely by and for the merits of Christ apprehended by faith But though it bee not the cause by or for which wee are justified or saved yet it is the way wherein wee being once justified are to walke towards our countrey in heaven Ephes. 2. 10. as Bernard well saith via regni non causa regnandi the way which leadeth to the kingdome but not the cause of comming unto it § XIII By our justification wee have our right and title to the kingdome of heaven but according to the duties of sanctification as the evidence shall the sentence of salvation bee pronounced at the last day § XIV We are justified by the grace of God as it signifieth onely his gracious love and favour in Christ. But wee are sanctified by Gods grace not onely as it signifieth the favour of God in himselfe but also as it signifieth the graces or gifts of grace infused into us and inherent in us § XV. In justification and in the parts thereof wee are meerely patients but in the duties of sanctification wee are also agents who being acted by the holy Ghost doe cooperate with him For which cause the holy Ghost in the Scriptures doth never exhort us to justification or the parts thereof viz. remission of sinne and acceptation of the beleever as righteous unto life as being the actions of God but to sanctification and the parts thereof he useth to exhort as to mortification Col. 3. 5. to vivification Ephes. 4.23,24 to both Ezek. 18.31 § XVI The acts of faith are of two sorts some tending to justification some to sanctification The former are immediate which are called actus eliciti which it bringeth forth of it selfe without the mediation of any other grace that is to beleeve in Christ by beleeving to receive him and by receiving him to justifie the beleever and therefore faith doth justifie alone The other mediate which it bringeth forth by the meanes of other graces which are called actus imporati and are the fruits of faith working by love and other graces tending to sanctification Thus faith by love worketh obedience and therefore it dtoh not sanctifie alone § XVII Of justification the Apostle treateth in the five first chapters of the Epistle to the Romanes of sanctification in the sixth and seventh § XVIII Our Saviour Christ the blessed Angels Adam in his integrity were sanctified but not justified properly For justification onely is of sinners and consisteth partly in remission of sinnes § XIX Of this difference betweene justification and sanctification the Papists will by no meanes take notice though it bee manifold and manifest But will needs understand justification to be that which wee according to the Scriptures call sanctification And this is the very ground both of their malitious calumniations against us and also of their owne damnable errours concerning justification For as if we also did confound justification and sanctification they charge us as if wee taught that wee are sanctified by faith alone that wee are formally made just or sanctified by a righteousnesse which is without us c. But if wee did hold that justification were to bee confounded with sanctification we would acknowledge that the most things which the Papists affirme concerning justification are true because they are true of sanctification As namely that wee are not sanctified by faith alone that we are sanctified by a righteousnesse inherent in us and performed by us that it is partly habituall consisting in the habits of grace as faith hope charity c. and partly actuall which is our new obedience consisting in good workes which are the fruits and effects of our faith and charity and other inward graces That of sanctification there are degrees and that by exercise and practice of the duties of holinesse and righteousnesse our sanctification is encreased c. § XX. What then Is the difference betweene us and the Papists in this great controvefie onely in words Nothing lesse For as their confounding of justification and sanctification is the ground of their calumniations against us so of their owne errours For confounding justification and sanctification first they confound the Law and the
Gospell the covenant of workes and the covenant of grace as if the Gospell did unto justification require inherent and that a more perfect righteousnesse than the Law requireth And consequently with the false Apostles and teachers of the Galatians doe teach another Gospell than that which the Apostle taught which whosoever doth hee is accursed Whrefore the samethings which the Apostle objecteth against the Galatians who were seduced by their false Teachers are verified of the Papists who seekng to be justified by the workes of the Law are under the curse they are fallen from grace to them the promise is of no effect to them Christ dyed in vaine then Christ profiteth nothing as hereafter I shall shew For whosoever seeketh to bee justified by the workes of the Law hee is a debtour to the whole Law and to him who is a debtour to the whole Law that is to bee subject to the curse if he transgresse it and to be excluded from justification and salvation if he doe not perfectly fulfill it Christ profiteth nothing For whereas they distinguish the workes which they make the condition of both the Covenants that the one are the workes of Nature the other of grace it is evident that all good workes and all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law which is the most perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse Secondly that inherent righteousnesse is not the condition of the covenant of grace but is the thing promised to all that truely beleeve For the better understanding whereof wee are to know that the covenant of workes was made with all mankinde in Adam the Covenant of Grace with the heires of promise in Christ. The former promiseth justification to these who in their owne persons performe perfect obedience that perfect obedience being the condition of the Covenant The latter that to us the sonnes of Abraham being redeemed and justified by faith the Lord will give grace to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him in which our new obedience consisteth which as I said is not the condition of the promise but the thing promised § XXI Secondly by confounding justification and sanctification they teach men to place the matter of justification and merit of salvation in themselves For the matter of sanctification is inherent and that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation Againe that which is inherent is both prescribed in the Law and is also our owne though received from God which the Pharisie himselfe confessed when he thanked God for it But the holy Ghost doth teach us that wee are neither justified by the obedience or righteousnesse which is taught in the Law nor by that which is ours And in regard of this very difference betwixt the Papists and us wee are not unworthily called Evangelici the professors of the Gospell and they the enemies thereof who seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse doe with scorne reject the righteousnesse of Christ imputed which is that righteousnesse of God revealed in the Gospell from faith to faith This being the maine doctrine of the Gospell that we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves but by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith § XXII By confounding justification and sanctification and so of two benefits making but one they doe abolish and take away that maine benefit of the Messias by which we are not onely freed from hell but also intituled unto the kingdome of heaven which the Scriptures distinctly call our justification without which there can bee no salvation For whom God doth justifie all them and onely them he doth glorifie And that they doe wholly take away the benefit of justification it shall further appeare in handling the second question of this first controverfie whereof I am now to speake CAP. VII That the Papists exclude remission of sinne from Iustification and in stead thereof have put expulsion and extinction of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse and that they fouly erre therein § I. BVT heare it will be objected that so long as the Papists acknowledge remission of sinne to concurre unto justification they cannot be said wholly to take away the benefit of justification but rather to follow the judgement of some of the Latine fathers who sometimes comprehending the benefit of sanctification under the name of justification seemed to make justification to consist in remission of sinne and sanctification Whereunto I answere that indeed the Papists pretend so much For the Councell of Trent in expresse termes saith that justification is not remission of sins alone but also sanctification and renovation of the inner man and to the like purpose Bellarmine disputeth that justification doth not consist in the remission of sinnes alone but also in inward renovation And yet all this is but a meere colourable pretence For as they exclude from justification the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which onely wee have remission of sinne so they doe indeed and in truth exclude remission it selfe And as in stead of imputation of righteousnesse they have brought in infusion of justice so in stead of remission of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse they have brought in the utter expulsion extinction deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse And for this they have some shew of reason For if they should hold that justification consisteth partly in remission that is in the forgivenesse or not imputation of sinne and partly in renovation or sanctification then they must confesse that there are two formall causes of justification which Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent and may truly bee objected against such of the Fathers as held justification to consist partly in remission and partly in renovation and consequently should bee forced to acknowledge two wayes of making men just by one and the same act of justification the one by imputation of that righteousnesse by which being without us we have remission of sinne the other by infusion of righteousnesse inherent by which sinne is expelled But the Councell of Trent doth stedfastly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is infusion of justice whereby sinne is expelled What then becometh of remission of sinne which according both to Scriptures and Fathers concurreth to justification I say of it as of justification the name is retained but the thing is taken away § II. Heere therefore I am to shew two things first that the Papists from justification exclude remission of sinne by putting into the roome thereof the expulsion and extinction of sinne which belongeth not to justification but to sanctification and consequently doe wholly abolish by their doctrine the benefit of justification Secondly that remission of sinne is not the utter extinction or deletion thereof As touching the former when Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent that it made two
motive in God the principium or primary cause which some call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of our justification he saith that we are justified by the grace of God Rom. 3. 24. Tit. 3. 7. that wee are saved by his grace Ephes. 2. 8. meaning thereby the gracious favour of God in Christ whereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath graciously accepted and embraced us in his beloved They most absurdly and wickedly that they may place the matter of their justification and merit of their salvation in themselves doe by grace understand the gifts of grace and namely and especially that of Charity habitually inherent in us For so they teach justifying grace to bee a divine quality inherent in the soule per modum habitus a supernaturall habit infused of God and that not really distinct from Charity And in like manner what in this kind is said of the Love of God they understand it commonly not of Gods Love whereby hee loveth us but of our love whereby wee love God § II. For the better understanding of this point we are to distinguish the divers acceptions of Gods grace For either it signifieth the favour of God in himselfe or the gifts of grace in us The former is the proper signification for the grace of God properly understood is one of Gods attributes whereby he is signified to be gracious and is referred to his goodnesse Exod. 33. 19. cum 34. 6. unto which also his love and mercy are referred but with this distinction For Gods goodnesse is considered either as hee is good in himselfe yea goodnesse it selfe or as hee is good to his creatures which is his bounty which being referred to his creatures either as having goodnesse communicated to them is his love or as being in misery is his mercy or as having deserved no good thing at the hands of God but the contrary is his Grace The latter signification is unproper and metonymicall the word Grace being taken for the effects of his grace viz. his free and undeserved gifts and benefits proceeding from his grace and favour which are not properly called the grace and favour of God but his graces and favours not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gifts of grace Rom. 11. 28. 1 Cor. 1. 7. 12. 4. 31. And in both senses it is either more largely taken for any favour or favours of God though common as both his favour and love in creating preserving and governing his creatures and also the fruits thereof which are his common favours as the gifts of nature in which sense Pelagius did call bonum naturae and namely free-will the grace of God and the gifts dispensed by his providence as his temporall blessings which he graciously bestoweth upon both good and bad Matth. 5. 45. In which respect hee is not onely said to be channun gracious Exod. 22. 27. and graciously to bestow such gifts Gen. 33. 5. 11. Esai â—…6 10. but also to bee the Saviour of all men 1 Tim. 4. 10. yea to save both man and beast Psalm 36. 6. Or else it is used more specially to signifie the peculiar favour and favours of God vouchsafed to his peculiar people viz. the Church tending to the salvation of it and of the members thereof which is the usuall acception of the word in the Scripture § III. This by the Schoolemen is very unfitly distinguished into gratia gratum faciens gratia gratis daâ—…a for first out of this distinction that which chiefly and properly is to be called grace viz. the gracious love and favour of God in Christ is left out Secondly whereas by gratia gratum faciens the justifying and saving grace they meane grace infused and namely the habit of Charity they oppose it to gratia gratis data to grace freely given as if the grace infused were not also freely given But they might have learned either from their Master a better distinction of Grace though he doe but lightly touch upon it that Grace is either gratia gratis Dans gratia gratis Data or a better exposition of that distinction which they have propounded according to the Scriptures that by Gratia gratum faciens is meant the gracious favour of God in himselfe whereby he graciously accepteth us in his Beloved and by gratia gratis data the gifts of grace freely bestowed upon us for so the Apostle seemeth to distinguish Rom. 5. 15. that it is either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God in himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as he speaketh Ephes. 3. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift of grace in us Or as elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gifts of grace The former is the gracious favour of God and is in God the giver of all good gifts as the fountaine of all graces the latter are the gifts of grace and are in the receivers as streames derived from that fountaine Now these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or gifts of grace are either sanctifying graces tending to the salvation of him who is indued with them as faith hope charity the feare of God c. or edifying graces which are given for the salvation of others and those either ordinary as the gifts of the ministery or extraordinary as the gifts of prophecie of tongues of working miracles which the Schoolemen called gratias gratis datas § IV. These 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these gifts of grace whether you understand those edifying or those sanctifying graces may every one of them by a metonymy be caled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a grace or by special relatioÌ„ to some peculiar grace vouchsafed to some particular person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this or that grace that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this or that giâ—…t of grace yet none of them can absolutely and properly be called the grace of God or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the saving grace of God or gratia gratum faciens of which this question is understood to wit whether this justifying and saving grace of God be inâ—…erent in us as a quality or habit or be out of us in God as being one of his attributes The Papists say it is inherent in us per modum habitus after the manner of an habit infused into us and so is the matter of justification considered as an action of God as we conceive of justification or the forme as they say speaking of justification passively and confounding it with sanctification But we though we doe confesse that in the gifts of saving grace as faith hope charity c. concurring in us our inward or habituall sanctification doth consist yet we deny them or any one of them to be either the matter or forme of justification But contrariwise we constantly affirme that the justifying and saving grace of God or as they speake gratia gratum faciens is the gracious
maketh in the question of justification betweene grace and workes as that if wee bee justified by the one wee cannot be justified by the other but they might as well stand together as the first justification of the Papists which is habituall consisting in the habits of grace infused with the second which is actuall consisting in works or rather the one would infer the other because we cannot be justified by the one I speak of adulti without the other for if wee bee justified by inherent righteousnesse that righteousnesse must be totall and perfect and therfore both habituall and actuall and both must concur unto justification for neither without the other is perfect Object Yea but the Apostle when hee saith that faith doth justifie without workes hee speaketh of the first juâ—…ification unto which works doe not concurre and when hee opposeth grace to workes hee meaneth the works of the Law done before faith without grace by the power of nature Answ. This is all that the Papists have to excuse themselves that they doe not openly contradict the Apostle who so often and so peremptorily concludeth that wee are justified by grace and not by workes by faith without the workes of the Law But it is evident that by the workes of the Law is meant all that obedience and righteousnesse that is prescribed in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse And therefore when the workes of the Law are rejected all inherent righteousnesse is excluded from justification It is also manifest that the holy Ghost speaketh generally of all men whether in the state of nature or in the state of grace and of all workes whether going before or following after faith insomuch that the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse Tit 3. 5. are excluded yea the workes of faithfull Abraham are denied to have justified him before God And therefore those who have both faith and works are justified by faith without workes But these objectiots I shall fully satisfie in their due place § X. Sixthly whereas the Papists say that justifying grace is the same with charity I argue thus Charity is the fulfilling of the Law in our owne persons But wee are not justified by our fulfilling of the Law in our owne persons Gal. 2. 16. 3. 10 11. Therefore we are not justified by our charity and consequently not by grace inherent § XI Seventhly that the Apostle by grace in the articles of justification and salvation understood the gracious favour of God in Christ and not inherent grace appeareth both by his assention Rom. 5. 20. that where sinne abounded Gods grace did much more abound and by his question Rom. 6. 1. shall wee continue in sinne that grace may abound for it were a strange conceit that where sinne aboundeth inherent righteousnesse should abound so much the more And to these we may adde those places which speake of going to the throne of grace that we may obtaine mercie and find grace Heb. 4. 16. of the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ for by grace we are saved Eph. 2. 7. 8. of the grace of God and the gift of grace distinguished one from the other Rom. 5. 15. of those that beleeve by the grace of God Act. 18. 27. of commending men to the grace of God Act. 14. 26. 15. 40. of the word of his grace Act. 14. 3. 20. 32. of the Gospell of his grace Act. 20. 24. of the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ who being rich became poore for us 2 Cor. 8. 9. of our predestination to the praise of the glory of his grace Eph. 1. 5 6. of the election of grace Rom. 11. 5. of the appearing of the grace of God which bringeth salvation Tit. 2. 11. of Christ his tasting of death for us by the grace of God Heb. 2. 9. of the reward not imputed of grace to him that worketh Rom. 4. 4. of turning the grace of God into wantonnesse Iud. 4. c. § XII Lastly so cleare is this truth which wee deliver according to the scriptures concerning justifying grace that Albertus Pighius a famous divine among the Papists doth confesse that what the Schoolemen teach concerning justifying grace that it is a quality in our soules infused of God and there remaining after the manner of an habit and that it is the same in substance with the habit of charity c. are meere devises of men having no warrant in the Scriptures Thomas Aquinas also writing on Tit. 2. 11. it is to bee knowne saith he that grace signifieth mercie and mercie alwayes was in God yet in respect of men in times past it lay hid but when Christ the Sonne of God appeared grace appeared and it may be said that in the Nativity of Christ grace appeared two wayes the former because by the greatest grace of God he was given unto us and upon this grace in the second place followed the instruction of mankind wherupon he saith teachingus c. Whereunto we may adde that those few places which Bellarmine alleageth for inherent grace are by some of their owne writers understood of the gracious favour of God as we shall shew in the particulars which now we are to examine CHAP. III. Bellarmines allegation for grace inherent out of Rom. 3. 24. proved to make against himselfe § I. BVt before I propound them I am to advertise the Reader that we do not deny that there are divers graces of sanctification and those also necessary to salvation as faith hope charity the feare of God c. inherent in the soules of the faithfull as divine qualities residing there per modum habitus So that Bellarmine in his booke de gratia lib. arbitr might well have spared his labour whereby he endeavoreth to prove such grace or graces to bee inherent in the soule which never any of us denyed But wee deny that gratia gratum faciens or justifying grace is inherent in us This therefore Bellarmine laboureth to prove lib. 2. de justif cap. 3. unto which in the other place hee doth referre us alleaging Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption which is in Christ Iesus c. Answ. It cannot bee denyed but that the popish cause in this particular is very desperate when for the defence thereof they are able to alleage one onely place where grace is mentioned and that such a one as is a most pregnant testimony to prove free justification by faith onely without respect of any righteousnesse or grace inherent in us § II. And this is proved first by the context or coherence of these words with those which goe before For thus the Apostle reasoneth Those that bee in themselves sinners and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God are not justified by righteousnesse inherent all which is prescribed in the Law but of necessity must be justified by a righteousnesse
