A treatise of iustification· By George Dovvname, Doctor of Divinity and Bishop of Dery

A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICA∣TION. (Book 2)

THE SECOND BOOKE: That Justification and Sanctification are not to bee confounded. (Book 2)

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 Doctrine* 1.1 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 con∣troversie 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 sa∣ving 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 justificati∣on, which are good workes; concerning which are two maine questi∣ons.

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 con∣found* 1.2 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 ha∣bituall, 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 morti∣fication, 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,* 1.3 whether to justifie doth signifie to make righteous by infusion of righ∣teousnesse, which is to sanctifie. Secondly, whether remission of sinne be the utter deletion and abolition of sinne by infusion of righteous∣nesse. In both the Papists hold the affirmative. The former, which is a most pernicious errour, they ground upon the like notation of the La∣tine words to justifie and to sanctifie. That as to sanctifie is to make ho∣ly 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 a 1.4 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 out∣wardly by declaration, as b 1.5 Bellarmine himselfe saith; then much more by imputation: even as we were made sinners by Adams actuall trans∣gression, and as Christ was made sinne, that is, a sinner for us. For

even as by Adams disobedience wee were made sinners and guilty of damnation, his transgression being imputed to us: so c 1.6 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 d 1.7 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 Testa∣ment, and of the Greeke in the New.

§. IV. The Hebrew root Tsadaq, from whence those verbs do spring,* 1.8 which signifie to justifie, is by the Septuagint translated, sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to be just, blamelesse or pure. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to be just, as Iob 9. 2. 15. 20. 10. 15. 15. 14. 25. 4. 33. 12. 34. 5. 35. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be blamelesse, as Iob 22. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be pure, as Iob 4. 17. sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the same sense, to be just, as being a translation not of a passive, but of a Neuter, as Gen. 38. 26. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thamar is more just than I. So Psal. 19. 10. j•…•…dicia Dei, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Psal. 51. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ and so Rom. 3. 4. Psal. 143. 2. Esai. 43. 9. cum 41. 26. Ezek. 16. 52. In Ecclus. 18. 1. De∣us solus justificabitur, the Greeke is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 first thine iniquities, that thou maist bee justified, Esai. 45. 25. in the Lord all the seed of Israel shall be justified.

The passive is onely once used Dan. 8. 14. where it is said that the* 1.9 sanctuary after 2300. dayes shall bee justified, that is expiated or purged.

In the second conjugation it signifieth to justifie, but not as the word* 1.10 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 righte∣ous, as Ier. 3. 11. Ezek. 16. 51, 52.

In the third conjugation it signifieth to justifie in that sense that the* 1.11 question of justification: And it is verbum forense, a judiciall word used in Courts of judgement, which usually is opposed to condem∣ning. And it signifieth to absolve and to acquit from guilt, and accep∣ting 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 they* 1.12 come unto judgement that the Iudges may judge them, then they shall justifie the righteous, and condemne the wicked. Prov. 17. 15. Hee* 1.13 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 this* 1.14 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

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. Sa∣lomon desireth the Lord that he would judge his servants, condemning the wicked to b•…•…ing his way upon his head, and justifying the righte∣ous, to give him according to his righteousnesse. Esai. 50. 8. Christ* 1.15 for the comfort of his members argueth, as the Apostle doth to the* 1.16 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,* 1.17 that is, by faith in him shall justifie many, and he shall beare their ini∣quities) and also as our intercessour and advocate, to plead for us sin∣ners 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.* 1.18 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 hea∣ven: and also as they are Embassadours and Ministers of God to pro∣nounce 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 reciprocall* 1.19 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 bee* 1.20 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 in∣herent: 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 in∣herent. 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 justifi∣eth him, by righteousnesse inherent. No more than hee that condem∣neth 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 e 1.21 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 or* 1.22 polluting, that is, making cleane or uncleane, attributed to the priest in

the f 1.23 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 significati∣on 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 g 1.24 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 liarh 1.25, and yet a man may beleeve i 1.26 a lye, which he cannot make true. Thus Rashah signifieth to be wicked, Hirshuah to make wicked by sentence; and so Tsadaq signi∣fieth 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 com∣position, as to glorifie, magnifie, vilifie, nullifie (as Herod k 1.27 did Christ) and so to justifie: for as we are said to justifie l 1.28 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 m 1.29 righte∣ousnesse unto them.

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

§. I.

THE Greeke words, which signifie to justifie and to be* 1.30 justified, are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; from whence are deri∣ved, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifieth justification, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which sometimes also signifieth justification. And of these I am now to speake. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are not in use among the authors of the Greeke tongue, in the sense of justifying or making just. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, saith Suidas, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it signifieth two things; to punish (as being derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which sometimes signifieth punishment) and to thinke right or meet: sometimes, both 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doe signifie to condemne, in the contrary sense to the sacred use of the words: sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifi∣eth onely to thinke, to judge or suppose, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 He∣brew words, which I spake of, importing justification, by these Greeke

words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 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. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used by the Apostle and by the Evangelist Luke,* 1.31 sometimes as the translation of Tsiddiq in Piel, as Luk. 7. 29. the people* 1.32* 1.33 and Publicans 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, justified God. The Lawyer, Luk. 10. 29.* 1.34 willing to justifie himselfe. The Pharisies, Luk. 16. 15. justified them∣selves 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 his* 1.35 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as the translation of Hitsdiq, as alwaies he doth in the questi∣on of justification, and alwayes as the action of God: as Rom. 3. 26.* 1.36 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,* 1.37 the beleeving sinner, that worketh not, Rom. 4. 5. and therefore not by inherent righteousnesse: how then? by imputing righteousnesse with∣out workes, vers. 6. who Rom. 8. 30. whom he calleth he justifieth, name∣ly* 1.38 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 ma∣nifestly 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. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used sometimes as the translation not of the pas∣sive* 1.39 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 be∣fore God, not wise before the king; or as it is usually translated, doe* 1.40 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,* 1.41 but a neuter. And so Apoc. 22. 11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 let him that is* 1.42 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: a 1.43 Luk. 7. 37. who, vers. 29. justified

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 made* 1.44 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 hearers* 1.45 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,* 1.46 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.* 1.47 The rash swearer shall not bee justified, that is, as it is in the Com∣mination of the third Commandement, shall not bee held guitlesse; but most plainely, Chap. 26. the last verse, the huckster shall not bee ju∣stified* 1.48 from sinne, that is, not absolved from sinne nor accepted as righ∣teous. So Act. 13. 38, 39. where most plainely, to be •…•…ustified from sinne,* 1.49 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.* 1.50 6. 7. He that is dead is justified (that i•…•…, as Chrysostome and O•…•…umenius expound it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is freed) from sinne. As these places are plainely repugnant to the Popish sense: so none of the rest, where 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used, doth favour it. For either they import remission of sinnes, and acceptation as righteo•…•…s, as Luk. 18. 14. The Publican who had* 1.51 humbled himselfe and craved pardon, went home justified, that is, ob∣tained pardon, and was accepted as righteous, rather than the Phari∣see, who had justified himselfe: or distinguish betweene justification and sanctification, as 1 Cor. 6. 11. or exclude justification by inherent* 1.52 righteousnesse, as Rom. 3. 20. Rom. 4. 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Gal. 5. 4. Or imply im∣putation,* 1.53 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,* 1.54 17. 3. 11.

§ IV. There remaine these two words, which I mentioned before, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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* 1.55 our sinnes, and was raised againe for our justific•…•…tion, to whom, as it is* 1.56 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 Savi∣our 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 resto∣red to life, as namely by his resurrection, his merits are effectually ap∣plied 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, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the guilt (which is to be supplied out of the sixteenth verse) came upon all* 1.57 men, the offspring of the first Adam, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, unto condemnation: so

by the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of one, whereby hee fulfilled the Law, viz. the second Adam, the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is divers•…•…y used, both in thec 1.58 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 ge∣nerall and indefinitely, as namely where no other word of the like sig∣ni•…•…cation* 1.59 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 lawesd 1.60 or pre∣cepts. For the whole Law, which is called mishmerethe 1.61 Iehovah, the ob∣servation of the Lord, that is, all that the Lord requireth to bee obser∣ved, is often distinguished into three parts:f 1.62 Mitsvoth, whi•…•…h the Sep∣tuagint translate 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Commandements of the morall Law: Mishpatim, which they translate 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the precepts of the judici∣all Law: Chuqqim, which they translate sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and some∣times 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the statutes and ordinances of the Ceremoniall Law. Insomuch that the vulgar Latine for Chuqqim, rendreth many times, even where the 72. have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ceremonias, as Gen. 26. 5. Deut. 4. 8,* 1.63 14, 45. 5. 1, 31. 6. 1. 17. 8. 11. 10. 13. 11. 1. &c. The Apostle Rom. 9. 4. calleth the Morall Law 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Iudiciall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Ceremoni∣all 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and accordingly the precepts of the Ceremoniall Law are called Heb. 9. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The ordinances of divine service, and because they were but externall observations, vers. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, carnall ordinances. Secondly, it signifieth the judgements of God,* 1.64 Apoc. 15. 4. which by the vulgar Latine and others is translated Iudicia. And as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sometimes signifieth the just workes of God which are the acts of his justice, so in the last place some expound 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in that place, then we are thereby to understand the merits of Christ, by which the Saints are justified; which are more fitly resem∣bled by a garment, than either inherent righteousnesse or righteous* 1.65 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 from* 1.66 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

blood of the Lambe. But here the holy Ghost expoundeth the fine lin∣nen, 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 shi∣ning, 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.* 1.67

