Scripture mistaken the ground of Protestants and common plea of all new reformers against the ancient Catholicke religion of England : many texts quite mistaken by Nouelists are lay'd open and redressed in this treatis[e] by Iohn Spenser.

THE THIRD CONTROVERSIE Concerning Iustification.

The Doctrine of the Roman Church deliuered in the Council of Trent, touching this Point.

Sess. 6. can. 1.

SI quis dixerit, hominem suis operibus, quae vel per humanae naturae vires, vel per legis do∣ctrinam fiunt, absque diuina per Iesum Christum gratiâ, posse iustificari coram Deo; Anathema sit.

It any one shall say, that a man can be iusti∣fied by his workes, which are done by the force of humaine nature, or by the doctrine of the law, without diuine grace through our Lord Iesus Christ; let him be accursed.

Ibidem. can. 2.

Si quis dixerit ad hoc solùm diuinam gra∣tiam per Iesum Christum dari, vt facilius ho∣mo iustè viuere ac vitam aeternam promereri

possit; quasi per liberum arbitrium vtrumque, sed aegrè tamen & difficulter possit; anathe∣ma sit.

If any one shall say that diuine grace through Iesus Christ is giuen only to this end, that a man may more easily liue iustly, and de∣serue eternal life, as if he could doe both, though with labour and difficulty, by his freewill; let him be accursed.

Ibidem. can. 3.

Si quis dixerit, sine praeuenien••e Spiritus sancti inspiratione, atque eius adiutorio, homi∣nem credere, sperare, diligere, aut poenitere posse sicut oportet, vt ei iustificationis gratiâ conferatur; anathema sit.

If any one shall say, that without the pre∣uenting inspiration of the holy Ghost, and his assistance, a man can beleeue, hope, loue, and repent, as he should doe to haue the grace of iustification bestowd vppon him; let him be accursed.

Here I demand vppon what ground the 13 of the 39 English Protestant Articles, speakes thus of the scoole men of the Roman Church, Workes done before the grace of Christ, and the inspiration of his spirit are not pleasant to God, for as much as they spring not of faith in Iesu Christ, neyther doe they make men meet to recriue

grace, or (as the schoole Authors say) deserue grace of Congruity. I would gladly haue those schoole Authours named and cited, who affirme, con∣trary to the expresse words of the Council of Trent, so great a semi-Pelagian Heresie, as this is whereof they are here accused. And if none attall can be produced, how great an vntruth is conteyned in this article, where it is said, not as some of the schoole Authours, but, as the schoole Authours say, that is, eyther vniuersally, or commonly affirme; whence may clearly be collected, that those new Prelates and Doc∣tours, who composed those 39 articles, which haue been (euer since they were composed) esteemed the summe and substance of the Protestant Religion, and faith in England, were eyther grosly ignorant, in the doctrine of the schoole Authours, and exceeding te∣merarious in affirming that of them, which they neuer vnderstood, or insufferably de∣ceiptfull, and malitious, in accusing them (against theyr own knowledge and conscien∣ce) of holding generally an errour, which not soe much as any one of them euer held, but the quite contrary.

Conc. Trid. ibidem cap. 8.

Cùm verò Apostolus dicit iustificari homi∣nem per fidem & gratis,* 1.1 ea verba in eo sensu intelligenda sunt, quem perpetuus Ecclesiae

Catholicae consensus tenuit, & expressit; vt sci∣licet per fidem ideo iustificari dicamur, quia fides est humanae salutis initium, fundamen∣tum, & radix omnis iustificationis: sine quâ impossibile est placere Deo, & ad filiorum eius consortium peruenire:* 1.2 gratis autem iustificari ideo dicamur; quia nihil eorum quae iustifica∣tionem praecedunt, siue fides, siue opera, ipsam iustificationis gratiam promeretur; si enim gra∣tia est,* 1.3 iam non ex operibus, alioquin, vt idem Apostolus inquit, gratia iam non est gratia.