accepted of him and rewarded by him but wee deny that any man is justified by it This question therefore is concerning the matter of justification For whereas justification considered as an action of God is his making or constituting a man righteous either by Christs righteousnesse imputed as wee teach according to the Scriptures or by righteousnesse infused as the Papists hold It is therefore apparent that as according to our Doctrine the righteousnesse of Christ is the matter and the imputation thereof the forme of justification so according to their doctrine inherent righteousnesse should be the matter of justification and the infusion of it the forme But howsoever wee differ in respect of logicall termes in setting downe the state of this controversie because they against reason make inherent righteousnesse the forme of justification yet the true state of the controversie betweene them and us is this whether wee bee justified before God by Christs righteousnesse which is out of us in him imputed to us or by that righteousnesse which being infused of God is inherent in us whether it bee the righteousnesse of God as the Apostle calleth it that is of Christ who is God inherent in him or a righteousnesse from God inherent in us we hold the former the Papists the latter § II. Now this is the principall point of difference betweene them and us in this whole controversie and that in two respects First because the righteousnesse of God whereby wee are justified is the principall matter contained or revealed in the Gospell Rom. 1. 16 17. For which cause wee who maintaine justification by that righteousnesse of God which is taught in the Gospell which the Pápists oppugne are worthily called the professours of the Gospell whereof the Papists are professed enemies Secondly because upon this all the other points of difference doe depend For if wee were justified by righteousnesse inherent then it would follow First that to justifie were to make just by infusion of righteousnesse inherent Secondly that wee are justified by the grace of God or rather graces inherent in us Thirdly that the forme of justification were infusion of righteousnesse Fourthly that faith doth justifie as a part of inherent and habituall righteousnesse and therefore also that it doth not justifie alone Fifthly that workes justifie as our actuall righteousnesse But on the contrary if wee bee justified by that righteousnesse which is not inherent in us but out of us in Christ then it followeth first that to justifie doth not signifie making righteous by justice inherent Secondly that we are not justified by inherent grace but by the gracious favour of God accepting us in Christ. Thirdly that wee are not justified by infusion but by imputation of righteousnesse Fourthly that faith doth not justifie as a part of inherent righteousnesse but as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse Fifthly that workes doe not justifie as causes to worke but as fruits and signes to declare and manifest our justification § III. And as the proofe of this inferreth the rest so the rest being proved are so many proofes of this For first if to justifie doe never in the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse then wee are not justified by inherent righteousnesse neither is justification by inherent righteousnesse that justification which the Scriptures teach Secondly if wee bee not justified by grace inherent then not by habituall or inherent righteousnesse if by the gracious favour of God freely without respect of any cause of justification in us then not by workes or inherent righteousnesse Thirdly if by imputà tion of Christs righteousnesse then not by infusion of inherent justice Fourthly if by faith as it is the hand to receive Christs righteousnesse then not by righteousnesse inherent Fifthly if not by workes as any cause then not by inherent righteousnesse But the two first I have fully and clearely proved already the first in the second booke and the second in the third And the rest I shall by the grace of God demonstrate in their due place § IV. That which hath already beene said both here and heretofore together with that which shall hereafter bee produced to prove the other three points remaining to bee proved might bee a sufficient demonstration of this point But because the proofe of this point being the principall doth prove all the rest as I have shewed therefore I will not onely bring a supply of divers arguments by disproving the popish assertion and proving our owne but also answere the cavills and objections of the Papists And first I will prove our assertion and disprove theirs joyntly and together and then severally I will disprove their assertion viz. that wee are justified by righteousnesse inherent in ourselves and prove ours to wit that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him CHAP. II. That we are justified by Christs righteousnesse and not by that which is inherent in us proved joyntly by three arguments § I. FIrst therefore That righteousnesse whereby we are justied is Gods righteousnesse and not ours The righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him is Gods righteousnesse that which is inherent in us is ours Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him and not by that which is inherent in our selves The former part of the proposition is proved out of Rom. 1. 17. and 3. 21. Thus The righteousnesse which there is said to be revealed in the Gospell is that righteousnesse by which wee are justified This proposition is confessed of all The righteousnesse of God is that righteousnesse which is revealed in the Gospell Rom. 1. 17. In the Gospell is revealed the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith as it is written the just by faith shall live Rom. 3. 21. The righteousnesse of God is without the Law manifested viz. in the Gospell even the righteousnesse of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all that beleeve Therefore the righteousnesse of God is that righteousnesse by which wee are justified The whole proposition in both the parts is proved out of Rom. 10. 3. where it is not onely signified that wee are justified by Gods righteousnesse and not by our owne but there is also such an opposition made betwixt Gods righteousnesse and ours in the point of justification that whosoever seeke to be justified by their owne rigâ—…teousnesse cannot be justified by the righteousnesse of God Wherefore Paul in the question of his owne justification renounceth his owne righteousnesse desiring to bee found in Christ not having his owne righteousnesse which is of the Law as all inherent righteousnesse is but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith Phil. 3. 9. § 2. The assumption in respect of the former part viz. that the righteousnesse of Christ is Gods righteousnesse is easily proved first
whole body shall bee lightsome where Bellarmine without any probability by the body understandeth a good worke and by the single eye a right intention for who knoweth not that many times workes are done with good intentions that are not good This place in Matthew is diversly expounded and may bee applied to many purposes But the proper true meaning may be gathered out of the coherence as I have shewed elsewhere for in the latter part of that Chapter our Saviour sheweth both what in our judgements wee should esteeme out chiefe good vers 19. c. and consequently what in our afflictions and endeavours wee should chiefly desire and labour for vers 25. c. 33. As touching the former he exhorteth us not to lay up our treasure upon earth but in heaven that is that we should place our happinesse not in earthly but in heavenly things For where our treasure is there will our heart bee also That is whatsoever wee esteeme our chiese good upon that our hearts and affections will be set This judgement concerning our chiefe good is by our Saviour compared to the eye whereunto whether it be right or wrong the whole corps or course of our conversation which he compareth to the body will be sutable If we repose our happinesse in heaven our conversation will bee religious and heavenly but if we place our paradise on earth our conversation will be answerable As for example if pleasure be our chiefe good our conversation will be voluptuous if profit it will bee covetous if honour it will be ambitious Such therefore as our judgement is concerning happinesse such will be our desires our endeavours and in a word such will bee our whole conversation But as his allegation is to no purpose so his conclusion is besides the question as if wee held that good workes were in their owne nature mortall sinnes when notwithstanding wee acknowledge them to be good per se and in their kinde as namely prayer and almes-giving but sinfull by accident as being stained with the flâ—…sh § V. His fourth testimony is 1 Cor. 3. 12. If any man build upon this foundation gold silver stones of price c. where he supposeth by gold and silver good workes are understood c. Answ. If they were they might be good and yet not purely good Even as a wedge of gold or of silver is truely called gold or silver though there bee some drosse therein But the Apostle speaketh not of workes but of doctrines for he comparing himselfe and other preachers of the Gospell to builders saith that he as a master-builder had laid the foundation whereon others did build either sound and profitable doctrines which he compareth to gold and silver c. or unsound and unprofitable compared to hay and stubble § VI. His fifth testimony is Iam. 3. 2. In many things we offend all Why I pray saith he doth he not say in all things wee offend all for if all the works of the righteous be sinnes then not onely in many things but in all we offend But Saint Iames knew what to say for in the second chapter hee had distinguished good workes from sinnes If you performe the royall Law according to the Scriptures thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe you doe well but if you accept persons you commit sinne and are reproved of the Law as transgressours Answ. The advise of Saint Iames in this place is that wee should not bee many Masters that is Censurers of our brethren knowing that by censuring and judging of others wee shall receive the greater judgement according to Matth. 7. 1. Rom. 2. 1. For he that will take upon him to censure other mens offences had need to be free from offence But we saith Saints Iames 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we all of us offend many wayes we are subject to manifold sinnes and corruptions For the Apostle doth not speake of the singular individuall acts but of the divers sorts of sinne As sinnes against God our neighbour or our selves sinnes of omission and commission sinnes in deed in thought and in word which last kinde being the fault of Censurers is as hee noteth in the next words most hard to bee refrained when as the Apostle therefore speaking of all and including himselfe though hee were worthily called Iames the just saith that many wayes wee offend all hee signifieth that even the best of us are subject to manifold corruptions causing us many wayes to offend according tâ—… the severall kinds thereof which is a manifest evidence that wee being sinners cannot bee justified by inherent righteousnesse especially if that bee added that as wee sinne many wayes according to the severall kinds of sinne so in our good workes which are good in their kind as in prayer almes giving c. wee offend by reason of the flesh which polluteth all our best actions But howsoever wee say that our righteousnesses are stained with the flesh yet wee distinguish them from our unrighteousnesses and with Saint Iames we distinguish good workes from sinnes things commanded from things forbidden things according to their kind good but by accident sinnefull from things which according to their kind are absolutely evill § VII His sixth testimony is from those places which exhort us not to sinne as Psalm 4. 4. Esa. 1. 16. Iohn 5. 14. 2 Pet. 1. 10. 1 Iohn 2. 1. For to what purpose serve these exhortations or admonitions if in every good worke wee cannot but sinne Answ. These exhortations doe not shew what wee are able to doe but what wee ought to doe Neither are they to no purpose for first they restraine men and especially the children of God from many particular sinnes Secondly though they exhort us to those things which in this corrupt estate wee are not able perfectly to performe as generally to abstaine from all manner of sin and to avoid all imperfectionsand defects which are incident unto our best actions yet they are to very good purpose For they serve to discover unto us our imperfections and to shew that perfection wherunto we ought to aspire to moveus not to performe our duties perfunctorily but to walke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accurately making conscience of all our waies to admonish us not to rely upon our owne righteousnesse which is so unperfect but to bewaile our imperfections and to crave pardon to teach us what need wee have of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and of his intercession for us and lastly to move us with an upright endevour to keepe all Gods Commandements with our whole heart and to strive towards that perfection which in this life wee cannot attaine unto which if wee doe our labour shall not bee vaine in the Lord. For the Lord in his children accepteth of the will for the deed and of their upright endeavours for perfect performance So long therefore as we are upright before God our imperfections
ought not too much to discourage us knowing that his grace is sufficient for us and that his strength is made perfect in our weakenesse § VIII His seventh testimony is taken from those places which teach that the workes of the righteous doe please God Mat. 3. 4. Sap. 9. 1. 2 Act. 10. 35. 1 Pet. 2. 5. Phil. 4. 18. But nothing can please God but that which is truly good and pure from all vice as Calvin himselfe confesseth Iust. l. 3. c. 12. § 1. Answ. As God hath made two covenants with men the one of works the other of grace so himselfe may bee considered either as a severe judge judging according to the Law which is the covenant of workes beholding men as they are in themselves or as a mercifull father in Christ dealing with us according to the covenant of Grace â—…eholding us in his beloved As he is a Iudge judging according to the Law no obedience can satisfie or please him but that which is pure and perfect as Calvin truely saith As hee is the father of the faithfull in Christ judging according to the covenant of Grace he dealeth with us as a loving father with his children Malach. 3. 17. Psalm 103. 13. accepting the upright though weake and unperfect endevours of his children in lieu of perfect performance Hence in the Scriptures to be upright or to walke with God is to please God Gen. 5. 24 cum Heb. 11. 5. and they who are upright are his delight Pro. 11. 20. Not that either they or their actions are perfect or accepted of God in and for themselves as being pure from sinne but that being covered with the righteousnesse of Christ they are accepted in him and not onely accepted but also graciously rewarded Then belike saith Bellarmine the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed not onely to the sinners themselves but to their sinnes also making them an acceptable sacrifice to God Answ. Wee speake not of the sinnes of the faithfull as hee maliciously cavilleth as if we made no difference betwixt their good workes and their sinnes but of their good workes which though unperfect and stained with the flesh the Lord accepteth in Christ as truly good not imputing to the faithfull their wants but covering them with the perfect obedience of Christ. § IX His eighth testimony is from those places which absolutely call the workes of the righteous good workes as Mat. 5. 16. 1 Tim 6. 17. Tit. 3. 8. Eph. 2. 10. Answ. where he saith that the workes of the faithfull are called absolutely good workes there is an ambiguity to bee cleared For though the Scriptures absolutely call the works of the righteous good workes yet they doe not say that they are absolutely good All good workes and vertues being considered in the abstract as they are in themselves according to their kinde and as they are prescribed in the word of God are absolutely good but considered as it were in the concrete as they bee in us or performed by us mixed with imperfections and stained with the flesh they are not absolutely purely and perfectly good Prayer in it selfe and â—…s it is prescribed in the word of God is a worke absolutely good but as it is performed by us it may bee truely good if performed in truth and with an upright heart but it is not absolutely and purely good by reason of those imperfections which concurre there with So faith and love and all other graces considered in the abstract are absolutely good but considered as they bee in us they are truly but not purely and absolutely good by reason of the impersections and defects which alwayes accompany them But saith Bellarmine out of Dionysiâ—…s Areopagita that worke is to be called evill in which there is any defect but it is not to be called good unlesse it be entirely and wholly good which is true according to the rigour of the Law from which our Saviour Christ hath freed the faithfull and in that sence all the good workes of the Papists themselves even their prayers in which they so much trust are sins Or if they deny any defect to be in their prayers or other their supposed good works they speake lyes in hypocâ—…isie having cauterized consciences But here againe let the Reader observe the desperate doctrine of the Papists who as they account no man justified in whom there is any sinne so they teach all workes to bee absolutely sinnes in which is any defect whereupon the accusation which they falsly lay to our charge will bee verified of them viz. that all the best workes of the faithfull are sinnes For wee deny them to bee sinnes though they have some defects but they affirme them absolutely to bee sinnes if there be any defect in them as undoubtedly there alwayes is as I have alrâ—…ady proved § X. These were his testimonies of holy Scriptures in the next place hee produceth other witnesses viz. Ambrose Hierome Augâ—…stine Gregory and Bernard who testifie nothing against our assertion but against the malicious misconceit of the Papists who conceive or at least report of us that wee put no difference betwixt good workes and sins From which wee are so farre that wee willingly subscribe to that conclusion which hee would prove out of the fathers and is the title of his chapter Opera bona non esse peccata sed verè bona that good workes are not sinnes but truly good § XI Now follow his reasons which if they served to prove no more than the same question which againe is propounded to bee proved wee would not gaine say But his first reason is brought to prove that the good workes of the righteous are no way vitiated corrupted or defiled and consequently that they are not onely truely but also purely good For if they were contaminated saith hee that would arise either from our inbred concupiscence or from the defect of love towards God or from the mixture of veniall sinnes concurring with them But from none of these For neither is that concupiscence a sinne in the regeneratâ—… nor is the want of the love of God a sinne in them nor veniall sinnes such sinnes as are contrary to the Law of God or unto charity Thus for the confirmation of one error Bellarminâ—… broacheth three more But if concupiscence bee a sinne if the want of Gods love bee a sinne if those which the Papists call veniall sinnes bee sinnes indeede then must it bee confessed that the good workes which are stayned with the flesh which proceed from a defective love of God and our brethren that are mixed with divers imperfections and corruptions are notpurely good § XII As for concupiscence of the flesh which remaineth in the regenerate it hath possessed and defiled all the parts and faculties of the soule which as they are in the regenerate partly spirit so they are also partly flesh And these two are opposite one to the other the Spirit lusting against the
remission of sinnes vouchsafing unto you righteousnesse and he made you holy and delivered from the tyranny of the Devill All these foure benefits are the fruits of Christs office of mediation as he is our Prophet our Priest and our King For as our Prophet in whom are all the treasures of wisedome and knowledge he calleth us by the Gospell his doctrine being our wisedome and making us wise unto salvation as our holy Priest hee justifieth us his sacrifice and his obedience being our righteousnesse as our gracious and glorious King being ascended on high to prepare a place for us he giveth the graces of his holy Spirit to his members whereby they being sanctified are fitted and prepared for his kingdome and being gone to prepare a place for us and us for it hee will come againe to bring us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the redemption of possession or our full redemption which is also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thes. 5. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Thes. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 10. 39. the obtaining of salvation the obtaining of glory and the saving of the Soule and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the redemption of the body Rom. 8. 23. Christ therefore is of God made unto us wisedome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption or salvation because his wisedome is communicated unto us by instruction in our vocation his righteousnes is communicated unto us by imputation in our justification his sanctifying graces by infusion in our sanctification his glory by possession or fruition in our glorification § VI. In rendring the second cause he confesseth the truth whereof I desire the Reader to take speciall notice That Christ is called our righteousnesse because he satisfied his Father for us which his satisfaction he doth so give and communicate unto us when he doth justifie us that it may bee called our satisfaction and our righteousnesse For although by justice inherent in us we bee truly called and are righteous notwithstanding we doe not by it satisfie God for our faults and for eternall punishment And thus saith he it were not absurd to say that Christs righteousnesse and merits are imputed unto us when they are given and applied as if we our selves had satisfied God And to that purpose he citeth Bernard who saith that Christ died for all ut viz. satisfactio unius omnibus imputetur that the satisfaction of one may be imputed to all but addeth this needlesse caution modo non negetur saith Bellarmine esse in nobis preterea justitium inherentem â—…ámque veram so it be not denied that there is in us besides a justice inherent and that true which if Bellarmine would stay there we would yeeld unto For we doe not deny that there is a righteousnesse inherent in those that are justified and that also a true though not a pure a perfect and absolute righteousnesse onely wee deny that we are thereby justified Wee are indeed just but by Christs righteousnesse as Bernard saith in the same place justum me dixerim sed illius justitiâ § VII This confession of Bellarmine dissolveth the very frame of his owne doctrine of justification whereunto he hath taught that nothing concurreth but deletion of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse And these not as two acts but as one act viz. the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne As for imputation of Christs righteousnesse hee and his fellowes deride and scorne it But here hee confesseth which needs must be confessed that in justification the satisfaction of Christ is imputed unto us and accepted of God in our behalfe as if we our selves had satisfied God and that for that cause hee is truly called our righteousnesse And this imputation he acknowledgeth to be necessary because by righteousnesse inherent we doe not satisfie for our sinnes and eternall punishment We say the same onely wee adde that this satisfaction made by Christ in our behalfe is not onely his death and sufferings whereby he satisfied the penalty of the Law and delivered us from the curse himselfe being made a curse for us but also the holinesse of his person and the obedience of his life whereby he perfectly satisfied the justice of God infulfilling the commandements Now Gods acceptation of Christs satisfaction in our behalfe whereby he absolveth us from the guilt of sin and damnation by imputation of Christs sufferings and his acceptation of us as righteous in Christ by imputation of his most perfect righteousnesse and obedience is that very thing which wee according to the Scriptures doe call justification which distinct benefit of Christ not to be confounded with sanctification the Papists must learne to acknowledge if they would bee saved § VIII To these I adde other as plaine testimonies where it is said that wee are justified by the bloud of Christ and his obedience From whence I argue thus If we be justifiâ—…d by the bloud and obedience of Christ that is by his passive and active righteousnesse then are we justified by the personall righteousnesse of Christ which being proper to his person is out of us in him But we are justified by the bloud and by the obedience of Christ Rom. 5. 9. 19. therefore by his personall righteousnesse § IX Our fifth argument By what righteousnesse our sinnes are covered as with a garment and by which we being indued therewith appeare righteous before God that is the matter of our justification For he is justified whose sinnes are covered Psal. 32. 1. By the righteousnesse of Christ as a most pretious robe of righteousnesse and as our wedding garment our sinnes are covered For as Iustin Martyr truly saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for what other thing was able to cover our sinnes but his righteousnesse and wee being clothed therewith appeare righteous before God Therefore by the righteousnesse of Christ we are justified Bellarmine having as it were in our name objected to himselfe Eph. 4. 22. 24. which none of us that I know of doe object for wee acknowledge the place to be understood of sanctification which consisteâ—…h in the putting off the old man and putting on the new hee saith that wee argue from the similitude of a garment as more fitly resembling imputed justice than inherent and that we confirme it by the example of Iacob who being clothed with the rayment of his elder brother obtained the blessing § X. To this Bellarmine shapeth two answers First that the similitude of a garment may fitly agree to inherent righteousnesse which I wil not deny for in the Scriptures theterme of clothing or putting on is of a large extent so that he will confesse that the Hebrew Labash and the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifying to cloth or to put on apparrell which is not inherent in the body but adherent is more fitly by a metaphore applyed to signifie outward than inward
