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.
[figure]

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 [...] summae (que) 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,In novissimis [...]emporib. i. reg­ [...]ance Antichrist. Ansel [...]. in 1 Tim. 4. 1. Vid. Diatrib. de Anti [...]h. & part. 1. l. 3. c. 1. §. 3. 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.
    1 Tim. 4. 1. 3.
    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, This distin­ction is pro­pounded by S. Augustine, de Trinit. lib. 13. c. 2. and by the master of the sentences. Sent. 3. dist. 23. not that by which we beleeve, sed illud quod creditur, bu [...] 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 [Page] 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 superiourVid. Diatrib. de Antichristo. lib. 4. c. 6. & 7. 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 arbi­ [...] pontificis tota Idem l. 3. 6. 49. conciliorum authoritas pendet, quae tantam ha­bent, quantam Papa indulget, and thus Bellarmine De [...]ont. Rom. lib. 4. cap. 3. 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, asBellar. de Con­cil. li. 2. c. 17. Conc. Trid. sess 4. Pari pietatis affectu & reve­rentia suscipi­unt ei veneran­tur. 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 th [...]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 on [...]ly match with the holy Scriptures, but even in many respects preferre be­foreCesteri Enchi­rid. cap. 1. Hutus praestantia multis par tib. [...]peral Scriptu­ras. them, and acknowledge them to bee the moreCesler▪ ibid. 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.

[Page]Fifthly, they change the rule of faith, when in stead o [...] the true sense and m [...]aning of the holy Scriptures expounded by the Scriptures according to the analog [...]e of faith, they obtrude 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 wordHosius de ex­presso Dei verbo. 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, Contr. Lucife­rian. & in Gal. 1. ne (que) enim in Scripturarum verbis, Evange­lium est, sed in sensu The words, saith Bellarmine, De verbo non scripto. l. 4. c. 4. 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 belee [...]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 dive [...]s times and by degrees. The number whereof is so great, as that Popery, or the Catholicisme of Papi [...]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 isRom. 10. 8. 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 haveSee lib. 7. c. 3. §. 9, 10, 11, 12. proved.

This assertion concerning the Apost [...]sie of the now Church of Rome, I [...]ppose as an antidote against the poison of their impudently depraved article concer­ning the Catholike Church, wherein there is a double imposture or poyso [...], 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 RomaneSee the lear­ned work called the Grand im­posture. Church, the mother, for so [...]th, and mistresse of all Churches; which they call [...]atholike, not as it is one particular Church, as every Ortho­dox Church was wont to bee called, as the Catholike Church ofApud Euseb. lib. 4▪ cap. 15. 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 n [...]t they co [...]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.

[Page]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 hims [...]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 Fathe [...]s of the Church, by this Romish article are most wic [...]edly and schi [...]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 id [...]latry, will-worship, and supers [...]ition, and from the Anci­en [...] 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,Gerdon. con­trv. 1. c. 27. 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 pri [...]ciple, wheron the authority of the Scriptures dependeth, and the last principle into which their faith is to bee resolved: thatIbid. in this article is summarily contained the whole Word of God, not onely written, but [Page] also unwritten: that Christ propounded unto us the whole Word of God, when he commanded us to heare the Church, Mat. 18. 17. Luk. 10. 16. and (which surpasseth all impudencie) that the FathersIbid. [...]. 3. sometimes in this sence do say, that all the doctrines of faith are contained in the holy Scriptures, to wit, as in a ge­nerall principle, quatenus illae monent credendum esse Ecclesiae, in that they admonish that the Church is to be b [...]leeved in all things. And further that the implicite faith, which is implied in this one article, I beleeve the Romane Church, and wh [...]tsoever that Church beleeveth, or propoundeth to be beleeved, is the mostHosius de authorit. Scrip­turae. lib. 3. entire faith and most safe, not onely for the lay people, though they know or beleeve no more, but also for the learned. For whom it is not so safe, when Satan contendeth with them, to defend their faith by the Scrip­tures, as to professe onely that they beleeve as the Church beleeveth.

But indeed this implicite faith, whereby men doe beleeve or professe them­selves to beleeve as the Church of Rome, and therein the Pope beleeveth or pro­poundeth to be beleev [...]d acknowledging him to be the principle, yea the chiefe, and last principle into which there is ultima resolutio fidei, upon which the authority of the Scriptures dependeth, is to take upon them the very marke of the beast,Vid. Diatrib. de Antichristo. part. 1. lib. 6. c. 4. §. 9. and to revolt from Christ to Antichrist: which is the miserable condition of all resolute Papists. For Antichrist prevaileth in them only that perish, whose names are not written in the booke of life. See Mat. 24. 24. 2 Thess. 2. 10. Apoc. 14. 9, 10, 11. and 17. 8.

Let not therefore the popish priests and Iesuits, the Emissaries of Antichrist, like egregious imposters terrifie any longer the people with these bug-beares, that there is no salvation but in the communion with the Church of Rome, and in subjection under the Pope; untill they have proved, which they will never be able to doe, that their Church is not Apostaticall, and that their Pope, who is the head of the Catholike Apostasie, is not, as about twelve yeeres ago [...] I pro­ved him to be, Antichrist. To conclude, let the popish Rabbins either vindi­cate their Church from Apostasie, and their Pope from Antichristianisme, or else for ever hereafter hold their peace.

A Table of the places of Scriptures allea­ged, expounded, or vindicated in this Treatise.

Genesis 15. 6.
  • ABRAHAM beleeved God, and it was imputed to him for righ­teousnesse. Lib. 7. Cap. 8. §. 11.
Exodus.
  • 28. 36. 38. Lib. 1. Cap. 4. §. 22. Lib. 4. Cap. 3. §. 11. Of [...]he golden plate which the high priest did weare on his forehead.
Deutronomie.
  • 30. 6. And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart—to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, &c. Lib. 5. Cap. 7. §. 7.
Ioshuah.
  • 11. 14, 15. He left nothing undone of all that the Lord commanded Moses. Lib. 7. Cap. 6. §. 13.
1. Chronicles.
  • 21. 8. Take away the iniquity of thy servant. Lib. 2. Cap. 8. §. 2.
Iob.
  • 1. 22. In all this Iob sinned not. Lib. 4. Cap. 4. §. 1. & 2.
Psalmes.
  • 4. 4. Sinne not. Lib. 4. Cap. 4. §. 7. 7. 4. 9. & 16. 1, 2, 3. & 18. 21. & 261. 119. 121. in which David plea­det [...] his owne innocenci [...]. Lib. 4. Cap. 4. §. 5.
  • 10. 15. And he shall not be found. Lib. 2. Cap. 8. §. 5.
  • 32. 1▪ 2. Blessed is hee whose trans­gression is forgiven and whose sinne is co­vered: Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not [...]. Lib. 5. Cap. 3. §. 2. 3. &c. ad 14. 37. 40. Hee sh [...]ll save th [...]m because they trust in him. Lib 6. Cap. 11. §. 7.
  • 51. 2. 7. Wash mee throughly from mine iniquity—purge me with bysope and I shall be cleane▪ &c. L. 2. C. 8. §. 4.
  • 62. 12. To thee O Lord mercie. Lib. 8. Cap. 2. §. 1. for thon rendrest to eve­ry man according to his worke. Lib. 8. Cap. 5. §. 13.
  • 78. 34. When hee sl [...]w them, they sought him. Lib. 6. Cap. 11. §. 4. n. 3.
  • 91. 14. Because hee hath loved me, therefore I will deliver him. Lib. 6. Cap. 11. §. 7.
  • 111. 10. The feare of the Lor [...] is the beginning of Wisedome. Lib. 6. Cap. 11. §. 3.
Proverbes.
  • 1. 7. The feare of the Lord [...] the beginning of Wisedome. Lib. 6. [...]ap. 11. §. 3.
  • 14. 27. The feare of the Lor [...] [...] a sountaine of Life. Lib. 6. Cap. 1. §. 4. n. 5.
  • 28. 25. Hee that putteth his trust in the Lord shall be made [...]at. Vulg. lat. qui sperat in Domino salvabitur. Lib. 6. Cap. 11. §. 7.
Ecclesiastes.
  • [Page]7. 20. There is not a just man upon earth that doth good and [...]inneth not. lib. 4. cap. 3. §. 12.
Esay.
  • 7. 9. If you will not beleeve, you shall not be established. Lat. cited by Bellarm. non intellig [...]tis. l. 6. [...]. 1. §. 6.
  • 26. 18. From thy [...]eare (as Bellar­mine readeth) wee have conceived and brought forth the Spirit of salvation. lib. 6. c. 11. § 4. n. 4.
  • 53. 11. My righteous servant by his knowledge shall justifie many. lib. 2. cap. 5. § 7 8 9 10.
  • 55. 1. Buy without mony and without price. lib. 8. c. 2. §. 4.
  • 64 6. Our righteousn [...]sses are like menstruous clouts. l. 4. c. 3. §. 4 5, &c.
Ieremie.
  • 23. 6. This is his name wher [...]by hee shall be called, I [...]HOVAH, our righte­ousnesse. lib. 1. cap. 3. §. 5. lib. 4. cap. 2. §. 2.
Ezechiel.
  • 18. 21. If the wicked shàll turne from all his sinnes hee shall live. lib. 7. c. 4. §. 17.
Daniel.
  • 9. 18. Wee doe not present our sup­plications before thee for our righteousnes­ses, but for thy great mercies. lib. 8. cap. 2. §. 4.
  • 12. 3. They that justifie m [...]y. lib. 2. cap. 5. §. 6.
Habakuk.
  • 2. 4. The just by faith shall live. lib. 1. c. 1. §. 1. & l. 6 c. 2. §. 11.
Malachy.
  • 3. 4. The offerings shall bee pleasant to the Lord. lib. 4. cap. 4. §. 8.

Apochrypha.

Ecclesiasticus.
  • 1. 28. Lib. 6. cap. 11. §. 2.
  • Lib. 6. cap. 12. §. 1.
  • 16. 14. Lib. 8. cap. 1. §. 1.
  • 18. 21. Lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 2. 3.
  • 47. 8. Lib. 5. cap. 7. §. 7.
Matthew.
  • 5. 16. That they seeing your good workes. lib. 4. cap. 4. §. 9.
  • 5. 20. Except your righteousnesse ex­ceed the righteousnesse of the Scribes, &c. lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 14.
  • 5. 48. Be you therefore perfect, &c. lib. 5 [...]p. 7. §. 9.
  • 6. 10. Thy will be done, &c. lib. 7. cap. 7. §. 12.
  • 6. 22▪ If thine eye be single, the whole body shal be full of light. lib. 4. [...]. 4. §. 4.
  • 9. 2. Bee of good cheere thy sinn [...]s are f [...]rgiven thee. lib. 6. cap. 11. §. 8.
  • 11. 30. My yoke is easie and my burden is light. l. 7. c. 6. §. 8.
  • 15. 28. O Woman, great is thy faith, &c. l. 6. c. 15 §. 12.
  • 16. 27. Hee shall reward every man according to his workes. l. 8. c. 5 §. 13.
  • 19. 17. If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the Commandements. l. 7. c. 4. §. 15. &c. 6. §. 12.
  • 19. 21. If thou wilt bee perfect, go [...] sell all, &c. l. 7. [...]. 7. § 3.
  • 20. 1. ad 16. The parable of the workemen in the vineyard. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 6, 7.
  • Matth. 25. 21. Well done thou good and faithfull servant, &c. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 15.
  • 25. 34. 35. Come ye blessed of my Fa­ther inherit, &c. lib. 7. c. 4. §. 12. and c. 5. §. 11. and lib. 8. c. 5. §. 14 15, 16.
Marke.
  • 7. 29. For this saying, goe thy way, & [...]. 6. c. 15. §. 12.
Luke.
  • [Page]1. 6. Righteous before God, &c. lib. 2. cap. 3. §. 1.
  • 6. 38. VVith what measure you meet, &c. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 13.
  • 7. 47. Her sinnes which are many are forgiven, for she loved much. lib. 6. cap. 12 §. 2. 3.
  • 7. 55. Thy faith hath saved thee. lib. 6. cap. 15. §. 11.
  • 10. 7. The labourer is worthy of his hire. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 22.
  • 17. 5. Increase our faith. l. 6. c. 3. §. 3.
  • 17. 7. 8, 9 10. VVhen you have done all, say that ye are unprofitable servants. lib. 8. cap. 2. §. 5. 6, &c.
  • 20. 35. They that shall be accounted worthy to obtaine that world, &c. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 22.
Iohn.
  • 1. 12. To so many as beleeved he gave power to be the sonnes of God, &c. lib. 6. cap. 10. §. 9.
  • 1. 29. Behold the Lambe of God which takes away the sinne of the world. lib. 2. cap. 8. §. 2.
  • 6. 64. Iesus knew from the beginning who beleeved not. lib. 6. cap. 2 §. 7.
  • 12. 42▪ 43. Many of the Rulers be­leeved on him but did not confesse him, &c. lib. 6. cap. 3. §. 8.
  • 14. 23. If a man love me he will keep my words, and my Father will love him. lib. 7. cap. 6. §. 22.
  • 15. 13. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay downe his life for his friends. lib. 5. cap. 7. §. 3.
Acts of the Apostles.
  • 13. 38▪ 39. Through this Man is preached un [...]o you remission of sinnes; and by him all that beleeve are justified, &c. Lib. 4. cap. 6. §. 1. 2, &c. ad 9.
  • 15. 9. Purifying their hearts by faith. Lib. 6. cap. 15. § 9.
  • 15. 10. A yoke which neither we nor our Fathers were able to beare. lib. 4. cap. 5. §. 9.
Epistle to the Romanes.
  • 1. 16, 17. The Gospell the power of God, &c. in it is revealed the righteous­nesse of God, &c. Lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 1.
  • 3. 24. Being just [...]fied freely by his race through the redemption, &c. l. 3. c. 3. & 4.
  • 3. 27. Boasting ex [...]luded, by what Law? &c. lib. 7. cap. 3. §. 2.
  • 4. 2. If Abraham were justified by workes he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. lib. 7. cap. 3. §. 2.
  • 4. 5 6. 11. The Lord imputeth righ­teousnesse. lib. 1. cap. 3. §. 10.
  • 4, 4. 5. To him that worketh the re­ward is not reckoned of grace but of debt, but to him that worketh not, but beleeveth, &c, lib. 1. cap. 3. §. 6. lib. 6. cap. 15. §. 7.
  • 4. 20. 21, 22. Abraham being strong in faith gave glory to God, therfore it was im­puted to him for righteousnes. lib. 6. §. 13. cap. 15.
  • 4. 25. Who was delivered for our sins, and rose againe for our justification. lib. 4. cap. 12. §. 2.
  • 5. 3, 4. Tribulation worketh patience, and patience probation, &c. l. 7. c. 5. §. 7.
  • 5. 5. The love of God shed abroad in our hearts by his holy Spirit. lib. 3. cap. 5.
  • 5. 17, 18▪ 19. For as by one mans of­fence, &c. lib. 2. cap. 5. §. 1. 2, &c. lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 1. 2▪ &c. ad 7.
  • 5. 19. As by the disobedience of one many were made sinners, so by the obedi­ence of one many shall be made righteous. lib. 1. cap. 4. §. 8. lib. 2. cap. 5. §. 1. 2. lib. 2. cap. 8. §. 10. lib. 5. cap. 2. §. 1.
  • 5. 21. As sinne reigned unto death, even so grace, &c. lib.. 4. cap. 12. §. 5.
  • 6. 4 6. Wee are bur [...]ed with him by baptisme into death, lib. 8. cap. 10. §. 17.
  • 6. 13. Neither yeeld your members as instruments of unrighteousnesse, &c. lib. 4. cap. 12. §. 6.
  • 6. 19. As ye have yeelded your members servants to uncleannes, &c. l. 7. §. 19. c. 8.
  • 6. 22. Ye have your fruit unto holines and the end everlasting life. lib. 4. c. 12. §. 11.
  • 6. 23. For the wages of sinne is death, but the gift of God is eternall life, &c. lib. 8. cap. 2. §. 13▪ &c.
  • [Page]7. 18. To will is present with me, but how to performe that which is good I finde not. lib. 4. cap. 5. §. 10.
  • 8. 3. The impossibility of the Law, in that it was weake through the flesh, &c. lib. 4. cap. 5. §. 11.
  • 8. 4. That the justification of the Law might bee fulfilled in us. lib. 7. cap. 7. §. 10. 11.
  • 8. 10. The body is dead by reason of sinne, but the Spirit is life because of righ­teousnesse. lib. 3. cap. 5. §. 7. 8. lib. 4. cap. 12. §. 7▪
  • 8. 13. If through the Spirit you morti­fie the deeds of the body, ye shall live. lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 11. 16. cap. 5. §. 8.
  • 8. 10. 15. 23. Lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 18.
  • 8. 15. Ye have received the Spirit of adoption, &c. lib. 3. c. 5. §. 6.
  • 8. 17. If yee suffer with him that yee may be glorified with him. lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 11. 17.
  • 8. 16. 17, 18. lib. 7. cap. 5. §. 9.
  • 8. 18. The sufferings of this present time are not worthy the glory which shall bee revealed. lib. 8. cap. 2. §. 18, &c. ad 22.
  • 8. 29. Conformable to the image of his sonne. lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 12.
  • 8. 30. Whom he hath called them hee hath justified. lib. 2. cap. 3. §. 5.
  • 8. 33, 34. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods children, it is God that justifieth, &c. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 4.
  • 10. 4. Christ the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth. lib. 1. cap. 4. § 9.
  • 10. 10. With the heart manbeleeveth unto righteousnesse, &c. lib. 7. cap. 5. §. 10.
  • 10. 13, 14. Whosoever shall call up­on the name of the Lord shall bee saved, how then shall they call upon him in whom they have not beleeved, &c. lib. 6. cap. 10. § 8. cap. 15. §. 14.
The first to the Corinthians.
  • 1. 30. Christ made unto us righte­ousnesse. lib. 4. cap. 9. §. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
  • 2. 6. VVe speake wisdome among them that are perfect▪ lib. 5. cap. 7. §. 10.
  • 3. 8. Every one shall receive his own reward according to his owne labour. lib. 8. c. 5. §. 13.
  • 3. 11. Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid which is Iesus Christ. lib. 6. cap. 15. §. 8.
  • 3. 12. If any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, &c. lib. 4. cap. 4. §. 5.
  • 4. 4. I know nothing by my selfe, yet am I not thereby justified. lib. 4. cap. 4. §. 17.
  • 6. 11. But ye are washed, but yee are sanctified, but ye are justified, &c. lib. 2. cap. 3. §. 4 lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 7.
  • 12. 9. To another, faith. lib. 6. cap. 1. §. 6.
  • 13. 2 Lib. 6. cap. 1. §. 6. & cap. 3. §. 2. 3, 4.
  • 13. 13. Now abideth faith, hope and charity, &c. lib. 6. cap. 3. §. 4.
  • 15. 49. We shall also beare the image of the heavenly. lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 12. 16.
The second to the Corinthians.
  • 4. 17. Lib. 7. cap. 5. §. 7. lib. 8. cap. 2. §. 21.
  • 5. 21. Him that knew no sinne hee made sinne for us, that we might bee made the righteousnesse of God in him. lib. 1. cap. 3. §. 10. lib. 5. cap. 1. §. 4. &c. ad finem capitis.
  • 7. 1. Perfecting holinesse in the feare of God. lib. 7. cap. 8. §. 20.
  • 7. 10. Godly sorrow worketh repen­tance, &c. lib. 7. cap. 5. §. 6.
  • 9. 10. He that ministreth seed, multi­ply your seed, and increase the fruits of your righteousnesse. lib. 7. cap. 8. §. 21.
The Epistle to the Galatians.
  • 1. 8▪ 9. If we or an Angell from hea­ven preach any other Gospe [...]l, &c. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 1.
  • 2. 16. Knowing that a man is no [...] ju­stified by the workes of the Law but by the faith of Iesus Christ, &c. lib. 7. cap. 3. §. 8, &c. ad 13.
  • 3. 21. If there had beene a Law gi­ven which could have given life, verily righteousnesse should have beene by the Law. lib. 4. cap. 12. §. 8.
  • [Page]5. 5. 6. We waite for the hope of righ­teousnesse by faith which work [...]th by lo ve. lib. 4. cap. 11. §. 2 3, 4. cap. 12. §. 3. in fine. lib. 6 cap. 12. §. 3. [...]. 4.
  • 6. 7. Whatsoever a man soweth that he shall reape. lib. 8. cap. 5. § 13.
The Epistle to the Ephesians.
  • 2. 8. 9. By grace ye are saved through faith not of workes, &c. lib. 7. cap. 3. §. 13.
  • 5. 8. Now we are light in the Lord. lib. 2. cap. 8. §. 6.
  • 5. 26▪ 27. That hee might sanctifie and cleanse it, that hee might present it unto himselfe, &c. lib. 2. cap. 8. §. 6.
The Epistle to the Philippians.
  • 1. 9. VVherefore God hath exalted him, lib. 1. cap. 4. §. 11. 12.
  • 2. 12. VVorke out your salvation in feare. lib. 7. cap. 5. §. 5.
  • 3. 8, 9. I account all things dung that I may winne Christ, and may be found in him not having mine owne righteousnesse, &c. lib. 7. cap. 3. §. 15. lib. 8. cap. 2. §. 22.
  • 3. 15. Let so many as perfect be thus minded. lib. 5. cap. 7. §. 10,
The second to the Thessalonians.
  • 1. 5, 6. That ye may be counted wor­thy of the Kingdome of God seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompence, &c. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 20. 22.
The first to Timothie.
  • 2. 14▪ 15. Notwithstanding s [...]e shall be saved in child bearing, if they continue in faith, &c. lib. 7. cap. 5 §. 4.
  • 5. 8. If any provide not for his owne he hath denyed the faith and is worse than an infidell. lib. 6. cap. 2. §. 6.
The second to Timothy.
  • 2. 11, 12. If wee bee dead with him, we sh [...]ll also live with him, if we suffer, we shall also reigne. l. 7. c. 4. §. 11. 16.
  • 2. 21. If a man purge himselfe from these he shall be a vessell unto honour san­ctified and meet [...] for the Masters us [...]. lib. 8. cap. 2. §. 9.
  • 4. 7, 8. I have fought a good fight, henceforth is laid up for me a crowne of righteousnesse, &c. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 20.
To Titus.
  • 2. 14. That hee might redeeme us from all iniquity, and might purge unt [...] himselfe a peculiar people zelous of good workes, lib. 4. cap. 4. §. 19
  • 3. 5 6▪ 7. Not by workes of righteous­nesse w [...]n we have done, but according to his mercie he saved us by the l [...]ver of re­generation, that being justified, &c. lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 8. lib. 7. cap. 3. §. 14.
To the Hebrewes.
  • 5 9. He became the author of salva­tion eternall to them that obey him. lib. 7. cap. 7. §. 12.
  • 6. 10. God is not unrighteous to for­get your worke. &c. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. [...]0.
  • 9. 28. Christ was once offered to beare the sinn [...]s of many. lib. 2. cap. 8. §. 2.
  • 10. 36. Ye have need of patience. lib. 7. cap. 5. §. 3.
  • 11. 4. 7, &c. lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 9.
  • 11. 6. He that comm [...]th to God must beleeve that God is, and that he is a re­warder, &c. lib. 6. cap. 10. §. 7. cap. 15. §. 15.
  • 13. 16. VVith such sacrific [...]s God is well pleased. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 2.
Iames.
  • 1. 25. Being a doer of the word, this man shall be blessed in his deed. lib. 7. cap. 5. §. 12.
  • 2. 14. 17. If a man say he hath faith and have not workes, &c. lib. 6. ca [...]. 2. §. 5. 10, &c. cap. 3. §. 5. lib. 7. cap. 5. §. 12.
  • 2. 24. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by faith onely. lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 4.
  • 2. 14. &c. ad finem, capitis. lib. 7. [...]. 8. §. 2, &c.
  • [Page]2. 26. As the body, without the Spi­rit is dead, &c. l. 4. c. 11. §. 7.
The second of Peter.
  • 1. 1. Who have obtained like precious faith with us in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour IESVS CHRIST. lib. 4. c. 2. §. 2.
The first of Iohn.
  • 2. 4. He that saith I know him, and keepeth not his Commandements is a lyar. lib. 6. [...]. 2. [...]. 8.
  • 2. 5. He that keepeth his word in him the love of God is perfected. lib. 5. cap. 7. §. 6.
  • 3. 14. We know that wee are passed from death unto, life, because wee love the brethren. l. 6. c. 12. §. 3.
  • 4. 19. Wee love him, because he first loved us. l. 6. c, 12. §. 5.
  • 5. 1. Whosoever beleeveth that Iesus is the Christ is borne of God. lib. 6. cap. 2. §. 9.
  • 5. 3. And his Commandements are not grievous. l. 7. c. 6. §. 8.
The Revelation.
  • 7. 14, 15. These are they that came out of great tribulation—therefore are they before the throne of God. lib. 8. cap. 5. §. 16.
  • 19. 8. The fine linnen is the righ­teousnesse of Saints. lib. 2. c. 2. §. 5.
  • 22. 11. He that is righteous, let him bee righteous still. l. 2. c. 4. §. 5. &c. 5. §. 10. l. 7. c. 8. §. 23.
  • 22. 12. I come quickly and my re­ward is with me, to give to every man as his worke shall be.
The end of the Table of the places of Scriptures expounded in this Treatise.

A Table of things contained in this Treatise of Iustification.

A
  • Abraham.
    • THough he abounded with good works yet he was justified by faith without workes. lib. 4. cap 8. §. 15. lib. 7. cap. 3. §. 2, 3. & [...]. ad 8.
    • As bee was justified, so are we, lib. 5. cap. 2. §. 6.
  • Adam.
    • Whether his sinne bee imputed. lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 1, 2.
    • Whether originall sinne bee traduced from [...]im. l. 4. c. 10. §. 3.
    • Whether the transgression and the cor­ruption bee communicated after the same manner ibid. §. 4.
    • The comparison betweene the first and the second Adam. ibid. §. 5.
  • Adoption.
    • That it is true. lib. 4. cap. 10. §. 18.
    • Such as is our adoption; such is our ju­stification. ibid. §. 19.
    • Adoption according to Bellarmi [...]es [...] is twofold, of the soul [...] and of the body. ibid. §. 20.
    • No reall change in adoption, but it is relative and imputative. ibid. §. 21.
  • Affiance.
    • Whether it be faith. lib. 6. cap. 4. §. 9. 11.
  • Assent.
    • It being fir [...]e lively and effectuall is faith. l. 6. c. 1. 2. §. &c. 4. §. 10.
B
  • Bellarmine.
    • His contradictions. l. 3. c. 4. §. 3. [...]. 3. l. 4. c. 2. § 5. ad literam o l. 4. c. 9. §. 7. l. 4. c. 10. § 1 2. l 5. c. 6. §. 7. l. 5 c. 8. §. 2. in fine. l. 6. c. 3. §. 7. [...]. 6. c. 8. §. 7. [...]. 4. l. 6. c 9. sub finem, ad literam *. l. 6. c. 10. §. 11 l. 6. c. 15. §. 10. l. 8. c. 2. §. 11. l. 8. c. 9. §. 3. [...]. 2. & § 4.
C
  • Causall particles.
    • Not alwayes nor for the most part notes of causes. l. 8. c. 5. §. 14. 16. 17.
  • Cause.
    • The Causes of iustification. l. 1. c. 2.
    • The Causes efficient; principall, God. l. 1. c. 2. §. 1.
    • The Father, §. 4. the Sonne, the holy Ghost. ibid.
    • The moving Causes. l. 1. c. 2. §. 2.
    • The instrumentall Causes lib. 1. c. 2. §. 5. &c.
    • The essentiall Causes. l. 1. c. 3.
    • The matter. lib. 1. cap. 3. 1, &c. ad 7. & l. 4.
    • The forme. lib. 1. cap. 3. §. 7, &c. & l. 5.
    • The finall cause. lib. 1. cap. 6. §. 1, 2, 3, 4.
  • Charity.
    • [Page]That it doth not justifie as well as faith. l. 4. c. 11. §. 2, &c.
    • That it is not the forme of [...]aith. lib. 4. cap. 11. §. 5.
    • Whether perfect in this life. l. 5. cap. 7.
  • CHRIST.
    • The mericorious cause of justification. l. 1. [...]. 2. §. 4.
    • Whether hee obeyed the Law for him­selfe or for us. l. 1. c. 4. §. 10.
    • Whether he merited for himselfe. lib. 1. c. 4. §. 11.
    • Christs exaltation, Phil. 2. 9. was his declaration to be the Sonne of God, lib. 1. c. 4. §. 11. 12.
    • How many wayes hee is said to justifie us. lib. 2. c 5. §. 8.
    • The righteousnesse of Christ is Gods righteousnesse. l. 4. c. 2 §. 2, 3, 4.
    • Christs right [...]ousnesse the materi [...]ll cause of justification. l. 1. c. 3, & 4. vide Materiall, and Matter.
    • Christs righteousnesse both the mat­ter and merit of our iustification. lib. 1. cap. 3. §. 1.
  • Concupiscence.
    • In the regenerate a sinne. lib. 2. cap. 8. §. 7 8. 9. lib. 4. cap. 4. §. 12. lib. 7. cap. 6. §. 14.
    • Concupiscence going before, consent a finnenne. lib. 2. c. 8, 9.
  • Counsells.
    • The Counsell of voluntary poverty, l. 7. c. 7. §. 4.
    • The counsell of single life. lib. 7. cap. 7. §. 5, 6.
D
  • David.
    • Not iustified by inherent righteous­nesse. lib. 4. c. 8. §. 15.
  • Definition.
    • Of Iustification. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 2.
  • [...].
    • The sig­nification of [...] lib. 2. cap. 2. §. 1, 2.
    • The sig­nification of [...] §. 3.
    • The sig­nification of [...] §. 4.
    • The sig­nification of [...] §. 5.
    • The sig­nification of [...] §. 6.
  • Dispositions.
    • Seven, alleaged by Bellarmine to dis­prove justification by faith alone. lib. 6. cap. 10 11, 12.
    • Whether any dispositio [...]s bee indeed re­quired by the Papists. lib. 6. c. 10. §. 4.
    • Whether faith, hope, love, as they bee dispositions, bee graces. lib. 6. cap. 12. §. 6, 7.
E
  • Efficient.
    • The efficient, principall of justification, God. lib. 1. c. 2. §. 1.
    • The motives; grace and iustice. ib. §. 2.
    • The actions of the Father, the Sonne, the holy Ghost distingu [...]shed. ibid. §. 4.
  • End.
    • The end or fi [...]ll cause of iustification, both supreme, the glory of God. lib. 1. c. 6. §. 1. and also subordinate, viz. salvation. §. 2. certainety of salvation. §. 2. sanctifi­cation. §. 4.
  • [...].
    • How to be understood. Gal. 5. 6. l. 4. c. 11. §. 3. & 4.
F
  • Faith.
    • The instrument on o [...]r [...] of iusti­fication. [Page] lib. 1. cap. 2. §. 7. Concerning it seven things considered.
    • 1. Th [...] it iustifieth not as it is an ha­bit or act in us, but as the hand to receive Christs righteousnesse. ibid. lib. 1. cap. 5. §. 12.
    • 2. It must therefore be such a faith as doth specially apprehend Christ. lib. 1. cap. 2. §. 8.
    • 3. It doth not prepare onely and dis­pose to iustification, but it doth actually iustifie. §. 9. l. 6. c. 7. §. 1, 2.
    • 4. It doth not iustifi [...] absolutely in re­spect of its own [...] worth, but relatively in respect of the object. §. 10.
    • 5. The meaning of the question, whe­ther we be justified by faith or by workes. §. 11.
    • 6. How faith is said to iustifie alone. §. 12.
    • 7. That faith doth not sanctifie alone. §. 12.
    • Whether the act of faith properly be im­puted [...]torighteousnesse. l. 1. cap. 2. §. 7. & cap. 5. §. 12.
    • That charity is not the form [...] of faith. l. 4. cap. 11. §. 5.
    • Of the distinction of saith, that it is either formata or informis. §. 6.
    • That faith is perfect Bellarmine pro­duceth sixe reasons which are answered. l. 5. c. 6.
    • The full discourse of faith. l. 6.
    • The Popish [...] concerning faith: l. 6. c. 1. §. 1.
    • What faith is. cap. 1. §. 2.
    • That it is not without knowledge. §. 3. against implicite faith. lib. 6. cap. 1. §. 3. &c.
    • The doctrine of implicit faith both fals [...] for many reasons. §. 4. and absurd in that they say it may better bee defined by igno­rance than by knowledge. §. 5.
    • Bellarm. allegations out of the Scrip­tures for implicite faith. §. 6, of Fathers. §. 7. Testimonies of Fathers against it. §. 13.
    • Bellarmines reason. §. 14.
    • The doctrine of implicite faith wicked, as being an egregious cooz [...]nage. §. 15, 16, 17. and pernicious to the people. §. 18.
    • True justifying [...]aith cannot be severed from charity. lib. 6. cap. 2.
    • Our reasons.
    • I. Because hee that hath true faith is regenerate. §. 1.
    • II. Because hee hath the Spirit of Christ dwelling in him. §. 2.
    • III. Because hee is sanctified. [...]. 3.
    • IV. Because hee is the true Disciple of Christ. §. 4.
    • V. Because true faith worketh by cha­rity. ibid.
    • VI. Because true faith is formata. ibid.
    • VII. Because if it be without charity it doth not iustifie.
    • VIII. Because they who love not, know not God. ibid.
    • 7. Other arguments out of Iames 2. §. 5.
    • 6. Other arguments defended against Bellarmine. §. 6. &c.
    • Testimonies of Fathers. lib. 6. cap. 2. §. 12.
    • Bellarmines proofes that true [...]aith may bee severed from charity. lib. 6. cap. 3.
    • The first o [...]t of Ioh. 12. 42, 43. §. 1.
    • The second out of 1 Cor. 13. 2. §. 2, 3. 4.
    • The third out of Iam. 2. 14. §. 5.
    • The fourth because in the Church there are both good and bad. §. 6.
    • The fifth from the [...]ature of faith and charity. §. 7, 8, 9.
    • The sixth from an absurdity. §. 10.
    • The seventh Testimonies of Fathers. §. 11.
    • Whether iustifying faith may be without speciall apprehension of Christ. lib. 6. c. 4.
    • No iustifying faith but that which lai­eth hold on Christ. §. 1.
    • To bele [...]ve in Christ is to receive and embrace him. §. 2.
    • Two degrees of faith, the former speci­ally apprehending the other actually ap­plying Christ. §. 3.
    • Of the former degree. §. 4.
    • Of the latter. §. 5.
    • The necessity of this speciall apprehen­sion to iustifio [...]tion. §. 6, 7.
    • The Popish obiections against speciall faith. lib. 6. cap. 4. §. 8.
    • Their obiections concerning fiducia af­fiance. §. 9.
    • [Page]By alively assent men beleeve in Christ. §. 10.
    • That affiance is not faith. §. 11.
    • The subiect of faith. lib. 6. cap. 5. vid. subiect.
    • The obiect of faith. lib. 6. cap. 6. vid. obiect.
    • Of the actor effect of faith, which is to iustifie.
    • First, whether indeed it d [...]th iustifie or only dispose to iustification. lib. 6. cap. 7. §. 1, 2.
    • Secondly, whether faith doth iustifie formally. §. 3.
    • The Papists cavill that we debase faith. §. 4. which themselves have [...]. §. 5.
    • Thirdly, whether faith doth iustifie alone. lib. 6. cap. 8. the state of the [...] ­troversie. §. 1.
    • The explanation of the three termes,
    • Fides. ibid.
    • Iustificat. §. 2.
    • Sola. §. 3, 4 5.
    • Our proofes. §. 6.
    • Testimonies of Scripture. §. 7.
    • Reasons. §. 8, 9. 10, 11.
    • Testimonies of Fathers and other [...] ­ters in all ages. lib. 6. cap. 9.
    • Bellarmines arguments that faith d [...]th not iustifie aloue. lib. 6. cap. 10.
    • This question he disputeth three waies, ail which are impertinent. §. 1, 2.
    • The first, that it doth not iustifie alone by way of disposing, which bee proveth by five principall arguments: the first, be­cause there are seven dispositions where­of faith is one, which discourse of the se­ven dispositions is idle and impertinent. lib. 6. cap. 10. §. 3.
    • VVhether any preparative dispositions be indeed required §. 4.
    • Of the first disposition which is faith. lib. 6. cap. 10. §. 5.
    • His argument, because it but begin­neth iustification and therefore d [...]th not inst [...]fie alone. § 6.
    • His first proofe Heb. 11. 6. §. 7.
    • His second Rom. 10. 13 14 §. 8.
    • His third Ioh. 1. 12. §. 9.
    • Testimonies o [...] Fathers that faith is the beginning. §. 10.
    • His reasons. §. 11.
    • Of feare the second disposition lib. 6. cap. 11. §. 1, 2. ad 6.
    • Of hope the third disposition. lib. c. 11. §. 6. &c.
    • Of love the fourth. lib. 6. cap. 12. 1 2. &c. ad 9.
    • Of [...] the fifth. lib. 5. cap. 12. §. 9. 10.
    • The sixth disposition a purpose and de­sire to receive the Sacrament. lib. 6. c. 12. §. 11.
    • The seventh a purpose of a new life. lib. 6. cap. 12. §. 12.
    • His second principall argument, be­cause faith being alone and severed from charity and other graces cannot [...]. lib. 6. cap. 13.
    • His third principall argument from the [...] [...] of the causes which may bee given why faith doth iustifie alone. lib. 6. cap. 14. which are [...]hree.
    • First, authority of Scriptures. § [...], 3, 4.
    • Secondly, [...]he will and pleasure of God. §. 5.
    • Thirdly, because it is the property of faith alone to receive Christ. §. 6. that is to [...] and to apply him. §. 7. 8.
    • His [...]ourth principall [...] from the [...] [...] faith d [...]th [...]. lib. 6. cap. 15.
    • I. Because it iustifieth as a caus [...]. [...]. [...]. &c. ad 7.
    • II. As the beginning of righteous­nesse. §. 7, 8, 9.
    • III. As the merit. §. 10. &c. ad finem capitis.
    • His fifth principall argument from two principles, viz. first from the formall cause of iustification. Lib. 6. cap. 15. §. 17. Se­condly, from the [...]ecessity o [...] good workes, for if faith [...] [...] [...], [...] would [...] alone. lib. 7. [...]. 5. §. 1, 2.
    • That good workes are necessary by way of efficiency. §. 3.
    • VVhether faith doth save alone. lib. 7. cap 5. §. 15.
    • Bellarmines reasons to the contrary. §. 16.
  • Feare.
    • The second disposition i [...] iustification [Page] according to the councell of Trent. lib. 6. cap. 11.
    • The finall cause of iustification see End.
  • Forme.
    • The formall cause of iustification, the imputation of Christs righteousnesse. l. 1. cap. 3. §. 1. 7. lib. 5. per totum.
    • Private opinions of some Divines con­cerning the forme of iustification. lib. 1. cap. 5.
    • Their depravation of our assertion as if wee held that wee are formally iust by Christs righteousnesse. lib. 1. cap. 5. §. 2.
    • Their errours. §. 3.
    • The private opinio [...]s concerning the matter and the forme of iustification very dangerous. lib. 1. cap. 5. §. 13, 14.
G
  • God.
    • The principall cause of iustification. lib. 1. cap. 2. §. 1. &c.
    • The righteousnesse of God by which we are iustified, is the maine doctrine of the Gospell. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 1.
    • It is called the righteousnesse of God, because it is the righteousnesse of Christ who is God. lib. 4. cap. 2, 3, 4.
  • Gospell.
    • The difference betweene the Law and the Gospell. lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 3.
    • The acceptions of the words Law and Gospell either more large or more st [...]ict. §. 3, 4.
    • Bellarmines disproofe of the difference by u [...] given. §. 5.
    • Because in the Gospell is contained the Doctrine of good workes. ibid.
    • Whether the promise of salvation made to our obedience doth prove the merit of good workes.
    • Eternalll life promised in three respects.
    • First, as a free gift. lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 6.
    • Secondly, as our inheritance. §. 7.
    • Thirdly, as a free reward. §. 8.
    • The Example of Gods dealing with Abraham. §. 9.
    • Though eternall life bee the reward of our obedience, yet it is not merited by it. §. 10.
    • Some places of Scriptures which the Papists understand of causes are to bee understood as notes. §. 11.
    • Or evidences. §. 12.
    • Three other answeres. §. 13.
    • Testimonies wherein upon condition of obedience eternall life is promised in the Gospell alleaged by Bellarmine. §. 14.
    • The I. Matth. 5. 20. lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 14.
    • II. Matth. 19. 17. §. 15.
    • III. Testimonies out of the Apostles. §. 16.
    • IV. Out of the Prophets. Ezec. 18. 21. §. 17.
    • V. From the condition of faith. §. 18.
    • Bellarmines second argument from the differences betweene the Law and the Go­spell. §. 19.
    • Eight differences betweene the Law and the Gospell assigned by Bellarmine. §. 19. 20.
  • Grace.
    • The moving cause of iustification. l. 1. cap. 2. §. 2.
    • VVhat is meant by the word Grace lib. 3.
    • The Papists by the grace of God by which we are iustified understand the ha­bit of grace inherent in us. lib. 3. cap. 1. §. 1.
    • The divers acceptions of the word Grace. §. 3.
    • The distinction of Grace. §. 3.
    • The state of the question concerning Grace. §. 4.
    • That by [...]ustifying grace is meant the gracious favour of God in Christ. lib. 3. cap. 2.
    • Our proofes, I. from the use of the word in the Scriptures. lib. 3. cap. 2 §. 1.
    • II. Because it is Gratia gratum sa­ciens. §. 2.
    • [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] By it the faithfull are [...] and chasidim. §. 3.
    • III. By the gracious favour of God in Christ, wee were elected, called, &c. §. 4.
    • Obiect. 1. The grace of election is eternall, the rest temporary. §. 5.
    • Obiect. 2. By inherent grace w [...] [...] sanctified. §. 6.
    • Obiect. 3. Faith a grace inherent. §. 7.
    • IV. Gratia gratum faciens expressed in the Scriptures by other words which be­token savour. §. 8.
    • V. Because grace is opposed to works. §. 9.
    • VI. Charity is not the i [...]stifying Grace. §. 10.
    • VII. Plaine testimonies of Scripture that grace signifieth favour. §. 11.
    • Confessi [...]n of Papists. §. 12.
    • Bellarmines first allegation of Rom. 3. 24. for inherent grace proved to mak [...] a­gainst it. lib. 3. cap. 3.
    • His pr [...]ofes from thence disproved. l. 3. cap. 4.
    • I. From the word Gratis. lib. 3. cap. 4. §. 2.
    • II. From the praposition per. §. 3.
    • III. Because the favour of God is not in vaine. §. 4.
    • IV. From the Attributes given to grace.
    • As first, that it is a gift. §. 5.
    • Secondly, a gift which wee receive. §. 6.
    • Thirdly, a gift given by Christ. [...]. 7. y [...]a made by Christ. §. 8.
    • Fourthly, that it is given by measure from Christ. §. 9.
    • Fifthly, it is compared to essence. §. 10.
    • Sixthly, It is compared to light. [...]. 11.
    • His second allegation out of Rom. 5. 5. answered. lib. 3. cap. 5.
    • How the word Grace is used in the Fa­thers and how in the latter writers. lib. 3. cap. 6.
H
  • Hebrew.
    • The Hebrew word hitsdiq▪ which is to iustifie, never signifieth to iustifie by inhe­rent righteousnesse. lib. 2. cap. 1. §. 4. &c.
  • Hope.
    • Bellarmines third disposition to justifi­cation. lib. 6. cap. 11. §. 6.
    • Hope, whether perfect. lib. 5. cap. 6. §. 7.
I
  • Image of Christ.
    • How borne by the faithfull, and whe­ther in respect of i [...]ification. l. 4. cap. 10. §. 13, 14, 15▪ 16.
  • Implicite Faith.
    • Confuted and condemned. lib. 6. cap. 1.▪ §. 3. &c. ad finem capitis.
  • Imputation of Christs righteousnesse.
    • The formall cause of i [...]stification. l. 1. cap. 3. §. 7.
    • Imp [...]tation of Christs satisfaction con­fessed by Papists. §. 8.
    • Imputation of Christs righteeusnesse denyed by some others b [...]sides Papists. §. 9.
    • Their reason, that then we are Redee­mers. ibid.
    • Imputation of Christs righteousnesse proved obiter, by two reasons. §. 10. The private opinion of some concerning impu­tation. lib. 1. cap. 5.
    • That Christs righteo [...]snesse it selse is imputed. lib. 1. cap. 5. §. 7.
    • Whether we fulfilled the Law in Christ. §. 8, 9, 10, 11.
    • The necessity of imputation. lib. 1. c. 5. §. 13, 14.
    • The full discourse concerning imputa­tion of Christs righteousnesse. lib. 5. per totum.
    • That wee are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse proved by five ar­guments. lib. 5. cap. 1.
    • Proved by eight arguments. cap. 2.
    • [Page]By two other arguments. cap. 3.
    • By testimonies of writers both old and new. lib. 5. cap. 4.
    • The objections of the Papists against imputation. lib. 5. cap. 5.
    • I. Against the name that it is new. §. 1.
    • II. That it is putatitia. §. 2.
    • III. That it is no whore to be found. §. 3.
    • IV. That it it is needlesse. §. 4. Both because remission is an utter deletion of sinne. §. 5. and also because the righte­ousnesse [...] is perfect. lib. 5. cap. 6. & 7.
    • V. That wee are not formally iust by it. lib. 5. cap. 8. §. 1. Bellarmines confes­sion that if wee did not hold that wee are formally iustified by it, our doctrine were true. §. 2.
    • VI. That we should be as righteous as Christ. §. 3.
    • VII. That we did not loose in Adam imputed righteousnesse. §. 4. that if by im­putation we are iust, then Christ a sinner. §. 5. but as Christ notwithstanding the im­putation of our sinne, was iust, so wee sin­ners. §. 6. That after iustification wee are called iust, and how. §. 7.
    • IX. The Spouse of Christ beautifull in her selfe. §. 8▪ 9.
    • X. Because the heart must bee pure before we can see God, and because Christ redeemed [...] that wee might be sanctified. §. 10.
    • Instrumentali causes of iustification. l. 1. c. 2. §. 5.
  • Justice.
    • The iustice of God a moving cause of iustification. l. 1. c. 2. §. 3.
    • The iustice of God distinguished. l. 8. c. 5. §. 19.
  • Justifie.
    • To iustifie, what it is. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 2.
    • To iustifie is not to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent. Lib. 2. cap. 1. §. 3.
    • The signification of the Hebrew word. §. 4. &c. & cap. 5. §. 5. Of the Gre [...] l. 2. [...] 2.
    • The same prov [...]d first by other termes. §. 7.
    • Secondly, because the whole processe of justification is iudiciall. §. 8.
    • Iustifying opp [...]sed to condemning. l. 2. c. 5. §. 2. & cap. 6. §. 1.
  • Justification.
    • The excellency of this argument. l. 1. c. 1. §. 1.
    • The definition of iustification. lib. 1. c. 1. §. 2.
    • The signification of the word. ibid.
    • Iustification considered as an action of God. §. 3.
    • As an action of God without us. §. 4.
    • But accompanied with those that are wrought within us. §. 5.
    • It is an act continued. §. 6.
    • Whether it b [...]e wrought but once and at once. §. 7.
    • The Papists confuted, who deny it ei­ther to be an action of God, or without us, or continued. §. 8.
    • The causes of iustification, the effici­ents. l. 1. c. 2.
    • The essentiall causes, viz. the matter and forme. lib. 1. c. 3. the matter Christs righteousnesse. §. 2, 3, 4, 5.
    • Private opinions concerning the matter. l. 1. c. 4. vid. Materiall.
    • The forme, the imputation of Christs righteousnesse. c. 3. §. 6. &c.
    • Private opinions concerning the forme. cap. 5.
    • The end. l. 1. c. 6. §. 1, 2, 3, 4.
    • The parts, absolution from sinne, and acceptation as righteous in Christ. [...]ib. 1. cap. 6. §. 5.
    • Redemption, reconciliation, and adop­tion comprised under iustification. §. 6.
    • The consequents and sruits of iustifi­cation. §. 7.
    • The heads of the controversie concer­ning iustification. l. 2. c. 1. §. 1.
    • The first concerning the name whether iustification and sanctification are to bee confounded. The Papists confounding them ground their errour upon the Latine word. §. 2, 3.
    • [Page]The Hebrew word signifying to instifie never importeth making righteous by infu­sion of righteousnesse. lib. 2. cap. 1. §. 4. &c ad finem capitis.
    • The use of the Greeke words signifying to iustifie or iustification, never importing righteousnesse inherent. lib. 2. cap. 2.
    • Foure significations of the word iustifi­cation alleaged by Bellarmine.
    • I. That it signifieth the Law. lib. 2. cap. 3. §. 1. 2.
    • II. Acquisition of righteousnesse. §. 3. 4, 5, 6.
    • III. Increase of iustice. lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 1. 2, 3, 4, 5.
    • IV. Declaration of iustice. l. 2. c. 4. §. 6.
    • Bellarmines proofes that iustification signifieth making righteous by inherent righteonsnesse. lib. 2. cap. 5.
    • Foure arguments of Calvin and Chemnitius, defended against Bellarm.
    • The first, because iustifying is opposed to condemning. lib. 2. cap. 5. §. 2. 3, 4.
    • Secondly, that as the hebrew so the greeke signifieth. §. 5. Bellarmines proofes that the hebrew word signifieth to make iust by infusion of righteousnesse inherent, §. 6. 7, 8, 9, 10.
    • The third and fourth concerning the latine word iustificare. §. II.
    • The use of the latine word in the Fa­thers. §. 12.
    • The manifold differences betwixt in­stification and sanctification. Litb. 2. cap. 6.
    • Their confounding of iustification and sanctification is the ground both of the Pa­pists calumniations against us. lib. 2. cap. 6. §. 19. and of their errours in the do­ctrine of iustification, which are pernicious §. 20. 21, 22.
    • The Papists from iustification exclude remission of sinne. lib. 2. cap. 7. §. 1. 2. vid. remission.
    • The popish distinction of iustification in­to the first and second. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 8. lib. 3. cap. 6. §. 5. lib. 7. cap. 3. §. 4. 5. cap. 8. §. 4.
    • Men are said to be iustified either be­fore God in foro coelesti, which properly is iustification, or in the court of their owne conscience which is the assurance of iusti­fication. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 7. lib. 2. c. 2. §. 8.
L
  • Law.
    • Law of faith and the Law of workes. lib. 7. cap. 2. §. 6. 7.
    • The difference betweene the Law and the Gospell. See Gospell.
    • Whether the faithfull doe or can fulfill the Law. lib. 7. cap. 6. §. 3.
    • The Law not possible by reason of the flesh. lib. 4. cap. 5. §. 3, &c. ad finem capi­tis.
    • Bellarmines proofes that the Law is ab­solutely possible. lib. 4. cap. 5. §. 5. lib. 7. cap. 6. §. 4.
    • First, by Sciptures; testimonies of three sorts.
    • I. That the Law is easie. lib. 7. cap. 6. §. 4. 7, 6, 7, 8.
    • II. That the law is kept by love lib. 7. cap. 6. § 9. 10, 11 12.
    • III. Examples of them that have fulfilled the law. §. 13. 14, 15. iust, that they kept the law with a perfect heart and with their whole heart. §. 15. 16.
    • Secondly, by fathers. §. 17. The diffe­rence betweene the Pelagians and Papists not great. §. 18.
    • His testimonies examined. §. 19. 20, 21.
    • That the Fathers did not meane that the law is absolutely possible, §. 22.
    • Bellarmines paradox, that a man may fulfill the law, though he cannot live with­out sinne. §. 23.
    • Testimonies of Fathers that the fulfilling of the law is not possible to us. §. 24.
    • Six [...] reasons to the same effect. lib. 4. cap. 5. §. 6, &c.
    • Bellarmines sixe reasons, answered. lib.. 7. cap. 7.
    • I. Because a man may doe more than is commanded. §. 1. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
    • II. If the precepts were not possible they would binde no man. lib. 7. cap. 7. §. 7. 8.
    • III. Then God should bee cruell, &c. §. 9.
    • IV. Then Christ [...]isseth of his end. §. 10. 11, 12.
    • [Page]V. They who have the Spirit fulfill the law. §. 13.
    • VI. Because they sinne not. §. 14, 15.
  • Liberty.
    • Christian liberty. lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 23.
  • Life eternall.
    • Life eternall considered by Bellarmine as an inheritance, and so due to due to the person by right of adoption; and as a re­ward and so due to workes. lib. 8. cap. 9. §. 3.
    • Eternall life promised in three respects. lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 6. 7, 8. lib. 8. cap. 9. §. 3.
    Love.
    • Bellarmines fourth disposition to justifi­cation. lib. 6. cap. 12.
M
  • Matoriall.
    • The materiall cause of justification, Christs righteousnesse. lib. 1. cap. 3. Whe­ther Christs passive righteousnesse onely. lib. 1. cap. 4. Which is denyed.
    • I. Because by it alone the Law is not fulfilled. §. 2, 3. and that is defended against divers exceptions. 4. 5. 6 7.
    • II. Because by Adams disobedience imputed to us we were made sinners. §. 8.
    • III. Because Christs obedience is ac­cepted for us. § 9. that Christ obeyed the Law for us. §. 10. that he did not merit for himselfe. §. 11.
    • Object. If Christ obeyed the Law for us then wee need not. §. 13.
    • Object. 2. If we be justified by the obe­dience of Christ why needed hee to dye for us. §. 14.
    • IV. To what end served Christs obe­dience if wee bee justified onely by his suf­ferings. §. 15.
    • V. Because there are two distinct parts of justification. §. 16.
    • Obiect. Then two formall causes of iustification. §. 17. That instification doth not consist onely in remission of sinne §. 18.
    • Obiect. Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission, as of commission §. 19.
    • Obiect. By it wee are made innocent. §. 20. Three arguments of I. P. §. 21. the arguments of I. F. §. 22. 23.
  • Matter of iustification. lib. 4.
    • The state of the controversie betweene us and the Papists concerning it. lib. 4. cap. 1. §. 1.
    • It is the principall question in the whole controversie of iustification wheron therest depend. lib. 4. cap. 1. §. 2. and is proved by the rest. §. 3.
    • That we are iustified by Christs righte­ousnesse and not by inherent: proved first ioyntly. lib. 4. cap. 1. § 4.
    • I. Because we are iustified by Gods righteousuesse and not by ours. lib. 4. cap. 2 Christs righteousnesse is Gods righteous­nesse. §. 2. 3. 4. inherent is ous. §. 5. the se­verall parts of inherent righteousnesse are called ours. §. 6..
    • II. Because by Christs righteousnes we stand iust before God, and not by ours. §. 7.
    • III. Because Christs righteousnesse is perfect; and so is not ours. §. 8. that the righteousnesse of all mortall men is unper­fect, because are at sinners proved by seven reasons. §. 9.
    • The question concerning the imperfe­ction of mans inherent righteousnesse fur­ther discussed. cap. 3. & 4. See righteous­nesse inherent.
    • IV. VVe are iustified by that righte­ousnesse by which the Law is fully satisfied lib. 4. cap. 5. The righteousnesse of Christ hathfully satisfied the Law. §. 2. Our righ­teousnesse cannot satisfie the law. §. 3. 4.
    • Bellarmines reasons that the law may be fulfilled. §. 5.
    • V. Because by the righteousnesse of Christ and not by ours, we are absolved, re­deemed reconciled and saved. lib. 4. c. 6.
    • VI. Because we are justified by the righteousnesse of faith and not of workes. lib. 4. cap. 7. §. 1.
    • VII. The righteousnesse by which we are iustified is not prescribed in the Law. §. 2.
    • [Page]VIII. The righteousnesse whereby wee are iustified satisfieth the iustice of God. §. 3.
    • IX. Because no man is iustified with­out remission of sinne. §. 4.
    • X. The true doctrine of iustification ministreth comfort. §. 5.
    • XI. From experience. lib. 4. cap. 7. §. 6.
    • Severally: that we are not iustified by inherent righteousnesse, proved by foure­teene arguments.
    • I. Because it is prescribed in the Law. lib. 4. cap. 8. §. 1. 2, 3, 4.
    • II. Because that doctrine confoun­deth the Law and the Gospell and maketh void the covena [...]t of grace. §. 5.
    • III. It depriveth men of the chiefe part of christian liberty. §. 6.
    • IV. Because all men are sinners. §. 7.
    • V. Because all me [...] [...] by [...] Law a [...] ­cursed. §. 8.
    • VI. Because none doe fulfill the Law. §. 9.
    • 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 si [...]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 alo [...]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 i [...]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 contr [...]versie of merit is in a man­ner [Page] 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 lati [...]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 m [...]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 mus [...] bee free. §. 13. it must be pure & perf [...]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 merit [...]. §. 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 all [...]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. Bellarmines [...]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 word [...] 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 Ui [...]e-yard. Matth. 20. 1. &c. ad 16. §. 6. 7.
    • Bellarmines cavils against. Melanct­hon and Calvin, answered. §. 8.
    • Maldonats exposition. §. [...].
    • 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.
    • Bellarmines [...]vill at our answeres §. 12.
    • The places of Scripture [...] and answered. §. 13.
    • 3. From those which place the rea­son [Page] 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 pl [...]ces where eternall life is promised to good workes, lib. 8. c. 5. §. 21.
    • 6. From those places where [...]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. [...]ight of the Greeke Fathers, §. 2. and eleven of the Latine Fathers. §. 3.
    • The authority of foure Councils. §. 4.
    • Bellarmines reasons to prove merits. §. 5.
    • Other questions concerning merits dis­cussed. l. 8. c. 7. whether trust is to bee re­posed in merit. §. 2. De intuitu mercedis. §. 3 4 whether it bee lawfull to doe a good worke with intent to merit thereby, lib. 8. cap. 7. §. 5.
    • The seven conditions required in me­rit. l. 8. c. 8. whereof three are not contr [...] ­verted. §. 1.
    • The fourth, that it bee liberum. §. 2.
    • Fifthly, that it be the worke of a man in state of grace. §. 3.
    • Sixthly, that it have the promise of God. §. 4.
    • Seventhly, that it proceed from cha­rity. §. 5.
    • All these conditions concurring doe not make a worke meritorious. lib. 8. c. 8. §. 6.
    • Bellarmines dispute that good workes are condignely meritorious, non solum ratione pacti, but also ratione operis, ex­amined. l. 8. c. 9.
    • His seven arguments to prove condigne merits ratione operis, l. 8. c. 9. §. 5. &c.
    • What things may be merited. l. 8. c. 9. §. 13.
N
  • Necessity of good workes urged by us. l. 7. c. 1. By Bellarmine. c. 4.
O
  • Obiect of Faith.
    • Lib. 6. cap. 6. The proper obiect of iusti­fying faith, is CHRIST. §. 2.
    • The obiect of Abrahams faith. §. 3, 4, 5.
    • Christ the proper obiect of faith in two respects. §. 6.
    • Bellarmines dispute first, that the ob­iect of faith is not speciall. §. 7.
    • By virtue of the iustifying faith, all other articles may become the obiect of speciall faith. l. 6. c. 6. § 7.
    • Whether every man is bound to beleeve that he is elected, &c. §. 8.
    • Secondly, whether a man may be iusti­fied without speciall faith. §. 9.
    • Thirdly, whether a man is iustified by speciall faith. l. 6. c. 6. §. 10.
  • Osiander.
    • His errour, that the righteousnesse of God by which we are iustified, is the righ­teousnesse of the Godhead dwelling in us. l. 1. c. 3. §. 2.
P
  • Papists.
    • They take away iustification. l. 1. c. 1. §. 1. l. 2. c. 6. §. 22.
    • From iustification they exclude remis­sion or forgivenesse of sinnes, lib. 2. cap. 7. §. 2.
    • They confound the Law and the Go­spell, and make void the covenant of grace. l. 4. c. 8. §. 5.
    • [Page]They deprive Christians of the chiefe part of their christian liberty. §. 6.
    • They are fallen from grace. lib. 7. c. 3. §. 9, 10, 11, 12.
    • Their maine errours in the article of iustification. l. 2. c. 1. §. 1.
  • Paritie.
    • Parity of righteousnesse. l. 4. c. 13.
  • Parts of iustification.
    • Lib. 1. c. 4. §. 16, 17. c. 6. §. 5.
  • Passive righteousnesse of Christ.
    • Whether we be iustified by it onely. l. 1. cap. 4.
  • Paul.
    • Not iustified by inherent righteous­nesse. l. 4. c. 8. §. 15.
  • Pelagians.
    • Their errours concerning grace. lib. 3. cap. 6. §. 2.
  • Perfect.
    • Whether any such. lib. 4. c. 10. §. 10, 11. l. 7. c. 6. §. 15. 16.
  • Penitencie.
    • Bellarmines fifth disposition to iustifi­cation. l. 6. c. 12. §. 9, 10.
  • Purpose to receive the Sacrament.
    • Bellarmines sixth disposition to iustifi­cation. l. 6. c. 12. §. 11.
  • Purpose of a new life.
    • Bellar. 7th. disposition. l. 6. c. 12. §. 12.
R.
  • Remission of sinne is not that onely thing wherein iustification consisteth. lib. 1. cap. 4. §. 16. 17. 18, 21. n. 3.
  • Obiect. It is as well of the sinnes of omission, as of commission. lib. 1. cap. 4. §. 19.
  • Obiect. 2. By it men are made inno­cent, therefore iust. §. 20.
  • Three arguments of I. P. §. 21. of I. F. §. 22. 23. Some make remission the en­tire forme of iustification. lib. 1. cap. 5. §. 1. & 4.
  • It is not that righteousnesse which is im­puted. lib. 1. cap. 4. §. 1. cap. 5. §. 5. 6.
  • Remission of sinne and acceptation as righteous the two parts of iustification. lib. 1. cap. 6. §. 5.
  • Remission of sinne is by the Papists ex­cluded from iustification. lib. 2. cap. 7. §. 1. 2.
  • Remission of sinne is not the utter ex­tinction of it. lib. 2. cap. 7. §. 3. It is as the forgiving of a debt. §. 4. What it signifieth in the Scriptures. ibid.
    Three questions.
    • I. What that is which is remitted. §. 5. whether the Macula. §. 6. 7.
    • II. The bookes out of which God doth wipe or blot our sinnes. §. 8.
    • III. By what act of God are our sins remitted. §. 9. The utter deletion or ex­tinction not granted in this life. §. 10. The guilt and punishment not taken away by infusion of righteousnesse. §. 11. Remis­sion doth not worke a reall change. §. 12.
    • Absurdities which follow this assertion that remission is the utter extinction of sinne. §. 13. and are necessary consequents of their doctrine of iustification by inhe­rent righteousnesse. §. 14. & lib. 5. cap. 5. §. 6. 7, 8.
    • Bellarmines proofes out of the Scrip­ture that remission of sin is the utter abo­lition of it. lib. 2. cap. 8. those places of Scripture mention either the taking away of sinne. §. 2. or the blotting out of sinne. §. 3. or the purging of sinne. §. 4. or the not being of it. §. 5. or the perfection of righte­ousnesse. §. 6.
    • Other arguments from the efficacie of Baptisme. §. 7. 8. his unanswereable argu­ment out of Rom. 5. 19. answered. lib. 2. c. 8. §. 10.
    • [Page]See more of this question, lib. 5. cap. 5. §. 6, 7, 8.
  • Reward.
    • Reward merces is either gratuita, free, or debita, due. l. 8. c. 5. §. 3. 4. 5.
    • The reward of eternall life equall, but not of glory. l 4. c. 13. §. 2.
    • How farre foorth good workes are re­warded, l. 8. c. 9. §. 12.
    • VVhether good workes may bee done with an eye to the reward. l. 8. c. 7. §. 3. 4.
    • VVhether they may bee done with in­tent to merit. §. 5.
  • Righteousnesse.
    • The righteousnesse of God, a moving cause of iustification. l. 1. c. 2. §. 2, 3.
    • Righteousnesse of Christians twofold. l. 1. c. 1. §. 2.
    • Bellarmines distinction of righteous­nesse of the Law, and in, or by it. l. 4. c. 8. §. 2. 3 4. l 7. c. 2. §. 8.
    • The righteousnesse of God is the mat­ter of iustification, not the righteousnesse of the Godhead. lib. 1. c. 3. §. 2. But the righteousnesse of the Mediator the man CHRIST IESVS. §. 3.
    • His whole righteousn [...]sse both negative and also possitive. §. 3 4. Which is truely called the righteousnesse of God. §. 5. The comfort arising out of this doctrine. §: 6.
  • Righteousnesse inherent.
    • Not perfect. l. 4. c. 2. §. 8, &c. and c. 3.
    • Reasons proving the works of the faith­full not to be purely and perfectly good.
    • I. Out of Esai. 64. 6. Lib. 4. cap. 3. §. 4 &c. ad 11.
    • II. Because there is a mixture in them of sinne out of, Exod. 28. 36, 38. §. 11. Eccles. 7. 20. §. 12.
    • III. The fru [...]t is as the tree. §. 13.
    • IV. Actions purely good may stand in iudg [...]ment. §. 14. an instance in pray­er. §. 15. Testimonies of Fathers. §. 16.
    • Bellarmines proofes. I. Allegation of Scriptures.
    • And I. Iob 1. 22. l. 4. c. 4. §. 1, 2.
    • II. Psalm. 7. 4, 9. &c. §. 3.
    • III. Matth. 6. 22. §. 4.
    • IV. 1 Cor. 3. 12. § 5.
    • V. Iam. 3. 2. §. 6.
    • VI. Psalm. 4. 4. Esai. 1. 16. Ioh. 5. 14. in which wee are exborted not to sinne. §. 7.
    • VII. From those places which teach that the workes of the faithfull doe please God. §. 8.
    • VIII. From these places which ab­solutely call them good. §. 9.
    • Two Testimonies of Fathers. §. 10.
    • Three Reasons, I. If good workes are impure, then either by reason of concupi­scence. l. 4. c. 4. § 12. or for want of cha­rity. §. 13. or because of veniall sinnes con­curring. §. 14.
    • II. From six absurdities. §. 15, 16.
    • By righteousnesse inherent the Law is not fulfilled. l. 4. c. 5. §. 3. 4. 4. None are able to fulfill the Law, first, because all are transgressours. §. [...].
    • Secondly, because none can be iustified by it. § 7.
    • Thirdly, because none can fulfill the first and the last Commandements. §. 8.
    • Fourthly, out of Act. 15. 10. §. 9.
    • Fiftly, out of Rom. 7. 18. §. 10.
    • Sixthly, Rom. 8. 3 §. 11.
    • By righteousnesse inherent we are not iustified: proved by foureteene reasons. l. 4. c. 8. vid. matter of iustification.
S
  • Sacraments.
    • They are seales of iustification. l. [...]. c. 2. §. 6. l. 6. c. 14. 8.
    • Whether they iustifie ex opere ope­rato. l. 6. c. 10. §. 3.
    • The purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament, Bellarmines six [...]h disposition to iustification. l 6. c. 12. §. 7.
  • Satisfaction.
    • The imputation of Christs satisfaction acknowledged by the Papists. l. 1. c. 3. §. 8.
  • Sanctification.
    • [Page]Not to be confounded with iustificati­on. l. 2. per totum.
    • How it is distinguished from iustifica­tion. l. 2. c. 6.
  • Sinners.
    • All men are sinners. l. 4. c. 2. §. 9. c. 8. §. 7. l. 5. c. 2. §. 2.
  • Subject of faith.
    • Viz. the party to whom it belongeth. lib. 6. c. 5. §. 1. and the parts of the soule wherein it is sealed. §. 2. viz. the minde, that is both the understanding and the will, proved by Testimonies. §. 3. 4. 5.
    • Whether the [...]nderstanding be com­manded by the will to beleeve. lib. 6. c. 5. §. 6.
T
  • Truth.
    • The doctrine of iustification and Sal­vation by faith in Christ is called the Truth. lib. 1 cap. 1. §. 1. & lib. 6. cap. 6. §. 2.
V
  • Veniall.
    • Whether veniall sinnes doe contaminate the good works of the iust. lib. 4. cap. 4. §. 14.
    • VVhether they doe [...]inder the fulfilling of the Law. l. 7. c. 6. §. 23.
    • Whether they be onely besides the Law, and not against it. ibid.
  • Vprightnesse.
    • It goeth under the name of perfection, and upright men are called perfect. lib. 4. c. 10. §. 10.
W.
  • Word.
    • The word an instrumentall cause of iustification. l. 1. c. 2. §. 5.
  • Workes.
    • Good work [...]s [...]re the fruites and effects, not causes of [...]. l. 1. c. 6. §. 7.
    • The necessi [...] of g [...]od works urged of us by better [...] than the Popish do­ctrine doth [...]. c. 1.
    • In what [...] we deny good workes to iustifie. l. 7. c. [...]. §. 1.
    • That good workes doe no [...] iustifie men before God prove by all the five [...] [...]. l. 7. [...]. 2. §. 2. by foure other reasons. §. 3.
    • [...], th [...]se that are iustified by [...] [...] [...] by their owne obedi­ence of the Law. §. 4.
    • [...] [...] it is [...] to the Scriptures. §. 5.
    • Bellarmines preamble to his answere, in which hee considereth three things first, what is meant by the Law of workes and by the Law of faith. lib. 7. cap. 2. §. 6, 7.
    • Secondly, the differences betweene the iustice of the Law, and in or by the Law. §. 8.
    • Thirdly; what is meant by workes which are excluded from iustification: whether the workes of the Ceremoniall Law. §. 9. 10. or also of the morall: and whether all or onely those which goe before faith. §. 11.
    • Bellarmines proofes that those onely [...] before or without faith are ex­cluded. l. 7. c. 2. §. 13.
    • Bellarmines dispute concerning the necessity of good workes. l. 7. c. 4. his me­thod. §. 1.
    • He proveth them necessary not to iu­ [...] [...] [...] §. 2.
    • His first proofe is from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell. §. 3. &c. ad 19.
    • Eight differences by hire propounded. l. 7. c. 4. §. 19, 20, 21, 22.
    • [Page]His second proofe from the doctrine of Christian liberty. l. 7. c. 4. §. 23.
    • That good workes▪ are necessary by way of efficacie Bellarmine proveth by three sorts of arguments: first, from Scrip­tures.
    • I. Testimoni [...], Heb. 10. 36. lib. 7. c. 5. §. 3.
    • II. 1 Tim. 2. 14, 15. l. 7. c. 5. §. 4.
    • III. Phil. 2. 12. §. 5.
    • IV. 2 Cor. 7. 10. §. 6.
    • V. 2 Cor. 4. 17. §. 7.
    • VI. Rom. 8. 13. §. 8.
    • VII. Rom. 8. 16, 17. §. 9.
    • VIII. Rom. 10. 10. §. 10.
    • IX. Matth. 25. 34, 35. §. 11.
    • X. Iam. 1. 25. & 2. 14. §. 12.
    • XI. The Epistles of Peter, Iames, Iohn, and Iude. l. 7. c. 5. §. 13.
    • Secondly, from testimonies of Fathers. §. 14.
    • Thirdly, from reason. §. 19. because faith d [...]th not save alone, lib. 7. c. 5. §. 16. 17.
    • Of the verity of the [...]ustice of good workes. l. 7. c. 6. §. 1.
    • VVhether they be sinnes. l. 7. c. 7. §. 17.
    • That they be sinnes it followes upon the doctrine of the Papists. lib. 4. c. 4. §. 9. in fine & 21.
    • Bellarmines proofes that good workes doe iustifie. l. 7. c. 8.
    • The first, Iam. 2. 24. lib. 7. c. 8. §. 2. &c. ad 19.
    • Sixe other testimonies, I. Eccl. 18. 21. §. 19. vide. l. 2. c. 4. §. 2. 3.
    • II. Rom. 6. 19. l. 7. c. 8. §. 19.
    • III. 2 Cor. 7. 1. l. 7. c. 8. §. 20.
    • IV. 2 Cor. 9. 10. §. 21.
    • V. Iohn 14. 23. §. 22.
    • VI. Ap [...]c. 22. 11. §. 23.
    • The Papists high opinion of their works. l. 8. c. 9. §. 14.
    • Our estimations of them. §. 15.
Y
  • Yoke.
    • Christs yoke easie. lib. 7. cap. 6. §. 4, 5, 6, 7.
FINIS.