When the Apostle saith that a man is iusti∣fied by fayth and gratis, or freely, those words are to be vnderstood in that sence, which the perpetuall consent of the Catho∣licque Church allwayes held, and expressed; to wit, that we are said to be iustified by faith, because faith is the begin̄ing of mans salua∣tion, the foundation, and roote of all iustifiea∣tion: without which it is impossible to please God, and to come into the number, of his childeren. But we are said to be iustified gra∣tis, because none of these things which goe before iustification, whether it be faith, or workes, deserue the grace of iustification; for if it be grace, it is not of workes, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace would not be grace.

Conc. Trid. ibidem. cap. 10.

Sic ergo iustificati, & amici Dei,* 1.4 ac dome∣stici facti, euntes de virtute in virtutem, reno∣uantur, vt Apostolus inquit, de die in diem,* 1.5 & exhibendo ea arma iustitiae in sanctificatio∣nem, per obseruantiam mandatorum Dei, & Ecclesiae, in ipsâ iustitiâ per Christi gratiam acceptâ, cooperante fide bonis operibus cre∣scunt, atque magis iustificantur, sicut scriptum est, Qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc.* 1.6

Being therefore thus iustified, and made the friends, and of the houshold of God, going on from vertu, to vertu, they are renewed, as the Apostle saith, from day to day and vsing those armes of iustice to sanctification, by the obseruance, of the commandements of God, and the Church, theyr faith cooperating with theyr good workes, they increace through the grace of Christ, in the iustice which they haue receiued, and are iustified more and more, as is it written, he who is iust, let him be iustified still.

Conc. Trid. ibidem. can. 9.

Si quis dixerit, solâ fide impium iustificari, ita, vt intelligat nihil aliud requiri, quod ad iusticationis gratiam consequendam coopere∣tur, & nullâ ex parte necesse esse eum suae vo∣luntatis

motu praeparari, atque disponi; ana∣thema sit.

If any one shall say, that a wicked man is iustified by faith only, soe that he meanes that nothing els is required, which may cooperate to the obtayning the grace of Iustification, and that it is noe way necessary that he be prepared, and disposed by the motion of his will; let him be acc••rsed.

From these authorities of the Council, it is manifest, that in this matter of Iustification, the Church of Rome, theaches, 1. that noe workes done by the mere naturall force of our freewill; 2. nor by the sole doctrine or knowledge of the diuine law, can iustifie a sinner in the sight of God. Can. 1. 3. That noe vniust persone, can without the preuenting in∣spiration of the holy Ghost, doe any thing (as it should be done) to obteyne, the grace of iustification. can. 3. 4. That neyther faith, nor workes, done by the inspiration of the holy Ghost, before Iustification, can merit Iustifi∣cation, for it is a free grace of God, giuen not of workes, but by the sole mercy of God, and for the sole merits of Christ. cap. 8. 5. That though the iustification of a sinner cannot be merited, yet a soul may be disposed, & prepar∣ed to instification, by acts inspired by the holy Ghost. c. 6. 6. That we are not thus disposed by faith only, but also by other good motions of

our will, preuented and assisted by the grace of God. can. 9. 7. That being thus freely iusti∣fied, & become the childeren of God through the assistance of Gods grace in Christ, we may doe good workes, and by them (accepted through Christ's merits) become more and more iust, in the sight of God. cap. 10. where in cheefly, consists the Roman doctrine, of Iusti∣fication by good workes.

This doctrine supposed, we will now take a vew, of those texts, which Protestants vsu∣ally presse, out of Scripture mistaken against it, hauing first proued the Roman doctrine.

The Catholicke Position. Faith only iustifyeth not.

