A treatise of original sin ... proving that it is, by pregnant texts of Scripture vindicated from false glosses / by Anthony Burgess.

TO THE READER.

A Digressive Epistle concerning Justification by Faith alone, excluding the Conditionality of Works in that Act, either begun or continued. Tending to a friendly debate between a Reverend, Learned, and godly Brother, and my self, in that Point.

THe Doctrine of Original sinne, and Justification by Faith alone, are not altogether heterogeneous: Yea, Stapleton maketh the former the Mother, and the latter the Daughter, as they are avouched in the Protestant way. I shall therefore here take the occasion to lay down severall Propositions, that may conduce to the further discovery of the Contents of that amicable collation between my learned Brother and my self in this particular. Not that my purpose is to vindicate those Arguments I have formerly in a Treatise of Righteousness, produced against conditionality of Works in the Act of Justification, from the Ex∣ceptions and Answers he hath pleased lately to give in unto them; for I shall venture their credit and strength, (notwithstanding all that he hath said to the contrary) with the intelligent and impartiall Readers, till I am advised by the judicious and Learned, there is a necessity of rescuing them from his assaults. The generation of Divines which shall arise, that knew Joseph, who are aquainted with the Do∣ctrine and Spirit of the first Reformers in this matter; they will not take up their perswasions from one or two English Writers, in this case. It is true, Aristole saith, lib. 1. Rhetor. cap. 11. that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Contentions are pleasant, and Conqest in them sweet. But that is true, in reference to the Philosophers and Oratours of old, who were

animals of glory, and had a libidinous appetite after applause, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, being 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as Justin Martyr alludeth; and the Oratours so insati∣able after praise, that rather then want it, they would hire their Laudi∣cenes to applaud them with a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But in Theologicall contests, we ought to have more mortified and sanctified hearts; for when we have watched over our souls with the greatest diligence we can, yet we have cause to pray, that God would forgive us our Book-sins, and preserve us from loosing the comfortable sense and enjoyment of Justification, while we dispute about it. Not therefore from a spirit of contention or opposition to my learned Brother, whom I highly honour, but love to that precious and antient Truth, as I judge it to be, which through infirmity is opposed by him, happily inclined thereunto by his laudable Zeal against Antinomian dotages, I proceed to lay down severall Propositions; which when I have done, my thoughts are to say, Ite missa est.

The Reformers in their first Conflicts with the Popish Adversaries about Justification (among the controversall Points therein) judged this none of the least;* 1.1 The Meanes or Manner how we are justified. Indeed, Justification being the heart (as it were) of Religion, a little prick therein is dangerous. It being the eye of Christianity, a little disease is dangerous. It is easie erring, but dangerous in this point. Hence this Article did so reign in the hearts of those Worthies, that they used all diligence to keep this Fountain pure, greatly fearing the posterity to come, would be negligent herein. Now as for the meanes how we are justified; they did not only learn it out of the Scrip∣tures, which peculiarly appropriate this to Faith, and not to any other particular grace; but experimentally and practically out of their own hearts; God suffering them to be greatly exercised, and tempted a∣bout his favour, and to be often in the deepes, not seeing the Sun for many daies, that so Justification by Faith alone, might be the more confirmed unto them, and they have the witness of this Doctrine in themselves. And although it be true, that the Protestant Writers in this Controversie, did chiefly militate against the merit and causality of Works in Justification then asserted by the Papists: Yet it is plain, that thereby also they did exclude their Conditionality also, as to the Act of Justification.* 1.2 Hence Perkins (quantus vir?) saith, Fides est unicum & solum illud instrumentum, &c. Faith is the alone and only instrument, wrought by the Spirit of God in the heart of a man, whereby he layeth hold on Christ, applying his righteousness to him∣self, which neither Hope or Charity, or any other grace can do. And whereas he had granted, in the ensuing Discourse, that these gra∣ces were present at Jnstification, but doing nothing to it, but Faith doth all: As the head is present to the eye when it seeth, yet it is the eye alone that seeth. Bishop his Adversary by scorn, calleth this a worthy piece of Philosophy, and laboureth to invalidate it; but the learned Abbot his Defendant, is large in clearing of this Truth, distin∣guishing of a separation, Reall and Mental; and that again into Negative

and Privative, declaring that Faith, though not negatively considered, excluding other graces, yet privatively abstracted from the considera∣tion of them, is said to justifie; I would referre the Reader to those solid and excellent Writers in this point. Perkins his Reason for Justi∣fication by Faith alone, is very pregnant, from Joh. 3. 14. where be∣lieving in Christ for eternal life, is compared to beholding of the Serpent that Moses lifted up in the Wilderness. Now as it was meer see∣ing, and no working that did heal the wounded Israelite, so it is meer believing, and no other grace that maketh us partakers of this Spiritu∣al Priviledge.* 1.3 Chemnitius also giving Reasons why the Protestants use the word solâ, of Faith in Justification, maketh one to be, that merits and dignity may be excluded from our works, and all attributed to grace only. But another ut ostendatur medium seu organon applicationis, for not by Works, but Faith alone, is the Promise received. It is clear then, that our former Divines, though they principally aimed at the excluding of the merit of Works, yet did also thereby shut out their conditionality; because they make Faith the only applicativum medium, and because they deny other graces to have any such recep∣tive power. For when the Papists urge other graces, as Love, &c. they answer, that these do consist in extramittendo, Faith in intus recipiendo. And lastly, because they make them only qualifications of the subjects, and the effects, or discoveries of true Faith; Insomuch, that we never read in Scripture, or (as I know of) in any sound Au∣thour, that we are justified by repentance, or by love.