Errata.

Page. 2. line 20, even our ju [...]if. p. 4. l. 9. [...]sadiq, p. 6▪ [...]. antepen. speciall, p. 9. marg. l. 2. [...] [...]. 2. 1. 2. l. 15. justifi­ca [...]i, p. 13. l. a fin. 19. VIII. [...] second p 15 l [...] [...]. 6. concur. l. penul [...] standeth, [...], p. 16. marg. l. 6. lib 1, cap. 2 p. 17. l. af. 11. her [...], l. [...]. 7. men. p. 18 l. 25. [...], l. 28. [...] is. p. 19 l 1. breake l. 15, 16. dele So the righteousnesse of our Me [...]iator who is God. p. 21 marg. l, 2. Ier 23 6. l af 5. dele sect p. 22. l. af. 14. then he intendeth, p 24. l. 6 [...], l. 11 par­tam, l. 18. nothing else. p. 26. l af 8 we are. p. 27. l af. [...] [...] no p. 28. l. 20, and s [...]condly, l. af. 13. id e [...]t, compl. p. 29. l. 1. receiv [...]d. l. af. 4. in us. p. 31. l. 3. [...] a [...], l. af. 12. y [...]t we p. 32 l. 26. ad [...]. p. 38. l. 17 [...], l. 18. [...] l. 22. scales, p. 43. l. antep. upon Christ, [...] [...] p 46 [...] 10, Workes. marg. l. 7. Psal. 115 p. 50. marg. l. af. 4. [...]. p. 51. l af. 15. t [...]at the word is used in the [...] ▪ ma g l 1. Rom. 5. 19. p 53 l. 13 [...] [...] l. af. 14. [...] p. 54 l. 9. [...]siddeq. l. 10. [...] l. af. 10. [...] p. 55. l. 10, the [...] man p. 58. l. 10. VIII. Secondly, because. p. 59. l. af. 19. pr [...]pcundeth. p. 6 [...]. l. 27. of the [...], [...]. 63 l 9. For first. l. penu [...]. [...], p. 64. l. ul [...]. [...], p. 66. l. [...] [...], l af. 15. [...], p. 67. l. 16. Therefore to be ju­stified, [...] p. 68. l. [...]7 [...] ▪ Calv [...], p. 69. l penul [...]. remain [...]. l. 16. imputed unto us, p. 70. marg. l. 7. & 10 [...], p: 70. l. a [...]. 11. 1▪ King. 8. 32. p. 77. l. 12. [...]. III. l. 15 the two fir [...]t, [...]. [...]8. [...]ighteous. p 78. marg▪ l. 9. Rom. 3. 21. p. 79. marg. l. 14. & 21. [...], l. 19. construed, l. penul [...]. d [...]th▪ marg. l. ult [...] ▪ p. 80. marg. l. af. 6. [...]allen from, l. af. 8 them, p. 84 marg. l 5. 2 Cor. 4. 16. p. 83, [...] [...]. 18, [...] now. p. 84. l [...]. [...]. [...] ▪ 9 [...] [...], p. 85. marg. l. 4. Psal. 32. 1. p. 86. l. 2 [...]. [...]. p. 88. marg l 1. the [...]ighth, sc argum [...]nt. p. 94. read. p 93. l. 14. [...] [...], p. 94 l. 8. 9▪ some of our w. l, 21. [...]riginall sinn [...] p 97. l. 5. justifying or saving. [...]. 99. l. 20. th [...]s. p. 100 l. 8. the fav [...]ur, p. 101. l. 12. [...], l. 24. ch [...]sid. lo, l. 25. [...], p. 103 l af. 21. [...]. p. 104. l. [...]. Psalm. 10 [...]. 8. 2 King. 13. 23. l. ul [...], asse [...]tion marg, l. [...]. favour. p. 109 marg. l. 5. c. 3. p. 110. [...]. af. 14. [...]. p 112. l. 5. and th [...] tru [...]ly. l. af. 8. Ro [...]. 5. 17. p. 114. l. 9 ches [...]d. p. 117. l. [...] 17. Iustini [...]. p. 118. l. as 3. [...] ▪ p. [...]19. l: 21. worke. p. 122. l. 5. vi [...]ut to. p [...]28. l. 3. reade, yet th [...] Papists th [...]ir [...]. p. 128 ad l. af. [...]. [...] in ma [...]g. 1 Iohn 3 16▪ p. 130 marg. l. 10. Qu [...]d dicitur D [...]i. l. 1 [...], 12. Qui [...] [...] De [...] p [...] [...]. l 18. quae p. 131. l 6. [...] sh [...]ll [...] 9. [...]ll good [...], p. 133. l. [...] i [...] [...] [...]. [...]. [...]. [...], l. af. 6. pro. p. 136. l 26. word l. 30▪ [...] l. 32. [...] p. 139. 1. 10. [...]. p. 145. [...]. 54. p. 141. [...] of. 8. Sacrifi [...]tc. p. 144. l 2 [...]. [...] [...] p. 145. l. 7. [...]. [...] 13 lib. 9. p. 146 l. [...]. 11. J. b [...]. p. 47. l 6 31 l. [...]f. 6. [...]. p. 149. l of. 5. [...]. ibi [...]. Sap. 9. 12. p 151. l. [...]. 7. [...] th [...] fl [...]sh l [...] [...]. p. 152. l. 2. we [...]. l 13. of [...]. p. 153. mar [...]. l 8. th [...] [...] abs l 14. s [...]cond [...]. [...] gainst. [...]. 17. l [...]. [...]. [...]. p. 154. l. 3 [...] l. 2 [...]. i [...] [...] l 25 rtmai [...]der. p. 155 l [...]f. 18. [...]. l [...]. 17. [...] p. 158 In the [...], by what, l. 22 1 [...] 1. 7 l. [...]. 4. I [...] p. 159 l 10. qui ibid. l 12. put [...]nt, l. 13 [...], l 8. r [...]liquum 25. 26. [...] [...] [...], l [...] [...] p. 161 marg l 4. [...]. p. 162. l. [...]f. 16. [...] [...] p. 163 l [...]f. 18. E conv. l. [...]. could not p164 l. [...]f. 2. [...]. p. 106. l. 17. [...]8. [...]. p 1 [...]8. l [...]. 14. dele [...] l [...]. 13. b [...] wha [...]. p. 169. l. 1. Act. 13. p. 201. l 9 [...] l. 16 [...] i [...]. l 18. [...]ut of l [...]. 21. be i [...]finite. p. [...]. marg. l. penult. Gomes l [...]f. 6. [...]. p. 204 l. 2. dele affir [...]ins l [...]f. 11. off p 205. l. 27. [...]. p. 208. l 22. Apostl [...]. p. 209 l 25. 2 [...]. 1. 1. p. 211 l 15 [...] l 21. Dan. 9. p. 222 l 22. d [...]le by. p. 223. marg. pone ad l. 3 in Cantic. si [...]m. 22 l [...]. 10. 11. [...] p. 225. l. 22. Ti p. 226 l [...]f. 13. [...], p. 228. l [...]. 22. [...] p. 232. l 14. b [...]fore wher [...] I. l [...]f 5 w [...] d [...], p. 233. l 2. b [...] [...]ur. l. 10. which [...] the Apost [...]e speak. p. 234 l 11. (F [...]r l. 14. gl [...]r: [...]) a [...]d [...] p. 235 l af. 12. [...]hamim marg l. 5. 16. 7▪ l af. 11. dele i [...]to walke [...] God. p. 236. l 16. sinn [...]s l. 27. indued l 237 l. a [...]. 15. [...] p. 238. l. 21. 2 Cor. 5. p. 239. l. 2 [...]. dele be should [...] said any t [...]ing to th [...] purpos [...]. l. 28. could. p. 240. l. 8. [...], l. 13. Septisters. p. 241. l [...]. 20. w [...]ich is. p. 242. l. 7. of him. p. 244. l. a [...]. 10. to signifit. l af. 4. to be [...]. l a [...]. 3. es­sectually. p. 246. mar [...] l 6. Rom. 12. p. 247 l af. 18. acquired. p. 248. m [...]rg. l. 1. l. 2. c. 6. 248. l. as. 6. insusi [...]u. p. 250. marg l. 4. Christus l. 7. ex [...]mplar. l. 16. [...] ▪ l 17. [...] ▪ l. 1 [...]. cons [...]cuti. p. 251. l 1. th [...]m. p. 252. [...]. 15. [...]n whic [...] p. 253 l. 10. in [...]ard and p. 253 l. a [...]. 16. os the. p. 255. l▪ [...]. [...]. p. 256. 1 [...]. wrought b [...] i [...]s. p. 258. l 8 [...]. p. 259 marg. l [...]. non [...]. p. 260. l. 12 dele m [...]n. p. 262. l 1. [...]ere p. 264. ma [...]g. l af 6. ut n [...]s. l. ul [...]. [...]d [...]. 265. marg. l. [...] 5. [...] l. a [...]. [...] p. 266 l. 3. [...] l. 9, beer [...], l. 10. as if [...]e wer [...] l▪ 26. [...]. l. [...]s. 8. quo [...]iam l. [...]s. 7. m [...]m. l. [...]s. 5. [...]. p. 2 [...]8. marg. l. [...]. del [...] [...] [...] p. 269 l. 21. but in Christ. in fin [...] line a d [...]le but. l. peu [...]lt. become [...] p. 270. l. af. 5. [...]. p. 273. l. [...]. i [...] i [...]. p, 276 l. 7. dele and, i [...] i [...]. p. 277. marg. l. 4 are imputative p. 279. l. [...]. dele [...]. p. 280. marg l 3. [...] not. p [...] 282. marg l 1. [...]. p. 283. l. [...] ad l. 3. [...] marg. [...]. 1. l. af. 12. [...] tacui: p. 284, marg. l. 12. [...] l. af. 10. [...] p. 285. l 13 could. l af. 5. [...]. p. 286 marg. l. 7. [...] 61. dele by l [...]. c. 1. [...]. 5 p. 291. [...], deest. viz p. 287. 188. 289. 290. p. 294 l. af. 10. their first. p, 295. l. 12. delo in. p. 296. marg. l. 1, 26. p. 298. l. af. 12. [...]. p. 300. l. af. 5. out of p, 305. l. af. 4 [...] imputed. p, 306 l. 5. then w [...] p. 308. marg l. 3. imputation. p 310. l af [...]12. [...] h [...], p. 311. l. 17. these l. af. 7. him therefore we &c. p. 3 [...]4. [...] faith i [...] salse. l u [...]t. dele Fat [...]h, ib [...]d. by God. p 315. l 9. [...], marg. l. 13. [...] 80. l. 21. [...] l. 26 [...] l 35 [...] [...] 4. prol [...]gom. p. 317. l. [...]. [...] p. 318 l. 7. & 8 and [...] p [...]320. l. af. 8. quo [...]ism. p. 321. l. 20 as are. p. 325. l. 4 [...] [...] p. 326. marg. l. 2. q [...] 2. p. 327. l. af. 7 [...] mar [...]. l. 8. 9. Pist. 38. si [...] p. 328. l. 12. walking. marg. l. [...] [...] p 334. l., 6. [...] l. 1 [...] p. 336. [...] [...]. 337. ad l. 10. marg. de [...], lib. 1. c. [...]5. l. af. 5. expresc [...]d. l. af 4. 38. p. 33. 8. [...]. 18. to feed. p. 340. l. 4. l. 15. p▪ 342. l. 10. orga [...]call p. 350. marg. l. 6. 1 Ioh. 5. 10. p. 357. l. af. 11. faitb is, p. 36 [...]. marg. l. ult. Rom. 4. 19. p. 373. l. af. 16. [...] respect of any, l. [...]f. 10. B [...]nedictus, p. 376. l. [...]. i [...] is, p. 377. l. 23 [...]. p. 378. l. 12. Blessed. Ambr. [...]. 21. [...]. [...] ef. 12. just. [...].

A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICA­TION.
THE FIRST BOOKE, Wherein is set downe the true doctrine of Justification according to the word of God.

CAP. I. The excellencie of this argument is set forth, and the definition of justification propounded, and in part expounded.

§. I.

AMong all the articles of Christian religion thereThe excellencie of this argu­ment. is none, as I suppose, either more necessarie to be knowne, or more comfortable to be belee­ved, than the doctrine of justification: where­by a faithfull man is taught to beleeve and know, that hee being a sinner in himselfe, and by sinne obnoxious to eternall damnation; is by the mercies of God, and merits of Christ through faith, not onely freed from the guilt of his sinnes and from everlasting damnation, but also accepted as righteous before God in Christ, and made heire of eternall life. This doctrine in many places of the Scrip­ture Lib. 6. Cap. 6. §. 2. hereafter▪ to be cited, is [...], by way of excellency called the truth Iohn 1. 17., and sometimes the truth of the Gospell Gal. 2. 5., as Gal. 2. 5. that is, the truth of God revealed in the Gospell concerning justification and sal­vation by the free grace of God, through the merits of Christ appre­hended by faith; being also the chiefe argument contained in the Gos­pell, which is therefore called the power of Rom. 1. 16, 17. God unto salvation, because therein the Righteousnesse of God, even that by which we are justified and saved, is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, The just shall live [Page 2] by faith, or he that is just by faith shall live: which doctrine is so invio­lably and incorruptly to be held, Gal. 1. 6. 8. that if an Apostle, if an Angell from heaven shall teach any other Gospell, that is, any other doctrine where­by to bee justified and saved, than by the onely merits of Christ appre­hended by faith, hee ought to bee held accursed. But by how much the more necessary and comfortable this doctrine is: by so much the more it is oppugned by Satan; who as at the first, hee did not abide in the truth, Iohn 8. 44. nor kept his first estate, but left his habitation rather Iude 6. than hee would (as some probably thinke) embrace this truth, namely that the second Person in Trinity should for the salvation of mankinde become flesh, and that in him the nature of man should be advanced above the nature of Angels: so hath hee ever since opposed it by all meanes, as namely by raising, not only other false teachers in the apostles times and since, but even Antichrist and his adherents in these later times, who have not onely perverted this doctrine, but also subverted it, and have as it were, taken away the subject of the question: for by confounding the law and the Gospell, the covenant of workes and the covenant of grace, the benefits of justification and sanctification, and of two ma­king but one; they have wholly abolished that great benefit of the Messias about our justification, whereby wee are freed from hell, and entituled to the kingdome of heaven, and consequently they are fallen Gal. 5. 4. from grace, having disanulled Gal. 3. 17, 18. the covenant of grace, and made the promise of none effect. For whosoever seeketh to be justified by inhe­renti Rom. 4. 14. righteousnesse, he is under Gal. 3. 10. the curse, he is a debtour Gal. 5. 2, 3, 4. Gal. 2. 21. to the whole law, and therefore to him Christ is become of none Of this see more, lib. 7. c. 3. §. 10, 11, 12. effect. This be­ing therefore a controversie of such importance, that it concerneth our very title to the kingdome of heaven, it is to bee handled with all diligence, and not without invocation of the holy Spirit of truth; whom wee beseech to guide and to direct us in setting downe the truth, to confirme and stablish us in the profession of it, and to assist and strengthen us against the enemies thereof. But before I come to confute the errours of the Papists, the enemies of the truth; I will first set downe the true doctrine of justification according to Gods word.

§. II. Iustification therefore is a most gracious and righteous action of The definition of Justification. God, whereby he imputing the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner, absolveth him from his sinnes, and accepteth▪ of him as righteous in Christ, and as [...] heire of eternall life, to the praise and glory of his owne mercy and justice. Where first consider the name of the thing, which wee haveThe name. now defined, and are hereafter to handle. To justifie, if you respect the [...] Justificar [...]. notation of the Latine word, signifieth to make just, as to magnifie, im­porteth to make great. Neither is it to be doubted, but that the Lord, whom he justifieth, doth constitute or make just. Now the Lord ma­keth men just two wayes; either by imputation of Christs righteous­nesse, which is out of them in Christ, as being his personall righteous­nesse: or by infusion of righteousnesse, as it were, by influence into them from Christ their head. To the faithfull therefore there belon­geth [Page 3] a twofold righteousnesse; the one of justification, the other of sanctification. The former is the righteousnesse of Christ, and there­fore the righteousnesse of God, as it is often called, the righteousnesse of God; because it is the righteousnesse of him that is God, and is impu­ted to the beleever: the later is ours, because inherent in us, though received from God, as all our good things are. The former is perfect, as being the righteousnesse of him that is God: the later is but begun in this life, and is to be perfected in the life to come. By the former we are justified, by the later we are sanctified. If it be objected, that there seemeth little or no difference betweene these two words: for as to ju­stifie is to make just, so to sanctifie is to make holy. And therefore as to sanctifie, is to make holy by holinesse infused: so to justifie, is to make just by justice inherent.

I answer, First, that this is contrary to the use of the word justifie▪ not onely pe [...]petuall in the Scriptures, but also ordinary in the speeches and writings of men. Wherein God is said to justifie men, and man is said to justifie God, and one man is said to justifie another, and one and the same man to justifie himselfe without any signification of infusing righ­teousnesse into him, but by cleering him and pronouncing him just. Se­condly, that there is no further respect to be had in this controversie to the notation of the Latine or English word, than as it is a true transla­tion of the Hebrew word in the old Testament, and of the Greek in the new: now I shall make it evident,Lib. 2. that the Hebrew hitsdiq, and so the greeke [...] is Verbum forens [...], a judiciall word taken from the courts of justice▪ which being attributed to the Iudge, is opposed to condem­ning, and signifieth to absolve, or to give sentence with the party que­stioned.

§. III. In the definition we consider justification, as an action ofThe definition of Justification explaned. 1. That it is an action of God, Rom. 8. 33. Esay 43. 25. God, whose alone worke it is; and so the Scriptures consider it in many places, as Rom. 8. 33. It is God that doth justifie, for it is he only that for­giveth sinnes, Esa. 43. 25. It is he onely that can by making us righteous in Christ, give us right and title to the kingdome of heaven. It is no action therefore of our owne, or of any creature, neither is it wrought by our owne preparations and dispositions. For although every man is bound to use all meanes to attaine to justification; yet it is not of him that willeth,Rom. 9. 16. nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For if God bee the agent in justifying us, then are wee the patients. And for that cause we are never in the Scriptures exhorted to justifica­tion, or to the parts thereof (which are not our Officia or duties, but Gods Beneficia) as wee are to the duties of sanctification, whereunto we being already justified and regenerated, doe cooperate with the Spir [...]t of grace.

§. IIII. Secondly, when we say it is an action of God, Imputing 2. An action of God without us. the righteousnesse of Christ and absolving the beleeving sinner, and accepting him, &c. wee consider it not as an action of God within us working a positive or reall change as in sanctification, but as an action of God without us. For it is a judiciall act of God, as the Iudge oppo [...]ed to [Page 4] condemning. And therefore as by his sentence hee doth condemne, that is, make wicked; so by his sentence hee doth justifie, that is, of guilty he maketh not guilty, [...], by his sentence God doth justifie, as Chrysostome and Oecumenius note upon Rom. 8. 33. where a judiciall pro­ceeding in the businesse of justification is plainely described. For there is mention of the accuser of Gods elect, there is God that justifieth, and none to condemne, there is the advocate and intercessor Verse 34. to plead for us. And as in condemning, though the hebrew word Hirshiah oppo­sed to justifying, signifieth to make wicked (for as Tsady is to be just, and Hitsdiq to make just, that is, to justifie; so Rashah to be wicked, and Hirshi­ah to make wicked, that is, to condemne) yet God by condemning doth not make a reall or positive change by infusion of wickednesse into the party whom by his sentence hee maketh wicked, that is, condemneth: so in justifying, though the word doe signifie to make righteous, yet the Lord doth not, Quatenus justificat, as he justifieth, worke a reall or po­sitive mutation in the party, whom by his sentence he maketh just, that is, justifieth, in respect of any inward dispositions or qualities, but onely a relative change or mutation in respect of his estate and condition be­fore God, and in respect of some relations to him. It is true, [...]hat in our justification we are of sinners made righteous; but the righteousnesse which we have by justification standeth in remission of sinne, and accep­tation or constitution of us as righteous, not in our selves, but in Christ: both which are wrought by imputation of his righteousnesse. It is true also, that whom God doth justifie, he doth also sanctifie. But in justification he doth not worke a reall change in the party, as he doth in sanctification. And this [...] in the like actions of God, viz. adoption, redemption, and reconciliation, which three in substance differ not from justification. For all agree in the not imputing of sinne Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Rom. 4. 5, 7. by imputation of Christs righteousnesse, but are diversified by certaine relations: all which concurre in justification, that men having their sinnes forgiven, whereby they had beene either the children of the de­vill, by adoption are made the sonnes of God; or the vassals and bond­slaves of sinne and Satan, are by redemption made the servants of God; or enemies to God, by their reconciliation become his favourites; or guilty of sinne and damnation, in their justification they are accepted as righteous in Christ▪ and consequently become Gods servants, Gods favourites, Gods sonnes; and if sonnes then also heires of eter­nall life. As therefore in adoption, redemption, reconciliation, there is no reall change made in the party, but onely a new relation acquired, of being a sonne and h [...]ire to the adoptour, a servant to the redeemer, a favourite to the reconciler, which before he was not: so neither in ju­stification is there a reall or positive change (as the Papists would have it) but [...] relative, or [...], that is, in relation, in respect of those relations even now mentioned; and in respect of his estat [...] and condi­tion before God; being in his justification translated from the estate of damnation, unto the state of salvation. Even as the councell of Trent, it selfe defineth Sess. 6. cap. 4. Vt sit translatio ab eo statu in quo homo nasci­tur silius primi Adami in statum grati [...] & adop­tionis filiorum Dei per secun▪ dum Adamum Jesum Christum salvatorem no­strum. justification to be a translation from that state [Page 5] wherein a man is borne the sonne of the first Adam, into a state of grace and adoption of Gods sonnes, through the second Adam Iesus Christ our Saviour, which is done without any reall change wrought in the party as hee is justified. For who before was guilty of sinne and damnation: the same man remaining a sinner in himselfe, and in himselfe worthy of dam­nation, is in his justification absolved from the guilt of sinne, and ac­cepted as r [...]teous in Christ, in whom also hee is made a servant, a fa­vourite, a sonne of God, and consequently (as I said in the definition) an heire of eternall life.

§. V. And yet we deny not, but that those whom God reconcilethJustification though it al­waies concur­reth with Gods gracious actions within us, yet it is carefully to be distinguished from them. unto himselfe, receiving them into his grace and [...]avour in Christ, them also he endueth in some measure with the graces of his Spirit: whom he adopteth to be his sonnes in Christ, them also he regenerateth by his holy Spirit: whom he redeemeth from the guilt of sinne, he also freeth from the dominion of sinne: and whom he justifieth by faith, he also sanctifieth by his Spirit, that is, whom he maketh just by imputation, them also he maketh just by infusion of righteousnesse: to whom he imputeth the merit of Christ his death and resurrection apprehended by faith, to them also he applieth the vertue and efficacie of Christs death and resurrection, both to mortifie sinne in them, and to raise them up to newnesse of life. By this doctrine we may trie our selves whether we be reconciled, redeemed, adopted, justified. For hereby it shall appeare, that God hath received us into his grace, if he hath also endued us with his grace. Chasidim, as they are called in the Scriptures, the favourites of God, are usually translated his holy ones, and all the faithfull, even in this life, are termed Saints. Hereby it will appeare, that we are redeemed from the guilt of sinne, if we be also freed from the dominion of sinne. Hereby it will appeare, that we are adopted, if [...] be also regeneratech Hereby it will appeare, that we are justified, if we [...]e also in some measure sanctified. But yet, howsoever these gra­ces [...]waies goe together, and cannot be severed: yet must we carefully distinguish betwixt the grace of God which is in himselfe, and his graces which are in us; betwixt the actions of Gods grace without us, and the actions of his grace within us. Wherefore, though adoption and regeneration, though receiving into grace and enduing with grace, though redeeming from the guilt and purging in some measure from the corruption of sinne, though justification and sanctification are alwaies unseparable companions: yet we may not with the Papists confound them, and so place the matter of justification, and merit of salvation in our selves, as they wickedly doe; but we are religiously to distinguish them, as they are in themselves truly and really distin­guished, to the praise of the glory, that is, the glorious praise of his grace, not of that which is in us, but of that which is in himselfe, whereby he hath graciously accepted us in his beloved, Ephes. 1. 6.Ephes. 1. 6.

§. VI. Thirdly, when we say it is an action of God imputing to a belee­ving Justification an action of God continued. sinner, &c. We consider it, not as a suddaine and momentany action, which is of no continuance, as if all our sinnes both past, present, [Page 6] and to come are remitted in an instant; but as an act of God conti­nued from our vocation, wherein the grace of faith is begotten in us, to our glorification, which is the end of our faith. For as this action of God is called the justification of a sinner; so, whiles we continue sin­ners, we have still need to be justified. And as we alwaies have sinne in this life: so, that it may not be imputed, we have need, that Christs righteousnesse should be imputed unto us: and that as we sinne daily, so Christ our advocate should continually make Heb. 7. 25. intercession for us: that notwithstanding our manifold slippes, whereinto through hu­mane frailety we fall; and notwithstanding those manifold infirmities and corruptions, which remaine in us as the relikes of originall sinne, we may be continued in the grace and favour of God, by the continued imputation of Christs righteousnesse, obtained by his continuall inter­cession for us. For therefore doth he continue his intercession for us, that our justification may bee continued to us: and that as wee sinne daily, so wee may daily seeke and obtaine pardon. But if justification should so be wrought once and at once, as that after that act wrought in an instance, we should no more be justified, nor no more neede remis­sion of sinne; then must we erroniously conceive, that the sinnes which after the first moment of our justification we doe commit, are actually remitted before they bee committed; whereas God forgiveth onely sinnes past, Rom. 3. 25. So shall we not onely set open a gap to all licen­tiousnesseRom. 3. 25. (for who will so feare to commit sinne as he ought, or when he hath committed it, so sue for the pardon thereof, who is perswaded beforehand that it is already remitted) but also shall open the mouthes of our adversaries, who will be ready to say, that we Protestants ought not to pray for remission of sinne, because in our opinion (as they say) we need it not: but to this calumniation of the Papist I have else­where The Covenant of Grace. Chap. 8. pag. 109. Whether Justifi­cation bee wrought but once and at once. answered.

§. VII. If it be said, that it is a received opinion among many, that justificatio simul & semel fit, that justification is wrought at once, and but once: I answere, that that assertion is not to be admitted without distinction, nor without good caution. The distinction is this: that there is a justification of a sinner before God in [...] coelesti, which pro­perly is called justification, and is that, which here I have defined: and there is a justification whereby a man already justified before God, is justified in foro conscienti [...], in the court of his owne conscience: which is not properly justification it selfe, but the assurance of it. To this latter that assertion of but once and at once cannot in any good sense, be applied. For neither is the full assurance of our justification attai­ned at once, but by degrees, wherein we are to labour and to give dili­gence to make, as our election and calling, so also our justification more and more sure unto us. Neither is it given but once. For by committing of any crime or any grievous sinne, by spirituall deserti­ons, by the [...]orcible temptations of Satan, this act of spirituall faith, which we call assurance, may be interrupted or lost for a time; and yet by repentance, by prayer and practise of pietie it may be recovered a­gaine; [Page 7] and therefore not given but once. To the former indeed it may be applied in both parts, but with a twofold caution: first, in respect of simul, at once, if it be understood as excluding degrees, and not con­tinuance. Namely, that we are not justified by degrees, and as it were by little and little, as though our justification were not perfect at the first. For no sooner doth a man truly beleeve in Christ, but the righte­ousnesse of Christ is imputed to him, and in and by that righteousnesse he standeth righteous before God, as well at the first, as at the last; that righteousnesse of Christ, by which he is justified, whether first, or last, being most perfect. Therefore the righteousnesse of justification can­not be increased, neither doth our justification before God admit de­grees, either in one and the same person, or yet in diverse men: howso­ever the assurance of justification, and the worke of sanctification, whereby we are to be renewed in the inner a Cor. 4. 16. man day by day have degrees, according to the degrees of our faith, and according to the measure of grace received. Secondly, when it is said that we are justified before God semel, but once, that also may be admitted, if by once be meant one continuall act. For as we are regenerated but once, because ut semel nascimur, ita semel renascimur: so faith, which is wrought in our regenera­tion is given but once. For that which Saint Iude saith, verse 3. of faith once given, is no lesse true of the habit, than of the doctrine of faith; which habit, being once had, is never utterly lost. For all they who have true faith, are borne of God, 1 Iohn 5. 1. Iohn 1. 12, 13. And those1 Iohn 5. 1. Iohn 1. 12, 13. 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 madeGal. 3. 2 [...]. Rom. 8. 17. 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 accordingThe Papists con­futed, who deny it either to be an action of God, or an action with­out us, or conti­nued. 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 [...]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.

[Page 8]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 theThe Causes of Justification. 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 Efficie [...]t causes are of two sorts, either principall or instrumen­tall. The principall is God, which I noted in the definition, when I said,The principall efficient. 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.Rom. 3. 26, 30. 4. 5, 6. 8. 30, 33. Gal. 3. 8. 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, Ia [...]. 4. 12. who hath power over our soules against whom wee sinne, Psalm. 51. 4. 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 recei­vedEsay 43. 25. 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 his2 Cor. 5. 19. [Page 9] beloved, Ephes. 1. 6. It is he alone, that forgiving our sinnes freeth us from hell, and giveth us right to his heave [...]ly kingdome. Which doctrineEphes. 1. 6. 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 1 Iohn 21. 2. and mediation of Christ, to whom alone our Saviour directeth us Matth. 6. 12. to sue for pardon. Secondly, it ministreth strong consolation to all the faithfull. For seeing it is God that justifieth them,Rom. 8. 33. who shall lay any thing to their charge? Who shall condemne, &c? Thirdly, it s [...]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.Exod. 34. 7. 7. which he appropriateth to himselfe, Esay 43. 25. and which no meereEsay 43. 25. man can without blasphemy arrogate to himselfe, Mark. 2. 7.Marke [...]. 7.

§. II. With the principall cause we are to joyne the considerationThe Motives. 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 Psalm. 6. 2. 123. 3. 31. 9.; 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 gr [...]cious and right [...] 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 C [...]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 In Rom. 3. 24. Scriptura sacra non dicit nos justificare per solam gratiam, sed per gratiam simul & iusti­tiam, sed utram­que Dei, hocest per gratiam Dei, & per iustitiam Dei, & non per justitiam homi­num. 2 Tim. 1. 9. 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 bee our righteousnesse. Secondly, because of his owne free grace he hath given us those meanes whereby the righteous­nesse [...] Ephes. 1. 6. Rom. 11. 5. Eph. 1. 5, 6. 2. 5. 8 2 Tim. 1. 9. of Christ might bee communicated unto us, as namely the Mini­stery of the Word and of the Sacraments. Thirdly, because of his grace hee blesseth those meanes unto us, working and encreasing in us the grace of faith by which we are justified: and las [...]ly, when we doe by faith, Ephes. 2. 8▪ which is his gift, b [...]leeve, hee freely imput [...]th unto us the righ­teousnesse of Christ, accepteth of us in him, and in him adopteth us to be his sonnes and heires of eternall life.The Lord is als [...] just, in justisy­ing a sinner. Rom. 3. 25, 26.

§. III. But as the Lord is gracious in justifying a beleeving sinner, so hee is also righteous, Rom. 3. 25, 26. For th [...]refore hath the Lord set [Page 10] forth his sonne and our Saviour to bee a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousnesse through the remission of sinnes that are past by the forbearance of God: to declare I say at this time his righteousnesse, that he might be just, and the Iustifier of him which be­leeveth in Iesus. For such is the righteousnesse of God, that hee forgi­veth no mans sinne for which his Iustice is not fully satisfied by Christ: neither doth hee accept of any as just, but such as by imputation of Christs righteousnesse are made just in him. The consideration of this justice of God in forgiving sinnes, doth afford singular comfort to the faithfull. For seeing the Lord forgiveth no sinne for which his justice is not satisfied; and seeing our Saviour hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father for the sinnes of all that beleeve in him: from hence we may be assured, that as there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus, so no punishment properly so called, that is, such a penalty as is inflicted in ordine justitiae, and by way of vengeance: because it cannot stand with the justice of God to punish the second time those sinnes in us, for which his justice is already fully satisfied in Christ.The actions of the three persons distinguished.

§. IV. But the actions of God the principall efficient of justificati­on are to bee distinguished, according to the distinction of the three Persons. For God the Father justifieth as the primary Cause and Au­thour: the Sonne as the meritorious cause: the holy Ghost as the cause applicatory, that is to say, God the Father through the Sonne doth ju­stifieThe Father. us by the holy Ghost. The Father, I say, as primary cause; and that in two respects; first, in that hee gave his onely begotten Sonne for us, and set him forth to be a [...] through f [...]ith in his blood, that all who beleeve in him should bee iustified, Rom. 3. 25. Ioh. 3. 16. Rom. 3. 25. Iohn 3. 16. Secondly, as the Iudge in absolving those that beleeve, and pronoun­cing them just in Christ. The Sonne, as the Mediatour and meritori­ousThe Sonne. cause; and that also in two respects. First, as he is our Surety, who paid our debt, and our Redeemer who laid downe the price of our re­demption for us, Esay. 53. 11. affording unto us the matter and merit ofEsay 53. 11. our justification. Secondly, as hee is our Intercessour and Advocate to plead for us, that his merits may be imputed to us, Rom. 8. 34. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Rom. 8. 34. 1 Iohn 2. 2. Heb. 7. 25. 9. 24. Heb. 7. 25. 9. 24. God the Father therefore justifieth, as the primary cause per authoritatem, as the Schoolemen speake; the Sonne, as the se­condaryEsay 53. 11. cause per ministerium. For so it is said, Esa. 53. 11. My righteous servant shall justifie many. The Father, as the Iudge; the Sonne, as the Mediator and Advocate. The Father, as the Creditour accepting Christs satisfaction for us: the Sonne, as the Surety paying our debt for us. But howsoever God the Father hath given his So [...]ne, and the Sonne hath given himselfe for us, and hath paid that price, and perfor­med that obedience which is sufficient for our justification: notwith­standing none are actually justified by the merits of Christ, but they onely to whom they are applyed. For although the sufferings of Christ be a precious salve to cure our soules; yet they will not heale us unlesse they bee applyed. And although his righteousnesse bee as a wedding garment to cover our nakednesse, yet it will not cover us, unlesse it bee [Page 11] put on. In the third place therefore the holy Ghost may also be said toThe holy Gh [...]st. justifie us, because hee doth apply unto us Christs merits unto our ju­stification; both as he is the Spirit of regeneration working in us the grace of faith, by which we receive Christ unto our justification in foro coelesti: and also as hee is the Spirit of adoption confirming our faith, and working in us the assurance of our justification, by which wee are justified in foro Conscientiae.

§. V. Now the meanes of this application, are instrumentall causesInstrumentall causes. of our justification, and doe justifie instrumentally. And these are of two sorts, viz. on Gods part, and on ours. For to effect this application, there must bee manus Dei offerentis, the hand of God offering, and ma­nus accipientis, the hand of the receiver. The instruments on Gods part, are the ministery of the Word and Sacraments, whereby the holy Ghost doth beget and confirme faith in us. In respect whereof Mini­stersThe Ministerie of the Gospell. are said to justifie men; Dan. 12. 3. For as touching the ministery of the Gospell: first, in it the benefit of the Messias, as namely reconcili­ation, adoption, and justification, &c. is revealed and offered to all that shall beleeve, and by it wee are stirred up to receive and embrace it. In which respect the preaching of the Gospell is called the ministery of re­conciliation; and the Ministers are Gods Embassadours sent to entreat men in Gods name and in Christs stead, that they would be reconciled2 Cor. 5. 18, 20. unto God, 2 Cor. 5. 18, 20. Secondly, the holy Ghost having thus by the ministery of the Gospell knocked at the doore of mens hearts, in his good time maketh it effectuall, opening their hearts Acts 16. 14. to give a lively and effectuall assent to the Gospell, whereby they receiving Christ and beleeving in him are justified. Thus faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10. 14, 17 the Word. And in this respect Preachers of the Gospell are said to be the1 Cor. 3. 5. Ministers by whom men doe beleeve, 1 Cor. 3. 5. Thirdly, in the prea­ching of the Gospell, seconded and made powerfull by the operation of the holy Ghost, the sentence of justification and remission of finnes, and consequently of salvation is pronounced and concluded in the consci­ence of the faithfull: when as out of the generall promise of the Gos­pell, Whosoever truely bel [...]eveth in Christ hath remission of sinnes, being by the Minister conditionally applyed to the hearer, and absolutely as­sumed by the beleever, after this manner, If thou, saith the Minister, doest truely beleeve in Christ, thou hast remission of sinnes and thouRom. 10. 9. shalt be saved, Rom. 10. 9. But I (saith the faithfull hearer) doe truely beleeve in Christ, my conscience bearing mee witnesse in the holy Ghost; this conclusion is inferred, as the verdict of the holy Ghost te­stifying with the conscience of the faithfull in the assumption, accor­ding to Gods Word contained in the proposition: therefore I have remission of sinnes, therefore I shall be saved. And in this sense Ministers are said to remit sinnes, Ioh. 20. 23. and consequently to justifie, when theyIohn 20. 23. doe pronounce remission of sinnes to them that beleeve and repent. And whatsoever they doe in this behalfe upon earth according to the Word, is ratified in heaven.

§. VI. As touching the Sacraments: in them first the benefit of theSacraments. [Page 12] Messias is represented before our eyes by the outward signes; where­upon the Sacrament is called Verbum visibile. Secondly, such is the Sa­cramentall union betweene the signe and the thing signified, that toge­ther with the signe the thing signified, that is, Christ with all his me­rits is offered in the lawfull use of the Sacrament. Thirdly, the benefit of the Messias is not only offered in the lawfull use together with the signe, but also conferd and given to every faithfull and worthy receiver. And hereof the Sacrament is a pledge given to the beleever, to assure him, that as the Minister doth give unto him the signe, so the Lord doth give unto him the thing signified. And in this sense every Sacrament is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith, Rom. 4. 11. annexed toRom. 4. 11. the promise of the Gospell, which by delivery of the Sacrament is par­ticularly applyed to every faithfull receiver, to assure him in particular of his justification and salvation by Christ. Thus the ministery of the Gospell is the meanes to beget faith, and the Sacraments the instru­ments to confirme the same. But the Papists deny both, for that faith is begotten in the ministery of the Word, and that so men attaine to re­mission of sinnes and justification, they say, it is a fiction of the heretikes of these times. Neither doe they grant that Sacraments are seales of righteousnesse, or that they were ordained to seale the promises unto us. But they hold them to bee such effectuall instruments as doe by ver­tue inherent in themselves conferre justifying grace (which they call gratiam gratum facientem) ex opere operat [...]. By which doctrine, a, they have turned Religion into a meere outward formality, according to the prophecy of them, 2 Tim. 3. 5. ascribing all the degrees of salvation to2 Tim. 3. 5. be atchieved in this life, viz. Vocation, Iustification, Sanctification to the externall use of the Sacraments; so they have made their do­ctrine of justification to bee an idle speculation, whereof in their pra­ctice there is little or no use. For to what purpose doe they dispute of justification, by vertuous preparations and gracious dispositions, when they teach that the Sacraments doe ex opere operato, that is, by the very performance of the outward act justifie the receiver, requiring in him neither any vertuous preparation, or gracious disposition, for without them hee is justified. Onely this caution they doe interpose, that hee doe not ponere obicem mortalis peccati, that hee put not the obstacle of mortall sinne. For if those things should necessarily be required, then the Sacraments should conferre grace, not ex opere operato, as they stifly hold, but ex opere operantis. So much of the hand of the giver.

§. VII. The instrument on our part which is, as it were, manus Faith the instru­ment to receive. accipientis, the hand of the receiver, is the grace of justifying faith; which I noted in the definition, when I said, that the Lord imputeth the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner. Now as touching saith, di­vers things are to be considered. For first, it is said to justifie, not as it1. Faith justisi­eth not as it is an habit or gift in us, but as it is the hand [...]o re­ceive Christ. g De Justif. l. 1. cap. 17. is a qualitie or habite in us, as the Papists teach; ipsa fides, saith g Bellar­mine, censetur esse justitia, faith it selfe is accounted to be justice, and it [...]elfe is imputed unto righteousnesse, Rom. 4. 5. for so it is a part of san­ctification; but as it is the instrument, and, as it were, the hand to re­ceive [Page 13] Christ, who is our righteousnesse. For if we should be justified by faith as it is an habit in us properly, then we should be justified by habi­tuall and inherent righteousnesse, which hereafterLib. 4. I shall fully disprove­And if we be not justified by it, as it is an habit, then much lesse as it is an act, as [...] and his followers teach; as though [...] ipsum credere, did properly justifie. Which opinion is worse than the other. For faith doth justifie (as hereaster shall be proved) as the instrument only; but it is the instrument, not as it is an act, but as it is an habit producing that act: and therefore it is said that we are justified by faith, and that faith is impu­tedRom. 4. 5. unto righteousnesse. But if wee should bee justified by it, as it is an act, then we should be justified by our owne workes: which hereaf­terLib. 4. & 7. is also to be confuted: and further, if we were justified by it, as it is an act, then we should be no longer justified actually than we doe actu­ally beleeve, [...] so there should bee an intercision of justification (which I proved before to be a continued act) so ost as there is an in­termission of the act of faith; which is ridiculous. Againe, if wee should be justified by faith, either as it is an habit, or an act in sensu pro­prio; as they speake, and not relatively or metonymically; then should we be justified by one habit alone, or by the act of one habit: and con­sequently by a partiall and most unperfect righteousnesse. When it is certaine that all the habits and acts of grace, which are in the best, con­curring together are not. sufficient to justifie a man before God for the reasons hereafter to be delivered, lib. 4. & 7. It is true, that faith is im­puted for righteousnesse, and is accepted of God, as the perfect per­formance of the whole law: but this is to bee understood relatively in respect of the object received by faith, that is, Christ, who is the endRom. 10. 5. and complement of the Law to all that beleeve; insomuch that who­soever truly beleeveth in Christ, hath fulfilled the Law.Secòndly, it must be such a faith às doth specially apprehend and embrace Christ.

§. VIII. 2. is the consequent of the former. For if faith doth justifie onely as it is an hand or instrument to apprehend and receive Christ, then justifying faith must be such a faith as doth apprehendOf this see mo [...]e, Lib 6. c. 4., receive and embrace Christ, which is not done, neither by the implicite, nor the un­formed, nor the bare historical and generall faith of the Papists; but it is done first by a lively and effectuall assent to the speciall doctrine concer­ning justification and salvation by Christ, which is the condition of the Evangelicall promise; and then by a sound application of the promise to our selves, as having that condition. For by a lively and effectuall be­leefe we receive and embrace Christ, not only in our judgements by a willing and firme assent, being undoubtedly perswaded and assured thathe is the Saviour of all that truly beleeve in him; but also in our hearts by an hungring desire to be made partakers of him, and in our wils by resolving, both to acknowledge him to be our Saviour, and also to rest upon him for salvation. Having this lively assent, which is the con­dition of the promise, we are to apply the promise to our selves, as be­longing to us. By the former degree we are justified, before God in foro coelesti; by the latter, we are justified in foro conscientiae, in the court of our owne conscience. By the former, we are justified properly; by the lat­ter, [Page 14] we are not properly justified, but are in some measure assured of our justification. By the former I doe effectually beleeve, that Iesus is the Saviour; by the latter I doe truely beleeve, that hee is my Saviour. That faith therefore which doth justifie, doth specially apprehend, and apply Christ: and the proper objectSee Lib. 6. c. 6. §. 2. of faith, as it justifieth, is Christ, or the promise of salvation by Christ; and therefore is often called faith in Christ, or the faith of Christ. For although by that faith, which justifieth, I beleeve all the articles of Christian religion, and every truth revealed by God in his word; yet I am not justified properly by belee­ving any other truth, but onely by beleeving the truth; neither is the promise of justification and salvation made to any other beleefe, but onelyIoh. 3. 16. Act. 16. 30, 31. Fat h do. h not dispose to justi­ficatio [...], but it do. h actually justifie. to faith in Christ.

§. IX. Thirdly, by this faith apprehending and receiving Christ, we are not prepared onely and disposed to justification, as the Papists absurdly teach, affirming that faith doth justifie, even as servileBellarm. de justificat. lib. 1. ca 13. §. Secun da dispositio. feare doth, by preparing onely and disposing; for then a man indued with justifying faith, might be as farre from justification, as he that is posses­sed with servile feare. But how can these two assertions be reconciled, that faith doth justifie by disposing onely as a preparative di [...]position, and yet that it justifieth formally as an habit infused, and as a part of in­herent [...]ustice. But the truth is, that by a true justifying faith we are not prepared onely, but wee are actually justified. For no sooner doth a man beleeve by a true justifying faith, but he is justifiedAct. 13. 39. and entitled unto the kingdome of heaven. As soone as he doth beleeve, he is transla­tedIoh. 5. 24. from death to life, yea, so soone he hathIoh. 6. 47. eternall life, that is, hee hath jus, right unto the heavenly kingdome.

§. X. Fourthly, when wee say that faith doth justifie, wee doe notFaith doth not justifie absolute­ly in respect of its owne worth, but relatively in respect of the object. meane that it justifieth absolutely or in respect of its owne worth and dignity; and much lesse, that it doth merit justification, either as it is an habit, or as it is an act, but relatively in respect of the object which it doth apprehend, that is, Christ, who is our righteousnesse For seeing faith doth receive Christ and make us partakers of him, therefore all those benefits which wee receive from Christ are attributed in the holy Scriptures to Faith: as to justifie, to saveSee Lib. 6. cap. 4. §. 6., &c. not, that these effects are to bee ascribed to the vertue of faith absolutely, but relatively in respect of the object. So when it was said to the woman, thyLuk. 7. 50. faith hath saved thee, the meaning is, Christ received by faith hath saved thee. Thus by the faith of Peter and Iohn the Creeple was cured, Act. 3. 6. yet not byAct. 3. 6. 12. [...]6. any power or holinesse of theirs, vers. 12. But the name of Christ, that is, Christ himselfe, by faith in his name, as the instrument, did cure him, vers. 16. so the name of Christ by faith in his name doth justifie and save, Act. 10. 43. Iohn 20. 31. And that faith doth not justifie in respect ofAct. 10. 43. Ioh. 20. 31. its owne worth appeareth by this evidence, because the faith of divers men, though unequall in degrees doth justifie alike, and therefore is called [...], of equall value, as Saint Peter speaketh of all the faithfull to whom he writeth, 2 Pet. 1. 1. [...],2 Pet. 1. 1. that is, as the Latine interpreter translateth, to them [Page 15] that have obtained coequall faith with us in the righteousnesse of our God and Saviour Iesus Christ. For it is not faith properly, which doth justifie, but the righteousnesse of Christ, received by faith. The almes received by a weake hand releeveth the party, as well as that which is received by a strong hand: because it is not the hand properly which releeveth, but the almes. And for the same cause the righteousnesse of justification is equall in all that are justified, neither doth it in the same persons ad­mit of degrees. For it is the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ, to which, considered as created and finite, nothing can bee added.

§. XI. Fifthly, from hence we learne the true meaning of that questi­on,The meaning of the question, whether by faith, or by workes. whether we be justified by faith or by workes, not as opposing the in­ward grace of faith to the outward acts of obedience, which indeed are the fruits of faith: but as opposing the righteousnesse of Christ appre­hended by faith, to that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves, and performed by our selves.

§. XII. Sixthly, when we say that faith doth justifie alone, two thingsHow faith is said to justifie alone. are implyed: First, that we are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith, and not by any righteousnesse in herent in us. Secondly, that this righteousnesse of Christ, by which alone wee are justified, is apprehended by faith onely. Not that justifying faith is or can bee alone: but because there being many graces in the faithfull, which all have their severall commendations; yet none of them serveth to apprehend Christs righteousnesse, but faith onely, and yet that faith which is alone, severed from all other inward graces, and outward obe­dience, doth not justifie either alone or at all; because it is not a true and [...] lively, but a counterfeit and a dead faith. For even as the eye among all the parts of the body, which all have their severall uses, hath onely the faculty of seeing: and yet that eye which is separated from the rest of the parts, doth see neither alone nor at all, because it is but the carcase of an eye. So among all the graces of the soule, it is the of­fice of faith alone, as the eye of the soule, to looke upon him that was figured by the brazen Serpent: yet if it should bee severed from the rest, it were dead. For as Saint Iames Ia [...]. 2. 17. saith, that faith which is alone and by it selfe is dead. And as the eye, in respect of being, is not alone, yet in respect of seeing it is alone: so faith which is not alone, doth ju­stifie alone.

§ XIII. Seventhly, and lastly, when we say that faith doth justifieFaith doth not sanctifie alone. alone, wee were never so absurd, as the Papists absurdly charge us, as if wee meant, that faith alone doth sanctifie. For although nothing in us doth conferre with faith to the act of justification as any cause thereof, (in which sense wee say, it justifieth alone) yet in the subject; that is, the party justified, many graces doe concurre with faith, as the necessary fruits thereof; wherein, as also in our obedience, our sanctification stan­deth, wherefore faith, which justifieth alone, is but one of those many graces, wherein besides our obedience, our sanctification doth consist.

CAP. III. Of the Essentiall causes of Iustification; viz. The matter and the forme.

§. I.

BUt let us come to the essentiall causes of justification, thatThe matter and forme of justi­fication, what they are. is to say, the matter and the forme. The matter of justifi­cation, considered as it is an action of God, is that which the Lord imputeth unto us for righteousnesse, and ac­cepteth as our righteousnesse, and that is the righteous­nesse of Christ, which I noted in the definition, when I said, imputing to a beleeving sinner the righteousnesse of Christ. The Papists confounding not onely justice and justification, but also the matter (which is the ma­teriall cause) and the subject; say, that the matter of justification is the soule ofBellarm. de ju­stifi. lib. cap. 2. man, or at the least the will of man; because that is the seat of justice, whereas indeed of justification, though passively understood, not the soule or the will is the subject, but the person or the whole man. For justification is totius suppositi, of the person, and not of any part or faculty of man. But for the better clearing of this point, let us briefly consider other not unlike actions: First, when Rebecca arrayed or clo­thed her sonne Iacob with the raiment of Esau her elder sonne, the mat­ter of this action was that, which being applyed unto him, did clothe him, viz. Esau's garment: the forme of that action was the applying of it to him, which was the indution or putting it on. For she clothed him by putting upon him Esau's garment. So the Lord justifieth us by putting upon us our eldest brothers righteousnesse, which is our wed­ding garment. Which similitude is used not only by SaintDe Jacob. & vitabeat. l. 2. cap. 6. Ambrose, but also by Pighius himselfe, as heereafterLib. 5. cap. 4. sect. 4. shall bee shewed. The mat­ter therefore of justification is Christs righteousnesse: the forme is the imputing thereof. Secondly, the actions of redemption, recon­ciliation and justification in substance are the same. As therefore the Lord redeemeth us, and reconcileth us by applying unto us and accep­ting for us the righteousnesse and merits of Christ, as the [...], or price of ransome, and as the propitiation; for God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe, 2 Cor. 5. 19. so hee justifieth us, by applying unto us and accepting for us, the same righteousnesse and merits of Christ, as our righteousnesse. As the matter therefore of our redemption is the [...], or price of ransome which Christ payed for us; the matter of reconciliation is the propitiatory sacrifice which Christ offered for us; the matter of justification is Christs righteousnesse which hee had and performed for us: so the forme of redemption, as it is Gods action, is the applying unto us the price of ransome which Christ payed, and the [Page 17] accepting of it in our behalfe; the forme of reconciliation, the ap­plying unto us the propitiation made by Christ, and accepting of it in our behalfe; the forme of justification, the applying or imputing of Christs righteousnesse unto us, and accepting it in our behalfe. In like manner the Papists, if they would consider Iustification as an action of God, should according to their owne doctrine conceive, that of their first justification; whereby as they teach, a sinner is made righteous by infusion of righteousnesse; the matter is the righteousnesse infused or inherent, the forme the infusion thereof: because according to their doctrine, the Lord in the first justification maketh a man righteous by infusion of righteousnesse. The Papists confesse after a sort, the righte­ousnesse of Christ to bee the merit of justification, but they deny it to be the matter thereof, whereas indeed it is both: the matter, as justification is the act of God imputing it; the merit, as justification is passively un­derstood, because for it wee are justified: the matter, I say, of Gods justifying us; the merit of our being justified. And this may appeare by the contrary: For justification, as hath beene said, and shall bee proved, is opposedMatth. 12. 37. Rom 8. 33. 1 King. 8. 32. to condemnation. As therefore sinne is not one­ly the matter of condemnation, which is the imputation of sinne; but also the merit both of the sentence, and of the punishment by the sen­tence awarded: so the righteousnesse of Christ is both the matter of justification, as being that which God imputeth to us; and also the merit both of the sentence of absolution, and of eternall life, unto which we are accepted.

§. II. But of the matter and forme of justification, whereof I amOf the matter and forme di­stinctly. hereafter to treat at large; of the matter, in the whole fourth booke; of the forme, in the fifth, I will here onely set downe briefly the ortho­dox doctrine of the reformed Churches, and maintaine it against the private opinions of some protestant Divines, who are not sound in these points.

The matter of justification is that righteousnesse, wherein wee standThe matter is that which is called the righ­teousnesse of God. perfectly righteous before God. This in many places is called the righ­teousnesse of God. As Rom. 1. 17. 3. 21. 10. 3. 2 Cor. 5. 21. 2 Pet. 1. 1. And is therefore called the righteousnesse of God, because it is the righteousnesse of that person, who is God,See Lib. 4. c. 2. §. 2. and therefore is not our righteousnesse, but his; not infused into us, but inherent in his per­son,Whether this righteousnesse of God be the righ­teousnesse of the Godhead. and imputed to us, being without us in him. Heare then wee are to consider whether this righteousnesse of God be the righteousnesse of Christ, as hee is God, or as hee is mediator betwixt God and man,1 Tim [...] 5. the man Christ Iesus. The righteousnesse of Christ, as he is God, is the essentiall righteousnesse of the Godhead. By which dwelling in man, Osiander supposed them to be justified. But this, being the essentiall and uncreated righteousnesse of God, which is his essence, and there­fore himselfe, cannot be the righteousnesse of any who is not God; and therefore if we should be justified thereby, we should also bee deified. Againe, the essentiall righteousnesse of God, being the essence of God and the very Godhead, cannot be communicated to any creature, much [Page 18] lesse can it become the accidentall righteousnesse of a creature. And farther, it being the righteousnesse of the Godhead, is the common righteousnesse of the whole Trinity, the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost. And therefore if we should be justified thereby, we should be justified by the righteousnesse of the Father, and of the holy Ghost, as well as by the righteousnesse o [...] the Sonne.

§. III. It is not therefore the righteousnesse of the Godhead. Is itWhether it be the righteous­nesse of the Manhood. then the righteousnesse of the Manhood? I answer, it is the righteous­nesse of Christ our Mediator, who is both God and man which he in his humanity had and performed in the dayes of his flesh for us. And this is to bee understood not of a part but of the whole righteousnesse of Christ, which was either inherent in the man Christ, or performed by him; whether to fulfill the Commandements, or to satisfie the Curse of the Law for us. This righteousnesse of Christ (that I may speake more distinctly of it) is either negative (if I may so speake) or positive. By the negative, I understand an absence of all sinnes and vices forbid­den in the Law. By the positive, I meane both a presence of all vertues and duties required to the perfect fulfilling of the Commandements, and also of the voluntary suffering of the penalty to satisfie the commi­nation and curse of the Law. The Negative is that, which wee call the innocencie of Christ, whereof the Scriptures speake in many places:The innocencie of Christ. signifying that he was not onely blamelesse, free in himselfe from all im­putation of sinne, being [...], unreproveable, [...], unblameable Iohn 8. 46. 1 Pet. 1. 19. but also spotlesse, free from all infection ofIohn 8. 46. 1 Pet. 1. 19. 1 Pet. 1. 19. Heb. 7. 26. 1 Pet. 2. 22, 23. sinne, as being [...] without spot, 1 Pet. 1. 19. [...], harme­lesse and undefiled, Heb. 7. 26. one, who never did, nor sp [...]ke evill, 1 Pet. 2. 22, 23. nor ever offended in thought, but was absolutely and in all respects [...], without sinne, Heb. 4. 15. as one2 Cor 5. 21. who knewHeb. 4. 15. no sinne.

§. IV. The positive righteousnesse of Christ, is twofold, his per­fectChrists positive righteousnesse. fulfilling of all things commanded in the Law, and his perfect sa­tisfaction in respect of the punishment threatned. The former is the holinesse of Christ, which the Apostle calleth the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ, Rom. 8. 2. which is also twofold, the holinesse of his na­ture,Rom. 8. 2. which is his habituall righteousnesse: the holinesse of his life and conversation, which is his actuall obedience. The holinesse of his Na­ture,The holinesse of his Nature. in that being conceived of the holy Ghost, and sanctified by him Matth. 1. 22. Luk. 1. 35. hee was also adorned with all vertues andMatth. 1. 22. Luk. 1. 35. Iohn 3. 34. graces, and that without measure, Iohn 3. 34. In respect whereof hee was said to be annointed with the oyle of gladnesse above his fellowes, Psalm. 45. 7. for he was full of the Spirit, Esai. 11. 2. full of grace andPsal. 45. 7. Esai. 11. 2. Ioh. 1. 14. truth, Iohn 1. 14. full, I say, not plenitudine vasis, in which sense fome of the faithfull have beene said to have beene full of the holy Ghost, and full of grace; but plenitudine fontis, for of his fulnesse wee receive even grace for grace, Iohn 1. 16. according to the measure of the donationIohn 1. 16. Ephes. 4. 7. of Christ, Ephes. 4. 7. The holinesse of Christs life was that wherebyThe holinesse of his lise. he continued in all the things which were written in the booke of the [Page 19] Law to doe them, and that for us. For he came not to breake the Law,Matth. 5. 1 [...]. Matth. 3. 15. Ioh. 8. 29. Rom. 8. 4. Esay 53. 11. Act 4. 27. Heb. 7. 26. 1 Ioh. 2. 20. Apoc. 3. 7. Act 3. 14. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Act. 2. 27. Dan. 9. 24. but to fulfill it, Matth. 5. 17. He fulfilled all righteousnesse, Matth 3. 15. and alwayes did those things which please God, Ioh. 8. 29. Hee perfor­med in his flesh [...], whatsoever the Law requireth to justifi­cation, Rom. 8. 4. and therefore most worthily is hee often called in the Scriptures not only righteous and holy, as Esay 53. 11. Act. 4. 27. Heb. 7. 26. 1 Ioh. 2. 20. Apoc. 3. 7. but also the just and the holy, Act. 3. 14. the just, 1 Ioh. 2. 2. the holy one of God, Act. 2. 27. the holy of holies, Dan. 9. 24.

The other part of Christs positive righteousnesse is his passive obe­dience, which is called Obedientia Crucis, the obedience of the Crosse,His passive righ­teousnesse. Phil. 2. 8. wherein hee willingly submitted himselfe to endure those punishments for us, which might satisfie the Iustice of God, and the sentence of the Law for our sinnes, as it is said, Phil. 2. 8. Hee humbled himselfe and be­came obedient to the death, even the death of the Crosse, and Gal. 3. 13.Gal. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, himselfe being made a curse for us. Now this passive obedience appeareth not onely in his death and passion, though in that principally, but also in all other his sufferings which hee voluntarily sustained for us in the whole course of his life, as2 Cor. 8 9. poverty,Heb. 12. 2. shame,Esay 53. 3. sorrow, &c. The matter therefore of our ju­stification is that whole righteousnesse, which was either inherent in the man Christ, or performed by him; whether to fulfill the commande­ments, or to satisfie the curse of the Law for us.

§ V. This righteousnesse of Christ our Mediatour, though inhe­rentThe righteous­nesse of Christ by which wee are justified is the righteous­nesse of God. in the humane nature and performed by it, yet is most truely, and to us most comfortably called (according to that kinde of phrase which is termed [...], the communication of properties) the righteous­nesse of God, because it is the righteousnesse of that Person, which is God; who, though a branch of David according to the flesh, is Iehovah our righteousnesse, Ier. 23. 6. God above all blessed for evermore, Rom. 9. 5.Ier. 23. 6. Rom. 9. 5. Act. 3. 15. In this sense the Iewes are said to have killed the Author of life, Act. 3. 15. and to have crucified the Lord of Glory, 1 Cor. 2. 8. For as the bles­sed VirginLuk. 1. 43. is said to be [...], the Mother of God, because she is the Mo­ther1 Cor. 2. 8. of that Person who is God: so the righteousnesse of our Mediator, who is both God and man, is called the righteousnesse of God; be­cause it is the righteousnesse of that Person, who is perfect God. Thus that blood, by which wee are redeemed, is called the blood ofAct. 2 [...]. 28. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. 3. 16. God, Act. 20. 28. or, which is all one, the blood of the Sonne of God, 1 Ioh. 1. 7. The life which was laid downe for us, was the life of God, 1 Ioh. 3. 16. the death by which wee are reconciled to God, is the deathRom. 5. 10. of his Sonne, Rom. 5. 10. the obedience by which wee are constituted just, Rom. 5. 19. is the obedience of the same Sonne of God; who be­ingRom. 5. 19. God coequall with his Father, humbled himselfe and became obe­dient to his Father even unto death, Phil. 2. 6, 8. and being the SonnePhil. 2. 6, 8. of God, was made subject to the Law, that hee might redeeme those that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sonnes, Gal. 4. 4. 5.Gal. 4. 4, 5.

[Page 20]§ VI. This doctrine of the Gospell, that the righteousnesse, byThe consort a­rising from this doctrine. which we are justified, is the righteousnesse of God, is the chiefe stay of our faith, and the principall foundation of our comfort. For hereby wee understand, his sufferings to bee an all-sufficient satisfaction to re­deeme us from hell, and his obedience of all-sufficient merit to entitle us unto the kingdome of heaven. And that wee might know undoub­tedly, that his sufferings were the sufferings of God, and his obedience the obedience of God, that is, of him that is God; therefore by his di­vine Spirit, by which hee had offered himselfe to God, Heb. 9. 14. he raised him­selfe from death to life, and to 1 Pet. 1. 21. glory; by which his resurrection, hee was mightily declared to be the Sonne Rom. 1. 4. of God, that our faith and hope might bee in God. For had not Christ risen from the dead, it had beene a plaine evidence of his not being God; and then our faith 1 Cor. 15 14. 17. were va [...]ne, and we should yet remaine in our sinnes. But seeing Iesus Christ, who is of God made unto us 1 Cor. 1. 30. righteousnesse, is God, even Ier. 23. 6. Iehovah our righteousnesse, hence wee learne, that the righteousnesse, by which we are justified, is the righteousnesse of God; and consequently of in­finite price and merit. For although the Godhead of Christ neither obeyed, nor suffered any thing for us: yet seeing the person, which obey­ed and suffered, was and is not onely man, but also God: therefore the Godhead affordeth such d [...]gnity, vertue, efficacy and merit to the obe­dience and sufferings of his Manhood; as that his sufferings are an all­sufficient price of ransome, and satisfaction for the sinnes of the whole world, as being the sufferings of God, and therefore of infinite value: and his holinesse and obedience being the righteousnesse of God, and therefore of infinite merit, and farre surpassing the righteousnesse of all men and Angels; maketh all those, to whom it is imputed, most perfect­ly righteous before God in Christ. Wherefore they who are clothed with this royall robe of Christs righteousnesse (as all the faithfull are) may with boldnesse appeare before the judgement seat of God, because they stand just before him, not in their owne righteousnesse, which is unperfect; but in the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ, against which no just exception can be taken. After this righteousnesse there­fore of Christ wee ought to hunger Matth. 5. 6. and thirst; after this righteous­nesse of God Matth. 6. 33. wee ought principally to seeke▪ to obtaine this most precious Matth. 13. 46. pe [...]rle, we are to forgoe all that we have, esteemimg our owne righteousnesse (in the question of justification, if it should be obtruded as the matter thereof) and whatsoever else of ours might seeme to bee an advantage unto us, or praise-worthy among men, as polluted Esay 64. 6. clouts, as Phil. 3. 7, 8. 9. dung, and the opinion of our owne worthinesse and righ­teousnesse as Phil. 3. 7, 8. 9. losse, so we may obtaine that pearle; and that wee gain­ing Christ may bee found in him, not as having our owne righteous­nesse, which is that which is prescribed in the [...]aw, but that which is by the faith of Christ, the righteousnesse which is of God by faith, that is the righteousnesse of Christ which is imputed of God, being appre­hended by faith. Now that this righteousnesse of God is the matter of our justification before God, and not any righteousnesse inher [...]nt in us, [Page 21] or performed by us, I shall prove at large in my fourth and seventh Bookes. Here onely I alleage the plaine testimonies of the holy Ghost,1 Cor. 1. 30. that Christ is made unto us of God our righteousnesse, 1 Cor. 1. 30 that hee is Ier. 23. 26. Iehovah our righteousnesse, and that by his blood wee are justified and absolved from our sinnes, Rom 5. 9. and by his obedience,Rom. 5. 9. 19. opposite to Adams disobedience, wee are made or constituted just, Rom. 5. 19.

§ VII. The formall cause of justification is the imputation of Christs The formall cause. Imputation of Christs righ­teousnesse. righteousnesse, because by imputing it the Lord doth justifie; which [...] expressed in the definition. And this necessarily followeth upon that which hath beene said of the matter. For it cannot bee imagined how we should be justified by that righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him, otherwise than by imputation. For even as wee were made sinners by Adams personall Rom. 5. 19. disob [...]dience; so wee a [...]e made righteous by the obedience of Ch [...]ist. But how could we either be made sinners by Adams disobedience, or justified by the obedience of Christ, whe­ther active or passive, unlesse they were communicated unto us. How could they possibly bee communicated unto us, being both transient, and having now no being? For true is that saying of a learned Philo­sopher, [...]ul. Scaliger. de su [...]til. Motus non est nisi dum fit; postquam factus est, non est: A mo­tion (whether it be action or passion) hath no bei [...]g, but whiles it is in doing or suffering; after it is done, it hath no being. Adams tranl gression was transient, and is past and gone so many thousand yeeres past: the active obedience of Christ was transient, and so was his pas­sive obedience, which had a being in rerum natura, no longer than they were in doing and in sus [...]ring. How then can either Adams disobedi­ence, or Christs obedience be communicated unto us? I answer, in re­spect of both, as Bellarmine De amiss gra­tia & statu pecc. lib. 5. cap. 17. § Itaque. answereth in respect of the former. Communi­catur eo modo, quo communicari potest, id quod trans [...]it, nimirum per imputati­onem: It is communicated after that manner, whereby that may be com­municated which is transient and gone, to wit, by imputation.

§. VIII. The same Bellarmine De Justif. l. 2. sect. cap 7. sect. Quarto &c. 10. sect. De­inde. with other Papists doth confesse, that the satisfaction of Christ is imputed unto us; but the imputation of his righteousnesse they deny, when as indeed the imputation of Christs [...]atisfaction, is the imputation of his righteousnesse, for what is Christs satisfaction but that whereby hee [...]ully satisfied the Law, and consequently the justice of God for us, which he did both in respect of the penalty, which he fully satisfied by Esai. 53. 11. bearing our iniquities; and al­so of the commandements, by fulfilling them: the former, is the obe­dience of the crosse, or his passive righteousnesse; the latter, is his con­formity to the Law, which is both his habituall and actuall righteous­nesse. By the former, he freeth us from hell▪ by the latter, he doth enti­tle us to the kingdome of heaven. But the meaning of the Papists is, that Christ by his satisfaction doth free us from hell; but as for heaven, we must attaine to it by our owne merits, as if there needed not so great a price to purchase heaven, as to redeeme from hell. But it is certaine, that there is required as infinite merit to purchase heaven, as there is [Page 22] required infinite satisfaction to redeeme from hell. In respect of both God accepteth of no righteousnesse to our justification, that is, either to free us from hell, or to entitle us unto the Kingdome of Heaven, but that which is of infinite value; because the offence of sinne, for which satisfaction is to be made, is infinite, and because the reward which is to be merited, is of infinite worth. But, that righteousnesse may bee of infinite value, it is not necessary, as Bellarmine De justificat. lib. 2. cap. 5. in fine. himselfe teacheth, that it should be infinite in it selfe; but it is sufficient, that it bee the righteousnesse of an infinite person. And such is the righteousnesse of Christ, as being the righteousnesse of him, that is, God; such is not the righteousnesse of any meere creature: which is an invincible argument, as hereafter shall bee shewed, to prove that wee are justified not by any righteousnesse in our selves, but onely by imputation of Christs righteousnesse.