§. VI. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is a verball derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, either as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sig∣nifieth* 1.68 to be just, in which sense the precepts of God are said to bee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Psalm. 19. 10. or as it signifieth to be justified. In the for∣mer sense 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth that which is just, either as the Law of God prescribing righteousnesse, (so the Law of nature written in the hearts* 1.69 of men is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Rom. 1. 32.) or as the whole righteous∣nesse* 1.70 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 ful∣filled* 1.71 by us) in the likenesse of sinfull flesh, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, all that the Law requireth to justification, might in our nature bee performed* 1.72 and fulfilled. In the latter sense it is once onely used, viz. Rom. 5. 16. in the same signification with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 ne∣ver 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, be∣cause* 1.73 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 ab∣solution 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 re∣mit 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 re∣conciled* 1.74 unto God by his death all one, 2 Cor. 5. 19. to reconcile us un∣to 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.* 1.75 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

that are sanctified, Ioh. 3. 18. He that beleeveth in Christ, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not condemned, that is, as Paul speaketh Act. 13. 39. is justified: but hee* 1.76 that beleeveth not him is condemned already. That, which Paul affir∣meth Rom. 3. 21, 22. now without the Law is manifested the righteous∣nesse* 1.77 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, which* 1.78 beleeveth in him, receiveth remission of sinnes through his name.

§. VIII. Because the whole processe of the justification of a sin∣ner* 1.79 is judiciall, Rom. 8. 33 34., For the sinner summoning himselfe be∣fore the judgement seat of God, as every one must doe that would bee justified; his owne conscience, being rightly informed by the paedago∣gie of the Law, accuseth him, the devill pleadeth against him, the Law convicteth him, and maketh him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, g 1.80 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 h 1.81 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 par∣don 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 i 1.82, 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 al∣so 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 pro∣ceedeth 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. These* 1.83 three degrees of Gods most gracious proceeding with the faithfull, I have set downe, not that there are so many degrees of justification, so

properly called. For the first degree onely is that justification, where∣of 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 justi∣fication: the two first significations thereof assigned by Bellarmine.

§. I.

HAving thus explained the true sense and meaning of* 1.84 these words, which in the holy Scriptures are used to signifie justification: let us now examine the allegati∣ons of the Papists concerning the same. Bellarmine therefore saith a 1.85 that the word justification (meaning the Latine word) is used foure wayes in the holy Scrip∣tures, 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 taken* 1.86 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 b 1.87, and our Rhemists c 1.88 urge it as a principall argu∣ment: 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 Scrip∣tures we did professe to translate the Latine edition, and not the Ori∣ginal Text. Now the word, which in the old Testament is by the vulgar Latine interpreted justificationes, and by the 72. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 sta¦tutes and ordinances of the Ceremoniall Law: insomuch that the vul∣gar Latine in many places, even where the Greek hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, rendreth Ceremonias, a as I shewed before d 1.89; 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 Eliza∣beth* 1.90 are said to have walked in all the Commandements and justifica∣tions of the Lord: where the Greeke word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is the trans∣lation

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 an∣swer, 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 pre∣cepts of the Law are called justifications, because by the observation of them men are justified, is directly contrary to that of the e 1.91 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 they* 1.92 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 nei∣ther are fitly called justifications; (though the Greeke word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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, f 1.93 which notwithstanding doe not justifie him, but us) unlesse they meane, that as by good workes the faithfull, so by righteous comman∣dements and just judgements God is declared and manifested to bee just. And farther, the law of Nature knowne to the Gentiles, is called g 1.94 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 h 1.95 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; Bel∣larmine had no reason to make this the first signification of the word in the Scriptures, for the Hebrew word, which the vulgar Latine transla∣teth sometimes iustificationes, and sometimes ceremonias in the same sense, doth signifie no such matter: and the Greeke, which twice * 1.96 at the most in the Scriptures signifieth justification, doth usually signifie the* 1.97 Law of God, and his statutes and ordinances, but more especially those of the ceremoniall Law, which if they be any where called justificati∣ons, it is to bee imputed to the corrupt translation; and not to the ori∣ginall truth.

§ III. So much of the first signification. The two next, whereof* 1.98 there is no example in the Scriptures, hee hath coined to fit their new∣found distinction of justification it selfe, which they distinguish into the first and the second. The first, when a man of a sinner, is made just by infusion of habituall righteousnesse. The second, when a just man is made more just by practise of good workes. Accordingly justification, saith Bellarmine, in the second place signifieth acquisition of righteous∣nesse, viz. inherent, which is their first justification; and in the third

place incrementum justitiae, the encrease of justice, which is their second justification: which distinction, if it were applied to sanctification, were not to be rejected. For that, which they call their first justification, is the first act of our sanctification, which the Scriptures call •…•…era∣tion: 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 gra∣ces, wherein their justification, which is habituall, consisteth. And that which they call their second justification being actuall, is our new obe∣dience, by which our sanctification is continued and encreased. But to justification it cannot truly be applyed; for first, justification is an action of God, for it is God that doth justifie. Their second justification is their owne act, whereby they being just already make themselves more just. Secondly, justification, as hath been said, is an action of God without* 1.99 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. Third∣ly, 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 significati∣on.* 1.100 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 ad∣dicted, whiles they lived in Gentilisme. Such you were then, saith the Apostle, but now since you gave your names to Christ, you were bap∣tized 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 repre∣sent the inward washing of the soule, both from the guilt and corrup∣tion 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 redemp∣tion,

and the water of sanctification: for by the blood, that is, the me∣rits 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.* 1.101 Our soules being washed with the blood of Christ, according to that in the Nicene Creed, I beleeve one Baptisme for the remission of sinnes: and wee are baptized unto the mortification of sinne, and rising unto holinesse of life, Rom. 6. 3, 4. our soules being washed by the water of the* 1.102 holy Ghost. For wee are baptized into the death of Christ and simili∣tude 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.* 1.103 3. 5. This then is the summe and effect of the Apostles exhortation: that seeing they having given their names unto Christ, had been bapti∣zed into his Name, and were therefore Sacramentally at the least wash∣ed, and consequently both in their owne profession and opinion of o∣thers, 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* 1.104 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,* 1.105 that whom the Lord calleth, hee doth justifie, and whom he doth justi∣fie, them also hee doth glorifie: from thence hee inferreth this conso∣lation, 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 sen∣tence 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, san∣ctification is either included in justification, or left our. Answ. It is left out: for the Apostle setting downe the chaine of the causes of sal∣vation, 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 de∣grees 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 re∣ceive remission of sinnes: thirdly, Glorification, that by faith they may receive the inheritance among them that are sanctified: where sanctifi∣cation is mentioned onely as the cognizance of them that are saved. Againe, sanctification is left out, because it is included, in respect of

the beginning thereof, which is our conversion or regeneration, in vo∣cation: and in respect of the consummation, in glorification: for as sanctification is gloria inchoata, so glorification is gratia consum∣mata.

§. VI. His third testimony is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him* 1.106 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: se∣condly, because to him that beleeveth in Christ, faith, relatively under∣stood, that is, the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith, is im∣puted 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 justifi∣eth a sinner.

CAP. IIII. The third and fourth signification of the word justifi∣cation assigned by Bellarmine.

§. I.

THirdly, saith Bellarmine, justification is taken for increase* 1.107 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 com∣parison of like there is a great unlikenesse: for cale∣faction implyeth a reall mutation and a positive change in the subject from cold to hot: but in justification the change is not reall, but rela∣tive, as before hath beene shewed. Bellarmine therefore must prove, that to justifie doth signifie to make righteous formally by righteous∣nesse inherent, before he can prove that it signifieth the increase of in∣herent justice. But if the former cannot be proved, much lesse the lat∣ter. But yet he bringeth three proofes, such as they be.

§. II. The first Ecclus. 18. 21. Ne verearis usque ad mortem justifica∣ri,* 1.108 qu•…•…niam merces Domini manet in aeternum: feare not to be justified un∣till death for the reward of the Lord adideth for ever. Answ. To omit, that the booke is Apocryphall, which ought not to bee alleaged

in controversies of faith: the testimonie it selfe is vilely depraved. The words in the Originall are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, stay not un∣till death to be justified; or as their own interlinear translation readeth* 1.109 it, ne expectes usque ad mortem justificari, wait not untill death to be justi∣fied: 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: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, whether as Bellarmine here readeth, ne verearis, or as some editions have ne vetéris, hath no affinity with the Originall. But our in∣terpretation, 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 conver∣sion; let nothing hinder thee to pay thy vowes in due season, and de∣ferre not untill death to be justified, or to become just.