Neither is this Justification by Faith alone,* 1.4 excluding the Conditio∣nality of Works, to be applyed to our Justification at first only, but as continued; so that from first to last, we are justified all along by Faith. Although therefore, the learned Brother doth often fly to this Sanctu∣ary (and if this fall to the ground, all his superstructure tumbleth with it) yet it is clear by Scripture, Justification begun and continued, is by Faith alone. Hence the Apostle, arguing in this very matter, brings that text: The just shall live by Faith, Gal. 3. 11. which belongs to the whole course of our life, respectively to Justification; and when the Apostle saith, Rom. 5. Being justified by Faith, we have peace with God. Would it not be irrationall, to limit it only to our Justification at first? Is not the righteousness of God revealed from Faith to Faith? Rom. 1. 17. Not from Faith to Works:* 1.5 See Calvin proving non minus Justitiae complementum, quam initium fidei tribuendum esse. So that our Justifica∣tion is by Faith to Faith, not by Faith to Works.

If my judgment were for Justification by Works,* 1.6 as a condition thereof, as well as Faith, I should think it my duty, both in Preaching and Printing, as occasion serveth, to perswade the forbearing of the word Sola, when we say Faith Justifieth: For if God hath appointed Works, as well as Faith, how dare any man presume to say Faith a∣lone. And thus we must receive the moderating advice of Cassander, who saith; Multis eruditis, & piis viris satius videtur & in conci∣onibus

popularibus vox illa (Sola) praetermittatur.

I can grant,* 1.7 that we are justified by Faith, as it is an instrument ap∣pointed by God, and as it is a condition; provided the conditionality of it be limited to the receptive Office of Faith, and Gods designment thereunto: But it cannot be an instrument applying, and a condition in the sense, my Reverend Brother contends for. When we say, Faith Justifieth as an applying meanes, then Christ and his Grace, is considered as do∣num oblatum; Faith being the hand that receiveth this Treasure. But when it Justifieth as a condition, in the sense asserted, it must be conside∣red ut opus praestitum; whereby the Covenant is made good to us, which maketh two distinct kindes of Justification; which latter differeth from the Popish way only, ut magis & minus. They make Works merits and Causes: he Conditions, whereas not only causality, but conditi∣onality, doth overthrow the alone Justification by Faith, and introdu∣ceth another way of Justification, then by application alone. Or if the learned Brother, will make Works a condition of Justification, when Faith alone doth begin and continue it, he will be necessarily involved in a contradiction. In what a sense I make Faith a Passive Instru∣ment (but supernatural) I have in my former Treatise clearly explai∣ned, and so need not repeat it here again.

It is no Contradiction to exclude Works form a Conditionality,* 1.8 as to the Act of Justification, and yet to affirm them requisite necessarily in the Sub∣ject Justified. I wonder at the wilfulness in some, who accuse them as a contradiction, when Protestant Writers do a thousand times over illustrate this, by divers Similitudes. Because Repentance is required as well as Faith, must their office and work be confounded? Must all they be Conditions? Certainly, it's not Repentance, but Faith, that receiveth the pardon: Yet Repentance qualifieth the Subject, and de∣noteth it capable of it▪ Is Sanctification a Condition of Justification, because they are inseparable one from another?

That distinction of Faith justifying,* 1.9 quae viva, but not quâ viva, which IS lively and working, but not AS lively and working; is not trifling as the Remonstrants say, nor is there any cheat in it. Most of the Fun∣damentals of Religion, are distinguished from confining errours, by such distinctions. If a man say, Christus qui Deus mortuus est, saith true; but if he should say, Quâ Deus, would he not speak blasphemy? And this I bring in the rather, because there are some who affect, and glory in a moderating way, thinking the Papists and Protestants do not so Fundamentally differ in the Point of Justification, but that they may be reconciled; whereas our learned Worthies, at first declared, that if the Romanists and we differed in no other point but this, this were e∣nough to have no Communion with them. Spalatensis, one of the unhappy Catholique Moderators; writing of the Protestants, who af∣firm, that Faith alone Justifieth, yet such a Faith as is lively, and work∣eth by love, so that although Faith Justifieth, yet other graces are present, though not proximely attingent of Justification, Ecce