§. IX. And yet this imputation of Christs righteousnesse (withoutImputation of Christs righte­ousnesse denied not onely by Pa­pists, but also by some others. which there can be no salvation) is denied, not onely by the Papists, but by some others hereafter to be mentioned in the fifth chapter of this booke; who seeme to have beene drawne to this opinion by this argu­ment of the Papists; which I will therefore in this place answer, for their satisfaction. If (say they) Christs righteousnesse and merits, where­byThe reason of their denia [...] confuted. hee redeemeth and saveth men should bee imputed unto us, then should we thereby become Saviours and redeemers of others: but this latter is false; therefore the former. Answere: I deny the consequence of the proposition; for first, when we say, that we are justified by impu­tation of Christs righteousnesse, our meaning is this, that the Lord accepteth for us, and in our behalfe, the obedience and m [...]rits of Christ, as if we had performed the same for our selves in our owne persons. For as the merit of Christ is the common price of redemption sufficient for the salvation of all universally, so it is the price for every particu­lar; and so is applyed to every particular, not as the common price re­deeming all, but as the price of those soules in particular, to whom it is particularly applyed. Secondly, the efficacie, or effect of imputation dependeth upon the will of the imputer, and therefore the force of it cannot be extended further than he extendeth it; which is the justifica­tion of the parties to whom it is imputed, but no further. Thirdly, the consequence of the proposition doth no more follow, than if I should argue thus: If by imputation of Adams transgression others are made guilty of sinne and damnation, then they to whom Adams transgression is imputed are made the cause and fountaine of sinne and damnation in all others; but of the first and second Adam we should conceive, not as of private men; but the first Adam is to be considered, as the root of mankind, in whom when he fell, all sinned. The second, as the head of all that shall be sa [...]ed, in whom, as the head communicating his merits to his members, all the faithfull have (as his members) fulfilled the Law, and satisfied the justice of God for themselves. The head and the body, saith Sum. 3. p. q. 48. art. 2. & q 49. ar̄t. 1. Caput & membrum sunt quasi una perso na mystica: & ideo satisfactio Christi ad omnes fideles pertinet, sicut ad [...]ua membra. Thomas Aquinas, are as it were one mysticall person, and there­fore the satisfaction of Christ belongeth to all the faithfull, as to his [Page 23] members: the Lord accepting in their behalfe the obedience and Merits of Christ, as if they had performed the same in their owne persons, not for others, but for themselves. And therefore by imputation of Christs righteousnesse they are not redeemers, but redeemed. For though Christ, who is the Saviour of his body, communicate to his members his obedience, yet not his Headship, nor his Mediatorship, in respect whereof hee was and is both God and man. Man, to doe and suffer: God, to give infinite value and worth to that which his Person did or suffered, for the justification and salvation of all those to whom his righteousnesse should bee communicated and imputed; but not to make them redeemers and Saviours of others. The righteousnesse of the head is of sufficient vertue to justifie and redeeme all the members to whom it is imputed; but being imputed, the merit thereof exten­deth no further, than to what end it is imputed; that is, to save the member, not to make it a Saviour, nor to confound the members with the head, nor to take away the proportion, that is and ought bee be­tweene the head and the members. Fourthly, to the Papists, who con­fesse Christs satisfaction to be imputed unto us, I returne the like argu­ment. If Christs satisfaction, whereby he redeemed mankind bee im­puted unto us, then are we also redeemers of mankind: But they will not, not cannot inferre, that therefore we are redeemers, but that wee among others are redeemed.

§. X. But that we are justified onely by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse, I shall by the helpe of God, fully prove hereafter in my whole fifth booke. Here onely for a tast, I will but point at two argu­menss,Rom. 4. 5. 6. 11. the former out of Rom. 4. 5. 6. 11. the basis or ground whereof is this, that whom the Lord justifieth, to them he imputeth righteousnesse. Now this righteousnesse is either the parties owne, or of another. Not their owne, for they are sinners, and being sinners they cannot bee justi­fied by righteousnesse inherent, but righteousnesse is imputed to them without workes, that is, without respect of any obedience performed by themselves. Therefore it is the righteousnesse of another: That other is no other, nor can be any other, but Christ onely; therefore by im­putation of his righteousnesse we are justified. The second shall bee out of 2 Cor. 5. 21. As Christ was made sinne for us, so are wee made2 Cor. 5. 21. the righteousnesse of God in him. By imputation of our sinne to him, Christ, who knew no sinne, was made sinne, and a sinner for us; there­fore by imputation of his righteousnesse, which here is called the righ­teousnesse of God, we who are sinners in our selves are made righteous, not in our selves, but in him.

CAP. IV. Whether wee are justified by the passive righteous­nesse of Christ only.

§. I.

NOw I come to the private opinions of some of our DivinesThe private opi­nions of some Divines concerning the matter of justification. concerning the matter and some of our justification. For some as touching the matter, doe hold that we are justifi­ed by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely. Of these men, some doe not hold the matter of justification to bee the passive righteousnesse of Christ it selfe, but a righteousnesse morte Christi partū, purchased by the death of Christ, as the meritorious cause thereof, viz. remission of sinnes, which they not without absurdity say is imputed to us. For what is remission of sinne, but the not imputing of it? If therefore wee bee justified by imputation of the remission of sinne, then are we justified by the imputation of the not imputing of sinne. Againe, the authors of this opinion confound justice with justification; for they say, that remission of sinne is our justice, and that justification is nothing also but remission; when indeed neither the one, nor the other is justice, but an action of God, imputing righte­ousnesse and not imputing sinne unto us. Others hold that by the pas­sive righteousnesse of Christ it selfe meaning thereby his death and passion, we are justified, as by the onely matter of justification imputed to us. But that wee are not justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ alone, it may appeare by these reasons:

§. II. By what alone the Law is fully satisfied, by that we are justifi­ed,The first reason, because there is no justification without the ful­filling of the Law. and by what alone the Law is not fully satisfied, by that alone wee are not justified. By the whole righteousnesse of Christ, that is to say, the righteousnesse of his person, that is, his holinesse, or habituall righteousnesse; the righteousnesse of his life, which was his obedience or actuall righteousnesse; the righteousnesse of his death and passion, which is obedientia crucis, or his passive righteousnesse, the Law was fully satisfied or fulfilled: but by the passive obedience alone of Christ the Law was not fulfilled; therefore by the whole righteousnesse of Christ and not by the passive onely we are justified. The proposition is thus proved: there is no justification before God without perfect and compleat righteousnesse, for without that no man can stand in judge­ment before God, and to imagine, that a man is justified without ju­stice, is as absurd, as to conceive that a man is cloathed without appa­rell: For they that are justified are clothed Psal. 132. 9. with righteousnesse, as having Gal. 3. 27. put on Christ, whose righteousnesse is their wedding garment, Matth. 22. 11. signified by that white and shining linnen, Apoc. 19. 8. which are the justifications [Page 25] of the Saints. But there is no perfect righteousnesse, but that which ful­filleth the Law, and is fully conformable unto it, it being the perfect, perpetuall and immutable Matth. 5. 18. rule of righteousnesse, Matth. 5. 18. there­fore without the fulfilling of the Law, either by our selves, or by ano­ther for us, there is no justification. Now to the full satisfying and ful­filling of the Law, since the fall of Adam, two things are required; not onely a perfect and perpetuall conformity to the Law to satisfie the commandement, and to fulfill the condition of the legall Lev. 18. 5. Rom. 10. 5. Gal 3. 12. promise, Doe this and live: but also a full satisfaction to the sentence of the Law by bearing the penalty therein denounced, in regard of sinnes alrea­dy committed. Againe, faith or the true doctrine of justification by faith, doth not abrogate the Rom. 3. 31. Law, but establish it. But if it should teach justification without Christs fulfilling of the Law for us, it should abrogate the Law, and not establish it.

§ III. Of the assumption there are two parts: the former affir­mative,By the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely the Law is not ful­filled. that by the whole righteousnesse of Christ the Law is fully sa­tisfied and fulfilled; for by his sufferings the penalty of the Law is fully satisfied for us to free us from hell, and by his righteousnes, both hab [...]tu­all and actuall, the commandements were fulfilled for us, to entitle us un­to heaven. Neither of which we were able to performe for our selves: for neither could wee satisfie the penalty, but by everlasting punishment; neither could wee fulfill the commandement, but by a totall, perfect, and perpetuall obedience; which to us, by reason of the flesh, is un­possible. And this was the miserable estate, wherein the Law did hold us: both to bee accursed, if but once, and that in the least degree wee did breake it (which the best of us often doe, and sometimes in an high degree) and to be excluded from justification and salvation, if wee did not fully and perfectly fulfill it, which since the fall hath beene impossi­ble. Wherefore as without imputation of Christs sufferings we could not bee freed from hell; so without his obedience and perfect confor­mity to the Law imputed unto us, wee cannot be justified or saved. By the former, our blessed Saviour hath redeemed us from the curse Gal. 3. 13. of the Law, himselfe being made a curse for us; by the latter hee maketh us partakers of the promised blessednesse, by performing for us that righteousnesse, which was the condition of the promise, Doe this and live.

The negative part is, that by the onely passive righteousnesse of Christ the Law is not fulfilled. The Law indeed is thereby fully satisfi­ed in our behalfe for the avoiding of the penalty therein threatned; but not fulfilled in respect of the commandement for the obtaining of the blessednesse therein promised. For the righteousnesse, which is of the Law, is thus described, that the man Rom. 10. 5. which doth those things (which are commanded) shall live therein. And that is de­fended against divers excep [...] ­ons. First, that the Law is satis­fied by bearing the penalty.

§ IIII. Against this assumption divers exceptions are taken. First, that the Law is satisfied either by doing that which is commanded, or by bearing the punishment, which is threatned. Answ. It is true in respect of the penall statutes of men, but not in respect of Gods com­mandements, [Page 26] in which there is not onely a penalty threatned, but bles­sednesse also promised. If man had continued in his integrity, the Law might have beene satisfied by obedience onely: but being fallen into a state of disobedience, two things are necessarily required to the ful­filling of the Law; the bearing of the penalty, in respect of sinne al­ready committed, to escape hell; and the perfect performing of the commandements, which is the condition of the covenant, Doe this and live, to attaine to the life promised: but neither alone will suffice to ju­stification. For neither will our obedience satisfie for the punishment De justis. lib. 2. cap. 10. Scct. Deinde. as Bellarmine confesseth; nor the bearing of the punishment performe the condition of the promise. But both must concurre.

§ V. Inst. I. But it will be said, that whosoever are freed from hell, Secondly, that those who are freed from hell, are admitted untobeaven. are also admitted into heaven. Answ. The reason thereof is, because our Saviour, who did beare the punishment to free them from hell, did also fulfill the commandements to bring them to heaven. But howsoe­ver these two benefits of Christ doe alwayes concurre in the party justi­fied; as the causes thereof concurre in Christ, who not onely did both obey and suffer, but in obeying suffered, and in suffering obeyed: yet both the causes betweene themselves and the effects are to be distingui­shed. For as it is one thing to obey the commandement, another to suffer the punishment: so it is one thing to be freed from hell by Christ his suffering the penalty, another to be entituled to heaven by his fulfil­ling the commandements.

§ VI. Inst. II. Yea but God is a most free Agent, and thereforeThirdly, that God may justifie by the passive righteousnesse onely if bee will. may if he will justifie men by the passive righteousnesse of Christ one­ly without fulfilling of the Law. Answ. What God may doe, if hee will, I will not dispute; but [...]ure I am, that he justifieth men according to his will revealed in his word. Wherein it is revealed, first, that God hath taken that course for the justifying and saving of sinners, as serveth most for the illustration of the glory of his justice, Rom. 3. 25, 26. as well as of his mercy. And therefore as in mercy he freeth none from hell, for whom his justice is not satisfied: so in mercy hee admitteth none to hea­ven, for whom Christ hath not by his obedience merited the fame. Secondly, it is revealed, that the judgement of God is according to the Rom. 2. 2. truth, and therefore he justifieth none by his sentence, but such as hee maketh just by imputation of Christs righteousnesse; thereby not onely absolving them from their sinnes, but also accepting, yea consti­tuting them righteous in CHRIST. Thirdly, that as wee are justifi­ed from our sinnes by the blood of Christ; so we are made Rom. 5. 9. 19. just by his obedience: that as he was made finne for us, so we were made 2 Cor. 5. 21. the righ­teousnesse of God in him; that as wee are reconciled unto God by the death Rom. 5. 10. of his Sonne, so wee are justified and saved by his life: by his life, I say, which he lived before his death in the dayes of his flesh; and by the life which he lived, and doth live, after his death. By the acts of his life before his death, meritoriously; by the acts of his life after his death, as his Rom. 4. 25. resurrection, his ascension, his session at the right hand of his Father and intercession, his comming againe to judgement, hee [Page 27] saveth us effectually, that Christ as hee was made unto us redemption, so also righteousnesse; that as hee came to deliver us from sinne, so to1 Cor. 1. 30. Dan. 9. 24. bring in everlasting righteousnesse, Dan. 9. 24.

§ VII. Inst. III. If we bee justified by Christ his fulfilling of theIf by Christs fulfilling of the Law, then by a legall righteous­nesse. Law then wee are justified by a legall righteousnesse; but wee are not justified by a legall justice; but by such a righteousnesse, as without the Law is revealed in the Gospell. Answ. The same righteousnesse, by which we are justified, is both legall and Evangelicall in divers respects. Legall, in respect of Christ, who being made under the Gal. 4 5. Law, that hee might redeeme us, who were under the Law, perfectly fulfilled the Law for us. Evangelicall, in respect of us, unto whom his fulfilling of the Law is imputed. And herein standeth the maine, both agreement and difference betweene the Law and the Gospell. The agreement, that both unto justification require the perfect fulfilling of the Law: the difference, that the Law requireth to justification perfect obedience to be performed in our owne persons. The Gospell propoundeth to justi­fication the righteousnesse of Rom. 1. 17. 3. 21. God, that is, the perfect righteousnesse of Christ, who is God, performed for us, and accepted in the behalfe of them that beleeve, as if it had been performed in their own persons.The second rea­son out of Rom. 5. 19.

§ VIII. Our second reason. As by the disobedience of the first Adam, by which he transgressed the Law, men were made sinners, his disobedience being imputed to them: so by the obedience Rom. 5. 19. of the se­cond Adam whereby hee fulfilled the Law, men are made righteous, his obedience being imputed to them. In answer to this argument, two novelties are broached; the former, that as wee were made sinners by one act of disobedience committed by one man, and that but once: so we are justified by one act of obedience performed by one and that but once; which was that oblation of Christ, whereby hee but once Heb. 9. & 10. offered himselfe. Whereunto I reply, first, that betweene sinne, where­by the Law is broken, and obedience whereby the Law is fulfilled, there is great ods. The Law is broken by any one act of sinne; for hee that offendeth in any Iam. 2. 10. one, is guilty of all. But the Law is not fulfilled by any one act of obedience, but by a totall, perfect, and perpetuall ob­servation of the Law; for by the sentence Gal. 3. 10. of the Law hee is accursed, whosoever doth not continue in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them. But in no one act of obedience, there neither is, nor can bee a continuance in doing all the things that are commanded. Secondly, that although the obedience by which we are justified was but of one man, yet it was not one act, but as the Apostle calleth it in the verse going Rom. 5. 18. before, [...]. Now [...] Rom. 8. 4. is all that the Law requireth to justification. The second Novelty is, that neither Adam in sinning transgressed the Law, nor our Saviour in his obedience to death obeyed the Law. For neithe [...] the commandement given to the first Adam concerning the forbidden fruit, nor the com­mandement given to the second Adam concerning his suffering of death for us, was any commandement of the Law; no more than the commandement given to Abraham for the sacrificing of his sonne, or [Page 26] [...] [Page 27] [...] [Page 28] to the Israelites for the spoiling of the Aegyptians, but a speciall com­mandement. Whereto I reply, that although every thing which God commandeth in particular, be not expressed in the Law; yet wee have a generall commandement Deut. 12. 32. expressed in the Law, that whatsoever God commandeth we must doe; and if we doe it not, we sinne; and every sinne is [...], that is, 1 Ioh. 3. 4. a transgression of the Law.

§ IX. Our third reason. If Christ by his conformity to the Law fulfilled the Law for us, then his obedience in fulfilling of the Law isThirdly, because Christ bis obedi­ence is accepted for u [...]. accepted of God in our behalfe, as if wee had fulfilled it in our owne persons: but Christ by his conformity to the Law fulfilled the Law for us; therefore his obedience in fulfilling of the Law is accepted of God in our behalfe, as if wee had fulfilled it in our owne persons; that is to say, both his habituall and actuall righteousnesse is imputed to us. The consequence of the proposition is necessary, for if hee performed obe­dience for us and in our behalfe; he performed it in vaine, if it be not accepted for us and in our behalfe. The assumption also is of necessary truth; for first, that Christ did fulfill the Law it is evident, for himselfe professeth, that he came to fulfill the Law, Matth. 5. 17. that it becameMatth. 5. 17. 3. 15. Ioh. 8. 29. him to fulfill all righteousnesse, Matth. 3. 15. that he did alwayes those things which please God, Ioh. 8. 29. and the Scripture testifieth, that not for himselfe but for us hee fulfilled [...], Rom. 5. 18. 8. 4. whatsoever the Law requireth to justification: that his whole life was a perpetuall course of obedience, Phil. 2. 8. [...], even untill his death; which he performed not for himselfe; for as hee was incarnate, not for himselfe, but for us men and for our salvation, (for it was the exinanition Phil. 2. 7. of himselfe) so being in­carnate, he sanctificed Ioh. 17. 15. himselfe for us, and was made under the Gal. 4. 5. Law, not for himselfe, for that was a farther degree of humiliation; that be­ing man hee humbled himselfe to bee obedient, Phil. 2. 8. Rom. 10. 4. even untill his death, and therein also humbled himselfe to undergoe the death of the crosse. The Apostle Rom. 10. 4. teacheth, that Christ is th [...] end, that is, the per­fection [...], as the Greeke Fathers speake; that is, complement of the Law to all that beleeve unto righteousnesse, that is, that hee hath fulfilled the Law for all beleevers, in so much that all who truely be­leeve, have in Christ fulfilled the Law. Upon which place Remigius writing saith, Christus fin [...] [...]gis, in completio legis, Christ the end of theChrysost. in Rom. 10. 4. Law, that is, the fulfilling of the Law; Theodoret. He that beleeveth in our Lord Christ, hee hath fulfilled the scope of the Law, and what that is Chrysostome sheweth. For, saith hee, What did the Law intend? To make a man just, but it was not [...]. able, for never any fulfilled it; but this end our Saviour Christ hath [...]. more amply accomplished through faith, if therefore [...]. thou beleevest in Christ, th [...] hast not onely fulfilled the Law, but much more than it commanded, for thou hast received a farre greater righteousnesse, and what can that be, but the righteousnesse of Christ? And Photias, [...]. who­soever therefore, saith the Apostle, beleeveth in Christ, hee fulfilleth the Law. Sedulius likewise, Perfectionem habet Legis, qui credit in Chri­stum. hee hath the perfection of the Law, who beleeveth in Christ. This therefore doth plainely prove, that Christs obedience in fulfilling the Law is imputed to all that beleeve unto righteousnesse, [Page 29] as if themselves had fulfilled it. And this is the conceived doctrine of the Church of England, Homil. of sal­vation. part. 1. that Christ satisfied the justice of God and redeemed us, not onely by the oblation of his body and shedding of his blood, but also by the full and perfect fulfilling of the Law, and the same was taught by I [...]st. lib. 2. cap. 16. §. 5. Calvin (not to mention all the rest of our Di­vines) Christum sc. nos reconciliasse Deo, & justitiam acquisivisse toto obe­dientiae suae cursu.

§. X. But against this assumption divers things are objected:Object. 1. That Christ o­beyed the Law not for us, but for himse [...]fe. first, they feare not to say (which I feare to relate,) that Christ obeyed the Law not for us, but for himselfe: for they say, that Christ, as he was man, was bound to obey the Law for himselfe; which assertion detra­cteth from the merit of his obedience, from the bounty of his Grace, from the dignity of his person. From his merit; for if his obedience were of duety, then were it not meritorious, as himselfe teacheth, Luk. 17. 10. for Debitum non est meritum. And if this be true, that ChristsLuk. 17. 10. obedience is not meritorious, than have we no title to heaven. From his bounty; if what he did indeed for us, and not for himselfe, hee should be thought to have done for himselfe, and not for us. From the dignity of his pe [...]son; as if either he needed to obey for himselfe, or by his obedi­ence hee were any way bettered in himselfe or improved. But these men shold have remembred, that the person, who (as both of us confesse) did obey the Law, was and is not onely man but God also, and therefore, as his bloud was Gods bloud, Act. [...]0. 28. so his obedience was the obedience Phil. 2. 6, 8. of God; and consequently was performed not of duty, nor for himselfe. For if of duty, then had God been a debtor to the Law: Neither needed the hu­mane nature, being by personall union united to the divine, to obey, or to merit for it selfe; seeing from the first moment of the conception thereof, it was personally united to the Deity of the Sonne of God, in whose person it subsisting was, from the beginning of the being thereof, most happy, and enjoying the beatificall vision, being at that time, as the Schoolemen speake both viator & comprehensor. Neither did the hu­mane nature, which doth not subsist by it selfe, work any thing by it selfe in the worke of our redemption, but God manifested 1 Tim. 3. 16. in the flesh, did in and by it both obey and suffer for us. And as the eternall Son of God, being God coequall with the Father, assumed the humane nature and became man, not for himselfe, for his incarnation was an [...]. Phil. 2. 7. abasing of himselfe, as it were, to nothing (for man compared to God is as Esay 40. 17. no­thing, if not as lesse than nothing) but for us men and for our salvation: so being man, whatsoever he did or suffered in obedience to God, was not for himselfe (for it was a further Phil. 2. 8. debasing of himselfe) but for us: and as for us he sanctified himselfe, Iohn 17. 17. so for us he performed all righteousnesse, Matth. 3. 15. and fulfilled the Law for us, Matth. 5. 17. that whatsoever the Law requireth to justification might bee fulfilledObject. 2. Of the Papists in it, Rom. 8. 4.

§. XI. But here the Papists object, R [...]mists in Phil. 2. Sect. 1. That Christ merited for himselfe. Phil. 2. 9. that our Saviour Christ by his humiliation did merit his exaltation; because the Apostle saith, that therefore God exalted him, Phil. 2. 9. Answere. In every aetiologie the [Page 30] reason, which is rendred, is in a large sense called the cause, though it may be any other argument, which is not the cause of the Consequent, but of the consequence; as here, humiliation was not the cause, but the way to exaltation: and exaltation not the effect; but the consequent, asLuk. 24. 26. it is said, Luk. 24. 26. ought not Christ to suffer these things and so to enter to his glory? And this appeareth by the scope of the Apostle in that place; which is to exhort us to the imitation Phil. 2. 3, 4. 5. of our Saviour Christ his charity and humility. Of his charity, in that hee being God, for our sakes became man; and being man ver. 6, 7, 8. vers. 9. humbled himselfe further, and became obedient untill his death, even the death of the crosse. Of his humility, in that it was the way to his glory. For before honour Prov. 15. 33. 18. 12. is humility, and he that humbleth himselfe shall be exalted. But humilia­tion is so farre from being the cause of exaltation, that it is the contra­ryLuk. 18. 14. to it; even as corruption to generation, and losse to recovery, yet because recovery presupposeth losse, and the generation of one the cor­ruption of another, and the exaltation of the Sonne of God, his fore­going humiliation: therefore each of these may be said to be causa sine qua non, as all necessary forerunners may, though they be no causes: Even as Fabius, when Livius Salinator bad him remember, that by his meanes hee had recovered [...]; Why should I not remember it, saith he, I had never recovered it, unlesse thou hadd [...]st lost it, Cic. 2. de Oratore.

And further I adde, that the exaltation of Christ, whereof the Apo­stle Phil. 2. 9. speaketh, was not the exaltation of him to be the Sonne of God; for that hee was from all eternity, but the manifestation thereof. For although in respect of Christs resurrection, Act 13 33. Psal. 2. 7. Heb. 1. 5. especially it be said, Thou art my Sonne, this day have I begotten thee; yet was not Christ then first begotten, whose generation is eternall; but then he was mightily declared to bee the Sonne of God by his resurrection, Rom. 1. 4. andRom. 1. 4. this was that name above all names, which God did give unto him after his humiliation, his manifesting and declaring him by his resurrection to be the Sonne of God. So the Apostle saith, Heb. 1. 4, 5. that ChristHeb. 1. 4, 5. hath obtained a more excellent name than the Angels: For unto which of the Angells said he at any time, Thou art my Sonne, this day I have begotten thee? This exaltation was a necessary consequent of his hu­miliation, and that in two respects; first, for avoyding the scandall of the crosse, for having taken upon him the forme of a servant, and therein having humbled himselfe to become obedient untill death, and to the death of the crosse; it was necessary, lest men should take offence at his great humiliation, and refuse to beleeve in a man that had beene cru­cified, that he should mightily be declared to bee the Sonne of God by his resurrection, ascension, and sitting at the right hand of his Father; secondly, this declaration of Christ to bee the Sonne of God was to follow his humiliation as a necessary stay of our faith in Christ, for if Christ had not risen againe; 1 Cor. 15. 14. 17. then had our faith beene vaine, and wee had remained in our sinnes. But by his resurrection and exaltation, whereby he was powerfully declared to be the eternall Sonne of God; [Page 31] wee understand, that the obedience, which he had performed, and the suffering which hee sustained for us, were not the obedience and suffe­rings of m [...]re a man, but of him that is God; for which cause Saint Pe­ter saith, that God did raise him and give him glory, that our faith 1 Pet. 1. 21. and hope might be in God.

§. XII. If they will needs with the Arrians See Cyril. The­saur. lib. 3. cap. 2. Christs [...]xaltati­on was bis ma­nifestation to be the Sonne of God. understand the place of Christs exaltation it selfe, which is his filiation, and not of the decla­ration thereof; thereupon it will follow, that Christ by his obedience and sufferings in the humane nature, had merited to bee God; but this hee had not by purchase, but by nature, and therefore himselfe prayed a little before his death, Ioh. 17. 5. And now Father glorifie mee with the Ioh. 17. 5. glory, (not which I have merited by my death, but with that glory) which I had with thee before the world wa [...]. And it is evident, that the glo­ry whereunto Christ in this place is said to be exalted, is proper to God himselfe, Esay 45. 22. And this may suffice for this point, for I will notEsay 45. 22. trouble the Reader with those two other allegations of our Rhemists, the one out of Apoc. 5. 12. that the Lambe which was slaine, was wor­thyApoc. 5. 12. to receive power and (as they read) Divinity: from whence they should prove, if they prove any thing, that Christ by his sufferings in his humanity, merited his Divinity. The other, Heb. 2. 9. that Christ,Heb. 2. 9. because of the passion of death, was crowned with glory and honour: where the words are thus to be construed, according to the distinction and interpretation of the See D. Fulke in his answer to the Rhemists Heb. 2. 9. Fathers: wee see Iesus crowned with glory and honour, who for a shor [...] time was made lesse than the Angels (viz. by hi [...] incarna [...]ion) for the suffering of death (that is,) that hee might suffer death; or as the Apostle speaketh, that by the grace of God hee might (viz. in the humane nature assumed,) tast of death for all.

§. XIII. Object. 3. If Christ obeyed the Law for us that by hisObject. 3. If Christ obeyed the Law for us, then we need not to ob [...]y it. obedience we might be justified, then shall not wee need to obey the Law: but the consequent is absurd, therefore the antecedent. I an­swere; that we need not to obey the Law to that end that we may there­by be justified, for from that yoke of most miserable bondage excluding us from [...]; if we doe no [...] perfectly fulfill the Law in our owne persons, our Saviour Christ hath freed us; the condition, which the Law requireth to justification, being utterly impossible to us by reason of the flesh. But howsoever we cannot perfectly fulfill the Law, that we must thinke our selves bound sincerely to keepe it: that is, we must have an [...] desire, an unsained purpose, a serious care, an upright ende­vour to walke in the obedience of Gods commandements, in this study and practice of piety consisteth our new obedience, which we must be carefull to performe, not to be justified thereby, but to glorifie God, to obey his will, to restifie our thankfulnesse towards him, to edifie our brethren; to gather sound testimonies to our selves and assurance of our2 Pet. 1. 10. justification; and so to make our calling and our election sure.Object. 4. If we bee justi­fied by the obe­dience of his life, what needed hee to die for us.

§. XIV. Object. 4. If wee be justified by the obedience of Christs life, what needed he to dye for us? Answ. the chiefest part of his obe­dience was to be performed at his death: His totall obedience was his [Page 32] fulfilling of the whole Law for us. The Law since the fall is fulfilled, neither by an obedience conformable to the commandements alone, because wee are all sinners, nor by suffering the punishment alone, but by both. And therefore Christ performed both for us, that by both we might be justified. But this objection I will requite with

§ XV. Our fourth reason. If wee bee justified altogether by theOur fourth rea son, to what end served the obe dience Christ, i [...] we b [...] justified onely by his sus­serings. death and passion of Christ onely, to what end and purpose serveth his habituall righteousnesse and actuall obedience, by which hee was obe­dient to the Law in the whole course of his life, doing alwayes those things which are [...]oh 8. 29. pleasing to God, performing Matth. 3. 15. all righteousnesse, ful­filling Matth. 5. 17. the Law, and whatsoever the Law Rom. 8. 4. requireth to justification? These things, as I shewed before, he did not for himselfe, therefore for us and in our stead. To this some of our aforesaid Divines doe answer, that Christ indeed fulfilled the Law for our sakes: but they put a diffe­rence betweene pro and propter, saying, that Christ obeyed the Law pro se, not pro nobis, sed propter nos, that is, for our sakes, but not for us, or in our stead, which some expresse thus, that he might be sanctus Pon [...]ifex, and sacra Victima, an holy Priest and an holy Sacrifice. Others thus, that these things are required in Christ, that in his blood hee may bee righteousnesse unto us. Answ. 1. That there is no such distinction in the Scriptures, but the words, [...], in this very point of Christs doing or suffering for us, are used indifferently: [...], 1 Cor. 8. 11. [...], Ioh. 17. 19. Rom. 5. 8. Luk. 22. 20. 1 Cor. 11. 24. [...], Matth. 26. 28. Mark. 14. 24. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. [...], Matth. 20. 28. Mark. 10. 45. Neither is this distinction acknowledged by the Fathers, who acknowledge that Christ obeyed pro nobis. Cyril. de rect â fide, ad Reginam Theodoret. thera­peut. 10. pag. 148. that hee was baptized pro nobis: Aug. tract. 4. in Ioan. & tract. 111. that he who dyed for us, liveth pro nobis. Cyril. Thesaur. lib. 9. cap. 2. That he was made a Priest pro nobis. Idem in Ioan. lib. 2. cap. 1. pro omnibus mortuus, pro omnibus resurrexit, &c. Answ. 2. This to me seemeth but a shallow conceit. For who is the Priest, and what is the Sacrifice? Was not the Priest the Son of God, both God and Man? Was not the Sacrifice the flesh or human nature of the Son of God? Surely, if Christ had never submitted himselfe to obey the Law, yet he being God, had been a most holy Priest; his body and blood being the body and blood of God, had beene a most holy and all-sufficient Sacrifice. Neither was it the holinesse of the humanity that sanctified the sacrifice, or gave the vertue of satisfaction unto it; but the dignity of the person, and the vertue of the Godhead, which made the righteousnesse of the Man Christ, as well active as passive, to bee meritorious and satisfactory for others. Iesus Christ therefore being both God and Man, was and is our high Priest, who offered the sacrifice of his humanity upon the al­tar of his Deity, which sanctified the sacrifice and made it an all-suffici­ent satisfaction for the sinnes of all that beleeve. It is the Spirit, saith our Saviour Christ, that giveth life, the flesh (by it selfe) profiteth no­thing, Ioh. 6. 63. the sufferings or obedience of Christ, as hee is Man,Ioh. 6. 63. considered apart from the Godhead, are neither satisfactory nor meri­torious [Page 33] for others; but being the sufferings of God, they are a suffici­ent price of ransome to free us from hell; and being the obedience of God, is of sufficient merit to entitle us unto the kingdome of hea­ven.

§. XVI. Our fifth reason. There are two parts of justification, theOur fifth rea­son: that there are two parts of justification. one, the absolving from the guilt of sinne and damnation; the other, the accepting of a beleeving sinner, as righteous unto life: the former, is wrought by the sufferings of Christ imputed, as a full satisfaction for sinne; the other, by imputation of Christs perfect obedience, as a suffi­cient merit of eternall life: by the former we are freed from hell, by the latter we are entituled to the kingdome of heaven. Of them both theRom. 5. 9. 19. Apostle speaketh, Rom. 5. that we are justified, that is, absolved from our sinne, by the bloud of Christ. v. 9. and that wee are justified, that is, constituted just by his obedience, vers. 19. To this argument they answere by denying the antecedent; saying, that there are no parts of justification, but that it wholly consisteth in remission of sinnes. In­deed if it were the onely matter of justification, as some of them teach, and the entire formall cause of justification, as others avouch, of whom we shall speake in the next Chapter; I say, if both these opinions were true, then I would confesse, that the whole nature of justification doth consist in forgivenesse of sinne; but whiles it is either, but the matter, as some say; or but the forme, as others; or neither of both, as I avouch: it is a manifest errour to say, that justification consisteth wholly in re­mission of sinnes. Againe, in every mutation, though it be but relative, we must of necessity acknowledge two termes; t [...]rminum à quo, & ter­minum ad quem; the denomination being taken commonly from the terminus ad quem. As in justification there is a motion or mutation from sinne to justice, (from which terme justification hath its name) from a state of death and damnation, to a state of life and Salvation. But if justification be nothing else but bare remission of sinne, then is there in it onely a not imputing of sinne; but no acceptation as righte­ous: a freedome from hell, but no title to heaven. To this they an­swere; that to whom sinne is not imputed, righteousnesse is imputed; and they who are freed from hell, are admitted to heaven. I doe grant, that these things doe alwayes concurre; but yet they are not to bee confounded, for they differ in themselves, and in their causes, and in their effects: in themselves, for it is one thing to bee acquitted from the guilt of sinne, another thing to be made righteous; as wee see daily in the pardons of malefactors: in their causes, for remission of sinne is to be attributed to Christs satisfactory, sufferings; the acceptation as righ­teous unto life, to Christs meritorious obedience. In their effects, for by remission of sinne wee are freed from hell; and by imputation of Christs obedience, we have right unto heaven.

§. XVII. If unto justification there be required besides remissionObject. Then there be two formall causes of justification. of sinne, Imputation of righteousnesse; then there are two formall causes; of justification. Answ. It followeth not, for although there bee two t [...]rmini in this mutation, yet there is but one action; and this [Page 34] one action is the onely forme of justification, viz. imputation of Christs righteousnesse; of which are two effects, which also be the two parts of justification, remission of sinne, and acceptation as righteous; as I said in the definition, that justification is an action of God, wherein hee im­puting the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner, doth not one­ly absolve him from his sinnes, but also accepteth of him as righteous, and as an heire of eternall life.

§. XVIII. Notwithstanding this so evident truth, some of theThat justificati. on doth not con­sist on [...]ly in re­mission of sinnes. Divines, of whom we spake, when they would prove justification by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely, take this position for granted, that justification is nothing but remission of sinne, and hereupon in­ferre, that seeing wee have remission of sinne onely by the bloud of Christ, we are justified by his bloud onely: And to this purpose they alleage many testimonies of Scriptures, affirming that by the bloud of Christ and by his death and passion wee have remission of sinne; to all which we readily subscribe. But if there be any other places that seeme to ascribe unto the sufferings of Christ more than remission of sinnes, as entrance into heaven and salvation, &c. such places are to be understood by a Synecdoche, putting the chie [...]e and most eminent part of his obe­dience for the whole. Others labour to prove this assertion, that justifi­cation is nothing but remission of sinne, by testimonies, and by reasons; and to this purpose collect a multitude of testimonies of Protestant Divines, who against the Papists have maintained, that justification confisteth in remission of sinnes onely. But this assertion, as hereafter I shall shew, is to be understood as spoken in opposition to the Papists, who unto justification, besides remission of sinnes, require inward reno­vation or sanctification; and therefore their meaning was to exclude from justification, not imputation of righteousnesse, which alwayes concurreth in the same act with remission of sinne, and without which there can be no remission; for by the same act of imputation of Christs whole and entire righteousnesse, we have both remission of sinnes, and acceptation unto life; but to exclude renovation à ratione justificationis, from the proper nature of justification; as if they had said, wee are not justified both by remission and renovation, as the Papists teach, but by remission without renovation; that is, in their meaning, by remission onely: and this is acknowledged by Bellarmine himselfe, as hereafter shall bee shewed. And forasmuch as by remission of sinne wee have an imputative righteousnesse, for to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne, to him he imputeth righteousnesse without workes, as the Apostle pro­veth, Rom. 4. 6, 7. therefore, when it is said, that we are justified by re­missionRom. 4 6, 7. onely, and not by renovation; it is all one, as if wee said, that wee are justified by imputation onely, and not by infusion of righteous­nesse.Their chiese ar­gument, because remission is as well of sinnes of omission as of commission.

§ XIX. Their chiefe argument to prove their assertion is this. Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission. As therefore he, whose sinnes of commission are remitted, is reputed, as if hee had done nothing forbidden: so whose sinnes of omission are re­mitted, [Page 35] is reputed, as if hee had left undone nothing that is comman­ded. Now hee that is reputed as if hee had neither done any thing for­bidden, nor left undone any thing that is commanded; hee is reputed, as if hee had fulfilled the whole Law.

I answer by distinction, if they consider remission of sinnes barely without imputation of righteousnesse (as they must, if they will make good their assertion) then hee that hath onely remission of the sins both of commission and omission, is freed from the guilt of both, but not from the fault. For notwithstanding such remission of his sinnes, he is a sinner, as having both committed what is forbidden, and also omitted what is commanded. Yet by remission or not imputation of sinne hee is freed from the punishment, and a r [...]atu poenae, from the guilt binding over to punishment, as if hee had neither committed any thing forbid­den, nor omitted any thing commanded. Hee therefore that h [...]th re­mission is reputed, as having neither committed any evill, nor omitted any good; not simply or absolutely, but in respect of the punishment, and the guilt which bindeth over to punishment. As for example, a male [...]actour being convicted of Felony, is by the Kings pardon acquit­ted both from the punishment and the guilt binding him over to pu­nishment; but yet notwithstanding his fault remaineth, [...]nd for all his pardon hee is a theefe. But if they conceive of remission of sinn [...], as having the imputation of righteousnesse concurring with it, as alwaies it happeneth in Gods justification of a sinner; then it is true, that he [...] to whom his sinnes are remitted, that is, to whom sinne is not imputed, and righteousnesse is imputed, is reputed simply and absolutely, as if he had neither committed any thing forbidden, nor omitted any thing commanded, but as if he had fulfilled the whole Law. For it is not in Gods pardon as it is in mens: A man by his pardon may remit the pu­nishment and the guilt binding over to punishment; but hee cannot take away the fault, neither can hee by his pardon, make the offendor just. But whom God doth justifie, hee maketh them righteous by im­putation of Christs righteousnesse, whereby hee doth not onely free them from the guilt of sinne and damnation; but also covering their fault he accepteth, ye [...] constituteth them righteous and heires of eter­nall life. For Gods judgement is according to truth, and therefore hee justifieth none but such as are just, though not by righteousnesse inhe­rent, for so none Psal. [...]43. 2. Gal. 2. 16. are or can bee justified, yet by righteousnesse impu­ted. Iustification therefore is not onely an acqui [...]ing of a sinner from punishment by the not imputing of sinne, but also an acc [...]pting of him to life by imputation of perfect righteousnesse: not onely a freeing of a man from hell, but also the entituling of him to [...]: not onely a forgiving of our debt, which Christ our surety hath paid for us, but al­so an enriching of us with the inestimabl [...] [...] of Christs most p [...] ­fect righteousnesse.

§ XX. To this argument some doe adde a second not unlike, who­soeverObject. By re­mission we are made innocent and therefore just. are innocent they are just; by remission of sinnes men are inno­cent; therefore by remission of sinnes men are just. Answ. The pro­position [Page 36] is not generally and necessarily true, for wee may conceive a man to bee innocent, who is not just: for innocency is but an absence of sinne, not importing a presence of righteousnesse. Infants if they were cleare from originall sinne, were innocent, but not just. To the assumption, I answer, that by the bare remission of sinnes without im­putation of righteousnesse men are not innocent: for bare remission is like to a Kings pardon, which taketh away the punishment, but not the fault. But if they speake of remission of sinne accompanied with impu­tation of Christs righteousnesse, then I will confesse, that by remission of sinne men are made both innocent and just. But that righteousnesse imputed which shall make a man just, must not stand in suffering onely, but in an universall conformity with the Law of God. You have heard our arguments, and their answers: now let us examine their proofes.

§ XXI. The principall authour of this Novelty hath three argu­ments.Three argu­ments of I. P. The first is this; Whereby we have entrance into heaven, there­by1 alone we are justified: by the blood of Christ wee have entrance in­to heaven; therefore by the blood of Christ alone wee are justified. Answ. The proposition if it had beene propounded thus, by what wee have entrance into heaven, by that wee are justified; or thus, by what alone we have entrance into heaven, by that alone wee are justified, had been true; but as it is propounded, it is false: for we have entrance into heaven by his resurrection, ascension, and intercession, (not to speake of his obedience, by which notwithstanding wee are as the Apostle saith, justified, and entituled to heaven) yet we are not justified by any of these alone. If his meaning be that by the blood alone of Christ we have entrance into heaven, the assumption also is false, unlesse hee ei­ther by a Synecdoche doe under one principall include all the merits of Christ, or exclude all other meanes out of Christ, who is our onely Saviour.

His second argument, Sablata privatione ponitur habitus, therefore sinne being remitted and taken away, justice followeth of its owne ac­cord.2 To which I answer briefly, that neither the punishment, nor the guilt, which onely (as themselves teach) are taken away in justification, are privations, nor the justice which is acquired is an habit in the party justified: and therefore that Logicall Axiome doth not serve his turne.

His third argument; If we are justified onely by remission of sinnes,3 then not by that righteousnesse which is in Christ: but we are justified onely by remission of sinnes. Answ. The consequence of the propo­sition is unsound, for although wee were justified by remission of sinnes alone; yet wee were justified by imputation of Christs passive obedi­ence, at the least, unto remission of sinnes. The assumption hee proveth, first, by this reason; because otherwise our sinnes being remitted, wee should still remaine accursed. Answ. It followeth not, for together with remission of sinnes by imputation of Christs sufferings, concurreth ac­ceptation unto life by imputation of Christs obedience, without which we could not be said to have fulfilled the Law in Christ. Secondly, by [Page 37] the authority of Calvin, whom in this case these men abuse worse than the Papists. For Bellarmine De justis l. 2. c. 6, though he object against Calvin, as these men doe, that he placeth justification onely in remission of sinnes; yet he consesseth De justis. l. 2. c. 1, that his meaning thereby was not to exclude imputati­on of Christs righteousnesse, but renovation or sanctification. And he citeth these words out of Lib. 3. c. 11. sect. 2. Calvins institutions, that hee placeth justification in peccatorum remissione, & justitiae Christi imputatione, in the remission of sinnes, and imputation of Christs righteousnesse. And againe Sect. 3., that God, when he doth justifie us, he doth absolve us by im­putation of righteousnesse, that in Christ wee may be accepted as just, who in our selves are not. Wherefore, saith hee, when Calvin in the same Chapter, §. 21. and 22. and in his Antidote unto the Councell of Trent, Sess. 6. doth contend, that justification consisteth only in remis­sion of sinnes; he doth not exclude the imputation of Christs righte­ousnesse, but inward renovation and sanctification. The same Bellar­mine confesseth De justif. l. 2. c. 1. & 6., that those whom he calleth Lutherans. (who indeed are very sound in this point) doe all of them place justification in the imputation of Christs righteousnesse, which assertion of theirs is most true, because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse wee have not onely remission o [...] sinnes, but also acceptation unto life, as being righ­teous in Christ; not onely freedome from hell, but also right and title to the Kingdome of Heaven.

§ XXII. Another treating of this point, affirmeth, that Christ is theThe arguments of J. F. matter of our justification, and is made righteousnesse unto us in his passive obedience onely; and yet confesseth, that both the holinesse of his person and the obedience of his life are necessarily required, that he might be meet to become our righteousnesse in his sufferings. But this is frivolous: because, as I noted before, he being perfect God, as well as perfect man, had beene in his sufferings an All-sufficient satis­faction for our sinnes, though hee had never submitted himselfe to the obedience of the Law. But the divine Nature of the Sonne of God, and the dignity of his person, as it made his sufferings all-sufficiently satisfactory for our sinnes, to redeeme us from hell, because they were the sufferings of God, the blood of God, &c. so it made his obedience all-sufficiently meritorious to constitute and make us righteous, and to make us Heires of Eternall life; because it was the obedience or righ­teousnesse of God. For the Sonne of God was made under Gal. 4. 4, 5. the Law, that he might not onely redeeme us, who were under the Law, by his sufferings; but also that by his meritorious obedience we might receive the Adoption of sonnes. But he proveth Christ to bee our righteous­nesse onely in his passive obedience, because it onely was both prefigu­red in the types and figures of the Law, and also represented in the sa­craments. As touching the types and figures of the Law which prefigu­red Christ; they were either figures of his person and office, or they represented his benefits, as namely and especially justification or [...]ancti­fication. And those, which figured his benefit of justification, either represented the remission of sinne by his sufferings; or acceptation [Page 38] with God by his obedience, or both. The ceremony of Gen. 35. 2. Z [...]ch. 3. 4. changing their clothes, when they were to come before God, did import that those who desired to please God, must be clothed with Christs righte­ousnesse, which is also signified by the wedding Mat. 22. 11, 12. garment, and the ho­ly attire, wherein the Priests were to appeare before God Exod. 28. 43. The high Priests wearing of the golden plate with this inscription Exod. 28. 36. 38 Holinesse of the Lord, (who is Iehovah I [...]r. 23. 6. our righteousnesse) was to this end, that the iniquity of the holy things, which the children of Israel should hal­low, in all their holy gifts, being taken away, they might bee accepted before the Lord. The high Priests offering of incense upon the golden Altar, resembled the pleasing obedience of Christ in his life and death, and his intercession for us. The Arke of the Covenant was a Type of Christ the Mediator; the cover upon it, of his propitiation; the ta­bles of Covenant within it, of his fulfilling the Law for us. The sanctification of the first fruits, which were a type of Christ (who is the first fruits of all that shall bee saved, 1 Cor. 15. 23.) was imputed to the whole increase or store, Rom. 11. 16. So [...]aith Athan [...]s. tom. 2 advers. eos qui negant Christum [...]x natura no [...]ra s [...]mpsisse primi­tias. Athanasius, [...]; That the fulfilling of the Law performed by the first fruits (so he calleth the flesh of Christ) is impu­ted to the whole lumpe, &c.

§ XXIII. But come we to the Sacraments, which hee truely saithWhether the passive obedi­ence of Christ onely, be repre­sented in the Sacraments. are the soules of that righteousnesse Rom. 4. 11. which is by Faith. And yet, saith he, Baptisme signifieth onely the washing of the soule by the bloud of Christ; the Eucharist representeth onely his body broken, and his blood shed for our sinnes. Answ. Though some parts onely of the benefits of Christ are represented in the severall Sacraments; yet the substance of each Sacrament is the participation of Christ wholly with all his merits and benefits. Thus in Baptisme we are incorporated in­to Christ, and in it we put on Gal. 3. 27. Christ, who is our righteousnesse. And it is the Sacrament, not only of remission of sinne and of justification, but also of regeneration and sanctification, we being therein conformed to his death and resurrection, Rom. 6. 3, 4, 5. In the Lords Supper we have communion with Christ, being not only united to him as Eph. 5. 30. bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh; but also have communion with him both in his merits by imputation, and in his graces by influence from him as our head. Other arguments are used by the same authour; but because in them he taketh two things for granted, which hee cannot prove; the one, that justification consisteth onely in remission of sin; the other, that wee ascribe remission of sinne to Christs active obedi­ence, I will not trouble the Reader with them. Onely let him call to minde the errours which the Authors of this opinion doe runne into for the defence thereof. First, that remission of sinnes is the matter of justification which is imputed to us. Secondly, that the Law is fully sa­tisfied by bearing the penalty alone. Thirdly, that by one act of obe­dience we are made just, as wee were by one act of disobedience made sinners. Fourthly, that neither by his disobedience Ad [...]m did trans­gresse the Law, nor Christ by his obedience unto death, obey it. Fifth­ly, [Page 39] that Christ obeyed the law not for us, but for himselfe. Sixthly, that justification consisteth wholly and onely in remission of sinnes. Which being for the most part consequents of this opinion, doe prove the an­tecedent to be false.

CAP. V. That the formall cause of Iustification is the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse.

§. I.

YOu have heard the private opinions of some of our Di­vinesPrivate opini­ons concerning the forme of ju­stification. concerning the matter of justification: now let us examine the unsound opinions of some others concer­ning the forme. For as the former made remission of sins the matter, which is imputed to justification; so these make it the forme. And as the former teach, that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinne, so doe these. And yet the former hold it to bee but the matter; and these, but the forme. Indeed if it were both the matter and the forme, they might well say, that justification doth wholly consist therein. But being, according to their owne conceipt, but the one, or the other, and according to the truth, neither of both, but an effect of the true forme (for by imputation of righteousnesse we have remission of sinne) their opinion must needs be unsound. But the thing wherein chiefely they erre is, that with Disp. de [...]. C [...]r. [...]. 4 part. c. 4. Christi justitiam nobis imputari est m [...]rum com­mentum. Socinu [...] the heretike they deny the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse; and consequently do hold, that neither the active nor passive obedience of Christ is that, which is imputed to us for righteousnesse. What then? forsooth the act of faith. Of these mens errour I shall not need to say much in this place: because, besides that, which hath already beene delivered in the third Chapter, I have plentifully and fully proved in my whole fourth booke, that the righteousnesse of Christ, is the matter which is impu­ted to justification; and in my whole fifth booke, that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the forme of justification. Only I will note their depravation of our Doctrine, and point at their errours.

§ II. As touching the former: when we say, that the imputation ofTheir depra­ving of our Doctrine. Christs righteousnesse is the formall cause of justification, because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse God doth justifie us: they willBellarm. de just. l. 2. c. 7. §. quart. needs, with the Papists, make us hold, that we are formally righteous by that righteousnesse, which is not in us, but out of us in Christ; which is absurd: for as themselves expound the phrase A. W. pag. 180. n. 4., Formall justice consi­steth either in the qualities of the soule, or in good actions (that is, it is either habituall or actuall) so that it cannot stand in imputation; by which wee can [Page 40] no more be just formally, than wife, rich, alive, by imputation of wisedome, ri­ches, and life. Wherefore I marvell how they could be so absurd, as to conceive so absurdly of us. But wee teach, that Christs righteousnesse, both habituall and actuall, by which he was formally just, is the matter; and the imputation thereof is the forme of justification. And so those very Authors, upon whom they would father this assertion, in expresse termes doe teach; affirming, that Christs obedience, or fulfilling of the Law is the Centur. 1. li. 2. c. 4. col. 240. lin. 3 materiall cause of justification; and the application or imputation thereof, is the Ib. col. 241. lin. 41. Scharp. de justif. controv. 8. arg. 2. & con­trov. 9. formall cause of justification. We say then, that the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe is not the formall cause of justi­fication, or that by which we are formally just; but the imputation of it; it selfe being the matter of justification; that is to say, that thing, which unto justification is imputed. Wherefore I shall not need to answere, in defence of our assertion, the arguments, either of those Ve­teratores, the Papists, or these Novatores, who both agree in this calum­niation against us, all tending to prove, that wee are not formally ju [...] by that righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him: which we doe not hold. For the righteousnesse, whereby a man is forma [...]ly just, is inherent in himselfe: for what is more intrinsecall than the forme? But Christs righteousnesse is not inherent in us, no more than our sinne was inherent in him. And yet, as he was made sinne or a sinner by our sinnes, not formally, (God forbid!) but by imputation: so wee are made righteous by his righteousnesse, not formally (as we are justified) or in our selves, but in him, viz. by imputation. And againe, as by Adams actuall transgr [...]ssion, which was transient, and now hath no being, we are made sinners, that is, guilty of sinne and damnation by imputation of his disobedience: so likewise by Christs obedience, which hee performed in the daies of his flesh, and was proper to his owne person, we are justified, that is, not onely freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation, but also constituted just, and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven. And yet we deny not, but that, as they to whom the guilt of Adams transgression is imputed, are also by sinne inhe­rent transfused from him by carnall generation formally made sinners: so they, to whom the obedience of Christ is imputed unto justificati­on, are also made formally just by an inchoated righteousnesse received by influence from Christ, and infused by his spirit in their spirituall re­generation.

§ III. In their opinion it selfe denying the imputation of ChristsTheir owne er­rors, which be­sides the princi­pall, are six. righteousnesse to justification they erre more dangerously than the Papists, who are forced to confesse the imputation of Christs satis­faction: for the maintenance of this maine errour they hold sixe others. First, that remission of sinne is the entire forme or formall cause of justification. Secondly, that justification is nothing else but remission of sinne. Thirdly, that no other righteousnesse concurreth to justification besides the remission of sinne, no not the righteous­nesse of Christ, otherwise than it doth merit remission of sinne. Fourth­ly, that the righteousnesse, by which we are justified, is not the righte­ousnesse [Page 41] of Christ it selfe, but a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ, viz. remission of sinne. Fifthly, that not the obedience of Christ it selfe is imputed whether active or passive, but the merit therof. Sixthly, that not the righteousnesse of Christ, but the act of faith is im­puted for righteousnesse. All which before I saw the booke wherein these errours are broached, I had plainely and fully confuted in this Treatise.

§ IV. For as touching the two first, and the maine errour it selfe;The two first of the sixe. I have proved, both in the third Chapter of this booke Lib. 1. c. 3. §. 7. &c. briefly, and in the whole fifth booke at large, that the forme of justification is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse; by which we are both absolved from our sinnes, and also are in Christ accepted and made righteous; and consequently, that these two are the essentiall parts of Lib. 1. c. 4. §. 16. &c. 6. §. justificati­on, viz. the not imputing or remission of sinne, which God doth grant by imputation of Christs sufferings, in respect whereof wee are said to be justified by his Rom. 5. 9. blood; that is, freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation; and the imputation of Christs Rom. 5. 19. obedience; by which wee are made or constituted righteous, and are entituled to the king­dome of Heaven. So that remission of sinne is not the forme, and much lesse the entire forme of justification, considered as an action of God; but an effect of the forme, because by imputation of Christs righteous­nesse we have remission of sinne. Neither is it the whole benefit of ju­stification, but a part thereof. For although many of our Divines, as hath beene said, have taught, that unto justification remission of sinnes is onely required: yet their assertion, as hath also beene shewed, is to be understood (as Bellarmine himselfe understandeth Calvin) as spoken in opposition to the Papists; who say, that to justification concurre, not onely remission of sinnes, but also inward renovation or sanctifica­tion. To contradict them, our Divines have said, that wee are justified by remission onely or not imputing of sinne, (wherewith alwayes con­curreth imputation of righteousnesse,) and not by renovation or sancti­fication. Their meaning therefore by the exclusive particle onely, was to exclude, not imputation of righteousnesse, which unseparably ac­companieth the not imputing of sinne, as Saint Paul proveth, Rom. 4.Rom. 4. 6. 8. 6. 8. and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth; but infusion of righteousnesse or renovation.

§ V. The third is the same in effect with that which I fully confu­ted,The third error Cap. 4. and contradicteth their owne assertion, who teach with us, that we are justified by the whole course of Christs obedience: for re­mission of sin is properly ascribed to Christs sufferings or his blood 1 Job. 1. 7. which cleanseth us from all our sinnes; and not to his active obedi­ence. And justification is nothing, as they say, but remission of sinne: whereupon it would follow, that we are justified onely by Chri [...]ts pas­sive obedience, which I have already disproved.The fourth error.

§ VI. The fourth, denying the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe to be our righteousnesse, I have fully confuted in the fourth booke: be­sides that, which hath already beene alledged in the third chapter of [Page 42] this book that which is added concerning a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ, is the same with that which I confuted, Chap. 4. §. 1. for our righteousnesse is not remission of sinne, but that by which wee have remission; not justification it selfe, but that by which wee are ju­stified. For remission of sinne, as well as justification it selfe, is an acti­on of God, not imputing sinne and imputing righteousnesse; and therefore is not that righteousnesse which is imputed. Thus therefore I argue; By what we have remission of sinne, by that wee are justified, and by what we are justified, that is, our righteousnesse by the bloud of Christ we have remission of sinne, and not by that righteousnesse which is purchased by his blood, viz. remission of sinne, for that to say were very ridiculous. Wherefore by the blood of Christ we are justified; and consequently, that with the res [...] of his obedience is our righteous­nesse.

§. VII. To the fifth I answer, that the meritorious obedience ofThe fift error. Christ both active and passive are the merits of Christ. If therefore the merit of Christ be imputed, then his meritorious obedience: Nei­ther can the merit of Christs obedience be imputed to us, unlesse the obedience it selfe be imputed, and by imputation accepted of God for us, as performed by our selves.

For as the guilt of Adams transgression could not be imputed to us, unlesse the transgression it selfe were first imputed, and made ours; by imputation whereof wee are made sinners, that is, guilty of his sinne unto condemnation: so the merit of Christs obedience cannot bee imputed, unlesse the obedience it selfe be imputed, and made ours; by imputation whereof we are freed from the guilt of sinne and damnati­on, and are accepted as righteous, and as heires of eternall life. And as it may truely be said of them, to whom Adams disobedience is impu­ted, that they sinned in Adam: so of them, to whom Christs obedi­ence is imputed, it may no lesse truely be said, that in Christ they have satisfied the justice of God, in Christ they have fulfilled the Law; the Lord accepting of the obedience of Christ in their behalfe, as if they had performed it in their owne persons. For Christ is the end, the perfection and complement of the Law to all that beleeve. So that whosoever truely beleeveth in Christ, hath in him fulfilled the Law, as the Greeke expositors expound that place, Rom. 10. 4.Rom. 10. 4.

§. VIII. But, say they, we were not so in Christ, when he obeied,Obiect. 1. as we were in Adam, when he sinned. Neither are wee members of Christ untill we actually beleeve. And therefore, neither could we be said to have satisfied the justice of God for our sinnes, nor to have ful­filled the Law in him, as we are truely said to have sinned in Adam. Or if it could be said, that in Christ we satisfied Gods justice for our sinnes, then should we need no pardon. Neither can punishment and pardon stand together if wee have borne the punishment, then are we not par­doned. A [...]sw. The first Adam was a Rom. 5. 14. type of the second, and both were heads and roots of mankinde. Adam, of those that shall bee con­demned; Christ, of those that shall be saved. For as in Adam all dye, [Page 43] 1 Cor. 15. 22. that dye eternally; so in Christ all live, that live eternally. And as in Adam Rom. 5. 19. [...] that is, all that shall be condemned were constituted sin­ners, his disobedience being imputed to them, because in him they sin­ned: so in Christ [...] all that shall be saved, shall be constituted just, his obedience being imputed to them, because in him, as their head, they have satisfied and fulfilled the Law. Neither are wee more truely derived from Adam in respect of the life naturall, than wee are from Christ in respect of the life spirituall. Therefore if Adams disobedience were imputed to condemnation, much more Christs obedience is im­puted unto justification of life, as the Apostle Rom. 5. 17, 18. argueth Rom. 5. and from thence Bernard; Epist. 190. See infr. lib. 5. chap. 4. Cur non aliunde justitia cum aliunde reatus? alius qui peccatorem constituit; alius qui justificat à peccato. Alter in semine, alter in sanguine. An peccatum in semine peccatoris, & non justitia in Christi sanguine?

§. IX. Yea but then (say they) when Christ obeyed, we were notObject. 2. his members: No more (say I) were we the branches of the first Adam, when he disobeied. Actually, we are neither branches of the first Adam, untill we partake the humane nature by generation; nor members of the second Adam, untill we be made partakers of the Divine 2 Pet. 1▪ 4. nature by regeneration, and yet it is most true, which Bernard avoucheth in the place even now cited, satisfecit Epist. 190. ergo Caput pro membris, &c. the head therefore satisfied for his members, &c.

§. X. Yea but our faith relyeth upon Christ, as having alreadyObject. 3. redeemed us.

Ans. Christ is the Lambe Apoc. 13. 8. of God slaine from the beginning of the world. The vertue of whose obedience is extended, not onely to them that come after Christ; but also to all the faithfull that went be­fore from the beginning of the world, who were members Their afflicti­ons were the reproch of Christ. Heb. 11. 26. viz. in his members. of Christ as much as we are now. And for them, as well as for us, Christ obeyed the Law, and suffered death; and to them (so many as beleeved) was the obedience of Christ imputed, Act. 15. 11. as well as to us. They all did eate the same 1 Cor. 10. 3. 4. spirituall meat, and did all drinke the same spirituall drinke. For they dranke of that spirituall Rocke which followed, and that Rocke was Christ.

§. XI. But if in Christ, say they, we satisfied the punishment, thenObiect. 4 we need no pardon.

Answ. When wee say, that in Christ wee satisfied and fulfilled the Law, our meaning is, that his satisfaction and obedience is imputed to us; that is, it is accepted of God in our behalfe, as if wee had perfor­med the same in our owne persons. Neither should it seeme strange, that satisfaction and pardon may stand together, seeing God pardo­neth no sinne, for which his justice is not satisfied. But it is Christ that satisfied, & bare the punishment; and we are they who are pardoned by imputation of his satisfaction unto us. Here therefore especially mercy and justice met together: justice, executed upon Christs mercy, exhibi­ted to us; who are justified by the grace of God freely, Rom. 3. 24. 15. in respect of us, through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus: and therfore not freely in [Page 44] respect of him, who paid so great a price. For him God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud, to declare his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes, &c. But that the righteousnesse of Christ is the onely thing, which properly is imputed to justification, I have at large disputed, Lib. 4. & 5.

§. XII. The sixth I have already refuted Lib. 1. Cap. 2. §. 7. Where­unto I now adde; that these men, confessing the truth with us, that faithThe sixth error is the instrumentall cause of justification, confute themselves. For if it be the instrument to receive that which is imputed, then is it not the thing it selfe which is imputed properly; though relatively it may in respect of the object, which it, as the instrument or hand, doth receive to justification: and that is the righteousnesse of Christ. And for this cause, as hereafter Lib. 6. c. 4. sect. 6. shall bee declared, the same benefits, which wee have from Christ properly, are attributed to faith; not absolutely, in regard of it selfe; but relatively in respect of that righteousnesse, which it doth apprehend. If it be said, that faith as the instrument receiveth remission of sinne, because by it we are assured thereof: I answer, that by faith receiving Christ we have remission of sinnes and justification, before we can by speciall faith be assured of it. And it is a great absur­dity, as elsewhere Covenant of Grace. cap. 8. page 94. n. 5. I have shewed, to teach, that men must beleeve, and be assured of the remission of their sinnes, to the end that they may be remitted.

§. XIII. I shall not need therefore to say any more in this place,A Caveat for young Divines. unlesse it be to give a Caveat to all young Divines, that they give no credit to these Novelties, which either affirme that wee are justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely; or deny that wee are justifi­ed by the righteousnesse of Christ at all, as the matter of our justificati­on. By Matter I understand that very thing, which is imputed as our onely righteousnesse; by which wee stand perfectly righteous before God; by imputation whereof, we are both freed from hell, and also en­tituled to the kingdome of heaven. And let all men take notice, that these opinions, howsoever to some they seeme matters of small impor­tance, are notwithstanding very dangerous, if not pernicious; seeing they concerne our very title to the kingdome of heaven, and seeing al [...]o I have proved in this Treatise, that without imputation of ChristsThe necessity of imputation of Christs righ­teousnesse. righteousnesse there can be no justification, nor salvation. For all will confesse, that without Christs obedience and sufferings none can bee justified or saved; and that they justifie or save none, but them onely to whom they are communicated and applyed. But they cannot be com­municated otherwise than by imputation, whereby God accepteth them in our behalfe, as if we had in our owne persons performed them for our selves. Againe, these foure assertions I hold for undoubted truthes: first, that what Christ our blessed Saviour in the daies of his flesh did or suffered in obedience to God, he did and suffered, not for himselfe, but for us: secondly, that whatsoever he did and suffered for us that beleeve, that the Lord accepteth in the behalfe of all that beleeve: thirdly, that what he accepteth in our behalfe that he imputeth unto us, [Page 45] for by imputation wee meane nothing else: fourthly, to say, that what Christ did and suffered for us God doth not accept in our behalfe, is both blasphemous against Christ the wisedome of his Father, as if hee did and suffered those things, which he did and suffered in vaine: and also pernicious unto us, for if Christs doings and sufferings for us bee in vaine, as they are if they bee not imputed to us; then is our faith vaine, and wee remaine in our sinnes, and in the wofull state of dam­nation.

§. XIV. But some will say; it is sufficient to beleeve, that by theObject. merits of Christ we have remission of sinne, and that having remission of sinnes we shall be saved by him. Answ. Yea, but God forgiveth no sinnes, for which his justice is not fully satisfied. For as he is mercifull, so he is just in forgiving our sinnes. But no such satisfaction can bee imagined, but that of Christ. For we our selves are not able to satisfie for our sinnes, but by eternall punishment. And how shall we have re­mission by Christs satisfaction, if it be not applyed and communicated unto us? how can it be communicated and made ours, but by imputati­on? And that the very papists themselves are at length forced to confesse. And where they say, that having remission of sinnes they shall be saved: I confesse it is true, because with Gods remission of sinnes there doth alwayes concurre imputation of righteousnesse. But the bare remis­sion of sinne without imputation of righteousnesse, which onely freeth a man from the guilt of sinne and damnation, doth not entitle him or give him right to the kingdome of heaven. It is one thing to have by faith remission of sinnes, and another to have by faith inheritance among them that be sanctified, Act. 26. 18. Eternall life is not to beeAct. 26. 18. had without perfect fulfilling of the Law, which is no where to bee found but onely in Christ. And therefore by the onely meritorious obedience of Christ, by which he hath merited and purchased salvation for us, wee are saved. But how should we be saved by his obedience, if it be not communicated unto us, and made ours for our selves? how can it bee made ours, but by imputation? wherefore no imputation of Christs obedience, no salvation.

CAP. VI. The end or finall cause, the essentiall parts, the fruits and consequents of justification.

§. I.

THE finall cause or end, for which God doth justifie aThe end Su­preame. sinner by imputation of Christs righteousnesse, is ei­ther supreme, or subordinate. The supreme, is the manifestation of the glory, both of his mercy, and of his justice (as is noted in the definition) which as they doe concurre in all the worke of God, Psalm. 145. 17.Psal. 145. 17. so especially in the worke of redemption and justification. For therein the mercy of God appeareth to be so great, that rather than hee would suffer us most miserable sinners to perish in our sinnes, he hath sent his owne and his only begotten Son, that we might be justified Rom. 3. 24. freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein hee hath made us Ephes. 1. 6. accepted in his beloved. His justice also such, that rather than hee would suffer the sinnes of his owne elect to goe unpunished, or forgive them without due satisfaction; hee hath punished them in his owne Sonne, and ex­acted from him a full satisfaction for them: having set him forth Rom. 3. 25, 26. to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud, to declare his righteousnesse through the forgivenesse of sinnes, which are past, by the sufferance of God; to demonstrate, I say, his righteousnesse at this time, that hee might be just and the justifier of him who beleeveth in Iesus. Not un­to us therefore, not unto us, as if we were justified by our owne righte­ousnesse or worthinesse; but Psal. 119. 1. to the name of God all glory is due for his mercy and for his righteousnesse sake; who doth justifie us, not of workes Ephes. 2. 9. Rom. 4. 2. lest wee should glory in our selves: but of his grace, freely, without any desert or cause in our selves, through the redemption wrought by Christ; who is of God made righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1. 30, 31. unto us, that he which gloryeth may glory in the Lord.

§. II. The subordinate end is our salvation, and the way unto it,The subordi­nate end. which is our new obedience or sanctification. Salvation, though it bee1 Salvation. our [...], our particular supreme end and chiefe good, unto which both justification and sanctification is referred; yet it is subordinate to the glory of God, as to the soveraigne and universall end. For such is Gods goodnesse towards his elect, that hee hath subordinated our sal­vation to his owne glory; as he hath our justification and sanctification to both. And therefore, as we are first above all things to desire, that God may bee Mat. 6. 9, 10, 11. glorified; so, that hee may bee glorified, wee are first [Page 47] among those things, which wee desire for our owne good, to seeke his Mat. 6. 33. Kingdome, and his righteousnesse; that his Kingdome of glory, and the Kingdome of Grace, which consisteth in the Rom. 14. 17. righteousnesse of justi­fication, and the two companions thereof peace and joy in the holy Ghost; may come upon us; and next, that his will may be done upon earth, as it is in heaven, by our new obedience: for this is the will of God 1 Thes. 4. 3., even our sanctification. Salvation, I say, is the end both of our justification and sanctification: for being made free from sinne▪ and be­come servants to Rom. 6. 22. God, we have our fruit unto holinesse, and the end everlasting life. The end of our faith by which we are justified, is the 1 Pet. 1. 9. salvation of our soules, unto which by justification wee are entituled, and Rom. 8. 24. saved in hope that being justified by his Tit. 3. 7. grace, wee should bee made heires according to, hope of eternall life: for all that be justified, Rom. 8. 30. shall be glorified. And this also I noted in the definition, when I said, that those whom the Lord doth justifie by imputation of Christs righ­teousnesse, he accepteth as righteous in Christ, and as heires of eternall life: for by faith Act 26. 18. we have remission of sinnes, and inheritance among them that are sanctified.

§ III. But we are justified by faith, not onely, that in the end wee2. Certainety of Salvation. may be saved; but also, that in the meane time our salvation being of Grace, might be certaine and sure: and that being justified Rom. 5. 1, 2. by faith we might have peace and joy in the holy Ghost: Whereas, if it de­pended upon our workes or worthinesse, it would be uncertaine. For the promise of this inheritance was not made to Abraham, and his seed through the Law, in respect of any righteousnesse therein prescribed, but through the righteousnesse of Faith. And therefore it is of faith, that it might bee by grace, to the end the promise might be sure to allRom. 4. 13, 16. the seed, Rom. 4. 13. 16.