YOu see that a man is iustifyed by workes,* 1.7 and not by faith only. which must needs be vnder∣stood of a true and internall iustification be∣fore Allmighty God: for it must be that iusti∣fication which comes by faith; but that is true and internall iustification, as appeares by all the texts cited hereafter in the paper, for proofe of iustification by faith only: that the iustification which S. Iames speakes of here, is the very same with that which comes by faith, is most cleare out of the words them∣selues. Yee see that a man is iustifyed by workes, and

not by faith only. For it would be quite contrary to common sense to vnderstand a iustifica∣tion before men, in the first part of this sen∣tence, yee see that a man is iustifyed by workes, and a true internall iustification in the sight of God, in the latter part, and not by faith only. For the word only, clearly demonstrates, that the same iustification is to be vnderstood in both parts of the sentence. Now that the iustifica∣tion common to both members of this place, must necessarily be meant of a true iustifica∣tion only in the sight of God, is out of all question to such as ponder what is deliuered in it: for it would be most false, were it vn∣derstood of a iustification only before men••; no lesse then this manner of speech, yee see that this man is vnderstood by his words, and not by his thoughts only, would be wholly false, were there only mention made of a man's being vnder∣stood amongst men: for amongst them he is not vnderstood at all by his thoughts; and so the latter part of this proposition would not be true and therefore to verify this manner of speech, it must of necessity be meant of a man's being vnderstood by Allmighty God who only by his own power vnderstands both thoughts and words; and so it is truly sayd, yee see that a man is vnderstood (to wit, by Allmighty God) by his words, and not by his thoughts only. And for the very same reason, this propo∣sition

of S. Iames wee see that a man is iustifyed by workes, and not by faith only▪ cannot be vnder∣stood of a iustification before men: for we are no more iustifyed by saith before men, then we are vnderstood amongst them by our thoughts: and therefore it must be interpreted of a iustification before Allmighty God; who only vnderstands our faith as he does our thoughts (by his own power and knowledge) and can only see whether our faith be true, sincere, and iustifying, or no; faith being nothing else but a thought, assent or iudge∣ment of the soul. And as all Protestants, in the ensuing texts vrged for iustification by faith only▪ vnderstand an internall iustification in the sight of God, so must they (will they not be vnreasonably and willsully partiall) vnder∣stand the same by iustification by faith, in this place of S. Iames, which is cleared v. 2. was not Abraham our father iustifyed by worket when he had offered Isaac his sone vppon the altar? for this hauing beene done priuatly in the desert could not, when it was done, iustifie him before men. and yet more clere v. 22. seest thou not how faith wrought with his workes, and by workes was faith made perfect? what is here spoken of but the operation of faith and workes in the soule, iustifying in God's sight? For faith cannot be truly made perfect but declared to be per∣fect, by workes soe farre as they iustifie only

before men. And it is further demonstrated v. 23. And the Scripture was fulfilled which sayth, Abraham beleeued God,* 1.8 and it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse, and he was called the friend of God. Can any Protestant deny this to be meant of an imputation of righteousnesse, as they terme it, or a iustification before Allmighty God, seeing it is the very same iustification which is mentioned by S. Paul to the Ro∣manes which they mainly contend to be a true iustification in the sight of God: or if they will haue it here a iustification only be∣fore men, they must acknowledge that the same mentioned to the Romanes is no other then before men; and so, by endeauoring by such shifts to weaken the force of this text against themselues, they take away all force from that of Rom. 4. to conclude any thing against vs. Besides, this iustification of Abra∣ham here mentioned by S. Iames, can be no other then that which is true and interuall before God: for, as it followes in the text, he was called a friend of God; and that truly, for he was indeede, as he was called, a friend of God: and hence it follows ineuitably, that the iustification which S. Iames deduces from that of Abraham, by works, and not by faith only, as appeares by the word then, wee see then &c. is a true intrinsecall iustification in the sight of God; for no other, saue that, could be