(saith he) Formalitates Theologicas; adding that the Romanists may grant to the Reformed, that the dispositions to Justification are not me∣rits. And again, the Reformed grant to the Romanists, that by these dispositions, being joyned with Faith, Justification is acquired not from merit, but Divine mercy alone. It is true, he declareth his own noti∣on, how Faith Justifieth alone, viz. Absque necessitate ullius alterius humanae positivae actionis, non tamen absque negativâ illa dispositione non faciendi quicquam quod sit á Deo vetitum. But in the protract of his Discourse, he maketh our differences herein to be pura quaedam meta∣physicalia ad salutem nihil necessaria,* 1.10 sed Galaticamur planè fratres, as Tertullian of old. There is a propensity in all to Galatize, to joyn Faith and Works under some notion or other, as to our Justification; whereas the Apostle maketh an immediatie opposition between them; not in the person Justified, but as to the manner of Justification. The lear∣ned Brother alledgeth a place out of Doctor Twisse, in the title page, with a signall accent upon it. The words are (Verum in diverso genere ad justitiam Dei refertur Christi satisfactio, & fides nostra; Christi satis∣factio ad eandem refertur per modum meriti & condignitatis; nostra verò fides ad eandem refertur per modum congruae dispositionis.) Who would not think by this passage, thus barely quoted, that the Doctor was speaking of Justification, that Christs satisfaction is meritorious of it, and our Faith a congruous disposition to it. But my Brothers over∣sight is very great in this allegation; for the learned Twisse is there speaking, of Gods Justice and Mercy, tempered together in Election; taken terminativè, as it effectually comprehends Salvation. There∣fore he said before,* 1.11 Electionem ad salutem non fieri sine intuitu miseriae nostrae & satisfactionis Christi, & fidei nostrae, & resipiscentiae, &c. So that his words oppose Doctor Hammond, and M^r Pierce, with others who odiously charge the Calvinists, as if they held irrespective De∣crees in Election and Reprobation, either to sinne or holiness: Where∣as the excellent Doctor sheweth, that Salvation, the terminus of Ele∣ction, is not accomplished without the satisfaction of Christ, and our Faith and Repentance, as fit dispositions to Salvation; he doth not say to Justification.

The Doctrine of Justification hath been greatly polluted of old,* 1.12 by Pla∣tonicall and Aristoteticall Philosophy: and we must take heed we do not de∣file it in a new way, by running to the Civil Law, and deductions from it. What are Bartolus and Baldus in this point? As Justification is a mer∣cy wholly revealed in Scripture, and supernaturally vouchsafed, so the Words and Phrases are observed by the Learned, to be peculiar; as, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. So that the Scripture expressions being compared together, will best discover the manner how we are justified; for it is wholly at Gods appointment, what way he will take therein, and from them we shall only discover a righteousness of Faith; not of Love, or any other particular grace. It was the ruine of Socinus; to conclude of the Truths of Divinity, according to principles of the

Civil Law, this made him deny Christs satisfaction.

The Discourse of the Apostle James concerning Justification by Works,* 1.13 doth not at all patrocinate the Reverend Brothers Opinion. For first, It is to be observed, that the Apostle doth not mention any particular grace, but Works in the generall, as externally and visibly practised. Had the Apostle said, Abraham was justified not only by Faith, but love, then there had been some colour for his Assertion. And secondly, The expressions used by the Apostle concerning Justificati∣on by Works, comply not with a conditio sine quâ non: For ver. 26. he saith, As the body without the spirit is dead, so is faith without Works. Is the soul a conditio sine quâ non of life? Again, ver. 22. By Abra∣hams Works, his Faith was made perfect; and his Works did 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with his Faith. Doth a condition sine quâ non 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? I urge not this as owning the Papists Expositions of Causality of Works and Merit, only they make not for a conditio sine quâ non. We must take Justifi∣cation and Faith in another sense, then the Papists do. When the learned Brother, explicateth that passage of the Apostle, Faith is dead being alone, after this manner: That Faith is dead, as to the use and purpose of Justifying; for in it self, it hath life according to its quali∣ty still.* 1.14 Adding afterwards, that (Works make Faith alive, as to the attainment of its end of Justification.) Can this be applyed to a conditio sine quâ non? But the Discourse swelleth too big: I have done what I thought sufficient in this matter. The good Spirit of the Lord so lead us into his Truth, that we may serve him with one heart, and one way; and wherein we have not yet attained, reveal such Truths unto us.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Prop. 1.
• * 1.2

  Cathol. Refor. Controv. 4. Cap. 1.
• * 1.3

  Exam. Concil. Trid. de fide Justific.
• * 1.4

  Prop. 2.
• * 1.5

  Sex. sessiois. Antidot.
• * 1.6

  Prop. 3.
• * 1.7

  Prop. 4.
• * 1.8

  Prop. 5.
• * 1.9

  Prop. 6.
• * 1.10

  Spalat. de Repub. Eccl. lib. 7. cap 11.
• * 1.11

  Vindic. Grat. lib. 1. pars ter∣tia. vol. Mai. pag. 218.
• * 1.12

  Prop. 7.
• * 1.13

  Prop. 8.
• * 1.14

  Aphorismes of Justification pag. 300.