§ III. But this testimony Bellarmine urgeth againe in another place,* 1.110 shewing that the place is to bee understood of continuing and procee∣ding in justice, and the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, are as much as cease not. And this he would prove by that which goeth before, be not hindred to pray al∣wayes: where the wise man admonisheth us to increase our justice by continu∣all 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth to cease: secondly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to pray: thirdly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth stay not, or waite not, and not cease not, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to render the vow and not to pray; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 re∣ward'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

great mercy that hee pardoneth the imperfection and iniquity of our good workes; greater, that he accepteth of them in Christ; but grea∣test, that hee graciously rewardeth them: and who knoweth not that eternall life it selfe, which is the reward that endureth for ever, is the* 1.111 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* 1.112 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 significa∣tion 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 con∣curreth 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 manife∣sted by workes, as it is verse 18. Answ. The Apostle doth not speake* 1.113 of justifying faith it selfe, but of the profession thereof, or of saith pro∣fessed 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 decla∣ration of him to bee a man justified before God, two things are requi∣site; the profession of the true faith, and a godly conversation answera∣ble 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 justifice∣tur adhuc, hee that is just let him bee justified still. Answ. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 trans∣lation 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, let him worke righteousnesse; of some Latine editions of the vulgar transla∣tion, which instead of justificetur, read justitiam faciat; and lastly of Cyprian, who rendreth the place thus, justus adhuc justiora faciat. This* 1.114 place therefore doth not speake of the encrease of our justification

before God which cannot bee encreased, and much lesse are wee ex∣horted unto it (for as soone as a man is justified, hee standeth righ∣teous before God in the most perfect righteousnesse of CHRIST, which admitteth no encrease) but of perseverance in righteousnesse. Moreover, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 still, doth not signifie encrease, but continu∣ance.

§ VI. And these were Bellarmine his three first significations of* 1.115 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 can∣not 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 there∣fore 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.* 1.116

§. I.

BVT let us examine Bellarmines disputation concerning the* 1.117 signification of the word Lib. 2. Cap. 3. where alleaging 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 5. 17, 18, 19. to prove justification by inherent righ∣teousnesse, 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 righ∣teousnesse:
• 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 there∣fore 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 thea 1.118 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 con∣demnation, 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to bee constituted just, should not be a judiciall word, as well as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 up∣on

it. For as in the bad it signifieth to convince or condemne, as Gal.* 1.119 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 con∣victed and condemned as sinners, that is, guilty of sinne and damnati∣on: 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 hereafterc 1.120 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 Objecti∣on* 1.121 of Calvin and Chemnitius, proving that to justifie is a judiciall word, signifying to absolve and to pronounce just. Their first reason is, be∣cause 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 an∣sweres: first, That justification is rightly opposed to condemnation; but is not therefore alwayes a judiciall word: for even condemnation it selfe some∣times 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, justifica∣tion 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 signifi∣eth, not to make just by infusion of righteousnesse; but by sentence af∣ter the manner of a Iudge, to absolve from sinne and to pronounce and accept as righteous, as being opposed to condemning, which being re∣ferred 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 sig∣nifie, 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

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 pro∣nouncing 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 ab∣solved from our sinnes, and accepted as righteous in him.

§. III. His second answer is, that although condemnation and justifi∣cation* 1.122 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) under∣stood 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 impu∣tation 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 here∣after* 1.123 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 sinners* 1.124 in themselves, 1 Ioh. 1. 8. Ecclus 7. 20. Therefore

No mortall man can truly be declared or pronounced just in respect of inherent righteousnesse, and consequently none are or can bee justi∣fied by righteousnesse inherent.

§ IIII. The testimony of Augustine is falsified. For disputing* 1.125 against the errour of the Pelagians, who imagined that originall sinne was not propagated from Adam, but that imitation onely maketh sin∣ners by Adam: hee inferreth, that then by the same reason onely imi∣tation maketh just by Christ. As though either Adam had done no more against us, or Christ for us, than that they had been prime exam∣ples 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 ju∣stification by Christ. First, that whereas to condemnation there con∣curres* 1.126 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) be∣cause 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 Bellar∣mine* 1.127 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 judici∣all 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 exam∣ples, 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 righte∣ousnesse inherent:

Therefore the Greeke word also hath the same signification.

To the assumption Bellarmine answereth, that the Hebrew word proper∣ly 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 outward∣ly by declaration, and also that the Verbe sometimes doth signifie so much. In vaine therefore doe the Papists urge against us the signification

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 of* 1.128 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 Tea∣chers, who justifie many, the vulgar Latine (which is the onely authen∣tique 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 significa∣tion of the word. Yea, but it disproveth, saith Bellarmine, the judiciall sig∣nification so much urged by you. For Teachers doe not justifie after the ma∣ner 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 en∣due 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 other∣wise the justice implyed in the signification of the word, bee after the judiciall sense, not inherent, but imputative. Thus (as I have said be∣fore) 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 un∣to us the merits of Christ, assuring us of our justification and adopti∣on. 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 com∣meth by hearing Rom. 10. 14, 17. and Preachers are said to bee Mini∣sters by whom you beleeve, 1 Cor. 3. 5. Sacraments doe justifie as

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 be∣leever receiving Christ and his righteousnesse unto justification.

§ VII. But the second place is in his conceit more cleare, viz.* 1.129 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 whatd 1.130 Chemnitius saith, Whereas Andradius (saith he) wresteth that sentence of Esay to prove, that to justifie is to en∣due the minde with the quality of inherent justice, it is great impuden∣cie 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 advo∣cates.

§. VIII. Now let us examine those foure words, all which serve to* 1.131 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 Tea∣cher▪ 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 the* 1.132 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 righteous∣nesse, 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 spea∣keth not of his doctrine, but of his knowledge, and that passively un∣derstood; not, for that knowledge whereby he knoweth all things, but

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. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the multitude of the Elect, who beleeve in him: how? by bearing their ini∣quiti•…•…s, that is, the punishment due for their sinnes, his sufferings being imputed to them: if therefore justifying by faith doe prove justificati∣on by works or by inherent righteousnesse, then this word proveth it.

§. IX. The second word is ipse justus: by which word, saith he, is sig∣nified* 1.133 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 there∣fore that righteousnesse, which he performed in his owne person, being both active, and therefore transient, and proper to his person, and there∣fore without us, cannot be imparted to us otherwise than by imputati∣on. 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 rea∣son? 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 do∣ctrine 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 righ∣teous 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* 1.134 serve his Father in the worke of justification, and consequently did justifie men, not by judging, but by ministring, as himselfe saith, Matth. 20. 28. and is therefore called the Minister of Circumcision; that is, of the Iewes. The* 1.135 fourth word and he shall beare their iniquities: which signifieth the manner how Christ by ministring doth justifie; that is, by bearing the burden of our sinnes upon his shoulders; that is, by suffering the punishment due for our

sinnes. Answ. The thing which hee indevoureth to prove, viz. that Christ, as he performed the office of Mediation in the dayes of his flesh, did not justifie us a•…•…ter the manner of a Iudge, is true. But his reasons are not sufficient. Not the former, for he might bee Gods Mi∣nister 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 al∣though Christ did not justifie us after the manner of a Iudge: yet it fol∣loweth 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 iniqui∣ties, 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 san∣ctification 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 dif∣fer 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:* 1.136 and is here impertinently recited to prove the signification of the He∣brew word, being not sufficient to cleare the Greeke. Seeing their owne best editions in stead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as I have shewed before.

§. II. The third and fourth reason, which Bellarmine alleageth out of Calvin and Chemnitius, and answereth them together, are concer∣ning 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 ar∣guments 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 significati∣on 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 under∣stood

to signifie the selfe same thing with the Hebrew and the Greeke: the use and signification whereof in the Scriptures is judiciall, and is ne∣uer used in the Popish sense: wherefore though the use of the word in other authors did favour the Popish conceipt, yet would it not disad∣vantage us: secondly, though the Latine words do signific to make just, (which is all that can be enforced from the signification and compositi∣on 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 inward∣ly by obtaining of righteousnesse inherent, or outwardly after a judici∣all 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 con∣trary 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 righte∣ous,* 1.137 whom to refuse in an ecclesiasticall question, and to appeale to the judge∣ment 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 inter∣pretation 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 be∣nefit 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 can∣not 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

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 advan∣tage to us. For a sinner cannot truely be pronounced just, unlesse he who pro∣nounceth 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. Howbe∣it wee freely confesse, that whom God justifieth, hee also sanctifieth, and that whosoever is in CHRIST IESVS, hee is a new Crea∣ture. 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.* 1.138 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 makea 1.139 wicked, even as the Verbe which signifi∣eth to justifie doth; if you respect the forceb 1.140 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, pronoun∣cing the party guilty, and deputing him to punishment: so when hee justifieth, he maketh just by his sentence, not by infusion of righteous∣nesse, 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 defi∣ling

with sinne, which is to make unholy and uncleane. What dif∣ference therefore is betweene condemning and polluting, the like is be∣tweene justifying and sanctifying. And as condemning and pollu∣ting 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 san∣ctification, from the corruption or pollution of sinne. For God is then* 1.141 said to justifie us, when he absolveth us from the guilt of sinne by impu∣tation 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 mea∣sure from the corruption thereof.

