A treatise of justifying righteousness in two books ... : all published instead of a fuller answer to the assaults in Dr. Tullies Justificatio Paulina ... / by Richard Baxter.

About this Item

Title
A treatise of justifying righteousness in two books ... : all published instead of a fuller answer to the assaults in Dr. Tullies Justificatio Paulina ... / by Richard Baxter.
Author
Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.
Publication
London :: Printed for Nevil Simons and Jonath. Robinson ...,
1676.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A69541.0001.001
Cite this Item
"A treatise of justifying righteousness in two books ... : all published instead of a fuller answer to the assaults in Dr. Tullies Justificatio Paulina ... / by Richard Baxter." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A69541.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 13, 2024.

Pages

Page 281

Aphorism.

CAn any more be said of Faith, than that * 1.1 we are justified and judged to life, both [for] it, and according to it?

Animadvers.

1. I do not know how so much may be said of Faith, as that we are justified [for] it, though so much may be said; (for so much the Scripture saith) that we are justified by it.

2. [For] notes the formal or the meritorious Cause. [By] notes only the Instrument or the Condition.

3. The Scripture doth not shew that we are justified [by] Works, much less [for] them.

4. Though it shew that we must be judged, and receive our reward according to them.

5. It seems strange that you should so confound secundum and propter, when-as Gregory so long ago so clearly distin∣guished them: Aliud est secundum opera reddere, & aliud propter ipsa opera reddere. Greg. in 7. poen. Psal. sive in Psal. 143. 8.

Reply.

1. I do not mean or say, that we are justified Constitutivè [for] Faith, as a Cause: nor that Faith is Causa Regnandi: But that God giveth this (our Faith and Obedience) as the reason of his absolving or justifying Sentence. And I offer you no other proof than the very express words of Scripture: [For I was hungry;] and, [Because thou hast been faithful.] And in Abraham's case in the very ex∣ample that James brings to prove Justification by Works, it is said, [Because thou hast done this, and hast not spared, &c.] The reason why this is Ratio judicii, is because, Lex est norma judicis: & quic∣quid Lex Conditionem praemii constituit, hoc ipsum est Ratio praemii adjudicandi. The same thing may be Causa sententiae, which is but Conditio praemii

Page 282

adjudicati. Justitia causae est ratio Justificationis per sententiam judicis: Ideo enim hominem Justificat quia justus est: hoc est, quia causa ejus controversa justa est. Sed tamen haec causa consistere potest in nudae Condi∣tionis praestatione, quae rei adjudicatae causa propriè dicta, non est.

2. [For] notes other causes than the formal or meritori∣ous. * 1.2 In our case it noteth, Rationem sententiae, quae est quasi causa impulsiva: Ʋt omnis justitia causae est causa impulsiva judici ut reum absolvat.

3. I marvel you say that the Scripture sheweth not that we are justified by Works; when you read Christ saying [By thy words shalt thou be justified, and by thy words shalt thou be condemned; and James 2. 24. A man is justified by Works, &c.]

4. [According to them,] is all one in sensu fo∣rensi, as [by] them.

5. I suppose by [propter] Gregory meant a meri∣torious propter, and so I agree with him. I never mentioned propter: The [For] that I speak of is [enim,] and not [propter.] It is Matthews [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,] and Luke's [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] 19. 17.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.