rightly inferred from the former. And indeed though we had none of the foresayd euiden∣ces, to conuince the true meaning of S. Ia∣mes, yet what man of iudgment can imagine that this holy Apostle would labour so much to proue that Christians are iustifyed by their good works before men, when that is a mat∣ter too cleare and known, to need proofe, and too light and friuolous to deserue it? or what considerate man can thinke that this Blessed Apostle or the holy Ghost by whose inspi∣ration he writ this, would so earnestly exhort Christians to abound in good works, to the end that they may be iustifyed before men? seeing corrupt human nature is too too prone to doe good workes for such by endes as these, and hath more need of a bridle then a spurre in this particular, and rather to be de∣terred from it, then put vppon it, as our Sa∣uiour did the Stribes and Pharisees, who did their works to be seene, and consequently to be praysed and iustifyed before men. This text therefore hauing been demonstrated to be meant of iustification before Allmighty God by works, and not by faith only; seeing S. Paul inspired by the same holy Spirit, in what is cited out of him in the insuing text, cannot possibly contradict S. Iames here, as he must needs be thought to haue done if he sayd (as Protestants would haue it) that we are iusti∣fyed

in the sight of God by faith only, and not by good works, working with faith and per∣fecting it, informing and vinificating it, as S. Iames describes them here. we will now see in what sense S. Paul's words are to be vnder∣stood,* 1.9 and reconcile them with this text of S. Iames.

The Protestant Position. Iustification by faith only. This is proued by Scripture mistaken.

Therefore wee conclude, that a man is iustifyed by faith.* 1.10 without the works of the law.

Being iustifyed by faith, we haue peace with God, through our Lord Iesus Christ.* 1.11

For therein is the righteousnesse of God reuealed, from faith to faith,* 1.12 as it is written, the iust shall liue by faith.

* 1.13Knowing this, that a man is not iustifyed by the works of the law, but by the faith of Christ Iesus: that we might be iustifyed by Iesus Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no liuing flesh be iustifeyd.

The first mistake. The word only, is not found in any of these texts.

In all these texts is not once the words faith only, to be found; which is put in this Pro∣testant

Position & was to be proued by them. Neither i•• i•• consequent: a man is iustifyed by faith without the works of the law; therefore a man is iustifyed by faith only: no more then this follows, a man is nourished by bread, without the grasse of the field; therefore a man is nourished by bread only. for though the grasse of the feeld do not nourish vs, yet many other things besides bread de nourish vs. in like manner, though the woreks done by force of the grace of God, and not by force of the law, do iustify vs, and so we are not iustifyed by saith only, nor at all by the works of the law; but by faith and good works done by the grace of Iesus Christ, and not by the k••owledge of rhe law.

The Second mistake. The workes of the law misunderstood.

That S. Paul here vnderstands only by works of the law, such works as are done by force and knowledge of the law, before the faith of Christ infused into a soul, or that it is in∣lightned and assisted by his grace: and by this law is vnderstood the law written in the books of Moyses, both morall in the ten Commandements, and ceremoniall, as cir∣cumcision, and other rites and ceremonyes of the Iewes.

That by works of the law, I say, are vnder∣stood

by S. Paul, only such works as are done by force of knowledge of the law, befotc the inlightning of the faith, and grace of Christ, is euident out of this chapter, Rom. 3. v. 14. Now we know, that what things soeuer the law sayth, it sayth to thcm that are vnder the law; that euery mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Here he speakes of the law, speaking or teaching what is to be done ac∣cording to it: and then adds presently, as a conclusion from that knowledge got by the law, v. 10. therefore by tbe deeds of the law no flesh shall be iustifyed in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. The reason why the deeds of the law iustify not, is, because they come from the knowledge of the law, & by the law is the knowledge of sin. wherunto he opposes the tighteousnesse of God, which is by faith of Ie∣sus Christ vnto all, in the first texts following verses 21. but now the righteousnetre of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and Prophets: v. 22. euen the righteousnesse of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all, and vppon all them that beleeue; for there is no difference. This is the known doctrine of all Roman Catholikes against the Pelagians, that no worke can iustify which comes only by doctrine and light of the written law; but all iustifying works must come from the faith and grace of Christ so that we all confesse and conclude

with S. Paul, that a man is iustifyed by faith vvith∣out the vvorkes of the lavv, that is, wirhout such works as are meerly of and from the law, as are opposed here by S. Paul to the grace and faith of Christ.