§. II. Iustification is an action of God without us, as also are re∣demption, reconciliation, and adoption, which three benefits in sub∣stance* 1.142 differ not from justification, but are all comprehended under it: the second first being the same in effect with the former part of justifica∣tion, viz. remission of sinnes; and the last being all one with the se∣cond part of justification, which is acceptation of the beleever as righteousnesse in Christ, and as an heire of eternall life, as I have shew∣ed heretofore: for then are wee said to have redemption,c 1.143 when wee have remission of sinnes, then is God said to reconciled 1.144 us unto him∣selfe,* 1.145 when hee doth not impute our sinnes unto us: then hee is said to adopt us, when hee acceptethe 1.146 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,* 1.147 which is in him as the subject, but imputed to us: the matter of sancti∣fication 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, justi∣tia inchoata, a righteousnesse which is but begun in us, and that new obe∣dience, 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 as∣surance* 1.148 thereof there bee, which are the degrees of speciall faith) be∣cause 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, f 1.149 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 mea∣sure of grace received.

§. VI. The forme of justification considered as an action of God, is imputation of Christs righteousnesse: of sanctification, the infusion* 1.150 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 imputing* 1.151 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 in* 1.152 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 righ∣teousnesse 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 pre∣scribed in the Law, but withoutg 1.153 the Law is revealed in the Gospell,* 1.154 the righteousnesse of God, that is to say, of Christ, who is God, appre∣hended 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 justi∣fication 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 perfor∣med by us. But the righteousnesse, by which wee are sanctified, is pre∣scribed 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 sub∣ject,* 1.155 that is, the party justified, as necessary fruits of our redemption and justification. Yea, in the question of justification, wherein is con∣sidered, 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 ash 1.156 dung, that we may bee found in Christ, not having our owne righteousnesse, which is prescri∣bed 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 be∣ing

both that habituall and also actuall righteousnesse and holinesse wherein our sanctification doth consist.* 1.157

§. XI. By our justification wee arei 1.158 entituled to Gods kingdome, that is, saved in hope: by our sanctification we are fitted and prepared for Gods kingdome, into which no uncleanek 1.159 thing can enter. Iustifi∣cation therefore is the right of Gods children to their inheritance. Sanctification is the cognizance and marke of those that shall bee sa∣ved, wherefore our Saviour saith, thatl 1.160 by faith wee have remission of sinnes, and inheritance among them that are sanctified.* 1.161

§. XII. The righteousnesse by which we are justified, is the meri∣torious 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 ju∣stified, 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 one∣ly* 1.162 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 * 1.163 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 * 1.164 cause the holy Ghost in the Scriptures doth never exhort us to justifi∣cation 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 mortifica∣tion,* 1.165 Col. 3. 5. to vivification, Ephes. 4.23,24. to both, Ezek. 18.31. * 1.166

§. XVI. The acts of faith are of two sorts, some tending to justifi∣cation,* 1.167 some to sanctification. The former are immediate, which are * 1.168 called actus eliciti, which it bringeth forth of it selfe, without the medi∣ation of any other grace; that is, to beleeve in Christ, by beleeving to receive him, and by receiving him to justifie the beleever: and there∣fore faith doth justifie alone. The other mediate, which it bringeth * 1.169 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 bym 1.170 love worketh obedience: and therefore it dtoh not sanctifie alone.

§. XVII. Of justification the Apostle treateth in the five first chap∣ters

of the Epistle to the Romanes, of sanctification in the sixth and seventh.

§. XVIII. Our Saviour Christ, the blessed Angels, Adam in his* 1.171 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 sanctifica∣tion* 1.172 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 ve∣ry ground, both of their malitious calumniations against us; and also of their owne damnable errours concerning justification. For as if we also did confound justification and sanctification, they charge us, as if wee taught that wee are sanctified by faith alone, that wee are formally made just or sanctified by a righteousnesse, which is without us, &c.

But if wee did hold, that justification were to bee confounded with sanctification, we would acknowledge, that the most things, which the Papists affirme concerning justification, are true, because they are true of sanctification. As namely that wee are not sanctified by faith alone, that we are sanctified by a righteousnesse inherent in us and performed by us; that it is partly habituall, consisting in the habits of grace, as faith, hope, charity, &c. and partly actuall, which is our new obedience consisting in good workes; which are the fruits and effects of our faith, and charity, and other inward graces. That of sanctification there are degrees, and that by exercise and practice of the duties of holinesse and righteousnesse, our sanctification is encreased, &c.

§. XX. What then? Is the difference betweene us and the Papists* 1.173 in this great controvefie onely in words? Nothing lesse. For as their confounding of justification and sanctification is the ground of their calumniations against us, so of their owne errours. For confounding justification and sanctification, first they confound the Law and the* 1.174 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 anothern 1.175 Gospell than that which the Apostle taught; which, whosoever doth, hee is ac∣cursed. 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 theo 1.176 Law are under the curse: they are fallenp 1.177 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 aq 1.178 debtour to the whole Law, and to him, who is a debtour to the whole Law, (that is, to bee subject to the curse, if he transgresse it, and to be excluded from justification and salvation, if he doe not perfectly fulfill it) Christ profiteth nothing. For whereas they distinguish the workes, which they make the condition of both the Covenants, that the one are the workes of Nature, the other of

grace; it is evident, that all good workes and all inherent righteous∣nesse is prescribed in the Law, which is the most perfect rule of all in∣herent 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 conditi∣on of the Covenant. The latter, that to us the sonnes of Abraham being redeemed and justified by faith, the Lord will give gracer 1.179 to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him, in which our* 1.180 new obedience consisteth; which, (as I said) is not the condition of the promise, but the thing promised.

§. XXI. Secondly, by confounding justification and sanctificati∣on* 1.181 they teach men to place the matter of justification and merit of sal∣vation 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 al∣so our owne, though received from God: which the Pharisie.s 1.182 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 taughtt 1.183 in the Law, nor by thatu 1.184 which is ours. And in re∣gard of this very difference betwixt the Papists and us, wee are not un∣worthily called Evangelici the professors of the Gospell; and they, the enemies thereof: who seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse, doe with scorne reject the righteousnesse of Christ imputed: which is that righteousnesse of God* 1.185 revealed in the Gospell from faith to faith. This being the maine doctrine of the Gospell, that we are justifi∣ed, not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves, or performed by our selves, but by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith.

§. XXII. By confounding justification and sanctification, and so* 1.186 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 salva∣tion. For whom God doth justifie, all them,* 1.187 and onely them he doth glorifie. And that they doe wholly take away the benefit of justificati∣on, 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 extincti∣on of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse; and that they fouly erre therein.

§. I.

BVT heare it will be objected, that so long as* 1.188 the Papists acknowledge remission of sinne to concurre unto justification, they cannot be said wholly to take away the benefit of justi∣fication: but rather to follow the judgement of some of the Latine fathers, who some∣times comprehending the benefit of sanctifi∣cation under the name of justification, seemed to make justification to consist in remission of sinne and sanctification. Whereunto I answere, that indeed the Pa∣pists pretend so much. For the Councella 1.189 of Trent in expresse termes saith, that justification is not remission of sins alone, but also sanctifica∣tion and renovation of the inner man: and to the like purpose Bellar∣mineb 1.190 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 remis∣sion 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, extin∣ction, 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 imputa∣tion of sinne, and partly in renovation or sanctification; then they must confesse, that there are two formall causes of justification, which Calvinc 1.191 objected against the Councell of Trent, (and may truly bee objected against such of the Fathers as held justification to consist, partly in re∣mission, 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 Coun∣cell of Trent doth stedfastly hold, that there is but one formall cause of

justification, and that is infusion of justice, whereby sinne is expelled. What then becometh of remission of sinne, which according both to Scriptures and Fathers concurreth to justification? I say of it, as of justification; the name is retained, but the thing is taken away.

§. II. Heere therefore I am to shew two things; first, that the Pa∣pists* 1.192 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:d 1.193 Bellarmine an∣swereth 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 renovati∣on. 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 for∣mall cause of justification; but to declare, that there are two termes of that mo∣tion which is called justification, or two effects of the same cause. For there can∣not bee that mutation or translation, which the Councell noteth to bee in justi∣fication, 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 expel∣ling the darknesse of sinne; and beginneth to bee just, the light of grace succeeding the darkenesse of sinne. And as in calefaction, which simili∣tude hee useth elsewhere, the accesse of heat expelleth cold; so in justifica∣tion, 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 beee 1.194 a passage from sinne to righteousnesse; though there be, as in all other motions, duo termini, viz. sinne, which is termi∣nus 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 acti∣ons, 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 bring∣eth light, driveth away darkenesse. Whereby it is evident, that by re∣mission 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 callethf 1.195 veram remissionem, true remission, as if the pardoning of the offence and taking away the guilt were not true re∣mission:* 1.196 but this true remission they hold to bee such, that in a man

who is justified, and hath remission of sinne, there is no sinne remain∣ing, 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 justificati∣on, and that brought in the roome of it, which belongeth to that per∣fection of sanctification, whereunto none attaine in this life.