§ IV. The other end, which is subordinate not onely to Gods glo­ry,Sanctification. but also to our Salvation, is our sanctification, as being the way to eternall life: for though we be saved by grace through faith, and not of workes; yet we are the workmanship Eph. 2. 8, 9, 10. of God, created in Christ Ie­sus unto good workes, which God hath before ordained, that we should walke in them: We are therefore justified, First, that God may be glo­rified. Secondly, that wee may bee saved in the life to come. Thirdly, that in this world we may lead a godly life. See Luk. 1. 74, 75. 1 Pet. 2. 24. Tit. 2. 11, 12, 13. So much of the causes.

§ V. There remaine the essentiall parts of justification, which I ex­pressedThe parts of justification. in the definition, when I said, that God doth justifie a belee­ving sinner, when imputing unto him the righteousnesse of Christ, he doth absolve him from his sinnes, and accepteth of him in Christ as righteous, and as an Heire of Eternall Life.

The parts therefore of justification are two, absolution from sinne, and acceptation as righteous in Christ; both which the Lord granteth by imputation of the full and perfect satisfaction of Christ, whereby he fully satisfied the Law, both in respect of the penalty, which he satisfied by his sufferings; and also in respect of the precept, which he satisfied [Page 46] [...] [Page 47] [...] [Page 48] by his perfect righteousnesse, both habituall and actuall. As therefore there were two branches of the Law to be satisfied, the commination and the Commandement; and two parts of Christs satisfaction answe­rable thereunto: so there are two parts of justification, absolution from the curse of the Law, by imputation of Christs sufferings, wherein he became a curse for us; and acceptation as righteous in Christ by im­putation of Christs most perfect righteousnes both habituall & actuall: in respect of both which parts of his satisfaction, Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnesRom. 10. 4., that is, doth justifie all that truly beleeve in him.

§ VI. And hereby it may appeare, that those three benefits of Re­demption, Reconciliation, and Adoption, are all comprehended un­derRedemption, reconciliation, adoption com­prised under Iustification. this maine benefit of justification; the two former, being all one in substance with the former part: for as touching the former, In Christ wee have Redemption through his bloudEp 17. Col. 1. 14, even remission of sinnes, Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. And as touching the latter; God was in Christ2 Cor. 5. 19. reconciling the world unto himselfe, not imputing unto them, or re­mitting their sinnes, 2 Cor. 5. 19. and therefore all three, Remission of1 [...]. 2. 7. Heb. 9. 22. sinnes,Col. 1. 14. 1 Pet. 1 19. Redemption, andRom. [...]. 10. Col. 1. 20. Reconciliation are ascribed to the bloud and to the death of Christ. The third is all one in substance with the second part: For what is it to be adopted, but to be accepted of GodEph. 1. 5, 6. in his beloved as righteous, and as an Heire of Eternall Life? and this is ascribed to the righteousnesse and obedience of ChristRom. 5. 19. both in his life and death. For therefore was the Sonne of God made under theGal. [...]. 4, 5. Law, namely to obey, and to fulfill, and to satisfie it; that hee re­deeming us from the yoke of the Law requiring perfect obedience in us to justification, we might receive the Adoption of sonnes.

§ VII. Now follow the consequents and fruits of justification, whichThe fruits and consequents o [...] Iustification. are the Grace of Sanctification and the parts therof, consisting partly in righteousnesse inherent, and partly in outward obedience called good workes: which I doe the rather mention in this place; because the Papists though they cannot deny, that they are the effects and fruits of justification, which as they use to alleage out of Augustine, Non praece­dunt justificandum, sed sequuntur justificatum, not goe before as causes, but follow as effects, yet notwithstanding most absurdly contend, that they concurre with faith unto justification, as the causes thereof: wee acknowledge them to be necessary in the subject, that is, the party that is justified, and to bee saved necessitate praesentiae, as the necessary fruits and consequents of justification, and as necessary antecedents to glori­fication: but we deny their necessity of efficiencie, as causes concur­ring to the act of justification, or merit of salvation: We acknowledge them as the necessary fruits of Redemption and Iustification, as the markes and cognizances of them that shall be saved, the necessary fore­runners of glorification, the onely true way to our heavenly countrey, the evidence according to which wee shall be judged at the last day; yet we are not justified by them, nor saved for them (as hereafter I shall plainely and plentifully prove) but onely by and for the righteous­nesse and merits of Christ apprehended by Faith.

A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICA­TION.
THE SECOND BOOKE: That Justification and Sanctification are not to bee confounded.

CAP. I. Setting downe the heads of the Controversies: the first whereof is, that Iustification and Sanctification are not to be confounded. The first proofe, 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 DoctrineThe heads of Controversie. 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. [Page 50] 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 con­foundThe Papists confound justi­fication and sanctification. 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,The Papists ground their [...]rrour upon the like notati­on of the La­tine words. 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 De justif. lib. 2. cap. 9. 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 De iustif. l. 2. c. 3. s [...]ct. Ad se­cundum. Po­test aliquis sieri iustus tum in t [...]insecè per a­doptionem iusti­tiae, tum ex­trinsecè per de­clarationem. 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 [Page 51] even as by Adams disobedience wee were made sinners and guilty of damnation, his transgression being imputed to us: so Rom. 5. 19. 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 2 Cor. 5. 21. 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,The Hebrew verbe in the first conjugati­on, or in Cal. 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. j [...]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. [...]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 theIn Niphal. Nitsdaq. sanctuary after 2300. dayes shall bee justified, that is expiated or purged.

In the second conjugation it signifieth to justifie, but not as the wordIn Piel. Tsiddeq. 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 Iob [...]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 theIn Hiphil. Hitsdiq. 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, or to give sentence with him. Deut. 25. 1. If there be a controversie betweene men, and theyDeut. 25. 1. come unto judgement that the Iudges may judge them, then they shall justifie the righteous, and condemne the wicked. Prov. 17. 15. HeeProv. 17. 15. that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord: and so the word is used, 2 Sam. 15. 4. Psal. 82. 3. Iob 27. 5. Esai. 5. 23.

§. V. From the Courts of men and from humane Iudges thisTo justifie, is a judiciall word translated from Courts of judgement. word is translated to spirituall judgements, and is attributed to God the Iudge to Christ our Mediatour, and Advocate; to Preachers, as they are the Embassadours of God in Christ his stead. God is said to [Page 52] justifie, when he absolveth a man from sin or guilt, and pronounceth him just, Exod. 23. 7. I will not justifie a wicked man, I will not absolve or acquit him, or hold him guiltlesse. 1 King. 8. 32. and 2 Chron. 6. 23. Sa­lomon desireth the Lord that he would judge his servants, condemning the wicked to b [...]ing his way upon his head, and justifying the righte­ous, to give him according to his righteousnesse. Esai. 50. 8. ChristEsai. 50. 8. for the comfort of his members argueth, as the Apostle doth to theRom. 8 33. like purpose, Rom. 8. he is neere that justifieth me, who will contend with me—who is mine adversary—who shall condemne mee? Christ our Saviour is also said to justifie, both as our Mediator and surety paying our debt, Esai. 53. 11. (my righteous servant agni [...]one sui, Esai. 53. 11. that is, by faith in him shall justifie many, and he shall beare their ini­quities) and also as our intercessour and advocate, to plead for us sin­ners appealing from the tribunall of justice to the throne of grace, 1 Iohn. 2. 2. Rom. 8. 34. Preachers also are said to justifie, Dan. 12. 3.Dan. 12. 3. both as they are the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in the soules of the Elect, by which they are justified in the Court of hea­ven: and also as they are Embassadours and Ministers of God to pro­nounce remission of sinnes to them that beleeve and repent, and so to justifie them in the court of their owne Conscience.

There remaineth the fourth Conjugation importing a reciprocallIn Hithpael, Hitstaddeq. signification, in which the word is once only used, Gen. 44. 16. how shall we justifie our selves?

§. VI. These are all the places wherein I fi [...]de this word to beeThe Hebrew word never signifieth to make just by righteousnesse inherent. used in the old Testament. By all which it doth evidently appeare that the Hebrew word, which signifieth to justifie, doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse, or by righteousnesse in­herent: the which will more clearely appeare by the countrary; for as to condemne is to make wicked; so to justifie, is to make just. The word Rashah signifieth to be wicked, as Tsadaq doth signifie to be just, so Hirshiah, which signifieth to make wicked, is to condemne, as Hitsdiq, which signifieth to make just, is to justifie. As therefore they, who are condemned, are said to be made wicked, or unjust, namely by sentence: so they, who are justified, are said to be made just, viz. by sentence. But he that condemneth the wicked, whether it be God or man, though he be said, according to the force of the word, to make him wicked; yet doth not make him wicked formally, or by infusion of wickednesse in­herent. Therefore, he that justifieth a man, whether he be God or man, though he be said, according to the Etymologie of the word, to make him just: yet quatenus justificat, he doth not make him just, as hee justifi­eth him, by righteousnesse inherent. No more than hee that condem­neth the just doth make him formally wicked; nor hee that justifieth the wicked doth make him formally just; which if a man should doe, it would be no abomination to God, as by he sentence of Prov. 17. 15. Salomon to justifie the wicked is, but the contrary, Iam. 5. 19, 20. Da [...]. 12. 3

§. VII. And not unlike hereunto is the phrase of cleansing orThe like use in other words. polluting, that is, making cleane or uncleane, attributed to the priest in [Page 53] the Levit. 13. 3. 6. &c. Law when hee was to judge of the Leprosie either in persons or things; which he was said to make cleane or uncleane, when he did but judge or pronounce them so to be. And further, this is to be noted, as a thing usuall in the Hebrew tongue, that the third Conjugation doth seeme to make that quality or thing, which is implied in the significati­on of the first Conjugation, not alwayes really and formally, but many times in word onely, or judgement, sentence, or conceit. Thus Gadal signifieth to be great, Higdil to make great or to magnifie, which is in words to extoll, in which sense we are said to magnifie Luk. 1. 46. God, &c. So Aman signifieth to be true, Heemin to make true, that is, to beleeve, as contrariwise not to beleeve a man is to make him a liar1 Ioh. 5. 10., and yet a man may beleeve 2 Thes. 2. 11. a lye, which he cannot make true. Thus Rashah signifieth to be wicked, Hirshuah to make wicked by sentence; and so Tsadaq signi­fieth to be just, and Hitsdiq to make just, namely by sentence. And such is the ordinary use of divers Latine and English words of the like com­position, as to glorifie, magnifie, vilifie, nullifie (as Herod Luk. 23. 1 [...]. did Christ) and so to justifie: for as we are said to justifie Luk. 7. 29. God, when wee ascribe righteousnesse unto him, to justifie other men, to justifie our selves: So God is said to justifie men, when he ascribeth or imputeth Rom. 4. 6. righte­ousnesse unto them.

CAP. II. The use of the Greeke Words signifying to justifie, or justifica­tion, never importing inherent justice.

§. I.

THE Greeke words, which signifie to justifie and to beThe Greeke words, first, [...]. justified, are [...], and [...]; from whence are deri­ved, [...], which signifieth justification, and [...], which sometimes also signifieth justification. And of these I am now to speake. [...] and [...] are not in use among the authors of the Greeke tongue, in the sense of justifying or making just. [...], saith Suidas, [...], it signifieth two things; to punish (as being derived from [...], which sometimes signifieth punishment) and to thinke right or meet: sometimes, both [...] and [...] doe signifie to condemne, in the contrary sense to the sacred use of the words: sometimes [...] signifi­eth onely to thinke, to judge or suppose, and [...] sometime to bee righted in judgement. From prophane authors therefore wee are not to setch the true meaning of the words, but from the Septuagints, who translating the Hebrew Text of the old Testament, doe render the He­brew words, which I spake of, importing justification, by these Greeke [Page 54] words [...] and [...]. And from them not only the sonne of Sirach, and other Ecclesiasticall authors writing in Greeke, but also the holy Apostles and Evangelists have received the same. And therefore these words are no otherwise to be understood, than as the translations of the said Hebrew words, signifying no other thing, than what the Hebrew words import: which (as I have shewed) doe never signifie to make or to be made righteous by inherent righteousnesse.

§. II. [...] is used by the Apostle and by the Evangelist Luke, [...] sometimes as the translation of Tsiddiq in Piel, as Luk. 7. 29. the peopleLuk. 7. 29. Luk. 10 29. and Publicans [...], justified God. The Lawyer, Luk. 10. 29.Luk. 16. 15. willing to justifie himselfe. The Pharisies, Luk. 16. 15. justified them­selves before men. And so is the word used sometimes by the sonne of Sirach, as Ecclus. 10. 29. who will justifie him that sinneth against hisEcclus. 10. 32. 13. 26. owne soule? Cap. 13. 26. alias 22. A rich man speaketh things not to be spoken, and yet men justifie him. Sometimes the Apostle useth the word [...] as the translation of Hitsdiq, as alwaies he doth in the questi­on of justification, and alwayes as the action of God: as Rom. 3. 26.Rom. 3. 26. 24 28. 30. who justifieth him that beleeveth in Iesus; how? vers. 24. gratis, without any cause or desert of justification in the party, without workes, that is, without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in him, or performed by him, vers. 28. who justifieth the Circumcision and uncircumcision, that is, both Iewes and Gentiles, not of workes or by inherent justice, but by and through faith, vers. 30. who justifieth the ungodly, that is,Rom. 4. 5, 6. the beleeving sinner, that worketh not, Rom. 4. 5. and therefore not by inherent righteousnesse: how then? by imputing righteousnesse with­out workes, vers. 6. who Rom. 8. 30. whom he calleth he justifieth, name­lyRom. 8. 30, 33. by faith, and whom he justifieth hee also glorifieth, using the word in the same sense, vers. 33. who can lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect? it is God that justifieth, who shall condemne? where most ma­nifestly the word is used as a judiciall word, opposed to accusing and condemning. Neither can any colour of reason be alleaged why the word in these places should signifie contrary to the perpetuall use both of it selfe, and of the H [...]brew word, whereof it is a translation, to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent.

§. III. [...] is used sometimes as the translation not of the pas­sive [...]. verbe, but as of the Neuter in Cal, as I have shewed before out of the Greeke translation of the [...]. So Ecclus. 7. 5. bee not just be­fore God, not wise before the king; or as it is usually translated, doeEcclus. 7. 5. not justifie thy selfe before God. So also in the new Testament. Rom. 3. 4. cited out of Psalm. 51. 6. where the Hebrew word is not a passive,Rom. 3 4. but a neuter. And so Apoc. 22. 11. [...] let him that isApoc. 22. 11. just, be just still. As the translation of the passive it is often used. But as it never signifieth to be made just by inherent justice (as I will shew, when I come to answere the objections of the Papists:) so it alwayes signifieth, either to be declared or pronounced just, or to bee absolved and made jus [...] by imputation. In the former sense, wisedome is said to bee justified of her Children: Matth. 11. 19. Luk. 7. 37. Luk. 7. 29. Luk. 7. 37. who, vers. 29. justified [Page 55] God. Christ, who is God, was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, 1 Tim. 3. 16. Thus by our words we shall bee justi [...]ed, not made1 Tim. 3. 16. just formally or by inherent righteousnesse, but in the sense opposed to condemnation. For as by thy words thou shalt bee justified, so by thy words thou shalt be condemned, Matth. 12. 37. Thus not the hearersMatth. 12. 37 alone, but the doers of the Law shall bee justified, that is, pronounced just, Rom. 2. 13. and in this sense the faithfull are justified by workes, that is, declared, approved, and knowne to bee just. Iames 2. 21, 23. 24,Jam. 2. 21, 23. 24, 25. 25. cum Genes. 22. 12. [...]n the latter sense, Ecclesiast. 1. 28. alias 22. the famous man, Chap. 31. 5. The lover of Gold, Chap. 23. 14. alias 11.Eccles. 1. 28 31. 5. 23. 14. The rash swearer shall not bee justified, that is, as it is in the Com­mination of the third Commandement, shall not bee held guitlesse; but most plainely, Chap. 26. the last verse, the huckster shall not bee ju­stifiedEccles 26. ver [...]. uit. from sinne, that is, not absolved from sinne nor accepted as righ­teous. So Act. 13. 38, 39. where most plainely, to be [...]ustified from sinne,Act. 13. 38, 39. doth signifie to be absolved or freed from the guilt of sinne, and is used promiscuously with remission of sinne. And this sense o [...] freedome from the guilt, is [...]ometimes extended to signifie a totall freedome, as Rom. Rom. 6. 7. 6. 7. He that is dead is justified (that i [...], as Chrysostome and O [...]umenius expound it, [...] is freed) from sinne. As these places are plainely repugnant to the Popish sense: so none of the rest, where [...] is used, doth favour it. For either they import remission of sinnes, and acceptation as righteo [...]s, as Luk. 18. 14. The Publican who hadLuk 18. 14. humbled himselfe and craved pardon, went home justified, that is, ob­tained pardon, and was accepted as righteous, rather than the Phari­see, who had justified himselfe: or distinguish betweene justification and sanctification, as 1 Cor. 6. 11. or exclude justification by inherent1 Cor. 6. 11. righteousnesse, as Rom. 3. 20. Rom. 4. 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Gal. 5. 4. Or imply im­putation,Rom 3 20. Rom. 4 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. G [...]l. [...]. 4. as where we are said to be justified either by his blood, as Rom. 5. 9. Or by faith, as Rom. 5. 1. Gal. 3. 24. Or by grace, as Ti [...]. 3. 7 Or both exclude the one and imply the other, as Rom. 3. 24. 28. Gal. 2. 16,R [...]m. 5. 9. Gal 3. 24. Tit. 3. 7. Rom. 3 24, 28. Gal. 2. 16. 17. 3. 11. 17. 3. 11.

§ IV. There remaine these two words, which I mentioned before, [...], and [...] is used onely in two plac [...]s, Rom. 4. 25. & 5. 18. In the former it is said, that Christ was delivered (to death) for [...] our sinnes, and was raised againe for our justific [...]tion, to whom, as it isRom. 4. 25. 5. 18. in the precedent verse, righteousnesse shall bee imputed, if wee beleeve on him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead: for as our Savi­our by his death, and obedience unt [...]ll death merited for us remission of sinnes, and the right to eternall life; so by the acts of Christ resto­red to life, as namely by his resurrection, his merits are effectually ap­plied and imputed to our justification. For if Christ had not risen againe, wee had beene still in our sinnes, 1 Cor. 15. 17. In the latter place, justification is in direct termes opposed to condemnation. For as by the offence or transgression of one, viz. the first Adam, [...] the guilt (which is to be supplied out of the sixteenth verse) came upon all1 Cor. 15. 17. Rom. 5. 18. men, the offspring of the first Adam, [...], unto condemnation: so [Page 56] by the [...] of one, whereby hee fulfilled the Law, viz. the second Adam, the [...], or free gift opposite to the guilt of damnation, which is our title and right to the kingdome of heaven, commeth to all men (that belong to the second Adam) unto justification of life.

§ V. The word [...] is divers [...]y used, both in the [...] in the purall number. plurall number, and in the singular. In the plurall, it hath three significations; for first, it signifieth Iura, the Lawes or Commandements of God, either in ge­nerall and indefinitely, as namely where no other word of the like sig­ni [...]cationPsalm. 119. 8. 12. Rom. 2. 26. is joyned with it, as Psalm. 119. 8, 12. Rom. 2. 26. Or more particularly the precepts of the ceremoniall Law. And this sense is most usuall, when it is joyned with words signifying other lawesLuk 1. 6. or pre­cepts. For the whole Law, which is called mishmereth Gen. 26. 5. Za [...]h. 3. 7. Iehovah, the ob­servation of the Lord, that is, all that the Lord requireth to bee obser­ved, is often distinguished into three parts: [...]eut. 5 3 [...]. 6. 1. Deut 8. 11. 11. 1. 1 King. 2. 3. 8. 58. Nehem. 1. 7. Mitsvoth, whi [...]h the Sep­tuagint translate [...], the Commandements of the morall Law: Mishpatim, which they translate [...] or [...], the precepts of the judici­all Law: Chuqqim, which they translate sometimes [...], and some­times [...], the statutes and ordinances of the Ceremoniall Law. Insomuch that the vulgar Latine for Chuqqim, rendreth many times, even where the 72. have [...], ceremonias, as Gen. 26. 5. Deut. 4. 8,Gen. 26. 5. Deut. 4. 8. Rom. 9. 4, Heb. 9. 1. 10. 14, 45. 5. 1, 31. 6. 1. 17. 8. 11. 10. 13. 11. 1. &c. The Apostle Rom. 9. 4. calleth the Morall Law [...], the Iudiciall [...], the Ceremoni­all [...], and accordingly the precepts of the Ceremoniall Law are called Heb. 9. 1. [...], The ordinances of divine service, and because they were but externall observations, vers. 10. [...], carnall ordinances. Secondly, it signifieth the judgements of God,Apoc. 15. 4. Apoc. 15. 4. which by the vulgar Latine and others is translated Iudicia. And as [...] sometimes signifieth the just workes of God which are the acts of his justice, so in the last place some expound [...], Apoc. 19. 8. to bee the just workes of the Saints; and as the author of the Homilies in Saint Augustine, justa facta, or justè facta; as the Greeke writers sometimes use the word; which the Papists will needs translate justifications, meaning thereby just workes, and hoping thereby to prove that men are justified by them: which we deny not in that sense wherein Saint Iames saith we are justified, that is, declared, and knowne to bee just by them. But if justifications bee the true translation of [...], in that place, then we are thereby to understand the merits of Christ, by which the Saints are justified; which are more fitly resem­bled by a garment, than either inherent righteousnesse or righteousApoc. 19. 8. Matth. 22. 11, 12. workes. And is indeed called Matth. 22. 11, 12. the wedding garment, which garment is put on by a true faith, by which the faithfull, as they are exhorted, Rom. 13. 14. put on Christ. Whereof Baptisme is a seale, Gal. 5. 27. And this is that white garment, which is to bee had fromGal 5. 27. Apoc. 3. 18. Apoc. 3. 4. 6. 11. 7. 9. Christ to cover our nakednesse, Apoc. 3. 18. Sometimes indeed the white robes doe signifie the glorious and happy estate promised to the faithfull, as Apoc. 3. 4. 6. 11. 7. 9. which is purchased by the merits of Christ, for which cause their robes are said to bee made white in the [Page 57] blood of the Lambe. But here the holy Ghost expoundeth the fine lin­nen, wherewith the Saints are arrayed, to bee the justifications of the Saints; which, as I said, are the merits and obedience of Christ put on by a true faith: which being without us, as garments use to be, and yet being applyed unto us and put on by faith, doe cover our nakednesse, and therefore are more fitly resembled by fine linnen pure and shi­ning, than our owne righteousnesse; which neither is without us, as a garment, nor yet pure, but Christs righteousnesse imputed is both as a garment pure and perfect in it selfe, and shineth forth by the light of good works, Mat. 5. 16.Matth. 5. 16.

§. VI. [...] is a verball derived from [...], either as [...] sig­nifieth [...] in the singular num­ber. Ps [...]. 19. 10. to be just, in which sense the precepts of God are said to bee [...], Psalm. 19. 10. or as it signifieth to be justified. In the for­mer sense [...] signifieth that which is just, either as the Law of God prescribing righteousnesse, (so the Law of nature written in the heartsRom. 1. 32. of men is called [...]. Rom. 1. 32.) or as the whole righteous­nesseRom. 5. 18. which in the Law is prescribed, and so it is used, Rom. 5. 18. For as by the transgression of one, (viz. the first Adam) whereby the whole Law was violated, guilt came upon all men (that were in him) unto condemnation: so by the [...] of one, the second Adam, whereby he fulfilled the whole Law, the free gift, which is our right and title to heaven came upon all men (who are in him) unto justification of life, and Rom. 8. 4. God sent his Sonne (the Law being impossible to be ful­filledRom. 8. 4. by us) in the likenesse of sinfull flesh, that [...], all that the Law requireth to justification, might in our nature bee performedRom. 5. 16. and fulfilled. In the latter sense it is once onely used, viz. Rom. 5. 16. in the same signification with [...], that is, justification, vers. 18. both of them being opposed to condemnation. If therefore the words which the holy Ghost doth use to expresse the benefit of justification, doe ne­ver signifie justification by inherent righteousnesse, but the contrary, as hath beene [...]hewed: then that justification, which the Papists teach, is not that which is taught in the holy Scriptures, but contrary to it.

§. VII. And the same is proved by these two reasons: first, be­causeThe first reason that the benefit of iustification is expressed in such terms as doe not imply insusion of iu­stice but im­putation. Rom. 4. 6, 7, 8. the Apostles, when they expresse the benefit of justification in other termes, they doe signifie the same, not by such words as import infusion of righteousnesse; but by such, as plainely signifie, either ab­solution from sinne, which is the not imputing of sinne, or imputation of righteousnesse, Rom. 4. these phrases are used to signifie one and the same thing: to justifie, to impute righteousnesse without works vers. 6. to re­mit sin, to cover sins, vers. 7. not [...]o impute sin, vers. 8. to be justified and to be blessed; and to be blessed is to have their sins remitted or covered, vers. 6. Rom. 5. 9, 10. to bee justified by the blood of Christ, and to be re­conciledRom. 5. 9, 10. 2 Cor. 5. 19, 21. unto God by his death all one, 2 Cor. 5. 19. to reconcile us un­to himselfe, not imputing our offences unto us, and vers. 21. to make us the righteousnesse of God in Christ, as he was made sinne for us, Act. Act. 26. 18. 26. 18. that by faith we may have remission of sinnes, and inheritance, that is, that we may bee heires of the heavenly inheritance among them [Page 58] that are sanctified, Ioh. 3. 18. He that beleeveth in Christ, [...] is not condemned, that is, as Paul speaketh Act. 13. 39. is justified: but heeIoh. 3. 18. Act. 13. 39. that beleeveth not him is condemned already. That, which Paul affir­meth Rom. 3. 21, 22. now without the Law is manifested the righteous­nesseRom. 3. 21, 22. of God, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousnesse of God, which is by the faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all that belee [...]e; Saint Peter more plainely expresseth, Act. 10. 43. unto him all the Prophets beare witnesse, that every one, whichAct. 10. 43. beleeveth in him, receiveth remission of sinnes through his name.

§. VIII. Because the whole processe of the justification of a sin­nerThe whole processe of ju­stification is judiciall. Rom. 8. 33, 34. is judiciall, Rom. 8. 33 34., For the sinner summoning himselfe be­fore the judgement seat of God, as every one must doe that would bee justified; his owne conscience, being rightly informed by the paedago­gie of the Law, accuseth him, the devill pleadeth against him, the Law convicteth him, and maketh him [...], Rom. 3. 19. subject to the sentence of condemnation, if God should judge him according to his Law. But the sinner being instructed in the Gospell, and the holy Ghost having opened Act. 16. 14. his heart to beleeve, appealeth from the sentence of the Law to the promise of the Gospell, and from the tribunall of justice to the throne of Grace, humbly intreating the Lord for Christs sake to par­don his sinnes, and to accept of the merits and obedience of Christ, as a full satisfaction for them. Our Saviour sitting at the right hand of his Father maketh intercession Rom. 8. 34. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Heb. 7. 25. 9. 24., and as an advocate pleadeth for him that forasmuch as he himselfe hath paid the debt, and satisfied Gods justice for the beleeving sinner; therefore the Lord, not onely in mercy, but al­so in justice is to remit his sinne, and to accept of him in Christ. The Lord, as a gracious and righteous judge imputing to the beleever the merits and righteousnesse of Christ, absolveth him from his sinnes, and accepteth of him as righteous in Christ, that is to say, justifieth him. The beleeving sinner being thus justified in the Court of heaven, is not at the first justified in the Court of his owne conscience, that is to say, is not yet perswaded and assured of his justification; untill the holy Ghost, by the ministery of the Gospell pronouncing remission of sinnes and justification to every one that beleeveth, teacheth him to apply the promises of the Gospell unto himselfe, which he sealeth unto him by the Sacraments. The beleever being thus perswaded, and in some measure assured of his justification, giveth diligence by practising the duties of repentance and sanctification, to confirme and increase that assurance more and more unto the end of his life, labouring by all good meanes to make sure his election, his vocation and his justification: and so pro­ceedeth from faith to faith. The beleever having thus beene justified in this life, both in the court of heaven, and in the court of his owne conscience; after this life, namely at the day of judgement, when our Saviour will judge of mens faiths according to the evidence of their works, shall be justified, that is, pronounced happy and blessed. TheseRom. 2. 13. three degrees of Gods most gracious proceeding with the faithfull, I have set downe, not that there are so many degrees of justification, so [Page 59] properly called. For the first degree onely is that justification, where­of wee treat, which admitteth no degrees. The other are degrees of the declaration thereof; the former, privately to the conscience of the faithfull; the other, publikely to the whole world.

CAP. III. The allegations of the Papists concerning the word justi­fication: the two first significations thereof assigned by Bellarmine.

§. I.

HAving thus explained the true sense and meaning ofBellarmine re­lateth foure significations of the word justification. these words, which in the holy Scriptures are used to signifie justification: let us now examine the allegati­ons of the Papists concerning the same. Bellarmine therefore saith De justif. l. 1. cap. 1. that the word justification (meaning the Latine word) is used foure wayes in the holy Scrip­tures, meaning the vulgar Latine edition, when as indeed neither the Latine edition it selfe, nor the Latine word is in this question further to bee respected, than as it is a true translation of the Hebrew in the Old Testament, and of the Greeke in the New. First, saith he, it is takenFirst, that it sig­nifieth the Law. Psal 119. 8. 12. for the Law which teacheth righteousnesse, and so is used, Psal. 119. 8. I will keepe thy justifications: and vers. 12. teach me thy justifications, &c. This Bellarmine barely expoundeth, without any further enforcing: but Gregory Martin Discovery of translations, cap. 1. § 50. and cap. 8., and our Rhemists In Luk. 1. 6. and in Apoc. 19. 8. urge it as a principall argu­ment: that the precepts of the Law are therefore called justifications, because the observation of them doth justifie us, and therefore exclaime against us, that in our translations, wee, in stead of justifications, doe read statutes or ordinances. As though in translating the holy Scrip­tures we did professe to translate the Latine edition, and not the Ori­ginal Text. Now the word, which in the old Testament is by the vulgar Latine interpreted justificationes, and by the 72. [...], is Chuqqim▪ which when it is used alone, signifieth undefinitely any of the precepts, statutes or commandements of God: but being used with other words of the like signification, from which it is distinguish'd, signifieth the statutes and ordinances of the Ceremoniall Law: insomuch that the vul­gar Latine in many places, even where the Greek hath [...], rendreth Ceremonias, a as I shewed before Cap. 2. sect. 5.; which though the Latines sometimes call justificationes, yet by the confession of the Papists themselves do not justifie. And the like is to be said of Luk. 1. 6. where Zachary and Eliza­beth Luk. 1. 6. are said to have walked in all the Commandements and justifica­tions of the Lord: where the Greeke word is [...], which is the trans­lation [Page 60] of Chuqqim, and signifieth the statutes of the ceremoniall Law, as being distinguished from the Commandements of the morall Law; but of the Greeke word I have spoken sufficiently before, Chap. 2. §. 5. If therefore the force of the Latine word justificationes bee urged, I an­swer, that the observation of the morall Law can justifie no man that is a sinner, and much lesse the observation of the ceremoniall. And the conclusion, which they inferre from the force of the word, that the pre­cepts of the Law are called justifications, because by the observation of them men are justified, is directly contrary to that of the Rom 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. 3▪ 11. Apostle, that by the workes of the Law no man living is, or can be justified.

§ II. But if they bee justifications, whose are they? For so theyTheir Argu­ment retorted. argue: If good workes, say they, bee the 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, Rom. 5. 18. Apoc. 19. 8. 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 Rom. 1. 32. [...], 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 Rom. 3. [...]1. 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 Rom. 5. 18. at the most in the Scriptures signifieth justification, doth usually signifie theApoc. 19. 8. fortè. 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, whereofThe second and third signi­fication. there is no example in the Scriptures, hee hath coined to fit their new­found 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 [Page 61] 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 [...]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 withoutLib. 1. Cap. 1. 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.The second sig­nification pro­ved by three testimonies. The first, 1 Cor. 6. 11. 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, [Page 62] 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.Act 2. 38. Mark. 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 theRom. 6. 3, 4. 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. Tit. 3. 5. 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 according to charity, sanctified from the corruption of sinne, and justified from the guilt of the same: therefore they should take heed, lest they should againe bee polluted with those sinnes from which they were sanctified; or made guilty of those crimes, from which they were justified.

§ V. His second testimony is Rom. 8. 30. Whom he hath called, them Bellarmines second testi­mony. hee hath justified. Answ. The Context doth shew, that the word in the 30. verse is used in the same sense as verse 33. For having shewed,Rom. 8 30. verse 33. that whom the Lord calleth, hee doth justifie, and whom he doth justi­fie, them also hee doth glorifie: from thence hee inferreth this conso­lation, who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect? It is God that justifieth, as was said, verse 30. who shall condemne, &c. Where justifying most plainely is used, as a judiciall word, signifying by sen­tence to justifie (as Chrysostome and O [...]cumenius on this place doe note) as opposed to accusing and condemning, and cannot with any shew of reason be drawne to signifie contrary to the perpetuall use of the word, infusion of righteousnesse. But heere it may bee objected, that in this place, where the Apostle setteth downe the degrees of salvation, san­ctification is either included in justification, or left our. Answ. It is left out: for the Apostle setting downe the chaine of the causes of sal­vation, in the degrees whereof every former being the cause of the latter, left out sanctification, as being no cause of salvation, but the way unto it, and the cognizance of them that are saved. And these de­grees are so set downe, Act. 26. 18. where the end of the ministery is expressed: first, Vocation that men should bee called, and thereby brought to beleeve: secondly, Iustification, that by faith they may re­ceive remission of sinnes: thirdly, Glorification, that by faith they may receive the inheritance among them that are sanctified: where sanctifi­cation is mentioned onely as the cognizance of them that are saved. Againe, sanctification is left out, because it is included, in respect of [Page 63] the beginning thereof, which is our conversion or regeneration, in vo­cation: and in respect of the consummation, in glorification: for as sanctification is gloria inchoata, so glorification is gratia consum­mata.

§. VI. His third testimony is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him His third Testi­monie, Rom. 4. 5. who justifieth the ungodly. Ans. he should have done well to have made up the sentence; his faith is imputed for righteousnesse: which place is so farre srom favouring the Popish conceit, that it plainely confutes it: first, it is called the justification of the ungodly, that is, of one who is a sinner in himselfe: for he that is a sinner in himselfe by inherent sinne, and so remaineth, cannot be justified by righteousnesse inherent: se­condly, because to him that beleeveth in Christ, faith, relatively under­stood, that is, the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith, is im­puted for righteousnesse: thirdly, because in this place justification is expressed by these termes, not imputing sinne, remitting or covering of sinne, imputing righteousnesse without workes, imputing faith for righteousnesse to him that worketh not, (that is, that seeketh not to bee justified by his owne righteousnesse) but beleeveth in him that justifi­eth a sinner.

CAP. IIII. The third and fourth signification of the word justifi­cation assigned by Bellarmine.

§. I.

THirdly, saith Bellarmine, justification is taken for increase His third signi­fication▪ for in­crease of justice. of justice: for even as he is said to be heated, not only who of cold is màde hot, but also who of hot is made hotter: even so he is said to be justified, who not onely of a sinner is made just, but also of just is made more just▪ Ans. In this com­parison of like there is a great unlikenesse: for cale­faction implyeth a reall mutation and a positive change in the subject from cold to hot: but in justification the change is not reall, but rela­tive, as before hath beene shewed. Bellarmine therefore must prove, that to justifie doth signifie to make righteous formally by righteous­nesse inherent, before he can prove that it signifieth the increase of in­herent justice. But if the former cannot be proved, much lesse the lat­ter. But yet he bringeth three proofes, such as they be.

§. II. The first Ecclus. 18. 21. Ne verearis usque ad mortem justifica­ri, Bellarmines first proofe out of Ecclus. 18. 21. qu [...]niam merces Domini manet in aeternum: feare not to be justified un­till death for the reward of the Lord adideth for ever. Answ. To omit, that the booke is Apocryphall, which ought not to bee alleaged [Page 64] in controversies of faith: the testimonie it selfe is vilely depraved. The words in the Originall are [...], that is, stay not un­till death to be justified; or as their own interlinear translation readethAriae Montani. it, ne expectes usque ad mortem justificari, wait not untill death to be justi­fied: where it is evident, that he speaketh of justification in our first conversion, which he would not have differred untill the time of death, and not of the continuance or increase of it: for then the sentence would beare a contrary, and indeed an ungodly sense: [...], abide not or continue not to be justified, or to be just untill thy death. And the words, untill death, are not to be joyned with the last word justified, but with the first, stay not untill death. And their translation of the words [...], whether as Bellarmine here readeth, ne verearis, or as some editions have ne vetéris, hath no affinity with the Originall. But our in­terpretation, as it agreeth with the words of the Text, so it is confirmed by the context. Vse Physike before thou bee sicke, before judgement prepare thy selfe,—humble thy selfe before thou bee sicke, and in the time of sinnes (that is, whiles thou mai'st yet sinne) shew thy conver­sion; let nothing hinder thee to pay thy vowes in due season, and de­ferre not untill death to be justified, or to become just.

§ III. But this testimony Bellarmine urgeth againe in another place,The same place urged, de justif. l. 4. c.19. shewing that the place is to bee understood of continuing and procee­ding in justice, and the words [...], are as much as cease not. And this he would prove by that which goeth before, be not hindred to pray al­wayes: where the wise man admonisheth us to increase our justice by continu­all prayer: and also by that which immediately followeth, because the reward of the Lord endureth for ever: for reward agreeth not to the first justification of the wicked, but indulgence. Answ. This interpretation of Bellarmine may then be admitted, when it shal be proved: first, that [...] signifieth to cease: secondly, [...] to pray: thirdly, [...] alwaies: fourthly, that those words, but the reward of the Lord endureth for ever, are found in the Originall Text. But if Bellarmine knew, that [...] signifieth stay not, or waite not, and not cease not, [...], to render the vow and not to pray; [...] in due season and without delay, and not alwayes; and that the clause concerning the reward of the Lord is not in the Greeke Text; then can it not be denied, but that Bellarmine endevoured against his owne conscience to father his errour upon the Sonne of Sirach: howbeit the reason which he rendreth is Pharisaicall: For unto the first justification, saith he, of sinners, not reward, but indulgence agreeth, as though there were any reward of our righteousnesse, (which alwayes in this life is impure and imperfect, Esai. 64. 6.) but by indulgence. If thou Lord should'st marke what is amisse, O Lord, who shall stand? but with thee there is mercy or indulgence, that thou maist be feared, Psal. 130. 3, 4. To them that love God, and keepe his Commandements, the Lord sheweth mercy, Exod. 20.6. To thee Lord mercie, for thou re­ward'st a man, (meaning the godly man) according to his works, Psalm. 62. 12. which plainely sheweth, that the reward of good workes is to be ascribed to Gods mercy and indulgence, and not to our defect: for it is [Page 65] great mercy that hee pardoneth the imperfection and iniquity of our good workes; greater, that he accepteth of them in Christ; but grea­test, that hee graciously rewardeth them: and who knoweth not that eternall life it selfe, which is the reward that endureth for ever, is theRom. 6.23. free and undeserved gift of God, not rendred to our merits, but given of his free grace.

§ IV. His second testimony is, Iam. 2.24. You see then that a man is His second proofe out of Iam. 2.24. justified by workes, and not by faith onely. Answ. Of this place wee are hereafter to treat more fully. Now we are onely to cleare the significa­tion of the word, which in this place most evidently signifieth, not to bee justified before God or made just, but to bee approved or declared just. In which sense the Schoolemen themselves doe teach, that good workes doe justifie declarativè. But here it may be objected, that Saint Iames in this place speaketh of that justification whereunto faith con­curreth with good workes, and good workes with faith. But to declare a man to bee justified, faith being an inward and hidden grace of the heart, hath no use or efficacy; but it selfe is to be declared and manife­sted by workes, as it is verse 18. Answ. The Apostle doth not speakeJam. 2.18. of justifying faith it selfe, but of the profession thereof, or of saith pro­fessed onely, as appeareth by the fourteenth verse, where the question is propounded; What doth it profit, my brethren, if a man shall say hee hath faith, and have not workes, can that faith, which is in profession onely, save him? Now to the justification of a man before men, and decla­ration of him to bee a man justified before God, two things are requi­site; the profession of the true faith, and a godly conversation answera­ble to that profession. For neither good workss declare a man to bee justified, if they bee not joyned with the profession of the true faith: neither doth the profession of faith justifie a man before men, if his faith cannot bee demonstrated by good workes. And in this sense it is said, that a man is justified, that is, knowne to bee just by workes, and not by faith onely.

§ V. His third testimony is, Apoc. 22.11. Qui justus est justifice­tur adhuc, hee that is just let him bee justified still. Answ. The word [...] in this place doth not signifie to bee justified, but to be just, as the word is often used not onely in the translation of the Septuagints, but also in the new Testament, as I have shewed before, as being the trans­lation not of the passive, but of tsadaq the verbe neuter in Cal, which signifieth not to bee justified, but to bee just. And this exposition is confirmed, first, by the words going before; He that doth wrong let him doe wrong still, hee that is filthy let him bee filthy still; and so, hee that is just let him bee just still. Secondly, by the authority of the Complutensis editio, of the Kings Bible, of Andraeas Caesariensis, and of Arethas in Apoc. who instead of [...] read [...], let him worke righteousnesse; of some Latine editions of the vulgar transla­tion, which instead of justificetur, read justitiam faciat; and lastly of Cyprian, who rendreth the place thus, justus adhuc justiora faciat. ThisDe bono pati­enti [...]. place therefore doth not speake of the encrease of our justification [Page 66] before God which cannot bee encreased, and much lesse are wee ex­horted unto it (for as soone as a man is justified, hee standeth righ­teous before God in the most perfect righteousnesse of CHRIST, which admitteth no encrease) but of perseverance in righteousnesse. Moreover, the word [...] still, doth not signifie encrease, but continu­ance.

§ VI. And these were Bellarmine his three first significations ofThe fourth sig­ni [...]ication of the word justi­fication. the word justification, whereof not any one can bee proved out of the word of God. Fourthly, saith he, It is taken for the declaration of justice after a judiciall manner, in which sense hee [...]s said to be justified, who when he had beene by the accuser made guilty of some iniquity, is by the sentence of the Iudge declared iust and absolved. And to this purpose hee alleageth not onely Prov. 17. 15. hee that justifieth the wicked and condemneth the just, &c. And Esay 5. 23. But (which are not so pertinent) Luk. 7. 35. and Luk. 10. 29. Now, saith hee, of the foure acceptions of the word our adversaries teach this fourth to be most proper. As for the [...]econd, and the third which ariseth from the second, they say it is improper, and not to bee found in any approved Authors. But of this matter, saith hee, wee will discourse Libro 2. Cap. 3. whether wee will follow him. In the meane time let it bee observed, that the Papists who can­not approve their owne acceptions of the word by any one place of Scripture, doe neverthelesse acknowledge that use of the word which we doe maintaine. But whereas hee doth insinuate, that we doe there­fore reject the second and third significations, because the word is not so used in approved Authors: I answer, if hee speake of the Latine word (as hee doth) that it is not used of the Authors of the Latine tongue at all; and in the Latine edition of the Scriptures, and from thence in other Ecclesiasticall writers, it is used as the translation of the Hebrew and the Greeke, and must accordingly bee understood. And if of the Greeke, that it is not used indeed of the Authors of the Greeke tongue in the Popish sense. But that is not the reason why wee reject those senses, but because they are not to bee found in the holy Scriptures.

CAP. V. Bellarmines discourse concerning the signification of the word justification, de Iustif. lib. 2. cap. 3. examined. De Iustif. l. 2. c. 3.

§. I.

BVT let us examine Bellarmines disputation concerning theHis 1. proofe out of Rom. 5. 17, 18, 19. signification of the word Lib. 2. Cap. 3. where alleaging [...]. 5. 17, 18, 19. to prove justification by inherent righ­teousnesse, he affirmeth, that to be justified by Christ in that place, doth signifie to bee made just by obtaining righteousnesse [...]. And this hee would prove by two reasons: first, out of those words j [...]sti constistuentur multi, many shall be constituted or made just: From whence he argueth thus:

  • To bee constituted just is to bee made just by inherent righ­teousnesse:
  • To bee justified is to bee constituted just, Rom. 5. 19. Therefore to bee constituted just is to bee made just by righteousnesse inherent.

Answ. Wee confesse, that whosoever is justified is constituted, yea, is made just: but the question is concerning the manner: whether by infusion of righteousnesse, or by imputation. The assumption there­fore is granted by us. But the proposition is false, and hath no ground in the Scriptures. Yea, the contrary may bee proved out of the place alleaged; where justification, or making righteous is opposed, not to the corruption of sinne, but to guilt and condemnation, vers. 16. and 18. And therefore he is said in this place to be justified, or constituted righteous, who being absolved and acquitted from the guilt of sinne, and from condemnation, is accepted as righteous unto life: for as in the former part of the 19. verse, many are said to be constituted sinners, that is, as theChrysoft. T [...]eo­doret. [...]. Greeke interpreters doe expound it, and as appeareth by the former verses, guilty of sin, and obnoxious to condemnation by the disobedience of Ada [...], meaning that one offence of his which we cal his fal; which cannot be otherwise understood but by imputation: so in the latter part, many are said to be constituted just, by the obedience of the second Adam, that is, absolved from the guilt of sinne and con­demnation, and accepted as righteous in Christ, his obedience being communicated to them; which cannot be by any other meanes, but by imputation. Neither can any reason be given why [...], to bee constituted just, should not be a judiciall word, as well as [...] to be justified. In all other places, this verbe, whether it bee used in the good sense or in the bad, signifieth no such thing, as Bellarmine inferreth up­on [Page 68] it. For as in the bad it signifieth to convince or condemne, as Gal. Gal. 2. 18. Iam. 4. 4. Rom. 5. 8. 2 Cor. 4. 2. 6. 4. 7. 11. 2. 18. Iam. 4. 4. so in the good, to approve or commend, as Rom. 5. 8. 2 Cor. 4. 2. 6. 4. 7. 11. And accordingly the meaning of this place may be this: as by the disobedience of the first Adam many were con­victed and condemned as sinners, that is, guilty of sinne and damnati­on: so by the obedience of the second Adam many shall bee approved and accepted as righteous.

His reason is from the antithesis of Adam to Christ: which as I shall hereafter [...]ib 4. c. 10. sect. 1. &c. in his due place prove, maketh wholly against him: for if by the actuall disobedience of Adam imputed unto us wee were made sinners; then by the obedience of Christ imputed unto us we are made righteous: but the former is true, therefore the latter. Of this antithesis I am hereafter to speake more at large: in the meane time this may suffice to maintaine and justifie our exposition of the word against Bellarmines cavils.

§. II. But here Bellarmine frameth to himselfe a fourefold Objecti­onBellarmines answere, de ju­stis. l. 2. c. 3. to foure Ob [...]e- ctions out of C [...]lvin and Chemnitius refuted. The first rea­son because justifying is opposed to condemning. Bellarmines hi [...]t answere. of Calvin and Chemnitius, proving that to justifie is a judiciall word, signifying to absolve and to pronounce just. Their first reason is, be­cause the Apostle opposeth justifying to condemning, as Rom. 5. 16. 18. 8. 33. Therefore as God is said to condemne, when he doth not acquit a man, but pronouncing him guilty deputeth him unto punishment: so on the contrary, he is said to justifie, when hee acquitteth and absolveth a man from guilt, and pronouncing him just accepteth of him in Christ as righteous unto eternall life. To this Bellarmine shapeth two an­sweres: first, That justification is rightly opposed to condemnation; but is not therefore alwayes a judiciall word: for even condemnation it selfe some­times is the act of a Iudge appointing him to punishment, who in judgement was found guilty: and sometimes it is the effect of a fault, which hath deserved punishment. And so Adam hath condemned us, and God condemneth: but Adam hath not condemned us by judging us after a judiciall manner, but by imprinting in us Originall sinne. After the same manner, saith hee, justifica­tion sometimes is the act of a Iudge, sometimes the effect of grace. And both wayes doth Christ justifie us: first, as the second Adam by deletion of sinne, and infusion of grace: secondly, in the day of judgment by declaring them just, whom before he had made just.

Reply: Iustification in this question, and in the places alleaged, is considered as an action of God, and being referred to God, it signifi­eth, not to make just by infusion of righteousnesse; but by sentence af­ter the manner of a Iudge, to absolve from sinne and to pronounce and accept as righteous, as being opposed to condemning, which being re­ferred to God, signifieth not to make sinfull, but by sentence after the manner of a Iudge to pronounce the offendour guilty, and to award him punishment. But what either justifying or condemning may sig­nifie, being referred to other either persons or things, it is not materiall; so that it be confessed, (which cannot be denied) that justifying, being ascribed to God, signifieth not to make righteous by infusion, no more than condemning, being attributed to God, signifieth to make wicked [Page 69] by infusion; but both are to bee understood as the actions of a judge, who either pronouncing a man just absolveth him from guilt; or pro­nouncing him guilty appointeth him to punishment. This therefore was an impertinent shift of a subtle sophister having nothing to say to the purpose, for whereas he applyeth his distinction of condemning and justifying to the first and second Adam, as pertinent to the places alleaged: I answer, first, that neither is considered, as the act of the first or second Adam, but as Bellarmine confesseth in his second answer, as the actions of God the Iudge: secondly, that although in some sense the first Adam may bee said to have condemned us, as the second Adam is truely said, Esai. 53. 11. to justifie us: yet both is to bee understood of the guilt of sinne, brought upon us by the one, and taken away by the other. For as the first Adam by his transgression may be said [...] to have condemned us, because hee hath inwrapped us in the guilt of his sinne, and so made us guilty of death and obnoxious to the [...]entence of condemnation, that transgression of his being imputed us, being in him as the root: so the second Adam may truely be said to justifie us (who are in him) both as a surety in taking upon him our guilt, and paying our debt for us, Esai. 53. 11. and also as our intercessour and advocate pleading for us, that by imputation of his righteousnesse we may be ab­solved from our sinnes, and accepted as righteous in him.

§. III. His second answer is, that although condemnation and justifi­cation Bellarmines second answer. some where signifie the action of the Iudge, as in the place cited, Rom. 5. 16. yet notwithstanding when God doth justifie a sinner by d [...]claring him just, he doth also make him just, because the judgement of God is according to the truth. And therefore Christ, whether he justifieth us by his obedience, or by his judgement, he alwayes maketh just. And thus Augustine (saith he) under­stood this place.

Reply: That God maketh just, whom he pronounceth just, we freely confesse: but the question still is of the manner, for in justification when he pronounceth a man just, he maketh him just, and that perfectly just, not by infusion of inherent righteousnesse, but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse. And whom hee justifieth, that is, maketh just by impu­tation of righteousnesse; them hee also sanctifieth, that is, maketh just in some measure by infusion of grace. For to use Bellarmines owne words, when God doth justifie a sinner by declaring him righteous, it is plaine, that in himselfe hee is a sinner, who by God is declared to bee just: and therefore, that hee is not justified by inherent justice, for in himselfe he is a sinner, as wee all are. How then shall the judgement of God bee according to the truth, when hee declareth a sinner to bee just? To a sinner beleeving in Christ, the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith is imputed for righteousnesse, Rom. 4. 5. and this we shall here­afterRom. 4. 5. shew to be an argument unanswerable.

None, remaining sinners in themselves, can truely bee declared or pronounced just in respect of righteousnesse inherent.

All mortall men, even the most righteous of them, meraine sinners1 Job. 1. 8. Ecclus. 7. 20. in themselves, 1 Ioh. 1. 8. Ecclus 7. 20. Therefore

[Page 70]No mortall man can truly be declared or pronounced just in respect of inherent righteousnesse, and consequently none are or can bee justi­fied by righteousnesse inherent.

§ IIII. The testimony of Augustine is falsified. For disputingAugustine de peccatorum me­ritis & remis. Lib. 1. Cap. 15. against the errour of the Pelagians, who imagined that originall sinne was not propagated from Adam, but that imitation onely maketh sin­ners by Adam: hee inferreth, that then by the same reason onely imi­tation maketh just by Christ. As though either Adam had done no more against us, or Christ for us, than that they had been prime exam­ples and precedents, the one of sinne, the other of righteousnesse. But Augustine sheweth out of Rom. 5. that as those who are regenerated by the Spirit of Christ, obtaine remission of sinnes and inward grace: so those who come from Adam by naturall generation, are made guilty of his sinne unto condemnation, and also receive corruption from him by propagation, all which we teach. But that Augustine pleadeth not for justification by inherent justice, appeareth by the antithesis, which in that place hee maketh betwixt our condemnation by Adam, and our ju­stification by Christ. First, that whereas to condemnation there con­curresNon tamen a­liqua justitia propter Chri­stum, sicut a­liqua peccata propter Adam. our owne voluntary transgression besides Adams sinne: yet to our justification there doth not concurre any righteoufnesse besides Christ. Secondly, (which difference Saint Paul also noteth Rom. 5. 15, 16) be­cause in the carnall generation originall sinne onely is contracted; but in the spirituall regeneration there is remission not onely of originall, but also of voluntary sinnes.

§ V. The second reason of Calvin and Chemnitius, which Bellar­mine The second reason of Cal­vin and Chem­nitius, that as the Hebrew, so the Greeke signifieth. taketh upon him to confute, is this, because the Apostle writing of justification did, no doubt, imitate the Hebrew phrase, though he wrote in Greeke. But the Hebrew word signifying to justifie, hath the judici­all signification. The argument may thus be propounded.

Such as is the signification of the Hebrew hitsdiq in the old Testament, the same is the signification of the Greeke word [...] both in the edition of the Septuagints, as being the translation thereof, and in the new Testament, which in this point retaineth the translation of the Septuagints:

But the Hebrew hitsdiq is meerely a judiciall word, opposed to condemnation, as I have proved heretofore by induction of exam­ples, as Deut. 25. 1. 1 King. 32. 8. Prov. 17. 15. Esai 5. 23. and never signifieth to make righteous by infusion, or to endue with righte­ousnesse inherent:

Therefore the Greeke word also hath the same signification.

To the assumption Bellarmine answereth, that the Hebrew word proper­ly signifieth to make just, but because a man may bee made just, both inwardly by obtaining of justice, and outwardly by declaration; hence it is, that the word admitteth these divers significations. Reply. In this answer we are to take his confession of the truth, both that we may be made just outward­ly by declaration, and also that the Verbe sometimes doth signifie so much. In vaine therefore doe the Papists urge against us the signification [Page 71] of the Latine word justificare, as signifying justum facere. seeing by our exposition it signifieth justum facere also, not onely by declaration, as Bellarmine heere speaketh, but much more by imputation. But though he confesseth the signification of the Verbe urged by us: yet wee may not acknowledge the signification so much urged by the Papists: yea wee confidently deny, that the Hebrew hitsdiq doth any where in the Scriptures signifie to endùe with righteousnesse inherent.

§ VI. This therefore hee endevoureth to prove by induction ofBellarmines first testimony, Dan. 12. 3. examples, and first out of Dan. 12. 3. Qui adjustitiam erudiunt multos, who instruct many to righteousnesse. The Hebrew word is matsdiqim, where the Prophet speaking of the great glory which shall bee of Tea­chers, who justifie many, the vulgar Latine (which is the onely authen­tique Text among the Papists) doth not translate the word making righteous by infusion, or enduing with righteousnesse inherent, which is the worke of God alone, and not of the Teacher; but instructing unto righteousnesse, or as Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth, by teaching to bring men to righteousnesse; which is done by bringing them to beleeve, and therefore this allegation proveth not the Popish significa­tion of the word. Yea, but it disproveth, saith Bellarmine, the judiciall sig­nification so much urged by you. For Teachers doe not justifie after the ma­ner of [...]udges, (howbeit the Popish Priests dot in their absolutions as themselves doe teach.)

Reply. But this is nothing but a cavill. For where wee say, that to justifie, in this doctrine of justification, is verbum forense, a word taken from Courts, having a judiciall signification, as namely to absolve from sinne, or to give sentence with a man after the maner of a Iudge: our meaning is, that this word being attributed to God, as it is God alone that justifieth, (and so wee consider justification as an action of God) it alwaies hath this judiciall signification, and never signifieth to en­due with righteousnesse inherent. But wee doe not say, that it being attributed to any other, as it is to divers others both per [...]ons and things, it is to bee expounded as the act of the Iudge; though other­wise the justice implyed in the signification of the word, bee after the judiciall sense, not inherent, but imputative. Thus (as I have said be­fore) Christ justifieth, not onely as hee is our Iudge, but also as our Surety paying our debt, and as our Advocate pleading for us. The holy Ghost justifieth, both as he is the Spirit of regeneration working in us the grace of faith; and as the Spirit of adoption, by applying un­to us the merits of Christ, assuring us of our justification and adopti­on. The Ministers of the Gospell justifie (as they are also said to forgive sinnes, to beget men unto God, and to save them) ministerially, as the Embassadours of Christ, whose office it is to reconcile men unto God, to preach and to pronounce remission of sinnes to them that beleeve, and also instrumentally, as the instruments of the holy Ghost, to worke in them the grace of faith, by which they are justified: for faith com­meth by hearing Rom. 10. 14, 17. and Preachers are said to bee Mini­sters by whom you beleeve, 1 Cor. 3. 5. Sacraments doe justifie as [Page 72] seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith, Rom. 4. 11. And as the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments doe justifie ut manus dantis, as the hand of God giving and applying Christ and his righteousnesse to the faithfull receiver: so faith is manus accipie [...]tis, the hand of the be­leever receiving Christ and his righteousnesse unto justification.

§ VII. But the second place is in his conceit more cleare, viz. His second Testimony, Esai. 53. 11. Esai. 53. 11. where the Lord speaking by his Prophet concerning Christ, saith, My righteous servant shall by his knowledge justifie many, and he sh [...]ll beare their sinnes, where the verbe is in Hiphil Iatsdiq, which signifieth shall make just: Chemnitius indeed, saith he, goeth about to wrest this place also to the judiciall signification: But in vaine, for there are foure words which are manifestly repugnant to his interpretation. But before wee speake of those foure words, let us heare whatExam. part. 1. pag. 131. a. Chemnitius saith, Whereas Andradius (saith he) wresteth that sentence of Esay to prove, that to justifie is to en­due the minde with the quality of inherent justice, it is great impuden­cie for there is presently added an exposition, how that justification is to be understood, because he shall, saith Esay, beare their iniquities: where Chemnitius doth not so much as mention the judiciall signification of the word, justifying, after the manner of a Iudge, but rather signifieth, that Christ at his first comming, did not justifie the Elect after the manner of a Iudge, but as a surety in taking upon himselfe our debt and bearing our iniquities, and as a Redeemer paying our ransome, and so di charging us from our debt and from our bondage. Neither doth it follow, that it is not a judiciall word, because in that place it signifieth not to justifie as a Iudge, for besides the Iudge there are other parties also who doe justifie in a judiciall sense, as namely sureties and advo­cates.

§. VIII. Now let us examine those foure words, all which serve toThe foure words which [...] ta­keth hold of. prove that Christ in that place is not said to justifie after the manner of a Iudge, which no man affirmeth, and therefore Bellarmine fighteth with his owne shadow. For we doubt not, but that Christ may be said to justifie divers wayes: first, by his doctrine, as our Prophet and Tea­cher▪ in which sense Teachers are said to justifie, Dan. 12. 3. secondly, as our Priest, both by his satisfaction and sacrifice propitiatory, as Esai. 53. 11. for so he saith, and he shall beare their iniquities; so Heb. 9. 26, 28. and also by his intercession, as our Advocate, 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Rom. 8. 34. Heb. 9. 24. thirdly, by his sentence, as our king and judge at the2 Tim. 4. 1. The first word, by his know­ledge. last day, Matth. 25. 34. The first word is by his knowledge, that is, as he expoundeth it out of Hierome, by his doctrine. Answ. Wee deny not, but that Christ by his doctrine did justifie many, working in them the grace of faith, for even other Teachers, who are but his Ministers, doe also justifie others, as Daniel speaketh, not by infusion of righteous­nesse, but as the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in the hearers, or being, as Saint Paul speaketh, Ministers by whom they doe beleeve, and beleeving are justified in the judiciall sense. But Esay spea­keth not of his doctrine, but of his knowledge, and that passively un­derstood; not, for that knowledge whereby he knoweth all things, but [Page 73] whereby hee is acknowledged to bee the Messias, that is to say, faith; and so Pagnine, Vatablus, and Tremellius read, scientia sui, or agnitione sui, that is, by faith in him (for so is faith often termed, as 2 Pet. 1. 2, 3. and 1 Tim. 2. 4. &c. by which, as it is said in this place of Esay, hee doth justifie La rabbim, that is as Paul speaketh Rom. 5. 19. [...], the multitude of the Elect, who beleeve in him: how? by bearing their ini­quiti [...]s, that is, the punishment due for their sinnes, his sufferings being imputed to them: if therefore justifying by faith doe prove justificati­on by works or by inherent righteousnesse, then this word proveth it.

§. IX. The second word is ipse justus: by which word, saith he, is sig­nified The second word, ipse justus. that Christ doth justifie not onely by teaching, but also by just working, and by imparting his righteousnesse unto us. Answ. Christ his obedience or just working is proper to his person, and inherent in him, and there­fore that righteousnesse, which he performed in his owne person, being both active, and therefore transient, and proper to his person, and there­fore without us, cannot be imparted to us otherwise than by imputati­on. To what purpose then doth he urge this word, seeing Christ is just in justifying us, as well by imputation, as by infusion? Forsooth, to shew, that Christ by his obedience and sufferings doth not justifie after the manner of a Iudge: which no man affirmeth. But what is his rea­son? because it is not required to justifying after a judiciall manner, that he, who justifieth others, should himselfe be just: as if he should say, it is not required that a Iudge should bee just: contrary to that Gen. 18. 25. But God doth justifie us after the judiciall manner, as a Iudge, through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus, and by forgivenesse of sinnes, and that to this end to shew forth his justice that hee might bee just▪ and the justifier of him who beleeveth in Iesus, Rom. 3. 25, 26. But this might better have beene objected against his owne exposition of the former word; seeing he, who is not just himselfe, may by his do­ctrine justifie others. Notwithstanding, that which Bellarmine here áffirmeth concerning Christ, is most true: that it was necessary, that he who should justifie others by his obedience should bee just himselfe: howbeit he impertinently alleageth, Rom. 3. 26. which speaketh of God justifying us, not as a Mediator by his obedience, but as a Iudge by his sentence. But the true reason, why the Prophet useth this word, is in respect of the words following, to signifie that Iesus Christ the righ­teous was made 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 The third word, my ser­vant. 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. TheThe fourth, and he shall▪ beare their ini­quities. 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 [Page 74] 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 a [...]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:Lib. 2. cap. 4. sect. 5. Ap. 22. 11. 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 [Page 75] 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, The use of the word in the Fa­thers. 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: which can­not be understood of justification by inherent righteousnesse. For it were very absurd to affirme (which the Papists would faine father upon us) that to justification by inherent righteousnesse nothing is required [Page 76] but faith only. Againe, Bellarmine objecteth, which in the ninth Chapter (where he confesseth justification to be often taken in the Scriptures for declaration of righteousnesse) he more plainely expresseth, although to justifie were every where taken for to pronounce just, yet that were no advan­tage to us. For a sinner cannot truely be pronounced just, unlesse he who pro­nounceth him just, doe withall make him just, which God onely can doe. And therefore hee alone is said to justifie a sinner, and by absolving him to make him truely just. Answere. Whom God pronounceth just, them hee maketh just: but still the question is of the manner: for to justifie by absolving, is to make righteous by the not imputing of sinne, and imputing of righteousnesse, and not by infusion of righteousnesse: for that is not to justifie, but to sanctifie. Howbe­it wee freely confesse, that whom God justifieth, hee also sanctifieth, and that whosoever is in CHRIST IESVS, hee is a new Crea­ture. But howsoever these graces doe alwayes concurre, insomuch that whosoever hath the one hath the other, and whosoever hath not both, hath neither: yet notwithstanding they must carefully bee distinguished. And that is it which hitherto I have endevoured to prove.

CAP. VI. H [...]w Iustification and Sanctification are to be distinguished.

§. I.

NOw let us consider how they are distinguished.First, by their contraries. And first the difference of them may appeare by their contraries. The contrary to justifying is condemning: the contrary to sanctifying is polluting or defiling with sinne: first therefore the word, which signifieth to condemne, if you respect the force of the word, signifieth to makeHirshiah. wicked, even as the Verbe which signifi­eth to justifie doth; if you respect the forceHitsdiq. of the word, it signifieth to make just: As God therefore, when hee condemneth, is said to make wicked, not by infusion of wickednesse, but by his sentence, pronoun­cing the party guilty, and deputing him to punishment: so when hee justifieth, he maketh just by his sentence, not by infusion of righteous­nesse, quatenus justificat: but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse he absolveth the party from guilt and punishment, and accepteth of him as righteous in Christ, and as an heire of eternall life: secondly, the contrary to sanctifying, which is to make holy, is polluting or defi­ling [Page 77] with sinne, which is to make unholy and uncleane. What dif­ference therefore is betweene condemning and polluting, the like is be­tweene justifying and sanctifying. And as condemning and pollu­ting are by no meanes to bee confounded, no more can justifying and sanctifying.

§. II. In justification wee are freed from the guilt of sinne: in san­ctification, from the corruption or pollution of sinne. For God is thenSecondly, free­dome from GuiltCoruptiō. said to justifie us, when he absolveth us from the guilt of sinne by impu­tation of Christs righteousnesse: and hee is then said to sanctifie us, when by his Spirit he mortifieth sinne in us, and freeth us in some mea­sure from the corruption thereof.

§. II. Iustification is an action of God without us, as also are re­demption, reconciliation, and adoption, which three benefits in sub­stanceThirdly, an action of God without us.within us. differ not from justification, but are all comprehended under it: the second first being the same in effect with the former part of justifica­tion, viz. remission of sinnes; and the last being all one with the se­cond part of justification, which is acceptation of the beleever as righteousnesse in Christ, and as an heire of eternall life, as I have shew­ed heretofore: for then are wee said to have redemption,Eph. 1. 7. when wee have remission of sinnes, then is God said to reconcile2 Cor. 5. 19. us unto him­selfe,Col. 1. 14. when hee doth not impute our sinnes unto us: then hee is said to adopt us, when hee acceptethEphes. 1. 5, 6. Rom. 8. 17. of us in Christ as righteous and as heires of eternall life. None of these actions doth worke a Reall change in the party, but importeth a new relation betweene God and them, as hath beene shewed. But sanctification is an action of Gods Spirit within us, working in us a reall change, by mortification of sinne within us, and infusion of Grace and righteousnesse into us.

§. IV. Of justification the matter is the righteousnesse of Christ,Fourthly, in re­spect of the matter. which is in him as the subject, but imputed to us: the matter of sancti­fication is a righteousnesse derived from Christ, but inherent in us. The matter therefore of our justification is perfect, but not inherent, to wit, the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him. The matter of our sanctification is inherent, but not perfect, to wit, justi­tia inchoata, a righteousnesse which is but begun in us, and that new obe­dience, which though it be sincere and unfained, is with great infirmity performed by us; recta forsan, sed non pura justitia, as Bernard saith.

§. V. Hereupon it followeth, that of justification it selfe, whereby wee are justified before God, there are no degrees; (though óf the as­suranceFifthly, de­grees of sancti­fication, but none of justi­fication. thereof there bee, which are the degrees of speciall faith) be­cause to the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ, by which we are even in our first conversion justified, nothing can be added; and therefore, as I have said, the faith of all the faithfull though different in degrees, is [...], 2 Pet. 1. 1. of equall worth in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ: even as the hands of divers men though unequall in strength, yet are of equall efficacie in respect of the almes received thereby. But of sanctification there are degrees according to the mea­sure of grace received.

[Page 78]§. VI. The forme of justification considered as an action of God, is imputation of Christs righteousnesse: of sanctification, the infusionSixthly, in re­spect of the forme. of righteousnesse. For God by imputation of Christs righteousnesse doth justifie us: and he doth sanctifie by infusion of righteousnesse.

§. VII. The parts of justification, are remission or not imputingSeventhly, in regard of the pa [...]ts. of sinne unto condemnation, and acceptation as righteous unto life, both wrought by imputation of Christs righteousnesse unto us. The parts of sanctification are mortification, whereby wee dye unto sinne, and vivification whereby wee live unto righteousnesse, rising from the grave of sinne, unto newnesse of life; and is therefore called the first resurrection; both wrought in us by the Spirit of sanctification.

§. VIII. Wee are justified by faith, not as it is a grace or habit inEightly, in re­spect of faith. us, that is to say, as it is a part of inherent righteousnesse: but as the hand or instrument receiving the righteousnesse of Christ, which is imputed to them that beleeve: but wee are sanctified by faith, as it is a part of that righteousnesse, which is inherent in us. And therefore wee are justified by faith alone, because no other grace doth concurre with it to the act of justification, none of them serving to receive the righ­teousnesse of Christ, but faith onely: but we are not sanctified by faith alone, 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 withoutRom. 3. 31. the Law is revealed in the Gospell,Ninthly, in respect of the Law. 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,Tenth­ly works in the questi­on of justifi­cation, of no value, sancti­ficati­on, of great worth. 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 asPhil. 3. 8. 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 [Page 79] both that habituall and also actuall righteousnesse and holinesse wherein our sanctification doth consist.Eleventhly, by justification entitled, by sanctification fitted for Gods kingdome.

§. XI. By our justification wee areAct. 26. 18. Tit. 3. 7. entituled to Gods kingdome, that is, saved in hope: by our sanctification we are fitted and prepared for Gods kingdome, into which no uncleaneApoc. 21. 27. 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, thatAct. 26. 18. by faith wee have remission of sinnes, and inheritance among them that are sanctified.In the Greeke Text there is a comma after [...]. and therefore the words [...], are not to be conserved with the Par­ticiple [...], but with the Verbe [...], thus, that by faith they may re­ceive 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 one­lySo Act. [...]0. 32. Thirteenthly, the title, the evidence. 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 Fourteenthly, justified by the grace of God: sanctified by the gifts of grace. 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 Fifteenthly, in justification we are pati­ents, in sancti­fication we are agents. 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. Col. 3. 5. to vivification, Ephes. 4.23,24. to both, Ezek. 18.31. Ephes. 4. 23, 24.