Secondly, by the law in this place is vn∣derstood, both the motall law written by Moyses in the ten Commandements; and the ceremoniall, conteyned in the bookes of Le∣uiticus, Deuteronomij &c. for the morall law, Protestants themselues, doubt not that the Apostle speakes of it, and that the ceremonial is here meant is euident in the two next fol∣lowing Verses, speaking of Iewes and Cir∣cumcision, v. 24. Is he God of the Iewes only, and not also of rhe Gentils: yea, of the Gentils also. v. 30. Seeing it is one God vvhich shall iustify circumcision by faith, and vncircumcision through fayth. and ••. 1. VVhat aduantage then hath the Ievv, or vvhat profit is there of circumcision? and the seauen last verses of the second chapter make it yet clearer; seeing that the Apostle's intent is there to proue, that iustification did not only belong to the Iewes, but to the Gentils also, and therefore the Iewes: were not to thinke that iustification came by the obseruance of their ceremoniall law which Moyses had giuen them: and whereby they were chiefly distinguished from the Gentiles, who had knowledge of the mo∣rall law, and esteemed themselues obliged to

obserue it. Which is the present doctrine of Roman̄e Catholikes.

The Third mistake. The vvord Iustifie missapplied.

Thirdly, by Iustification here, is vnderstood, only the fitst Iustificatiō from sinne to iustice, wherby a beleeuer is made of a child of the deuil, the child of God. this is cleare v. 23. For all haue sinned, and come short of the glory of God, v. 23. being iustifyed freely by his grace, through the redemption vvhich is in Iesu Christ. v. 25. VVhom God hath set forth to be a propitiation trough faith in his bloud, to declare his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes that are past, through the forbearante of God. And in this all agree that the first iustifica∣tion of a sinner is a worke of the mercy and grace of God, through the merirs of our dearest Sauiour;* 1.14 and cannot be condignly me∣rited by any works precedent. But the Apostle makes here no mention at all of the second iustification, or increase of that iustice and grace which is giuen vs in the first iustifica∣tion, and wherof S. Ihon speakes Reu. 22. v. 11. Qui iustus est, iustificetur adhuc, he that is righteous, let him be righteous still, saith your English text, which signifyes only a perseuerance in that righteousnesse or iustice which was first re∣ceiued; when it should be, he that is righteous,

let him be made righteous still: as the latin hath it, iustificetur adhuc: and all the other phra∣ses adioyned, shew not only a perseuerance, butsalso an increase, of that wickednesse, or holynesse wherin they were before: or, let him vvorke righteousnesse, or iustice still, as the greeke hath it, wich comes all to the same purpose. Now the question betweene vs and Pro∣testants, is only of the second iustification, or increace of iustice acquired in the first; which we only affirme to be augmented by good works done in and through the grace of Ie∣sus Christ.

The fourth mistake. The vvord faith misconstu••ed.

Fourthly, by faith is not to be vnderstood a bare, sole, act of Christian faith; and much lesse of particular confidence, and application of Christ merits to our selues, (whereof the Apostle speakes not one word in this place) where on P••otestants rely soe much; but a faith viuificated, informed, and animated with charity, and other Christian vertus ioyned with it. This is cleate chap. 4. v. 1.2.3. where the faith of Abraham is brought in by the Apostle in proofe of what he had sayd. Now who can deny but this faith was viuifi∣cated with charity? seeing S. Iames, c. 2. v. 22.