§. III. Now, that the Papists grossely erre in making remission of* 1.197 sinne to bee the utter abolition or expulsion of it by infusion of righte∣ousnesse, may appeare by these arguments: First, whereas in sinne there are two things to bee considered, the guilt and the corruption, or Ano∣my 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 morti∣fication thereof, not wholly in this life, and at once, but by degrees, we being day by day g 1.198 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. For∣give 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 h 1.199 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 expel∣ling the offence out of the offender, but out of our thoughts.

§. IV. Thus in the Scriptures, to remit sinne is not to abolish and* 1.200 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 re∣mission 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, condona∣re, 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. Ha∣bar, 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 re∣membrance 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 re∣move, Esay 27. 9. Lo chashab not to impute, Psal. 32. 2.

In like manner the Greeke 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to remit, or forgive, Mat. 6. 12, 14, 15. 18. 27, 32. whence is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, remission, that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, forgivenesse, as Hesy∣chii•…•…s expoundeth it. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, condonare, to forgive, Luk. 7. 42. 2 Cor. 2. 10. Ephes. 4. 33. Col. 2. 13. 3. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 it* 1.201 remaineth untill it bee remitted. Thirdly, by what act of God it is re∣mitted. 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 sinnes* 1.202 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 para∣bles 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 actu∣all: An habituall sinne God doth remit, when hee doth take away the guilt of it, i 1.203 and cover the Anomy of it, not that it should not be at all, but that it should not bee imputed, as Augustine k 1.204 saith of concupi∣scence or originall sinne, whereof all particular habituall •…•… sinnes are* 1.205 members and branches. Actuall sinnes God doth remit, when he doth forgive the sinfull act m 1.206 it selfe, and the guilt also which remaineth af∣ter 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 where∣as* 1.207 there are two things, which as themselves doe teach, n 1.208 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 pro∣perly 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 un∣to us. Hence therfore they should have learned to distinguish between justification and sanctification, rather than to confound them, that whereas there are two things remaining after sinne committed, the guilt, and the pollution; the guilt is taken away by imputation of Christs righteousnesse in our justification; the pollution is in some

measure cleansed in our sanctification.

§. VII. And how soever that, which they say of the macula or pol∣lution* 1.209 remaining, is true in respect of Originall sinne, wherein, upon the guilt of Adams transgression imputed, there followeth an univer∣sall macula or corruption, consisting of two parts, the privation of Ori∣ginall righteousnesse, and an evill disposition and pronenesse to all manner of sinne, by which twofold corruption all the parts and fa∣culties 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 tou∣ching the former part, which is the privation; neither are the unrege∣nerate by their actuall sinnes deprived of grace or righteousnesse infu∣sed, which they had not before they sinned: neither are the regenerate utterly deprived of grace by such sinnes as they commit, as I have else∣where o 1.210 proved: and as touching the latter part, which is the evill dis∣position; this macula, whereof they speake, is no new evill disposition making him a sinner who before was not, but an evill disposition re∣maining of the old man, which by committing of actuall sinnes is in∣creased. 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 re∣liquia or remnants of originall sinne in some measure mortified, or the increments thereof, when by the committing of actuall sinnes they re∣ceive 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 mortifi∣cation p 1.211 of them; which is a part of sanctification and not of justifica∣tion. Neither is the mortification of sinne a totall deletion or aboliti∣on 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 corrup∣tion, which is called concupiscence, remaineth more or lesse mor∣tified.

§. VIII. Now followeth the subject, where that, which is to bee* 1.212 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 provi∣dence, 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 at∣turney indicting us of sinne. In regard whereof David saith, Psalm. 51. 3. I doe know, or am conscious to my transgressions, and my sinne is ever before mee. Out of the former booke the Lord doth wipe out sinnes, when he justifieth us in the Court of Heaven: out of the latter, when we are justified in the Court of our owne Conscience.

§. IX. And hereby the third thing appeareth: namely, by what* 1.213 act of God our sinnes are remitted. For if that which is remitted be a

debt, which is recorded in Gods booke: then this debt is remitted not by any act of God within us, either really wiping the pollution out of our soules, or infusing grace into them (both which are done in some measure after the debt is remitted, in our sanctification) but by an act of God without us, wiping our sinnes out of his booke, blotting them out of his remembrance, Esai. 43. 25. casting them behinde his backe, Esai. 38. 17. turning his face from them, Psalm. 51. 9. not remem∣bring, Ier. 31. 34. nor imputing them, Rom. 4. 8. ex Psal. 32. 2. but forgiving and forgetting them, and accepting of Christs satisfaction for them in the behalfe of all that truely beleeve in Christ, Rom. 3. 24, 25.

§. X. Our fifth argument may be this: The utter deletion of sinne* 1.214 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 testifi∣ed in many places of Scripture.

Or thus: If in justification there were an utter deletion or aboli∣tion 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 corrup∣tion* 1.215 by infusion of righteousnesse, and nothing else concurre to justifica∣tion, 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 propitia∣tion for our sinnes, whereby Gods justice may be satisfied, our debt dis∣charged, our selves freed from hell and damnation, but onely the satis∣faction of Christ, without imputation whereof there is no justification nor salvation: but none of this is done by righteousnesse infused ex∣pelling sinne. Wherefore the Papists, if they will bee saved, must ac∣knowledge, besides the benefit of the infusion of righteousnesse expel∣ling the corruption of sinne, which they call justification, but is indeed sanctification, another greater benefit, whereby we are both freed from hell, and entituled to heaven, by imputation of Christs satisfaction, called in the Scriptures justification, which they by their Antichristian doctrine have utterly abolished.

§. XII. Seventhly, that which worketh no reall change in the party* 1.216 doth not really take away and expell all sin from him by infusion of righ∣teousnesse, for that cannot bee done without a reall, yea and a great change in the party. True remission of sinne doth not worke a reall

change in the party. Therefore the true remission of sinne doth not re∣ally 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, presuppo∣sing the imputing of righteousnesse without workes, therefore it wor∣keth not a reall change.

§. XIII. My eighth argument is from theabsurdities which fol∣low* 1.217 upon this Popish Doctrine. First, Necessity of despairing, not one∣ly to the tender conscience labouring under the burden of sinne: but also to all not cauterized consciences, which have any sense of their* 1.218 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 remis∣sion 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 per∣fect righteousnesse, whereby sinne is wholly expelled. And these, as you shall heare hereafter p 1.219 are two of Bellarmines * 1.220 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 ex∣presse termes, Mihi semper q 1.221 necessarium visum fuit asserere, maculam pec∣cati ipsa justitia inherente tanquam forma contraria nullo accedente favore & condo natione deleri.

§. XIV. These absurdities doe necessarily follow upon their Anti∣christian 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 un∣perfect cannot wholly expell sinne, the imperfection being of it selfe a sinne; and if upon infusion of perfect righteousnesse there doth neces∣sarily and of its owne accord follow a totall deletion of sinne, then to remission of sinne favour and condonation is needlesse. And yet we have not done with their absurdities: For to dreame that men who

are but infants in Christianity, yea infants in age, before they have the use of reason, or are capable of habits, are endued. and that ordinarily, with perfect righteousnesse in their first imaginary justification, which is inciptentium of such as be but incipients, whereunto the best profici∣ents 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.

* 1.222

§. I.

BVT how absurd soever their assertion is, Bellarmine will* 1.223 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 ex∣presse the true remission of sinne; so that if a man would of purpose seeke words to signifie the utter abolition of sinne, hee could not devise any which the Scripture hath not already used. And to this purpose citeth eighteene Testimonies, nine out of the Old Testament, viz. 1 Chron. 21. 8. Esai. 44. 22. Ezek. 36. 25. Psalm. 51. 7. Prov. 15. 27. alias, 16. 6. Psalm. 103. 12. Mic. 7. 19. Psalm. 10. 15. Cant. 4. 7. And nine out of the New, Ioh. 1. 29. Act. 3. 19. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Act. 22. 16. Heb. 1. 3. 9. 28. 1 Cor. 6. 11. Ephes. 5. 8. and 27.