is to say justified so also by infusion that is sanctified For the justifying faith being a lively and effectuall faith purifieth the heart and worketh by love and may be demonstrated by good works And where is not inherent righteousnesse concurring with faith there is no justifying faith at all But although sanctification doe alwaies accompany justification yet wee are not justified by the righteousnesse of sanctification which is inherent because it is unperfect and wee are sanctified but in part whiles we have the flesh that is the body of sinne remaining in us Neither was there ever any man since the fall absolute or perfect in respect of inherent righteousnesse Christ onely excepted § X. Yea but saith Bellarmine the Scripture acknowledgeth some men to have beene perfect Gen. 6. 9. immaculate Psal. 119. 1. just before God Luke 1. 6. I answere that this perfection is not legall as being a perfect conformity with the Law which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse but evangelical as being one of the properties of our new obedience which is not to bee measured by the perfect performance but by the sincere and upright desire and purpose of the heart For this uprightnesse goeth under the name of perfection and what is done with an upright heart is said to be done with a perfect heart and with the whole that is entire heart And likewise those men who were upright are said to have been perfect And yet notwithstanding all those men who are said in the Scriptures to have been perfect and to have walked before God with a perfect heart as Noah Iacob Iob David Ezâ—…kias c. had their imperfections Ezekias is said to have been a perfect man and to have served God with a perfect heart notwithstanding when God left him a little to try him he discovered his imperfections 2 Chr. 32. 25. 31. Of Asa it is said 2 Chron. 15. 17. that his heart was perfect all the dayes of his life and yet in the very next chapter there are three faults of his recorded where Zachary is said to have beene just before God and to have walked in all the Commandements and Ordinances of God blamelesse in the same chapter his incredulity is registred for which hee was stricken with dumbnesse and deafnesse for the space of tenne moneths So that all that are sincere and upright that is to say no hypocrits are notwithstanding their imperfections called perfect and so the word which is translated immaculate Psal. 119. 1. signifieth upright and to be righteous before God is all one with upright Thus the holy Ghost teacheth us to expound the word which is translated perfect viz. thamin and tham that to be upright is to walke before God is to walke before God and to walke before God is to be perfect Gen. 17. 1. Let perfection and uprightnesse preserve me Psal. 25. 21. Psal. 37. 37. Observe the perfect man and behold the upright for the end of that man is peace § XI Yea but Bellarmine will prove that these men which are in the Scriptures called just were endued with inherent righteousnesse because they brought forth good workes which were the fruits and effects of their inward righteousnesse for he that doth righteousnesse is righteous whom doth he now confute wee doe not deny them who are commended in the Scriptures for righteous persons to have been endued with righteousnesse inherent but wee deny that they or any of them were justified before God thereby As for example Abraham who abounded with good workes was justified by faith without workes Rom. 4. 2 3. and as hee was justified so are all the faithfull Rom. 4. 23 24. David though a man according to Gods own heart walking before him in truth and righteousnes and uprightnesse of heart yet professeth that neither he nor any man living could be justified if God should enter into judgement with them and therefore placeth his happinesse and justification notin his vertues or good works but in the not imputing of sin and imputation of righteousnesse without workes Rom. 4. 6. Paul though hee knew nothing by himselfe yet professeth that hee was not thereby justified 1 Cor. 4. 4. Yea in the question of justification hee esteemeth his owne righteousnesse of no worth Phil. 3 8 9. But as wee doe not deny the faithfull to bee endued with inherent righteousnesse so we affirme that whosoever is justified by imputative righteousnesse is also sanctified in some measure with righteousnesse infused and inherent In respect whereof though they bee also sinnes in themselves by reason of their habituall corruptions and actuall transgressions being in part carnall and sold under sinne and by the Law which is in the members led captive to the Law of sinne yet they have their denomination from the better part Even as a wedge of metall wherein much drosse is mingled with Gold is called a wedge of Gold though not of pure Gold and an heape of Corne wherein is as much chaffe as Wheate is called an heape of Wheate though not of pure Wheate So the faithfull man in whom there is the flesh and body of sinne as well as the Spirit and regenerate part is called of the better part a righteous man though not perfectly absolutely purely just in respect of his righteousnesse inherent Indeed every true beleever so soone as he is indeed with a true justifying faith is perfectly just by righteousnesse imputed but at the best he is sanctified onely in part § XII His sixth testimony is taken out of Rom. 8. 29. and 1 Cor. 15. 49. where it is said that the just are conformable to the image of Christ and doe beare the image of the second Adam as they have borne the image of the first Adam from whence hee collecteth three reasons The first As Christ was just so are wee and as hee was not just so â—…re not we But Christ was just by inhâ—…rent rightâ—…ousnesse and not by imputatiâ—…n Therefore we are just by inherent righteâ—…usnesse and not by impâ—…tation The proposition he proveth by the places alleaged First I answer to the proofe of the proposition that the places alleaged are impertiâ—…ent For the question being of the righteousnesse of â—…ustification never any understood the Apostâ—…e in these places to speake thereof But either of filiation as Chrysostome and others understand the former plate because as Christ is the Sonne of God so also are wee or of afflictions because whom God hath predestinated to bee like his Sonne in glory they shall bee conformable to the image of his Sonne in bearing the Crosse which sence is given by our Writeâ—…s and is agreeable to the scope of the Apostle in that place to the Romans or of Glory that when he shall appeare wee shall bee like him in glory of which as Ambrose Sedulius and others understand Rom. 8. â—…9 fo the other place being read in the future as it ought to bee in
his flesh is communicated unto us by imputation and accepted of God in our behalfe as if we had performed the same in our own persons To conclude therefore it is not the image of Christs righteousnesse and obedience by which we are justified But we are justified by the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ it selfe § XVII His seventh Allegation of Rom. 6. 4. 6. is scarce worth the answering wherein hee proveth which no man denieth that the godly doe truly and not putativè dye unto sinne and rise unto righteousnesse even as Christ whose death and resurrection is represented in Baptisme did truly dye and rise againe For this dying unto sinne and rising unto righteousnesse are the two parts of our sanctification which never any denied to bee inherent But that justification and sanctification are not to bee confounded I have before proved at large If hee would have said any thing to the purpose he should have said any thing to the purpose hee should have proved that our justification consisteth in our mortification and vivification and then might he well have concluded that we are not justified by imputation but by inherent righteousnesse But I cannot sufficiently wonder at the blind malice of these men who either would perswade themselves or would goe about to perswade others that we hold the righteousnesse of sanctification and the parts thereof which we acknowledge to be wrought in us by the holy Spirit not to bee inherent but imputative As for these words vers 7. he that is dead is justified from sinne the meaning is as I have shewed before that he is freed from sinne as our translation readeth and as Chrysostome and Oecumenius expound it the speciall sense of freeing from guilt opposed to condemnation which is the proper sense of the word Act. 13. 38 39. extended to the generall signification of freedome he that is dead is freed from committing of sinne according to that place of Peter 1 Epist. 4. 1. which Bellarmine paralelleth with this he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sinne § XVIII In his eighth allegation hee patcheth divers places of Scripture together as it were invita Minerva out of which nothing can be concluded but that the Papists have not one found Argument to prove their justification by inherent righteousnesse The places which he patcheth together are these Rom. 8. 15. That wee now by Christ have received the Spirit of Adoption of the sonnes of God quoad animam saith he in respect of the Soule the which as it is there said viz. vers 10. liveth by reason of justification although the body be dead that is be mortall as yet by reason of sinne But saith he â—… little after viz. vers 23. he addeth that wee having the first fruits of the Spirit doe groane within our selves expecting the adoption of the sonnes of God even the redemption of our body For as the same Apostle saith Phil. 3. 20. 21. wee expect our Saviour who shall reforme the body of our humility configured to the body of his glory But the adoption of sonnes which wee expect in the redemption of the body shall be most true and inherent in the body it selfe that is to say immortality and impossibility not putative but true Therefore the adoption which now we have in the spirit by justification must also be true not putative otherwise as we expect the redemption of the body so also wee should expect the redemption of the soule Answ. See what poore shifts so learned a man is put unto according to the ancient profession of Sophistres noted by Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make good a bad cause This is Bellarmines whole dispute word for word where with much travell he hath brought forth this conclusion that our adoption which now we have by justification is true and not in conceit onely which we freely confesse For whoever denied that our adoption is as true as our justification But doth it from hence follow that wee are justified by inherent righteousnesse A good syllogisme concluding that assertion from those premisses had beene worth his labour The most that can bee said in this matter as I suppose is this That when our gracious God by his holy Spirit doth regenerate us he doth beget in us the grace of faith As soone as faith is wrought in us wee are engrafted into Christ to us being in Christ the Lord communicateth the merits of his Sonne by imputation of whose righteousnesse unto us hee remitting our sinnes doth not onely accept of us as righteous in Christ but also in him hee adopteth us to bee his Sons and heires of eternall life § XIX Let this proposition then tanquam commune principium bee agreed upon betweene us Such as is our adoption such is our justification and let us see what either of us can inferre thereupon Bellarmine assumeth thus but our adoption is not imputative for that I suppose is his meaning by that odious word putative as though if it were imputative it were but putative which is most false For he that either is a sinner by imputation of Adams transgression is as truely a sinner as by transfusion of the corruption yea if he had not beene truely a sinner by imputation of Adams guilt hee should never have beene punished either with the transfusion of the coâ—…ruption or with death unto which by the guilt he was bound over or hee that is righteous by imputation of Christs righteousnesse is as truely righteous before God yea more truely than by infusion of inherent righteousnesse For that is perfect this is stained with the flesh and therefore is but a sinnefull righteousnesse which cannot stand in judgement before God judging according to the sentence of his Law But Bellarmine assumption as I was saying is this Our adoption is not imputative but by grace inherent therefore our justification is not imputative but by righteousnesse inherent The assumption which is utterly false hee endevoreth to prove because the Apostle Rom. 8. 15. saith that now by Christ wee haâ—…e received the Adoption of the sonnes of God quoad animam saith Bellarmine that he might patch with it vers 10. in respect of the soule which as it is there said liveth prâ—…pter justificationem although the body bee dead that is to say mortall by reason of sinne These places Belâ—…mine alleaged before to prove that the grace by which wee are justified is inherent and namely charity because charity is that by which wee cry in our hearts Abba Father Secondly because it is said that the Spirit liveth by reason of justification though the body bee dead by reason of sinne to both which I have before answered § XX. But here Bellarmine maketh a twofold Adoption the one of the soule patched out of Rom. 8. 10. 15. the other of the body pieced out of Rom. 8. 23. and Phil. 3. 20 21. when as indeed Adoption is not of either part but of
matter of charity for the mater is that which is formed and as it were animated by the forme but the consequent is absurd therefore the antecedent And againe howsoever faith worketh those acts which I called mediate or imperatos by meanes of other graces which acts doe tend to sanctification for which cause faith doth not sanctifie alone yet the actus eliciti or immediate acts of faith which are to believe in Christ and by beleeving to receive and by receiving him who is our righteousnesse to justifie faith worketh neiby charity nor by any other grace and therefore it justifieth alone § VI. Yea but without charity faith is informis with it it is formata Answ. This distinction of faith that it is either formata or informis in a right sence may bee admitted as namely if by forme bee understood the integrity or inward efficacie and if that be called formata which is sound unfained lively and effectuall and that informis which iâ—… uneffectuall dead and counterfeit For that distinction is intimated by the Apostle when he speaketh either of faith unfained or contrariwise of a dead faith for in the former it is implyed that there is also a fained and a counterfeit faith and in the latter that there is also a lively faith And so wee admit this distinction that faith is either Formata which is lively and unfained Informis which is dead and counterfeit But in the popish sence it is to be rejected and that in three respects First because they propound this distinction as agreeing to a true justifying faith as if a true faith might be without forme when as that which is without forme is dead and counterfeit and no more to bee called a true justifying faith than the carcase or counterfeit of a man is to be called a man For howsoever such a faith may perhaps be true in respect of the object because it is of the truth yet it is not true in respect of the integrity efficacy and soundnesse thereof and that which is not truely faith is not faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or indeed Hee that saith either that he beleeveth that there is a God and in deeds doth deny him and that he is just and feareth not to offend him or good and doth not love him or omniprâ—…sent and omniscient and feareth not to play the hypocrite before him c. such a one doth not indeed and in truth beleeve that which he proâ—…esseth himselfe to beleeve He that saith he knoweth Christ that is beleeveth in him and hath not a desire and care to keep his Commandements hee is a lyar and the truth is not in him That faith which is dead and counterfeit cannot justifie or save a man as Saint Iames sheweth For howsoever faith alone doth justifie yet that faith which is alone doth not justifie neither alone nor at al becauseit is not a true and lively but a dead and counterfeit faith Neithercan that be a true justifying faith which is common to the wicked both men and Angels Neither may wee omit Bellarmines confession in this place Here saith hee the Apostle to prevent occasion of errour explaineth what manner of faith that is that justifieth non quaecunque fides sed quae per dilectionem operatur not every faith but that which worketh by love § VII Secondly this distinction is to bee rejected being understood in the popish sense wherein it is implyed that charity is the forme and as it were the soule of faith which opinion I have already confuted Neither can they ground it upon Iames 2. 26. As the body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes is dead For if the habit of charity cannot bee the forme of faith as I have shewed then much lesse can good workes which are the outward fruits both of faith and of charity bee the soule of faith it selfe Of the profession indeed of faith a godly life is as it were the soule and without which it is dead but of faith it selfe it is not anima the soule but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the breath as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to breath doth properly fignifie in which sense it is often used being called the Spirit of the mouth the spirit of the nostrils And in this sense it may be said that as the body without breathing is judged to bee dead so faith without workes which are as it were the breathing of a lively faith is also judged to be dead not because it ever had lived but because it wanteth life § VIII Thirdly this distinction is to bee rejected because as Bellarmine saith it is to be understood of one and the same faith which being informis may become formata and being formata may become informis againe remayning still the same But fides informis is not of the same kinde with that which is formata or justifying faith as things which be without life are not of the same kinde with those that are living or as counterfeits are not of the same kinde with those things which they doe resemble Besides justifying faith is divine the informis is humane that infusa infused and supernaturall this acquisita required by the strength of nature in the use of meanes that a grace of regeneration proper to the Elect this a gift of illumination onely common to the reprobate that is vera being truely that whereof it beareth the name this simulata not being that truly which it is called but aequivocè that doth so beleeve in Christ that it doth imbrace him and willeth and desireth at the least to apply him to the beleever this so beleeveth Christ that either it is joyned with horrour as in the Devils and desperate sinners or is severed from any will or desire of application this is without fruit and root and therefore is temporary that hath both root and fruit and never faileth And howsoever that which is informis may by Gods grace bee changed into formatam yet that which is formata can never be informis No more than hee who is once borne of God can be unborne againe The rest of his arguments serve to prove that faith is not the whole formall cause of justification that is as wee speake according to the Scriptures of sanctification which we deny not for wee doe acknowledge a concurrence of many graces with faith unto sanctification As for justification we deny faith either in whole or in part to bee the formall cause thereof Neither doth any other of his arguments prove that either charity or any other grace doth with faith concurre unto justification CAP. XII That justification doth nâ—…t câ—…nsist in renâ—…vation § I. HIs second ranke of arguments proving indirectly justification by righteousnesse inherent is propounded in his sixt Chapter the title whereof is this That oâ—…r justification doth not consist in the remission of sinnes alone Neither doe