novv cited, affirmcs, that his faith vvrought vvith his works, and by works his faith was made perfect. And Galat. 5. v. 6. where the Apostle treates of the same iustification by faith, maketh this matter out of question: for in Iesus Christ neither circumcision auayleth any thing, nor incircumcision; but faith, which worketh by loue, or charity. This truth is imbraced by all Romane Catholi∣kes, though it be not, as they hold, our formall iustification, nor a condigne merit of our first iustification; but only a congruous, and yet sure disposition to it, through the mercifull and faithfull promise of God, and through the only merits of our Sauiour. By all these particulars duly pondered, appeares, that this text of the Apostle, Rom. 3. v. 28. therefore we conclude that a man is iustifyed by faith without the works of the law, sayes nothing but what is taught by Romane Catholikes vniuersally. But if Protestants would conclude any thing against vs, they must produce a text which sayes, good workes of such as are iustifyed already, done by vertue of the grace of Christ, and not by the bare knovvledge of the lavv, do not iustify, (and this only is in question betwixt vs) that is, augment and in••crease that righteousnesse or iustice already ac∣quired, and make vs more iust. The former answer is likewise to be applyed to the other texts, Rom. 5. v. 1. Rom. 1. v. 17. Galat. 2. v. 17. for the Apostles meaning is the same in them all.

Yet because I intend to giue full satisfaction to each text obiected against vs, I will adde a word or two to these seuerall texts.

The second text. Rom. 5. v. 1. Being iustified by faith, vve haue peace vvith God, through out Lord Iesus Christ.

This text is mistaken.

Here S. Paul speakes of the fitst iustifica∣tion, wherby a sinner is made a seruant and friend of God (agreably to Romane Catho∣liks now deliuered) as appeares, v. 8. But God commendeth his loue to vs in that vvhile vve vvere yet sinners, Christ dyed for vs, and v. 10. for if vvhile vve vvere enemyes, vve vvere reconciled to God, by the death of Christ, much more being reconciled, vve shall be saued by his life: and the whole sequell of the chapter shewes euidently that his maine dis∣course is of the first iustification and atto∣nement of sinners and enemyes to God through the death of Christ: yea euen the text it selfe v. 1. here obiected, declares it selfe sufficiently to be meant of the first iustifica∣tion, Therefote being iustifyed by faith, vve haue peace vvith God through our Lord Iesus Christ, sayth the text; for this hauing peace vvith God by iustification, argues that before that iustifica∣tion, we had not peace, but ••mnity with God,

and so were in state of sinne and damnation; which is only true of the first iustification; for before the second iustification or increace of iustice we haue that peace with God, and so receiue not peace by reason of it. And though there were no other answer saue this, that, of whatsoeuer iustification this text speakes, Rom. 5. v. 1. yet iustification by faith only, (for proofe of which it is alleadged, will neuer be proued from it; for it sayth, being iustifyed by feith, but no newes here of faith only.

The third text. Rom. 1. v. 17. For therin is the righteousnesse of God reuealed from faith to faith, as it is vvritten, the iust liueth by faith.

This text is mistaken.

These words prooue nothing at all for iusti∣fication by faith only, no more then this propo∣sition, the iust man liues by breath, proues that the iust man liues by breath only: for as his liuing corporally by breath. hinders not his liuing by meat, and drinke, so his liuing spiritually by faith hinders not his liuing by good vvorks: for as breath, meate, and drinke concurre to his tem∣porall; so faith an good works concurre to his spirituall life. and euen Protestants them∣selues must confesse that this text, the iust man

liueth by fatih, cannot possibly inferre that he liueth by faith only: for S. Paul saith, Rom. 3.24. being iustifyed freely by his grace: and v. 18. euen so by the righteousnesse of one, the free gift came vppon all men to the iustification of life. So that according to S. Paul, the iust liues by grace, and by the righteousnsse of Christ, as well as by faith; and so not by faith only. Neyther can it bee answeared, that faith it self is that grace where of the Apostle speakes, and con∣sequently this objection of myne is to noe purpose, for though faith be a gift and grace of God, yet there are many more gifts and graces besides it, signified by the word grace, and particularly that preuentinge grace, or diuine light, and inspiration, which the holy Ghost infuses into mans hart as the principles, and causes of diuine faith in vs, which is be∣stowed vppon vs, purely gratis, and out of mere mercy.