§. II. Answ. These places are to be distinguished: for either they* 1.224 are alleaged to prove the abolition of sinne, or perfection of righteous∣nesse: the former mention, either the taking away of sinne or the wi∣ping 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.* 1.225 103. 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 ex∣pounded, 2 Sam. 12. 13. where Nathan saith to David, the Lord* 1.226 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 a 1.227 our sinnes to be distant from us: which is not understood of the corrupti∣on extinguished, but of the guilt removed or taken away. Mic. 7. 19.* 1.228 thou wilt cast all their sinnes into the depth of the Sea, that is, hee will cast them out of his sight or remembrance, hee will cast them behinde his backe, he will bury them in oblivion, that they should not be seene or remembred. Ioh. 1. 29. The Lambe of God which taketh away, or* 1.229 taketh upon him the sinne of the world, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the translation of Nose:

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 ta∣king them upon him, or bearing them: as it is said of the scape Goat, the figure of Christ, Levit. 16. 22. and so that place, Ioh. 1. 29. is to bee* 1.230 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: and this is fully expressed by the Prophet, Esay 53. 12.* 1.231 that Christ Nasa did beare the sinne of many: as before verse 4. that hee hath borne (the Verbe is Nasa) our griefes, and carried our forrowes, and vers. 11. hee shall beare their iniquities. Heb. 9. 28. Christ was* 1.232 once offered ad multorum exhaurienda peccata, that is, as our Rhemists translate, to exhaust the sinne of many. The word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 owne* 1.233 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,* 1.234 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, b 1.235 est meta∣phora ab iis qui delent, qui prius in rationes scripserant, to wipe out is a me∣taphore from those, who wipe out such things, as before they had writ∣ten upon their account, or in their debt-bookes. The booke is Gods re∣membrance, out of which those things are wiped which are forgotten: and thus deletion is often ascribed toe 1.236 oblivion. For Gods wiping out of sins is his blotting them out of his remembrance: and so it is expoun∣ded, Es. 43. 25. his not remembring them. Psal. 25. 7. 79. 8. Ier. 31. 34. as contrariwise, his not blotting them out, is his remembring of them, his not forgiving them. Ier. 18. 23. forgive not their iniquity, neither* 1.237 blot out their sinne from thy sight. Psal. 109. 14. Let the iniquity of his* 1.238 father be remembred with the Lord; and let not the sinne of his mo∣ther 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,* 1.239 namely out of thy remembrance: and no more can bee gathered out of Act. 3. 19. that your sinnes may be blotted out (of Gods booke) where* 1.240 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 be∣fore 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 profes∣seth* 1.241 his reconciliation with Israel in taking away their sinnes, which as

a cloud, yea as a thicke cloud had hid his face from them: the guilt whereof being taken away, the light of his countenance did shine upon* 1.242 them. Howbeit Tremellius and Innius read, Deleo ut densa nubes defecti∣ones 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 ta∣king* 1.243 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 whichd 1.244 cleanseth us from all our sinnes. Purge me with hyssope which was the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (wherewith they used to sprinkle thee 1.245 bloud upon those which were cleansed) that is, sprinkle me with the blood of that eter∣nall sacrifice of Christ prefigured in the Law, without which bloudf 1.246 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•…•…sg 1.247 (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, wher∣in we are to be renewedb 1.248 in the inner man from day to day. The Co∣rinthians, to whom the Apostle giveth thisi 1.249 testimony, that they were washed, &c. were farre from perfection of inherent righteousnesse, as appeareth by that Epistle; wherein he calleth them carnall, and repro∣veth them both for their errours in judgement, and for their misdemea∣nours 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* 1.250 9. 35. quaeretur peccatum illius, & non inveniatur, against the true mea∣ning of the place, it being not a prayer for the justification or sanctifi∣cation of the wicked, that his sinne may bee no more, as Bellarmine ab∣surdly expoundeth it; dicet peccatum fuisse & non esse: but is a propheti∣call 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 expoundeth* 1.251 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, nei∣ther

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 * 1.252 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 con∣crete Lightsome, as being inlightned, as the Children of Light: not that they are that light in which there k 1.253 is no darkenesse. Neither is it said, that we are in our selves Light, but, notwithstanding that darke∣nesse, which remaineth in us, wee are Light in the Lord. The second * 1.254 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 men∣tion 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 presen∣ted unto him, a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinckle, &c. Wherefore Augustine, l 1.255 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, m 1.256 where∣soever 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, * 1.257 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 be∣gun 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 * 1.258 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 justificati∣on, but also of sanctification. And therefore as it is the Sacrament of remission of sinne, and the seale n 1.259 of that righteousnesse which is by faith: so it is called the Lavero 1.260 of regeneration, wherein we are Bap∣tized into the similitude p 1.261 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 Bap∣tisme

is there a totall abolition of sin; seeing it is manifest, that origi∣nall sinne, which is called the flesh, the old man, and evill concupis∣cence, remaineth in all the faithfull, though in some measure mortifi∣ed, yet never fully and altogether extinguished in this life. And al∣though the Papists for maintenance of their severall errors, viz. of ju∣stification by inherent righteousnesse, of the perfect fulfilling of the Law, of merit, of works of supererogation, doe maintaine, that concu∣piscence, remaining in the faithfull after Baptisme, is not a sinne; and the Councell of Trentq 1.262 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 placesr 1.263 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 forbid∣ding lust, to worke in men all manner of evill concupiscence, is not on∣ly convinced to be a sinne, but also to be* 1.264 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, exceeding∣ly sinnefull.* 1.265

§. VIII. And not only habituall concupiscence in generall which is thes 1.266 body of sinne, and the bodyt 1.267 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, selfe∣love, 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, swervings from the Law of God; not onely as defects of righteousnesse (which were enough to make them sinnes) but as posi∣tive 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 what∣soever is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is sinne: For as every sinne is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,u 1.268 so every 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is a sin, that being a perfect definition of sinne, as Bellarmine himselfe confes∣seth,* 1.269 Non potuit rectius & brevius definiri peccatum, quàm ut à S. Ioanne fu∣it definitum illis verbis, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But all evill concupiscence, both habituall and actuall; both in generall the body of sinne, and in parti∣cular the severall branches, being so many habituall sinnes, in whomso∣ever they are found, even in the most regenerate, are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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* 1.270 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 concupi∣scence at all. And it is most evident, that the concupiscence forbidden in the tenth Commandement, is such as goeth before the consent of

will. For it is such, as Saint Paul himselfe had not knowne to be sinne, if the Law had not said, x 1.271 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 y 1.272 and preferre the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, cor∣rupt interpretations of the Elders of the Iewes before the exposition of the Lawgiver himselfe, z 1.273 Matth. 5. True therefore is that, which some Writers cite out of a 1.274 Augustine, that Originall sinne is remitted in Bap∣tisme, not that it be not, but that it be not imputed unto sin. Here Bellar∣mine takes on, and saith, that Luther first falsified this testimony of Au∣gustine, and that all who have followed him, have continued the same fault, though they have beene told of it. A great accusation, if true. Au∣gustines words in answere to an objection, (which the Papists can∣not answer) how can originall sinne bee transmitted from regenerate parents, if in Baptisme it be wholly taken from them, are these: I an∣swer, saith he, dimitti concupiscentiam in baptismo, non ut non sit, sed ut in peccatum non imputetur. Where Augustine speaking of the traducti∣on 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 deleti∣on 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 cal∣led 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, b 1.275 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 c 1.276 unanswerable; which notwithstanding I have not onely answered elsewhere d 1.277, but also have used it as an invin∣cible argument e 1.278 to prove justification by imputation of Christs righ∣teousnesse, 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

Adams disobedience we were made truely sinners, namely by unrigh∣teousnesse inherent, and not onely f 1.279 by imputation. Therefore through the obedience of Christ we are made truly righteous, namely by righ∣teousnesse 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 obedi∣ence of Christ made inherently just, which we confesse, though not in∣tended 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•…•…i∣vè, sed verè, not by imputation, but truly. His former argument I re∣torted 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 infusi∣on 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 imputa∣tion, we are not freed truly. For the Apostle useth these termes promis∣cuously, remitting of sinne and not imputing of sinne, justifying and imputing righteousnesse. And as Christ g 1.280 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 abolish∣ing 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.

Notes

• * 1.1

  The heads of Controversie.
• * 1.2

  The Papists confound justi∣fication and sanctification.
• * 1.3

  The Papists ground their •…•…rrour upon the like notati∣on of the La∣tine words.
• a 1.4

  De justif. lib. 2. cap. 9.
• b 1.5

  De iustif. l. 2. c. 3. s•…•…ct. Ad se∣cundum. Po∣test aliquis sieri iustus tum in t•…•…insecè per a∣doptionem iusti∣tiae, tum ex∣trinsecè per de∣clarationem.
• c 1.6

  Rom. 5. 19.
• d 1.7

  2 Cor. 5. 21.
• * 1.8

  The Hebrew verbe in the first conjugati∣on, or in Cal.
• * 1.9

  In Niphal. Nitsdaq.
• * 1.10

  In Piel. Tsiddeq.
• * 1.11

  In Hiphil. Hitsdiq.
• * 1.12

  Deut. 25. 1.
• * 1.13

  Prov. 17. 15.
• * 1.14

  To justifie, is a judiciall word translated from Courts of judgement.
• * 1.15

  Esai. 50. 8.
• * 1.16

  Rom. 8 33.
• * 1.17

  Esai. 53. 11.
• * 1.18

  Dan. 12. 3.
• * 1.19

  In Hithpael, Hitstaddeq.
• * 1.20

  The Hebrew word never signifieth to make just by righteousnesse inherent.
• e 1.21