we say it doth The exclusive particle used by some of our Divines doth exclude infusion not imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth For wee doe hold though all perhaps have not so plainely expressed their meaning and some few have delivered their private opinions that remission of sinne is but a part of justification and that by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we are both absolved from our sinnes and also accepted as righteous in Christ and as heires of eternall life But Bellarmine howsoever he would seeme to acknowledge the concurrence of remission of sinne unto justification yet indeed excludeth it For by remission of sinne concurring to justification hee doth not understand the not imputing or forgiving of sinne but the extinction and abolition thereof wrought by the infusion of habituall righteousnesse which expelleth its contrary as heat doth cold and light darkenesse And howsoever there bee duo termini two termes in this motion or mutation as he conceiveth of justification as being a passage b or change from sinne to righteousnesse yet there be not two causes nor yet two distinct actions but the onely cause is justice infused and the action is but one and the same the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne Even as in creation which is transitâ—…s à non esse ad esse in illumination which is transitâ—…s à tenebris ad lâ—…cem in calefaction which is a passage from cold to heat But if this be all that is required in the Popish justification as undoubtedly it is the whole and onely forme thereof being infused of righteousnesse or as they love rather to speake righteousnesse infused their justification also not differing from that which the Scriptures call sanctification saving that they dreame of a totall mortification or deletion of sinne and of a perfect renovation then what is become of the absolving of â—…â—…tom the guilt of sinne by which wee are freed from hell and the acceptation of us as righteous in Christ by we are intitled to the kingdome of heaven Both which are wrought by imputation of Christs righteousnesse in which true justification doth consist For infused righteousnesse though it were perfect could not discharge us from our former debts and being unperfect as their owne consciences cannot but tell them it cannot entitle them to the kingdome of heaven Wherefore if they will be saved they must of necessity flee to the righteousnesse or satisfaction of Christ who hath fully satisfied the Law both in respect of the penalty by his sufferings and also in regard of the commandement by his obedience which obedience and sufferings being transient and gone so long since can no otherwise bee communicated unto them but by imputation Now if they can be content to acknowledge the imputation of Christs satisfaction which sometimes they doe and must doe if they will bee saved for there is no other meanes either to escape hell or to come to heaven then let them according to the Scriptures acknowledge this imputation of Christs satisfaction by which they are to bee acquitted and freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and also accepted as righteous in Christ and heires of eternall life to be their justification As for the mortification of sinne and the renovation of us according to the image of God in true holinesse and righteousnesse both which are but in part and by degrees wrought in us by the Spirit of regeneration let them bee acknowledged to bee the two parts of our sanctification § II. But Bellarmine will needs have our renovation to be the righteousnesse of justification And this he indevoureth to prove by Testimonies of Scripture by the authority of Saint Augustine and by reason The texts of Scripture which he citeth are six The first Rom. 4. 25. who was delivered up for our sinâ—…es and rose for our justification From whence Bellarmine argueth thus to what the Apostle giveth the name of justification in that justification consisteth rather than in that unto which hee doth not give the name But to renovation in this place the Apostle doth give the name of justification and not to remission of sinne Therefore justification consisteth rather in renovation than in remission of sinne Before I answere I thinke good to advertise the reader againe that Bellarmine here by remission of sinne doth not understand the not imputing of sinne or as we in plaine English call it forgivenesse of sinne but the utter deletion the extinction the totall mortification of sinne And that hee doth foure times at the least signifie in this one passage Now I answer by denying his assumption because the Apostle in this place doth give the name of justification neither to remission nor yet to renovation which is not mentioned so much as once in all the Chapter Indeed in some other places the Apostle and his Disciple Saint Luke doe give the name to remission of sinnes that is to the not imputing of sinne or to the absolving and acquitting from sinne Rom. 4. 6 7 8. 〈◊〉 13. 38 39. but never to renovation § III. His assumption Bellarmine proveth because it cannot be doubtâ—…d but that the Apostles meaning was that Christ his death was a samplar or patterne of the death of sin that is saith he of remission or deletion of sins and that his resurrection was a samplar or patterne of our renovation and inward regeneration by which we walke in newnesse of life And is this the meaning of the Apostle Then be like wee are justified by imitation and not by imputation of Christs death and by imitation of his resurrection and then also by the same reason we are made sinners by imitation and not imputation of Adams transgression But indeed in this place the Apostle doth not propound by way of exhortation the death and resurrection of Christ as an example to bee followed in dying to sinne and rising to righteousnesse represented in Baptisme as hee doth in the sixth to the Romans where he exhorteth to sanctification as an inseparable consequent and companion of justification but by way of Doctrine hee speaketh of the death and resurrection of Christ as the cause of our justification of which he had spoken in the whole Chapter and even in the verses next going before that righteousnesse shall bee imputed to us as well as to Abraham if wee beleeve in him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead who was given by his father and by himselfe to us and for us that by the obedience of his life untill death but especially at his death he might satisfie for our sinnes and was raised from the dead that we might be justified and saved by his life which he liveth after his death Christ by his death and obedience did satisfie for our sinnes paying a full ransome for them and so did justifie us meritoriously and in that sense we are said to bee justified by his bloud and by his obedience both as the
and by imputation of his obedience properly wee are entituled to the kingdome of heaven as I have shewed heretofore But in the popish justification there is neither remission of sinnes properly to free them from hell nor donation of such juâ—…tice as may entitle them to heaven For neither the abolition or extinction of sinne present by infusion of righteousnesse though it were compleate as it is not can satisfie for their former sinnes nor can their righteousnesse being unperfect give them right to heaven But it is the onely satisfaction of Christ by his righteousnesse and obedience both Passive and Active which being communicated unto beleevers by imputation doth both free them from hell and giveth them a Title and Right to the Heavenly Kingdome His proofe taken from the courts of men I admit as good against them who holding that wee are justified onely by the Passive righteousnesse of Christ doe make justification to bee nothing else but remission of sinnes For they whom being guilty in themselves as we all aâ—…e before God a judge doth justifie are freed indeed from punishment but they doe not thereby obtaine new rewards Howbeit there is a great dissimilitude betweene Gods justification of men and that of humane Iudges For a judge by his absolution though he doth free the guilty and indeed faulty parson from punishment and from the guilt binding him over to punishment and thereby perhaps bewrayeth his owne unjustice yet he doth not free him from the fault nor doth he make him righteous and much lesse doth hee indow him with new priviledges But when God doth justifie a beleeving sinner hee doth not onely free him from hell and from the guilt binding him over to condemnation by imputation of Christ sufferings but also by imputation of Christ obedience he maketh him righteous and an heire of eternall life And in thus justifying a beleeving sinner he is just because Christ by his sufferings hath fully satisfied for his sinnes and by his obedience hath merited for him eternall life § XIII His third reason justification of enemies maketh us Gods friends children beloved Citizens of Heaven the Domesticks of God heires of his kingdome as the Scriptures every where speake therefore it doth not stand onely in remission of sinnes Thus farre we agree with him But as it is a good argument against those who hold justification to bee nothing else but remission of sinne so it maketh not for him who holdeth justification by infusion of righteousnesse but against him For whereas the Scriptures testifie that God when he justifieth men hee doth of enemies make them his beloved friends and his children c. It is to be confessed that here is a very great change but is it reall or relative by infusion or by imputation Surely when God reconcileth men unto himselfe and of enemies maketh them his favourites when he adopteth men and of the children of the devill maketh them his owne children when justifying men hee doth of foes make them his beloved friends of bondslaves not onely freemen but also Citizens of heaven of alients his Domesticks of men obnoxious to damnation heires of his Kingdome hee doth not these things by infusion of any reall or positive qualities into them but these are externall favours which God vouchsafeth unto them when forgiving their sinnes and imputing unto them the righteousnesse of his Sonne hee doth in him accept them for such yea and in respect of his relation unto them maketh them such as before they were not And when he hath made men such by imputation he also maketh them such by infusion of such qualities and dispositions as are answerable to that which they are called as I shewed in the beginning whom God receiveth into his grace and favour them hee endueth with grace whom hee redeemeth from the servitude of sinne and Satan hee maketh them his faithfull servants they who are the sonnes of God by adoption are also his sonnes by regeneration and finally those whom God doth justifie them also he doth sanctifie § XIV And this is all which Bellarmine hath brought for the proofes of justification by inherent and infused righteousnesse either from the Scriptures or from naturall reason Afterwards indeed in his eighth Chapter hee produceth the testimonies of Augustine and some others which he calleh the tradition of the ancient Fathers as if they did agree with the doctrine of the present Church of Rome which they doe not For first though some of the Latine Fathers led by the notation of the Latine word which was not to be respected it being bnt the translation of the Hebrew and Greeke did under the name of justification include the benefit of sanctification whereof there is no example in the Scriptures yet they did not exclude that which the Scriptures call justification as â—…the Papists doe For they acknowledged that justification containeth remission of sinnes and that it standeth chiefly in remission of sinnes that being our happinesse and therefore implying besides the not imputing of sinne acceptation unto life The Papists also talke of remission but their remission is not that which the Scriptures and Fathers speake of for the Scriptures and Fathers and all ancient Writers whatsoever by remission understand veniam pardon condonation forgiving not imputing of sinne absolving from it which is a distinct action of God from infusion of righteousnesse that being a worke of God without us working no reall or positive change within us and herein wee have the consent of all antiquity The Papists by remission of sinne understand the expulsion or extinction the utter deletion or abolition of sinne which is not a distinct action as they teach from infusion of righteousnesse but one and the same action which is the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne And is an action of God not without us as the other but within us working in us a reall and possitive change And therefore remission of sinne in the Popish sense belongeth not to justification but to perfect sanctification as being a totall mortification of sinne which none attaine unto in this life but of this point I have already treated in the second question of the first controversie Secondly the fathers oftentimes use the word justification in the same sense that wee doe according to the Scriptures as implying the forgivenesse of sinnes and acceptation unto life by the satisfaction and merits of Christ communicated unto us As namely when they teach as very oft they doe that we are justified by faith alone which they could not have taught if by justifying they had meant sanctifying for we are not sanctified by faith alone as all confesse Thirdly the Fathers did not looke to bee justified before God by any righteousnesse inherent in themselves or performed by them but renounced it as being unperfect and stained with the flesh And therefore where they speake of justification by inherent righteousnesse they meant sanctification and not justification before God whereof our question
is For they professe that by inherent righteousnesse no man living can be justified in Gods sight as I have shewed in this third controversie and in the fifth and sixth CAP. XIII An appendice to this third controversie concerning the parity of justice § I. VPon this controversie concerning the matter of justification dependeth another which is scarce worth the mentioning but onely to shew the blinded malice of the Papists in propounding it and to vindicate our selves from their calumniations Bellarmine therefore de justif l. 3. c. 16. propoundeth the question de paritate justitia of the parity or equality of justice whether all just men be in justice equall among themselves For faine would hee have the world to thinke that we are like to Iovinian or the Stoiks calumniating us against the light of his owne conscience For he cannot be ignorant but that wee doe acknowledge degrees of righteousnesse inherent and of the graces of sanctification not onely in divers men according to the measure of grace bestowed upon them some being incipients some proficients and some growne men but also in the same men every man being bound to labour that they may grow in grace and proceed from Faith to Faith untill hee come to a perfect man in Christ. § II. Indeed if the question bee concerning righteousnesse imputed we doe teach that in respect thereof all the faithfull are equally just Because as they are justified they stand just before God in the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ by which the weake Christian is justified as well as the strong And in this regard the faith of Gods children though unequall in degrees in some weaker in some stronger in some more and in some lesse is said by the Apostle Peter to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a like pretious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ that is in that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified And as the merit of Christ is equally imputed to all that beleeve so the reward in respect of the substance which is eternall life shall be equally given to all that beleeve yet I doubt not but that whom God in this life hath adomed with greater graces he will in them crowne his greater graces with greater glory And therefore as Saint Ambrose faith he giveth â—…qualem mercedem vitae â—…on gloriae the equall reward of life but not of glory and 〈◊〉 unus denarius non est unum prâ—…mium sed una vita una de gâ—…enna liberâ—…tio and Gregory there be many mansions with the father and yet unequall labourers receive the same peny because unto all there shall bee one equall blesseduesse of joyfulnesse though the sublimity of life be not one and the same to all § III. But Bellarmine though he confesseth that we doe not hold that either vertues or sinnes are equall and that we doe not deny but that both the same men may and ought to increase in faith hope and charity and in other vertues and that also divers men may bee more just than others in respect of such vertues as be in them but that wee hold that men being not justified before God by these vertues but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith wee are in respect of this righteousnesse by which wee are justified equally just Yet all his proofes are to prove the inequality and degrees of sanctity or inherent righteousnesse as though we denyed the same or held that paradox which may in respect of habituall righteousnesse more justly be imputed to the Papists For if incipients in Religion yea infants in age be justified or made just as they teach with perfect righteousnesse infused what difference shall there bee betwixt Baptized infants and the greatest Proficients among them who dreame of perfection in regard of habituall righteousnesse saving that the infants justice may seeme to bee more pure from actuall concupiscences But of this question more hath beene said than enough A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE FIFTH BOOKE Concerning the formall cause of justification CAP. I. Containing five proofes that we are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § I. THE fourth grand errour of the Papists in the article of justification is concerning that which wee call the forme thereof For they denying and deriding the imputation of Christs righteousnesse without which notwithstanding no man can bee saved doe hold that men are justified by infusion and not by imputation of righteousnesse we on the contrary doe hold according to the Scriptures that we are justified before God onely by imputation of Christs righteousnesse and not by infusion And our meaning when wee say that God imputeth Christs righteousnesse unto us is nothing else but this that hee graciously accepteth for us and in our behalfe the righteousnesse of Christ both active that is his obedience which in the dayes of his flesh hee performed for us and passive that is his sufferings which he sustained for us as if we had in our owne persons both performed and suffered the same for our selves Howbeit we confesse that the Lord doth infuse righteousnesse into the faithfull yet not as he justifieth but as hee sanctifieth them and consequently wee acknowledge that in all the faithfull there is true righteousnesse inherent but we deny that they are justified by it How I am first to prove our assertion and to maintaine our proofs against the exceptions and cavils of the Papists And then will I answer their allegations § II. My three first proofes shall bee taken from those things which have already beene proved And first those reasons which before I alleaged to prove the formall cause of our justification to bee the imputation of Christs righteousnesse Secondly If to justifie in the Scriptures doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse or to make a man righteous formally by inherent righteousnesse then it is evident that the justification which the Scriptures teach is not by infusion of righteousnesse And if not by infusion then by imputation for a third thing cannot be named But the former I have most evidently proved therefore the latter cannot be denyed Thirdly If we be justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him and not by any righteousnesse infused or inherent in us then it is evident that we are justified not by infusion of righteousnesse but by imputation But the former I have fully demonstrated therefore the latter must be confessed For wee are justified either by inherent righteousnesse or imputed not by inherent as hath beene shewed therefore by righteousnesse imputed § III. My fourth proofe shall be taken from the confession of our Adversaries who doe confesse that Christ his satisfaction is imputed unto us which they understand but of the one halfe of his satisfaction and not all that viz. in respect onely of the everlasting
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
childish things for now to wit by faith wee see and know as it were in or by a looking-glasse and as it were in a riddle or in a dâ—…rke speech but then wee shall see face to face Now I know in part but then I shall know even as also I am knowne If therefore faith shall bee perfected by vision the consequence of the proposition with the proofe thereof is to be denyed and the evacuating of it by vision is a pregnant proofe that in this life it is but in part As touching the assumption I say that faith which is the evidence of things not seene and the substance of things hoped for shall never bee perfected untill the things which are beleeved shall bee seene and the things hoped for shall be enjoyed § III. His second reason to prove that faith may be perfect in this life is this because that faith which hath bene tryed in the forâ—…ace of temptation is perfect whereto if hee assume that the faith which in justification is first infused either in infants when they are baptized or in others in their first justification hath beene tried in the Fornace of temptation hee shall be ridiculous for it must be before by tryall it bee approved but supposing him to speak of the faith of men being adulti and already justified his impertinent proofe standeth thus That faith which is more precious than gold tryed in the fire is perfect That faith which hath beene tryed and approved by temptation is more precious than gold tryed in the fire witnesse Saint Peter 1 Epist. 1. 7. therefore that faith is perfect Answ. The proposition is to bee denyed For temptations and afflictions are trialls not of the perfection but of the soundnesse and unfainednesse of faith All faith which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is true and unfained though not perfect endureth temptations Heresies are trialls whereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not the perfect but the sound and upright Christians may be knowne Affliction worketh patience and patience worketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 probation that is sheweth them to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is sound and approved who patiently beare afflictions Wherefore blessed is the man that endureth temptation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because when hee shall be found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not a perfect but a sound and approved Christian hee shall receive the Crowne of life Temptation therefore is fitly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the triall of our faith because it tryeth those who professe the faith whether they be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sound and upright Christians or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is hypocrites But not all that be not perfect are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor any perfect though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but all those that are not upright are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say hypocrites § IV. His third reason whosoever beleeve with all their heart or their whole heart their faith is perfect some do beleeve with their whole heart as namely the Eunuch Act. 8. 37. therefore the faith of some is perfect To helpe him I will confesse that not onely some but all who have faith unfained beleeve with their whole heart But the proposition is to bee denyed For to beleeve with the whole heart being not legally but evangâ—…lically understood is to beleeve not with an heart and an heart that is an heart divided but with an entire and upright heart wherein there is no guile that is hypocrisie So that hee which beleeveth integro corde with an upright heart or with faith unfained is said according to the scriptures to beleeve with his whole heart which proveth not the perfection but the soundnesse of faith Neither is it credible either that Philip would require perfect faith in men before they be baptized for to such Baptisme were needelesse or that the faith of the Eunuch being a new convert not yet baptized was at that time perfect For what I pray you was his faith Was it not this I beleeve that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God which is the very first degree of justifying faith § V. His fourth reason because the faith of Abraham was altogether perfect What will hee from thence inferre Ergo the faith of all when they are first justified is perfect but hee commeth farre short of that conclusion All that can bee concluded if the premisses were true is this Abraham had perfect faith Abraham was justified therefore some justified person hath a perfect faith The proposition hee proveth out of Rom. 4. 19. 20. where it is said that hee was not weake in faith as many are who notwithstanding are justified neither staggered at the promise of God through unbeleefe as Zacharias did Luk. 1. 20. who notwithstanding his unperfect faith was a man justified but was strong in faith being fully perswaded and therefore had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fidei the full perswasion of faith which few or none have when they are first justified Now saith he this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the perfection of faith Answ. first to the proposition that Abrahams faith when hee was first justified was not perfect whatsoever it was afterwards secondly to the proofe of it out of Rom. 4. 20. 21. from which testimony it is indeed proved that the faith of Abraham after he had beene for a long time justified was strong but not perfect Neither is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or full perswasion of this point that God is omnipotent which here is adscribed to Abraham the perfection of faith nor yet every full perswasion of the truth of God concerning Christ. For first there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a full perswasion of assent to any truth of God but especially to the truth that Iesus the Sonne of the Virgin Mary is the eternall Sonne of God and the Saviour of all that truely beleeve in him which though it justifie if it be a lively and effectual assent joyned with an earnest desire and settled resolution of application yet is farre from the perfection of faith For there is also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the full perswasion of speciall faith which goeth beyond the ordinary faith of all Papists when thou certainely beleevest not onely that Christ is the Saviour of all the faithfull but also that he is thy Saviour and that by him thou shalt be saved Now every assurance or assured perswasion is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which there are many degrees through which we must strive proceeding from faith to faith towards a full assurance which yet is never so full but that still more and more may and ought to be added to it As for Abraham though his faith were strong and excellent yet was it not perfect which appeareth by many signes For if his faith had beene perfect then it had not needed to have beene strengthened and confirmed Why then did the