§. XVI. The acts of faith are of two sorts, some tending to justifi­cation,Ezek. 18. 31. some to sanctification. The former are immediate, which are Sixteenthly, the acts of faith mediate and imme­diate. 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 Seventeenthly, of justification the Apostle teacheth in the five first chap­ters to the Rom. of sanctificati­on in the sixt and seven. 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 byGal. 5. 6. love worketh obedience: and therefore it dtoh not sanctifie alone.

§. XVII. Of justification the Apostle treateth in the five first chap­ters [Page 80] of the Epistle to the Romanes, of sanctification in the sixth and seventh.

§. XVIII. Our Saviour Christ, the blessed Angels, Adam in hisEighteenthly, justification is onely of sin­ners. 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 sanctifica­tionThe Papist [...] wilf [...]ll con­founding of iustification and sanctifi­cation, the ground of their malitious ca­lumniations against us. 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 PapistsIt is also the source of their errours, which are most per­nicious. 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 theFirst, they con­found the Law and the Go­spell, and are farther from grace. 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 anotherGal. 1. 8, 9. 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 theG l 310. Law are under the curse: they are fallenGal. 5. 2, 4. 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 aGal. 5. 3. 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 [Page 81] 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 graceLuk. 1. 73, 74, 75. to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him, in which ourHeb. 8. 10. ex Ier. 3. 31. 33. Heb. 10. 16. new obedience consisteth; which, (as I said) is not the condition of the promise, but the thing promised.

§. XXI. Secondly, by confounding justification and sanctificati­onThey place the matter of iusti­fication and merit of salva­tion in them­selve [...]. 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.Luk. 18. 11 [...] 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 taughtRom. 3. 21. 28. Gal. 2. 16. in the Law, nor by thatPhil. 3. 8. 9. Rom. 10. 3. [...] 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 GodRom. 1. 16. 17. 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 soThirdly, they wholly take away the be­nefit of iustifi­cation. 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,Rom. 8. 30. 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 asObjections that the Papists re­taining remissi­on of sinnes, doe not wholly take away the benefit of justi­fication. 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 CouncellSess. 6. cap. 7. 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 De Iustis. lib. 2. cap. 6. 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 Antidot. ad Sess. 6. 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 [Page 83] 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 Pa­pistsThe Papists from justifica­tion exclude remission of sinne. 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 formall causes of justification:De justif. Lib. 2. Cap. 2. Bellarmine an­swereth thus, the Councell of Trent in expresse termes said, that there is but one onely formall cause of justification. Yea but, say wee, the Councell seemeth to make two, viz. remission of sinnes and renovati­on. But, saith he, when the Councell maketh mention severally of remission of sin, and of infusion of grace, it did it not to signifie, that there is a twofold for­mall cause of justification; but to declare, that there are two termes of that mo­tion which is called justification, or two effects of the same cause. For there can­not bee that mutation or translation, which the Councell noteth to bee in justi­fication, unlesse by remission of sinne a man cease to bee wicked, and by infusion of justice begin to be godly. But, saith hee, as the aire, when it is enlightened of the Sunne, by the same light, which it receiveth, ceaseth to bee darke, and beginneth to be lightsome. So a man by the same justice given and infused by the Sunne of righteousnesse ceaseth to bee unjust, the light of grace expel­ling the darknesse of sinne; and beginneth to bee just, the light of grace succeeding the darkenesse of sinne. And as in calefaction, which simili­tude hee useth elsewhere, the accesse of heat expelleth cold; so in justifica­tion, the infusion of justice expelleth sinne. This then is the doctrine of the new Church of Rome; that in this mutation called justification which they define to beeTransitus a peccato ad justi­tiam. a passage from sinne to righteousnesse; though there be, as in all other motions, duo termini, viz. sinne, which is termi­nus à quo, and righteousnesse, which is terminus ad quem; yet there are not two distinct actions concurring, viz. remission or expulsion of sinne, and infusion of righteousnesse; but one and the same action, which is the infusion of justice expelling sinne, even as in calefaction, though there bee two termes cold and hot, yet there are not two acti­ons, for the same action of fire which bringeth in heat, expelleth cold; and so in illumination, there are two termes, darkenesse and light, but not two actions; for one and the same act of the Sunne, which bring­eth light, driveth away darkenesse. Whereby it is evident, that by re­mission of sinne the Papists doe not understand, as all men from the beginning of the world have understood, pardoning, forgiving, not imputing sinne; but the utter deletion, expulsion, abolition of it: which Bellarmine callethDe justif Lib. 2. Cap. 7. veram remissionem, true remission, as if the pardoning of the offence and taking away the guilt were not true re­mission:§. secundò. but this true remission they hold to bee such, that in a man [Page 84] who is justified, and hath remission of sinne, there is no sinne remain­ing, and hee onely is to bee held a just man, in whom there is no sinne. Thus then remission of sinne is by the Papists excluded from justificati­on, and that brought in the roome of it, which belongeth to that per­fection of sanctification, whereunto none attaine in this life.

§. III. Now, that the Papists grossely erre in making remission ofThat remission of sinne is not the extinction of it. sinne to bee the utter abolition or expulsion of it by infusion of righte­ousnesse, may appeare by these arguments: First, whereas in sinne there are two things to bee considered, the guilt and the corruption, or Ano­my thereof; it is evident, that the guilt of sinnes past is taken away by remission wholly and at once: the corruption is taken away by morti­fication thereof, not wholly in this life, and at once, but by degrees, we being day by day 2 Cor. 4. 19. renewed in the inner man. The latter is the worke of Gods Spirit within us. The former is an action of God without us, such as is that of the Creditor in remitting or forgiving a debt. And so the Scriptures conceive of remission. For our sinnes are debts in respect of the guilt binding us over to punishment, which wee owe for them. When as God therefore remitteth the debt, releaseth this obligation, forgiveth the punishment, hee is said, to remit our sinnes. This our Saviour taught by the parables of the creditors and debtors, Matth. 18. 23. Luk. 7. 41. And thus he hath taught us to pray, Matth. 6. 12. For­give us our debts, as wee forgive our debtors. How doe wee forgive? By not revenging the offence, but laying aside all desire and purpose of revenge, by passing by it, and as it were forgetting it, by covering it with Prov. 10. 12. charity, by not imputing it, by being reconciled unto the party who hath offended us; not by a reall taking away of the sinne from the offender, but a wiping of it out of our remembrance; not by expel­ling the offence out of the offender, but out of our thoughts.

§. IV. Thus in the Scriptures, to remit sinne is not to abolish andTo remit, what it is in the Scriptures. See more Lib. 5. Cap. 3. extinguish the sinne it selfe, but to absolve from the guilt of sinne, to pardon and to forgive the debt, and to remit the punishment, to cover a mans sinne and not to impute it. And this plainely appeareth by these manifold phrases which are used in the Scriptures to signifie re­mission of sinne, all which import the taking away of the guilt, but none the utter abolishing of the corruption. As first the Hebrew Salach, Exod. 34. 9. Numb. 14. 19, 20. 30. 6. Deut. 29. 19. Psal. 103. 3. Esay 55. 7. Ier. 31. 34. Dan. 9. 20. signifieth parcere, remittere, ignoscere, condona­re, propitium esse. Kasah, to hide, to spare, to forgive, Nehem. 4. 5. Psal. 32. 1. 85. 2. Ioel 2. 17. Deut. 13. 8. Kaphar also is to cover, to pardon, to be propitious, Deut. 21. 8. Psal. 65. 4. 78. 38. 79. 9. Esay. 22. 14. Nasa, to spare, to forgive, to take away the guilt, Gen. 18. 24, 26. 50. 17. Exod. 32. 32. Numb. 14. 19. Psalm. 32. 1. cum Rom. 4. 7. Esay 33. 24. Psalm. 25. 18. Ha­bar, to passe by an offence, Mic. 7. 18. and Hehebir to cause it to passe, 2 Sam. 12. 13. 24. 10. Zech. 3. 4. Machah, to wipe, or to blot out of re­membrance the sinnes of men, as it were out of a booke, to blot them out from before his face, Nehem. 4. 5. Psalm. 51. 9. Ier. 18. 23. Hesir, to re­move, Esay 27. 9. Lo chashab not to impute, Psal. 32. 2.

[Page 85]In like manner the Greeke [...], to remit, or forgive, Mat. 6. 12, 14, 15. 18. 27, 32. whence is [...], remission, that is, [...], forgivenesse, as Hesy­chii [...]s expoundeth it. [...], condonare, to forgive, Luk. 7. 42. 2 Cor. 2. 10. Ephes. 4. 33. Col. 2. 13. 3. 13. [...] not to impute, Rom. 4. 8. 2 Cor. 5. 19. So the Latine, remittere, dimittere, ignoscere, condonare, donare, veniam dare, parcere, propitium esse; and the English to remit, to pardon, to forgive.

§. V. For the farther clearing of this point, let us consider these three things; first, what that is which is remitted. Secondly, where itThree other arguments. remaineth untill it bee remitted. Thirdly, by what act of God it is re­mitted. The thing remitted is our debt, Matth. 6. 12. The subject where it remaineth are the bookes of Gods providence and of our own consciences. The act of God in remitting our debts is the wiping them out of his remembrance, as it were, his debt-bookes The debt is the sinne it selfe, which maketh us debtors unto God. And therefore sinnesFirst, the debt. are called debts, and sinners debtors, Matth. 6. 12. cum Luk. 11. 4. Matth. 23. 16, 18. Luk. 13. 4. cum 2. which also appeareth by the para­bles of the debtors, Luk. 7. 41. Matth. 18. 23, 35. and therefore sinners are called debtors, because for their sinnes they owe punishment, unto which by the just ordination of God they are obliged. This obligation, whereby sinners are bound over to punishment, is called reatus, that is, guilt. When as therefore God remitteth sins, he forgiveth the debt, hee remitteth or releaseth the punishment, hee taketh away the guilt, whereby we were bound over to punishment. And è converso, when God forgiveth the debt, releaseth the punishment, taketh away the guilt, he is said to remit sinne. Now sinnes are either habituall or actu­all: An habituall sinne God doth remit, when hee doth take away the guilt of it, Psalm. 32. 2. and cover the Anomy of it, not that it should not be at all, but that it should not bee imputed, as Augustine De Nupt. & saith of concupi­scence or originall sinne, whereof all particular habituall [...] sinnes areConcupisc. c. 25. 1 Col. 3. 5. members and branches. Actuall sinnes God doth remit, when he doth forgive the sinfull act Act. 8. 22. it selfe, and the guilt also which remaineth af­ter the act is past and gone.

§. VI. But here the Papists have found out a new devise, to confirme their error in confounding justification and sanctification; that where­asWhether re­mission be of the macula. there are two things, which as themselves doe teach, Thom. 1. 2. [...] q. 87. art. 6. c. & ad. 1. [...]. remaine in the soule after the act of sinne hath been committed, viz. reatus & macula, the guilt and the blemish or spot; they teach against sense that it is pro­perly the macula which is remitted in justification. But then say I, what becometh of the punishment, & the guilt binding over to punishment? It is certaine, that the infusion of righteousnesse doth not take away the guilt, nor free us from punishment. Neither can we be freed either [...]rom the one or the other, but only by the satisfaction of Christ imputed un­to us. Hence therfore they should have learned to distinguish between justification and sanctification, rather than to confound them, that whereas there are two things remaining after sinne committed, the guilt, and the pollution; the guilt is taken away by imputation of Christs righteousnesse in our justification; the pollution is in some [Page 86] measure cleansed in our sanctification.

§. VII. And how soever that, which they say of the macula or pol­lutionThat which they say of the macula [...]emai­ning is not al­together true. remaining, is true in respect of Originall sinne, wherein, upon the guilt of Adams transgression imputed, there followeth an univer­sall macula or corruption, consisting of two parts, the privation of Ori­ginall righteousnesse, and an evill disposition and pronenesse to all manner of sinne, by which twofold corruption all the parts and fa­culties of the soule are defiled: yet it seemeth not to be altogether true in regard of mens personall sinnes, in respect of either part: for as tou­ching the former part, which is the privation; neither are the unrege­nerate by their actuall sinnes deprived of grace or righteousnesse infu­sed, which they had not before they sinned: neither are the regenerate utterly deprived of grace by such sinnes as they commit, as I have else­where In the trea­tise of perse­verance. proved: and as touching the latter part, which is the evill dis­position; this macula, whereof they speake, is no new evill disposition making him a sinner who before was not, but an evill disposition re­maining of the old man, which by committing of actuall sinnes is in­creased. Insomuch as where the same actuall sinne is often committed and reiterated, that evill disposition groweth to bee an habit. For all evill dispositions or habituall sinnes, which are in men, are either the re­liquia or remnants of originall sinne in some measure mortified, or the increments thereof, when by the committing of actuall sinnes they re­ceive increase. And such a thing is that macula, whereof they speake: which remaining in the soule per modum habitus, is to bee taken away, as all other habituall sinnes are, as they are pollutions, by the mortifi­cation Col. 3. 5. of them; which is a part of sanctification and not of justifica­tion. Neither is the mortification of sinne a totall deletion or aboliti­on thereof in this life, as if no sinne or corruption remained in the party justified or sanctified: for though in the forgiving or remitting of originall sinne, the guilt bee wholly taken away; yet the corrup­tion, which is called concupiscence, remaineth more or lesse mor­tified.

§. VIII. Now followeth the subject, where that, which is to beeThe booke out of which God doth wipe our sinnes, when he doth remit them. remitted, doth remaine; and from whence, when it is remitted, it is wiped or blotted out, that is, Gods remembrance and our conscience, which are as it were the Lords debt-bookes, according to which bookes he will judge, Apoc. 20. 12. the former is the booke of Gods provi­dence, Psalm. 56. 8. 139. 15. wherein all offences are written, and wherein they remaine upon record, Hos. 7. 2. 8. 13. Ier. 17. 1. The other is the booke of our conscience, which is, as it were, the Lords at­turney indicting us of sinne. In regard whereof David saith, Psalm. 51. 3. I doe know, or am conscious to my transgressions, and my sinne is ever before mee. Out of the former booke the Lord doth wipe out sinnes, when he justifieth us in the Court of Heaven: out of the latter, when we are justified in the Court of our owne Conscience.

§. IX. And hereby the third thing appeareth: namely, by whatBy what Act of God our sinnes are remitted. act of God our sinnes are remitted. For if that which is remitted be a [Page 87] debt, which is recorded in Gods booke: then this debt is remitted not by any act of God within us, either really wiping the pollution out of our soules, or infusing grace into them (both which are done in some measure after the debt is remitted, in our sanctification) but by an act of God without us, wiping our sinnes out of his booke, blotting them out of his remembrance, Esai. 43. 25. casting them behinde his backe, Esai. 38. 17. turning his face from them, Psalm. 51. 9. not remem­bring, Ier. 31. 34. nor imputing them, Rom. 4. 8. ex Psal. 32. 2. but forgiving and forgetting them, and accepting of Christs satisfaction for them in the behalfe of all that truely beleeve in Christ, Rom. 3. 24, 25.

§. X. Our fifth argument may be this: The utter deletion of sinneOur fifth argu­ment becau [...]e the utter dele­tion of sinne is not granted in this life. is not granted in this life: Remission of sinne is granted to the faithfull in this life: Therefore remission of sinne is not the utter deletion of it.

The proposition is certaine: For during this life sinne remaineth in the best, Rom. 7. 17. 20. 1 Ioh. 1. 8.

The assumption is undeniable, as being an Article of our faith testifi­ed in many places of Scripture.

Or thus: If in justification there were an utter deletion or aboli­tion of sinne, then in those, that are justified, there is no sinne.

But there is no mortall man, though justified, in whom there is no sinne.

Therefore in justification there is not a Totall deletion of sinne.

§. XI. Sixthly, if remission of sin be an utter deletion of the corrup­tionSixthly, the guilt and pu­nishment which are ta­ken away in justification, are not ta­ken away by infusion of righteousnesse. by infusion of righteousnesse, and nothing else concurre to justifica­tion, but infusion of righteousnesse expelling sin; what then becommeth of the guilt of sinne and the punishment? how is our debt satisfied? The justice infused, though it should utterly expell the corruption; yet it neither doth nor can satisfie for the punishment, as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth. Neither is there any other satisfaction or propitia­tion for our sinnes, whereby Gods justice may be satisfied, our debt dis­charged, our selves freed from hell and damnation, but onely the satis­faction of Christ, without imputation whereof there is no justification nor salvation: but none of this is done by righteousnesse infused ex­pelling sinne. Wherefore the Papists, if they will bee saved, must ac­knowledge, besides the benefit of the infusion of righteousnesse expel­ling the corruption of sinne, which they call justification, but is indeed sanctification, another greater benefit, whereby we are both freed from hell, and entituled to heaven, by imputation of Christs satisfaction, called in the Scriptures justification, which they by their Antichristian doctrine have utterly abolished.

§. XII. Seventhly, that which worketh no reall change in the partySeventhly, re­mission doth not worke a re­all change. doth not really take away and expell all sin from him by infusion of righ­teousnesse, for that cannot bee done without a reall, yea and a great change in the party. True remission of sinne doth not worke a reall [Page 88] change in the party. Therefore the true remission of sinne doth not re­ally take away and expell all sinne by infusion of righteousnesse. The assumption is thus proved: first, the forgiving of a debt worketh no reall change in the debtor, but relative. The true remission of sinne is the forgiving of our debt, therefore the true remission doth not worke a reall change in the party. Secondly, that which is imputative doth not worke a reall change in the party but is an act wrought without the party. True remission of sinne is imputative, as the Apostle teacheth, Rom. 4. 6, 7, 8. consisting in the not imputing of sinne, presuppo­sing the imputing of righteousnesse without workes, therefore it wor­keth not a reall change.

§. XIII. My eighth argument is from theabsurdities which fol­lowEight absurdi­ties following on this Pop [...]h Doctrine. upon this Popish Doctrine. First, Necessity of despairing, not one­ly to the tender conscience labouring under the burden of sinne: but also to all not cauterized consciences, which have any sense of theirSer. lib. 5. c. 5. §. 6, 7, 8. owne estate. For if remission of sinne bee the utter deletion of sinne, then have not they, neither can they have remission of sinne, in whom any sinne remaineth: and those, that neither have, nor can have remis­sion of sinne in this life, because sinne doth ever remaine in them, what remaineth to them but despaire? Secondly, that there is no necessity of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse for justification, because there is in them both a totall deletion of sinne, and an infusion of per­fect righteousnesse, whereby sinne is wholly expelled. And these, as you shall heare hereafter Lib. 5. are two of Bellarmines De justis. l. 2. 6. 7. §. secund [...]. & § tertio. principall Arguments to prove the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to bee needlesse, both because, when our sinnes are remitted they are utterly abolished; so that whosoever is justified is no longer a sinner in himselfe, nor hath any sinne remaining in him; and also because in justification there is an infusion of perfect righteousnesse. The third, that to remission of sinne there needeth no favour or indulgence for pardon or forgivenesse: for if remission of sinne be a totall deletion of sinne by infusion of perfect righteousnesse, then without any accession of favour the one contrary is necessarily expelled by the other. And this doth Vasques professe in ex­presse termes, Mihi semper In 1. [...] 2. [...] Disp. 204 n. 2.3. necessarium visum fuit asserere, maculam pec­cati ipsa justitia inherente tanquam forma contraria nullo accedente favore & condo natione deleri.

§. XIV. These absurdities doe necessarily follow upon their Anti­christian doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse: For if a man be justified before God by inherent righteousnesse, then is he not a sinner in himselfe, and consequently hath no sinne in him. And if by infusion of righteousnesse there be a totall deletion of sinne, then must that righteousnesse, which is infused, be perfect. For that which is un­perfect cannot wholly expell sinne, the imperfection being of it selfe a sinne; and if upon infusion of perfect righteousnesse there doth neces­sarily and of its owne accord follow a totall deletion of sinne, then to remission of sinne favour and condonation is needlesse. And yet we have not done with their absurdities: For to dreame that men who [Page 89] are but infants in Christianity, yea infants in age, before they have the use of reason, or are capable of habits, are endued. and that ordinarily, with perfect righteousnesse in their first imaginary justification, which is inciptentium of such as be but incipients, whereunto the best profici­ents doe not in this life attaine, is a monstrous absurdity.

CAP. VIII. Bellarmines dispute, that remission of sinne is the utter deletion of it, confuted.

De Iustis. l. 2. cap. 7.

§. I.

BVT how absurd soever their assertion is, Bellarmine willBellarmines proofe out of the Scripture. maintaine it, and set a good face upon it: telling us first, that wee may not deny it, unlesse wee will deny the Scriptures. For the Scripture, saith he, useth all manner of words to ex­presse the true remission of sinne; so that if a man would of purpose seeke words to signifie the utter abolition of sinne, hee could not devise any which the Scripture hath not already used. And to this purpose citeth eighteene Testimonies, nine out of the Old Testament, viz. 1 Chron. 21. 8. Esai. 44. 22. Ezek. 36. 25. Psalm. 51. 7. Prov. 15. 27. alias, 16. 6. Psalm. 103. 12. Mic. 7. 19. Psalm. 10. 15. Cant. 4. 7. And nine out of the New, Ioh. 1. 29. Act. 3. 19. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Act. 22. 16. Heb. 1. 3. 9. 28. 1 Cor. 6. 11. Ephes. 5. 8. and 27.

§. II. Answ. These places are to be distinguished: for either theyPlaces, which mention the taking away of sinne. are alleaged to prove the abolition of sinne, or perfection of righteous­nesse: the former mention, either the taking away of sinne or the wi­ping or blotting of it out, or the purging of it, or the not being of it. For the taking away of sinne, these are brought, 1 Chron. 21. 8. Psalm. 1 C [...]ron. 21. 8. 103. 12. Mic. 7. 19: Ioh. 1. 29. Heb. 9. 28. In 1 Chron. 21. 8. the word is Hahaber, transire fac, cause it to passe, that is, remove it out of thy sight; not that it bee not at all, but that it bee not punished, or which is all one, take away the guilt: and so the word seemeth to be ex­pounded, 2 Sam. 12. 13. where Nathan saith to David, the Lord2 Sam. 12. 13. Psal. 103. 12. hath taken away thy sinne, thou shalt not dye. Psalm. 103. 12. how farre the East is distant from the West, so farre hath hee made Hirchiq. our sinnes to be distant from us: which is not understood of the corrupti­on extinguished, but of the guilt removed or taken away. Mic. 7. 19.Mic. 7. 19. thou wilt cast all their sinnes into the depth of the Sea, that is, hee will cast them out of his sight or remembrance, hee will cast them behinde his backe, he will bury them in oblivion, that they should not be seene or remembred. Ioh. 1. 29. The Lambe of God which taketh away, orIo [...]. 1. 2 [...]. taketh upon him the sinne of the world, [...] is the translation of Nose: [Page 90] and the Verbe Nasa having reference to finn [...], when it is attributed to God, it signifieth to forgive, as hath before beene shewed; and likewise when it is attributed to men, who have been offended, Gen. 50. 17. 1 Sam. 15. 25. 25. 28. when it is attributed to Christ our redeemer, as in the place alleaged, it signifieth, that he taketh away our sinnes by ta­king them upon him, or bearing them: as it is said of the scape Goat, the figure of Christ, Levit. 16. 22. and so that place, Ioh. 1. 29. is to beeLevit. 16. 22. Merc [...]r in the sauro. Voce Nasa. understood. Nasa, saith one, sometimes doth signifie tollere, that is to take up, and to beare, (as when we are commanded tollere crucem, to take up our crosse) or to take upon him, which Saint Iohn the Evangelist rendreth by the Verbe [...]: and this is fully expressed by the Prophet, Esay 53. 12.Es. 53. 12. that Christ Nasa did beare the sinne of many: as before verse 4. that hee hath borne (the Verbe is Nasa) our griefes, and carried our forrowes, and vers. 11. hee shall beare their iniquities. Heb. 9. 28. Christ wasHeb. 9. 28. once offered ad multorum exhaurienda peccata, that is, as our Rhemists translate, to exhaust the sinne of many. The word is [...], to take up and to beare: the meaning is, that Christ was offered upon the crosse, that he might tak [...] up and beare our sins, even as S. Peter speaketh to the like effect, 1 Epist. 2. 24. who himselfe did beare our sinnes in his owne1 P [...]t. 2. 24. body upon the tree, that is, the Crosse: where the same Verbe is used, and is by the Latine interpreted pertulit, and by the Rhemists, beare our sinnes.

§. III. Other places are alleaged, which mention the deletion,Places, which mention the blotting out of finne that is, the wiping or blotting out of sinne, Psal. 51. 1. 9. Act. 3. 19. Esa. 44. 22. But I aske, from whence? Delere, saith Vatablus, in Psal. 51. 10. est meta­phora ab iis qui delent, qui prius in rationes scripserant, to wipe out is a me­taphore from those, who wipe out such things, as before they had writ­ten upon their account, or in their debt-bookes. The booke is Gods re­membrance, out of which those things are wiped which are forgotten: and thus deletion is often ascribed toDeut. 31. 21. Est. 9. 28. Eccl [...]. 4. Ier. 23. 4 [...], 50, 5. Es. 43. 25. oblivion. For Gods wiping out of sins is his blotting them out of his remembrance: and so it is expoun­ded, Es. 43. 25. his not remembring them. Psal. 25. 7. 79. 8. Ier. 31. 34. as contrariwise, his not blotting them out, is his remembring of them, his not forgiving them. Ier. 18. 23. forgive not their iniquity, neitherIer. 18. 23. blot out their sinne from thy sight. Psal. 109. 14. Let the iniquity of hisPsal. 109. 14. father be remembred with the Lord; and let not the sinne of his mo­ther be blotted out, (ne deleatur, id est, non tradatur oblivioni,) but let them be before the Lord continually, verse 15. And thus David prayeth, Psal. 51. 9. hide thy face from my sinnes, and blot out all mine iniquities,Psal. 51. 9. namely out of thy remembrance: and no more can bee gathered out of Act. 3. 19. that your sinnes may be blotted out (of Gods booke) whereAct. 3. 19. Tremellius noteth it to bee a metaphore taken from those who keepe bookes of account, &c. Howsoever, it is not to be doubted, but that be­fore the day of judgement, whereof Saint Peter there speaketh, there shall be a totall deletion of the sinnes of the faithfu [...]l, both in respect of the guilt, and also of the pollution. As for Es. 44. 22. the Lord profes­sethEs. 44. 22. his reconciliation with Israel in taking away their sinnes, which as [Page 91] a cloud, yea as a thicke cloud had hid his face from them: the guilt whereof being taken away, the light of his countenance did shine uponNumb. 6. 25. Psal. 4. 6. them. Howbeit Tremellius and Innius read, Deleo ut densa nubes defecti­ones tuas, according to which reading, that place hath affinity with those, which mention washing, cleansing, purging; of which [...] am now to speake.

§. IV. Of these, some are to be understood of justification and ta­kingPlaces which mention the purging of sin Psal. 51. 2. 7. away the guilt of sinne, as all the first part of the 51. Psalme, which is a prayer for the pardon of sinne; out of which are cited verse 2. and 7. where David prayeth, that God would wash him, and cleanse him from his sinne, namely by the bloud of Christ: for that is it which1 Iohn 1. 7. cleanseth us from all our sinnes. Purge me with hyssope which was the [...] (wherewith they used to sprinkle theLevit. 14. 6. Num. 19. 18. Heb. 9. 19. bloud upon those which were cleansed) that is, sprinkle me with the blood of that eter­nall sacrifice of Christ prefigured in the Law, without which bloudHeb. 9. 22. being shed, there was no remission. And there is no doubt but the blood of Christ was shod for the remission of sinnes, Mat. 26. 29. and that our conscienc [...]sHeb. 9. 14. (the seat of guiltinesse) might bee purged from dead workes. The words following, and I shall bee whiter than snow, doe plainely argue the purity, not of sanctification (for to such a degree thereof we never attaine in this life) but of justification: in respect whereof our soules being perfectly just, are whiter than snow. Some are to be understood of sanctification, as Ezek. 36. 25. Some of both, as 1 Cor. 6. 11. Act. 22. 16. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Heb. 1. 3. but with this difference, that we are cleansed and purged from the guilt of sin past, wholly and at once: but from the corruption in part, and by degrees in this life, wher­in we are to be renewed2 Cor. 4. 16. in the inner man from day to day. The Co­rinthians, to whom the Apostle giveth this1 Cor. 6. 11. testimony, that they were washed, &c. were farre from perfection of inherent righteousnesse, as appeareth by that Epistle; wherein he calleth them carnall, and repro­veth them both for their errours in judgement, and for their misdemea­nours in their conversation. That which he citeth out of Pro. 15. per mifericordiam & fidem purgantur peccata, is found in the Latine, v. 27. but not in the originall: the like sentence is found Pro. 16. 6. but there the Verbe purgatur, for which the Text is alleaged, is not used in the Latine.

§. V. For the not being of sinne, he alleageth, Psalm. 10. 15. aliàs For the not be­ing of sinne. Psal. 10. 15. 9. 35. quaeretur peccatum illius, & non inveniatur, against the true mea­ning of the place, it being not a prayer for the justification or sanctifi­cation of the wicked, that his sinne may bee no more, as Bellarmine ab­surdly expoundeth it; dicet peccatum fuisse & non esse: but is a propheti­call imprecation against the wicked, that God would break their arme, that is, their power and strength: and that when he, as a judge, should inquire into their wickednesse, they should not be found (according to that Prov. 10. 25. he shall be no more, that is, as Augustine expoundethProv. 10. 25. it, that the wicked, when he is judged, shall perish for his sinne. And so Vatabius, make inquiry into his sinne, thou shalt not finde him, nei­ther [Page 92] doth the Psalmist say, non invenietur ipsum, scil. peccatum, sed non invenietur ipse, scilicet peccator, not it, but he shall not be found.

§. VI. For the perfection of righteousnesse hee alleageth three Places for the perfection of righteousnesse, Ephes. 5. 8. places, two out of Ephes. 5. vers. 8. Yee were sometimes darkenesse, but now light in the Lord; where the abstract Light is put for the con­crete Lightsome, as being inlightned, as the Children of Light: not that they are that light in which there 1 Ioh. 1. 5. is no darkenesse. Neither is it said, that we are in our selves Light, but, notwithstanding that darke­nesse, which remaineth in us, wee are Light in the Lord. The second Ephes. 5. 26, 27. place is, Ephes. 5. 26, 27. where it is said, that Christ did give himselfe for his Church, that he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that hee might present it to himselfe a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinckle, or any such thing; but that it should be Holy and without blemish. In which words there is no men­tion of justification, but of sanctification, which in this life is begun and increased by the worke of the Spirit in the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments, that at the Marriage of the Lambe it may bee presen­ted unto him, a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinckle, &c. Wherefore Augustine, Retract. lib. 1. c. 19. the like he hath lib. de persectione justific. p. 975. Col. 3. [...]. That which I said, saith he, that God hath chosen unto himselfe a glorious Church, I did not therefore speake it, because now it is altogether such; though no doubt she was chosen, that she might be such, when Christ who is her life, shall appeare: for [...]en she also with him shall appeare in glory; for which glory she is called a glorious Church. And againe, Retract. lib. 2. cap. 18. where­soever I mentioned the Church not having spot or wrinckle, it is not so to bee taken, as though now it were, but because it is prepared to be such, when she also shall appeare glorious. And the same answer will serve for the third place cited out of the Canticles 4. 7. Tota pulchraes, & macula non est in te, Cant. 4. 7. thou are all faire, there is no spot in thee; unlesse perhaps he speake of the beauty of the Spouse adorned in her justification with the perfect righteousnesse of Christ; for of her Sanctification, which is but be­gun in this life, it is not true. But the Papists are without shame, who apply such texts of Scripture to the now Church of Rome.

§. VII. Besides these places of Scripture, Bellarmine saith, many Bellarmines ar­guments out of his booke de Baptismo, lib. 1. cap. 13. other very weighty arguments might bee brought; but hee hath already produced them in his first booke De Baptismo, cap. 13. which when they shall call come to bee weighed, will be found light enough. For those places, which speake of the efficacie of Baptisme, in washing, cleansing and taking away our sinnes, prove not, that in justification sinnes are utterly abolished. For in Baptisme is sealed to them that are Baptized, yea, and conferred to the faithfull, the benefits, not onely of justificati­on, but also of sanctification. And therefore as it is the Sacrament of remission of sinne, and the seale Rom. 4. 11. of that righteousnesse which is by faith: so it is called the LaverTit. 3. 5. of regeneration, wherein we are Bap­tized into the similitude Rom. 6. 3, 4. of Christ his death and resurrection. And therefore, though in Baptisme sinne were wholly taken away, as well in respect of the corruption, as of the guilt: yet it would not follow, that in justification there is a Totall deletion of sinne. But neither in Bap­tisme [Page 94] is there a totall abolition of sin; seeing it is manifest, that origi­nall sinne, which is called the flesh, the old man, and evill concupis­cence, remaineth in all the faithfull, though in some measure mortifi­ed, yet never fully and altogether extinguished in this life. And al­though the Papists for maintenance of their severall errors, viz. of ju­stification by inherent righteousnesse, of the perfect fulfilling of the Law, of merit, of works of supererogation, doe maintaine, that concu­piscence, remaining in the faithfull after Baptisme, is not a sinne; and the Councell of TrentSess. 5. c. 5. hath denounced Anathemà against them that shall say it is a sinne: yet it is manifest, not onely by the testimony of antiquity, and evident reasons, which I could produce, if I would runne into another controversie; but also by the doctrine of the Apostle; who doth not onely in many placesRom. 6. 12. 7 8. 11. 13. 17. 20. 23. 8. 10. Heb. 12. 1. expressely call it a sinne, and describeth it as a sinne, but also setteth it forth as the mother of sinne, the sinning sinne; which because it taketh occasion by the Commandement forbid­ding lust, to worke in men all manner of evill concupiscence, is not on­ly convinced to be a sinne, but also to beRom. 7. 8. 13. [...], exceeding­ly sinnefull.Concupiscence a sinne.

§. VIII. And not only habituall concupiscence in generall which is theRom. 6. 6. body of sinne, and the body7. 24. of death (in respect of which sinne, the body of the faithfull is said to be dead, Rom. 8. 10.) is sinne: but also the severall members and branches thereof, which remaine even in the best, are so many habituall sinnes: as a spice at the least of pride, selfe­love, carnall security, infidelity, hypocrisie, envy, worldly and carnall love of pleasure, profit, preferment and glory in this world, &c. Which, though they bee not imputed to the faithfull, yet in themselves are sins, as being [...], swervings from the Law of God; not onely as defects of righteousnesse (which were enough to make them sinnes) but as posi­tive vices. Neither is it to be doubted, but that as the acts of pride and other habituall vices remaining even in the best are sinnes; so, much more the vices themselves, from which they proceed, are sinnes, and are by the same Commandement of the Law forbidden. Now what­soever is [...] is sinne: For as every sinne is [...],1 Iohn 3. 4. so every [...] is a sin, that being a perfect definition of sinne, as Bellarmine himselfe confes­seth,De amiss gra­tiae & statu pec­cati, lib. 2. ca. 18. Non potuit rectius & brevius definiri peccatum, quàm ut à S. Ioanne fu­it definitum illis verbis, [...]. But all evill concupiscence, both habituall and actuall; both in generall the body of sinne, and in parti­cular the severall branches, being so many habituall sinnes, in whomso­ever they are found, even in the most regenerate, are [...], aberrations from the law of God. Therefore all evill concupiscence whatsoever, in whomsoever remaining, is a sinne.

§. IX. Yea, but concupiscence is no sinne unlesse the Will consent unto Object. that concupiscence without con­sent is no sinne. it. Then, say I, not a sinne in infants not baptized. But the Law doth not say, non consenties concupiscentiis, sed omninò non concupisces: thou shalt not consent to concupiscences, but thou shalt not have any evill concupi­scence at all. And it is most evident, that the concupiscence forbidden in the tenth Commandement, is such as goeth before the consent of [Page 94] will. For it is such, as Saint Paul himselfe had not knowne to be sinne, if the Law had not said, Rom. 7. 7. Non concupisces, thou shalt not covet. But such concupiscences, as have the consent of the will, the very Heathen knew to bee sinnes. And the Papists themselves must acknowledge them to be forbidden in the former Commandements, unlesse they will deny the Law of God to be spirituall Rom 7. 14. and preferre the [...], cor­rupt interpretations of the Elders of the Iewes before the exposition of the Lawgiver himselfe, Ma [...]th. 5. 28. Matth. 5. True therefore is that, which some Writers cite out of De Nupti [...]s & Concupis [...]. lib. 1. cap 25. Augustine, that Originall sinne is remitted in Bap­tisme, not that it be not, but that it be not imputed unto sin. Here Bellar­mine takes on, and saith, that Luther first falsified this testimony of Au­gustine, and that all who have followed him, have continued the same fault, though they have beene told of it. A great accusation, if true. Au­gustines words in answere to an objection, (which the Papists can­not answer) how can originall sinne bee transmitted from regenerate parents, if in Baptisme it be wholly taken from them, are these: I an­swer, saith he, dimitti concupiscentiam in baptismo, non ut non sit, sed ut in peccatum non imputetur. Where Augustine speaking of the traducti­on of originall sinne, calleth it (as his manner is) Concupiscence, in stead whereof, some of our Writers have said sinne, both Augustine and they meaning nothing else, but originall. Now, that Augustine by that which he calleth Concupiscence, meant sinne, hereby appeareth; first, he saith it is remitted in Baptisme, and remission is of debts onely, and of sinnes, as debts; secondly, because he saith it is remitted, not that it should not bee any longer, but that (though it be a sinne, yet) it should not be imputed unto sinne; for nothing is wont to be imputed unto sin by God, but that which is sinne. Where by the way wee may observe, that in Augustines judgement remission of sinne is not the utter deleti­on of it, that it bee no more, but the not imputing of it. For whereas the Papists for a poore shift and evasion say, that Concupiscence is cal­led sinne, not because it is a sinne, sed quia expeccato est, & ad peccatum inclinat; this hindereth not its being a sinne, but rather setteth forth the greatnesse of this evill, as having all the respects of evill in it: being both a sinne, and a punishment of sinne, and the cause of all other sinnes, a [...] Augustine saith, Contr. Iulian. lib. 5. cap. 3. Bellarmines unanswerable argument out of Rom. 5. 19. Concupiscentia carnis adversus quam bonus concupiscit Spiritus (sc. in renatis) & peccatum est, & poena peccati, & causa pecca [...]i.

§. X. But howsoever Bellarmine letteth passe (as well he might) his other arguments alleaged in his Booke of Baptisme, as impertinent to this present question; yet one of them hee hath thought good not to omit, as being in his conceit De justif. l. 2. c. 7. §. multa. unanswerable; which notwithstanding I have not onely answered elsewhere Lib. 2. c. 5. §. 1. 2. l. 4. c. 9. §. 2, 3, 4., but also have used it as an invin­cible argument Lib. 5. c. 2. §. 1. to prove justification by imputation of Christs righ­teousnesse, viz. the argument taken from the antithesis of Adam to Christ, Rom. 5. 19. which Bellarmine here straineth beyond the extent of the antithesis made by the Apostle. In other places Bellarmine hath thus argued: As through Adams disobedience we were made sinners, so through Christs obedience wee are made righteous: but through [Page 95] Adams disobedience we were made truely sinners, namely by unrigh­teousnesse inherent, and not onely Non [...]ola impu­tatione de bap­ [...]is. l. 1. c. 13. by imputation. Therefore through the obedience of Christ we are made truly righteous, namely by righ­teousnesse inherent. But here, to serve his present turne, he altereth both the assumption and the conclusion. The assumption; for where before he said, not onely by imputation, here he saith, not by imputation. The conclusion: for first, in stead of concluding, that wee are by the obedi­ence of Christ made inherently just, which we confesse, though not in­tended by the Apostle in that place; he concludeth, that the obedience of Christ hath truly taken away and wiped out or abolished all our sinnes. And secondly, that he hath taken away our sinnes non imputa [...]i­vè, sed verè, not by imputation, but truly. His former argument I re­torted after this manner:

As through Adams disobedience wee were made sinners, that is, guilty of death and damnation: so by Christs obedience wee are made just, that is, absolved from that guilt, and accepted as righteous unto eternall life.

But by imputation of Adams disobedience we were made sinners.

Therefore by imputation of Christs obedience wee are made righteous.

The assumption, that we were made sinners by imputation of Adams disobedience, I proved, as by other arguments, so by Bellarmines owne confession in other places. Secondly, I have acknowledged it to bee true, that as we are made truely sinners through Adams disobedience, not onely by imputation of Adams sinne, but also by transfusion of both that privative and positive corruption, which by that disobedi- ence he contracted: so we are made truly just through the obedience of Christ, not onely by imputation of his obedience, but also by infusi­on of righteousnesse from him. But though we be truly made just by righteousnesse inherent yet it followeth not, that we are in this life made perfectly just. Neither doth it follow, that because Christ doth free us from the dominion of sin, we are therfore freed wholly from the being of sinne in us: neither, that if we be freed from sinne by imputa­tion, we are not freed truly. For the Apostle useth these termes promis­cuously, remitting of sinne and not imputing of sinne, justifying and imputing righteousnesse. And as Christ [...] Cor. 5. 21 was truly and really made a sacrifice for sinne in our behalfe: so wee are truly and indeed made the righteousnesse of God in him.

Thus have I proved, that neither remission of sinne is the abolish­ing of sinne, nor justification all one with sanctification: and that the Papists by confounding justification and sanctification, and of these two making but one, have utterly taken away and abolished out of their Divinity, that great benefit of our justification.

A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICA­TION.
THE THIRD BOOKE: Concerning Justification or saving Grace.

CAP. I. What is meant by the word Grace in the Question of Iustification.

§. I.

THE second Capitall errour of the Papists in thePapists by grace under­stand the ha­bits of grace in us. Article of justification, is concerning justifying and saving grace. For when as the holy Ghost would note unto us [...] the first moving cause or motive in God, the principium or primary cause (which some call [...]) of our justification, he saith, that we are justified by theRom. 3 24. Tit. 3. 7. Ephes. 2. 8. 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 [...] Ephes. 1. 6. 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 Catech. Rom. § 38. quality inherent in the soule per modum habitus, a supernaturall habit infused of God: and that, not really di­stinctB [...]llarm. de gra­tia & lib. arb. l. 1. c. 3. & 6. from Charity. And in like manner, what in this kind is said of the Rom. 5. 5. 8. 35. Love of God, they understand it commonly, not of Gods Love, [Page 98] whereby hee loveth us; but of our love; whereby wee love God.

§ II. For the better understanding of this point, we are to distin­guishThe divers acceptions of the word Gr [...]ce. 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 alsoExo. 33. 19. 34. 6. his love and mercy are referred; but with this distinction. For Gods goodnesse is considered either Exod. 34. 6. Ps [...]l. 119. 68. 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, [...]. 145. 7, 8, 9. 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, Psal. 111. 4. I [...]n. 4. 2. gracious, Exod. 22. 27. and graciously to bestow such gifts, Gen. 33. 5. 11. Esai. [...]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 intoThe Schoole­mens distin­ction of Grace. gratia gratum faciens, & gratia gratis da [...]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 Lib. 2. dist. 27. D. 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 [Page 99] 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 Rom. 11. 28., tending to the salvation of him who is indued with them, as faith, hope, charity, the feare of God, &c. or edifying Rom. 12. 6. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Pet. 4. 10. Eph. 4. 7. 11. 12. graces, which are given for the salvation of others: and those, either ordinary, as the gifts of the ministery; or extraordinary, 1 Cor. 12. 8, 9, 10, 28. 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 meto­nymyThe state of the Question. be caled [...], a grace, or by special relatiō to some peculiar grace, vouchsafed to some particular person, [...], 2 Cor. 8. 6, 7. Ephes. 3. 8. this or that grace, that is, [...], this or that gi [...]t of grace; yet none of them can absolutely and properly be called the grace of God, or [...] Tit. 2. 11., 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 in [...]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 favour of God in Christ, which is out of us in him, concurring to our justification, neither as the matter nor forme, but as the efficient cause thereof. Against which assertion the accursed Numb. 24. 9. Councell of Trent Sess. 6. can. 11. Si quis dixerit g [...]atiam qua ju stisicamuresse tantum savo▪ rem Deianathe­ma sit. hath denounced Anathema, If any man shall say, that the grace, by which we are justified, is onely the favour of God, let him be accursed. But first I will produce our proofes; and then answere their objections.

CAP. II. Our proofes, that by the Grace of God, by which we are justified, is meant the gracious favour of God in Christ.

§. I.

THe Papists, for all their cursing, are not able to1 The use of the word in the Scripture. produce any one pregnant testimony to prove, that the grace, whereby wee are justified, is inhe­rent in us. But, that Grace doth signifie that fa­vour of God, wee are able out of the New Testa­ment to alleage above fifty testimonies, whereof some shall hereafter be cited. And as for the Old Testament, it is evident, that the Hebrew Chen, chani. nsh Jer. 16. 13. Techinnah. Ios. 11. 20. Chesed Psal. 40. 11. symmach. Ps. 136. 1, &c. 2 Sam. 16. 17. words which signifie the grace of God, and are to be translated by the word grace, doe alwaies signifie favour, and never grace inherent. As, if I have found grace in thy sight, Gen. 18. 3. Ex. 33. 13. 17. God gave Ioseph grace in the sight of the keeper, Gen. 39. 21. and the people of Israel grace in the sight of the Egyptians, Exod. 3. 21. In which sense the blessed Virgin is said to have found grace with God, Luk. 1. 30. and our Saviour to have increased in grace with God and man, Luk. 2. 52.

§. II. Secondly, that grace whereby the Lord [...] gratos fecit, 2. It is gratia gratum faciens, because by it God [...] us gracious. made us gracious or graciously accepted us in his beloved, is gratia gra­tum faciens, that is, the justifying and saving grace.

By the gracions love and favour of God in Christ, which is out of us in him, the Lord [...] hath made us gratious, or gra­tiously accepted us in his beloved, and not by any gift of grace inherent in us.

Therefore the gratious love and favour of God in Christ is gratia gratum faciens, that is, the justifying and saving grace, and not any gift of grace inherent in us.

The proposition is in it solfe evident. The assumption is proved out of Eph. 1. Blessed be God, who hath blessed us in Christ with all spiri­tuall blessings—according as he hath elected us in him before the foundation of the world—having predestinated us unto the adop­tion of children—to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein or whereby [...] id est, gratos fecit, hee hath made us accepted in his beloved, in whom wee have redemption through his blood even forgivenesse of sinnes, according to the riches of his grace, verse 3, 4, 5, 6. 7. For by or in that grace, to the glorious praise whereof the Lord e­lected us before the foundation of the world, and according to the ri­ches whereof wee are redeemed by Christ, the Lord hath gratiously ac­cepted [Page 101] us in his beloved. But it were very absurd to say, that God hath elected us to the praise of the glory of our Charity, or that wee are re­deemed according to the riches of our charity. But we were elected to the praise of the glory of his grace, that is, of his gracious love and bounty in Christ, which grace was given unto us in Christ before all secular2 Tim. 1. 9. times: and according to the riches of this grace he hath redee­med us by Christ. Wherefore gratia gratum faciens, the grace, by which wee are justified, is not any gift of grace inherent in us, but the eternall grace and favour of God vouchsafed unto us in Christ, before the foundation of the world, and before all secular times.

§. III. In respect of this grace, whereby the Lord [...]graciouslyIn respect of this grace the faithfull are [...] and chasidim. accepted the blessed Virgin, she, is called [...] Luk. 1. 28. graciou­sly accepted or graced, or as it is expounded verse 30. that she had found grace and favour with God. And so may all the elect and faithfull chil­dren of God be called [...]; as in many places of the Old Testa­ment they are in the very same sense, called chasidim passively under­stood. Especially, where that word is read with the Affix or Pronoune betokening God, to signifie his chasidim the favorites of God: and thus it is read with the Affix of th [...] first Person, when God is the speaker, cal­ling them Chasidai, Psal. 50. 5.my favourits: or of the second whenthe speech is di­rected unto God, and then they are called in the plurall Chasideica, thy favorits, Psal. 52. 9. 79. 2. 132. 9. 145. 10. and in the singular Chasideca thy favourite, Deut. 33. 8. Psal. 16. 10. 89. 19. or of the third person in the singular Chasido, his favourite, or Chasidso, So the 72. and the Latine [...], sanctum s [...]um Psal. 4. 3. and in the plu­rall Chasidain, his favourites. Psal. 31. 24. 85. 9. 97. 10. 116. 15. 149. 9. that is, as not onely Tremellius and Iunius, but also Vatablus interpret it, quos benignitate prosequitur, those whom God doth specially favour, those who have found grace with God; which commonly are transla­ted Saints, and so are all the faithfull usually called, even in the New Testament Rom. 1. 7. 8. 27. 12. 13. 15. 25. 31. 10. 2. 15 1 Cor. 6. 1. 14. 33, &c. as the translation of the Hebrew chasidim: sanctity not being the cause of Gods favour, which is eternall, but the proper badge and cognizance of those, who are the favorites of God, by which they are knowne.

And further out of the same place, Eph. 1. 6. where it is said that byThe grace of Christ, that is, thegracious fa­vour of God in Christ. this grace hee hath made us gracious in his beloved it is plainely pro­ved, that by it is meant the gracious favour of God towards us in Christ, in which respect it is also called the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ. Act. 15. 11. So Rom. 16. 20. 1 Cor. 16. 23. 2 Cor. 13. 14. Gal. 1. 6. 6. 18. Phi. 4. 23. 1 Thess. 5. 28. 2 Thess. 3. 18. Philem. 25. Apoc. 22. 21. and to the same effect it is called the love of Christ, Rom. 8. 35. that is, as it is expressed vers. 39. the love of God which is in Christ. Which places cannot without absurdity bee understood of that grace of God, or of that love of God, which is in us, that is to say of our love of God.Arg. 3 by the gracious favour of God wee are elected, called, &c.

§. IV. Thirdly, by what grace of God wee are elected, called, redeemed, reconciled, adopted, saved, by the same wee are ju­stified.

[Page 102]But by the gracious favour of God, by which hee hath gratiously ac­cepted of us in his beloved, and not by any thing in us, we were elected according to the [...] of his will to the praise of the glory of his grace, Eph. 1. 5, 6 for which cause our election unto life is called the election of grace, Rom. 11. 5. By grace wee are effectually called, according to Rom. 8. 28. his purpose. For God hath called us with an holy calling, not accor­ding to our workes, but according to his owne purpose of grace, which (grace) was given us in Christ Iesus, before all secular times, but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour, 2 Tim. 1. 9. By his gra­cious favour in Christ, God hath redeemed us, reconciled us unto him­selfe adopted us, and not by our charity, or any thing in us. And finally, by his gracious favor we are saved through faith, and not of works or of any grace or righteousnesse iuherent in us, that he might shew the ex­ceeding riches of his grace, in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ, Eph. 2. 7, 8. Therefore by the gracious favour of God in Christ, and not by any grace inherent in us, the Lord doth justifie us: and ther­fore the sacred fathers of Trent must take home to themselves (accor­ding to the censure of the Apostle, Gal. 1. 8. 9.) that Anathema, which they denounce against those, who say, that the grace whereby wee are justified is onely the gracions favour of God in Christ.

§. V. Against the proposition if it bee objected, that the grace ofObject. 1 that the grace of election is eter­nall. election is eternall, but the benefit of vocation and the rest is temporall, and therefore not the same: I answer, that although the benefit of vo­cation and of the rest be given us in time yet the grace, by which we are called, justified, and saved, is eternall, 2 Tim. 1. 9. And therefore Bellar­mines distinction of grace De gratia at lib, arbitr. lib. 1. cap. 2. into eternall, by which wee were elected; and temporary, by which wee are called, and justified, is idle and to no purpose.

§. VI. If againe it be objected, that by what grace we are sanctified,Obiect. 2. of the grace of sancti­fication. by the same we are justified: by inherent grace we are sanctified, there­fore by inherent grace we are justified: I answer by distinction of the phrase by grace: for if therby be meant the efficient cause, then I confesse the proposition, to wit, that by what grace we are sanctified, we are also justified. For the same gracious favor of God is the efficient cause as wel of our sanctification, as of our justification; and I deny the assumption. But if by that phrase be meant the essentiall c [...]use, that is, the matter or the forme of our sanctification: then I confesse the assumption, and deny the proposition: For by the inherent graces (wherin our habitual sanctifi­cation consisteth) we are sanctified: but we are justified not by any grace inherent, but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ: as I have shewed before, and hereafter shall fully prove in its due place. For wee are ju­stified by the grace, that is, the gracious favour of God in Christ, Rom. 3. 24. gra­tis in respect of us, that is, without any cause or desert in us, through the redemption which is in Christ, without the works of the Law, that is, without respect of any obedience performed by us, or righteousnesse inherent in us, that is prescribed in the Law, which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse.

[Page 103]§. VII. If in the third place it be objected, that faith is a grace in­herentObject. 3. from faith. but we are justified by faith. Or thus, faith doth justifie, faith is a grace inherent, therefore some grace inherent doth justifie. I answer againe, by distinction, that faith doth not justifie, as it is a grace or qua­lity inherent, or as it is a part of our inherent righteousnesse; but rela­tively, as it is the instrument, as hath beene said before, to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse: neither doth faith properly, but the object thereof, which it apprehendeth, justifie. As it is the almes properly, which releeveth the poore man, not the hand which receiveth it. For when we say that a man is justified by faith without workes, or by faith alone, our meaning is, that we are justified by the righteousnes of Christ alone, which is apprehended by faith onely, without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us, or obedieuce performed by us.

§. VIII. Fourthly, the justifying and saving grace is expressedGratia gratum facien [...] expres­ssed by other termes which signific favour. many times by other words of like signification to the gracious favour of God, which cannot be drawne to signifie our charity, or any grace inherent in us. As appeareth both by such synonyma, as are joyned with it in the same places, as grace and love, 2 Cor. 13. 14. Grace and mercie, 1 Tim. 1. 2. 2 Tim. 1. 2. Tit. 1. 4. 2 Iohn 3. and also by parallel­ling other places, as where it is said, Tit. 2. 11. When the grace of God appeared, the same is expressed thus, chap. 3. 4. When the kindnesse of God and his love towards man appeared. And where in some places Rom. 3. 24. Eph. 2. 8. Tic. 3. 7. 2 Tim. 1. 9. Tit. 3. 4. 5. 7. it is said, that wee are justified or saved by his grace, or according to his grace: in others it is said, according to his [...], his good will and pleasure, Eph. 1. 5. 9. Phil. 2. 13. according to his mercy, Tit. 3. in which place these foure words are used as Synonyma, signifying the same thing, [...], kindnes or bounty, [...], love of mankind, [...] mercy, [...] grace This grace of God is notably expressed, Eph. 2. 4. 5. 7. 8. by divers words of the like signification. God, who is rich in mercie, for his great love wherewith he loved us, hath when wee were dead in our sinnes quicke­ned us together with Christ (by grace you are saved) that in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ: for by grace yee are saved through faith, &c. here is the riches of his mercie, the exceeding riches of his grace, his greatlove wherewith hee loved us, his bounty towards us in Christ, and all to set forth his saving grace. So in the Old Testament, mercie and grace are used as words of the like signification. Exo. 33. 19. I will bee gracious to whom I will bee gracious, and I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy; which text the Apostle rendreth thus, Rom. 9. 15. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercie, and I will have compassion of whom I will have compassion. Exod. 34. 6. where the Lord proclaiming his goodnesse or bounty before Moses as hee had promised chap. 33. 19. expresseth it in these termes. The Lord, the Lord God, mercifull, and gracious, slow to anger, abundant in chesed ve emeth, in bounty and truth (which in the New Testament are translated grace and Iohn 1. 14. 17 truth) keeping mercie for thousands, forgiving iniquity, &c. So Psal. 86. 15. Thou O Lord art a God full of compassion and graci­ous, [Page 104] long suffering and plenteous in mercie and truth. Likewise Psal. 130. 8. 2 King. 13. 3. So also Psal. 145. 8, 9. the Lord is gracious and full of compassion, slow to anger, and of great mercy, the Lord is good to all, and his mercies are over all his workes. And in like manner, Nehem. 9. 17. thou art a God of condonations, that is ready to pardon,So Jon. 4. 2. gracious and mercifull, sl [...]w to anger, and of great bounty.

§. IX. Fifthly, if justifying grace were inherent, there would be noThe fift argu­ment because it is opposed t [...] workes. such opposition, as the Apostle 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 ju [...]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 Psal. 143 2. Rom. 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. 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 Lib. 7. Arg 6 because charity is not the justifying grace. 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 justi­ficationArg. 7. plaine testimonies where grace signifieth grace and salvation understood the gracious favour of God in Christ and not inherent grace, appeareth both by his assention, Rom. 5. 20. that [Page 105] 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 accordingArg. 8. the con­fession of Pa­pists. to the scriptures concerning justifying grace, that Albertus Pighius, De lib. arbitr. 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,The calumnia­tion of the Pa­pists, that wee deny inherent graces, and in herent iustice. 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 Lib. 1. cap. 3. & [...]. 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. §. Alterum. His allegation of Rom. 3. 24. 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.The place Rom 3. 24 maketh wholly against the Papists.

§. 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, which without the Law is revealed in the Gospell, even the righ­teousnesse of God, that is, of Christ, who is God, apprehen­ded by faith.

But all men, without exception, both Iewes and Gentiles are in themselves sinners, and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God.

Therefore, seeing all have sinned, and are fallen short of the glory of God, that is, excluded from eternall glory, they are not justified by righteousnesse inherent which is prescribed in the Law; but they are justified by a righteousnesse, which without the Law is revealed in the Gospel, to wit, the righteousnesse of God, that is, of Christ, who is God, [Page 107] apprehended by faith. And that is it which is said in this text, that those who have sinned, and are fallen short of Gods glory, and from their title to heaven, are justified, that is, acquitted from their sinnes, and entituled unto the Kingdome of heaven, freely, without respect of any grace or righteousnesse in themselves, by the meere gracious favor of God, when they had deserved the contrary, through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus, whom God hath set forth to bee a propitiation through faith in his bloud, to declare his righteousnesse, &c.

To the same purpose the Apostle disputeth, Gal. 3. as hereafter wee shall heare.

§ III. Secondly, it is proved by the words of the text alleaged: theSecondly, it is proved by the words o [...] th [...] text. first wherof is [...], being justified. Now the word [...], as I have pro­ved heretofore, doth never in al the Scriptures signifie to make righte­ous by infusion of righteousnesse, and therfore here it is not meant, that wee are justified by grace infused. Neither doth justification import a reall or positive change in the subject, but relative and [...], as hath beene shewed. And wee must remember, that as it is called, so it is ju­stificatio impii Rom. 4. 5., the justification of a sinner; not onely because before ju­stification men are sinners, but also because being justified, they still re­maine sinners in themselves, though in Christ 2 Cor. 5. 21. they are made righte­ous. And we are to conceive of justification as a continued act of God from our vocation Rom. 8. 30. to our glorification, whereby hee doth accept of a beleeving sinner, as righteous in Christ, not onely at his first conversi­on, but also afterwards, whiles hee beleeveth in Christ: though still in himselfe hee bee a sinner. And to that end doth our Saviour make continuall intercession for us, that the merit of his obedience may be [...] continually imputed unto us.

As for the Papists, they being in their owne conceit justified, as they all are after they have beene either baptized in their infancie, or absol­ved when they come to yeares; they are no sinners, neither is there any thing in them Concil. Trid. s [...]ss. 5. de pec [...]at. orig. In renatis nihil odit Deus. which God hateth, or which may properly bee called sinne. But justification being of sinners, and they being no sinners, but [...]aying they have no sinne, and avouching, that hee onely is a just man in whom there is no sinne; hereby it appeareth, that neither are they justified, neither is there any 1 Ioh. 1. 8. The second word, [...] freely. truth in them.

§ IV. The next word is [...], which is an exclusive particle, exclu­ding the false causes of justification, and signifying, that wee are justifi­ed without any desert or worthinesse in our selves, without works, with­out respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us: which directly over­throweth the assertion of the Papists, for proofe whereof this place was alleaged.

§ V. The third word is [...], by his grace: that is, by the graci­ousThe third, word, by his grace. favour of God in Christ, which is out of us in him, as hath beene proved, that is, by his love of us, and not by our love of him. Neither is there any shew of reason, why it should in this place, above all others signifie as it never doth, an habit of justifying grace inherent in us: es­pecially, if that bee true, which hereafter I shall plainely demonstrate, [Page 108] that wee are not justified by that which is inherent. And thus Saint Ambrose expoundeth these words, gratia Dei gratis; justificati sunt gratis, quia nihil operantes, neque vicem reddentes, sola fide justificati sunt, do­no Dei: they are justified freely, because neither working (before their justification) nor rendring any recompence (after their justification) they are by faith onely justified by the grace, that is, (as he expoundeth it) the gift of God. And on those words by the redemption, which is in Christ Iesu; he testifieth Gratiam D [...]i iu C [...]isto essè testatur Aposto­lus. (saith hee) that the grace of God is in Christ, (but not in us) because by the will of God we were redeemed by Christ. Pererius likewise a learned Iesuit, The name of Grace, saith he, Perer▪ in Rom. 3. Disput. 15. when it is here said, justified freely by his grace, though it may sig­nifie, that supernaturall and divine quality infused into the soule of man, and inherent therein: yet rather it seemeth in this place to signifie gratuitam Dei b [...]nitatem & benignitatem erga hominem, the free or gra­cious goodnesse and bounty of God towards man. Grace therefore doth not signifie, either the matter, or the forme, but the efficient cause of our justification.

§. VI. The fourth word is, through the redemption that is in Christ Ie­sus, The fourth word, through the redemption that is in Christ. whereby is meant Christs whole satisfaction made to the Law, both in respect of the precept, and of the penalty; by which, being as the Papists themselves confesse, imputed unto us, we are redeemed and ju­stified, as being the matter and merit of justification.

§. VII. The fifth word is by faith, whereby is noted the instrument,The fifth word, by saith. by which we apprehend and receive that satisfaction or righteousnesse of Christ, by which we are justified; which is indeed out of us in him, but imputed to those that beleeve. The righteousnesse therefore, by which we are justified, is the righteousnesse of faith, that is, the righ­teousnesse of God, or of Christ apprehended by faith.

§. VIII. The sixth and last is the end, why God did give his SonneThe sixth is, the end. to be a propitiation for our sinnes; to shew forth his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes, and that hee might bee just, and the justifier of him, which beleeveth in Iesus. For in the worke of our redemption and justi­fication Gods justice is declared to be such, that he forgiveth no sinnes, but those onely, for which his justice is satisfied by Christ: neither doth he justifie any, but those, whom by communication of Christs righte­ousnesse unto them, he maketh just. But how should the satisfaction of Christ, that is, his obedience and sufferings being transient, and so long agoe performed, bee communicated unto us for our justification, otherwise but by imputation? And if wee bee justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse, then not by inherent grace, or infused righ­teousnesse.

CAP. IV. Bellarmines dispute out of Rom. 3. 24. refuted.

§. I.

NOw let us see what Bellarmine inferreth upon thisBellarmines dispute out of Rom. 3. 24. De Iusti [...]. lib. 2. cap. §. Alterum. place. Here (saith he) all the causes almost of justi­fication are set forth together. The efficient cause is noted in the word gratis, freely, importing the libera­lity of God: the formall cause, in the word Grace: the meritorious cause, in the word redemption: the disposing cause, in the word faith: all of them al­most depraved or misapplyed by Bellarmine. For neither is the true efficient cause [...], (which he calleth, vocabulo ni­mis diluto, Gods liberality) signified by the word gratis; but the false [...], or meritorious cause is by this word excluded, and the true [...] ▪ which is the merit of Christ, included in the word redemp­tion. As if he had said, we are justified grat [...]s in respect of us, that is, without any cause or desert in us, without any worthinesse of ours: but not gratis in respect of Christ, by whose pretious death and merits we are justified. Neither by Grace is meant iustice given and infused of God, which, hee saith, is the formall cause of justification: but the grace of God, as I have shewed, signifieth the gracious favour of God; which is not the formall cause of justification, but the [...] the efficient or moving cause. Neither is redemption, passively understood, the meritorious cause of our justification: for that, as well as reconciliation or justification it selfe, is the [...], the fruit and effect of Christ his death and obedience: which, as they are the matter and meritorious cause of our justification, so also the price and merit of our redempti­on. How then are we said to be justified through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus? either by a metonymy of the effect for the cause, re­demption being put for Christs satisfaction, or paying of a price of ransome for us, by which we were redeemed: or else we are said to be ju­stified by his redemption, as we may be said to be justified by remission of sinnes. For by Christ wee have redemption, that is, remission of sinnes, Col. 1. 7. Ephes. 1. 14. and so Occumenius expoundeth these words by the redemption, &c. [...]. But how is he justified? by the forgivenesse of sinnes which wee obtaine in Christ Iesu. Neither is faith the disposing cause, as he saith, (for then a man might have a true, lively, justifying faith, and not bee actually justified, which is contrary to the Scriptures, Act. 13. 39. Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 47. but the instrumentall cause: which is therefore said [Page 110] to justifie, because the object, which it receiveth, doth justifie: in which sense the same benefits which wee receive from Christ, are ascribed to faith. Now the object of faith being the righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him; it is evident, that when wee are said to bee justified by faith, it is meant, that wee are not justified by righteousnesse inherent, but by that righteousnesse which faith doth apprehend.

§. II. Yea, but Bellarmine will prove by divers arguments, thatBellarmines proofe that grace Rom. 3. 24. doth not signifie the fa­vour of God. First, from the word gratis. Grace in this place doth not signifie the gracious favour of God: first, be­cause the favour of God was sufficiently signified by the word gratis. For hee that justifieth freely doth it out of good will and liberality: therefore that ad­dition, by grace, doth not signifie the favour it selfe, but some thing else, that is to say, the effect of that favour. I answere, that the Greeke word [...] and the Hebrew Chinnam, is a particle exclusive of any cause, price, worth or desert in us, which may be shewed by many examples. Where it signifieth, first, without cause or desert: As where it is said, they hated me [...], that is, without any cause in me or desert of mine, Ioh. 15. 25. ex Psalm. 35. 19. and vers. 7. where Symmachus readeth [...], Psalm. 69. 4. So Ezech. 14. 23. 1 Sam. 19. 5. 25. 31. 1 King. 2. 32. Psalm. 109. 3. 119. 161. Lam. 3. 52. Secondly, freely, without paying any price, as Exod. 21. 11. Numb. 11. 5. 2 Sam. 24. 24. Esai. 52. 3. 5. Mat. 10. 8. Apoc. 21. 6. 22. 17. So that this exclusive particle was inserted, not to set downe the true cause of justification, but to exclude the false: that we are justified freely without any cause in us, or desert of ours, or price paid by us, meerely by the grace of God, through the redemption which is in Iesus Christ. And thus is the word expounded by all Wri­ters almost, both Old and New, and those as well Papists as Prote­stants.In Rom. 3. Ambrose, as you heard, gratis, saith he, quia nihil operantes, nec vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei: freely, because working nothing, nor making any recompence, they are justified through faith alone, by the gift of God. De verbis Apo­stoli. Serm. 15. Augustin, Prorsus gratis das, gratis salvas, qui nihil invenis unde salves, & multum invenis unde damnes: Altogether freely thou gi­vest, and freely thou savest, because thou findest nothing for which thou shoul­dest save, and thou findest much for which thou maist condemne. In Rom. 3. Oecume­nius, [...], freely, that is, without any good deeds of thine thou art saved: and [...]. againe, as bringing nothing else but faith, and after, because all have sinned, therefore all that beleeve in Christ are justified freely, [...]. bringing onely faith to their justification. Hugo Cardinalis; glossa interlin. gratis, i. sine meritis. So Thomas Aguinas, and other Popish Writers; yea,Justificari gratis, est justi­ficari sine meri­to, sine operi­bus. De Iustif. lib. 1. cap. 21. His second reason from the preposition per. Bellarmine himselfe, to bee justified freely is to bee justified without merit, without workes. This particle therefore sheweth not by, or for what wee are justified: but by or for what wee are not ju­stified.

§ III. His second reason: because the preposition per, when it is said, per gratiam, being not a note, as hee saith, of the efficient cause, is not rightly applied to the favour or good will of God, which is the efficient cause, but either to the formall cause, or to the meritorious cause, or to the instrument. For wee could not well say, that God doth justifie us per favorem aut per suam bene­volentiam, [Page 111] by his favour or by his good will: but wee say well by grace inhe­rent (though not very well by his grace inherent, for that which is in­herent is ours, though from him) by the merit of his sonne, by faith, by the sacraments.

First, I answere, that the preposition is not in the originall text, where the Apostle doth not say, [...], as noting in Bellarmines conceit the formall cause, but [...], as noting the antecedent or moving cause, which is principium actionis, as is usuall in the like actions, which (the efficients working per se) are done naturâ, arte, consilio or voluntate, &c. in which wee doe not say, per naturam, per artem, &c. And there­fore this objection is very frivolous. Secondly, I answer, that per in La­tine, and [...] in Greeke, are very often applyed to the efficient cause: whereof, even in the New Testament, there are, as I suppose, more ex­amples than there bee leaves: whereof some are attributed to God, as Rom. 11. 36. Gal. 1. 1. Heb. 7. 21. to the Sonne, Ioh. 1. 3. Col. 1. 16. Heb. 1. 6, &c. to the holy Ghost, Rom. 5. 5. 1 Cor. 12. 8, 9. And to omit other examples, which are innumerable, to the attributes of God, which are the prime motive causes of all his actions: as by the will of God, 1 Cor. 1. 1. Eph. 1. 1. Col. 1. 1. Rom. 5. 32. 2 Cor. 8. 5. by the grace of Iesus Christ wee shall bee saved, Act. 15. 11. who beleeved by Grace, Act. 18. 27. called by his grace, Galath. 1. 15. by the tender mercies of our God, Luk. 1. 78.

Thirdly, to Bellarmine in thisDe justif. l. 2. cap. 3. place denying the preposition per to be rightly applied to the efficient cause, I oppose Bellarmine C. 12. §. Respondeo illud: Particu­lam a. per signi­ficare causam efficientem per­spicuum est. His third rea­son not proving the point. in the twelfth chapter of the same booke, affirming, that the particle per doth signifie the cause efficient, as Pro. 8. per me Reges regnant, &c.