  Prov. 17. 15.
• * 1.22

  The like use in other words.
• f 1.23

  Levit. 13. 3. 6. &c.
• g 1.24

  Luk. 1. 46.
• h 1.25

  1 Ioh. 5. 10.
• i 1.26

  2 Thes. 2. 11.
• k 1.27

  Luk. 23. 1•…•….
• l 1.28

  Luk. 7. 29.
• m 1.29

  Rom. 4. 6.
• * 1.30

  The Greeke words, first, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.31

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.32

  Luk. 7. 29.
• * 1.33

  Luk. 10 29.
• * 1.34

  Luk. 16. 15.
• * 1.35

  Ecclus. 10. 32. 13. 26.
• * 1.36

  Rom. 3. 26. 24 28. 30.
• * 1.37

  Rom. 4. 5, 6.
• * 1.38

  Rom. 8. 30, 33.
• * 1.39

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.40

  Ecclus. 7. 5.
• * 1.41

  Rom. 3 4.
• * 1.42

  Apoc. 22. 11.
• a 1.43

  Matth. 11. 19. Luk. 7. 37. Luk. 7. 29.
• * 1.44

  1 Tim. 3. 16.
• * 1.45

  Matth. 12. 37
• * 1.46

  Jam. 2. 21, 23. 24, 25.
• * 1.47

  Eccles. 1. 28 31. 5. 23. 14.
• * 1.48

  Eccles 26. ver•…•…. uit.
• * 1.49

  Act. 13. 38, 39.
• * 1.50

  Rom. 6. 7.
• * 1.51

  Luk 18. 14.
• * 1.52

  1 Cor. 6. 11.
• * 1.53

  Rom 3 20. Rom. 4 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. G•…•…l. •…•…. 4.
• * 1.54

  R•…•…m. 5. 9. Gal 3. 24. Tit. 3. 7. Rom. 3 24, 28. Gal. 2. 16. 17. 3. 11.
• * 1.55

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.56

  Rom. 4. 25. 5. 18.
• * 1.57

  1 Cor. 15. 17. Rom. 5. 18.
• c 1.58

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the purall number.
• * 1.59

  Psalm. 119. 8. 12. Rom. 2. 26.
• d 1.60

  Luk 1. 6.
• e 1.61

  Gen. 26. 5. Za•…•…h. 3. 7.
• f 1.62

  •…•…eut. 5 3•…•…. 6. 1. Deut 8. 11. 11. 1. 1 King. 2. 3. 8. 58. Nehem. 1. 7.
• * 1.63

  Gen. 26. 5. Deut. 4. 8. Rom. 9. 4, Heb. 9. 1. 10.
• * 1.64

  Apoc. 15. 4.
• * 1.65

  Apoc. 19. 8. Matth. 22. 11, 12.
• * 1.66

  Gal 5. 27. Apoc. 3. 18. Apoc. 3. 4. 6. 11. 7. 9.
• * 1.67

  Matth. 5. 16.
• * 1.68

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the singular num∣ber. Ps•…•…. 19. 10.
• * 1.69

  Rom. 1. 32.
• * 1.70

  Rom. 5. 18.
• * 1.71

  Rom. 8. 4.
• * 1.72

  Rom. 5. 16.
• * 1.73

  The first reason that the benefit of iustification is expressed in such terms as doe not imply insusion of iu∣stice but im∣putation. Rom. 4. 6, 7, 8.
• * 1.74

  Rom. 5. 9, 10. 2 Cor. 5. 19, 21.
• * 1.75

  Act. 26. 18.
• * 1.76

  Ioh. 3. 18. Act. 13. 39.
• * 1.77

  Rom. 3. 21, 22.
• * 1.78

  Act. 10. 43.
• * 1.79

  The whole processe of ju∣stification is judiciall. Rom. 8. 33, 34.
• g 1.80

  Rom. 3. 19.
• h 1.81

  Act. 16. 14.
• i 1.82

  Rom. 8. 34. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Heb. 7. 25. 9. 24.
• * 1.83

  Rom. 2. 13.
• * 1.84

  Bellarmine re∣lateth foure significations of the word justification.
• a 1.85

  De justif. l. 1. cap. 1.
• * 1.86

  First, that it sig∣nifieth the Law. Psal 119. 8. 12.
• b 1.87

  Discovery of translations, cap. 1. § 50. and cap. 8.
• c 1.88

  In Luk. 1. 6. and in Apoc. 19. 8.
• d 1.89

  Cap. 2. sect. 5.
• * 1.90

  Luk. 1. 6.
• e 1.91

  Rom 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. 3▪ 11.
• * 1.92

  Their Argu∣ment retorted.
• f 1.93

  Rom. 5. 18. Apoc. 19. 8.
• g 1.94

  Rom. 1. 32.
• h 1.95

  Rom. 3. •…•…1.
• * 1.96

  Rom. 5. 18.
• * 1.97

  Apoc. 19. 8. fortè.
• * 1.98

  The second and third signi∣fication.
• * 1.99

  Lib. 1. Cap. 1.
• * 1.100

  The second sig∣nification pro∣ved by three testimonies. The first, 1 Cor. 6. 11.
• * 1.101

  Act 2. 38. Mark. 1. 4.
• * 1.102

  Rom. 6. 3, 4.
• * 1.103

  Tit. 3. 5.
• * 1.104

  Bellarmines second testi∣mony.
• * 1.105

  Rom. 8 30. verse 33.
• * 1.106

  His third Testi∣monie, Rom. 4. 5.
• * 1.107

  His third signi∣fication▪ for in∣crease of justice.
• * 1.108

  Bellarmines first proofe out of Ecclus. 18. 21.
• * 1.109

  Ariae Montani.
• * 1.110

  The same place urged, de justif. l. 4. c.19.
• * 1.111

  Rom. 6.23.
• * 1.112

  His second proofe out of Iam. 2.24.
• * 1.113

  Jam. 2.18.
• * 1.114

  De bono pati∣enti•…•….
• * 1.115

  The fourth sig∣ni•…•…ication of the word justi∣fication.
• * 1.116

  De Iustif. l. 2. c. 3.
• * 1.117

  His 1. proofe out of Rom. 5. 17, 18, 19.
• a 1.118

  Chrysoft. T•…•…eo∣doret. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.119

  Gal. 2. 18. Iam. 4. 4. Rom. 5. 8. 2 Cor. 4. 2. 6. 4. 7. 11.
• c 1.120

  •…•…ib 4. c. 10. sect. 1. &c.
• * 1.121

  Bellarmines answere, de ju∣stis. l. 2. c. 3. to foure Ob•…•…e- ctions out of C•…•…lvin and Chemnitius refuted. The first rea∣son because justifying is opposed to condemning. Bellarmines hi•…•…t answere.
• * 1.122

  Bellarmines second answer.
• * 1.123

  Rom. 4. 5.
• * 1.124

  1 Job. 1. 8. Ecclus. 7. 20.
• * 1.125

  Augustine de peccatorum me∣ritis & remis. Lib. 1. Cap. 15.
• * 1.126

  Non tamen a∣liqua justitia propter Chri∣stum, sicut a∣liqua peccata propter Adam.
• * 1.127

  The second reason of Cal∣vin and Chem∣nitius, that as the Hebrew, so the Greeke signifieth.
• * 1.128

  Bellarmines first testimony, Dan. 12. 3.
• * 1.129

  His second Testimony, Esai. 53. 11.
• d 1.130

  Exam. part. 1. pag. 131. a.
• * 1.131

  The foure words which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ta∣keth hold of.
• * 1.132

  2 Tim. 4. 1. The first word, by his know∣ledge.
• * 1.133

  The second word, ipse justus.
• * 1.134

  The third word, my ser∣vant.
• * 1.135

  The fourth, and he shall▪ beare their ini∣quities.
• * 1.136

  Lib. 2. cap. 4. sect. 5. Ap. 22. 11.
• * 1.137

  The use of the word in the Fa∣thers.
• * 1.138

  First, by their contraries.
• a 1.139

  Hirshiah.
• b 1.140

  Hitsdiq.
• * 1.141

  Secondly, free∣dome from

  • Guilt
  • Coruptiō

  .
• * 1.142

  Thirdly, an action of God

  • without us.
  • within us.
• c 1.143

  Eph. 1. 7.
• d 1.144

  2 Cor. 5. 19.
• * 1.145

  Col. 1. 14.
• e 1.146

  Ephes. 1. 5, 6. Rom. 8. 17.
• * 1.147

  Fourthly, in re∣spect of the matter.
• * 1.148

  Fifthly, de∣grees of sancti∣fication, but none of justi∣fication.
• f 1.149

  2 Pet. 1. 1.
• * 1.150

  Sixthly, in re∣spect of the forme.
• * 1.151

  Seventhly, in regard of the pa•…•…ts.
• * 1.152

  Eightly, in re∣spect of faith.
• g 1.153

  Rom. 3. 31.
• * 1.154

  Ninthly, in respect of the Law.
• * 1.155

  Tenth∣ly works in the questi∣on of justifi∣cation, of no value, sancti∣ficati∣on, of great worth.
• h 1.156