faith of all the faithfull though unequall in degrees in some greater in some lesse is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a-like precious in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ 2 Pet. 1. 1. which is an evidence that faith doth not justifie in respect of its owne dignity or worthinesse but in respect of the object which it doth receive which being the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ unto which nothing can be added is one and the same to all that receive it Of this see more lib. 1. cap. 2. § 10. § IV. Here now the Papists because wee deny faith to justifie in respect of its owne worthinesse and merit take occasion to inveigh against us as if we made it Titulum sine re and as it were a matter of nothing Which is a malicious and yet but a frivolous cavill For first in respect of justification we acknowledge it to bee the onely instrument or hand to receive Christ to be the condition of the Covenant of Grace to which the Promises of remission of sinnes and of Salvation are made without which the promises of the Gospell doe not appertaine unto us and without which our blessed Saviour doth not save us Secondly in respect of Sanctification wee attribute all that and more which the Papists ascribe unto it in respect of their imaginary justification That it is the beginning the foundation and root of all inherent righteousnesse the mother of all other sanctifying Graces which purifieth the heart and worketh by love without which it is impossible to please God without which whatsoever is done is sinne § V. But howsoever here the Papists would seeme to plead for faith yet the truth is that as they have abolished the benefit of justification as it is taught in the holy Scriptures so with it they have taken away the justifying faith For though they retaine the name yet in their doctrine there is no such thing For first to faith they doe not ascribe the power to justifie but only to be a disposition one among seven even such a one as servile feare is of a man unto inherent righteousnesse or to the grace of Sanctification it selfe being not as yet a justifying or sanctifying grace Secondly that faith being infused becommeth the beginning and a part of formall inherent righteousnesse But so small a part they assigne unto it that they say that the habit of formall righteousnesse differeth not from the habit of charity so that in justification it hath no use at all and in sanctification charity is all in all which is a manifest evidence that the Church of Rome is fallen away from the ancient doctrine of the faith For both Scriptures and Fathers every where ascribe justification to faith and not to Charitie to faith and not to workes but the Papists ascribe the first justification to charitie which they make to be the onely formall cause of justification which as themselves teach is but one and the second justification they assigne to workes CHAP. VIII Whether we be justified by Faith alone The state of the Controversie and some reasons on our part § I. NOw I come to the third question which is the principall concerning faith whether we be justified by faith alone as wee with all antiquity doe hold or not by faith alone but also by other habits of grace as charitie and the rest and by the workes of grace which the Papists hold to concur in us to the act of justification as the causes thereof Where first we are to explaine our assertion and afterwards both to prove and to maintaine it And great reason there is that wee should explaine it because the Papists most wickedly against their owne knowledge calumniate our doctrine in this point I will therefore explaine all the three termes Fides justificat sola Faith doth justifie alone for by Faith wee doe not understand as I have shewed before neither the profession of faith or faith onely professed which S. Iames doth deny to justifie nor that faith which is a bare assent which is the faith of Papists and is common to them with the Divels and with other hypocrites and wicked men for such a faith we deny to justifie either alone or at all but a true lively and effectuall beleefe in Christ being a speciall apprehension or receiving and embracing of Christ and of the promises of the Gospell joyned with application or at least with a true desire will and endevour thereof The which faith also wee deny to be true if in some measure it doe not purifie the heart if it doe not worke by love if it cannot be demonstrated by good workes § II. Now for the word justifie shall I need to tell you that by justifying we doe not meane sanctifying And yet such is the blinded malice of the papists as that because they wickedly confound justification and sanctification which we carefully according to the Scriptures distinguish they beare the world in hand that our assertion is this in effect that faith alone doth sanctifie and that nothing concurreth to sanctification but faith onely and consequently that wee teach the people so they can perswade themselves that they have faith they need not take care either for other graces or for a godly life But howsoever we hold that faith doth justifie alone yet wee doe not hold that it doth sanctifie alone but that our sanctification is partly habituall unto which with faith concurre the habits of other sanctifying graces as hope charity c. and partly actuall which is our new obedience in the practice of good workes § III. But the word sela alone doth most displease the Papists who will needs part stakes with Christ in their justification This therefore is to be explaned And first when we say that faith alone doth justifie we doe not meane fidem solitariam that faith which is alone neither doe we in construction joyne sola with fides the subject but with justificat the predicate meaning that true faith though it bee not alone yet it doth justifie alone Even as the eye though in respect of being it is not alone or if it be it is not a true and a living but a dead eie which seeth neither alone nor at all yet in respect of seeing unto which no other member doth concurre with it it being the onely instrument of that faculty it is truely said to see alone so faith though in respect of the being thereof it is not alone or if it bee it is not a true and lively but a counterfeit and dead faith yet in respect of justifying unto which act no other grace doth concurre with it it being the onely instrument of apprehending and receiving Christ it is truely said to justifie alone wherefore as the brazen Serpent which was a figure of Christ was life up and set on high in the wildernesse that whosoever was bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking onely
to three heads The first is the authority of Gods word For if the Scriptures any where expresly say that faith alone doth justifie it must he beleeved though no other cause could be rendred The second is the will of God justifying namely because it hath pleased God to grant justification upon the onely condition of faith The third is the nature of faith it selfe because it is the properâ—…y of faith alone to apprehend justification and to apply it unto us and to make it ours Besides these I have rendred other causes the chiefe and principall whereof is this because we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which being out of us in him is imputed onely to them that beleeve and is received onely by faith § II. But these three causes or reasons which he mentioneth will not easily be remov'd the first the authority of the Scriptures this being the maine doctrine of the Gospell Yea but saith Bellarmine it is no where said in expresse termes that faith alone doth justifie when we saith he have expresse termes that a man is justified by workes and not by faith onely Iam. 2. 24. Answ. To the place in the Epistle of Iames I shall answere fully in his due place Onely here I say thus much That Saint Iameâ—… speaketh not of the justification of a sinner before God by which he is made or constituted just of which our question is but of that whereby a just man already justified before God may be approved declared and knowne both to himselfe and others to be just And that the Apostle Iames speaketh not either of workes as causes but as signes of justification or of the habit of true faith but of the profession of faith or faith professed onely and concludeth that a man is justified that is knowne and approved to be just not onely by the profession of the true faith but by workes also a godly conversation being as it were the life and soule of the profession and without which it is dead But though in expresse tearmes it be not said in so many words and Syllables that faith doth justifie alone yet this doctrine is by most necessary consequence deduced from the Scriptures And what may by necessary consequence be deducted out of the Scriptures that is contained in the scriptures as all confesse Wherunto may be added that the Fathers so conceived of the doctrine of the scriptures who with one consent as you have heard have taught according to the scriptures that by faith we are justified alone And the Papists must remember that by oath they are bound to expound the scriptures according to the coÌ„sent of the fathers § III. Now that this doctrine is contained in the Scriptures I have plentifully proved before and something here shall bee added There are but two righteousnesses onely mentioned in the Scriptures by which wee can bee justified either that which is prescribed in the Law which is a righteousnesse inherent in our selves and performed by our selves or that which is taught in the Gospell which is the righteousnesse of Christ inherent in him and performed for us The former is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes the latter is the righteousnesse of faith A third righteousnesse by which wee should bee justified cannot be named And betweene these two there is such an opposition made in the Scriptures that if wee bee justified by the one we cannot by the other If therefore the Scriptures teach that wee are justified by faith and not by workes it is all one as if they said that wee are justified by faith alone If it bee all one to say by faith and not by the workes of the Law or by faith alone then saith Bellarmine I demand whether all workes and every Law be excluded or not For if all workes be excluded then faith it selfe which Ioh. 6. 29. is the worke of God and if every Law then the Law of faith and consequently faith it selfe and so to be iustified by faith shal be nothing else but to be justified without faith Answ. it is plaine that by the Law is meant the Law of workes and by the workes of the Law all that obedience which is prescribed in the Law Now in the Law which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed Then saith Bellarmine faith it selfe and the act of faith is excluded from the act of justification I answere first in this question the Apostle opposeth faith to workes and therefore faith is not included under workes Secondly faith as it is either an habit or an act and so part of inherent righteousnesse doth not justifie but as hath beene said relatively in respect of the object which being received by faith doth justifie as it was the brâ—…sen serpent apprehended by the eye which did heale and not the eye properly § IV. Againe the Scriptures teach that we are justified gratis gratiâ per sanguinem Christi per fidem Gratis that is freely without respect of any good workes done by us no not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done Tit. 3. 5. but by his meere grace and favour when we had deserved the contrary through the bloud and alone satisfaction of Christ received onely by faith To the word gratis Bellarmine answereth that it excludeth our owne merits which indeed can be none but not the free gifts of God as love and penitencie and the like for then faith also should be excluded That followeth not for when wee are justified by faith onely we are justified gratis gratis saith the Apostle freely by his grace through the merits of Christ by faith bringing onely faith to justification as the Fathers have taught and that not to bee any essentiall cause of our justification but onely to be the instrument and hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnes and therfore it is the condition required on our part in the covenant of grace The rest as love and hope and repentance c. being not the conditions of the covenant but the things by covenant promised to them that beleeve Vpon the condition of faith which is also the free gift of God the Lord promiseth remission of sins and justification and to those who are redeemed and justified by faith he doth by oath promise the graces of sanctification So that faith only on our part is required to the act of justification besides which we bring nothing else thereunto but love and the rest of the graces as Augustine saith of workes non precedunt justificandum sequuntur justificatum and therefore wee are justified by faith alone § V. And by this the second head is also proved namely that it is the good pleasure of God to grant justification upon the condition of faith alone If ye looke into all the promises of the Gospell ye shall find that they interpose only the
no man lay besides that which is laid which is Christ Iesus By foundation saith hee Augustine and other interpreters understand faith in CHRIST But Paul himselfe say I in expresse termes saith that this foundation is Christ himselfe who most properly is called the foundation of his Church If therefore saith bee but the beginning and a part of justification because in Bellarmines conceit it is called the foundation then Christ himselfe the author and finisher of our faith and our perfect Saviour who most properly is the foundation shall afford us but a beginning and a part of our justification But be it that faith is called the foundation yet I would rather thinke that it is called the foundation relatively because Christ whom it apprehendeth is the foundation than that Christ should bee called the foundation because faith is Sometimes faith is put for the object of it and so is hope and thus some understand Gal. 3. 23 25. But that Christ should bee put for faith I suppose is not usuall But whereof is it the foundation it is the foundation the beginning the root the fountaine of Sanctification and of all inherent righteousnesse yet of justification it is not but Christ onely who alone is the foundation of all our happinesse Augustine indeed by foundation understandeth not onely Christ himselfe but faith also working by love which as Bellarmine said in the last argument is not as here he speaketh the beginning but the perfection of justice Chrysostome and Theophylact whom hee quoteth speake not of faith but of Christ onely Howbeit if faith must be held to be this foundation I doubt not but that according to the Scriptures we are to understand the doctrine of faith concerning Christ which often times is called faith which foundation the Apostle laid when hee preached the Gospell and whereupon other preachers are to build This argument therefore was farre fetched and cannot be brought to conclude the point The foundation is Christ and not faith Or if faith then either the habit of faith working by love which is not the beginning or foundation of justification but of sanctification or the doctrine of faith of which the question is not understood § IX His third testimony is Act. 15. 9. purifying their hearts by faith which plainely speaketh not of justification but of sanctification For we having received Christ by faith hee dwelleth in our hearts by faith and by his Spirit applying unto us not onely the merit of Christ his death and resurrection to our justification but also the virtue and efficacie of his death to mortifie sinne in us and of his resurrection to raise us to newnesse of life The testimonies of the Fathers serve all to prove that saith is the foundation and beginning of a godly life which because we doe freely confesse he might have forborne to prove § X. The third part of his assumption was that faith doth obtaine remission of sinnes and after a sort merit justification and therefore justifieth not by receiving and apprehending the promise Answ. In the antecedent of this reason Bellarmine contradicteth the Councill of Trent which hath decreed nihil eorum quae justificationem precedunt sive fides sive opera ipsam justificationis gratiam promeretur None of those things which goe before justification whether faith or workes doe merit the grace of justification But here Bellarmine ought to have proved three things which because he could not prove he taketh for granted The first is that by other things besides faith we doe merit justification which notwithstanding God doth grant us gratis that is freely and without merit For if faith did merit it which nothing else in us can doe it would follow that faith doth justifie alonâ—… The second that faith doth not obtaine remission of sinnes by receiving and apprehending the object which is Christ. But the Scriptures say plainely that by beleeving in Christ that is by receiving of him we receive remission of sinne The third that impetrare est quodammodò mereri to impetrate is after a sort to merit for then what by faithfull prayer we begge of God we should be said to merit and in like manner the beggar should by begging merit his almes But what saith Bellarmine elsewhere Multum inteâ—…esse inter meritum impetrationem that there is great difference betweene merit and impetration and Thomas Impetramus ea quâ—… non meremur Meritum nititur justitia Dei impetratio benignitate wee impetrate those things which we doe not merit Merit relieth upon Gods justice Impetration on his bounty But let us examine his proofes § XI The first out of Luk. 7. 50. where our Saviour telleth the Woman to whom he had said thy sinnes are forgiven thee that her faith had saved her for saith he it could not wel be said that her faith had saved her from her sinnes that is justified her if it conduced no more to justification than onely to receive the pardon For who would say to a poore man who onely put forth his hand to receive the almes thine hand hath releeved thee or to a sicke man who received a medicine with his hand thy hand hath cured thee Answ. Bellarmine before Chap. 13. alleaged this place to prove that the great love of this Woman towards Christ had procured the remission of sinnes which if it had beene true would have proved that not her faith but her love had saved her Secondly when our Saviour saith thy faith namely in me hath saved thee his meaning is that himselfe being received by faith had saved her As for the similitude of the hand I say thus that if releefe by almes or cure by Phyâ—…cke were promised upon this condition onely that whosoever would but put forth his hand to receive the almes or the Physicke should be releeved or cured it might truely be said that by the hand as the instrument â—…elatively the party is releeved or cured For such gracious promises hath God made to us that if we shall but put foorth the hand of faith to receive Christ wee shall bee justified and saved from our sinnes And such is the accompt that he maketh of this instrument by which onely we receive Christ that for our comfort he may say unto any true beleever as hee did to the woman thy faith hath saved thee For as when the people of Israell were bitten by the fiery Serpents the Lord having promised safely to all that should but liâ—…t up their eyes to behold the brasen Serpent which Moses had set on high to that purpose it might then have beene said of those that were saved that their eye had cured them So our Saviour was lift up upon the crosse that whosoever doth but looke upon him with the eye of faith shall be saved Not that the hand absolutely doth releeve or cure but relatively in respect of the almes or of the medicine which it doth receive Nor
which we shall be judged at the last day at which time God will judge men according to their workes For wee must all appeare before the judgement seat of Christ that wee may receive according to those things which we have done in the body whether it bee good or evill Those that have done good shall goe into everlasting life and they that have done evill into everlasting punishment For good workes though wee are not justified by them nor saved for them yet they are the evidence according to which our Saviour will pronounce the sentence of salvation Matth. 25. 34 35. According to that Psal. 62. 12. And to thee Lord mercie for thou rewardest a man meaning the godly man according to his workes § IX Lastly they are necessary necessitate medij and as that which though it be no cause is called causa sine qua nâ—…n And thus they are necessary first as the way which leadeth to life eternall via qua nos perducturus est ad finem itsum quem promisit the way by which hee will bring us unto that end which he hath promised saith Augustine For those that are justified and by justification entituled to the Kingdome of heaven they are to goe in the way of sanctification towards their glorification Eâ—…h 2. 10. good workes therefore though they bee not the cause of raigning yet they are the way to the Kingdome And so saith Bellarminâ—… himselâ—…e that although God in predestination hath determined to give the Kingdome of heaven to certaine men whom he loved without any prevision of workes notwithstanding hee did withall ordaine that in respect of the execution the way to come to his Kingdome should be good workes I say then with the Prophet Esay this is the way let us walke in it Secondly as necessary fruits of our election for wee are elected to that end that we should bee holy Ephes. 1. 4. as necessary fruits of faith without which it is judged to bee dead â—…am 2. 26. as unseparable consequents of our redemption and justification Luk. 1. 74. And as they are necessary consequents of our justification so they are necessary forerunners of salvation by which wee are fitted for Gods Kingdome because no uncleane thing can enter into the Kingdome of heaven Apoc. 21. 27. and finally so necessary is a godly life that without it no man shall see God Heb. 12. 14. I conclude with Bernard that good workes are occulia predestinationis jndicia futurâ—… fâ—…licitatis presagia via regni non caâ—…saregnandi tokens of our secret predestination presages of our future happinesse the way to the Kingdome but not the cause of our obtaining that Kingdome For howsoever good workes are necessary in many respects as I have shewed necessitate presentiae yet they are not necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes of our justification § X. Secondly the Papists calumniate us as if wee taught that good workes are not necessary to sanctification which slander as all the rest ariseth from their willfull and pernicious errour in consounding justificâ—…tion and sanctification In the question of justification we hold according to the Scriptures that if our owne workes or righteousnesse should bee obtruded unto the Lord as the matter or merit thereof whereby wee should bee both acquitted from our sinnes and so delivered from hell and also entituled to the Kingdome of heaven they are not onely to bee rejected but also detested as menstruous clouts as dung as losse But in the question of sanctification where they are considered both as fruits of faith and the Spirit as consequents of justification whereby wee testifie our thankefulnesse to God gather testimonies to our selves of our justification benefit and edifie our brethrenâ—… and also as necessary forerunners of glorification whereby we are fitted and prepared for Gods Kingdome unto which by justification wee are entituled and as the way wherein we are to walke towards our heavenly countrey and as the evidences according to which our Saviour will judge us at the last day c. wee doe acknowledge they are highly to be esteemed of as those things wherein our sanctification doth in good part consist For wee doe teach that our sanctification is partly habituall consisting in the habits of sanctifying graces faith hope charity humility the feare of God c. which is the first justification of the Papists and partly actuall consisting in our new obedience or which is all one in good workes which is their second justification This then is that which we doe hold that although good works doe not concurre with faith unto the act of justification as any cause thereof yet of necessity they must concurre in the subject that is the party justified as necessary fruits of faith as necessary consequents of justification as necessary antecedents of salvation And this is that which not only we but Bellarmine himselfe often citeth out of Augustine Bona opera accedunt justificato non praecedunt justificandum or thus bona opera non praecedunt justificandum sed sequantur justificatum good workes doe not goe before but follow after justification which is a pregnant proofe that they are no causes thereof CAP. II. That we are not justified by Workes § I. HAving thus avoided the calumniations of the Papists wee are now to dispute the question which is to bee understood not of justification before men whereby we are declared or knowne to bee just but of our justification before God whereby hee maketh us just nor of workes as fruits and consequents but as of causes of justification For we doe confesse that men are justified declarativè that is declared and knowne to be just to themselves or others by good works as the proper fruits of faith and undoubted consequents of justification but wee deny that we are justified before God by good works as any causes therof And this our assertion we will first prove by necessary arguments and then defend the same against the objections of the Papists § II. And first I prove it by all the arguments which I used before to prove the five severall points already handled For first if justification is not to be confounded with sanctification as if it consisted in a righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves then are we not justified before God by workes But the former hath beene clearely proved therefore the latter is to be confessed .2 If wee bee justified by the meere grace of God and that freely without respect of any workes done by us then are we not justified before God by works For the holy Ghost maketh such an opposition betweene grace and workes that if we be justified by the one we cannot be justified by the other But the antecedent hath beene formerly proved therefore the consequent cannot be denyed 3. If we be not justified before God by righteousnesse inherent in or performed by our selves but onely by the righteousnesse