His third argument. The good will of God cannot bee in vaine, but al­wayes performeth and worketh that good, which hee willeth to any. For whatsoever he willeth that he doth, Psal. 115. 3, &c. Answ. All this is true in respect of his will decreeing any thing, which is absolute,Esa. 46. 10. and is called voluntas beneplaciti; but not in respect of his will prescribing or requiring any thing, which is conditionall, and is called voluntas signi: of which will the Apostle speaketh in the place cited by Bellarmine, 1 Th. 4. 3. This is the wil of God even your sanctification. Otherwise, by Bellarmines argument all men should bee holy, because, as hee saith, God would have them truely just and holy. Therfore, saith he, if justifying grace be the favour and goodwill of God, and God doth not favour nor wish well in vaine, but ma­keth us holy, and blamelesse, such as he would have us to bee, then it followeth, that to be justified by grace, is not onely to bee reputed just, and not to bee so, but to be truly just, holy, and blamelesse. Answ. This argument doth not prove the particular point, for which it is brought, namely, that by grace is meant grace inherent, and not the gracious favour of God. But if it were ought worth, it would serve to prove the maine question: that although grace did signifie the favour of God, when it is said, that wee are justified by his grace: yet this place would prove, that wee are also made just by grace inherent. For whom the Lord favoureth and wish­eth well unto, his benevolence is not in vaine to him: but to whom hee [Page 112] willeth good hee worketh it, making them truely just and holy, whom by his grace hee justifieth. For hee hath elected us that wee might bee holy, Eph. 1. 4. and this is his will, our [...]anctification. All this wee freely confesse, that whom God justifieth, he maketh just; first, by imputation, and truly and perfectly, as hee justifieth: secondly, by infusion, as hee sanctifieth. But the Papists must at length learne to distinguish be­twixt justification and sanctification. For as wee have said before, wee are justified by grace, as it signifieth the gracious favour of God onely: but wee are sanctified not onely by his gracious favour as the efficient, but also by his graces infused and inherent in us, as the matter.His fourth rea­son, from the attributes given to Grace.

§. V. His fourth argument consisteth of sixe slender proofes put to­gether, which are scarce worth the answering. That justifying grace, [...]aith hee, is not onely the favour of God, but a gift inherent in the soule, it may bee understood by the divers attributes and names thereof. As first, that it is called a gift, a gift which wee receive, a gift given by Christ, a gift given by measure. Secondly, that it is compared to essence. Thirdly, that it is compared to light. The first be cause it is a gift

To the first, I answere, that the gracious love and favour of God is said in the scriptures to bee given, that is vouchsafed unto us, even the grace whereby wee were elected and predestinated to the adoption of children, according to the good pleasure of his will, by which wee are called, justified, and saved, 2 Tim. 1. 9. God hath saved and called us with an holy calling, not according to our workes, but according to his owne purpose and grace, which (grace) was [...] given us in Christ Iesus before secular times, having thereby graciously accepted us in his beloved, Eph. 1. 6. Behold, saith1 Ioh. 3. 1. Saint Iohn, how great love the Father hath [...] given us, that wee should be called the children of God, 1 Ioh. 3. 1. For to so many as received Christ, hee gave [...] power to bee the sonnes of God, even to them that beleeve in his name, Ioh. 1. 12.

§. VI. Yea, but it is such a gift as wee doe receive. Very like: for gi­vingSecondly, a gift which we re­ceive. and receiving are relatives; and therefore what God giveth us we doe receive, namely as hee giveth it: but hee doth not give all things by infusion, and therefore hereof it doth not follow, that what we receive in inherent, but that onely, which hee giveth by way of infusion. Now hee hath vouchsafed us his grace, whereby hee elected, redeemed, adop­ted, justified us, not by infusion, but by acceptation in Christ, which grace wee receive by the hand of faith, and whom hee hath graciously accepted in his beloved, they are [...], made partakers of that grace, which notwithstanding is in God, and not in them. But let us consider his proofe, Rom. 5. 11. receiving the abundance of grace and of the gift os righteousnesse. Answ. By grace here is meant gracious favor, neither doth the Apostle here say the gift of grace, but the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousnesse. For where these two are joyned toge­ther, grace and gift, grace signifieth gracious favour: the gift of grace the fruit and effect of that favour, being some benefit bestowed, whether reall or relative. The former is [...] the grace of God, the latter is pro­perly [...]. And this is prooved out of the 15. verse, where is mention [Page 113] both of the grace of God, and of the gift by grace: and that which is here called the abundance of grace, and vers. 15. the abounding grace, is elsewhere called the superabundant riches of his grace, Ephes. 2. 7. that is, of his gracious favour: which in the same Chapter to the Ro­mans, vers. 20. is said to have superabounded, where sinne did abound: which, without great absurdity, cannot bee understood of grace inhe­rent. Neither is the gift of grace, or of righteousnesse here mentio­ned, inherent: but this [...], which came upon us to justification, is opposed to [...] guilt, which came upon all men [...], unto con­demnation; that is to say, the merit of Christs obedience, opposed to the guilt of Adams fall▪ as the whole context doth prove. But as wee were made sinners by Adams fall, the guilt thereof being imputed unto us: so we are made righteous by Christs obedience, the merit thereof being imputed unto us.

§. VII. Yea, but it is a gift given by Christ. It is very true, for in and byThirdly, a gift given by Christ. Christ all grace and favour is vouchsafed unto us: for in him hee hath graciously accepted Ephes. 1. 6. us. And therefore, as it is called the grace of God, so in many places it is called the grace of Christ; not onely be­cause in and by him it is granted to us, but also, because he doth bestow it. But doth it hereof follow, that this grace is inherent? what spiritu­all favour or grace tending to salvation hath God vouchsafed unto us, otherwise than in and by Christ? In him he vouchsafed us grace Ephes. 1. 3. 6. in generall, and in particular the grace of election: for in him wee were chosen, Ephes. 1. 4. The grace of vocation, and salvation given us in Christ. 2 Tim. 1. 9. the grace of adoption, [...], by Iesus Christ, Ephes. 1. 5. The grace of reconciliation in and by Christ, Rom. 5. 1. 11. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Col. 1. 20. The grace of redemption by Christ, Rom. 3. 24. Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. The grace of justification by Christ, Rom. 5. 9. 17, 18, 19. And how is this proved, which no man doubteth of, that grace is given by Christ? because it is said, Ioh. 1. 17. Gratia & veritas per Iesum Christum facta est, grace and verity was made by I [...]sus Christ, where, leaving his hold, that it is given; he urgeth, as if he had forgot himselfe, the phrase, facta est, is made; for, saith he, it is not well said that the favour and benevolence of God is made.

§. VIII. Answ. The word in the Originall is [...], which dothMade by Christ. not alwayes signifie was made, but many times is expressed by the Verbe substantive fuit, or extitit, as Mark. 1. 4. [...], Matth. 11. 26. 26. 6. Iohn 1. 6. sometimes by the Verbe became, as Ioh. 1. 14. [...], the word became flesh, so Mark. 1. 17. 1 Cor. 9. 20. 13. 1. and sometimes by the Verbe came, and that in the sense either of hap­pening, Rom. 11. 25. 2 Tim. 3. 11. or of growing, Matth. 21. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 4. or of being present, Ioh. 6▪ 21. 25. Act. 21. 17. 35. 27. 7. Now the sense of the word varying, it is to be fitted to the place, where­in it is used, but the sense, that grace and truth was made by Christ, fit­teth not. But either we are to say, extitit, it was by Christ, as Valla and sometimes Beza translated [...], or that it came by him, as our translati­on readeth, or that it was exhibited Beza, pr [...]stita est. or given by Christ, as the law both [Page 114] morall (shewing sinne and denouncing the curse) opposed to grace, and also ceremoniall (consisting of shadowes and types) opposed to truth, was [...]. given by Moses. And thus Bellarmine himselfe understood this place: for to prove, that grace was given by Christ, he alleaged this text. But though grace and truth were given by Christ, doth it follow, that therefore grace doth signifie grace inherent? or if it did, that, that inherent grace is justifying grace? Howbeit the true meaning of the word, is either according to the proper signification, which is most usu­all, especially when these two Chased and Emeth, grace and truth goe to­gether: or because grace and truth given by Christ are opposed to the Law given by Moses; by grace and truth wee may understand the do­ctrine of grace and truth. For as the doctrine of grace, that is to say, the Gospell (which is the word of grace Act. 20. 24 32. and the Gospell of Gods grace) especially, when it is opposed to the Law, is termed grace, Rom. 6. 14, 15. Gal. 5. 4. Ephes. 3. 2. 1 Pet. 5. 12. so also the doctrine of salvation by Christ, which is the word of truth, Ephes. 1. 13. 2 Tim. 2. 15. Iam. 1. 18. the truth of the Gospell, Gal. 2. 5. 14. or the word of the truth of the Gospell, Col. 1. 5. is oftentimes called the truth, Iohn 5. 33. and in many other places, as hereafter Lib. 6. c. 6. §. 2. shall be shewed.

§. IX. Fourthly, he alleageth that this grace is given by measure from Fourthly, a gift g [...]ven by mea­sure from Christ. Christ himselfe, Ephes. 4. 7. To every one of us grace is given according to the measure of the donation of Christ. But the favour of God, saith hee, is not given by measure, nor by Christ. Answ. This place is not understood of justifying grace, which is the gracious favour of God in Christ, which is out of us in him; but of the severall gifts of grace in us, which by a Metonymy are called graces, but properly [...], (as Oecumenius upon that place hath well observed, [...], to every one is given grace, that is, a gift of grace) whether they bee the graces of sanctification, which are the proper fruits of saving grace, or those which by the Schoolemen are called gratiae gratis datae, of which the Apostle seemeth to speake in that place; as hee explaineth himselfe in the verses following, vers. 8. 11, 12. In which sense the Apostle Peter useth the words [...] and [...], 1 Pet. 4. 10. As every one hath recei­ved [...], a gift of grace, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. Of these gifts of grace it is true, which Bellarmine saith, that they are given Ephes. 4 8. by Christ, and that they are given by measure. But will hee from thence prove, that what grace is either given by Christ, or in measure, is not Gods fa­vour? I had thought, that the saving grace of God, according to his last allegation out of Ioh. 1. 17. had beene given by Christ, and that it is from the Father, through the Sonne, by the Holy Ghost. And there­fore as it is called the grace of Tit. 2. 11. God, who is the God of all grace, 1 Pet. 5. 10. so also the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ2 Cor. 13. 14., and the grace of the holy Spirit who is the Spirit of grace. Heb. 10. 29. And I had also thought, that the favour of God (though not that which justifieth) is in divers degrees vouchsafed unto his creatures. God loveth and favou­reth Sap. 11. 24. all his creatures, hee is good to all, and his mercies a [...] over all his [Page 115] workes, Psal. 145. 9. giving all things to all, Act. 17. 25. yet among the bodily creatures hee respecteth and favoureth men chiefely, 1 Cor. 9. 9. Psal. 8. 4. Mat. 6. 26. 30. Prov. 8. 31. for which causeTit. 3. 4. [...] (love of mankind) is attributed to him. Among men he favoureth the faithfull more than the rest, 1 Tim. 4. 10. who are therefore called the favourites of God, as I have shewed before. Among them the Lord especially fa­voureth Ministers and Magistrates, Psal. 105. 15. who are also called the favourits of God, not onely in respect of justifying grace (which is [...] ­quall in all to whom it is vouchsafed) but also in respect of their functi­ons, and the gifts of grace bestowed on them for the good of others, De [...]t. 33. 8. 2 Chron. 6. 41. Psal. 4 4. 132. 6. 16. To which purpose [...] Aug. t. 9. in Ioan. Omnia dilig [...] Deus quae feci [...]: & inter ea ma­gis diligit crea­tures ratione; & de illis eas am­plius, qua sunt membra unlgenitum sui, & multo magis ipsum anige­nit [...]m suum. 5. Grace com­pared to es­sence. saith wel, God loveth all things which he hath made; and among them he loveth more the reasonable creatures; and among them hee loveth more amply those, who are the members of his onely begotten Sonne; and much more his onely begotten himselfe, the sonne of his love. And generally, by how much the better any man is than others, it is an evidence, that hee is so much graced and favoured of God: the grace and favour of God being the cause of their goodnesse, and consequently the greater favour of greater goodnesse.

§. X. Fifthly, it is, saith he, compared to essence, which is given by creation, hence it is, that we are said to be created in Christ, Eph. 2. 10. and to be a new creature, Gal. 6. 15. But that, by which we are called creatures, is inward and inherent in us. Answ. That, whereby wee are created anew accor­ding to the image of God in true holinesse and righteousnesse, is the grace, not of justification (for wee are created to good workes, which in the same place are opposed to grace and are excluded from justificati­on) [...] Eph. 2. 8. 9. but of regeneration and sanctification, which we acknowledge to be inwardly wrought by the holy Spirit in those that are justified by the gracious favour of God through faith. But who would thinke, that the Papists were so blinded with malice, as either to perswade themselves, or to goe about to perswade others, that wee deny the graces of sancti­fication to bee inherent, and affirme, that wee are sanctified by such a righteousnesse or holinesse, as is without us.6. Grace com­pared to light.

§. XI. Finally, saith he, it is compared to light, 2 Cor. 6. 14. What followship hath light with darkenesse? Eph. 5. 8. Ye were sometimes darkenesse, but now you are light in the Lord. 1 Ioh. 2. 9. He that saith, that hee is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkenesse. But light doth not make a body lucidum, unlesse it be inherent: neither doth it suffer darkenesse with it. How then [...], a justified man bee said not onely to be [...]ucidus lightsome, but also light in the Lord, whereas before he was darke, if still the darkenesse of sinne be inherent i [...] him, and the light of grace abide without. Answ. Wee are called light in the abstract by a metonymie; either because we are in the light (which is not inherent in us, being either God, or the favor of God, which is the state of grace) or because of that light which is in us: which is the grace not of justification, but of regeneration; and is compared to light, both in respect of the inward illumination of the soule, and also of the externall sanctification of the life shining forth to others, of which our [Page 116] Saviour speaketh, Mat. 5. 16. Let your light, viz. of your godly conver­sation, so shine before men, that they seeing your good workes may glo­rifie your Father that is in heaven. But where he saith, there can be no darkenesse in him that is light, it is as much as if hee should say, that there can be no sinne in him that is sanctified. But he should remember, that God alone is light in whom there is no darkenesse, 1 Ioh. 1. 5. and that in the best of us there is darkenesse, that is, the flesh, even a body of sin and of death, as well as light, that is, the Spirit, Gal. 5. 17. Rom. 7. 14, 17, 20, 23, 24, 25. and that hee who saith, hee hath no sinne (which is the case of all justified, yea of all baptized, and of all absolved and absolute Papists) he is a Iyar, and there is no truth in him. 1 Ioh. 1. 8. And this was his fourth argument containing sixe petite proofes.

CHAP. V. His fifth argument from Rom. 5. 5. answered.De justif. l. 2. c. 3. § Preterea gratiam.

§. I.

His fifth proofe from Rom. 5. 5. FOr having no more places where grace is named to proove justifying grace to bee inherent, hee flyeth to Rom. 5. 5. where not grace but the love of God is mentioned. That grace, saith he, wher­by the Apostle saith wee are justified, is said also to be charity diffused in our hearts by the holy Ghost, which is given unto us. The words are, because the love of God, or Gods love, is effused or powred forth, &c. But here now the question is, first, whether by the love of God in this place is meant the love, whereby God loveth us: or that love whereby wee love God. And secondly, if that love of God whereby wee love him should be meant, how is it proved, that that love of ours is Gods justifying grace? For this latter, though wee constantly deny it, Bellarmine goeth not about to prove, but taketh for granted, it being the maine point in question, which cannot be proved out of this, or any other place. As touching the former, our Divines doe hold, that by Gods love in this place is meant that love, whereby God loveth us, and not that whereby wee love God: The Papists hold the contrary, which Bellarmine endeavoreth to proove by the testimony ofDe Spiritu & litera. c. 32. Augustine and two weake proofes out of Rom. 8.August. testi­mony that here that love is meant, wherby we love God, opposed by ma­ny testimonies.

§. II. The testimony of Augustine hee urgeth very sophistically, as if wee had no better proofe to oppose to the testimony of Saint Augu­stine, than the authority of our owne writers: or as if we might not differ from Augustine in expounding some place of Scriptures, unlesse we will preferre our selves before him, when notwithstanding the Popish wri­ters [Page 117] in expounding the Scriptures differ from Augustine, as oft as wee. But to the Testimony of Augustine, who saith, that the love, which is said to bee shed in our hearts, is not that love whereby God loveth us, but that whereby we love God; we oppose first, the authority of those Writers, who understand this place of the love of God, both actively wherewith he loveth us (which is the same with his saving grace) and also passively, whereby he is loved of us, (which is a notable fruit of his saving grace) or of either of them both indifferently: as Orig [...]n, Seduli­us, Haymo, Anselmus, Remigius, Bruno, Thomas Aquinas, Dominicus à Soto, Pererius Disput. 2. in Rom. 5. Cornelius à Lapide: Secondly, the authority of those, who understand this love to be that, wherewith God loveth us. As of In locum. Ambrose, who saith, wee have the pledge of Gods love in us by the holy Ghost given unto us—for that the promise is faithfull, the holy Ghost given to the Apostles, and to us, doth prove, and doth confirme our hope, and that he might commend the love of God in us, that because it is impossible that those who are beloved should be deceived, he might make us secure concerning the promise, because both it is God who hath promised, and they are deare to him to whom he hath promised. Of In locum. Chrysostome, who saith, [...] whom Theophylact followeth, from that love which God sherv­ed towards us. Of Oecumenius [...], out of the love of God alone wherewith he loved us: of Hierom [...] and likewise of Pri­matius, Quomodo nos Deus diligat ex hoc cognoscinous, how God doth love us hereby wee know. To these, from among the Popish Writers we may adde Cardinal In locum: solidum spei fundamentum ex Dilectione Dei erga nos ma­nifestat. Cajetan, who saith, the Apostle manifesteth the solid foundation of hope from the love of God towards us: and againe, Vnde patet, quod primum f [...]ndamentum spei explicat di­lectionem Dei erga nos. whereby it appeareth that he setteth forth the love of God towards us, as the chiefe foundation of hope. Cardinal Tolet, charitatem Dei appellat qua diligit nos Deus, he calleth it the love of God wherewith hee loveth us. [...]lucid. in. Rom. 5. 5. Arias Montanus, that our hope is rooted in that love wherewith God hath loved us. B. In locum. Reasons pro­ving that Gods love to us Is meant. First, from the words of the Text. Iustitian, who expoundeth the words thus, because that divine charity wherewith God imbraced us is shed into our hearts.

§. III. Thirdly, wee oppose evident reasons from the whole con­text, that is, not onely from the words of the text it selfe, but also from those, which either goe before, or follow after. For, first touching the words of the Text: By the holy Spirit is meant the Spirit of Adopti­on, as Bellarmine confesseth in his next proofe, viz. that the Apostle speaking, Rom. 8. 15. de hoc ipso Spiritu, of this selfe same Spirit, saith, you have received the Spirit of Adoption; who is then said to shed abroad Gods love in our hearts, when he doth perswade our soules of Gods love towards us in Christ, testifying with our Spirits that wee are the sonnes of God, Rom. 8. 15, 16. Gal. 4. 6. and making us to cry in our hearts Abba Father, with whom being the Spirit of promise, Ephes. 1. 13, 14. 4. 30. 2 Cor. 1, 21. 5 5. and the earnest of our inhe­ritance, so many as beleeve are sealed unto the day of our [...]ull redemp­tion. Thus by sealing unto our soules the assurance of Gods love, he is said to shed abroad the love of God in our hearts: Secondly, that love [Page 118] of God which he sheddeth abroad in our hearts and sealeth unto us, as the ground whereupon our sound hope, which never maketh asha­med, is founded, is Gods eternall and immutable love; from the assu­rance whereof sealed unto us by the Holy Ghost our assured hope doth flow. And therefore if we speake, as the Apostle here doth, of such a love of God, as is both the Object of our faith, and the ground of our hope: we must say with Saint 1 Ioh. 4. 10. Iohn, herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Sonne to be the propitiation for our sinnes. For that is it, whereby especially God hath commended this his love towards us, as it is here said, vers. 8. and as Saint Iohn also saith in the same place, 1 Ioh. 4. 9. In this was manifested the love of God towards us, because God sent his onely begotten Sonne into the world, that we might live through him. As for us, wee love God, be­cause he loved us first, 1 Ioh. 4. 19. For when we are by the holy Ghost shedding abroad the love of God in our hearts perswaded of Gods love towards us in Christ; then, and never till then our hearts are inflamed to love God againe, and our neighbour for Gods sake. But why is this love of God said to be shed forth in our hearts? (for this some doe urge.) I answere, either in respect of the knowledge and assurance thereof wrought in us by the holy Ghost, as I have said (for therefore the holy Ghost is given unto us, that we might know 1 Cor. 2 1 [...]. [...], the things freely given or vouchsafed unto us of God, among which the principall is his love:) or as those of the Church of Rome, who consent with us in this point, do speak; it is said to be effused, either as the cause is said to be effused by the effects, which are the gifts proceeding from Gods love, the chiefe whereof is the Spirit, which is given unto us, even the Spirit of adoption, which as Chrysostome saith upon this place, is [...], the greatest gift: or as the bounty of a Prince is shed abroad by his Almoner distributing the princes goods: for even so the love and gracious bounty of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Spirit of grace the dispenser of Gods gifts unto us, 1 Cor. 12. 11.

§. IV. In the words going before the Apostle setteth downe theSecondly, out of the words pre­cedent. fruits of justification by faith; first, that being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ; secondly, by him we have through faith accesse into this grace wherein wee stand, or as the Apostle speaketh, Ephes. 3. 12. by him we have boldnesse and accesse with confidence through faith in him; thirdly, joy in the holy Ghost, rejoycing in hope of the glory of God. And in these three the king­dome of grace consisteth, viz. in righteousnesse, peace, and joy in the holy Ghost, Rom. 14. 17. And this joy the Apostle amplifieth, because we glory and rejoyce in hope of glory, not onely when all things goe with us according to our minds, but also in affliction and tribulation. Knowing that affliction being sanctified to them who have peace with God, worketh patience, and patience worketh probation ( [...]) that is, as Chrysostome very well expoundeth it, [...], it maketh him approved who is tryed: for by patient bearing of afflictions, which are [...], tryals, a man is by experience found to bee [...], that is, a [Page 119] sound and upright Christian, as Saint Iames Iam. [...] 12. saith, and when hee is so found, hee shall receive the Crowne of life. And therefore hath cause to hope, as Saint Paul here saith, that probation worketh hope, and the hope of him that is [...] maketh not ashamed: whereas contrariwise the hope of the hypocrite maketh him ashamed, but what is the ground of all this? how come wee to have this peace, this confidence, this joy, this undaunted hope? Can wee have it by the bare assent of faith with­out application or desire thereof, which is the onely faith which the Papists acknowledge? Can wee have it by our owne charity, when wee cannot know, as the Papists teach, that we have charity? Nothing lesse, but the ground and foundation of all our peace and comfort is this, be­cause the spirit of God, teaching those that beleeve to apply the promi­ses of the Gospell to themselves (which cannot be done without special faith) the love of God is shed forth into their hearts that is, by the Spirit of adoption sealing those that do beleeve, they are perswaded, & in some measure assured of the eternall love of God towards them in Christ, up­on which doe follow peace of conscience, accesse with confidence and joy in the holy Ghost. I conclude with Chrysostome, Chrys. in locum [...], saith hee, the Apostle having said, that hope maketh not ashamed, hee ascribeth all this not to our good workes, but to the love of God; not that whereby wee love him, for that is our chiefe [...] (good works) but that wher­by he loveth us.

§. V. Now let us come to the words which follow, which as Cornelius à Thirdly, from the words that follow. Lapide confesseth, Valde favent, doe very much favour our exposition: wherein the Apostle sheweth, how this love of God, whereon our hope, &c. is grounded, is both manifested and assured unto us. It is manife­sted by this, verse 6. that when wee were of no strength, yea dead in our sinnes, the Son of God dyed for us: for so saith the Apostle, Eph. 2. 4, 5. God who is rich in mercie, for his great love, wherewith he loved us, even when wee were dead in our sinnes, hath quickened us together with Christ, by whose grace wee are saved: which wonderfully setteth forth the love of God towards us: for scarcely as it is vers. 7. for a righte­ous man will one dye. And greater love no man hath than this, that a man lay downe his life for his friend, Ioh. 15. 13. But God (saith the A­postle vers. 8.) commendeth his love towards us (even that love menti­oned verse 5.) in that, whiles wee were yet sinners, and by our sinnes his enemies, Christ dyed for us. It is assured, by an argument from the [...] Rom. 5, 9, 10. lesse to the greater. For if when we were sinners we were redeemed and justified by the bloud of Christ, much more being justified, wee shall be saved from wrath through him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne, much more being recon­ciled wee shall bee saved by his life. I conclude therefore, that not­withstanding the testimony of Augustine, (which as himselfe Uid. diatrib. de Antiebristo part. 2 ad de­monstr. 1. confes­seth deserveth no credit further than it is warranted by the authority of Gods word, or sound reason) by the love of God in this place is meant Gods love towards us. I come to his two other arguments.His former proofe out of Rom. 8. 15.

§. VI. The former, (which is a very weake one) is by paralleling [Page 120] that place with Rom. 8. 15. For, saith hee, the same Apostle speaking of the same spirit given unto us, saith, You have received the Spirit of adoption of sonnes, by which we cry Abba Father. Now, saith hee, wee cry Abba Father by that charity, whereby we love God, not by that whereby he loveth us. Which reason, if it bee reduced into a syllogisme, will not conclude his asserti­on, but the erroneous opinion of Lombard Lib. dist. 17. the master of sentences, which Bellarmine De grati [...] &. lib. arb. l. 1. c. 8. himselfe elsewhere confuteth, namely, that the chari­ty whereby wee love God, is the holy Ghost.

That whereby wee cry in our hearts Abba Father is the holy Ghost.

By that charity wherewith wee love God we cry in our hearts Abba Father:

Therefore that Charity wherewith wee love God is the holy Ghost.

This conclusion Bellarmine knoweth to bee false. Therefore either the proposition is false, or the assumption: for it is impossible, that a false conclusion should bee inferred from true premisses in a formall syl­logisme, as this is. But the proposition is the Apostles, both Rom. 8. 15. and Gal. 4. 6. therefore the assumption is false. Neither is charity that fruit of the holy Ghost, whereby the Spirit of adoption causeth us to cry Abba Father, but faith. For although by charity wee may bee declared or knowne to bee the sonnes of God: yet wee become the sonnes of God, not by charity, but by faith, Ioh. 1. 12. Gal. 3. 26. And consequent­ly not by charity, but by faith wrought in us by the Spirit of adoption, testifying with our Spirits that wee are the sonnes of God, the said spi­rit maketh us to cry in our hearts, Abba Father.

§. VII. His second proofe is out of Rom. 8. 10. where it is said, that His second proofe out of Rom. 8. 10. by justifying grace we doe live. The body indeed is dead by reason of sinne, Spi­ritus autem vivit propter justificationem, as the vulgar Latine readeth: but the Spirit liveth because of justification. But wee cannot well be said to live by the externall favour of God, seeing nothing is more inward than life. Answ. In this argument nothing is sound, for first it proveth not the point for which it is brought, viz. that by the love of God, Rom. 5. 5. is meant our love of God. Neither is it said, Rom. 8. 10. that wee live by justifying grace, for neither is justifying grace mentioned, but [...], justice; neither is it said, that we live by it, (though it bee true that by justifying faith we live) but that the Spirit is life propter justificationem, for or by reason of righteousnesse. And further it is well said, that our Spirit liveth the spirituall and eternall life by the gracious favour of God, which is out of us in him, by which wee are saved: as also for and by reason of the righteousnesse and merits of Christ, which also are out of us in him. Neither doth it follow, that because life is inward, that therefore it propter quod for which or by reason whereof wee doe live, should also be inward.

§. VIII. But to let passe his impertinent allegation of this place,The true mea­ning of the place. and to explaine the true meaning thereof: which is to set downe in this verse and that which followeth two priviledges of those in whom Christ [Page 121] dwelleth by his Spirit, the one in respect of the soule, vers. 10. that howsoever by reason of sinne the body is dead, that is, mortall or subject to death: yet the soule is life, that is, designed unto life, by reason of righteousnesse. The other, in respect of the body, vers. 11. that if Christ dwell in us by his Spirit; then hee which raised up Christ from the dead, shall also by the same Spirit quicken, that is, raise up unto life eternall our mortall bodies. Now, as our bodie is dead, that is, subject to death by reason of Adams sinne, in whom, as the roote, all sinned: so our soule is life, or intituled to life, by reason of Christs righteousnesse; in whom, as our head, wee satisfied the justice of God: The sinne of the first Adam, and the righteousnesse of the second, be­ing both communicated unto us by imputation. And this is all that Bellarmine hath alleaged to prove that justifying grace is inherent: all which is as good as nothing.

CAP. VI. The use of the word Grace in the writings of the Fathers.

§. I. HAving shewed how the word grace is used in theThe word grace used most frequently for the grace of sanctification, because that was oppugned by the Pelagi­ans. Scriptures, something is to be added concer­ning the use thereof in the writings of the Fa­thers, whose authority the Papists are wont to object against us. Howbeit as in the Scriptures, so also in the Fathers, there are two principall significations of the word Grace: the one, pro­per, signifying the gracious favour of God in Christ, by which they acknowledge us to be elected, called, justified and saved. The other, metonymicall, signifying the gift of grace, and name­ly the grace of regeneration or sanctification, which in the Scriptures is called the Spirit, opposed to the flesh, and the new Man, or new crea­ture, which is renewed, and as it were recreated according to the Image of God in true holinesse and righteousnesse.

Of this grace of sanctification there is more frequent mention in the Fathers, who wrote against the Pelagians than of the other. Because the Pelagians acknowledging the grace of God in forgiving sinnes, which is indeed the justifying and saving grace: they had not the like occasion to insist upon the declaration and proofe thereof, as they had of the other, which the Pelagians denyed.

§. II. Of whose errors in this point there were foure degrees.Foure degrees of the errour of the Pelagi­ans. For first, they acknowledge no other inward grace of God but bonum [Page 122] naturae, the possibility of nature and the power of free-will: which be­cause it is freely given of God without any precedent merits of ours, they acknowledged to bee Gods grace. In the second place they ac­knowledged the grace, that is, the gracious favour of God in forgiving sinnes: but the inward vertue, avoid sinnes and to walke in obedience, they ascribed to the power of nature. Thirdly, for our direction and instruction, how and what sinnes to avoid, and how and what duties to performe; they acknowledged Gods grace in teaching and instructing us by his word and by his law. Fourthly, they acknowledged, after a sort, the helpe of grace for the more easie performance of their duties; but they denied the necessity thereof, because without grace they being directed by the word, were able of themselves, though not so easily, to fulfill the Law.

§. III. These three latter degrees are condemned by so many decrees of the Councell of Milevis, among which this is one,C. 3. de­nouncing Anathema against such, as shall say, that the grace of God, whereby wee are justified through our Lord Iesus Christ, doth availe onely to remission of sinnes, which are already committed, and not for a helpe that we may not commit them: unto which rightly understood we doe subscribe, acknowledging, that by the same grace of God, by which we were elected, redeemed, called, reconciled, adopted, justified, wee are also sanctified: For wee professe that our blessed Saviour was given unto us of God,1 Cor. 1. 30. not onely to bee our justification and redemp­tion, but also to be our Sanctification. And we doe acknowledge, that in the Covenant of graceIer. 31. 33, 34. the Lord hath not onely promised remissi­on of sinnes to those that beleeve in Christ; but hee hath also sworne,Luk. 1. 73, 74, 75. that he will give us, being redeemed and having remission of sinne, to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the daies of our life. And therefore we do also willingly subscribe to those sentences of Augustine which Gratian hath transcribed into the third part of his decree.De consecr. dist. 4 c. 141. Ne­mo. ex August. depeccat. merit. & remiss. l. 1. cap. 23. No man taketh away sinnes but Christ alone, who is the Lambe of God taking away the sinnes of the world—Now he taketh them away both by forgiving those that are already committed (among which originall sinne is contained) and also by helping that they bee not committed, and by bringing us unto life where they cannot bee committed at all. And againe,De consecr. dist. 4. c. 45 Gratia. ex Au­gust. the grace which by our Lord Iesus Christ is given, is neither the knowledge of the divine Law, neither nature, nor remission of sinnes alone: but it felfe also causeth, that the Law be fulfilled, that nature be freed, that sinne raigne not. And this, IDe gratia & lib. arb. ad Va­lentin. c. 14. presume, is as much as can truely bee alleaged out of the Fathers: For seeing they doe hold, as wee shall hereafter shew, justification by faith onely; it cannot bee imagined, that they held justification, properly understood, by inherent graces, unlesse wee can imagine, that they thought there is no inherent grace but faith onely.

§. IV. But howsoever the Fathers may be excused, who opposingThe use of the word grace in the Schoole­men and latter writers. the errors of the Pelagians, which oppugned the sanctifying grace, did much insist upon the declaration, the proofe, and the amplification [Page 123] thereof, oftner speaking of this gift of grace, which was oppugned, than of the gracious favour of God in forgiving of sinnes, which the Pela­gians did confesse: yet the backsliding posterity cannot bee excused, and that in three respects. For first, they leave out altogether the proper signification of grace, which is most frequent in the holy Scriptures, as if there were no other grace to bee acknowledged, but that which is inherent. Secondly, they take away that grace of remission, which the Pelagians did confesse, and in the roome thereof they have brought in an utter deletion or abolition of sinne, caused by the infusion of grace. Thirdly, that grace which they would seeme so much to magnifie, is not much better acknowledged by them, than it was by the Pelagians. For first they doe not acknowledge it to be a quickning and reviving grace to them that are dead: but an healing grace to the sicke, and a helping grace to the weake. And by how much they extoll the power of na­ture, and lessen the foulenesse of originall sinne: so much they extenu­at the benefit of grace, and are as well as the Pelagians, worthily ter­med the enemies of Gods grace: Secondly, there seemeth to be little or no difference betweene the Pelagians bonum Naturae, which they acknowledged to bee Gods grace, and that sufficient grace, which the Papists hold to be common to all. Thirdly, neither is there any great difference betweene them in respect of that grace whereby men are called. For the Pelagians acknowledged the great grace of God in re­vealing his will unto us, and in directing us what to doe and what to beleeve; and withall confessed, that God doth worke in us to will by revealing his will to us. And what doe the Papists acknowldge more? but that God having called us by his word, and moved us to turne untoAugust. Epist. 105. him, it is in the power of our free-will either to accept Gods effectuall grace, or to refuse it. But this belongeth to another controversie.

A TREATISE OF IV STIFICA­TION.
THE FOVRTH BOOKE: Of the Matter of Justification.

CAP. I. The state of the question concerning the matter of justification, it being the principall point in controversie.

§. I. THE third Capitall errour of the Papists in the questi­onThe state of the Question. of justification, is concerning that righteousnesse whereby we are justified: where, for prevention of Popish calumniations, I must desire the Reader to re­member three things: First, that the controversie is not concerning our Sanctification, but concerning our Iustification: For wee confesse, that our habituall sanctification consisteth in our righteousnesse inherent; and actuall, in our new obe­dience. Secondly, that the question is not of our justification before men, but before God. For we acknowledge, that we are justified, that is, declared and knowne to be just, not onely by profession of the faith, but also by good workes, as SaintIam. [...]. 14. 24. Iames teacheth. Thirdly, that wee doe not deny, that there is a righteousnesse in the faithfull, as Bellar­mine falsly chargeth us. For we professe, that there is no faithfull or ju­stified man, in whom there is not inherent righteousnesse, more or lesse, according to the measure of grace received. And further we professe, that this righteousnesse which we have from God, and is inherent in us, is graciously both accepted of him, and rewarded by him; but wee [Page 126] 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.This, the prin­cipall point.

§. 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.The other points prove this.

§. 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 [Page 127] 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 imputà­tion 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, andLib. 1. c. 3. & 4. and lib. 2. & 3. This point to be proved, in the affirmative part, and in the negative, first joyntly, and then severally. 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 justi­edArg. 1. we are justified by Gods righte­ousnesse, and not by ours. 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.

[Page 128]The righteousnesse of God is that righteousnesse, which is revea­led in the Gospell. Rom. 1. 17. In the Gospell is revealed theRom. 1. 17. 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 rig [...]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 righ­teousnesseThe righte­ousnesse of Christ is Gods righteousnesse. I [...]r. 23 6. of Christ is Gods righteousnesse, is easily proved: first, because Christ is God, who as [...]eremy prophecied, should be called [...]ebovah our righteousnesse, [...]er. 23. 6. Now his righteousnesse is called Gods righte­ousnesse, as hath beene said▪ not because it is the righteousnesse of the Godhead; but because it is the righteousnesse of him that is God. For as the bloud of Christ, by which we are redeemed, is Gods bloud, Act. 20 28. so the righteousnesse of Christ, by which we are justified, is the righ­teousnesse of God, and is so called, 2 Cor. 5. 21. Rom. 1. 17. 3. 21. 10. 3. and most plainely, 2 Pet. 1. 1. where it is called the righteousnesse of God2 Pet. 1. 1. and our Saviour Iesus Christ; which is an excellent testimony to prove the Deity of our Savior, like to that, Ti [...]. 2. [...] 3. for it is not said of God, & of our Saviour, as noting two persons Not [...], but [...]., but of God and our Saviour, as betokening one. Secondly, because it is that very righteousnesse of God whereof the Apostle speaketh in the places even Rom. 1. 17. 3. 21. 10. 3. 2 Cor. 5 21. 2 [...]et. 1. 1. now mentioned, where it is so called, neither because it is the essentiall righteousnesse of God, as I have shewed before against Osiander; nor because it is a righ­teousnesse in us from God, for that is perfectly described in the Law, as this is not, Rom. 3. 21. and because that (as I shall shew in the proofe of the second part of the assumption) is not called Gods, but ours: but be­cause it is the righteousnesse of that person who is God: which, that wee should not thinke to bee any thing in us, is called sometimes his bloud, Rom. 5. 9. sometimes his obedien [...]e Rom. 5. 19., that is, both his passive and active righteousnesse, by imputation whereof those that truely beleeveThe Fathers by the righ [...]eous­nesse of God, und [...]rstand Christ and his righteousnesse. are made the righteousnesse of 2 Cor. 5. 21. God, not in themselves, but in Christ: even as hee by imputation of our sinnes, was made sinne for us.

§. III. 3. Because divers of the Fathers, to whose judgment some of [Page 129] the popish Salmero. B. Iustinian. Doctors subscribe, by the righteousnesse of God mentio­ned in the first, third, and tenth chapters to the Romanes, understand Christ and his righteousnesse. Origen in Rom. 3. therefore this righte­ousnesse of God, quae est Christus, which is Christ, is manifested without the Law, and so in Rom. 10. 3. Ambrose in Rom. 10. 3. Not knowing the justice of God, that is (as hee expoundeth) ignorantes [...]uncesse Chri­stum; the Iewes being ignorant that this is the Christ, whom God had promised, said, another was to be expected, preferring their owne righ­teousnes, which they had by the Law, before him who is the righteous­nesse of God by faith; justitia n. ipse est, for hee himselfe is the righteous­nesse: which words wee finde also in Sedulius in Rom. 10. 3. Ansel­mus in R [...]. 10. 3. they are not subject Justiciae Dei, id est, Christo, to the righ­teousnesse of God, that is, to Christ. Remigius in Ro. 10. 3. Ignorantes Dei justitiam, non quo ipse justus est essentialiter, sed Christm, &c. They being ignoran [...] of the justice of God, not that whereby he is just essentially, but Christ—they would not submit their neckes justitiae Dei, id est, Christ [...], to the justice of God, that is, to Christ, and in Rom. 3. 21. possumus ipsam justitiam Dei Patris, id est, Filium intelligere, we may understand the very righteousnesse of God the Father, that is to say, the Sonne from whom and by whom we are justified—ipse Christus justitia nostra, Christ him­selfe our righteousnesse hath testimony from the Law and the Prophets Some to the same purpose understand the righteousnesse of faith. The­ophilact in Ro. [...] 10. 3. and Oecumenius likewise, [...] the faith in Christ hee calleth the righteousnesse of God. Anselmus in Roman. 1. 17. the righteousnesse of God is revealed in the Gos­pell, that is, the righteousnesse of faith, which was covered in the Law, for the righteousnesse of God is that, by which hee freely justifieth a sin­ner (through faith without the workes of the Law, Sedulius in Rom. 1. 17. the righteousnesse of God) because it was just, that as Abraham beleeving was justified by faith onely, so all others imitating his faith should be saved. Augustine speaking of those words, Rom. 3. 21. (the righteousnesse of God is manifested) hee did not say (saith hee) De Spiritu & litera, cap. 9. the righteousnesse of man, or the righteousnesse of our owne will, but the righteousnesse of God; not whereby God himselfe is just, sed q [...] induit hominem, but wherewith hee endueth a man (which is a metaphore ta­ken from garments) when he justifieth a sinner: where, if Augustine had by righteousnesse understood inherent, he should have beene confuted out of the very place, which saith this righteousnesse is revealed with­out the Law which cannot be verified of inherent righteousnesse. And againe, Ibid. cap. 11. this is the righteousnesse of God, quae testamento veteri velata, in [...] revelata, which having beene covered in the Old Testament (which cannot be said of righteousnes inherent, for all that righteous­nes which is from God in us, whether it bee habituall consisting in the habit of charity, or actuall which is obedience, is exactly, prescribed in the Law, which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse) is dis­covered in the New: which is therefore called the righteousnesse of God, because by imparting it he maketh men righteous.

[Page 130]§. IV. But most agreeable to the words and meaning of the Apo­stleThe exposition of [...], and the [...] of Pa­pist [...]. is the exposition of Theodore [...], as it is related by Cardinall in Rom. 1. 17. Tolet, and [...] Rom. 1. Dispu [...]. 7. Pererius the Iesuite. That by the righteousnesse of God is meant the righteousnesse of Christ, who is both God and man, which he per­formed for the redemption of Mankinde▪ thereby fully satisfying the justice of God for us. I conclude with Pererius, and Cardinall Cajetan. The justice of God is a justice satisfactory to God for the sinnes of Mankinde by the death (I adde, and obedience) of Christ. And this is called the justice of God, the justice of faith, or the justice which is by fa [...]th, Rom. 10. 6. Cajetan in Rom. 10. 3. The justice of God is a justice of satisfaction to God for mankinde by the death of Christ: and in 2 Cor. 5. 21. the righteousnesse of God in Christ is the merit of Christ sufficient even to satisfie for us, and to justifie us—which is called Gods Quod de Deo, tum quia est Deo [...], tū quia [...]st apud di­vinum tribunal vera [...]stitia, ad diff [...]rentiam [...] no­strarum, quia apud divinum tribun [...]l s [...]nt velut pannus menstrua [...]ae, &c. both because it is the righteousnesse of God personally, and al­so because before the tribunall of God it is true righteousnesse, diffe­ring from our righteousnesse, which before the judgement seate of God are as the cloth of a menstruous woman: when therefore the me­rit of Christ is communicated unto us, then are we made the righteous­nesse of God in Christ, because wee are made just not by our owne righteousnesse, but by the righteousnesse of God communicated unto us in Christ: for we are made just before God, by the merit, by the sa­tisfaction, by the reconciliation made by Christ: and againe in Rom. 3. 24. The redemption wrought by Christ, is Gods righteousnesse, not ours, because Iesus Christ himselfe is true God.

This righteousnesse of Christ, which is called the righteousnesse of God, by which we are justified; the Papists (even Bellarmine himselfe) sometimes confesse to be a plenary satisfaction to God, and by him im­puted to them that beleeve: and that this righteousnesse of Christ is the meritorious cause of our justification, and that by the merit of Christs righteousnesse we are justified: and yet they cannot abide to heare, that it is the matter of justification: when as wee by the matter of justification understand nothing, but that righteonsnesse, which is imputed to justification. Now it is certaine, that the righteousnesse of Christ, neither active nor passive, which were transient, nor the merit thereof, can otherwise be communicated to us, but by imputation. Even as the actuall transgression of Adam, and the guilt thereof, were by imputation communicated to us. Neither could inherent righteous­nesse bee merited for us unto our sanctification, unlesse his righteous­nesse it selfe and the merit thereof were first imputed to us unto ju­stification: no more than the actuall sinne of Adam could have infected us with originall corruption, if his sinne and the guilt thereof had not first beene imputed to us.

§. V. The fecond part of the assumption was, that the righteous­nesseThe righteous­nesse inherent is ours. inherent in us, is our righteousnesse: which, one would thinke should need no proofe. For though we receive it from God, as wee doe all other good things which wee have, yet it, as well as all other good things, even our daily bread, which we have received from God, [Page 131] is to be called Matth. 6. 11. ours. All good things which we have, are Gods gifts, and yet they are not called his, but ours. As our bodies, our soules, our life, our liberty, our learning, our wisedome, our charity, our tempe­rance, our piety, &c. and so our righteousnesse. The Papists, and some others doe teach, that, that righteousnesse is called Gods righteous­nesse, which wee shall have from God▪ and that ours, which wee have from our selves, and by the strength of nature: whereto I answer, first, there can bee no righteousnesse, which is not the gift of God, fromJam. 1. 17. whom all gifts doe come. Neither is it credible, that the Iewes, who were instructed in Gods word, should ever looke to bee justified by a righteousnesse not received from God. The Pharisee himselfe, who trusted unto his owne righteousnesse, and thought, as the Apostle spea­keth of the Iewes, Rom. 10. 3. to be justified by his owne righteousnesse, acknow­ledged it to be the gift of God, and therefore thanked him for it. And hereunto Bellarmine De [...] l. [...] c. 8 elsewhere accordeth, endeavouring by the exam­ple of the Pharisee (who trusted in himselfe, as being righteous) to prove that men are not justified by speciall faith, or by affiance in Gods spe­ciall mercie. And lest any should object, that hee trusted to a righte­ousnesse which he had of himselfe, hee addeth: Neither can it bee said, that the Pharisee had faith or affiance of Gods benevolence by reason of his owne merits, as though hee [...]eleeved that he had his righteousnesse from himselfe. Nam agebat gratias Deo de sua justitia, proinde à Deo eam se habere credebat: for he gave God thankes for his righteousnesse, and therefore beleeved that he had it from God. Secondly, the righteous­nesse of God, by which wee are justified, is without the Law revealed in the Gospell: but all that righteousnesse which is from God within us, is fully and perfectly described in the Law.

§. VI. Thirdly, as the severall parts of inherent righteousnesse,The severall parts of righte­ousnesse inhe­rent [...]re called ours. though received from God, as being his gifts of grace, are notwithstan­ding called ours, as our faith, Matth. 9. 2, 22. Rom. 1. 8. Hab. 2. 4. [...]am. 1. 3. Our charity, 2 Cor. 8. 8, 24. 1 Cor. 16. 24. Philem. 1. and 7. Our hope, Phil. 1. 20. 1 Thess. 2. 19. Our good workes, Mat. 5. 16. Apoc. 2. 2. Our patience, Luk. 21. 19. 2 Thess. 1. 4. Apoc. 2. 2. 3. 10. 13. 10. So righteousnesse inherent is in very many places of Scripture called ours, whereof I will quote some, Gen. 30. 33. 1 Sam. 26. 23. 2 Sam. 22. 21, 25. 1 King. 8. 32. Iob 33. 26. Psalm. 7. 8. 18. 20, 24. 35. 27. 112. 3, 9. Prov. 11. 5, 6. Eccl. 7. 16. Esa. 5. 23. 64. 6. Ezech. in his 3. 4. 18. and 33. chapters, foureteene times. Matth. 5. 20. and 6. 1. ac­cording to the Latine, 2 Cor. 9. 9, 10. but there are two which are most remarkeable, Psalm. 4. 1. where David thus calleth upon the Lord, O God of my righteousnesse, that is, saith Bellarmine, in Psal. 4. à quo est omnis me [...] justi­tia, acknowledging all his righteousnesse to bee from God, and yet cal­leth it his owne righteousnes. Esa. 54. 17. their righteousnesse is from me, saith the Lord, from God, but yet theirs. If it bee objected out of Au­gustine, that it is called the righteousnesse of God, non qua justus est, sed qua nos justos facit, not whereby hee is just, but whereby hee maketh us just. I answer, that Christs righteousnesse both habituall and actuall, [Page 132] both active and passive is such, for it is not that whereby God, that is the Godhead is just, but that whereby hee maketh us just.

Fourthly, whereas the Papists will needes have the righteousnesse of God, by which wee are justified, and which is the principall matter taught in the Gospell to be inherent in us, though from God: they con­found Gods righ teousnes and ours, and thereby confound the Law and the Gospell, and by confounding them abolish the righteousnes of God: as before, by confounding justification with sanctification they abolished the benefit of justification, and evacuate the Gospell, or at least with the false Apostles, Gal. 1. teach another Gospell whiles they teach another righteousnesse whereby to bee justified, than the righte­ousnes of God: which whosoever doth, though hee were an Apostle, though an Angel from heaven, Gal. 1. 8. Our second argument. By Christs righte­ousnesse we stand righteous before God, and not by righte­ousnesse inhe­rent. he ought to be held accursed.

§. VII. Our second argument: That is the matter of our justifica­tion besore God, by which wee being sinners in our selves (for that justification, which the Scriptures teach, is the justification Rom. 4. 5. 5. 8. 10. of a sinner) doe stand righteous before God; which wee being sinners may oppose to the judgement of God, why he should not condemne us; which wee being sinners may interpose betwixt Gods justice and us; and which we may plead as a full satisfaction to God for us. Such is the righteousnes of Christ: for being sinners in our selves, yet beleeving in Christ, we are in 2 Cor. 5. 21. Rom. 5. 19. him accepted and constituted righteous. The righteousnesse of Christ is that, which we being sinners in our selves may oppose to Gods judgement, or interpose betwixt Gods justice and us, which wee may plead as a full satisfaction made in our behalfe. For though by our sins wee have deserved to bee condemned, and to be excluded from heaven: yet if wee beleeve in Christ, his sufferings are accepted in our behalfe to free us from hell, and his obedience to entitle us unto heaven. In him we have borne the penalty, in him wee have fulfilled the Rom. 10. 4. Law. Such is not ours: for being sinners in our selves wee cannot stand before God as righteous by justice inherent, neither can wee oppose it to Gods judge­ment, or interpose it betwixt Gods justice and our sinnes, or plead it as a full satis faction. But the best of us must pray with Da­vid, Psal. 143. 2. Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord, for no flesh shall bee righteous in thy sight, namely, if thou enter into judge­ment with him: and againe, Psal. 130. 3. 4. if thou Lord shalt marke iniquity, O Lord who shall stand, but there is forgivenesse with thee that thou mayst be feared. Augustine on those words, August. in Psal. 1 29. Quis sustinebit? Non dixit, ego non sustinebo, sed, quis sustinebit? vidit n. propè totam vitam huma­nam circumlatrari peccatis suis, accusari omnes conscientias cogitationibus s [...] ­is, non inveniri cor castum praesumens de sua justitia. Si ergo cor castum non potest inveniri, quod praesumat de sua justitia, praesumat omnium cor de miseri­cordia Dei, & dicat Deo, Si iniquitates observaveris Domine, Domine quis fu­stinebit? quae a.spes est? quoniam apud te propitiatio est: & quae est ista pro­pitiatio, nisi sacrificium? & quod est sacrificium, nifi quod pro nobis oblatum est? Sanguis innocens fusus delevit omnia peccata nocentium——Ergo est apud te propitiatio. Nam si non esset apud te propitiatio, si judex solum esse [Page 133] velles, & misericors esse nolles, observares omnes iniquitates nostras, & quae­ [...]eres, eas, quis sustineret?—quis staret in judicio tuo? Spes ergo una est, quoniam est apud te propitiatio. Againe, Contr. Crescon. lib. 4. Augustine and some others doe use to joyne in coherence the 8. and 9. verses of the 20. Chapter ofProv. 20. 8. 9. the Proverbs: when the righteous King shall sit on his throne, who can say my heart is cleane? wee deny not that there is a righteousnesse in­herent in the faithfull, that it is accepted of God in Christ, that it is graciously rewarded; but we deny that we are justified thereby. This is not it, in which wee can stand in judgement before the righteous King sitting on his throne.

§. VIII. Our third argument: By that righteousnesse of man,The third ar­gument be­cause Christs righteousnesse is perfect, and not ours. which onely is perfect, wee are justified, and not by that which is un­perfect.

The righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him, is the onely righteousnesse of man which is perfect, and all our in­herent righteousnesse in this life is unperfect.

Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him, and not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves.

The proposition needeth no proofe; for that justice, which is not per­fect, cannot stand in judgement before God, and is so farre from justi­fying, that it selfe is sinfull, every imperfection and defect being [...], a transgression of the Law, and consequently a sinne. So long, saith Au­gustine Epist. 29. ad Hieron. quam­diu augeri potest charitas, [...] illud quod minus est ex vi­tio est., as charity may be increased, assuredly that, which is lesse than it ought to bee, is vicious: and againe Lib. de perf. justis. ad. 15. more plainely, peccatum est, cum charitas minor est quàm debet, it a sinne when charity is lesse than it ought to-be. I doe not say, that the habit of grace, as faith or charity, or a worke of grace, as prayer, or almes giving is a sinne, and much lesse a mortall sinne, as our adversaries charge us: but I say, that the im­perfection or defect of the habit or the worke is a sinne: and in respect thereof neither the habit, nor the worke, though good, is purely and perfectly good, but sinfull and stained Esai. 64. 6. with the flesh: which staine to them, who are in Christ Iesus, is veniall, and it notwithstanding, both the habit and the worke of grace are cum venia, with favour and indulgence through the merits and intercession of our Saviour in him accepted: the want and imperfection being by his perfect righteous­nesse and obedience covered. That the righteousnesse of Christ is per­fect, is also manifest: And that it is the onely righteousnesse of man which in this life is perfect, is evidently proved, because all the righte­ousnesse of all meere and mortall men is unperfect. And that I prove by these reasons:The righte­ousnesse of all mortall men is unperfect; first, because all are sinners.

§. IX. First, no sinners have perfect righteousnesse inherent in them.

All mortall men are sinners.

Therefore no mortall man hath perfect righteousnesse in­herent in him.

The proposition is manifest: for whiles men bee sinners, they can­not [Page 134] be perfectly righteous. The assumption, viz. that all men are sin­ners, it is proved by the common experience of all men in all ages. Se­condly,2 it is grounded upon most plaine and undeniable testimonies of holy Scriptures, which have concluded all men whatsoever under sinne. Gal. 3. 22. Rom. 3. 23. 1 King. 8. 46. Eccl. 7. 20. Thirdly, it is a3 confessed and received truth: which therefore the Apostle in his Enthymeme, Gal. 3. 10. taketh for granted. For thus the Apostle argueth;

Every one that is a transgressour of the Law, is accursed, therefore

All men whatsoever, even those, who seeke by their obedience of the Law to be justified, are accursed. If any man should deny the con­sequence of this Enthymeme, it is to bee made good by adding the as­sumption (which the Apostle left out as a thing presupposed and taken for granted) thus,

Whosoever is a transgressour of the Law, is by the Law accursed; which the Apostle expresseth in these termes, Gal. 3. 10. Cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them.

But all men without exception, even those which seeke to be justified by the Law, are transgressours of the Law: Never any man continued in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them, that is, never any meere and morall man hath so abstained from all evill forbidden, as that he hath also done the things commanded, that he hath done all, that hee hath ever continued in do­ing all. Thus Chrysostome understandeth the Apostle to argue. No man is justified by the Law, [...], for all have sinned and are under the curse; and saith, that the Apostle by testimony pro­veth [...], that no man hath fulfilled the Law: and Oecume­nius likewise in Gal. 3. that the Apostle proveth, that even those who seeke to be justified by the Law are under the Curse, why? [...], because no man, saith he, fulfilleth the Law.

Therefore all men without exception, even those which seeke to bee justified by the Law, are by the Law accursed: which con­clusion is of no force if it bee not granted, that all men are transgres­sours4 of the Law. Fourthly, all they who are to pray to God for the forgivenesse of their sinnes, are sinners: But all, even the best of men are to pray to God for the forgivenesse of their sinnes. Psal. 32. 6. Pro hac (that is, for remission of sinnes) or abit ad te omnis sanctus, every godly man shall pray unto thee. Our Saviour taught his owne Apostles and all other Christians, to pray daily for remission of sinne. Every one saith Cyprian De oratione dominica. is taught peccare se quotidie, dum quotidie per peccatis jubetur ora­re, that he sinneth daily, seeing he is commanded to pray daily for his sinnes. Therefore all, even the best of us are sinners: Fifthly, whosoever5 doth that evill which he would not, and doth not that good which hee would, is a sinner, both in respect of commission and omission: but such is the condition of the best, even of the Apostl [...] himselfe, Rom. 7. [Page 135] 15. 19. for so he saith, vers. 25▪ [...], I my selfe.

Sixthly, whosoever hath sinne is a sinner; All men have sinne: and that I prove thus;

Whosoever is a lyar himselfe, and maketh God a lyar, that saith he hath no sinne, he undoubtedly is a sinner.

But every man, though he were as holy as the beloved Apostle and Evangelist Saint Iohn, is a lyar himselfe, and maketh God a lyar, that saith he hath no sinne: for if wee (saith he, including him­selfe) say we have no sinne, wee deceive our selves, and the truth is not in us, 1 Iohn 1. 8. if we say that we have not sinned we make him a ly­ar, and his word is not in us, vers. 10. Therefore every man, though hee be as holy as Saint Iohn himselfe, is a sinner.

Seventhly, whosoever is free from sinne is also free from death: No mortall man is free from death: Therefore no mortall man is free from sinne.

CHAP. III. The question concerning the imperfection of inherent righteousnesse further discussed.

§. I. TO contradict this argument, that we are not justi­fiedBellarmines proofes that inherent righ­teousnesse is perfect. by righteousnesse inherent, because it is un­perfect; Bellarmine indeavoureth to prove that it is perfect both in respect of habituall, and actu­all righteousnesse. But in both hee useth to dis­puteDe Iustif l. 2. c. 7. § Tertio, fidem, spem, & chari­tatem in hac vita posse esse perfectam. Sophistically: in the first, because some men have beene indued with perfect righteous­nesse: in the second, because some good works of the just are purely and perfectly good. For though both these assertions were true, as they are not, yet would they not conclude justification by inherent righteousnesse. For first, as touching the persons, the question is not, whether some choice men in some part of their life, after they have beene good and long proficients, doe attaine to some perfection; but whether they, and all others, when they are first justified, are endu­ed with perfect justice: for if they be not then endued with perfect in­herent righteousnesse, they are not justified by it. Now justification by habituall righteousnesse, which they call their first justification, is incipi­entium, of incipients: and themselves distinguish Christians into three rankes, that some are incipients, some proficients, some perfect. But incipients are such as be infants and babes, either in respect of age, when being baptized in their infancie, are, as they teach, justified; or in re­spect of religion, being new converts. But to imagine, that either in­fants, [Page 136] which have not so much as the use of reason, nor are as yet capa­ble of the habits of Faith, Hope, and Charity, and much lesse are able to produce the Acts, to Beleeve, to Hope, to Love; or new converts, who are like Babes to bee fed Heb. 5. 12. 1 Cor. 3. 2. with Milke, are indued with perfect righteousnesse, is a great absurdity.

§. II. Yea but, saith De Justis. l. 2. cap. 14. §. re­spond [...]o. Bellarmine, the workes of God are perfect, Deut. 32. 4. habituall righteousnesse is the worke of God, therefore it is perfect. Answ. The workes of God are either immediate, and such asBellarmines ar­gument for ha­bituall righte­ousnesse, be­cause the works of God are per­fect. hee worketh at once; or else mediate, which hee worketh by degrees. The former are perfect at the first, according to their kinde: as were the workes of creation. The latter are not perfect at the first, but by degrees are brought to perfection: as the worke of procreation or carnall generation, and of Spirituall Re-creation or Regeneration. Adam was the immediate Worke of GOD created at once: and therefore perfect in his kinde at the first. Seth also was the Worke of GOD, not immediate by creation, but mediate by Procreati­on, being first begotten by his parents and conceived, then formed in the wombe, then borne, then growing from age to age, untill hee came to bee a perfect man. So it is in the Spirituall Re-creation. For wee are the workemanship of God created Ephes. 2. 10. unto good workes: but we are not perfect Christians at the first. For we are first begotten by the incorruptible 1 Pet. 1. 23. seed of Gods Word, receiving, as it were, the seeds of Gods graces at the first, being but as Embryons in the wombe untill Christ Gal 4. 19. bee formed in us. And when wee are borne a new, wee are at the first but as new borne Babes, who are to desire the sincere 1 Pet. 2. 1. milke of the worke, that we may grow thereby: and afterwards stron­ger meats, that wee may grow more and more: and then, not conten­ting our selves with that measure of growth, which wee have attai­ned unto, must still strive towards perfection, being from day 2 Cor. 4. 16. to day renewed in the inner man untill we come to be adult, growne men, or, as the Apostle speaketh, Phil. 3. 15. perfecti; and when we are such, (because alwayes in this life we are in our [...], or growing age, receiving one­ly the first Rom. 8. 23. fruits of the Spirit) wee must imitate the Apostle Paul; who, though he farre excelled the most perfect among us, acknowled­ged, that he had not attained Phil. 3. 12, 13, 14, 15. to perfection, but did strive towards it: exhorting all others, who are perfect, that is, adulti or growne men, to be of his minde; that is, that they should acknowledging their imper­fection still more and more strive towards perfection.

§. III. As touching actuall righteousnesse, hee dealeth also So­phistically:Bellarmines ar­gument for actuall righte­ousnesse. for first, where hee should prove, that the works of the faithfull are perfect, or purely and absolutely good, he proveth that they are truely good, and not sinnes: but especially, when he should prove, that all the workes of the faithfull or righteous, are purely and perfect­ly good; he proveth, that some are. As though a man who is not one­ly guilty of many sinnes, and infected with manifold corruptions and infirmities, but also in respect of his former sinnes obnoxious to dam­nation; could bee justified by some good workes among many not [Page 137] good. But this is a most erroneous conceit of the Papists, who hold, that every good worke, proceeding from charity, doth absolutely deserve heaven; even as well as any evill worke committed against charity de­serveth hell. As though by one act of charity the whole Law were ful­filled, as well as by one act committed against charity the whole Law is broken. Hee that transgresseth one Commandement, Iam. 2. 10. though it bee but once, is guilty of all. But hee doth not fulfill the Law, and much lesse can bee justified by his obedience, whose obedience is not totall, Gal. 3. 10. perfect, and perpetuall. It is true, that a faithfull man may bee justifi­ed, that is, declared and approved to be just by some one or more good workes, as Abraham Iam. 2. 21, 25. by offering his sonne Isaac, and Rahab by her enter­taining and delivering of the Espies; but no man can bee justified be­fore God by his works, who is guilty of any sinne. For if Paul 1 Cor. 4 4. who was not conscious to himselfe of any sinne, was not thereby justified: how can he that is guilty of any, or rather many sinnes be justified? For who­soever is justified before God Rom. 4 6. is blessed, but cursed Gal. 3. 10. is every one that continueth not in all the things, which are written in the booke of the Law▪ to doe them.Reasons pro­ving that the workes of the faithfull are not purely and perfectly good. and first, Esa. 64. 6.

§. IV. But if it shall evidently appeare, that none of the workes of the faithfull are purely and perfectly good, how farre then are the Pa­pists from proving justification by workes. And this I will prove by di­vers arguments, which I will also maintaine against the cavils of the Papists. And first out of Esa. 64. 6. We are all as an uncleane person, or thing, all our righteousnesses are as a menstruous cloth. Where the Church doth freely confesse her selfe and all her members to bee un­cleane, and all their righteousnesses, that is, all their most righteous workes, to bee as polluted clouts: which, though it be a most pregnant testimony, wherein wee have just cause to triumph; yet Bellarmine De justi [...] l. 4. c. 20. §. Quarto. saith it is impertinent, and that for three reasons: First, because without doubt the Prophet speaketh not of just men, but of notorious sinners, for whose sinnes the City of Ierusalem and people of the Iewes was to be delivered into the hands of the King of Babylon. And that the prophet speaketh in the person of such wicked men, he endeavoureth also to prove by three arguments: First, because he a little before had said, because thou art angry and wee have sinned, that is, as Cyrill expoundeth it, because thou art angry, thou hast forsaken us. But neither is God angry with the just, neither doth hee forsake them. I answere no lesse confidently, but upon better grounds, that without doubt the prophet speaketh in the person of the Church, and namely of the faithfull, who living after the desolation of Ierusalem in the captivity of Babylon, should bewaile their owne sinnes and of the whole people of the Iewes, which had drawne upon them those fearefull judgements. For these words are part of that prayer of the Church of the Iewes, which from the seventh verse of the 63. chapter is continu­ed to the end of the 64. And in token of this continuation, the lat­ter part of the last verse of the former chapter in the hebrew, is the be­ginning of this chapter in the Greeke, Latine, and other translations. Now in the former chapter, the same persons, which here confesse their [Page 138] sinnes, after they had magnified Gods mercies towards them, verse 7. &c. doe say unto God, verse 16. doubtlesse thou art our Father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel know us not: thou O Lord art our Father and our Redeemer. And in this chapter, as they bewaile in this verse their sinnefulnesse with aggravation: so they desire the Lord (whom they call their Father) not to remember their iniquities, because they are his people, verse 8. 9. professing their hope of salvation, verse 5. which is not the manner of notorious and impenitent sinners, but of those that are penitent, and faithfull. And further, that which Esay here foretelleth, is accordingly performed: First, by Daniel, chap. 9. from the fourth verse to the twentieth, who in like manner in the name and be­halfe of the desolate Church of the Iewes, prayeth unto God, confes­sing his owne sinnes and of the people of Israel, as he speaketh, verse 20. Secondly, by the Church in captivity, which send the like prayer writ­ten by Baruch to the priest and people, who then were at Ierusalem. Baruch 1. from the 15. verse of the first chapter to the end of the third.

§. V. This then is the confession of the Church, which accordingThat in Esa. 64. 6. to be the confession of the faithfull, proved by te­stimonies. to Tertullians rule, is to bee extended▪ unto the faithfull in all times: and so it is understood by Origen in Rom. 3. lib. 3. who saith, that no man may glory of his owne righteousnesse, seeing here it is said, that all our righteousnesse is as the cloth of a menstruous woman: by Hierome in locum., wee shall bee saved onely by thy mercie, who of our selves are uncleane. And what righte­ousnesse soever wee seeme to have, is compared to a cloth of a men­struous woman. By Augustine, De tempore serm. 43. all our righteousnesse compared with divine justice is accounted like the cloth of a menstruous woman, as the Prophet Esay saith, &c. and again, Tom. 9. soliloq. c. 28. whatsoever an uncleane person tou­cheth shall bee uncleane: but all wee are as the cloth of a menstruous woman, comming from a corrupt masse and uncleane, we beare in our foreheads the spot of our uncleannesse, which wee cannot conceale, at least from thee, who seest all things. By Bernard in divers places? First, for De verbis Esai [...], Nostra n. (si qua est) bu­milis instit [...]a recta for sitan, sed non pura, &c. our humble righteousnesse, if wee have any, is perhaps right but not pure: unlesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to be better than our forefathers, who no lesse truely than humbly said, all our righteous­nesse is like the cloth of a menstruous woman: for how can there be pure justice, where as yet fault cannot bee wanting. And againe, In festo omni­um Sanctorum serm. 1. what can all our righteousnesse bee before God? shall it not, according to the Prophet, be reputed as the cloth of a menstruous woman? and all our righteousnesse, if it bee straitly judged, will it not be found unjust and defective? What then will become of our sinnes, seeing our righteous­nesse cannot answere for it selfe? wherefore crying earnestly with the Prophet, Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord, let us in all humility have recourse to mercie, which alone can save our soules. Thirdly, De verbis Origenis. if I shall bee just, I will not lift up my head, for all my righte­ousnesses before him are as the cloth of a menstruous woman. Fourthly, De verbis [...] Apo­stoli, 1 Cor. 1. 31. it is perfect and secure glorying, when wee feare all our workes, as bles­sed Iob testifieth of himselfe, and when wee acknowledge with the pro­phet Esay, that all our righteousnesses are to bee reputed no other, than [Page 139] the cloth of a menstruous woman. Fifthly, De decic. Ec­clesia, serm. 5. surely if all our righte­ousnesses being viewed at the light of truth shall bee found like a menstruous cloth, what then shall our unrighteousnesses bee found to bee? And to the like purpose I might alleage Dionys. Carthus. in Psal. 142. Gerson. tom. 3. de Consolat. lib. 4. pros. 1. & tom. 4. tr. de sign. Cajetan. in 2 Cor. 5. 21. Iacob. Clict. in Canonem apud Cassandrum con­sult. art. 6. Stella in Luk. 17. Ferus in Matth. lib. 3. cap. [...]0. Andreas Vega opusc. de justif. Pag. 25. qu. 1. propos. 4. Adrianus de Traject▪ Apud Cas­andr. Consult. art. 6., afterwards Pope in quartum sentent. Quasi pannus menstruat [...] sunt omnes justitiae no­strae: jugiter igitur super pannum bonae vitae, quem justitiae operibus teximus, stillamus saniem diversorum criminum; all our righteousnesses are like the cloath of a menstruous woman: wherefore continually upon the cloth of a good life, which we weave by the works of righteousnesse, we drop the filthy matter of divers crimes.