  Phil. 3. 8.
• * 1.157

  Eleventhly, by justification entitled, by sanctification fitted for Gods kingdome.
• i 1.158

  Act. 26. 18. Tit. 3. 7.
• k 1.159

  Apoc. 21. 27.
• l 1.160

  Act. 26. 18.
• * 1.161

  In the Greeke Text there is a comma after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. and therefore the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, are not to be conserved with the Par∣ticiple 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but with the Verbe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, thus, that by faith they may re∣ceive remission of sinnes, and inheritance among them that are sancti∣fied.
• * 1.162

  So Act. •…•…0. 32. Thirteenthly, the title, the evidence.
• * 1.163

  Fourteenthly, justified by the grace of God: sanctified by the gifts of grace.
• * 1.164

  Fifteenthly, in justification we are pati∣ents, in sancti∣fication we are agents.
• * 1.165

  Col. 3. 5.
• * 1.166

  Ephes. 4. 23, 24.
• * 1.167

  Ezek. 18. 31.
• * 1.168

  Sixteenthly, the acts of faith mediate and imme∣diate.
• * 1.169

  Seventeenthly, of justification the Apostle teacheth in the five first chap∣ters to the Rom. of sanctificati∣on in the sixt and seven.
• m 1.170

  Gal. 5. 6.
• * 1.171

  Eighteenthly, justification is onely of sin∣ners.
• * 1.172

  The Papist•…•… wilf•…•…ll con∣founding of iustification and sanctifi∣cation, the ground of their malitious ca∣lumniations against us.
• * 1.173

  It is also the source of their errours, which are most per∣nicious.
• * 1.174

  First, they con∣found the Law and the Go∣spell, and are farther from grace.
• n 1.175

  Gal. 1. 8, 9.
• o 1.176

  G l 310.
• p 1.177

  Gal. 5. 2, 4.
• q 1.178

  Gal. 5. 3.
• r 1.179

  Luk. 1. 73, 74, 75.
• * 1.180

  Heb. 8. 10. ex Ier. 3. 31. 33. Heb. 10. 16.
• * 1.181

  They place the matter of iusti∣fication and merit of salva∣tion in them∣selve•…•….
• s 1.182

  Luk. 18. 11•…•…
• t 1.183

  Rom. 3. 21. 28. Gal. 2. 16.
• u 1.184

  Phil. 3. 8. 9. Rom. 10. 3. •…•…
• * 1.185

  Rom. 1. 16. 17.
• * 1.186

  Thirdly, they wholly take away the be∣nefit of iustifi∣cation.
• * 1.187

  Rom. 8. 30.
• * 1.188

  Objections that the Papists re∣taining remissi∣on of sinnes, doe not wholly take away the benefit of justi∣fication.
• a 1.189

  Sess. 6. cap. 7.
• b 1.190

  De Iustis. lib. 2. cap. 6.
• c 1.191

  Antidot. ad Sess. 6.
• * 1.192

  The Papists from justifica∣tion exclude remission of sinne.
• d 1.193

  De justif. Lib. 2. Cap. 2.
• e 1.194

  Transitus a peccato ad justi∣tiam.
• f 1.195

  De justif Lib. 2. Cap. 7.
• * 1.196

  §. secundò.
• * 1.197

  That remission of sinne is not the extinction of it.
• g 1.198

  2 Cor. 4. 19.
• h 1.199

  Prov. 10. 12.
• * 1.200

  To remit, what it is in the Scriptures. See more Lib. 5. Cap. 3.
• * 1.201

  Three other arguments.
• * 1.202

  First, the debt.
• i 1.203

  Psalm. 32. 2.
• k 1.204

  De Nupt. &
• * 1.205

  Concupisc. c. 25. 1 Col. 3. 5.
• m 1.206

  Act. 8. 22.
• * 1.207

  Whether re∣mission be of the macula.
• n 1.208

  Thom. 1. 2. •…•… q. 87. art. 6. c. & ad. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.209

  That which they say of the macula •…•…emai∣ning is not al∣together true.
• o 1.210

  In the trea∣tise of perse∣verance.
• p 1.211

  Col. 3. 5.
• * 1.212

  The booke out of which God doth wipe our sinnes, when he doth remit them.
• * 1.213

  By what Act of God our sinnes are remitted.
• * 1.214

  Our fifth argu∣ment becau•…•…e the utter dele∣tion of sinne is not granted in this life.
• * 1.215

  Sixthly, the guilt and pu∣nishment which are ta∣ken away in justification, are not ta∣ken away by infusion of righteousnesse.
• * 1.216

  Seventhly, re∣mission doth not worke a re∣all change.
• * 1.217

  Eight absurdi∣ties following on this Pop•…•…h Doctrine.
• * 1.218

  Ser. lib. 5. c. 5. §. 6, 7, 8.
• p 1.219

  Lib. 5.
• * 1.220

  De justis. l. 2. 6. 7. §. secund•…•…. & § tertio.
• q 1.221

  In 1. •…•… 2. •…•… Disp. 204 n. 2.3.
• * 1.222

  De Iustis. l. 2. cap. 7.
• * 1.223

  Bellarmines proofe out of the Scripture.
• * 1.224

  Places, which mention the taking away of sinne.
• * 1.225

  1 C•…•…ron. 21. 8.
• * 1.226

  2 Sam. 12. 13. Psal. 103. 12.
• a 1.227

  Hirchiq.
• * 1.228

  Mic. 7. 19.
• * 1.229

  Io•…•…. 1. 2•…•….
• * 1.230

  Levit. 16. 22. Merc•…•…r in the sauro. Voce Nasa.
• * 1.231

  Es. 53. 12.
• * 1.232

  Heb. 9. 28.
• * 1.233

  1 P•…•…t. 2. 24.
• * 1.234

  Places, which mention the blotting out of finne
• b 1.235

  in Psal. 51. 10.
• e 1.236

  Deut. 31. 21. Est. 9. 28. Eccl •…•…. 4. Ier. 23. 4•…•…, 50, 5. Es. 43. 25.
• * 1.237

  Ier. 18. 23.
• * 1.238

  Psal. 109. 14.
• * 1.239

  Psal. 51. 9.
• * 1.240

  Act. 3. 19.
• * 1.241

  Es. 44. 22.
• * 1.242

  Numb. 6. 25. Psal. 4. 6.
• * 1.243

  Places which mention the purging of sin Psal. 51. 2. 7.
• d 1.244

  1 Iohn 1. 7.
• e 1.245

  Levit. 14. 6. Num. 19. 18. Heb. 9. 19.
• f 1.246

  Heb. 9. 22.
• g 1.247

  Heb. 9. 14.
• b 1.248

  2 Cor. 4. 16.
• i 1.249

  1 Cor. 6. 11.
• * 1.250

  For the not be∣ing of sinne. Psal. 10. 15.
• * 1.251

  Prov. 10. 25.
• * 1.252

  Places for the perfection of righteousnesse, Ephes. 5. 8.
• k 1.253

  1 Ioh. 1. 5.
• * 1.254

  Ephes. 5. 26, 27.
• l 1.255

  Retract. lib. 1. c. 19. the like he hath lib. de persectione justific. p. 975. Col. 3. •…•….
• m 1.256

  Retract. lib. 2. cap. 18.
• * 1.257

  Cant. 4. 7.
• * 1.258

  Bellarmines ar∣guments out of his booke de Baptismo, lib. 1. cap. 13.
• n 1.259

  Rom. 4. 11.
• o 1.260

  Tit. 3. 5.
• p 1.261

  Rom. 6. 3, 4.
• q 1.262

  Sess. 5. c. 5.
• r 1.263

  Rom. 6. 12. 7 8. 11. 13. 17. 20. 23. 8. 10. Heb. 12. 1.
• * 1.264

  Rom. 7. 8. 13.
• * 1.265

  Concupiscence a sinne.
• s 1.266

  Rom. 6. 6.
• t 1.267

  7. 24.
• u 1.268

  1 Iohn 3. 4.
• * 1.269

  De amiss gra∣tiae & statu pec∣cati, lib. 2. ca. 18.
• * 1.270

  Object. that concupiscence without con∣sent is no sinne.
• x 1.271

  Rom. 7. 7.
• y 1.272

  Rom 7. 14.
• z 1.273

  Ma•…•…th. 5. 28.
• a 1.274

  De Nupti•…•…s & Concupis•…•…. lib. 1. cap 25.
• b 1.275

  Contr. Iulian. lib. 5. cap. 3. Bellarmines unanswerable argument out of Rom. 5. 19.
• c 1.276

  De justif. l. 2. c. 7. §. multa.
• d 1.277

  Lib. 2. c. 5. §. 1. 2. l. 4. c. 9. §. 2, 3, 4.
• e 1.278

  Lib. 5. c. 2. §. 1.
• f 1.279

  Non •…•…ola impu∣tatione de bap∣•…•…is. l. 1. c. 13.
• g 1.280

  •…•… Cor. 5. 21