But faith that is Christ received by faith saveth alone Thus much may suffice to have answered his former Argument in defence of that difference which wee make according to the Scriptures betweene the Law and the Gospell in respect of justification § XIX His other argument to prove the necessity of good works which wee deny not is taken from his true pretended differences betwixt the Law and the Gospell whereof he setteth downe two principall and six secondary differences arising from the principall All of them impertinent to the matter in hand excepting the first and also the last which serveth to confute the first is that such is the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell as betweene a doctrine begunne and perfected for as in respect of the mysteryes to believed and the promises to be hoped for the Gospell excelleth the Law 〈◊〉 should have said the new Testament excelleth the old for of the the two Testaments that is of the Law and the Gospell largely and not strictly taken this difference is to be understood so also in respect of the precepts which are to be done For to omit the ceremoniall and judiciall Lawes which hee impertinently mentioneth hee saith that the Law and the Gospell have in a maner the same morall precepts but with this difference that in the Gospell some more heavy or weighty things are imposed upon Christians thaâ—… were in the Law exacted of the Iewes as in the matter of polygamy and billes of divorce which not withstanding by the morall Law were as much forbidbed to them as now to us Secondly that Christ did perfect the moral Law prescribing a more perfect righteousnesse than the Law required Thirdly that to the precepts hee hath added Counselles tending to perfection Answ. This difference is suitable to the rest of their wicked and Antichristian doctrine which in this whole treatise I confute wherby as they confound justification and sanctification so also the Law and the Gospell saving that in the Gospell they say greater perfection is required of inherent righteousnes to justification than the Law prefcribeth and so make it a Law of workes as much or rather more than the Law it selfe § XX. This is confuted by the eigth or last difference wherin hee truely saith that the Law of Mose was most heavy and unportable but the Gospell of Christ is an easie yoake and a light burden If Petor therefore exclaimed against those which sought to impose the Law of Moses upon Christians Act. 15. 10. what shall wee thinke of our Popish Rabbins that impose an heavier yoake than the Law it selfe For whereas Bellarmine saith the Gospell is the easier because of the grace of the newe Testament accompanying it yet the difference is to be understood in respect of the doctrine it selfe and the letter which if it reqâ—…ire more perfect obedience is in it self the heavier burden II. This difference by confounding the Law and the Gospell doth make void the covenant of grace which God made with Abraham and performed in Christ which was concerning Iustification by faith which as it could not be disannulled by the Covenant of works so much lesse was it repealed but renewed and ratified in the Gospell But if in the Gospell were taught justification by works and not by Christs righteousnesse apperhended by faith the Covenant of grace made with Abraham should in the Gospell be repealed rather than renewed For the covenant of works promiseth justification and life upon condition of perfect and perpetuall obedience the covenant of grace upon condition of faith And these two in the Article of justification are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incompatible If therfore the Gospell doe teach justification by workes it maketh void the covenant of grace and thus the popish gospel overthroweth the Gospel of Christ. Thirdly This difference overthroweth a maine benefit which we have by Christ and without which we can neither be justified nor saved which is this that he hath freed us from the rigour of the Law which standeth in an exaction of perfect righteousnesse to be inherent in us and perfect obedience to be performed by us unto the acceptation either of our persons or actions which by reason of our corruption is impossible unto us And therfore miserable is their estcate who are in bondage to the Law either subjecting them to the curse if they offend in the least degree when in many things wee offend all or excluding them from justification and salvation if they yeeld not perfect and perpetuall obedience which by reason of the flesh is impossible From this curse Christ hath freed us in being made a curse for us bearing the punishment due for our sinnes and from this exaction of perfect righteousnesse to be performed by our selves hee hath freed us in being made unto us of God righteousnesse even Iehovah our righteousnesse performing perfect obedience to the Law for us But if the Gospell which they call the new Law require more perfect obedience than the old Law unto justification and salvation then doe wee continue in that miserable estate neither doth our blessed and most perfect Saviour availe us any thing Neither will this free us from this bondage that with the newe Law the grace of the new Testament whereby we should be enabled to obey the Law is conferred For first it is conferred onely to those who are already justified and secondly to whom it is conferred it is not given in such perfection in this life but that ever they are sinners in themselves sinne alwayes abiding in them So that still if wee must be justified by no righteousnesse but that which is inherent in us we remaine in that fearefull bondage seeing we have nothing either to free us from the curse in respect of our former sinnes or to entitle us to the kingdome of heaven our best righteousnesse being unperfect and stayned with the flesh Fourthly the righteousnes required in the new Law to justification is either the same with that which was prescribed in the old Law or more perfect If the same how then are we not justified by the works of the Law If more perfect then the Law of God was not perfect which the Scriptures testifie to be so perfect as nothing can bee added thereto Neither did our Saviour Christ perfect the Law by adding more perfection unto it in respect either of the precepts or the counsells which the Papists conceive to have bin added by Christ to the precepts For as touching the precepts he did but more perfectly explaine them freeing them from the depravations of the Scribes and Pharisees who rested in the outward letter as if the Law were not spirituall nor did forbid any more but the grosse sins which in the 〈◊〉 of the Law are expressed And as for the Counsells they are also morall duties for omission wherof men may according to the sentence of the Law be condemned as not to love our enemyes not
For what will it profit a man saith St. Iames if hee shall say that hee hath faith and hath not workes will that faith save him For as the body without the Spirit is dead so that faith which is in profession onely and is without workes is dead § XVII But this reason of his hee doth illustrate by two unlike similitudes For saith hee even as fire because by its heat alone it heateth if from the fire were taken away all other qualityes which are by accident joyned with heat it would still without doubt heat And as a father because by the onely relation of paternity hee hath reference to his sonne if from him who is a father all other attributes were removed as knowledgen â—…bility power health beauty and in stead os them there should succeed ignorance basenesse weaknes sicknes deformity and among all these attributes paternity should remaine yet still that father should have relation to his sonne Even so because a Christian apprehendeth salvation by faith alone and unto it is referred by our adversaryes surely it followeth that faith remayning hee may be saved although hee have no good workes and have many ill Answ. In the former similitude hee compareth a Christian man to fire faith to heat and other graces and good workes to such other qualityes as in fire by accident concurre with heat In which similitude nothing is like For neither doth a Christian man justifie or save others by faith as fire by his heat doth heat other things neither is hee justified or saved by his faith as it is a quality inherent but as it is the hand to receive Christâ—… neither are other graces or duetyes of sanctification which wee call good workes to be compared with I know not what accidentall qualityes concurring with heat but to those unseparable qualityes of fire viz light and drynes For even in the fire that is inflamed there doe concurre necessarily with heat drynesse and light neither were it a true fire without them and yet the act of heating is to be ascribed to the heat of the fire properly and not to the light or drynesse of the element so in a true Christian that is justified there doth concurre necessarily with faith both other sanctifying graces answerable to the drynesse of the fire and also the light of a Christian conversation without which hee is not to be held a true Christian or truely justified and yet the act of justifying or saving is not to be ascribed either to other graces or to good workes but onely to faith receiving Christ or rather to Christ onely received by faith In the other similitude he compareth the reference which faith hath to salvation unto that relation with is betweene father and sonne But faith and salvation are no such relatives Neither are the graces of the sanctification or good workes to be compared to those accidentall adjuncts attributed to a father which may come and goe as being not necessary to the being of a father but rather to those properties of the humane nature as reason will understanding wit c. For although a man cannot become a father without these yet his being a father is not not to be ascribed to these § XVIII And whereas hee would seeme to take away the answeare of his adversaties who alleage that his supposition is impossible both because in his first booke he had proved that saith may truely and indeed be severed from charity and good workes and also because at least in conceit it may be severed from them which he saith is sufficient for the confirmation of an hypotheticall prâ—…position neither can his adversaries deny it who teach thah faith and workes have that relation which is betweene the cause and the effect Hereunto I reply First that I have formerly not onely answered his arguments which hee produced to this purpose but also proved by unanswereable arguments that true justifying faith cannot be severed from charity and good workes Secondly as I said even nowe his supposition implyeth a contradiction and therefore is impossible Impossible I say that workes being supposed to bee present necessitate presentiae should in the same speech be truely supposed to be absent Thirdly If Bellarmine can conceive that true justifying and saving faith may be without charity and good workes then hee may also conceive that that faith may save which is severed from charity and destitute of good workes His assumption I grant for wee teach according to the Scriptures that that faith which is alone severed from charity and good works doth justify or save neither alone nor at all and doe ascribe lesse to such a faith than the Papists themselves doe But his conclusion is faulty as contayning more than can be inferred upon the premisses that good workes are necessary not onely in regard of presence but also of some Efficiencie which was not so much as mentioned in the antecedent of the proposition which the conclusion should gainsay and say no more Thus much of the necessity of good workes CHAP. VI. Of the verity of the justice of works and of the possibilitie of fulfilling the Law § I. NOw Bellarmine will discourse of the truth of the justice of workes or of actuall righteousnesse And in this dispute he spendeth eigth Chapters But to what end for I feare hee wandreth still Hee had in the first booke propounded five principall arguments to prove that faith doth not justifie alone The Fifth and last was that good workes also doe justifie and therefore not faith alone This assertion hee laboureth to prove by divers arguments The first from the necessity of good workes which I have answeared The second from the verity of the justice of workes namely that the good workes of the faithfull and regenerate are truely good which wee doe not deny wee say indeed that the seeming good workes of men unregenerate are not truely good because an evill tree cannot bring forth good fruit But the good workes of the regenerate being the workes of grace and the fruits of the Spirit wee acknowledge to be truely good But will it hereupon followe that therfore they are or may be justified by workes Nothing lesse Hee must prove that the workes of the regenerate are not onely truely good but also purely and perfectly good and not onely that but that they are also perpetually and universally good For if they faile in any one particular as in many things we saith Iames the just offend all they cannot be justified by their obedience For hee that offendeâ—…h in one is guilty of the breach of the whole Law and is so farre from being justified by his obedience that by the sentence of the Law hee is accursed because he hath not continued in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them unlesse therfore he can prove that not onely some but all the workes of the faithfull are not onely truely but
what we were and not what we are that seeing from what wee are fallen we might seeke to bee repaired in Christ who is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. The covenant of workes God made with man in his state of integrity when he was able to keepe it But after the fall because it was not possible that man should performe that covenant in and by himselfe he in great mercie made with man the Covenant of grace in Christ. But lest any man should either through ignorance or pride neglect the benefit of the Messias it pleased God to renew the Covenant of workes not to that end that men should be justified or saved thereby but that it might bee a meanes to drive them unto Christ. And fo Bellarmine himselfe hath taught Lex non data erat ut justificaret sed ut morbum â—…stenderet ad quaerâ—…ndum medicum excitaret The Law was not given to that end that it should justifie but that it might shew the disease and stirte up men to seeke to the Physitian Againe a distinction is to be made as in the answere to the second reason of the parties to whom the law is given For to the wicked and reprobate who are Gods rebellious subjects the law is indeed impossible through their owne default and yet God exacteth most justly that righteousnesse in which hee did create them hee requireth most justly an accompt of those talents which hee committed to them though now they be not able to pay The debt is duely exacted of the debtour though through his own default hee bee not now able to make payment As for the elect whom the Lord hath before they were loved in Christ hee hath given his law to them not to this end that either by the observation thereof in their own persons they should bee justified or by the breach thereof they should bee condemned for then who could be saved But the use of the law to them before their conversion is that it might bee unto them a Schoolmaster unto Christ and after their conversion and justification it might bee a rule whereby to frame their lives and conversation aspiring alwaies towards that perfection which the law prescribeth though they cannot fully attaine unto it Why then saith Augustine should not this perfection bee enjoyned to man though no man in this life have it Non enim rectè curratur si quò currendum est nesciatur quomodo autem sciretur si nullis praeceptis ostenderetur For men cannot runne well if they know not whither they must runne and how should they know that if by precepts it be not made known to them And worthy is that saying of Bernard to be repeated againe and againe Neither was the commander ignorant that the weight of the commandement doth exceed the strength of men but hee judged it profitable that hereby they should be admonished of their owne unsufficiencie and that they might know to what end or perfection of righteousnesse they should aspire Therefore by commanding impossible things hee did not make men transgressors but humble that every mouth may bee stoppod and the whole world made obnoxious to God For by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified in his sight For receiving the commandement and feeling our defectivenes wee shall cry to heaven and God will have mercie on us And wee shall know in that day that not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done but according to his mercie hee hath saved us § X. His fourth reason is collected out of three places of scripture Rom. 8. 4. Mat. 6. 10. Heb. 5. 9. In the first it is said that Christ suffered that the justification of the Law might be fulfilled in us In the second we are taught to pray that Gods will may bee done upon earth as it is in heaven In the third that Christ is made to all that obey him the cause of eternall salvation But saith hee if we canâ—…t fulfill the Law then Christ misseth of his end For notwithstanding his sufferings the justification of the Law is not fulfilled in us neither is our prayer ever obtayned of fulfilling Gâ—…ds will and commandements on earth as in heaven neither is Christ the authour of salvation to any because none obey him Answ. As touching the first place because it is often alleaged by Bellarmine I will somewhat insist upon it The place is two wayes expounded either of sanctification or of justification Ifit be to be understood of sanctification as the Papists commonly expound it we acknowledge that our sanctification is the end and fruit of our redemption by Christ and that this end is atchieved iâ—… all those who live not after the flesh but after the Spirit that is in all true believers I say it is archieved 〈◊〉 in this life and perfectly in the life to come But as I suppose it is rather to be understood of justification For the Apostle having assured the faithfull vers 1. that notwithstanding sinne and the body of sinne and of death wherof hee had complayned chap. 7. remayneth in them yet forasmuch as we are delivered from the same by Iesus Christ our Lord vers 25. there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ as his members whom hee describeth by this character that they walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit In the verses following he confirmeth the same conclusion showing how Christ hath delivered us For saith hee vers 2. the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Iesus hath delivered me from the law of sinne and of death Whereby the law of the Spirit of life we understand the virtue and power of holynes or sanctification not in us but in Christ Iesus for so hee saith though they doe not observe it who understand this place of sanctification and righteousnesse inherent who by his righteousnesse and merits hath delivered us from the power of sinne and of death But the Apostle as in the former chapter vers 24. so here in the singular number speaketh of himself teaching by his owne example every true Christian to apply the benefits of Christ to himself For that which was impossible for the law to doe that is to justifie us in that it was weake through the flesh God sending his owne sonne in the likenes of sinfull flesh that is in the humane nature subject to passions and infirmities and that for sinne that hee might take away the sinne of the world for so saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemned sinne in the flesh that is exacted the due punishment of sinne in his humane nature that the guilt of our sinnes being taken away by his alsufficient satisfaction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which the law requireth unto justification might by Christ bee fulfilled in us who are his members which walke not as also hee had said in the first verse not after
as the servants of sinne in whom sin reigneth yet they are penitent and beleeving sinners in whom sinne remainteh who often sinne through humane frailty There is no man that sinneth not saith Salomon yea there is not a righteous man upon earth that doeth good and sinneth not in many things we saith Iames the just doe offend all If we say that wee have not sinned or that wee have no sinne saith the most holy Apostle Saint Iohn wee deceive our selves we make him a lyer and there is no truth in us And therefore desperate againe is Bellarmines assertion that whosoever is justified or regenerated sinneth not that is never sinneth and on the other side whosoever sinneth is not a man regenerate nor justified which is to exclude all men from Iustification and consequently from Salvation § XVI And thus have I answered Bellarmines arguments concerning the possibility of the Law Now it may be expected that I should propound and mainetaine ours But this taske I have already performed in handling the third question of this controversie concerning the matter of our justification where among many other arguments proving that we are not justified by any righteousnes inherent in us or performed by us but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him we used this for one By what righteousnesse we are justified the Law is satisfied By Christs righteousnesse alone the Law is satisfied and not by that which is inherent in us or performed by us And this assumption wee prove because wee are not able to sati fie the Law neither in respect of the Commandement it being by reason of the flesh impossible unto us nor in respect of the penalty which cannot be satisfied by us but with endlesse torment So that as I said before all this discourse of the possibilitie of the Law is nothing but a defence against a piece of one of our arguments Now I should follow him to the second point which hee propounded to prove that the workes of the righteous are simply and absolutely just and after their manner perfect Which may also seeme to be an answere to another piece of our argument For that righteousnesse by which wee are justified is perfect such onely is the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him such is not that which is inherent in us as the habituall or performed by us as the actuall Bellarmine therefore in opposition to that breach concerning perfect actuall righteousnesse propounded the proofe of this point But that our best righteousnesse is unperfect and stained with the flesh I have fully proved before and have answered all the arguments which Bellarmine produceth here in my fourth Booke whereunto I referre the reader Here onely I signifie againe that Bellarmine falleth very short in his proofes for where he should prove that the workes of the faithfull are simply and absolutely just and perfect as hee propounded the question hee now seemeth to prove this that the good workes of the righteous are truely good which we deny not § XVII Yes but you Protestants will they say doe teach that the best workes of the faithfull are sinnes c. Ans. We doe not say that their good workes as namely their prayer or their almes c. are sinnes but that in them they being otherwise good there are some imperfections and staines which are sinnes in respect whereof the faithfull man in doing that which is good sinneth according to that Eccl. 7. 20. We doe confesse that the duties which the faithfull performe are good workes and so called in the Scriptures though not purely and perfectly good but having their imperfections and being stained with the flesh Even as we call a man regenerated a just or a good man though he be not perfectly just being partly flesh and partly spirit Thus a vessell wherein there is wax mixed with hony before it be clarified is truly called a vessell of hony though not sinceri mellis of pure or sincere honey A cup of wine wherein is a mixture of some water with wine is truely called a cup of wine though not vini meraci of pure wine In like manner a wedge of gold wherein there is some drosse is truely called a wedge of gold though not of pure gold An heape of corne in the floore wherein there is perhaps as much chaffe as wheat is truly called an heape of wheat A field wherein are tares and other weeds as well as corne is notwithstanding called a corne field the denomination being taken from the better part Verily whiles we live in this world we are as gold wherein there is much drosse and never are fully refined untill wee are to bee translated into the celestiall house of God Whiles we are in the Church militant as it were in Gods floore we are mingled with much chaffe and are never perfectly cleansed from the chaffe of our corruptions untill we are to be translated into the Lords Granaries And such as wee are such also are our actions such as the tree is such is the fruit But if hee will prove that men are justified by their workes hee must prove not onely that they are truely good but also purely and perfectly good and not onely that some of their workes are truely and purely good but that all their workes are truely and perfectly and not that onely but also perpetually good For if any of his workes bee sinnes he cannot be justified by his workes But this can never be proved Neither doth hee goe about to prove that all the actions of justified men are good but some onely and these not purely and perfectly but truely good To which purpose he spendeth three whole Chapters which I have fully answered in my fourth Booke CHAP. VIII Whether good Workes doe justifie Bellarmines proofe but especially that Testimony of Saint Iames Chapter 2. fully discussed and clared § I. AFter so many wandrings Bellarmine at length commeth to make good his fifth Argument which he propounded to prove that faith alone doth not justifie because good workes doe also justifie though here as I have noted this Argument is brought in to prove the truth of actuall righteousnesse The Title of this Chapter is that good workes are not onely just but that also they doe justifie In stead whereof he presently propoundeth this assertion to be proved that by good workes a just man is more justified and made more just But this is not the Question For we doe confesse that a man already justified before God by the practise of good works increaseth in righteousnesse inherent and is made more holy and just The thing which we deny is this that good workes doe not concurre with faith unto the act of iustification before God as any cause thereof Against this assertion he ought to have disputed if he would seeme to contradict us But he hath altered the question because he is not able to