§. VI. But let us briefly examine Bellarmines proofes, where toAnswer to Bel­lar mi [...]es proofe first, from the words going before. omit Cyrill, who understandeth the place, contrary to Bellarmines con­ceipt, of the wicked Iewes, who, after they had crucified Christ, per­sisted in their infidelity: his first reason is from the words going be­fore, V. 5. because God is not angry with the just, nor forsaketh them, but according to our doctrine (forsooth) hee covereth their sinnes, and im­puteth them not. I answere, first, that when the children of God do [...] sinne, God is angry, as the Prophet here saith; behold, when wee sinne thou art angry. God was angry with Moses, Exod. 4. 14. Deut. 1. 37. with Aaron, Deut. 9. 20. with David, 3 Sam. 11. 27. Psalm. 38. 3. 88. 16. with Salomon, 1 King. 11. 9. with his people, Psalm. 85. 4, 5. Esai. 47. 6. with the sheepe of his pasture, Psalm. 74. 1. with his faithfull servants, Esai. 12. 1. Secondly, that by their sinnes 1 Cor. 11. 29, 30. they provoke Gods judgements, the fruits of his anger: from which they are so farre from being exempted, that judgement beginneth 1 Pet. 4. 17. at the house of God. Thirdly, that if they meet Am. 4. 12. 1 Cor. 11. 30, 31. Psal. 32. 4. not the Lord in his judgments, and doe not judge themselves, then are they sure to be judged of the Lord▪ For though he doth not hate them, nor execute upon them the fruits of his eternall anger: yet he is angry with his children when they sin, (for to sin against him is to offend him) and for their sins he doth many times judge and correct them: but our comfort is, when we are judged, we are chastized 1 Cor. 11. 32. of the Lord, that wee should not be condemned with the world. Fourthly, that they are patiently to beare the anger of God, because they have deserved it, Lam. 3. 39. Mic. 7. 9. I will beare the indignation of the Lord, because I have sinned against him. And as touching Gods forsaking of his Children (whereof notwithstanding there is no mention in this place) it is certaine, that although he doth never utterly or finally forsake his children, Psalm. 37. 25. 28. Heb. 13. 5. Psal. 89. 33. 2 Cor. 4. 9. yet sometimes they are subject to spi­rituall and temporall desertions for a time, wherein God is said to hide his face from them, as it is here said, vers. 7. see Deut. 31. 17, 18. Iob 13. 24. Psalm. 22. 1. 88. 14. 2 Chron. 32. 31. Esai. 8. 17. 54. 8. Ier. 39. 24. 29. Iud. 6. 13. Psal. 77. 7. Es [...]i. 49. 14. and 62. 4. Howbeit [Page 140] that is verified of them, which the Lord professeth to his Church by his Prophet Esai. c. 44. 7, 8. for a small moment have I forsaken thee, but in great mercies will I gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindenesse will I have mercie on thee, saith the Lord thy redeemer.

§. VII. His second proofe is from the words following, vers. 7.His second proofe from the words follow­ing. And there is none that calleth upon thy name, nor standeth up to take hold of thee. But the just doe call upon God: therefore the prophet doth not speake in the person of the just. Answ. Ordinarily the godly doe give themselves to prayer: though sometimes, when they are left unto them­selves, they doe neglect it. But as ordinarily they doe not neglect this duty; so when they have neglected it, their manner is, as in this place,Psal. 109. 4. to complaine of the neglect thereof. For according to this prophecie, Daniel and the remnant of Iuda which were in captivity, in whom it was fulfilled, use the very same complaint in their prayer, Dan. 9. 13. Baruch 2. 8.

§. VIII. His third proofe is out of the words themselves: whereHis third proofe from the words of the text. the righteousnesse of them that make this prayer is compared to a men­struous cloth, and therefore, saith he, he speaketh not in the person of the just whose good works in the Scriptures are highly commended. Ans. It is not like­ly, that the hypocrits, who use to trust in their owne righteousnesse, and to boast of it, would complaine of the defectivenesse therof. But howso­ever the godly, though weak indevors of the faithfull are graciously ac­cepted of God in Christ, and freely rewarded; yet the children of God, when they are humbled under the hand of God, or doe summon and present themselves before the judgement seat of the Lord, or in their soules doe exercise judgement according to the testimony of their owne conscience; they doe use to judge and condemne themselves, and to speake as basely of themselves and of their works, as the faithfull doe in this place, wee are as an uncleane person (that is, as a Leper, who ac­cording to the Law was to cry out, I am uncleane, I am uncleane, Le­vit. 13. 45.) and all our best actions are stained with the flesh like a polluted cloth, or as Dan. cap. 9. and the remnant of Iuda, Baruch c. 1. 2, 3. in whom this prophecie was fulfilled; who speake most basely of themselves, and of their actions. Yea, the more godly a man is, the more sensible he is of his corruption, and the more ready with aggrava­tion to confesse it. Quanto, saith Gregory, Moral lib. 9. cap. 28. ad Deum veriùs per bona opera surgimus, tanto subtiliùs vitae nostrae sordes agnoscimus, by how much more truly wee arise to God by good works, by so much the more exquisite­ly wee acknowledge the pollutions of our life: and againe, Ibid. in sum­mario. with how great cleanenesse soever holy men doe shine, notwithstanding by rea­son of this body, wherein they are, which is corrupted, they judge themselves abominable, and by reason of the filth of concupiscences, without which they are not, they repute themselves uncleane: and to the like purpose Cardinall De Iustisicat. Uiri sancti quanto magis in sanctitate pro siciunt, tanto mi­nus sin placent. Cont. Godly men, saith he, by how much the more they profit in godlinesse, by so much the lesse they please them­selves: Especially, when they are summoned, or doe summon themselves [Page 141] to appeare before God, as every one ought to doe, who would be justi­fied, either before God, or in the Court of his owne Conscience. Iob the most holy and righteous in his time, when hee stood before God, abhor­red Iob 42. 5, 6. himselfe, repenting in dust and ashes. The holy Prophet Esaias, when in a vision hee beheld God sitting on a throne attended by the Seraphin proclaiming Holy Esa. 6. 3, 5., Holy, Holy, the Lord God of hosts; ex­claimeth, Woe is me, I am undone, for I am a man of polluted lips and dwell in the midst of a people of uncleane lippes, Esa. 6. 5. The faith­full are Mat. 5. 3. [...], beggars in spirit, who acknowledging that there is no­thing in them whereby they might hope to bee justified or saved; as beggars, rely wholly upon the mercies of God and merits of Christ, re­nouncing their own merits, and in the question of justification deresting them as polluted clouts, as dung, Phil. 3. 8, 9. as losse, and acknowledging them­selves in themselves, to be wretched sinners: for as Herome Advers. Pelag. dial. 1. saith, Tunc ergo iusti sumus quando nos peccatores fatemur, then are wee just when wee confesse our selves to be sinners. But the pharisaicall Papist, if he be once justified, as by their doctrine all are, for a time at the least, who ei­ther are baptized or absolved; hee must thinke that in him there is no sinne, nothing that God can justly hate. And therefore farre bee it from him to make such a confession as this, or to cry out with the Apostle, Wretched man that I am, who shal deliver me from this body of death? Rom. 7. 24.

§. IX. His second reason to prove this allegation to bee imperit­nentHis second rea­son that this testimony of Esay is imper­tinent. is this: Because although Esay should speake of all, that is, of that whole people: yet hee doth not speake of all, at all times, but onely of the people of the Iewes at that time, who for their extreme wickednesse were delivered into cap­tivity, as appeareth by the words following, verse 10. Zion is a wildernesse, Ierusalem a desolation, the Temple burnt, &c. Answ. These words doe prove that the Prophet in this place doth not speake in the person of the wicked Iewes that lived in his time before the desolation of Ierusa­lem, but of the remnant of the faithfull and penitent Iewes, who being in captivity bewaile their sinnes, and lament the desolation of the Tem­ple and City. And therefore what is said of them, may be extended to the faithfull in all times, being, as these were, humbled before God for their sinnes, as penitent suppliants.

§. X. His third reason, because the Prophet speaking onely of the wicked His third rea­son. of that time, meaneth not all their workes, as though all were sinnes (for then Bellarmine must confesse that the best workes of the unregenerate are but splendida peccata) but such as they accounted to bee their righteousnesse, as their sacrifice, and new-moones, and other ceremoniall observatious where­in they placed their righteousnesse, which, because they were not [...] with a good intention, nor as they ought, are worthily compared (but not by them) to a menstruous cloth, and are rejected by God, Esa. 1. 11. Answ. Here Bellar­mine taketh for granted, that the Prophet speaketh of the workes of the wicked onely of that time, which I have disproved. Or if hee had spo­ken of the wicked, it were more probable either that they should place their righteousnesse in morall workes, if they had any, rather than in [Page 142] ceremoniall, or if they placed the top of their righteousnesse (as hypo­crites many times doe) in ceremoniall observations, that they would compare those things, which they so highly esteemed, to menstruous clouts. But hee speaketh of all the persons, All wee, and therefore in­cluding the righteous, if there were any at all among them, as some there were both before the captivity and in it, and of all their righteous­nesses, and therefore not of their ceremonials onely, but also of their morals. Neither might they performe the chiefe of their ceremonials during their captivity being in a forraine land. Our second reason that the worke of the faithful are not purely and per­fectly good, because there is in them a mixture of sin. proved sirst out of Exo. 3. 28. 36. 38.

§. XI. Secondly, that the good workes of the faithfull in this life are not purely and perfectly good, I prove, because in all our best acti­ons there is a mixture of evill, either by the absence or defect of some good thing which ought to bee therein, or by the presence of some fault or corruption, which ought not to be in them. And this I prove: first, out of Exod. 28. 36. 38. where the high Priest, who was the figure of Christ, is appointed to weare on his forehead a plate of pure gold, which is also called an holy coronet, Exod. 29. 6. Levit. 8. 9. engraven with this inscription, Holinesse of the Lord; and so the 72. translate it, [...], of the Lord, that is, of Christ, who is the Ier. 23 6. Lord our righte­ousnesse. The end wherefore he was to weare it, was, that Aaron might beare the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israel should hallow, in all their holy gifts. And it was alwaies to be on his forehead, that they (the holy gifts) might be accepted before the Lord: where we are plainly taught, that in all our best actions and holy services which wee performe to God, there is iniquity, which must bee taken a­way by the holinesse and righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us, o­therwise they cannot in themselves be accepted of God.

§. XII. Secondly, out of Eccl. 7. 20. There is not a just man upon the Secondly, out of Eccl. 7. 10. Quisecerit bo­num & non poccârit. earth, that doth good, and sinneth not; that is, who in doing good sin­neth not. For if the meaning were onely thus, as Bellarmine would have it, that none are so just, but that sometimes they sinne, according to that, 1 King. 8. 46. those words, that doth good were superfluous: for there is no just man that doth not good. But his meaning is, that there is no just man upon earth, who doing good sinneth not, that is, which doth good so purely and perfectly, as that hee doth not sinne therein. For to the perfecting of a good worke many things must concur, the want of any whereof is a sinne. The truth of this doth best appeare in the particulars; Prayer is a good worke, and so is the hearing of the word, &c. but there is no man doth so pray, or so heare the word, but that when hee hath done, he hath just cause to pray unto God to forgive his defects and de­faults, both in the one and the other. And in this sense Luther did tru­ly hold, that justus in omni opere bono peccat, that a just man sinneth in e­very good worke. Not that the worke in respect of its kind, or per se, is a sinne, as if wee said that prayer, &c. is a sinne, but per accidens, be­cause in that good worke, there happeneth a defect, which defect is a sinne, not mortall to them who are in Christ, but veniall. And thus Au­gustine also seemeth to understand this place. For speaking of the im­perfection [Page 143] of charity in this life, hee saith, Episto la. 29. that so long as it may be in­creased profectò illud quod minus est quàm debet, ex vitio est, ex quo vitio non est justus in terra qui faciat bonum & non peccet; assuredly that which is lesse than it ought to be, is out of vice; by reason of which vice there is not a just man upon earth, who doth good and sinneth not, by reason of which vice no living man shall bee justified before God: and in another place, more plainely, hee saith, De perfect. iu­stitia resp [...]ad. 15. peccatum est cum charitas minor est quàm esse debet, it is a sinne when charity is lesse than it ought to bee. Thirdly, such as is the tree such is the fruit

§. XIII. Thirdly, such as is the tree, such is the fruit. The tree is corrupt in part: For even in the best there is the Old man and the New, the flesh and the Spirit, betwixt Gal. 5. 17. which there is a perpetuall conflict, so that wee cannot doe the things wee would, and much lesse as we would, Ro. 7. 18, 19. 21 but all, even our best actions are stained with the flesh: which is such a law in us, that when wee would doe good, evill is present with us.

§. XIV. Fourthly, actions absolutely good may stand in judge­mentActions purely good maystand in iudgement. before God. But our workes cannot stand in judgement. The best of us have need to pray with him, who had lesse neede than wee: Psal. 143. 2. En­ter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord. If Psal. 130. 3. thou Lord shouldest marke what is amisse, even in our best actions, who should be able to stand? Noliergo intrare mecum in judicium Domine Deus meus: wherefore enter not into judgement with me O Lord my God: August. in Psa. 142. Quan­tumlibet rectus mihi videar, producis tu de the sauro tuoregulam, coaptas me adeam, & pravas invenior. For though I seeme to my self never so right, thou bringest forth of thy treasury a rule, thou examinest mee by it, and I am found wicked. This which David, and Augustine expounding him, speake in respect of the person, may bee applyed to his best actions; as namely to his prayer, unto which more specially David in both places doth seeme to have relation. Lord heare my prayer, &c. and enter not into judgement with thy servant. Lord heare my voice, &c. if thou shouldest marke what is amisse, who should stand? For though my prayer (may the best of us say) seeme to my selfe never so godly, yet thou hast a rule, according to which if thou shouldest exactly examine my prayer, it would bee found sinnefull. Alas, Lord, I doe not pray with that humility in respect of mine unworthinesse, nor with that feeling of my want, nor with that reverence of thy great and glorious Majesty, nor with that attention of minde, nor with that devotion and fervencie of Spirit, nor with that assurance of faith, &c. that I ought to doe. There­fore I come unto thee, not in any conceit of mine owne righteousnesse, or of the worthinesse of my prayer; but I come unto thee in the name and mediation of Christ, appealing from thy tribunall of justice to the throne of thy grace, desiring and beleeving, that the incense of my pray­ers, being perfumed with the odours of his merits, may and shall bee ac­ceptable unto thee.

§. XV. But if any popish pharisee doth thinke, that hee needeth not Appeale to the conscience of the Papists. thus to pray, I shall desire his Conscience thus to speake unto him: Doest thou thinke, that for the worthinesse of thy prayer thou shalt bee heard, and that if the Lord should enter into judgement with thee ac­cording [Page 144] to his exact rule, he could finde no fault with thy prayer? Alas, besides those blemishes and imperfections even now mentioned, where­of the most godly have just cause to complaine: thou directest thy prayer not to God alone, but to Saints and Angels, and so committest horrible idolatry: and when thou dost direct thy prayer unto God, thou dost conceive of him under some bodily shape, whereby thou doest circumscribe him, and make him finite, and so no God, but an idoll of thine owne braine. Thou doest not come unto God, in the name and mediation of Christ alone, who is the onely mediatour be­twixt God and man, but in the mediation of many others, by whose merits and intercession thou hopest and desirest to be heard. Thou cra­vest not the helpe of the Holy Ghost the Spirit of grace and supplicati­on, whose helpe thou findest not thy selfe to need for such a prayer as thou doest make. Thy prayer is but a formall recitall of a certaine taske of words, uttered for the most part without understanding, without fee­ling, without devotion, without faith. Thou, if unlearned, as the most are, thou prayest in an unknowne language, speaking like a Parrat thou knowest not what, thy prayer is a meere lip-labour, thou hopest by the multitude Matth. 6. 7. of thy words, and the often repetitions of thy Ave-maries, thy Pater-nosters and thy Creeds, most ridiculously and odiously reite­rated upon thy Beads by most superstitious Matth. 6. 7. Battology. And notwith­standing all this, wilt thou bee so wickedly impudent, as to obtrude thy orisons unto God, not only as an acceptable service, wherewith, though he should enter into judgement with thee, he could finde no fault, but also impetratory of thy desires, satisfactory for thy sinnes, and meritori­ous of eternall life? Nay, I assure thee, that thy prayer to God with the opinion of satisfaction and merit, though it were otherwise well quali­fied (as it is farre from it, there being nothing almost performed in it which is required in prayer) it were abominable in the sight of God: what shall I say more? The acceptable and effectuall prayer is the pray­er of faith, Iam. 5. 16. whereby a man doth specially beleeve, Matth. 21. 22. Mark. 11. 24. Iam. 1. 6, 7. that his requests are or shall bee granted to him, as namely for remission of sinnes and eternall life: but thou (I speake to the best and most lear­ned of the Papists) thou I say dost scorne and detest this speciall faith, and so thy prayer, wanting faith, besides all other the abominations thereof, is turned into sinne.

§. XVI. So in like manner in respect of the rest of our actions, though seeming laudable unto us; wee must pray, that the Lord will not enter into judgement with us. To which purpose manifold testi­moniesTestimonies of Fathers. of the Fathers might be alleaged. These few may serve, In Psal. 142. Hilarie what living man can bee justified in the sight of God? In whom there is a mixture of anger, of sorrow, of concupiscence, of ignorance, of for­getfulnesse, of casualty, of necessity happening either through the na­ture of the body, or the motion of the soule alwaies wavering.

Ambrose In Psal. 118. Serm. 20., hee that thinketh hee hath gold hath lead, and hee who thinketh himselfe to have the graine of Wheat, hath chaffe which may bee burnt.

[Page 145] Augustine Confess. l. 9. c. 13. vae etiam laudabili vitae hominū si remo­ta misericordia disculias cam., woe to the very laudable life of men, if mercie being re­moved thou dost examine it. Gregory in many places of his Morals, lib. 5. c. 7. quia s [...]pe ipsa justitia nostra ad examen divinae justitiae deducta, inju­stitia est, & sordet in districtione judicis, quod inestimatione sulget operantis, lib. 5. cap. 18. ipsa nostra perfectio culpâ non caret, nisi hanc severus judex in subtili lance examinis misericorditer penset, Lib. 9. cap. 1. Sancti viri omne meritum vitium est, si ab aeterno arbitri [...] districtè judicetur, Lib. 9. cap. 2. omne virtutis nostrae meritum esse vitium, lib. 9. c. 11. Si remota pietate discutitur, in illo examine etiam justorum vita succumbit, & cap. 14. on those words of Iob. Si habuero quippiam justum, non respondebo, he saith, ut enim sape diximus omnis humana justitia injustitia esse convincitur, si di­strictè judicetur, prece ergo post justitiam indiget ut quae succumbere discussa poterat, ex sola judicis pietate convalescat, lib. 1. cap. 27. Si remota pietate discutimur, opus nostrum poen [...] dignum est, quod remunerari praemiis presto­lamur, & cap 28. quousque poena corruptionis astringimur, quamlibet rectis ope­ribus insudemus, veram munditiem nequaquem apprehendimus, sed [...] ­mur, lib. 27. cap. 15. Sciunt Sancti, quia omnis humana justitia injustitia est, si divinitùs districtè [...]: and in the conclusion of his worke, lib. 35. cap. 26. wherein as hee professeth that hee sought chiefly to please God, so hee confesseth, that this intention was accompanied with other worse intentions and sinister respects as seeking to please men, and affecting their praise: whereupon hee inferreth, Si autem de his divinitùs, districtè discutimur, quis inter ista remanet salutis locus: quando & mala nostra pura mala sunt, & bona, quae nos [...] credi [...]s, pu­ra bona esse nequaquam possunt: the evill things, saith he, which we have, are purely and meerely evill, but the good things which we suppose our selves to have, are not, nor can in any wise be purely good, and so said De verb. Esaiae ser [...]. 5. Bernard, Nostra siqu [...] est humilis justitia, recta forsan, sed non pura: whence it followeth necessarily that none of the workes of the faithfull are pure, and consequently that their very best workes are impure.

This which hath been said may suffice to a conscience not cauteri­zed; neither shall I need to say any more in this needlesse argument. For though it should bee granted that some of the works of the faith­full were purely good, (as they are not) yet so long as any of their works are sinfull, as in many things we faile Iam. 3. 2. all, insomuch that the righteous (as Bellarmine himselfe doth cite the place) doth fall Pro. 24. 1 [...]. seven times a day, they cannot be justified by their workes, but are by the sentence of the Law in themselves accursed: because they doe not continue in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them: and because the breach of any one commandement maketh them guil­ty of all. I conclude against the Papists as Hares. 59. [...] Epiph [...]ius did censure the Catharists, these men professing themselves pure, by this suppositi­on make themselves unpure, for whosoever pronounceth himselfe to be pure, therein he doth utterly condemne himselfe to be impure.

CAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments answered.

§. I. THis was our third argument taken from the imperfe­ctionHis first testi­mony, Job 1. 22 of our obedience and righteousnesse, which I have defended against Bellarmines cavils: before I proceed to the fourth, I hold it needfull to answere his arguments in propounding whereof hee falleth short of his projects: as I noted before, for hee that would prove that men are justified by their workes; had need to prove, that all the workes of all the faithfull, are purely and perfectly good, which is impossible to bee proved: but hee neither concludeth of all works nor of all the faithfull. And yet it is most certaine, that if the faith­full be justified by their works, then all the works of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good. His proofes are of three sorts: authority of Scriptures, Testimonies of Fathers, and other reasons. Out of the Scrip­ture he citeth eight testimonies De Iustif. lib. 4 cap. 15. The first out of Iob 1. 22. In all these things Iob sinned not with his lips: And that we may not answere with some Non peccavit Iob labiis suis. of the Rabbins, that though he sinned not with his lips, yet hee might sinne in his heart: hee telleth us, that in the next Chapter, Iob 2. 3. God giveth him this testimonie, that still he retained his innocency; and therefore sinned neither in his tongue, nor in his heart. Againe, whereas Satan sought by so many temp­tations to bring Iob to sinne, and God on the other side permitted all those temp­tations, that the patience and vertue of that holy man should bee manifested; if Iob should have sinned, God should after a sort have beene over come by the devill: wherfore it is certaine, that that worke of Iobs patience was not stained with any sinne; and that the Lutherans, which say the contrary, take part with the devill against God.

§. II. Answ. Those temptations were permitted by God, as tyralsAnswere to his allegation out of Iob 1. 22. of Iob, not perfection, but integrity. For that is Gods end, that they who are [...], sound and upright may be knowne, 1 Cor. 11. 19. and this end was atchieved, Cap. 2. vers. 3. for still Iob retained his integrity. But Satans intention was to prove him to be an hypocrite, and to move him not onely to fall, but to fall away from God, and to blaspheme him to his face and so much hee undertooke both Cap. 1. 11. and Cap. 2. 5. howbeit hee failed in his enterprize. And so much is signified in both the places alleaged by Bellarmine: that Iob was so farre, either from blaspheming God to his face, which Satan undertooke he should, that he offended not with his lippes, nor charged God foolishly; or, from being discovered to be an hypocrite, that by Gods owne testimony he [Page 147] retained his integrity, as that word signifieth which Tummath. Bellarmine, ac­cording to the vulgar Latine, calleth innocencie. But Iob though hee were upright and sincere, yet he was not perfect, nor without sinne; as appeareth by his manifold imperfections, which afterwards he discove­red Cap. 3. &c. and also by his free confession of his sinfulnesse, Cap. 9. 20. 33. and lastly by his feare and jelousie, which hee had over his best actions lest he had sinned in them: for as Moral. lib. 9. c. 2 262 Gregory writing on those words of Iob, Verebar omnia opera mea, Iob 9. 28. understandeth it to be an hum­ble confession, as if he had said, quae apertè egerim video, sed quid in his la­tenter pertulerim, ignoro, what overtly I performed, I see: but what co­vertly I suffered therein, I know not. But here may be objected, which Bellarmine in the next Chapter alleageth out of the said Epist. ad Au­gust. resp. 10. Gregory, Bona­rum mentium est, ibi etiam aliquo modo culpam agnoscere, ubi culpa non est, it is the property of good minds even there to acknowledge a fault, where nofault is, wherto I answere, that Gregory speaketh in regard of humane infirmities which were laid upon man after his fall, (and namely of the monthly infirmity of women) which though they bee not inflicted up­on a man for his personall offences: yet it is the property of good minds to esteeme them as laid upon them for their sinnes. Thus Iob, though his afflictions were not inflicted upon him, as corrections for his sinnes, but as tryals of his vertue; yet he imputeth them to his sinnes, Iob 13. 26.

§. III. In the second place he allegeth diverse testimonies out of theTwo alegations out of the Psalmes, answe­red. Psalmes wherein David pleadeth his owne innocencie, and appealeth unto God to be judged according to his owne righteousnesse Psalm. 7. 4. 9. 16. 1, 2, 3. 18. 2. 1. 26. 1. 119. 121. Answ. In some of these places David pleadeth the justice of his particular cause against his ad­versaries, not the absolute innocencie of his person. The rest are to be understood of his uprighttnesse and integrity. For otherwise, no man was more forward to confesse and to deplore his manifold sinnes, than David was; none more ready to implore Gods mercy, none more fearefull that God should enter into strict judgement with him.

§. IV. His third testimony is Matth. 6. 22. If thine eye be single, the whole body shall bee lightsome: where Bellarmine, without anyHis third testi­mony Matth. 6. 22. 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 Serm. in Mat. 6. 33. 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, [Page 148] 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 fl [...]sh.

§. V. His fourth testimony is, 1 Cor. 3. 12. If any man build up­onHis fourth Te­stimonie 1 Cor. 3. 12. 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 offendHis fifth Testi­mony Iam. 3. 2. 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 [Page 149] 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 t [...] 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 Sixthly, from those places which exhort us not to sinne. 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 [...] Eph. 5. 15. 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 ac­ceptethl 1 Cor. 15. 58. of the will 2 Cor. 8. 12. 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 2 Cor. 12. 9. is sufficient for us, and that his strength is made perfect in our weakenesse.

§. VIII. His seventh testimony is taken from those places which Seventhly, from those pla­ces which te­stifie that the workes of just men doe please God. 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 [Page 150] 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, [...]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 1 Pet. 2. 5. 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 Testimony 8. from those pla­ces which call the workes of the faithfull good workes. 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 [...]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 Dionysi [...]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 [Page 151] 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 hypoc [...]isie, 1 Tim. 4. 2. 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 alr [...]ady proved.De iustif. l. 4. c. 1 [...] Testimonies of Fathers.

§. X. These were his testimonies of holy Scriptures: in the next place hee produceth other witnesses, viz. Ambrose, Hierome, Aug [...]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 noDe iustif. l 4. c. 17 Reasons, first the workes of the iust are not conteminated. 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 pure­lyNot with con­cupiscence. 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 regenerat [...], 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 Bellarmin [...] 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 theConcupiscence in the regene­rate a sinne. 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 Flesh, and the Flesh lusting against the Spirit. So that though Will be present with us, Rom. 7. 18. Gal. 5. 17. that wee cannot doe what we would and much lesse after what manner wee would, that is, with our whole [Page 152] soules, with our whole mind, heart, and affections. For what good wee minde or will as wee are Spirit, the same wee will as wee are Flesh. This concupiscence the Apostle had not knowneRom. 7. 7. to bee a sinne, had not the Law said, non concupisces, that is, thou shalt have none evill concupi­scence, neither habituall nor actuall. Neither is it onely a sinne, as the Apostle oftentimes doth cal it, but also it is the mother-sinne, Iam. 1. 13 Rom. 7. 17. which taking occasion by the Law, to produce ill concupi­scences therein forbidden, is convinced, not onely to bee a sinne, but ex­ceedingly sinnefull, Rom. 7. 13. But of this I have spoken before, and pro­ved by the testimony of Augustine, that concupiscence against which the good Spirit lusteth, (viz. in the regenerate, for in the unregenerate the Spirit is not) is both a sinne, and the cause of sin, and a punishment sinne.Secondly, nor with want of charity.

§. XIII. And as touching the second: the summe of the Law is, that we should love God with all our heart, and with all our soule, &c. but where is any defect of love, there God is not loved with all the heart, &c. it being legally understood: and therefore every defect is an aberration from the Law, and consequently a sinne. I have also proved out of Augustine, Epist. 29. illud quod minus est qudm debet ex­vitio est. that it is a fault where love is lesse than it ought to bee, from which fault it is, that there is not a righteous man upon earth which doth good, and sinneth not. For which also though wee1 De persect iu­stie. resp. adul. Peccatumest, vel cum non est cha­ritas quae esse debetvel minor est quàm debet, sive hocvolunta­te vitari possit sive non possit. Thirdly, nor with veniall sinnes. bee never so good proficients, wee must of necessity say, forgive us our debts. Therefore every defect is a debt, that is, a sinne, whereunto wee may adde that of the same Augustine. It is a sinne, either when there is not charity where it ought to bee, or is lesse than it ought to bee, whe­ther this may or may not bee avoided by the Will.

§. XIV. And as to the third: If those, which the Papists call veni­all sinnes bee not contrary to the Law, then they are not forbidden in the Law: and without doubt they are not commanded therein. Now if neither they bee commanded nor forbidden, then they are things indifferent:. but that is absurd: yea but (saith hee) veniall sinnes hinder not justice, And the Scripture absolutely calleth some men just and perfect, notwithstanding their veniall sinnes. I answere, they hinder not imputa­tive justice, nor evangelicall perfection which is uprightenesse: for to them that beleeve and repent they are not imputed. Neither can it be denied, but that the most upright men have their imperfections, infir­mities and slippes, which though in themselves and according to the Law are mortall sinnes (for if they should not bee forgiven, they would, as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth, exclude men from heaven:) yet to them that are in Christ Iesus th [...]y become veniall by the mercie of God, through the merits and intercession of Christ.

§. XV. His second reason is taken from divers absurdities, whichHis second rea­son, from sixe absurdities which he put­teth upon us. hee conceiveth doe follow upon our assertion: when as indeed they fol­low not upon our doctrine, but upon his malicious misconceiving and misreport thereof; as if wee held, that all, even the best workes of the righteous are mortall sinnes. But wee acknowledge, that the good workes of men regenerate are truly good, and so to bee called, notwith­standing [Page 135] the imperfection thereof. Onely wee deny them to be purely good: wherin we have the consent of holy Scriptures and of the ancient Fathers, some whereof I before alleaged, to whom I added Gregory and Bernard. Gregory in the concl [...]sion of his Moralls saith thus, Mala no­stra Moral. l 35. c. 26. pura mala sunt, & bona quae nos habere credimus, pura bona esse uequaquā possunt: Our evill things are purely evill, and the good things which weDeve [...]bis Esaiae serm. 5. re­cta for sitan sed in pura. suppose our selves to have, can by no meanes bee purely good. Bernard, t Our lowly justice (if we have any,) is perhaps true, but not pure. Vn­lesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to bee better than our fore-fa­thers, who said no lesse truely, than humbly, all our righteousnesses are as it were the cloth of a menstruous woman; wee doe not say that the good workes of the faithfull are sins, and much lesse mortall sins: For we hold, that the sins of the faithful become to them venial. But this we say with Salomon, Eccl. 7. 20. that there is not a righteous man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not, which in effect is the same with that assertion of Luther, Iustus in omni opere bono peccat.

§. XVI. Now let us examine the absurdities, which hee absurd­ly,The second ab­surditie th [...]t then the worke of faith, and of pray er were a sinne. upon his owne malitious misconceit, objecteth against us. In all which it is supposed, that wee call the good workes of the righteous sinnes, yea mortall sinnes. The first: if all the workes of the faithfull bee sinnes, then the worke of faith, whereby we are justified, and that prayer whereby we begge remission of sinne, should be sinnes.

Answ. The worke of faith and the act of prayer are good, but notSec [...]nd absurd. purely and perfectly good. Neither are we justified by the worthinesse or by the worke of our faith, but by the Object which it doth receive; nor obtaine our desires by the merit of our prayer, but by the mediati­on and intercession of Christ our Saviour. Our faith is such, that wee have need alwayes to pray, Lord increase our faith, Lord I beleeve, help mine unbeleefe: and our prayer such, that when wee have performed it in the best manner we can, wee have neede to pray, that the wants and imperfections of our prayer may bee forgiven us.

§. XVII. The second: If all the works of the righteous be sinnes, with what face could the Apostle say, 1 Cor. 4. 4. that h [...] knew nothing by himselfe? And what boldnesse was that, for his good workes, that is, for his mortall sinnes, to expect 2 Tim. 4. 8. a Crowne of righteousnesse? Answ. Though the Apostle had no doubt sometimes offended after his conversion; yet he was not con­scious to himselfe in particular of any actuall sinne or crime commit­ted by him: for as the Psalmist saith,Psal. 19. 13. who can understand his errors? No man, saith Basil, [...] is [...], free from sinne but God; for of those many things wherein we offend, the most wee understand not: for which cause the Apostle saith, I know nothing by my selfe, but in that I am not justified: [...] that is, in many things I offend, and doc not perceive whence also the Prophet saith, who understandeth his trespasses? But though hee was not conscious to himselfe of his slippes and oversights; yet hee was not ignorent of his owneRom. 7. 24. corruptious and infirmities: against which when hee had prayed to God, hee received this answere; [...] Cor. 12. 9. My grace is sufficient for thee, and in weakenesse my power is made perfect. [Page 154] Neither did the Apostle expect the reward for the merit of his works, but for the truth and fidelity of God, who is just in keeping his promise made to the upright, though unperfect indeavers of his servants. And therefore the reward, whereby God doth crowne his owne gifts in us, is called a crowne of righteousnesse, not of ours, but of Gods righte­ousnesse, as De gratia & lib. arbit. in fine. The third ab­surdity. Bernard saith.

§. XVIII. The third: If all the works of the righteous were mortall sinnes, then God himselfe should sinne mortally, because it is God that wor­keth in us, when we doe any good works, Phil. 1. and 2. Answ. If all good workes were absolutely sinnes, yea mortall sinnes, as they malitiously charge us to hold: then indeed, God, who is the author of them, might perhaps bee said, though not to sinne, and much lesse to sinne mortally (for he is not subject to the precept of the Law and much lesse to the curse of it) yet to be the author of sinne. But wee hold, that the good works of the faithfull are truly good, though not purely good: and that what goodnesse is in them is the worke of God, and what im­purity is in them, it is from the flesh, which staineth the workes of grace in us. Neither are the defects of the secondary causes to be imputed to the first cause. That which God worketh in us, no doubt is good, but this good worke hee hath but begun in us, as in the place by him quoted, Philippians 1. 6. for our in regeneration wee are not wholly renew­ed, and at once, for then wee should bee wholy spirit and no flesh. Neither doth the leaven of grace season the whole lumpe at once, but the inward 2 Cor. 4. 16. man is renewed day by day: And what is not yet renued is a remainer of the old man, and what is not Spirit, is flesh. Now betweene these two there is a perpetuall conflict, Gal. 5. 17. the spirit lusting against the flesh, and the flesh lusting against the Spirit. So that a man regenerate cannot with full consent of will doe either good or evill, there being a reluctation of the Spirit against the evill, which the flesh affecteth; and a rēluctation of the flesh against that good, which is willed by the Spirit. By reason of this conflict it comes to passe, that as the sinnes of the faithfull are sinnes of infirmity more or lesse, and not wilfull sinnes committed of meere malice: so the good works of theThe fourth ab­surdity. faithfull are not purely good, but stained with the flesh.

§. XIX. The 4. that our assertion is greatly injurious to our Redeemer, who as the Apostle saith, gave himselfe for us, that he might redeem us from all ini­quity, & might purge unto himselfe an acceptable people, zealous of goodworks: For neither should he truly have redemed us from any iniquity, nor truly clean­sed his people, nor made them zealous of works truly good, but of mortall sinnes, namely if all their good works be mortall sinnes, (which we utterly deny)

But I answere, Our Saviour Christ gave himselfe for us, both that he might justifie us by redeeming us from all iniquity, and also that hee might sanctifie, or as the Apostle speaketh, that hee might purifie unto himselfe a peculiar people, zelous or studious of good works. The ini­quity from which he redeemeth us, is not onely of those transgressions, which are absolutely sinnes, but also of those unperfect and defective workes, which wee indevour to performe in obedience to God. And [Page 155] herein, as I have said, the high Priest was a notable type of our Saviour Christ, who did weare in the forefront of his Miter a plate of gold, in which was ingraven this inscription Exod. 28 36. 38. Holinesse of the Lord, meaning of Ier. 23. 6. Iehovah our righteousnesse, which he was appointed to weare, that he might beare the iniquity of the holy things, which the Children of Is­raell should hallow in all their holy gifts, that notwithstanding the ini­quity of them they might be accepted before the Lord, by imputation of his holinesse, who is Iehovah our righteousnesse. And the like is to be said of the incense Apoc. 8. 3. 4. of the Saints upon earth, that is, of their pray­ers, and all other their good works: which have need to bee perfumed with the odours Ephes. 5. 2. of Christs sacrifice; that so being defective in themselves, they may be accepted 1 Pet. 2. 5. of God in Christ. As for our sanctification, it is true, that Christ gave himselfe to sanctifie us. But this sanctification is but begun, and in part in this life, and is to be perfected in the life to come. So saith the Apostle, Ephes. 5. 25, 26, 27. Ephcs. 5. that Christ loved his Church and gave himselfe for it, that hee might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himselfe (viz. at the mariage of the Lambe) a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinckle or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without ble­mish: which last words, as I have shewed out of Augustine, are to bee understood not of the Church militant on earth, but of the Church triumphant in heaven. The workes, which we are to be studious of, are workes not onely truly, but also, as much as is possible, purely good. For though wee cannot in this life attaine to full purity and perfection: yet we must aspire towards it, affecting and desiring to performe good works in a better manner and measure, than wee can indeed attaine un­to. Howbeit we must say with the Rom. 7. 18. Apostle to will is present with me, but how to performe that which is good, I finde not, for the good that I would, I doe not, but the evill which I would not, that I doe, and lest it should bee said, that the Apostle speaketh all these things in the per­of a carnall man, he concludeth thus: so then [...], even I my selfe, with the minde, that is, the Spirit serve the Law of God, but with the flesh the Law of sinne.

§. XX. The fifth, If all good workes are mortall sinnes, then some mortall The fifth ab­surditie. sinnes are good works: and then we may conclude thus. All good works are to be done: some mortall sinnes are good works; therefore some mortall sinnes are to be done. Againe, no mortall sinne is to bee done; all good workes are mortall sinnes; therefore no good worke is to bee done. Conclusions worthy of the Lutherans, that some mortall sinnes are to bee done, and that no good worke is to be done. Answ. we deny good workes to bee mortall sinnes. though in every good worke the most righteous doe sinne. The worke it selfe is good, though the defect or imperfection, which goeth with it, is evill. The good worke therefore is to bee done: the defect we are to strive and to pray against, and to crave pardon for it. To which depre­cation we are to expect this answeare or the like, My 2 Cor. 12. 9. grace is sufficient for thee, and in thy weakenesse my power is perfected. Againe, wee must distinguish betwixt workes, which are sinnes absolutely and per [Page 156] se: and those which are onely by accident. For those which are good per se, are to be performed as well as we can, because commanded, know­ing that God will accept of our upright though weake indevour.The sixth ab­surdity.

§. XXI. The sixth and the last, who seeth not, that these words, good workes are mortall sinnes, imply a contradiction, for they shall be good and not good, &c.

Answ. We doe not affirme that good workes are mortall sinnes, nei­ther doe we deny them to be truly good. Onely we deny them to bee purely and perfectly good. And we acknowledge the impurity and im­perfection concurring with them to bee a sinne: and consequently, that the good workes of the faithfull are good per se, as being commanded, as being the fruits of the Spirit, and of faith working by love; but sinfull per accidens, as being stained with the flesh, yea, but saith Bellarmine, Bonum non existit nisi ex integra causa, malum verò ex quolibet vitio: that is, that is not to bee accounted a good worke whereunto all things doe not con­curre which are requisite, but that is evill wherein there is any defect: there­fore if there be any defect or imperfection to bee found in any worke, that worke is not to be accounted good but evill. Answ. that rule of Diony sius, is true, according to the rigour of the Law, which they call [...] from which our Saviour hath delivered us; but it is not true according to the covenant of grace, wherein the Lord accepteth the sincere and upright indevours of his children. though defective and un­perfect, for perfect performance, their wants being not imputed unto them, but covered with the robe of Christs perfect righteousnesse. As therefore their persons, though in themselves sinners, are in 2 Cor. 5. 21. Christ accepted as righteous; so their actions, though in themselves defective, are acceptable 1 Pet. 2. 5. in Christ. Here therefore wee may justly retort both the accusation it selfe, and all these absurdities upon the Papists, who be necessary consequence are proved to hold, that all the workes of the righteous are simply evill and so absolutely to be called sinnes.

Those works wherein is found any defect or imperfection are not good, but absolutely they are to bee called sinnes, as the Papists teach:

But in all even the best works of the righteous there is to be found some defect, imperfection, or blemish, as being stained with the flesh. This assumption is plainely taught in the holy Scriptures as I have proved heretofore:

Therefore all, even the best actions of the righteous, are absolute­ly to be called sinnes, as the Papists teach.

Here then let all men againe take notice of the Popish pharisaisme, or pharisaicall hypocrisie of Papists, with whom no man is just or justi­fied, in whom is any sinne: no action good, but simply evill, in which is any defect: and yet their persons are just, and their actions not onely good, but also meritorious, and that ex condigno, and that ratione operis, of eternall life.

CHAP. V. Our fourth Argument, that the righteousnesse by which wee are justified, satisfieth the Law: so doth Christs righte­ousnesse, so doth not that, which is inherent in us.

§. I. NOw I returne to our owne proofes. The fourthThe fourth ar­gument we are iustified only by that righteous­nesse which ful­ly satisfieth the Law of God. argument therefore to prove joyntly that we are justified by Christs righteousnesse and not by ours, may be this.

By that righteousnesse alone and by no o­ther we are justified by which the Law is fully satisfied; By the righteousnesse of Christ alone the Law is fully satisfied, and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us:

Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone, and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us, or performed by us.

For the proofe of the proposition, three things are to be acknowled­ged: first, that whosoever is justified is made just, by some righteous­nesse: for as I have shewed heretofore, to thinke that a man should be justified without justice, is as absurd, as to imagine a man to be clothed without apparell: secondly, that all true righteousnesse is a conformity to the law of God, which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse, inso­much as what is not conformable to the Law, is [...], that is iniquity and sinne: thirdly, that there can be no justification without the Law be fulfilled, either by our selves, or by another for us. For our Saviour, when he came to justifie us and save us, protested, that hee came not to breake the Law but to fulfill it: and professeth that not one jot or tittle of the Law should passe unfulfilled, Matth. 5. 17, 18. Saint Paul like­wise avoucheth, that by the doctrine of justification by faith, the Law is not made void, but established, Rom. 3. 31. The proposition there­fore is undenyable. The assumption hath two parts: the former, affir­mative, that by the righteousnesse of Christ the Law is fully satisfied: the other, negative, that by any righteousnesse inherent in us, or per­formed by us, the Law neither is, nor can be fully satisfied. For the clearing of the assumption in both the parts, wee are to understand, that to the full satisfying of the Law, since the fall of Adam two things are required, the one, in respect of the penalty, unto the suffering where­of sinne hath made us debtours: the other, in respect of the precept, [Page 185] to the doing wherof the Law doth bind us. The former, to free us from hell and damnation; the other to entitle us to heaven and salvation: ac­cording to the sanction of the Law, If thou dost not that which is com­manded, thou art accursed: if thoudoest it, thou shalt be saved. In respect of the former, the Law cannot be satisfied in the behalf of him, who hath oncetransgressed it, but by eternal punishment, or, that which is equiva­lent: in respect of the latter, it is not satisfied, but by a totall, perfect and perpetuall obedience.

§. II. Now our Saviour Christ hath fully satisfied the Law for allThe righteous­nesse of Christ hath fully satis­fied the Law for us. them that truly beleeve in him, in both respects. For hee hath supera­bundantly satisfied the penalty of the Law for us by his sufferings and by his death: and he hath perfectly fulfilled the Law for us, by perfor­ming all righteousnesse, in obeying his Father in all things, even unto death: and by them both he hath justified us, freeing us from hell by his sufferings and entituling of us unto heaven by his obedience. And therefore the holy Ghost affirmeth that wee are justified by his bloud, Rom. 5. 9. and by his obedience verse 19. For his sufferings were the suf­ferings of God; in which respect, they who put him to death, are said to have killed the Author of life, Act. 3. 15. and to have crucified the Lord of glory, 1 Cor. 2. 8 and for the same cause, the bloud, by which we are redeemed, is called the bloud of God, Act. 20. 28. or, which is all one, the bloud of the Sonne of God. 1 Iohn 17. His obedience like­wise was the obedience of God. For Iesus Christ the word, that is, the1 I [...]hn 3. 16. second person in Trinity, being in the forme of God P [...]il. 2. 6, 7, 8. God coequall with his Father, for our sakes became flesh, Io [...]n. 1. 14. that is, abased himselfe to become man, which before hee was not, but not ceasing to bee that, which hee was before, namely the true 1 Iohn 5. 20. and the great Tit. 2▪ 13. God, God Rom. 9▪ 5. a­bove all blessed for evermore; in our nature (being perfect God, and perfect man) hee farther humbled himselfe and became obedient untill death, even to the death of the cros [...]e. And therefore the righteousnesse of Christ, both habituall inherent in his person, and that which was per­formed by him, both active, and passive, being the righteousnesse of God as it is often called, Rom. cap. 1. 3. 10. the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour, 2 Pet. 1. 1. who was given to us of God to be our righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1. 30. that wee beleeving in him might bee the righteousnesse of God in him, 2 Cor. 5. 21 is therefore called Iehovah our righteousuesse, Ier, 23. 6. I say his passive righteousnesse being the righteousnesse of God the bloud of God▪ it is a price of infinite valew, and superabundantly suf­ficient to satisfie for the sinnes, not onely of the faithfull, but of all the world; and not onely of this one world, but of more, if there were more And this habituall and actuall righteousnesse being the righteousnesse and obedience of God, is of infinite and al [...]-sufficient merit to entitle all those, that beleeve in him, were they never so many, to the kingdome of heaven. These things if the Papists should deny, It would deny them to be Christians. The former part therefore of the assumption is of undoubted truth.

§. III. Come wee then to the other part. Is there any righte­ousnesse [Page 151] inherent in us, or performed by us, that can fully satisfie theOur righteous­nesse cannot satisfie the Law neither in re­spect of the pe­naltie. Law? Nothing lesse. For first in respect of the penalty which is due un­to us for our sinnes, wee cannot possibly fatisfie it, but by enduring e­verlasting torment; which though wee should endure for a million of millions of yeares; yet wee could not bee said to have satisfied the Law which cannot be satisfied, but by endlesse punishment, or, that which is equivalent, but there is nothing equivalent but the precious death and sufferings of the eternall Son of God, who gave himself to be [...] 1 Tim. 2. 6. a full price of ransome countervailing, in respect of the dignity of his person, the eternall pains of hel, which all the elect should have suffered. Therefore there is no possibility for us to escape hell the just guerdon of our sinnes, unlesse the Lord impute our si [...]s to our Saviour Christ, and his sufferings to us, accepting them in our behalfe, as if we had sustained them in our owne persons. For although wee should for the time to come performe a totall and perfect obedience to the Law, yet that would not free us from the punishment already deserved by us. Marcus Ere­mit. de [...]is quid ex operibus se justificari pu­tan [...]es. sent. 42. Si quo [...] que, bona natura [...] [...], quotiaie [...] [...], quid reliqum pro an [...] [...] D [...]oretrionemus & sent. 43. quantum vir­ [...]utis augmen­tum bodie fece­rimus, [...] negligentia ar­gumentum est, non conpensatio. But the Law must be satisfied, both in respect of the penalty to be borne, and in respect of perpetuall and perfect obedience to bee performed through out our whole life. Neither may we thinke by the payment of one debt to satisfie another, The obedience, which wee hope to performe for the time to come, though it were totall and perfect, is a debt and duty which wee owe unto God, Luk. 17. 10. and therefore cannot discharge us of the penalty, which is another debt, which wee owe for our sinnes past: for wee were sinners from the wombe, Psal. 51. 5. yea, in the wombe: and to the guilt of Adams transgression in whom wee sinned, and to that ori­ginall corruption, which we have received from him, for which though wee had no other sinnes, wee were worthily subject to eternall damna­tion; wee have added in the former part of our life innumerable perso­nall transgressions, all deserving death and damnation, which if wee be not delivered therefrom, by the death and merits of Christ, wee must make account to suffer in our owne persons: neither can our future in­tended obedience satisfie for our sinnes, as Bellarmine confesseth. God is just Rom. 3. 26. in forgiving sinnes, neither doth he forgive any sinne, for which his justice is not fully satisfied.Nor in respect of the precept.

§. IV. Neither can our righteousnes [...]e [...]atisfie the Law in respect of the precept, by fulfilling it: for whosoever hath not continued in all the things, which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them, but hath at any time transgressed the Law, hee hath not fulfilled it. There­fore it is most certaine, that, we cannot satisfie the Law in respect of the precept, because wee have already broken it, and by our breach of it have made our selves subject to the curse of the Law, so farre are we from being justified by it. Neither are wee able by our obedience to satisfie the Law for the time to come.

§, V. Against this branch of our argument which by us is addedBellarmines al­legation, that the Law may be fulfilled. [...] as over measure. Bellarmine taketh exception; alleaging, that the faithfull and regenerate are able to fulfill De iustif. l. 4. c. 11, &c. the Law, and entreth into a large dispute to prove that the Law is possible: which disputati­on [Page 160] I have fully examined in his due Lib. 7. cap. 6. & 7. place, and confuted. Here let the Reader take notice, that Bellarmine disputeth sophistically in diverse re­spects▪ for first hee will needs be actor, when indeed hee is reus; and that hee might get the better end of the staffe pretendeth to confute our er­rours: when indeed he laboureth to defend his owne. Secondly, hee an­swereth but a piece of our argument, and such a piece as might be spa­red, as being added mantisae loco, by way of advantage: for thus we rea­son, no man can satisfie the Law because hee hath already broken it: yea hee is so farre from satisfying the Law, in respect of the time past, that for the time to come hee is not able to fullfill it. Thirdly, where hee should prove, that all those, who are to bee justified, doe fulfill the Law for else how should they by fulfilling of the Law be justified, all, that he endevoureth to prove, is, that it is possible for them that are already ju­stified to fullfill it▪ disputing, as wee say, a posse ad esse. Fourthly, where hee should prove, that all who are justified doe fulfill the Law, for else how should they be justified by fulfilling it, hee endeavoureth to prove that some rare men have fulfilled it not caring what becomes of the rest Fifthly, where hee argueth, that if men shall fulfill the Law, they shall be justified; his consequence doth not hold in respect of them, who at any time heretofore have broken it (as all meere men without exception have done) though they should perfectly fulfill the Law for the time to come. Sixthly, he would prove, that some doe fulfill the Law, and yet cannot deny, but that even those some doe sinne many times, yea seven times a day, and that they have need daily to pray for the forgivenesse of their sinnes: and therefore faileth in the proofe of that also, as I have made manifest in answering Lib. 7. cap. 6. & 7. his arguments.Sixe reasons, that men are not able to ful­fill the Law. First, because all are trans. gressours.

§. VI. Now to make good this part of our reason, I will not con­tent my selfe to have answered elsewhere all his objections againstit, but I will here also briefly propound some of our arguments to prove, that wee (I meane all mortall men) neither doe, nor can by our righteous­nesse and obedience fulfill, and so even in that respect cannot satisfie the Law. And first I prove it by this most plaine reason.

No transgressours of the Law doe fulfill it.

All men without exception of any but Christ, are trans­gressours of the Law, not onely the unregenerate, but the regenerate also:

Therefore no man whatsoever (Christ excepted) doth fulfill it.

The proposition needeth no proofe, the assumption I have proved before, Lib. 4. cap. 2. §. 6. and every mans Conscience giveth testimony to it for himself.

Or thus:

Whosoever is a fulfiller of the Law is without sinne.

No mortall man is or can bee without sinne.

Therefore no mortall man is or can bee a fulfiller of the Law.

§. VII. Secondly, If any man could fulfill the Law, he might bee justified thereby, Rom. 2. 13. Gal. 3. 12.

[Page 161]But no man whatsoever can be justified by the Law, Gal. 2. 16. 3. 10, 11. Rom. 3. 20.

Therefore no man can fulfill it.

§. VIII. Thirdly, Those who cannot fulfill the first commande­ment of the two, and the last of the ten, cannot fulfill the whole Law.

But no mortall man is able to fulfill the first and last comman­dements.

Therefore no mortall man is able to fulfill the whole Law.

The first▪ which is the great commandement, injoyneth us to love the Lord our God with all our soules, &c. which, being legally understood, no mortall man is able to fulfill. For whosoever are in all the parts and faculties of the soule, partly flesh and but partly Spirit, they cannot love God with all their soules.

The most regenerate in this life are partly flesh, and but partly Spirit in all the parts and faculties of the soule.

Therefore the most regenerate in this life cannot love God with all their soules, that phrase being legally understood.

The last commandement forbiddeth all evill concupiscence: whe­ther habituall, with which all men generally are infected, or actuall, from which none are free, and those not such as are joyned with consent of the wil, which are passions of lust, for those are forbidden in the former com­mandements; but such as goe before consent, which are called [...] ▪ with which all men without exception doe abound. Neither is the commandement, thou shalt not consent to lust, but thou shalt not lust, that is, thou shalt have no evill concupiscence, which as De persect. iustitiae. Augustine saith ought not to be bridled onely Concupiscentia non [...] sed omnino esse non debet. De Nupt. & concup. l. 1. c. 29. Multum b [...] ­ni facit qui facit quod sc [...]iptum est, post concupi▪ scentias tuas non eas; sed non proficit, quia non implet quod scriptum est, non concupisces. but not to be: for hee that hath concu­piscences, though he doth not goe after them, doth not fulfill the Law, thou shalt not cove [...].

§. IX. Fourthly, by the testimony of Saint Peter, Act. 15. 10. that the observation of the Law is not to be imposed upon Christians as neces­sary to justification, as being a yoke, which neither the Apostles, nor their forefathers the Patriarches and Prophets were able to beare: but that we are to be justified and saved by the grace of God through a live­ly faith▪ which purifieth the heart. Bellarmine answereth, that the Apostle speaketh of the ceremoniall Law, which wee doe not altogether deny. But from hence wee argue, as from the lesse. If the ceremoniall Law were an unsupportable yoke, how much more the morall? For the cere­moniall Law, in it selfe considered, was not unsupportable, nor requi­red any thing exceeding the power of man. For not onely the godly did performe it, but hypocrites also; who many times were more pre­cise in observing the ceremonies, than the godly themselves: but as it was an appendice of the Law morall: As for example: Circumcision, in it selfe (though the most painefull ceremony) might well bee borne. But as by it men were made debtors Gal. 5. 3. to the whole Law, in such sort as they could not be justified, but were under the curse, if they did not observe the whole Law, it was a yoke unsupportable. For in that sense [Page 162] the Apostle speaketh, when he protesteth to the Galathians, that if they were circumcised Gal. 5. 2. Christ should profit them nothing. And in that sense, as it seemeth, it was urged by the beleeving Act. 15. [...]. 5. Pharisees: that it was needfull, that the disciples, meaning all the Christians of that time, as well Gentiles, as Iewes, should bee circumcised, and so required to keepe the Law; otherwise they could not be justified nor saved. And to that purpose tendeth Saint Peters Act. 15. 7, 8, 9. speech, That it was not needfull to require the beleeving Gentiles to be circumcised; seeing it was well knowne, that the Gentiles were first called by his ministery, had truly beleeved, and had received the holy Ghost, who had purified their hearts by a lively faith, by which without circumcision or other obser­vations of the Law they were justified, as well as the beleeving Iewes: the Iewes also themselves expecting to bee justified and saved by the grace of the Lord Iesus Christ, even as the Gentiles were, without the workes of the Law, as Paul also reasoneth, Gal. 2. 15, 16.

§. X. Fifthly, by the testimony of Saint Paul, and his experience in himselfe, Rom. 7. 18. &c. From whence I reason thus: whosoever are not able to performe that which is good, though by the grace of God they are willing to performe it, they are not able to fulfill the Law. But the faithfull and regenerate are not able to performe that which is good, though by the grace of God [...]hey be willing thereunto. There­fore they are not able to fulfill the Law.

The assumption is proved from the example of Saint Paul, as it were an argument from the greater. For if Saint Paul himselfe, who in san­ctity farre excelled any man now living, did not finde in himselfe ability to performe that which was good, but was so hindered by the flesh, that the good, which he would, he did not: how sholl those, who are farre inferiour unto him, bee able to doe it? being the common conditi­on of all the regenerate, that by reason of the reluctation of the flesh, they cannot doe those things they would, Gal. 5. 17.

§. XI. Sixthly, the Apostle Rom. 8. 3. doth acknowledge [...], the impossibility of the Law, namely to justifie us. The reason whereof is not any defect in the Law it selfe, but our impotencie to ful­fill it by reason of the flesh: for if it were possible for us to fulfill the Law, it were possible to the Law to justifie us: but it is not possible to the Law to justifie us by reason of the flesh, and therefore by reason of the flesh it is not possible for us to fulfill the Law, whiles the flesh re­maineth in us, as it alwayes doth remaine even untill death. To these arguments, if you shall adde the testimonies of the Fathers, which in handling the sixth question I doe plentifully alleage Lib. 7. c. 6., you will acknow­ledge, that besides the authority of Scriptures, and evidence of reason, we have the consent of antiquity, that no mortall man is able to fulfill the Law of God.

CAP. VI. Our fift [...] argument, containing foure branches: By that w [...]e are justified, by which we are absolved, redeemed, reconciled, and for which wee shall be saved.

§. I. THe fifth argument. By what righteousnesse wee are ju­stified,The fifth con­taining foure branches which are so many argu­ments doubled. by it wee are absolved from our sinnes, redee­med from our iniquities, reconciled unto God, and for it we shall bee saved: And againe by what righteous­nesse wee are absolved, redeemed, reconciled, and for which wee shall be saved, by it we are justified.

By that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves, wee are not absolved from our sinnes, nor redeemed from our iniqui­ties, nor reconciled unto God, nor for it shall bee saved: But by the righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him, wee are absolved from our sinnes, redeemed from our iniqui­ties, &c.

Therefore we are not justified by that righteousnesse which is inhe­rent in our selves, but by that righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ.

The proposition in both the parts thereof containeth foure bran­ches.The first branch by what righteousnesse we are justified, by that we are absolved, &c. The first, by what righteousnesse we are justified, wee are by it ab­solved from our sinnes: and a converso, by what righteousnesse we are ab­solved from our sinnes, by that we are justified. This is proved from the signification of the word justifie, as being a judiciall word opposed to condemnation, which I have at large proved before Lib. 2.. For this doth in­vincibly demonstrate, that by what wee are justified, by that wee are ac­quitted and absolved: and by what wee are absolved, by that we are ju­stified. But more specially it may bee proved out of Act. 13. 38, 39. where, as I have shewed before, not onely the word justification andAct. 13. 38, 39. remission of sinnes are promiscuously used, but the phrase also of being justified from sinne signifieth plainely to be absolved from sinne: where also the maine question itselfe is concluded. Bee it knowne unto you saith S. Paul to his brethren the Iewes who feared Act. 13. 16. 26. God, that through Iesus Christ is preached unto you forgivenesse of sinnes. And by him all that beleeve are justified from all those things (meaning sinnes) from which yee could not be justified by the Law of Moses. From our sinnes therefore we are justified or, absolved by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith, from which we could out be acquitted by any o­bedience, which we could performe to the Law.

[Page 164]§. II. But of this place we are further to speake in defence of Calvins allegation thereof against Bellarmines cavils. Calvin, prooving thatCalvins allega­tion of Act. 13. 38 39 def [...]n­ded against [...] ca­vils De justis l. 2 c. 12. in [...]titut. 3. c. 11. §. 3. God doth justifie us, when hee absolveth us from our sinnes, and accep­teth of us in Christ, alleageth this place. Through this man, that is, Christ, is preached unto you remission of sinnes, and by him all that be­leeve are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses. You see, saith Calvin, that justification is here set after remission of sinnes by way of interpretation r you see plainely, that it is taken for absolution: you see, that it is denied to the workes of the Law: you see, it is meerely the benefit of Christ: you see, that it is re­ceived by faith: and finally you see, that there is a satisfaction interpo­sed, where hee saith, that through Christ wee are justified from our sinnes.

Bellarmine pretending to answere this argument, relateth it thus, as if Calvin had said; First, By this man, that is, by Christ we are justified, and not by any vertues or qualities of ours: Secondly, is preached, that signifyeth, that the very preaching or declaring of the promise, if it bee apprehended by faith, doth justifie, for so the Apostle presently expoundeth himselfe, by him every one that beleeveth is justified. Thirdly, forgivenesse of sinnes: that signifieth that justification consisteth in nothing else, but in remission of sinnes wherefore t [...]e inward renovation is not the other part of justication: for that renovation is not so much justifica [...]ion, as an effect thereof. And lastly, these words, from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses, doe signifie, that justifi­cation doth not consist in the observation of the Law, but onely, as hath beene said, in remission of sinnes for or through the righteousnesse of Christ imputed, Thus, as you see, hee maketh Calvin speake what hee pleaseth. But be­cause the things, which he inforceth in Calvins name upon this place, be for the most part our assertions, it shall not bee amisse to weigh the answeres which he maketh to them.

And first, where it is said per hunc, by this man, hee saith, this doth First, per hunc, by this man. not exclude our vertues or qualities infused of God. For by Christ wee are ju­stified as the efficient, which is signified by the preposition per: by vertues and qualities infused, as the formall cause. Now if Christ or his righteousnesse bee the efficient cause, then it cannot be the formall cause; for the forme is the ef­fect of the efficient; nor can the same thing be the cause and effect of the same thing. Neither may they say as they are wont, that this is a mystery of faith, that reason cannot attaine unto. For mysteries though they surmount reason, yet are notrepugnant to reason. Neither ought we to faine mysteries (as the Pa­pists use to doe) where the Scriptures have an easie and perspicuous meaning. R [...]ply. This were a good caveat to the papists. As for us, we faineno such mysteries, neither doe we say, that Christ or his righteousnesse is both the efficient and formall cause of our justification. But this we say, that the righteousnesse of Christ, is both the matter of our justification, and also the merit both of our justification and salvation: and that Christ himselfe as he is Mediatour is the secondary efficient of our justificati­on, affording unto it both the matter thereof and the merit.Secondly, is preached.

§. IV. That word is preached doth not signifie, saith hee, that by the onely preaching of Scriptures apprehended by faith men are justified. For then [Page 165] Peter would not have said, Act. 2. 38. Doe pe [...]ance, and bee every one of you baptized for remission of sinnes. But it signifieth, that remission of sinnes is preached to all that beleeve in Christ, as they ought, that is, in doing whatsoever he comma [...]deth to be done, according to that Mat. 28. 20. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. In this sence every one that b [...]leeveth is justified, that is, whosoever beleeveth as he ought, namely by fulfilling all things, which faith doth declare ought to be fulfilled. For not he that beleeveth a Physician, though he be never so skilfull, and one that infalli­bly cur [...]th, is healed, unlesse he receive such medicines as hee doth appoint.

Reply. Wee doe not say, that preaching alone apprehended by faith doth justifie: but wee say, that a true and a lively faith, which is begot­ten by the preaching of the Word, doth justifie a man before God: and that, wicked is that aphorisine collected out of Bellarmine Tom. 2. in indi­ce. voc [...] predica­tio, Per predica­tionem verbi Dei excitari fidem, & sic remitt [...] peccata figmen­tum est baeretico­ [...]um nostri t [...]m peris., that by the preaching of the Word of God faith is stirred up, and so sinnes are forgiven, is a fiction of the hereticks of our time. Nay, we say more, that by the preaching of the Word, faith is not onely excited, where it was before; but that it is first wrought ordinarily, and begotten by the mi­nistry of the Gospell. The Papists ascribe the begetting of faith to the Sacraments, and the stirring of it up to the Word. As if faith infused in Baptisme did ly a sleep untill it be excited and awakned by the word,Rom. 10. 17. But the Scripture teacheth us, that faith commeth by hearing the Word, that Preachers are Ministers by whom you do beleeve, that with­out1 Cor. 3. 5. a preacher men cannot ordinarily beleeve, Rom. 10. 14. that men are begotten to God by the preaching of the Word, 1 Cor. 4. 15. that there­fore preachers are their Fathers in the faith, that they justifie men, Dan. 12. 3. because they are the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in them, whereby they are justified. Why then doth Peter require them to whom he had preached, to repent and to be baptized? I answer, that the holy Ghost by Peters sermon had wrought the grace of faith in the hearers before they were baptized, Act. 2. 41. as by Pauls preaching, Act. 13. 48. in so many of the hearers as were ordained unto life, in Lydia, Act. 16. 14, 15. By Philips preaching in the Eunuch, Act. 8. 38. by Peters preaching in Cornelius and his company, Act. 10. 43. 44. and by this faith they were justified before God before they were baptized, even as Abra­ham was before he was circumcised, Rom. 4. 11. But that they might be justified also in the Court of their owne Conscience, and much more that they might be saved; many other things, as repentance and a godly life, with the use of the Sacraments, and of all other good meanes are re­quired besides that faith, whereby alone they are justified before God. And to this end did Peter require them to repent and to bee baptized: not that Baptisme properly doth justifie, and much lesse that it beget­teth [...]aith, for, in all these faith was wrought before they were baptized, but because it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith to them that are baptized, not onely at the time of Baptisme, but whensoever or how long soever they beleeve. And whereas he saith, that remission of sinnes is preached to those that beleeve as they ought: I confesse it is true, that remission is not promised to an idle dead or counterfeit faith, but [Page 166] to the true, lively and effectuall faith, which in some measure purifieth the heart, and worketh by love; causing a man, though not to fulfill all things that are commanded, as Bellarmine speaketh; yet to will, to de­sire, and to endevour that hee may performe all things commanded, ac­cording to the measure of grace received. But though obedience bee a necessary consequent of faith: yet it is very absurd to confound it with faith, as Bellarmine here seemeth to doe.The similitude [...] the Physi. [...].

§. V. As for his similitude of the Physitian, I answer: the onely meanes to bee cured of the wounds of our soules, which are our sinnes, by our spirituall Physitian which is Christ, is to beleeve in him; and the onely plaisters to bee applied are his sufferings and merits: for by his stripes we are healed Esa. 53. 5. and the onely meanes, on our part, to ap­ply them is faith. For even as Moses lifted up the brazen Serpent in the Wildernesse, that those who were bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking upon that, which was but a figure [...]. 3. 14, 15. of Christ, be healed: e­ven so our Saviour Christ was lifted up upon the Crosse, that whosoe­ver being stung, as we all are, by the old Serpent, and made subject to e­ [...]all death, shall looke upon him with the eye of a true faith, shall bee sa­ved. To which remedie alone all true physicians of mens soules do use to direct the wounded Conscience: when the Iaylour, Act. 16. 30, 31. in great consternation of mind came trembling: and falling downe before Paul and Silas, demanded of them what he might doe that he might bee saved: they said beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ, and thou shalt be sa­ved. And this remedy [...]in curing miraculously corporall discases was used sometimes with good successe, Mat. 9. 21. 22. 14. 36. and was by our Saviour himself prescribed as the onely receipt, Mar. 5. 36. Luk. 8. 50.

§. VI. Thirdly, where the Apostle in this place nameth onely re­missionThirdly, remis­sion of sinnes. of sinnes, hee saith, it hindreth not, but that just [...]fication may bee un­derstood to consist in remission of sinnes, and infusion of righteousnesse. For as we have not once shewed saith hee, remission of sinnes is not onely the pard [...] ­ning of the punishment, but also the washing away and cleansing of the fault, which is not done but by the cleannesse of grace and comelinesse of justice com­ming in the place: which the name of justification pretendeth being named from justice. Reply. Not once, but very oft hath hee said, that remission of sinne is the utter deletion and extinction of sinne, and that it is not a distinct act from infusion of righteousnesse, because by infusion of ju­stice sinne is expelled: as by the accession of heat and light cold and darkenesse is expelled. But as for condonation and pardon of the guilt and punishment, that he hath utterly excluded from justification. For the pardoning of the guilt and punishment is not done by infusion of righteousnesse, (which, as hee teacheth, is the onely act of justification, whereof there is but one formall cause, which is righteousnesse insu [...]ed, as the Councel of Trent [...]. 6. c [...]p. 7. hath defined) but by imputation of the satis­faction of Christ. For righteousnesse infused, De iustif. l. 2. cap. 10., as Bellarmine hath con­fessed, doth not, or cannot, satisfie for our sinnes. Now if there bee but§. Deinde. one formall cause of justification (as indeed there is but one) and that one be not the imputation, but the infusion of justice, or, as they rather [Page 167] use to speake, the justice infused, which expelleth sinne, which expulsion or deletion they call the remission, yea, the true remission of sinne: then the forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment belongeth not to justifica­tion. But if the forgiving of the guilt and punishment, be the not im­puting of sinne, which necessarily bringeth with it imputation of righ­teousnesse, as Bellarmine confesseth, and the Apostle proveth, Rom. 4. viz. that the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes, when hee imputeth not sinne: then it will necessarily follow, that imputation of Christs satisfaction or righteousnesse is the onely formall cause of justi­fication; whereby, we being absolved from sinne are accepted as just, yea constituted righteous in Christ. And that infusion of righteous­nesse expelling sinne, is another thing, which the Scriptures call Sancti­fication. And this I take to be a manifest truth: which being granted, we have obtained the whole cause.

§. VII. Fourthly, againe (saith he) although there were mention madeFourthly, iusti­fication from sinn [...]. in this place of justification only from sinnes: yet in many other places there is mention made of Sanctification, of cleansing, of washing, and renewing, which shew the other part of justification. Reply, we doubt not, but the Scriptures make mention of both these benefits sometimes severally, and sometimes joyntly: which though in use and practice they alwayes goe together; yet they must bee carefully distinguished. And howsoever the Scriptures often make mention of Sanctification, as well as of justification: yet no where doe they make Sanctification a part of justification. This Bellarmine should have proved and not have craved. Neither is it to bee doubted, but that if forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment concurre unto justification as a part thereof, re­novation or infusion of righteousnesse being the other part as Bellarmine here affirmeth, the [...]e are two actions and two formall causes of justifi­cation, which themselves utterly deny. And therefore they must bee forced to acknowledge these two actions having distinct formes to bee justification, whose forme is imputation and sanctification, whose forme is infusion of righteousnesse.Fifthly, by the Law.

§. VIII. Finally saith he, from which you could not be justified by the Law of Moses, signifieth, that the observation of the Law, neither by the strength of nature, nor by helpe of the Law alone presumed, doth justifie: not because the true observation of the Law is not righteousnesse, but because be­fore remission of sinne, the Law cannot be kept. Reply, By the observation of Law is meant, all obedience and righteousnesse inherent whatsoever prescribed in the Law, whether it goe before faith and justification, or follow after. For before, as Bellarmine truly saith, the Law cannot be fulfilled, neither can there be any true righteousnesse. And that obedi­ence, which is performed after, though it be a righteousnesse begun in us, and be not onely accepted in Christ, but also graciously rewarded: yet it cannot satisfie for our former sinnes, nor justifie us from them. That, which Bellarmine addeth, I admit with some small qualification, as making for us. For God, saith he, when by the merits of Christ he recon­cileth any man, hee doth withall forgive his sinnes, (so saith the Apostle [Page 198] 2 Cor. 5. 19. which is all one, as if Bellarmine had said, when God justi­fieth a man not imputing his sinne, and accepting of him as righteous in Christ) then hee infuseth charity, by which he may keepe the Law, which is all one as if he had said, when God hath justified a man he doth also Sanctifie him. This, saith he, is that which Saint Augustine so often repeateth (and wholly maketh for us) opera non pr [...]cedere justificandum, that workes goe not before, (as causes of justification) sed sequi justificatum, but follow after as effects and fruits thereof. And this Augustine spea­keth, not of such workes as perfectly fulfill the Commandements, for such there are none whiles they are stained with the flesh: but of all good works, which notwithstanding their defectivenesse, are accepted of God in Christ, that which he addeth out of Rom. 8. 4. I have dis­cussed Lib. 7. c. 7. §. 7. The foure branches of the proposition proved. elsewhere.