The 4. text, Gal. 2. v. 11. Knowing that a man is not iustifyed by the vvorks of the law, but by the faith of Iesus Christ, that vvee might be iustifyed by the faith of Christ, and not by the vvorkes of the law: for by the vvorks of the law shall no flesh be iustifyed.

This text is mistaken.

These words prooue as little as any of the former, that is, nothing at all for iusti∣fication by faith only. For, as it is most

manifest by the whol precedent context in the chapter, the whol matter there handled, is about Circumcision and obseruation of the ceremoniall law of the Iewes, as different from the life and practice of the Gentills: see v. 2.3.5.7.8.12.14. and chap. 4. v. 10. Yee obserue dayes, and monthes, and tymes, and yeares, saith S. Paul reprehending the Christians for re∣turning to those empty elements of the cere∣moniall law, v. 6. and the like chap. 5. v. 1.2.3. about circumcision, stand, and be not held in againe vvith the yoke of seruitude, behold I Paul tell you, that if yee be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing; and I testify again to euery man circum∣cising himselfe, that he is a debtour to the whol law.

Now neither Romane Catholike, nor En∣glish Protestant beleeue that they are iusti∣fyed by the ceremoniall law of the Iewes, which only is touched in this chapter. And it is no lesse cleare that there mention is made of the first iustification wherby a sinner be∣coms a child of God, v. 10. VVe sinners by na∣ture Iewes, and not of the Gentiles. Nay the text it selfe obiected, Gal. 2. v. 16. speakes clearly of the first iustification of a sinner to the state of grace, for by the workes of the law shall no flesh be iustified; the word flesh signifijng most familiarly in S. Pauls Epistles, that which is not yet spirituall, but carnall, vnder the guilt of sin, and corruption of nature. For though

such as are already iustified, retayne the con∣cupiscenses of the flesh in them, yet because they resist and subdue them, so long as they remaine iustified. they are not called flesh, by S. Paul, but rather spirituall men.

And that he speakes of the law as known by its own force, light, and doctrine is eui∣dent also v. 16. For if by the law be righteousnesse, then Christ is dead in vayne. which is most true if we speake of the law as known to vs, and working in vs by its owne force, wholy inde∣pendent of the grace and illumination of Christ; but can haue no true sense if we speake of the law as iustifying by the grace of Christ: for then Christ will not haue dyed in vaine; because by his death he merited that grace and light by vertu of which only the law iustifyes. And chapter 3. v. 2. Haue yee receaued the Spirit by the vvorks of the law, or by the hearing of faith? wherby is manifest, both that he speakes of the workes of the law, as working before the receiuing the holy Ghost, and of the first iustification, or receiuing of the Spirit, by the faith of Christ. and v. 18. For if a lavv vvere giuen vvich could viuificate, righteousnesse vvere truly from the lavv. which shewes eui∣dently, that the Apostle speakes of the law as considered in it selfe, and its proper force: for if we consider it as illuminated by faith, and the grace of Christ, it is able to viuificate, and

consequently to iustify, as the Apostle here plainly affirmes. And that he speakes of the law as preceding the faith of Christ, is out of all question v. 23. Before faith came, we were con∣cluded vnder the law, into that faith which was to be reuealed. Therefore the law was our schoolmaster in Christ, that we might be iustifyed from faith.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Rom. 8.
• * 1.2

  Hebr. 11.
• * 1.3

  Rom. 11. Ephes. 2. Tit. 5.
• * 1.4

  Psal. 83.
• * 1.5

  2. Cor. 4. Coll. 3. Rom. 6.
• * 1.6

  Apo••. vl••▪
• * 1.7

  Iames 2▪ v. 24.
• * 1.8

  Rom. 4. v. 1.2.3.
• * 1.9

  Iames 2. v. 22.26.
• * 1.10

  Rom. 3. v. 28.
• * 1.11

  Rom. 5.1.
• * 1.12

  Rom. 1.17
• * 1.13

  Gal. 2.16.
• * 1.14

  Concil. Trid. siss. ••. ••, 8.