condignae or Ambrose and Augustines indignae but not worthy or unworthy And what is it not to be worthy or to be unworthy but not to deserve Yea Bellarmine himselfe both in his second and third chapters endevoureth to prove merit from all those places where the word worthy is used for dignum esse praemio saith he mereri pr aemium idem sunt bee worthy of reward and to deserve it are all one Therefore according to this translation which with the Papists is the onely authenticall text of Scripture the Apostle teacheth that the sufferings of this life deserve not the life of glory Neither is it materiall whether we read worthy of it or worthy to it that is equall in worth to it or worthy to be compared to it For if they be not worthy to it they are not worthy of it neither can they merit or deserve it The words in the originall are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not worthy to the glory or not worthy to be compared to it Thus Prov. 3. 15. where the Greeke readeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no precious thing is worthy of wisdome the Latine hath non valent comparari they may not be compared with it according to the hebrew So Eccl. 26. 20. alias 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lat omnis autem ponderatio non est digna continentis animae No weight is worthy of her chast mind that is nothing of worth is equall ot to bee compared in worth to it The meaning then of the words is this I resolve saith the Apostle the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth that when a man hath cast his accounts and well weighed the matter he concludeâ—…h resolveth determineth as Rom. 3. 28. 6. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of this present time that is the sufferings which the godly sustaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are not worthy of so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 throughout the New Testament doth fignifie or not worthy to bee compared or comparable or equall in worth to the glory which shall bee revealed in us or upon us § XIX In the former sense these words are a direct and absolute deniall of the merit of condignity For if the passions of this life are not worthy of eternall life then much lesse the actions of this life For by the sufferings of this time Martyrdome is chiefely meant Now the Papists teach that the merit of a Martyr is greater than of a Confessor that by it as Infants by Baptisme those which suffer though not before baptized are purged from their sinne and are immediately translated into heaven And yet of them Saint Augustine saith nullo modo superbiant sancti Martyres tanquam dignum aliquod prâ—… illius patriae pâ—…rticipatione fecerint ubi aeterna est vera faelicitas Let not the holy Martyrs by any meanes bee lifted up with pride as though they have done something for the participatioâ—… of that countrey where is eternall and true felicity Bellarmine who telleth us that wheresoever in the new Testament there is mention of worthinesse there merit is meant is faine to â—…lee from the signification of unworthinesse to the second sense importing disproportion and inequality signifying though hee doth not very well exprâ—…sse himselfe when hee saith that the Apostle speaketh of the substance of the workes not of the absolute proportion that howsoever they bee unequall yet they are not unworthy of eternall life So that this inequality he understandeth not in respect of worth but in respect of length and greatnesse Whereto I reply first if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every where in the New Testament signifieth worthy and worthinesse implyeth merit as Bellarmine teacheth then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fignifieth non condigna as their own authentique translation readeth that is they are not worthy which is all one as as if it were said they deserve not nor merit the future glory Oecâ—…menius upon the place saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle sheweth that we are not able either to suffer or to conferre any thing worthy the remnueration that is there Ambrose The Apostle that hee might exhort us unto suffering addeth this reason because all things which we suffer are lesse and unworthy for the paines whereof there should be rendred so great a reward of future good things Eusebius Emissenus Ergo totis licet animae corporis laboribus desudemus totis licet obedientiae viribus exerceamur nihil â—…amen condignum merito pro coelestibus compensare afferre valebimus Non valent viâ—…ae prâ—… sentis obsequia â—…terna vitae gaudiis comparari Lassescant licet membra vigiliis pallescant licet ora jejâ—…niis non erunt tamen condignae passiones hujus temporis ad futuraâ—… gloriam c. Athanasius In vita Sancti Antonii cited by Bellarmine neâ—… 〈◊〉 orbi renunciantes dignum aliquod habitaculis possumus compensare câ—…lestibus Augustine Quanto labore dignâ—… est requies quae non habet finem Si verum vis comparare verum judicare aterna requies â—…terno labore rectâ—… emitur See the testimony of Gregory cited § 2. of this chapter Secondly if they bee unequall if there be a great or rather infinite disproportion betweene our short and light asflictions and the eternall superexcellent weight of glory then cannot our sufferings merit eternall life For betweene the merit and the reward there must bee some proportion of equality Wherefore this text as in the former sense it directly contradicteth the merit of condignity so in the latter it doth disprove it by necessary consequence For condigne merits are equall to the â—…ward the sufferings of this life are not equall to the future glory therefore they doe not merit eternall life § XX. Neither will it helpe our Rhemists nor â—…ellarmine himselfe to salve their errour with blasphemy The note of the Rhemists upon the word condigne is this Our adversaries groâ—…nd hereon that the workes or sufferings of this life be not meritorious or worthy of life ever lasting where the Apostle saith no such thing no more than he saith that Christs passions be not meritorious of his glory hee expresseth onely that the very afflictions of their owne nature which â—…e suffer with or for him â—…e but shâ—…rt momentaâ—…y and of no account in comparison of the recompeâ—…ce which we shall have in â—…eaven No more indeed were Christs paiâ—…es of their 〈◊〉 nature compared to his glory any whit comparable yet they wâ—…re â—…eritorious 〈◊〉 worthy of heaven and so be ours Where they seeme to put no difference betweenâ—… the Head and his members If Christ did merit his glory by his short fufferings then doe we if wee doe not then not he But their wisedomes should have considered the obedience of Christ was the obedience of God that is of him who was and is God that the sufferings which hee did sustaine were the sufferings of God
bountyof God then are they fooles who repose affiance in their owne workes And no doubt but they are fooles who trust in their owne heart as Salomon saith Prov. 28. 26. For as Adrian saith who after was Pope Our merits are like astaffe of reed which not onely breaketh when it is leaned upon but also pierceth the hand of him that leaneth on it To trust in a mans owne righteousnessâ—… is the property of a proud Iustitiary and hypocrite Ezec. 33. 13. Luke 18. 9. and of one that is accursed because hee removeth his heart â—…rom God and putteth his trust in man that is to say hâ—…mselfe for as Bernard well faith for a man to trust in himselfe Non fidei sed per â—…dem est nec confidentiae sed diffidentiae magis in semetipso habere fiduciam But the true and upright Christian renouncing all confidence in his owne righteousnesse as being a beggar in spirit Matth. 5. 3. resteth wholly on the mercies of God and merits of Christ Psal. 130. 3 4. 143. 2. Dan. 9. 18. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Phil. 3. 8 9. according to the advice of our Saviour Luk. 17. 10. If it be objected that the godly in many places of Scripture doe alleage their owne innocency and integrity as seeming to put some affiance therein 2 King 20. 3. Nehem. 5. 19. Psal. 18. 21 24. 2 Tim. 4. 7 8. I answere first it is one thing to place affiance in our good works as causes of our salvation as merit-mongers use to doe another from our good workes as tokens and signes of our election vocation justification and as presages of our glorification to gather comfort assâ—…rance and hope to our selves of our justification and salvation which the faithfull use to doe and to that end are they commanded to practise good workes that they make their calling and election sure 2 Pâ—…t 1. 10. This distinction is acknowledged by Bellarmine Sciendum est saith hee aliud esse fidâ—…ciam nasci ex 〈◊〉 aliâ—…d fiduciam esse ponendam in meritis It is one thing out of our good workes to gather assurance and affiance in God which the faithfull doe as they are exhorted in the Scriptures 2 Pet. 1. 10. Iob 11. 15. Rom. 5. 4. Probation worketh hope 1 Ioh. 3. 21. If our heart condemne us not then have wee confidence towards God and it is another thing to place affiance in our merits which none but proud Iustitiaries and Pharisaicall Hypocrites use to doe Secondly we must distinguish betwixt the innocency and justice of a mans cause and the innocency and justice of his person For the same men in the Scripture who for the justification of their persons desire the Lord not to enter into judgement with them for the justification of their cause have not feared to appeale to Gods judgement § XIII Our sixth reason those who cannot fully discharge their duety much lesse can they merit For they that merit must doe more than their duety For they that doe but their duety though they doe all that is commanded must acknowledge themselves to be unprofitable servants But if they faile in their duety and come short of that which is commanded then can they merit nothing but punishment at the hands of God But no mortall man is able fully to satisfie his duety Our duety is to abstaine from all sinne yea to be 〈◊〉 from all sinne and to doe the things commanded to doe all and to continue in doing all and that in that manner and measure which the Law requireth But those things no mortall man is able to doe as hath beene proved heretofore So farre is every mortall man from meriting any thing but punishment at the hands of God Our seventh reason If good workes doe merit salvation then wee are saved by them but we are not saved by good workes Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. therefore they doe not merit salvation Eightly the last reason The heavenly Canaan is a land of promise as the earthly Canaan was which the Lord gave to the Israelites not because of their merits Deut. 9. 5. Nor for the merit of their forefathers Iosh. 24. 2. but because he loved them and that for no other cause but because hee loved them Deut. 7. 7 8. In which love as hee freely promised it so in the same undeâ—…erved love he did freely bestow it And yet hee was just in giving it because hee had promised it Nehem. 9. 8. The same wee are to conceive of the heavenly Canaan whereof the other was a Type that it is a land of promise and noâ—… of merit freely promised and freely bestowed on the heires of promise CAP. IIII. Testimonies of Fathers disproving merits and first those which Bellarmine hath sought to answere and then others § I. TO the former testimonies and proofes I will adjoyne the testimonies of Fathers and other writers And first those which Bellarmine hath endeavoured to answere of which Hilarie is the first Spes in misericordia Dei in sâ—…culum in seculum seculi est Non enim illa ipsa justitiae opera sufficient ad perfectâ—… beatitudinis meritum nisi misericordia Dei etiam in hac justiâ—…ae voluntate hâ—…manarum demutationum motuum vitia non reputet hinc illud Prophetae dictum est melior est misericordia tua super vitam In tantum misericordia Dei muneratur ut miserans justitia voluntatem aeternitatis quoque suae justum quemque tribuat esse participem His intendement is that the hope of salvation is to bee placed in Gods mercy which is better than our righteous life For the workes of righteousnesse without Gods mercy in forgiving of sinnes will not suffice to obtaine the reward of blessednesse which the mercy of God pitying our will of righteousnesse bestoweth on the just But Bellâ—…mine maketh him speake what pleaseth him for to omit that for sufficient hee readeth Sufficerent Hilary saith hee doth teach that with our goodworkes are mingled certaine sinnes which though they make not a man unjust as being light â—…nd veniâ—…ll yet they need pardon and mercy because nothing that is defiled can enter into the kingdome of heaven Bellarâ—…ines meaning is that at the day of judgement the faithfull shall need Gods mercy for the pardoning of veniall sinnes as heretofore â—…ee hath taught But there is no such matter in Hilary neither is it tâ—…ue as I have shewed beforâ—… that at the day of â—…udgement the faithfull shall need remission of veniall or any other sinnes neither doth Hilary say that the sinnes which are forgiven by the mercy of God are light and such as the Papists call veniall Neither is it true that there bee any sinnes which doe not make them sinners in whom they are seeing Bellarmine here confesseth that men are so defiled by them that they being not remitted exclude them from heaven neither doth hee say with good merits are mingled sinâ—…es neither doth
our selves to bee sinners and our righteousnesse consisteth not in our owne merit but in the mercy of God 4. God resisteth the proud and giveth grace to the humble but where is grace it is not the retribution of workes but the largesse of the giver that the saying of the Apostle may be fulfilled it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy 5. Writing on those words Esai 64. 8. thou art our Father hee saith Si nostra consideremus merita desperandum est si tuam autem clementiam c. If wee consider our merits wee must despaire but if thy clemency who doest scourge every sonne whom thou receivest we dare powre forth our prayers 6. When the day of judgement or of death shall come all hands will bee dissolved because no worke shall bee found worthy Gods justice and in his sight shall no man living be jâ—…stified namely if he enter into judgement with him whereupon the Prophet saith in the Psâ—…lme If thou Lord observe iniquities who shall abide To these two that thred-bare answere is given that they speake of humane workes not assisted by grace when it is plaine that the former words are spoken in the person of Gods children whose good workes are alwayes assisted by grace the latter of all men even of the best whose workes though proceeding from grace are stained with the flesh and therefore not worthy of Gods justice § XIII The same answere is given to the testimonies of Macaâ—…ius and Marcus the Eremits which cannot bee so eluded Macarius speaking of the dignity of Christians for whom God hath prepared a kingdome writeth thus As touching the gift therefore which they shall inherit a man might well say that if any one should â—…ven from the creation of Adam to the consummation of the world fight against Satan and should suffer afflictions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee should doe no great matter in respect of the glory which he shall inherit Marcus among his twenty two sentences concerning those who thinke to bee justified by workes which in the first â—…entence hee calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath divers against merits whereof I will cite a few Our Lord saith he when he would shew that the keeping of the whole Law is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 debita to bee performed as a debt and that the adoption of sonnes is given by his blood hee saith when you shall have done all things that are commanded you say wee are unprofitable servants we have done what was our duety to doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore the kingdome of heaven is not wages or a mercenary reward of workes but the Grace or free Gift of the Lord prepared for his faithfull servants The servant doth no require liberty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a deâ—…erved reward but receiveth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as given by grace Some not doing the Commandements thinke they beleeve well Others doing them looke to receive the kingdome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as due wages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both sorts misse the heavenly Canaan From Lords no reward is due to servants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither doe they obtaine liberty unlesse they serve well If Christ dyed for us according to the Scriptures and wee live not to our selves but to him that dyed for us and rose againe surely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wee are bound as debtours to serve him uâ—…till death how then shall we esteeme the adoption or inheritance of sonnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 due unto us § XIV Out of Chrysostome many pregnant testimonies are alleaged first In Coloss. homil 2. Why doth hee call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lot or inheritance by lot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. he sheweth that no man by his owne good workes doth obtaine the kingdome for no man sheweth forth such a conversation that hee should bee worthy of the kindgdome but this is altoâ—…ether of the gift of God wherefore he saith when you shall have done all say we are unprofitable servants for what things wee ought to doe wee have done The same hath Theâ—…philact To this you may adde that which I cited before out of his Treatise De compunctione ad Stâ—…lochium and that which hee writeth in Psal. 4. 5. and in his sermon De primâ—… homine praelato â—…mni creaturâ—… In which it is said though we should die ten thousand deaths and should shew forth all virtue though we should performe ten thousand good workes yet we cannot performe any thing worthy of those honours bestowed upon us worthy of that heavenly kingdome or correspondent unto it but it is of his mâ—…rcie of his love of his grace that we are saved than which nothing can bee spoken more plaine against the merit of â—…ondignity To all which a senselesse answere is given that heaven is the free gift of God and yet is purchased by our merits which implyeth a contradiction within it selfe and is expressely repugnant to the Scriptures Rom 4. 4. 11. 6. And the reason which is given to prove it doth overthrow it because the good works which they call merits are the free gifts of God and therfore cannot merit of God as I have shewed before § XV. To that which is alleaged out of the life of Saint Anthâ—…ny and out of Augustine in Psal. 36. Conc. 2. in both which places is notably expressed the infinite disproportion betweene that we can doe or suffer which the Papists call merits and the heavenly reward which evidently overthroweth the Popish doctrine of meriâ—…s as I have heretofore proved it is answered that notwithstanding all this disproportion eternall life is given and justly given as the reward thereof But the question is not whether God doth justly give the reward which he hath freely promised but whether we doe merit and deserve it This answere therefore is frivolous Out of Augustine I have before produced manifold and manifest testimonies but yet because the Papists alleage out of him two Assertions which to them seeme contrary to that wee hold to wit that God is our debtour in respect of eternall life and that in justice he doth render it unto us I will brâ—…efly cleare them For first Augustine every where professeth that God is not a debtour unto us in respect of out desert but in regard of his gracious promise which proveth not our merit but the contrary For what he freely promised without respect of our worthinesse or desert that hee also promised to give freely And therefore eternall life when it is given according to his promise it is given freely and without our desert God is a debtour onely in respect of his promise a debtour unto himselfe as I have said before in respect of his trueth and fidelity it being impossible that he should lie or deny himselfe but not a debtour to us in respect of our