§. IX. But to returne to the proofe of my proposition: to that place of the Acts, I adde for the further proofe of the first branch, Rom. 4. vers. 5, 6, 7, 8. where the Apostle useth these words promiscu­ously, justification and blessednesse, and proveth out of Psal. 32. 1. that this blessednesse consisteth in remission of sin, or, as he also speaketh, in the not imputing of sinne, and imputation of righteousnesse without works: from whence this is proved; by what righteousnesse we have remission of sinne, by that we are justified: and by what wee are justifi­ed we have remission of sinne. The second branch; by what righteous­nesse we are redeemed, by that we are justified, and è converso, by what we are justified, by that we are redeemed. The benefit of redemption is explained by the Apostle, Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. to bee remission of sinne, and expressed by the phrase of redeeming from all iniquttie, Tit. 2. 14. Psalm. 133. 8. The third branch, by what righteousnesse wee are reconciled to God, by it we are justified, and by what we are justified we are reconciled. The Apostle Rom. 5. 9, 10. useth these words pro­miscuously, to bee justified by the bloud of Christ, and to bee reconci­led to God by the death of his Sonne, and 2 Cor 5. 19. God is said to reconcile men unto him in Christ, when hee doth not impute untio them their sinnes, but imputeth unto them righteousnesse, even the righteousnesse of God, that is, of Christ, that they only may be made the righteousnesse of God in him, vers. 21. The fourth branch: for what righteousnesse wee are saved, by that wee are justified, and è converso: that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation: for which cause justification and to be justified is many times expressed, by salvation or to bee saved: for they that are justified are saved in hope Tit. 3. 7.; and by what they are justified, by that they are intituled to salvation, and by what we receive remission of sinnes, by that also we receive our Act. 26. 18. inheritance. Iustification may bee compared to the institution of a Minister unto a benefice which giveth jus ad rem; glorification to in­duction which giveth possession, and jus in re.

§. X. I come to the assumption: the first branch whereof is, that weThe assumpti­on proved in all the foure branches. are absolved from our sinnes by the righteousnesse of Christ, and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us [...] both wich are plainely averred, [Page 199] Act. 3. 38, 39. The former also is every where testified: that the bloud of Mat. 26. 28. Esai. 5. 3. 510, 11. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Ephes. 1. 7. Heb. 9. 14. Apoc. 1. 5. Rom. 3. 25. 1 Joh. 2. 2. Christ was shed for the remission of sinnes, and that it doth cleanse us from all our sinnes, that he is the propitiation for our sinnes, &c. The latter is also evident, that we cannot be absolved from our sinnes by righteousnesse inherent: first, because it cannot satisfie for our sinnes: secondly, because it cannot stand in judgement. If wee should plead it before God, we could not be justified thereby, Psal. 143. 2. Neither are we able to answere him one of a thousand, Io [...] 9. 3. Thirdly, because our obedience, though it were totall (as it is never in this life) yet it were a debt and we cannot be absolved from one debt, by the payment of ano­ther, when ye shall have done all things which are commanded you, say, we are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to doe, Luk. 17. 10. The second branch, that we are redeemed by the me­rits of Christ, and not by our owne righteousnesse, needeth no proofe, neither in respect of the affirmative, that by his bloud we have redemp­tion even the Ephes. 1. 7. remission of our sinnes, that he gave himselfe 1 Tim. 2. 5. to bee [...], a full price of ransome to redeeme us from all iniquity. Nor in respect of the Negative; unlesse it may be thought, that we, who were held captives under sinne and Satan 2 Tim. 2. 26. to doe his will, could deliver our selves, which God doth sweare to bee his gift, Luk. 1. 73, 74. Neither could we be delivered out of the hands of the strong man, but by him Mat. 12. 29. that is stronger than he. The third branch also is manifest, both in re­spect of the affirmative, that we are reconciled unto God by the death of his Sonne, Rom. 5. 10. Col. 1. 21, 22, and also of the negative. For we were enemies, when we were reconciled, and such enemies, as what­soever we minded Gen. 6. 5. was enmity against God, Rom. 8. 7. Lastly, the fourth branch needeth no proofe, neither in respect of the affirmative, unlesse it may bee thought needfull to prove, that we are saved by the merits of Christ: nor in respect of the negative, the Scriptures so of­ten testifying that we are saved by grace Ephes. 2. 8, 9. through faith, not by workes, no not by any workes of righteousnesse Tit. 3. 5. that we have done. So much of this argument, which if I should strive for number might stand for eight, foure for the affirmative and foure against the negative.

[...]
[...]

CAP. VII. Containing sixe other arguments, proving joyntly that we are justified by Christs righteousnesse, and not by ours.

§. I.

THe sixth argument: The righteousnesse, by which weArg. 6. by faith and not by workes. are justified, is the righteousnesse of faith, and not of workes, as Saint Paul Rom. 3. 20. 28. 4. 6. constantly teacheth.

The righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ isGal 2. 16. Eph. 2. 8. 9. Tit. 3. 5. 7. the righteousnesse of faith; or the righteousnesse which we receive and have by faith, or the righ­teousnesse of God by faith: The righteousnesse inherent is of workes. By that justice therefore we are justified, and not by this.

§. 2. The seventh: The righteousnesse of God, by which wee are ju­stified,Arg 7. righte­ousnesse of iu­stisication not prescribed in the Law. is not prescribed in the Law to justification, but without the Law is revealed in the Gospell, Ro. 1. 17. 3. 21. Rom. 3. 21.

The righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ was not prescri­bed in the Law to justification, but without the Law is revea­led in the Gospell: righteousnesse inherent is prescribed in the Law to justification, which in the question of justification is re­nounced in the doctrine Phil 3. 8, 9. of the Gospell. This being the maine difference betweene the Law and the Gospell, that the Law to justification requireth perfect obedience to bee performed in our owne persons: the Gospell propoundeth the obedience of Christ which hee performed for us, to bee accepted in their behalf who beleeve in him. Wherfore let him be held accursed, Gal. 1. 8, 9. though hee were an Apostle, though an Angell from heaven, who shall reach justification by the legall righteousnesse, and not by the evangelicall. A­gaine, the Law was given as the Apostle Gal. 3. 17. saith foure hundred and thir­ty yeares after the covenant of Grace, and promise of justification by faith in Christ, was made to Abraham: and therefore cannot disanull that covenant which was before confirmed in Christ, that it should make the promise of none effect, which it would, if the promise of justi­fication were made upon condition of fulfilling the Law.

§. III. Eightly, By what righteousnesse we are justified, the justiceArg. 8 the righ­teousnesse of iustification sa­tisfieth Gods iustice. of God is fully satisfied. God being so mercifull in forgiving sinnes that he remaineth just, Rom. 3. 25, 26. For though he proclaime him­selfe Exod 34. 7. mercifull and gracious, long-suffering and abundant in goodnesse and truth, keeping mercie for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgres­sion and sinne: yet he protesteth, that absolving he will not absolve, that [Page 201] is, by no meanes will absolve such as ought not to be absolved, that is, such as for whom his justice is not satisfied. Neither doth he indeed for­give any sinne, for which his justice is not satisfied. But as every sinne deserveth death, so it is punished with death, either with the death of the party, for whom he hath no other satisfaction: or with the death of Christ, who hath satisfied the justice of God for the sinnes of all that truly beleeve in him.

By the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him, the ju­stice of God is fully satisfied (as Bellarmine himselfe proveth, g and therefore professeth that in him he is well pleased. Finally, g De iustif. l. 2. c. 5. §. 4 quar­ta ratio. saith Bellarmine, Ibid. §. at longe. Nothing more frequently doth all the Scripture testifie than that the passion and death of Christ was a full and perfect Mat. 3. 17. 17. 5. satisfaction for sinnes. He made the attonement Col. 1. 20 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Rom. 3. 25. Ephes. 5. 2. betweene God and us, giving himselfe an offering and sacrifice to God, for a sweet smelling savour.

But by that righteousnesse which it inherent in us, the justice of God is not satisfied, as Deiustif. l. 2. [...]. 10. §. Deinde. Bellarmine confesseth. Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ, which is out us in him, and not by righteousnesse inherent in us.

And here I will make bold, with Bellarmine to borow a speech from him, (which he borrowed as it seemes from our Writers) to the confu­sion of himselfe and all other Popish Iustitiaries. For where Osiander had argued, that God accepteth for a satisfaction no justice, but that which is infinite, and consequently none but his owne uncreated and essentiall righteousnesse, Bellarmine answereth: De iustif. l. 2. [...]. 5. sine. God indeed doth not accept as a true satisfaction for sinne, any justice, but that which is infinite, because sinne is an infinite offence. But that some justice may be finite, that is, of infinite price and valour, it is not necessary that it should be the essentiall justice of God, but it is sufficient that it be the justice of an infinite person, such as Christ is, God and man. Therefore the obedience, the passion and death of the Sonne of God, though in it selfe and essentially it was a created justice and finite, notwithstan­ding in regard of the person, who obeyed, suffered, and died, it was infinite, and in the true rigour of justice it was a propitiation for our sinnes, and not for our sinnes alone, but for the sins of the whole world. From whence I argue thus, that justice, which is of infinite value, the Lord accepteth as a true satisfaction for sinne, and that which is not of infinite value he doth not accept; for the offence of sinne is infinite. But the righteousnesse of Christ onely is of infinite value, ours is not: therefore the Lord accepteth Christs righteous­nesse, and not ours, as a true satisfaction for sinne.

§. IV. Ninthly, they that cannot be justified without remission of sin, Arg. 9. no man iustified with­out remission of sinne. are justified neither by inherent righteousnesse, because they are sinners, nor without the righteousnesse of Christ imputed; without which, as there can be no satisfaction for sinne, so no remission of sinne.

But no man can be justified without remission of sinne. Therefore no man is justified by righteousnesse inherent, but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ.

[Page 202]§. V. The tenth, that is to be esteemed the true doctrine of justifica­tion,The true doctrine of iustification is comfortable. which doth minister sound comfort to the distressed conscience of the faithfull; and that falfe, which is a racke to the conscience of Gods children, when they are humbled under the hand of God.

The doctrine of justification by the merits and obedience of Christ imputed, ministreth singular comfort to the distressed conscience of the faithfull, even in the agony of death: assuring the beleeving sinner, that howsoever the devill accuseth, the Law convicteth, the conscience confesseth his demerits: yet notwithstanding, if hee truly beleeve in Christ, he shall be accepted of God as righteous in Christ, and as an heire of eternall life; Christs sufferings and obedience being imputed unto him, and accepted of God in his behalfe, as if he had suffered and performed the same in his owne person.

But the doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse, is, as it were, a racke to mens consciences. For when a man being summoned to appeare before the judgement seat of God, shall seriously consider with himselfe, what he shall oppose to the accusations of Satan, to the conviction of the Law, to the Testimony of his owne Conscience, con­fessing himselfe to be a most wretched sinner, to the judgment of God, the most righteous judge: If he looke backe to his owne conversation, as having nothing to trust to, but his owne righteousnesse, he shall finde sufficient matter of despaire. He may say with In libello de Miseria homi­nis. Anselme, Terret me vi­ta mea, &c. my life doth terrifie me: for being diligently examined, my whole life almost appeareth either to bee sinne or barrennesse: and if there seeme to bee any fruit therein, it is either so counterfeit, or un­perfect, or some way or other corrupted, as that it can doe no other, but either not please, or displease God. And summoning himselfe before the judgement seat of God, hee findeth himselfe to bee in great straits. On this side, saith he, will be accusing sinnes, on that side terrifying ju­stice: under, will lye open the horrible gulfe of hell; above, an angry Iudge; within, a burning conscience, without, a flaming world—where shall I be hid, how shall I appeare? to be hid is impossible, to appeare is untolerable. To avoide these straits, there is no way but to renounce the doctrine of justification by works or inherent righteousnes, and to fly to the doctrine of the Gospell teaching justification by the grace of God, freely without respect of works through the merits of Christ received by faith: and to appeale from the tribunall of Gods justice to the throne of his mercy. For whiles a man retaineth this opinion, that he can bee no otherwise justified than by his owne good workes, or inherent righte­ousnesse, he can never be soundly perswaded, that his righteousnesse is sufficient for that purpose, but ever hath just caufe not onely of doub­ting but also of despaire. And this is the cause of that Popish opinion, that no man without speciall revelation can be assured of the remission of his sinnes, or of salvation.Argument ele­ven from expe­rience.

§. VI. The eleventh and last argument shall be taken from experi­ence. For when men seriously considering of their justification before God, as a judiciall act of God (as the word it selfe importeth) shall sin­cerely, [Page 203] and in the feare of God, set themselves before his judgement seat, where they must receive the sentence either of absolution or condem­nation; and shall bethinke themselves, what, they being accused of Sa­tan, and convicted by the testimony of their owne Conscience, have to oppose to the just judgement of God, why sentence of condemna­tion should not passe against them; they would utterly disclaime their owne righteousnesse. For as Augustine, and other of the Fathers observe, as before I have noted, out of the eight and nine verses of Prov. 20. joyned together, cum Rex justus sederit in solio, quis potest dice­re mundum est cor meum, when the righteous King shall sit upon his throne, who can say, my heart is cleane? yea, the best of the Papists, when By deadly sicknes [...]e, as Gods messenger, they have beene summo­ned to come before Gods judgement, they have beene forced to leave their schoole-trickes, and sophisticall distinctions; and plainely re­nouncing their owne righteousnesse, to rest wholly upon the mercies of God and the merits of Christ. Insomuch that many who have li­ved Papists, have in this most weighty point died reformed Catholicks. And to this purpose there is extant among them in divers Bookes a forme of visiting the Questiones au­thore Anselmo morientibus proponisolit ae per universum chri­stianum or bem. D. Vssher de suc­ciss. pag. 194 & respons ad Ie­suit pag. 513. Chemnit. exam. part. 1. pag. 143. Card. Hosii con­fess▪ Petricovi. ens. c. 73. fol. 143. b. f. sicke, wherein both the Pastor is directed what to say, and the sicke person is instructed what to answere. The Pastor therefore having demanded these questions, Brother dost thou rejoyce that thou shalt dye in the faith? doest thou confesse that thou hast not lived so well as thou ought? Doth it repent thee? hast thou a will to amend, if thou hadd'st space of life? Dost thou beleeve that our Lord Iesus Christ dyed for thee? doest thou beleeve that thou canst not bee saved but by his death? and having received affirmative answers to eve­ry question, he inferreth this exhortation; that whiles his soule remai­neth in him, he should place his whole affiance in the death of Christ, and in no other thing: and that if God will judge him, if hee shall say unto him thou art a sinner, that thou hast deserved damnation, that hee is angry with thee; he should say, O Lord I interpose the death of thy Sonne betweene me and thy judgement, betweene my sinnes, and thee, betweene mee and my bad deserts, betweene me and thine anger. In the edition printed at Venice, Or do bapti­zandi cum modo visit andi im­press. venet [...]. an. 1575. fol. 34. there are these two questions, dost thou beleeve that thou shalt come to glory not by thine owne merits but by the vertue and merit of Christs passion? And a little after, dost thou be­leeve that our Lord Iesus Christ died for our Salvation, and that no man can bee saved by his owne merits, or by any other meanes, but by the merit of his passion? unto both which an affirmative answere was made: but both blotted out in the Index expurgatorius Impress. Ma­driti apud. Alphons. Gemos. ann [...]. 1584. set forth by Cardinall Quiroga.

CAP. VIII. The disproofe of the Popish assertion affirming, that we are not justified by righteousnesse inherent.

§. I. NOw we are severally to disprove the Popish asser­tionThe disproofe of the Nega­tive. and to prove ours. As touching the former, that wee are not justified by righteousnesse inhe­rent.The first argu­ment because inherent righ­teousnesse is prescribed in the Law. Our first argument may bee this. That righteousnesse of God, by which we are justifi­ed, is not prescribed in the Law, as before hath beene proved, Rom. 3. 21. nor is that righteous­nesse which is of the Law, Phil. 3. 9.

All inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law, and is that which is of the Law:

Therefore inherent righteousnesse is not that righteousnesse of God, by which we are justified.

That all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law, it is mani­fest: first, because the Law is a perfect rule of all inherent righteous­nesse, whether habituall or actuall: secondly, because charity, wherein they place their inherent righteousnesse, even that charity, whereby they are to love God withall their soules, and their neighbour as them­selves: that charity, which proceedeth from a pure heart, from a good conscience, and from faith unfained is prescribed in the Law, as the summe and complement thereof, Matth. 22. 37. 39, 40. 1 Tim. 1. 5.

§. II. To avoid this most evident truth, Bellarmine bringeth a frivo­lousBellarmines di­stinction De iu­stif. l. 1 c. 19. betweene the iustice of the Law and in the Law. distinction, as he applieth it; to wit, that there is, justitia legis, and justitia in lege or exlege: The justice of the Law, the justice in the Law or of the Law. The justice of the Law is that very justice which the Law prescribeth, or that justice which is described in the Law, and is not rejected by the Apostle but commended. That justice which is in, of, or by the Law, is that, which men without faith and without grace doe performe by the strength of nature, onely holpen by the knowledge of the Law. And this, saith he, the Apostle doth reject as unprofitable, and opposeth it to the righteousnesse of faith. h. e. saith he, operibus bonis quae fiunt ex gratia & fide, that is, to good workes which are done by grace and by faith. So that justitia fidei, the righteousnesse of faith, is now in Bellarmines divinity, be­come justi [...]ia operum, the justice of workes. In Rom. 10. disput. 2. Pererius to the same pur­pose bringeth a threefold distinction of justice, that it is Legis, ex lege, & Dei: and inveigheth against Calvin, for that he tooke no notice of it, being so plainely, as hee saith, taught by the Apostle, Rom. 9. 31. 10. 3. 5.

[Page 205]§. III. Answ. 1. This distinction cannot be collected out of the writings of Saint Paul, who no where mentioneth [...], theAnswere, refel­ling this di­stinction of [...]llarmine. righteousnesse of the Law, and much lesse distinguisheth it from that which is of, in, or by the Law (though the vulgar Latine hath justitias legis, where the Greek is [...], Ro. 2. 26. and justificatio legis, Rom. 8. 4. where the Greeke is, [...], but useth these termes to expresse our inherent righteousnesse, [...], Rom. 10. 5. Phil. 3. 9. or [...], Phil. 3. 6. that which is of, in, or by the Law: which termes the righ­teousnesse of the Law, or that which is of, in, or by the Law, doe no more differ than [...], Rom. 4. 13. [...], Rom. 9. 30. 10. 6. [...], and [...], Phil. 3. 9. the righteousnesse of faith, or that which is of, by or through faith. Secondly, the righteousnesse of the Law is that, which the Law prescribeth, as themselves define it: and what doth that differ from that, which is prescribed in the Law? Thirdly, of the righteousnesse of the Law our Saviour speaketh, saith Pererius, Matth. 19. 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements. Of that, which is of or by the Law, Moses speaketh that he which doth those things (that are commanded) shal live in them: betwixt which two spee­ches of Christ and Moses there is no difference. Fourthly, if the righte­ousnes prescribed in the Law could be performed, then would the Law give life, according to that legal promise, he that doth these things shall live thereby, Levit. 18. 5. Ezek. 20. 11. Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Rom. 2. 13. and if there had been a Law given which could have given life then there should have been righteousnesse [...], of, or by the Law, Gal. 3. 21. and therefore that perfect righteousnesse justifying and giving life, should be called [...] the righteousnesse which is of, or by the Law. Fifthly, the righteousnesse of the Law is, as they teach, necessari­ly required of all that shall bee saved, and cannot be performed without grace and without faith: and therefore, according to their doctrine, differeth not at all from the righteousnesse of faith, hoc est, saith Bellar­mine, operibus bonis quaefiunt ex gratia & fide, that is, from good workes, which are done by grace and faith. So that by this goodly distinction, the Law and the Gospell, the Law of workes and the Law of faith, the righteousnesse of the Law, and the righteousnesse of faith are confoun­ded. For the righteousnesse of the Law is charity proceeding from grace and from faith, 1 Tim. 1. 5. and the righteousnesse of faith as Bel­larmine here teacheth are good works proceeding from grace and faith. And yet I deny not, but that great difference is to be made between the seeming obedience performed by carnal men without faith & without grace, (which cannot truely be called righteousnesse) and the new obe­dience of men spirituall and regenerate proceeding from faith working by love, as the fruits of the Spirit. But neither the one, nor the other, is the righteousnesse of Faith. The new obedience of the faithfull is in­deed a righteousnesse begun, and performed in some measure [...], according to the Law, Act. 22. 12. [...] according to the Com­mandements, 2 Iohn 6. but the righteousnesse of faith is this, that hee who beleeveth in Christ, in that hee beleeveth, fulfilleth the Law. [Page 206] [...] he that beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the Law, saith Photius Photius apud Occum, in Ro. 10., and likewise Primasius Primas in Rom. 10 3., qui in Christo credit, ipse perfi­cit legem, for to him Christ is [...] the end and complement of the Law, Rom. 10. 4. and in him by Christ, [...] that which the Law requireth to justification is fulfilled, Rom. 8. 4. Chryso­stome In Rom. 10. [...]om. 17., the end of the Law, saith he, was that a man might be justified: but this end, Christ [...] more amply performed by faith: feare not therefore (saith hee) because thou art a transgressour of the Law, see­ing thou art come to faith. For then doest thou transgresse the Law, when by reason of it thou doest not beleeve in Christ: but if thou doest beleeve in him, [...] thou hast also fulfilled the Law, and much more than it commanded: [...] for thou hast received a much greater righteousnesse, viz. the righteous­nesse of Christ, which is the righteousnesse of faith.

§. IV. Yea, but Augustine hath this distinction, denying thoseBellarmines obiect. that this distinction is found in Augustin. ad­vers. 2. epistolas Pelag. liv. 3. c. 7. who have justitiam in lege or ex lege in or by the Law, to fulfill justitiam legis the righteousnesse of the Law. I answer, that Augustine disputing against the Pelagians, who held that men might fulfill the righteous­nesse of the Law by the strength of nature, saith, that they might have a kind of righteousnesse in the Law or by it, which notwithstanding did not fulfill the righteousnesse of the Law, which could not bee done without the grace of the Spirit. By the justice of the Law, Au­gustine meaneth that which the Apostle calleth [...] (for o­therwise Paul never so much as nameth the righteousnesse of the Law) that is, whatsoever the Law requireth to justification. This justice of the Law, Augustine considereth in the Abstract, as Bel­larmine also himselse doth in his first booke, De iustif. 41. c. 1. for that righteousnesse of the Law, as it is described in the booke of the Law, being perfect and compleate: which Bellarmine saith is properly called the justice of the Law, of which hee saith, justitia legis est in libris, the justice of the Law is in bookes; even as habituall righteousnesse is in the heart; and actuall, in the hands. The justice in and by the Law hee considereth in the concrete, with relation to the subject in whom it is, viz. for that righteousnesse which men attaine unto by their observation of the Law written. And hee proveth against the Pelagians, that the righte­ousnesse, which they seemed to have in lege, or ex lege, in or by the Law, did not fulfill justitiam legis the righteousnesse of the Law: unto which wee may adde against the Papists, that all the righteousnesse, even of the faithfull also and regenerate, (though endevouring to live accor­ding to the Law, and according to the Commandements), which they have in or by the Law, doth not fulfill the righteousnesse of the Law, which Paul calleth [...], which Christ onely fulfilled for us: by whose [...], hee being but one, we are justified, Rom. 5. 18. For as the [...] or guilt by the fall of one man came upon all [...] to con­demnation; so by the [...] the righteousnesse of one whereby hee ful­filled the Law▪ [...] the grace of absolution and of Gods acceptation redounded upon all unto justification of life. And thus this distinction [Page 207] maketh against the Papists. For justitia legis the justice of the Law considered in the abstract, as it is described in the booke of the Law, being most perfect, is never fulfilled by that righteousnesse of the con­crete in or by the Law, which men not onely carnall but spirituall also attaine unto by their observation of the Law, being alwayes unperfect in this life and stained with the flesh. For even as it may bee said of all other graces, which being considered in the abstract, are perfect, and are so defined: but considered in the concrete as they be in men, who have received but the first fruits Rom. 8. 23. of the Spirit, according to the measure of the donation Ephes. 4. 7. of Christ, they are unperfect: So the righteousnesse of the Law, as it is taught in the Law, and as it was performed by Christ, is perfect; but as it is in all mortall men, it is unperfect. Therefore righteousnesse inherent in us is not that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified.

§. V. Our second argument. That doctrine, which confoundethArg. 2. the po­pish doctrine confoundeth the Law and the Gospell. the righteousnesse of the Law and of the Gospell, and by confounding them maketh void the Covenant of grace, is false and Antichristian.

The Popish doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse, confoundeth the righteousnesse of the Law and of the Gospell, and maketh void the covenant of grace.

Therefore it is false and Antichristian.

The assumption is thus proved: whosoever maketh the condition of justification to be the perfect fulfilling of the Law in our owne persons, confoundeth the Gospell with the Law. For the righteousnesse of the Law is, the man that doth these things (which are prescribed in the Law) shall live by them: but the true condition of the Gospell is, beleeve in Christ, and thou shalt be saved. He also maketh void the Covenant of grace. For if justification be promised upon condition of perfect obe­dience or righteousnesse, which condition is impossible by reason of the flesh, then is the promise void and of none effect. But the Papists make the condition of justification to bee the perfect fulfilling of the Law in our owne persons, or perfect righteousnesse inherent. Againe, whosoever are made debtours to the whole Law, to them not onely the covenant of grace is void, but Christ himselfe is of none effect, as the Apostle teacheth, Gal. 5. 2, 3. But they who must bee justified by inhe­rent righteousnesse are made debrours to the whole Law, which they must perfectly fulfill, else they cannot bee justified. But of this more Lib. 7 c. 3. hereafter.

§. VI. Our third argument, That doctrine, which depriveth Chri­stiansThirdly, it de­priveth men of the chiefe part of Christian liberty. of the chiefe part of that Christian liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, is false and Antichristian. The popish doctrine of justifi­cation by inherent righteousnesse depriveth Christians of the chiefe part of that Christian liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free: the chiefe part of our liberty is, that, which we have by justification, where­in wee are freed from hell, and intitled to heaven. And that is a free­dome from a double yoke of most grievous bondage, wherein all are held that are under the Law: the former in respect of the curse, under [Page 208] which all are, who in the least degree at any time transgresse the Law, Gal. 3. 10. which all do both oft and grievously: the other in respect of the rigour of the Law, excluding all men from justification and salvati­on, who doe not perfectly fulfill it: which by reason of the flesh is un­possible. But by the popish doctrine the benefit of justification it selfe is taken away, as I have shewed, and with it, the liberty, which we have by it. For if we cannot be justified but by perfect inherent righ [...]eousnes, then are we subject to the curse, then are we excluded from all possibili­ty of justification and salvation as being sinners in our selves, wherefore all those, who will stand fast Gal. 5. 1. in that liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, must abhorre the doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse, which intangleth the imbracers of it with this double yoke of bondage, whereby they are subjected to the curse and damnati­on, and are excluded from heaven and salvation.

§. VII. Our fourth Argument, No sinners, whiles they remaineFourthly, be­cause all men are sinners. sinners, are justified by righteousnesse inherent.

All men whatsoever (Christ alwayes excepted:) are sinners as I proved Supr. c. 2. §. 9. before, and so remaine whiles they remaine in the flesh.

Therefore no man whatsoever is justified by righteousnesse in­herent.

This seemeth to be the Apostle argument in the three first Chapters of the Epistle to the Romans: whosoever are sinners, they are not justified by the works of the Law, that is to say, by no righteousnesse inherent in themselves or performed by themselves.

All mortall men whatsoever, both Iewes and Gentiles, are sin­ners, which hee proveth at large. Therefore no mortall man whatsoever is justified by the works of the Law, that is, by righ­teousnesse inherent.

§. VIII. Our fifth argument: None that are accursed by the Law,Fifthly, because all men by the Law are accur­sed. are justified by their obedience to the Law, for to bee justified is to bee blessed, Rom. 4. 6.

All mortall men without exception are accursed by the Law, as the Apostle proveth, Gal. 3. 10. because all without exception have broken the Law.

Therefore none are justified by their obedience to the Law, and therefore not by inherent righteousnesse.

§. IX. Our sixth argument: whosoever is justified by inherentSixthly, be­cause none ful­fill the Law. righteousnesse fulfilleth the Law.

But no mortall man doth fulfill the Law, as I have elsewhere defen­ded and proved Supr. c. 5. §. 3. Lib. 7. c. 6, & 7. at large. And thus [...], hom. 17 in Rom. 10. 5. Chrysostome argueth.

No man can be justified by the Law, unlesse he fulfill the whole Law, but this is not possible for any man; therefore that righteousnesse is fal­len to the ground.

To this argument adde a seventh as being a Consectary thereof: whosoever is justified by inherent righteousnesse, and namely by cha­rity, he is justified by his owne fulfilling of the Law. For charity is the [Page 209] fulfilling of the Law, but no man is or can bee justified by his owne ful­filling of the Law, for none can fulfill it: therefore none are justified by inherent righteousnesse.

§. X. Our eighth argument: we are not justified before God: bothEigthly, Not by faith and by workes. by faith and by workes, by Gods righteousnesse and our owne, by that righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ, and by that which is inhe­rent in our selves. For the holy Ghost maketh such an opposition be­tweene these, as that they cannot stand together, Rom. 3. 28. 4. 4, 5. 9. 30, 31, 32. 11. 5, 6. Phil. 3. 9. Gal. 2. 16. 3. 11. Eph. 2. 8, 9. But wee are ju­stified by faith, by the righteousnesse of God through faith, by Christs righteousnesse which is out of us in him. viz. by his sufferings and by his obedience, as besides the places even now quoted appeareth, Rom. 5. 9. 19.

Therfore we are not justified by righteousnesse inherent in our selves.Ninthly, be­cause it is impu­tative.

§. XI. Our ninth argument: Imputative righteousnesse is not in­herent, as being not ours, nor in us, but communicated to us by im­putation.

The righteousnesse by which we are justified is imputative: that

I prove, first, by testimony, Rom. 4. 6, 7, 8, 23, 24. for then is God said to justifie, when not imputing sinne, hee imputeth righteousnesse without workes. Secondly, by reason. The personall righteousnesse of Christ is inherent in him and not in us, being proper to his person, though by imputation communicated unto us. The righteousnesse of God, by which we are justified, is the personall righteousnesse of Christ, 2 Pet. 11. viz. his passive and active righteousnesse, Rom. 5. 9. 19. And that it is his personall righteousnesse, appeareth evidently, because it is the righteousnes and obedience of one onely, wheras if it were a righteous­nesse from him in us, it would be the justice of so many as are justified: so saith the Councell Sess 6 Sess. 7. of Trent, justitiam in nobis recipientes unus­quisque suam.

§. XII. Our tenth argument. That justification which the Scrip­tureTenthly, iusti­fication taketh away boasting teacheth, taketh away all matter of boasting, Rom. 3. 27. Epbes. 2. 9.

But justification by works or by inherent righteousnesse doth not take away all matter of boasting, Rom. 3. 27. 4. 2. Eph. 2. 9.

Therefore justification by workes or inherent righteousnesse is not that which the Scriptures teach, we must therefore say with Ambr. de Iacob. & vitabeata. l. 1. c. 6. Sed & illud mihi pro­dest, quod non iustificamur ex operibus legis. Non babeo igi­tur, unde glori­ari in operibus, meis possim: non habeo unde me jactem. Et idco gloriabo [...] in Christo. Non gloriabor, quia iustus sum, sed gloriabor, quia redemptus sum: gloriabor non quia vacuus p [...]cati sum, sed quia mihi re­missa sunt peccata. Non gloriabor, quia profui, nec quia profuit mibi quisquam, sed quia pro me advocatus apud Patrem Christus est, sed quia pro me Christi sanguis effusus est. Ambrose, that is profitable to me, that we are not justified by the works of the Law: wherefore I have not whereof to glory in my workes, I have not whereof to boast. And therefore I will glory in Christ. I will not glory because I am just, but I will glory, because I am redeemed. I will glory, not that I am without sinne, but because my sinnes are forgiven mee. I will not glory because I have beene profitable, or because any other hath profited me, but because Christ is an Advocate for me with the Father, and because his bloud was shed for me.

[Page 210]§. XIII. Our eleventh argument: If there be no justification but by righteousnes inherent, and that also perfect and pure, then is justificati­on promised upon an impossible condition, and so consequently the promise should be void and of none effect. But farre be it from us to thinke, that the promise of justification by Christ is void and of none effect. Therefore wee are not justified by workes, or by righteousnesse inherent, but by faith, that the promise might bee sure to all the seed, as the Apostle reasoneth, Rom. 4. 13, 14, 15, 16.

§. XIV. Our twelfth argument: because unto justification con­currethTwelfthly, be­cause remissi­on of sinne is a necessary part of iustification. remission of sinnes, as a necessary part thereof: from whence three arguments arise, First, true justification is not without remission of sinne. The popish justification by infusion of perfect righteousnesse is without remission of sinne. For although they pretend that to their justification concurreth remission of sinne: yet by remission they not understanding the pardoning or forgiving, but the extinction and abo­lition of sinne, have utterly excluded from justification the forgivenesse of sinne, as I have shewed before. Secondly, unto true justification ne­cessarily concurreth remission of sinne. And where is remission of sin, there is imputation of righteousnesse without workes. But in the po­pish justification there needeth no imputation of righteousnesse; and that for two reasons, which Bellarmine doth prosecute at large in his dis­pute against imputation. The one, because in justification by infusion of righteousnesse, sinne is fully expelled, and therefore no need of im­putation. And secondly, because the righteousnesse which is infused is perfect of it selfe without imputation of any other righteousnesse. Thirdly, if our justification and blessednesse doth consist in the forgive­nesse of our sinnes, as it doth Rom. 4. 6, 7. ex Psal. 32. 1. then not in per­fect inherent righteousnesse: for where is neede of the forgivenesse of sinne, there is no perfect righteousnesse inherent. And where perfect righteousnesse is infused, there needeth not imputation of righteous­nesse.

§. XV. Our thirteenth argument. If Abraham, David, and Paul Thirteenthly, from the exam­ple of Abraha [...]. were not justified by righteousnesse inherent, then much lesse any of us, who are so farre inferiour to any of them.

Not Abraham, whose example was a samplar in this behalfe, Rom. 4. 23, 24. For as Abraham the father of the faithful was justified, so are we Abraham though he were a mirrour of piety abounding with good workes; yet was not justified thereby. As the Apostle proveth, Rom. 4. 3, 4, 5. For to whom righteousnesse is imputed of grace through faith, he is not justified by workes before God: And contrariwise whosoever is justified by workes, to him the reward of righteousnesse is not impu­ted of grace, but rendred as a due and deserved debt, ver. 4. To Abra­ham righteousnesse was imputed of grace through faith, vers. 3. and 5. and therefore though hee abounded with workes, yet hee was not justified by workes, verse 2. or inherent righteousnesse, but by faith without workes.Of David.

Not David: for hee though a man according to Gods owne heart, [Page 211] walking before God 1 King. 3 6. in truth and righteousnesse and in uprightnesse of heart: yet he desireth the Lord that he would not enter into judge­ment with him, for if hee did, not onely himselfe, but no man living Psal. 143. 2. could be justified: for himselfe, he maketh this confession, as De tempore serm. 49. Augu­stine understandeth him, nam me invenies reum, si in judicium intraveris mecum, for thou shalt finde me guilty, if thou shalt enter into judge­ment with me. And therefore he places his blessednesse or justification, in the not imputing of sinne, and imputing of righteousnesse without workes, Psal. 32. 1, 2. Rom. 4. 6, 7. and professeth, Psal. 71. 16. I will remember thy righteousnesse onely.Of Paul.

Not Paul: for he, though he knew nothing by himselfe, yet profes­seth that he was not thereby justified, 1 Cor. 4. 4. though hee had lived after his conversion in all good conscience before God, Act. 23. 1. though herein he did exercise himselfe to have alwayes his conscience Act. 24. 16. [...], cleare and without offence towards God and man: yet in the question of justification he renounceth all his righteousnesse Phil. 3. 8, 9. inherent, that he might be found in Christ indued with his righteousnesse. And [...]o these we might adde, Iob, Esay, and Daniel, who, as well as the former,Of Iob, Esay, and Daniel. had that righteousnesse which is à Domino, I meane, righteousnesse in­herent, but were not justified thereby, see Iob, 9. 2, 3. 15. 20. 10. 15. 42. 6. Esai. 6. 1. 5. Dan. 6. 7. 18.

§. XVI. Our foureteénth argument: The righteousnesse by which14 because it is not the righ­teousnesse of one. we are justified, is the righteousnesse and obedience of one, and but of one, Rom. 5. 18, 19. Inherent righteousnesse is not of one, but of so many as are indued therewith. Therefore inherent righteousnesse is not that whereby we are justified.

CAP. IX. The severall proofe of our assertion, that wee are justified by that righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him.

§. I.

_ [...]Ow I am to prove severally our assertion: thatArg. 1. because God accepte [...]h Christs righte­ousnesse in our behalfe. we are justified by Christs righteousnesse. And first, I prove it by that argument, which Bellar­mines useth against De i [...]stif. l. 2 c. 5. §. quartarati [...] Osiander, what righteous­nesse God accepteth in our behalfe, by that we are justified: The righteousnesse of Christ which he performed for us in the dayes of his flesh, God accepteth in our behalfe: otherwise, saith hee, why did the Sonne of God take our flesh upon him, why did hee humble himselfe to become obedient untill death, &c. Therefore by [Page 222] the righteousnesse of Christ performed in his manhood, wee are ju­stified, &c.

§. II. Hereunto I adde a second out of the same place De iustif. l. 2. c. 5. §. quòd vero. for Bellar­mine, though he holdeth against Osiander, that wee are not justified by the essentiall righteousnesse of the Godhead: yet he confesseth that the Lord accepteth of no righteousnesse as a satisfaction for sinne, but thatArg. 2. God ac­cept [...]th it alone as being of insinit [...] va­l [...]. which is of infinite value: such is the righteousnesse of Christ onely in regard of the dignity of his Person, being the true God, the great God, God above all, blessed for ev [...]rmore; therefore by his righteous­nesse only we are justified: but of this see more Lib. [...]. c. 7. §. 3. in the seventh Chapter here I argue thus: what righteousnesse the Lord accepteth as a full satisfa­ction for our sinnes, by that we are justified:

The righteousnesse of Christ the Lord accepteth as a full satisfa­ction for our sinne, Therefore by Christs righteousnesse we are justified.

By Christs righteousnesse, I say, imputed, and accepted of God in our behalfe. The assumtion is thus proved. What righteousnesse is of i [...]finite value, that, and that alone the Lord accepteth as a full satis­faction for our sinnes.

The righteousnesse of Christ is of infinite value, as being the righ­teousnesse of God, as it is often called.

It therefore, and by it alone the Lord accepteth, as a full satis­faction for our sinnes.

§. III. My third argument shall be from those places, wherein ei­ther it is said, that our righteousnesse is in Christ, Esai. 45. 24, 25. and that we are righteous in him, 2 Cor. 5. 21. Phil. 3. 8, 9. or our Savi­our Christ himselfe is said to bee our righteousnesse. Ieremy prophecy­ing of the Messias the righteous Branch, whom God would raise to David, saith; In his daies Iuda shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell sase­ly: and this is the name whereby he shall be called, IEHOVAH our righteousnesse, Ier. 23. 6. and the very same prophecy is repeated, I [...]r. 33. 16. that the Branch of righteousnesse should grow up to David, in whose dayes Iuda should be saved, and Ierusalem shall dwell safely: and he who shall call her, that is, Ierusalem his Church (for so it ought to be read) is IEHOVAH our righteousnesse, 1 Cor. 1. 30. But of him ye are in Christ Iesus, who of God is made unto us, wisedome, and righteousnesse, and sanctification, and redemption; where Christ is said to bee made our righteo [...]snesse. To this D [...] [...] l. 2. c. 10. Bellarmine answereth: that Christ is rightly called our righteousnesse, for two causes: first, because he is the efficient cause of our justice. For as God in the Psalmes is called our strength and our Salvation, because it is God that strength­neth and saveth us, and in this place, as Christ is said to bee made our wisedome and redemption, because he maketh us wise and redeemethR [...]ply to Bellar­ [...]nes [...]st an­swere, that Christ is called [...] [...], b [...]cause [...] is the au­thour of it. us: So Christ is called our right [...]ousnesse, because he maketh us just, viz. by infusion of righteousnesse.

§. IV. Reply, It is true, that Christ, when hee doth sanctifie us by his Spirit, is the Author of inherent righteousnesse in us: but this is [Page 223] that which followeth in the text, that he is our Sanctification. These two benefits, as they are here distinguished, so they ought not to bee confounded. Bernard in a Sermon of his doth oftentimes very ele­gan [...]ly goe over these foure unctions, as he calleth them, distinguishing justification and sanctification, as we doe: Christ, saith hee, was made unto us wisedome, in preaching; justice, in absolution of sinnes; sanctification, in his conversation; redemption, in his passion—the shadow of thine ignorance hee hath driven away with the light of his wisedome, and by that righteousnesse which is of faith hee hath loosed the cords of sinne, freely justifying the sinner: by his godly conversati­on he hath given a forme of life, and by his death he hath given a price of satisfaction—he freeth from errour (by his wisedome) he covereth faults (by his righteousnesse) he giveth merits (that is ability of working well) by his life, and rewards by his death—enlighten mine eyes O Lord that I may bee wise, remember not the sinnes of my youth and mine ignorances, and I am just: lead me O Lord in the way, and I am holy: but unlesse thy bloud mediate for mee I am not safe—hee was made unto us of God wisedome, teaching prudence; justice, forgiving sinnes, &c. They onely are wise who are instructed by his doctrine, they onely just who of his mercie have obtained pardon of sinne, those onely temperate or holy, who study to imitate his life; they onely vali­ant, who imitate his patience.

§. V. And that they are here to bee distinguished, appeareth byRighteousnesse here to be di­stinguished from Sancti­fication. this consideration: that in this text all the benefits, which we have by Christ besides our election, which is also noted in the first words (of him yee are in Christ) are reduced unto foure heads. For of God wee were elected in Christ, who of God is made unto us, wisedome, in our vocation; righteousnesse, in our justification; holinesse in our Sancti­fication; full redemption Ephes. 1. 14. 4. 30. Rom. 8. 23. Luk. 21. 28. in our glorification: that so we may learne not to boast in our selves 1 Cor. 1. 31., but to ascribe the whole glory of our sal­vation and of all the degrees thereof, to Iesus Christ our alone and perfect Saviour. To the like purpose In [...]ocum. Theophylact observeth the order here used by the Apostle: first, he exempteth from errour, and making men wise instructeth them to the knowledge of God: then hee giveth the pardon of sinnes: and by his holy Spirit indueth them with holi­nesse: and then granteth perfect deliverance from all evils, which hee calleth redemption, as Chrysostome also and [...]. O [...]cumenius who observe the same order. And likewise Theoderet, he gave you true wisedome, he gave unto you 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 Col. 2. 3. wisedome and knowledge, he calleth 2 Thes. 2. 14. us by the Gospell, his doctrine Deut. 4 9. 1 Cor. 2. 6, 7. being our wisedome, and making us wise 2 Tim. 3. 15. unto salvation: as our holy Priest hee justifieth us, his sacrifice Rom. 5 9 19. and his obedience, being our righteousnesse: as our gracious and glorious King, being ascended on high to prepare Jo [...]. 14. 2. a place for us, he giveth [Page 224] Ephes. 4. 8. 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 Ioh. 14 3. will come againe to bring us [...] Ephes. 1. 14. Luk. 21. 28. [...], 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: where­ofBell [...]rmines second cause, why Christ is said to be our righteousnesse, because he sa­tisfied for us. 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 Epist. 190. 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 [...]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 ofBellarmines confession overthroweth the popish do­ctrine of iustifi­cation. 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 [Page 225] 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 isArg. 4. because we are iustified by the bloud of Christ and by his obedience. said, that wee are justified by the bloud of Christ, and his obedience. From whence I argue thus:

If we be justifi [...]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 areArg. 5. because by Christs righteouinesse out sinnes are covered. 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 asad Diogn [...]m 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 De iustif. l. 2. cap. 11. 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 consiste [...]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 simi­litudeBellarmines first answere. 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 indowments. And therefore that I may come to the proofe of my assumption, those phra­ses of putting on Christ and his righteousnesse, figured by Iacob his put­ting on of his elder brothers apparell, Gen. 27. of the wedding garment, [Page 226] Mat. 22. 11. of the first or chiefe robe, Luke. 15, 22. of the white garment promised by Christ, Apoc. 3. 18. of the fine linnen cleane and shining, which is the righteousnesse of the Saints. Apoc. 19. 8. (of which place I have spoken before) are most fitly understood of the righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us, and put on as it were by faith.His second answere.

§. XI. In his second answere Bellarmine confesseth, that this simi­litude of garments and that example of the Patriarch Iacob, may after a sound manner bee accommodated to righteousnesse imputed, if it shall bee said, that it behoueth us to put on, or to be clothed with the merits of Christ: that, being after a sort covered with them, we may aske of God pardon of our sinnes: for as I have said before (saith he) Christ alone was able to satisfie for our sins, and indeed in justice did satisfie: and that satisfaction is given and applyed to us, and reputed ours, when weare reconciled unto God and justified. That exam­ple therefore being referred to the righteousnesse of satisfaction for the fault, it may be admitted. But if it be referred to that righteousnesse, whereby wee are formally justified, when of sinners and wicked men we are made just and godly, it is by all meanes to be rejected; seeing it is manifestly repugnant, to the Scrip­tures, to the Fathers, and to reason it selfe. For that one man should satisfi [...] for another, it may easily be conceived: but that one man should be just, because another is just, was never heard of, and is not onely above, but also against reason,

§. XII. Here, as you see, Bellarmine maketh a distinction betwixtReply to Bel­larmines an­swere. the righteousnesse of satisfaction, and that by which wee are formally made just. But what is that righteousnesse of satisfaction? No doubt, that whereby our Saviour satisfied the Law for us; which he was to sa­tisfie, as I have shewed before, not onely in respect of the penalty threa­tened, by his sufferings; but also in respect of the Commandement, by his perfect obedience fulfilling the condition of the promise, Doe this and live. To this, Bellarmine acknowledgeth the similitude of garments and the example of the Patriarch Iacob may fitly be applied: which is as much as wee desire. For this is the whole righteousnesse of justificati­on, wherein the Lord imputing to a beleever the sufferings of Christ, covereth, or not imputeth or forgiveth his sinnes and the punishment thereunto belonging; and imputing unto him the perfect obedience of Christ, accepteth of him as righteousnesse in Christ. For it is most certaine, that to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne, them hee accep­teth as righteous: and that hee imputeth righteousnesse, to whom hee imputeth not sinne, Rom. 4. 6, 7. For as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth, the not imputing of sinne bringeth with it the imputing of righteous­nesse. Neither is it to be doubted, but that the Lord accepteth as well the merits of his obedience, as of his sufferings. And what is that ju­stice, whereby he saith we are formally made just? no doubt inherent justice, or the righteousnesse of sanctification, by infusion where of sinne is expelled. To this, saith Bellarmine, the similitude of apparell and the example of Iacob cannot be applyed. For though one may satisfie for another: yet one cannot be formally just by the righteousnesse of ano­ther: which never any of us (to my knowledge) affirmed. The more [Page 227] absurd was Bellarmine in thinking so absurdly of us. For because hee confoundeth justification and sanctification, hee would needs beare the world in hand, that wee confounding them also, doe teach, that wee are formally made just by the righteousnesse of another, which is out of us in him. But if justification and sanctification are to be distinguished, as I have proved they must of necessity bee distinguished: then it will appeare manifestly, that, that which Bellarmine calleth the justice of sa­tisfaction, is the whole righteousnesse of justification: and that, by which hee saith wee are formally made righteous, is the righteousnesse of sanctification. Now wee are well content, that the righteousnesse whereby wee are sanctified, or formally made righteous, should not be imputative: so that they will confesse, that the righteousnesse of Christs whole satisfaction, whereby wee are justified before God, is imputed unto us: which they must confesse, or else they cannot bee saved. Here therefore we may sing the triumph, and say; Magna est veritas & prae­valet.

And thus have I aboundantly proved, that the righteousnesse ofConclusion. God, whereby wee are justified, is not any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us: but onely the righteousnesse of Christ our Saviour, which is out of us in him, as being proper to his person; though by imputation communicated to all that truly beleeve in him.

CHAP. X. Bellarmines eight allegations De iustif. lib. 2. cap. 3. to prove justification by inherent righteousnesse, answered.

§. I.

Bellarmines first allegation out of Rom. 5. 17. 18, 19. NOw I am to examine Bellarmines proofes. And first hee alleageth Rom. 5. 17, 18, 19. out of which place he would prove, that to bee justified by Christ is not to be accounted or pronounced just, but to be tru­ly made and constituted just by obtaining inherent righteousnesse; and that, a righteousnesse not unper­fect, but absolute and perfect: for, that to justifie, in this place, is to makejust, and not to pronounce just, appeareth; first, out of those words, verse 19. many shall be constituted or made just, unto which allegation I have heretofore answered in his due Lib. 2. c. 5. §. 1. place so much as concerneth the signification of the word, and have main­tained the exceptions of Calvin and Chemnitius, Ibid. §. [...]. 3, &c against his cavils. His second reason is from the Antithesis of Adam unto Christ. For thus, saith he, the Apostle writeth. As we are made unjust through the disobedience of Adam, so we are made just through the obedience of Christ.

[Page 228] But it is certaine, that through Adams disobedience we are made un­just by injustice inherent, and not Non in iusti­tia Adaminobis imputata. imputed:

Therefore through the obedience of Christ we are made just by righ­teousnesse inherent, and not imputed.

Answ. Wee confesse, that as from the first Adam we receive inherent corruption in our carnall generation: so from the second Adam wee receive inherent grace in our spirituall regeneration, but this is not our justification, but our sanctification, whereof the Apostle speaketh not in this place, whereas therefore he assumeth, that wee are made unjust through Adams disobedience by inherent injustice onely not im­puted, I deny the assumption, and returne the argument upon the Ad­versary.

As we are made sinners, that is, guilty of sinne and damnation by Adams disobedience or transgression: so wee are justified, that is, not onely absolved from the guilt of sinne, and dam­nation, but also accepted as righteous u [...]to salvation, by the obedience of Christ.

But wee are made sinners, that is guilty of sinne and dam­nation by imputation of Adams disobedience, or trans­g [...]ession:

Therefore wee are justified, that is, not onely absolved from the guilt of sinne, but also accepted as righteous, by imputation of Christs obedience.

As touching the proposition: that the word sinners doth in this place signifie guilty of sinne, and obnoxious to condemnation; it is testified by In locum. Chrysostome, [...], what then is the word sinners in this place? it seemeth to mee, that it is to be subject or obnoxious to punishment, and condemned to death: by Oecumenius [...], and by Theophylact likewise, sinners; that is obnoxious to punishments and guilty of death, which exposition is plainely confirmed by the verses going before, where the same opposition betweene the first and second Adam being made, the [...]ormer part is expressed in these words, that the [...], or guilt of Adams transgression came upon his posterity [...] unto condem­nation, especially, vers. 16. and 18.

§. II. The assumption, though gaine-said by Bellarmine in this placeWhether A­dams sinne bee imputed. yet is taught not only by other Papists, who fully contradict Bellarmines Assumption but elsewhere also by Bellarmine himselfe. For Durandus, Controv. a. de orig. pe [...]cat. Pighius, In R [...]m. 5. in opuse. de lap­su [...]ominis & orig. peccat. c. 6. Catharinus, doe hold originall sinne to be nothing else, but the guilt of Adams fall, or the disobedience of Adam imputed unto us, which opinion also Occam professeth, that he would hold, if he were not hindered by the authority of the Fathers. Yea, saith De amiss. gra­tiae & stat. pec. l. 5. c. 16. Bellarmine it see­meth to have beene the opinion of some of the ancient, as 2 Sen [...]. dist. 30. Peter Lombard, reporteth. I [...] refuting this opinion Bellarmine justly findeth fault with them, that they De amiss. gra­tiae & [...]. pec­ca [...]. l. 5. c. 17. held originall sinne to be nothing else, but the guilt of Adams disobedience imputed, it being also the depravation of our na­ture following thereupon. But in that they say, originall sinne is the dis­obedience [Page 229] of Adam imputed unto us, that he doth approve. For Adam alone did ind [...]ed commit that sinne by actuall will. Ibid. §. itaque. but to us it is communica­ted by generation eo modo quo communicari potest id quod transiit, ni­mirum per imputationem, after that manner whereby that may be commu­nicated which is transcient and gone, to wit by imputation. Omnibus enim imputatur, &c. for it is imputed to all who are borne of Adam, because wee all being then in the loynes of Adam, when hee sinned, in him and by him wee sinned. Yea, and farther hee rightly disputeth, Ibid. c. 18. Reatus cum sit relatio conse­quens actionem, qua ratione fieri potest, ut existat in eo, qui non est particeps actio­nis [...] sio ba­bitualis, nisi precesserit actu­ali [...], ne in [...]elligi qu [...]dem potest. that if Adams sinne were not ours by imputation, neither the guilt of it, nor the corrupti­on following upon it, had belonged to us. ▪This assertion of Bellarmine confirmeth our assumption and contradicteth his own, alleaging that wee are made sinners through the disobedience of Adam by injustice inherent, and not imputed: which also he contradicteth in other pla­ces. For he granteth De amissi. gra­tiae & s [...]atu peccat. l. 4. c. 10. the sinne of Adam so to be imputed to all his poste­rity, as if they all had committed that sinne, and to the same purpose citeth Bernard Serm. de Domi­nica. 1. po [...]t octa­vas Epipha [...]iae.. Ours is Adams fault, because though in another, yet we sin­ned; and to us it was imputed by the just, though secret judgement of God. And againe, De [...]. & st at. pecl. 4. c. 12. § est alia [...]x Anselm de con­ceptu. c. 7. Virg. & 10. & ex [...]h, in 1. 2. q. 81. art. 1. & ex Scot [...] Du­rando, &c. in 2. sent. dist. 51.: taking upon him to prove that the propagation of sinne may bee defended without maintaining the propagation or traduction of the soule: he saith, that nothing else is required to the tradu­ction of sinne, but that a man be descended from Adam by true and ordinary generation. For generation Ibid. §. porro vere. not being of a part, but of the person, or whole man (for homo generat hominem) therefore the person descending from Adam (though his soule be from God) was in the loynes of Adam, and being in him originally, as in the roote, in him, and with him hee sinned; the actuall sinne of Adam being communicated unto him by imputatio [...]. For as Augustine saith, definita est seutentia, &c. it is a resol­ved case by the Apostle, that in Adam we all sinned.

§. III. But what shall wee say to the inherent corruption, whichWhether origi­nall corrupt [...]on be traduced from Adam. Adam by his transgression contracted? By this assertion, it seemeth not to be traducted otherwise, than as the fruit and consequent of the actuall disobedience: which was the opinion of Pighius and Catharinus For as Adam by his first transgression, which was the sinne of mankind, contracted not onely the guilt of death, but also the corruption of his nature, being both a privation of originall righteousnesse, and also an evill disposition and pronenesse to all manner of sinne, which is that macula peccati remaining in the sinner after the act is gone: so wee ha­ving sinned in Adam are not onely made guilty of death, and void of o­riginall righteousnesse; but also are defiled with that habituall disposi­tion and pronenesse to all manner of sinne. So that, according to this assertion, it may be defended, that nothing in our generation is com­municated unto us with the humane nature but the disobedience of Adam, which is communicated by imputation. As for the guilt of death and the inherent coruption, they are not derived from Adam, but con­tracted by our sinning in him. And hereunto we may apply Bellarmines distinction De amiss. gra. & statu pec. l. 5. c. 17. of sinne so properly called: that it is either a voluntary transgression, or that blemish which remaineth in the soule, caused and [Page 230] contracted by the transgression, being of the same nature with it, diffe­ [...]ing no otherwise from it, than as heat from the act of heating. For in the former sense originall sinne is the voluntary trangression of Adam imputed unto us, and is one and the same in all men; in Adam actuall and personall, in us originall. For onely he by actuall will committed it, but to us it is communicated, after that manner, by which, that which is past and gone, may bee communicated, to wit, by imputation. In the latter sense it is the corruption inherent contracted and caused, as in Adam by his personall sinne, so in us by our sinning originally in him, which though it bee alike and equall in all, yet it is every mans owne.

§. IV. But supposing originall sinne, according to the received [...] the transgr [...]ssion be after the same mann [...]r communicated. opinion, to be wholly communicated unto us from Adam in our gene­ration: yet we must distinguish betwixt Adams first transgression or actuall disobedience, which we call his [...]all; and the corruption or de­pravation of his nature, which thereupon followed. For though we be partakers of both, yet not after the same manner. Of the transgression we can be no otherwise partakers than by imputation. For Adams trans­gression being an action, and actions continuing, or having a being, no longer than they are in doing, cannot bee traducted or transmitted from Adam to his posterity. But the corruption being habituall, is de­rivable by propagation. Now the Apostle, Rom. 5. speaketh of Adams actuall disobedience once committed by him, by which he saith we are made sinners, that sinne of his being communicated unto us by impu­tation; and not of the corruption thereupon following. So by the like reason we are made just by the obedience of Christ, which hee perfor­med for us in the daies of his flesh, which can no otherwise be commu­nicated unto us, than by imputation.

Object, Yea, but wee are truly made sinners by the disobedience of Adam, and truly made righteous by the obedience of Christ. Answ. As we are truly made sinners by imputation of Adams disobedience; so we are as truly made righteous by imputation of Christs obedience. Iust. Yea, but we are made sinners by injustice inherent through Adams disobedience, and therefore wee are made just by inherent justice, through [...]he obedience of Christ. Answ. We are not made sinners in re­spect of inherent justice by Adams disobedience formally, as De iustif. l. 2. c 9 §. Quartum. Bellarmine saith, (Inobedientia Adami nos cons [...]ituit peccatores, non formaliter sed [...]) for that only is imputed, but by the corruption which followeth and is caused by that transgression, committed by Adam, and imputed to us. In like manner, wee are not made just in respect of inherent ju­stice, by the obedience of Christ, whether active or passive formal­ly, for that is onely imputed; but by the graces of the Spirit me­rited by the obedience of Christ, performed by him, and imputed to us.

§. V. Thus then standeth the comparison betwixt the first and theComparison betwixt th [...] first and se­cond Adam. second Adam. As by the actuall disobedience or transgression of the first Adam all his off spring were made guilty of sinne, and subject to [Page 231] death, his disobedience being not inherent in them, but imputed to them, as if it were their owne, because they were in him originally: so by the obedience of the second Adam all his Heb. 2. 13. off spring are or shall be justified from sinne and accepted to life, his obedience not being in­herent in them, but imputed to them, as if it were their owne, because by faith they are in him. And this is our justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse. And further as Adams fall deserved, as a just punishment, the defacing of Gods image by inherent corruption in all his posterity, to whom the same corruption is by naturall generation transfused: so the obedience of Christ merited, as a just reward, the re­storing of Gods image in us by inherent righteousnesse in all the faith­full, into whom the said righteousnesse is in their Spirituall regenerati­on infused. And this is our Sanctification by the Spirit of Christ, of which the Apostle speaketh not untill the next Chapter, where he shew­eth, that our justification is alwayes accompanied with Sanctification. In a word from either of the two Adams we receive two things, which are contrary each to other. From the first Adam, his disobedience is communicated unto us by imputation, whereby wee are made sinners, that is, guilty of sinne and damnation; which guilt is opposite to justifi­cation, and secondly the corruption, which he contracted, is transfu­sed unto us by carnall generation, which corruption is contrary to san­ctification. From the second Adam, his obedience is communicated to us by imputation, whereby wee are constituted just, that is, absolved from the guilt of sinne and damnation, and accepted in Christ as righ­teous and as heires of eternall life which is the benefit of justification, and secondly, the graces of his holy Spirit, which hee received without measure, are in some measure as it were by influence infused into us by our spirituall regeneration.This place al­leaged by Bel­larmine maketh not for him, but most strongly a­gainst him.

§. VI. Whereas therefore hee would prove out of this place, that justification is the obtayning of righteousnesse inherent. I answer, first, that to be constituted sinners by Adams disobedience, is to be made guil­ty of sinne and subject to death and damnation: and so contrariwise, to be constituted just or justified by Christs obedience, is to be acquitted from the guilt of sinne and damnation, and to bee accepted unto life: secondly, that wee are constituted sinners by Adams personall sinne, which is not inherent in us, but once, and that long since committed by him: so we are justified by Christs personall obedience, which is not in­herent in us, but long since performed by him: thirdly, that as wee are truely made sinners by imputation of Adams transgression which is not inherent in us: so we are truly made just by imputation of Christs obedience, which is not inherent in us: fourthly, that the disobedience of the first Adam is imputed to all his children, because they were in him originally, as the root; so in him they sinned, and therefore when he did fall, they fell: so the second Adams obedience is imputed to all the sonnes of God, because by faith they are in him, as his members, the head and the members making but one body. This place therefore al­leaged by Bellarmine, maketh wholly against him. Neither doth that, [Page 232] which he addeth concerning persect, absolute and abundant righteous­nesse communicated unto us by Christ, agree to that righteousnesse, which is in herent in us, unperfect and but begunne, as being the first fruits of the Spirit; but to the absolute and most perfect righteousnesse of Christ communicated unto us by imputation. On this place I have insisted the longer, because, though Bellarmine alleage it as a prime place to prove his purpose; is notwithstanding a most pregnant testimony to prove justification by impu [...]ation of Christs righteousnesse, as hereafter shall further appeare.Lib. [...]. c. 2. § 1. Testimome 2. Rom. 3. 24.

§. VII. His second Testimony is, Rom. 3. 24 which I have al­so heretofore fully proved to make wholly against him, Lib. 3. Cap. 3. & 4.

His third allegation is out of [...] Cor. 6. 11. to which also have I answered Lib. 2. c. 3. §. 3. Testimonie 3. 1 Cor. 6. 11. before I where acknowledged the benefit of baptisme to be here descri­bed, according to that which here he alleageth out of Chrys [...]st. Ambrose, Theophylact and others which is noted first, generally in the word wash­ed, and then particularly in the words Sanctified, and Iustified; the for­mer, signifying the cleansing of the Soule from the pollution of sinne; the latter, from the guilt of sinne: the former wrought by the Spirit of our God; the latter, by faith in the name of the Lord Iesus. And these two distinct benefits the Scriptures ascribe to Baptisme, viz. remission of sinnes, and regeneration, as I shewed before. And therefore these benefits which the Holy Ghost hath accurately distinguished, ought not to be either ignorantly or Sophistically confounded. And whereas he saith, that these benefits (as here it is noted) are wrought by the invo­cation of the name of Christ, and by the power of his Spirit, neither of which is needfull to justification, by declaration or imputation: he saith, he knoweth not what. For to justification (as we conceive of it) to be granted and sealed in Baptisme, both these are as needfull; as to Sancti­fication. For to the obtayning of the remission of sinnes to be sealed unto us in Baptisme, invocation of the name of God is required, Act. 22. 16. and it is the Spirit of Adoption, which by Baptisme sealeth unto us the remission of our sinnes.

§. VIII. His fourth testimony is Tit. 3. 1. 6, 7. whence hee argu­ethTestimony 4. Tit. 3. 5, 6, 7. to this effect:

Rege [...]ration [...]r ren [...]vation is formally wrought by some inherent gift: Iustisication according to the Apostle in this place is regeneration [...]r renovation. Th [...]refore justification is formally wrought by some inhe­rent gift.

The proposition, which no man denieth, he laboreth to prove by three arguments, which he might very well have spared; but that he would have the world to thinke, that we deny sanctification to be inherent. The assumption (which do we deny) he proveth by his own authority; alleaging, that in the fifth and the sixth verses, The Apostle describeth justifi­cation (which indeed he doth not) to be regeneration and ren [...]vation wrough [...] in us out of the bounty of God by the laver of Baptisme, and effusion of the holy Ghost. This we deny: first, because the word justifie, never in the [Page 233] whole Scriptures is used in that sense: secondly, here the Apostle in plaine termes saith, that we are justified and saved not by works of righ­teousnesse, whereby is excluded all justice inherent, but by Gods grace. How then doth he prove it? because in these words, vers. 7, that being justified by his grace wee might bee heires in hope of eternall life, the Apostle rendreth a reason, why God by the laver, and by the Holy Ghost did regenerate and renew us, and saith the cause was, that being justified, that is, saith he, that being by that regeneration and renovation ju­stified, we might Esfici mere­amur. deserve to be made heires of the kingdome, and of life ever­lasting. Answ. This glosse, maketh the Apostle not like himselfe, but like a popish merit-monger, corrupteth the text, which indeed doth paralell that, 1 Cor. 6. 11. shewing how men converted from Gentilisme to Christianity shuld be exhorted to the performance of Christian duties. For howsoever whiles they were Gentiles, they were addicted to many vices and sinnes: yet after they were called (which the Apostle expresseth thus; after that the bounty and humanity of God was manifested, viz. by the preaching of the Gospel) God, not out of any desert of theirs, but out of his meere mercy, saved them by Baptisme (as Saint 1 Pet. 3. 21. Peter also spea­keth) that is, justified them, for that is the salvation we have here, to bee intitled to salvation, or saved in hope; that being justified by his grace, that is, (as he said before) by his undeserved mercy, they should be made heires, according to hope of eternall life, that is, they might be saved in hope. Of this sentence therefore stripped of its amplifications, as it were its garments, the naked substance is this. But after we were called, God by Baptisme justified us, that being justified by his grace, we might be saved in hope. The amplifications which are added, are to set forth and describe Baptisme unto us: which as hee had noted to be the seale Rom. 4. 11. of that righteousnesse which is by faith, when he saith, that God justified or saved us by it: so he calleth it the laver of regene­ration and of the renovation wrought by the Spirit, which God hath plentifully bestowed upon us. So that these words are not a descrip­tion of justification, as Bellarmine dreameth waking, but of Baptisme. And they are added according to the purpose of the Apostle in this place, as arguments to move men to Christian duties. Why? Because Baptisme, as it was a seale unto them of their justification; so also a Sacrament of their regeneration and renovation of the Spirit; which Spirit God hath poured forth plentifully upon the faithfull: which he speaketh to this end, that the faithfull which are Baptized, should make this use of their Baptisme, not onely as of a seale to assure them of their justification and salvation: but also to be a Sacrament, token, memori­all of their regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit plenti­fully poured upon them. (To which purpose the Apostle telleth the Rom. 6. 4. 6. Romans, that so many as were baptized into Christ, were baptized in­to the similitude of Christs death and resurrection) whereupon the Apostle inferreth in the next words vers. 8. this is a faithfull saying, and these things I will thou shouldest affirme and confirme, that they which have beleeved in God, ought to bee carefull precedents of good [Page 234] workes. The Apos [...]le therefore doth not say (as Bellarmine maketh him speake) that we are justified, or saved, or made heires of salvation by re­generation or renovation, and much lesse that thereby we merit our in­heritance: but that God hath justified, or saved us Sacramentally by Baptisme, which as it is the seale of our justification and salvation; so it is also the laver of regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spi­rit, that being justified by his grace we might, according to hope, bee made heires of eternall life. For howsoever we are neither justified nor saved, nor made heires of eternall life, by our Sanctification: yet San­ctification is, both the way, wherein from our justification wee are to walke Ephes. 2. 10. unto glorification. For God hath chosen us to salvation through the sanctification of the Spirit, 2 Thes. 2. 13. and therefore sanctification, as it is a necessary consequent of our justification, so it is a necessary fore-runner Heb. 12. 14. of glorification, a necessary marke and cognizance of all that are justified and to be saved. And therefore ou [...] Saviour saith, Act. 26. 18. that by faith in him wee receive remission of sinnes, and inheritance among them that are sanctified and so the Apostle also, Act. 20. 32.

§. IX. His fifth testimony is, Heb. 11. and some other places of theTestimonie 5. Heb. 11. &c. where some men have been absolutely cal­led iust. Scripture, which doe give testimony to some men, that they were tru­ly, and perfectly just, and that not by an imputative justice, but inhe­rent: his reason is, because the Scriptures would not call them abso­lutely just, if they were not absolutely just. Answ. To omit, that it is one thing to be absolutely called just, and another to be just absolutely and perfectly: I answere, that the faithfull, who are commended in the Scriptures for righteous, were righteous, by a twofold justice, both im­putative and inherent. The former, being the righteousnesse of justifi­cation; the latter, of sanctification: the former, absolute and perfect; the latter, inchoated and unperfect. By the former they were justified before God: in respect of the latter, though they were also called just, yet they were not justified thereby: that is, they were neither absolved thereby from their sinnes past, nor intitled to the kingdome of heaven; as may appeare by all those Arguments which before I produced against justification by inherent righteousnesse. As for those examples, which hee alleageth out of Heb. 11. (which is the Chapter of saith,) namely of Abel, vers. 4. and Noah, vers. 7. &c. it is evident, that they were justified by the righteousnesse which is of faith (as is expresly said of Noah, vers. 7.) that is, by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith, and imputed to them that beleeve: for the righteousnefse, which is of faith, is imputative, Rom. 4. 5. And when it is said, that without faith they could not possibly have pleased God, Heb. 11. 6. it is plainely intimated that by faith they pleased God, and that they being besore justified by faith, brought forth the fruits of faith acceptable unto God. by which their faith was approved. But as they were just by imputati­on, that is to say, justified; so also by infusion, that is, sanctified. For the justifying faith, being a lively and effectuall faith, purifieth Act. 15. 9. the heart, and worketh by Gal. 5. 6. love and may be demonstrated by Ia [...]. 2. 18. good works. [Page 235] 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.Bellarmines ob­iect. that some men have been perfect.

§. 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. F