desert or dignity â—…or whatsoever hee hath promised us he hath promised it to them that are unworthy as was alleagâ—…d beforâ—… out of Augustine in Psal. 109. that it should not bee promised as a wages or a mercenary reward but being Grace might according to the name be graciously given Againe it is just with God that hee should render to the faithfull eternall life not because they deserve it but because he hath promised it for what he hath promised he is faithfull and just to performe But hee hath promised without respect of our desert to give it freely therefore it is just that he should freely give it to us and without our desert XI § XVI Theodoret The salvation of men dependeth on Gods mercie alone for wee doe not attaine unto it as wages but it is the gift of Gods goodnesse wherefore the Lord saith Propter me salvabo I will save for mine owne sake c. To this the answere is shamelesse that this place maketh not for our purpose And why For by salvation is not meant eternall life but of our first vocation wherof there is no shew As though Theodoret did contend that we doe not attaine to our first vocation by which we are as it were called into the vineyard as wages And againe he speaketh of the Church that is of them that are already called and no doubt but that by the same grace by which wee are elected called justified wee are also saved but that was free and undeserved and therefore so is this Againe The crownes surpasse the fights the rewards are not to bee compared with the laboâ—…rs For the labour is small but great gaine is hoped for and therefore hee called those things which are expected not wages but glory Rom. 8. 18. and in Rom. 6. 23. Hîc non dicit mercedem sed gratiam heere hee doth not say wages but grace It is answered that although the reward doe much surpasse the paines yet it is a just reward No doubt But why just Not because it is equall as it ought to bee if it bee rendred to merit of condignity but because it is promised and accordingly given of God the righteeous Iudge Prospers testimony which Bellarmine to whom his Disciple doth referre us sought to obscure was before cleared to bee most pregnant against the merit of good workes unto which wee may adde that on Psal. 102. upon these words who crowneth with mercy that we may understand saith he that by the same mercy the crownes of good workes which hee calleth merits are given by which were given the merits of the crownes that is freely and without merit or desert § XVII And this was the doctrine of the primitive Church for the first five hundred yeares and was continued in the next five hundred and in the third also as is plentifully proved by multitude of testimonies in the said learned worke of our most learned Primate unto which because his adversary giveth no answer I will referre the Chri stian reader citing onely a few of the latter times as it were for a taste Venerable Bede Et hoc non ex meritis sed sola gratia And thus that the godly man shall bee well rewarded is not by merits but by grace onely Haymo vita aeterna nulli per debitum redditur sed per gratuitam misericordiam datur Eternal life is rendred to none by debt or duty but is given by free mercie Rupertus the greatnesse or eternity of heavenly glory is a matter not of merit but of grace Photius In Rom. 6. 23. hee did not say that eternall life is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wages of good workes but a free gift Oecumen in Coloss. 1. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. well did he call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being a certaine inheritance and gift for the sufferings of this present time are not worthy c. Rom. 8. 18. On which place also hee saith the Apostle sheweth that wee neither can suffer nor conferre any thing worthy the remuneration that shall bee there I conclude with Anselmus Si homo mille annis serviret Deo etiam ferventissimè non mereretur ex condigno dimidiam diem esse in regno coelorum If a man should serve God a thousand yeares and that most fervently he should not condignely merit to bee halfe a day in the Kingdome of heaven CHAP. V. Bellarmines dispute sirst concerning the name merit Secondly concerning the thing which he endevoureth to prove out of the Scriptures § I. NOw we are come to Bellarmines dispute concerning merits Wherein he discourseth first of the name and afterwards of the thing it selfe As touching the name hee endevoureth to prove that it is grounded on the Scriptures And to this purpose he alleageth in the first place Eccl. 16. 14. which he according to the vulgar Latine translation readeth thus omnis misâ—…ricordia faciet locum unicuique secundum meritum operum suorum all mercie shall make place for every one according to the merit of his workes So that his first proofe is nothing but a corrupt translation of a testimony cited out of an Apocryphall Booke The words in the originall are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make way for every worke of mercie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for every man shall finde according to his woâ—…kes that is saith Bellarmine according to the merit of his workes Answ. But the phraâ—…e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is often used in the Scripture as when it is said God will judge every man or he will render to every one according to their workes doth not import merit that the name of merit should thereon be grounded but the quality of mens workes whether good or evill that is hee will graciously reward them that have done well and he will severely punish those that have done evill and so it is expounded 2 Cor. 5. 10. according to that which hee hath done whether good or evill so Rom. 2. 6 7 8. Matth. 16. 27. cum Matth. 25. 46. Ioh. 5. 29. This truth is acknowledged by Gregory the great it is one thing saith hee to render secundum opera according to workes and another thing to render propter ipsa â—…pera for the workes themselves for in that which is said according to workes ipsa operum qualitas intelligitur the quality it selfe of the workes is understood that whose workes shall appeare to bee good his retribution also shall bee glorious which words were spoken by Gregory in answer to an objection which is the same with Bellarmines in this place If the felicity of Saints be mercie and not acquired by merits as you say what shall become of that which is written and thou shalt render to every man according to his workes If it be rendred according to workes how shall it be esteemed mercie
But saith he it is one thing to say according to workes whereby the quality onely is noted good or bad another for the workes themselves which noteth merit But the Scripture no where saith that God doth reward the godly prâ—…pter opera sua but thus it speaketh To thee Lord mercie for thou rewardest every man that is every good man according to his work you see then that the objeâ—…tion made against Gregories assertion or rather Davids is Bellarmines the answer which Gregory maketh is ours Yea but Hierome saith Bellarmine who was most skilfull in the three languages doth use to translate that which in the Hebrew and Greeke is according to workes by the word merit saying according to the merit of their workes Answ. If he did so that would not prove the use of the name merit in the Scriptures but indeed he doth â—…ot so for usually hee rendreth secundum opera according to their workes Indeed Latine interpreters of latter times in the Church of Rome being poisoned with the Popish doctrine of merits are very forward as might be shewed at large to â—…oist in the word merit into their translations where the originall which they translate hath no such thing an instance whereof I will hereafter give in the translatour of Ignatius The vulgar Latine is more sparing howsoever Gen. 4. 13. it rendreth the words of Caines complaint thus Major est iniquitas mea quam â—…t veniam merear My sinne is greater than I can merit that is according to the ordinary use among the Latines obtaine pardon for it cannot without great absurdity bee understood of merit properly Howbeit the words are rather thus to bee rendred my punishment is greater than I am able to beare which interpretation is proved by those reasons which Cain useth in that place to aggravate not his sinne but his punishment Besides that place the verbe mereri is used but eight times in the Latine Bible and alwaies in sense the worse viz. deserving punishment and that is the proper sense for sinnes are properly merits of punishment and therefore to merit punishment is properly attributed to them The Nowne merit is used but thrice and that onely in the Booke of Ecclesiasticus that is to say besides this place in two others where it signifieth not merit of reward but worth or dignity as namely of the soule chap. 10 31. Of the men chap. 38. 18. So that the name merit taken in the popish sense for a good worke deserving the reward of eternall life hath no warrant at all not so much as in the Latine vulgar translation and much lesse in the originall Scriptures themselves § II. His second testimony is Heb. 13. 16. to doe good and to communicate forget not talibus enim hostâ—…is promeretur Deus for with such hosts say our Rhemists God is promerited The Greeke word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unaptly and barbarously translated promeretur when as it properly signifieth is well pleased and the meaning is that such sacrifices are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 well pleasing or acceptable unto God Oecumenius expoundeth it by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is pleased But not all â—…hings that please God doe merit of him Servants must bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 well pleasing to their Masters Tit. 2. 6 and doe that which is pleasing in their sight who notwithstanding cannot merit any thing at their hands So all our obedience in doâ—…ing that will of God which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acceptable is pleasing to God and wee our selves in so doing are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acceptable to God but when wee have done all things that wee can wee cannot merit so much as thankes but must confesse our selves to bee unprofitable servants in doing but that which was our duety to doe Luk. 17. 10. Here therefore nothing but a barbarous translation is alleaged to prove that which is not in the originall â—…text Bellarmine though hee cannot deny it to bee barbarous yet he saith it is a very fit translation for most properly we say in Latine that one man doth merit of another and oblige him to him to himselfe whâ—… doth any thing whereby another is pleased or delighted I answere first that who so doth merit of another doth also please him but not whosoever doth that which is pleasing unto another doth also merit of him as I said before of servants Secondly there is great disparity between God and man One man may merit of another or oblige or make him beholding unto him It is therefore a strange conceit of Bellarmine because one man may merit of another by doing him a pleasure that therfore a man may mâ—…rit of God or oblige him unto him By doing good we profit our selves and others but we cannot profit God our goodnes reacheth not to him Psal. 16. 2. Can a man bee profitable unto God saith Eliphaz is it any pleasure to the Almighty that thou art righteous or is it gaine to him that thou makest thy way perfect Iob. 22. 2 3. and so Elihu Iob. 35. 7 8. This translation therefore as it is barbarous so it is impious in making God beholden unto us Yea but saith Bellarmine this word being joyned with that of sacrifices doth not onely signifie that God is delighted with good workes but that his favour is procured and hee induced to reward them that doe well Answer The Apostle doth not say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God is made propitious or as Bellarmine alleaging out of Latine Chrysostome placatur where the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in the text of the Apostle For the sacrifice of Christ alone by it selfe is propitiatory the sacrifices of the Law onely as they were types of it As for the spirituall sacrifices whereof the Apostle speaketh they are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propitiatory but onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acceptable and well pleasing in Christ as being perfumed with the odours of his sacrifice This therefore was but a poore and indeed a base shift which Bellarmine was put to who finding no releefe in the originall text of the Scripture is faine to flee unto corrupt translations as he doth not only in these two places already alleaged but also in that allegation of Chrysostome for placatur and as afterwards wee shall see in citing Ignatius and other Greeke Fathers § III. And this is all the footing that the name merit hath in the Scriptures For though Bellarmine adde two other arguments yet they belong not to the name but to the thing So that here Bellarmine might have begun his third Chapter with this transition sed ut ad rem ipsam veniamus Having spoken of the name let us come to the thing For his other two arguments the one from the word Dignity the other from the name reward used in the Scriptures doe not prove the use of the of the name merit in the holy Scriptures but serve in his conceit to prove the thing and
worke but to give them what to him should seeme just according to the Covenant of grace which promiseth the reward of keeping the whole Law to them that truely beleeve who expecting reward not according to their owne merit but according to the grace and good pleasure of God in whom they â—…trusted were of the last made the first So farre is this parable from proving thatet ernall life is given to men according to the merit of their workes that it proveth that the reward which is given is freely given and that those who seeke â—…o obtayne eternall life by their owne desert doe misse of it § VIII But here Bellarmine cavilleth with the answeres of Melancthon and Calvin who as is it seemeth understanding as the most doe by the day-pennie the equall reward of eternall life doe answere First that it may be called merces a reward in regard of the promise which it selfe is free of that which is freely given and therefore is a reward of grace and not of merit Secondly because it is the reward of the inheritance which though given in Gods purpose before all times to those whom hee hath elected in Christ without respect of workes yet to draw us unto obedience and to fit us for our inheritance he hath promised it as a free reward of our faith and obedience To the first Bellarmine replyeth that the reward is given to the workes which is the condition of the promise and not to the promise it selfe I rejoyne that it is given to the works according to the promise that is as a free reward To the second hee saith that eternall is more properly called reward than inheritance c. I answere primarily it is the inheritance intended before all time in Christ without respect of workes and in the fulnesse of time purchased by Christ and so promised to all the faithfull and yet in a secondary respect that we might be allured to obedience and to good workes by which we might be fitted for that heavenly inheritance into which no uncleane thing can enter it is also promised as a gracious reward freely given of God not merited by us Even as a father having adopted a sonne thereby intending to him and indeed entitling him to his inheritance should upon his obedience either already performed or to be performed promise to make him his heire In this case who seeeth not that although the sonne come to his fathers patrimonie both as his inheritaâ—…ce and as a reward Yet the prime title is the right of inheritâ—…nce the second is the title of free donation But of merit though the sonne behave himselfe never so well no title at all Neither is that the more honourable title as Bellarmine here absurdly avoucheth unlesse that we rre to thinke that the mercenary title of an hired servant is more honourable than the hereditary title of a sonne For this is all the honour which by their doctrine accrueth to the children of God that they turne the adopted sonnes of God into mercenary servants and the inheritance of sonnes into the wages of servants But of this heretofore § IX Others perceiving that the equality of reward rendred to labours so unequall as of twelve houres and of one cannot stand with justice if rendred as in justice due for it is just where the reward is of duety that the greater labour should receive the greater reward howbeit as you heard out of Ferus where all is of grace no wrong is done for may I not doe with mine what pleaseth mee saith the Master of the vineyard have sought out another evasion That they who were called at the eleventh houre and so wrought but one houre laboured as much as the first who laboured all the day which is not worth the confuting For if in one houre they laboured as much as the other in twelve then deserved they as great a reward at the least Why then did their fellow labourers expect a greater reward Why did they murmure at their Lords unequall dealing And why did not the Lord himselfe plead that equall reward was to bee given to equall labours â—… Why did he plead his right to doe with his owne what he pleaseth â—… but that he would have it understood that the reward by him given was not of duety but of grace not rendred as a debt out of duety but given as a free reward out of his owne bounty and as Bellarmine himselfe saith non ex justitia sed ex liberalitate This fiction therefore never heard of before was by Maldonate devised for a poore shift in a desperate cause § X. Bellarmines second argument is taken from those places wherein it is taught that the heavenly reward is given to men according to the measure and proportion of their workes and labour His argument is thus to be framed What is given according to the measure and proportion of workes that the workes doe merit Eternall life is given according to the measure and proportion of workes therefore workes doe merit eternall life The proposition he proveth because if the reward be given according to the proportion of workes then there is regard had in giving that reward not onely of the promise or of the bounty of the rewarder but also of the dignity of the workes The assumption he confirmâ—…th by divers texts of Scripture as Psalm 62. 12. thou shalt render to every man according to his workes Mat. 16. 27. The sonne of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his Angels and then he shall render to every one according to their workes Luk. 6. 38. with the same measure that you mete it shall be measured to you againe Rom. 2. 6. who will render to every man according to his workes 1 Cor. 3. 8. every man shall receive his reward according to his owne labour Gal. 6. 7. what things a man shall sâ—…w those also he shall reape Apoc. 22. 12. Behold I come quickly and my reward is with me to render to every man according to his workes § XI Before I apply mine answer to the parts of his Syllogisme I am to propound a twofold distinction concerning the reward of our inheritance First that it may bee considered either as our inheritance or as our reward Secondly that it may be considered in respect either of the substance of it as it is eternall life or of the degrees of glory therein As it is our inheritance as it is eternall life it is one and the same equally given to all that aâ—…e saved and not given unequally according to the proportion of our virtues or workes It is one and the same first in respect of the same meritorious cause which is the merit of Christ. For as by his righteousnesse we are equally justified so by his merits we are equally saved equally made partakers of that inheritance which by the same price of his mâ—…rits is equally purchased for all that
sanctification of the Spirit we might bee fitted for his kingdome and receive the inheritance among those that are sanctified And this holinesse is so necessary a property and cognizance of them that shall bee saved as that without it no man shall see God wherefore â—…hough it bee not the cause as I have shewed heretofore yet it is the way to the Kingdome and consequently causa sine quâ—… non And therefore that wee may bee stirred up to seeke after holinesse which is so necessary the Lord in aboundant mercie hath promised eternall life thereunto as the reward whereby hee doth superaboundantly recompence all our service and obedience and most graciously crowne his owne gifts and graces in us Yea but saith toâ—…saack â—…saack yet his pleasure was that hee should obtaine them by the merit of prayer Reply that a man should merit by prayer is as absurd as to imagine that a poore man who hath nothing doth by his begging merit almes It is true that when God promiseth good things unto us as the end wee are to use those meanes which God hâ—…th preordained whereof prayer is a principall and to walke in that way which leadeth to that end but those meanes are no merits nor that way no cause of obtaining that which God as hee hath graciously promised so hee freely bestoweth § XVIII The fourth argument is from those testimonies where the reward is said to bee rendred to good workes out of justice as 2 Thess. 1. 4. we glory in you in the Churches of God for your patience and faâ—…th in all your persecutions and tribulations which you sustaine for an example of the just judgement of God and after vers 6. If yet it bee just with God to repay tribulation to them that vexe you and to you that are vexed rest with us 2 Tim. 4. 7 8. I have fought a good sight I have consummate my course I have kept the faith Concerning the rest there is laid up for me a crowne of justice which our Lord will render to me at that day a just judge Heb. 6. 10. God is not unjust that hee should forget your worke Iam. 1. 12. Blessed is the man that suffereth tentation for when he hath beene proved he shall receive the Crowne of life Apoc. 2. 10. Bee thou faithfull untill death and I will give thee the Crowne of life Hereto also saith hee belong those places Pro. 19. 17. foeneratur Domino he lendeth as it were upon usury to the Lord who hath piâ—…y on the poore 1 Cor. 9 24. Know you not thâ—… they which runne in the race all runne indeed but one receiveth the price so runne that you may obtaine 2. Tim. 1. 12. I am sure that he is able to keepe my depositum unto that day For he should doe wrong who should either not repay that which was lent or not pay the prize to him that overcommeth or not restore the depositum that is the thing which is committed to his trust For all these include justice His argument is thus to be framed That reward which God in justice rendreth to good works is merited by them Eternall life is a reward which God in justice rendreth to good works Therefore eternall life is merited by them The proposition he taketh for â—…ranted the assumption hee proveth by all those testimonies which he hath alleaged § XIX But first I answere to his proposition by distinguishing the word justice which is taken either universally comprehending all morall virtues and so it is all one with Gods goodnesse both as hee is good in himselfe and as hee is good to his creatures comprising the bounty and therein the love the grace and mercie of God as well as that which more properly is called his justice So that what good things is rendred accorâ—…ing to this justice is not therfore merited More particularly justice is either in word or deed God is just in his word both in respect of his precepts which are just as a just Law-giver and also in respect of his promises in performance whereof hee is faithfull and just For it is a just thing for any to stand to his promises yea as the Oratour saith fâ—…ndamentum est justitiâ—… fides Hence in the Scriptures faithfull and just are sometimes joyned as synonyma 1 Ioh. 1. 9 If wee confesse our sinnes he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sinnes And in this sense God is said to be just when hee doth render unto us that which he hath promised So in the places alleaged 2 Tim. 4. 7 8. Heb. 6. 10. Iam. 1. 12. Hee is just also in his workes Psal. 48. 10. 145. 17. For God doth whatsoever he willeth and whatsoever he willeth that is just This justice by Philosophers is distinguished into distributive and commutative both observing equality the former geometricall the later arithmeticall But this distinction doth not agree to the justice of God in respect of the later branch which consisteth in commutation that is in mutuall giving and receiving For God giveth all things to all Act. 17. 25. but receiveth not any thing from any Rom. 11. 35 as I have said before and therefore cannot be a debtour to any but to himselfe in regard oâ—… his promise Thus then the justice of God which is in fact may more fully be distinguished that it is either disponens or remunerans disposing either as a just but most free and absolute Lord of all or as he is the just God the Creatour Governour and Preserver of all things Remunerating as he is the just judge As a most free and absolute Lord hee disposeth things according to his absolute will and pleasure Who possessing all things by full and absolute right may according to his pleasure dispose of them doing with his owne what he pleaseth Rom. 9. 18 21. Matth. 20. 15. As hee is the just God that is the Creatour Preserver and Governour of all hee disposeth of all things according to his goodnesse Mat. 5. 45. 48. giving all good things to all not universa singulis but such as are agreeable and fitting to all according to their severall kind nature and quality And from this justice the order of the whole Vniverse dependeth This goodnesse os God sometimes in the Scripture is called his justice Psal. 116. 5. and so translated by the 72. Gen. 19. 19. 32. 10. Exod. 34. 7. Esai 63. 7. and this justice is by the said 72. rendred mercie Deut. 6. 25. 24. 13. Psal. 24. 5. 33. 5. 103. 6. Esai 1. 27. Dan. 4. 24. 9. 16. And as he is God of all and just to all in giving to all those good things which belong to them so is he after a more peculiar manner the God of the faithfull Gen. 17. 7. even the God of their righteousnesse Psa. 4. 1. as their justifier and Saviour by the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ by imputation