A key to the key of Scripture: or An exposition with notes, vpon the Epistle to the Romanes; the three first chapters begun at Walsall in Staffordshire, continued at Pitmister in Somerset. By William Sclater Batchelar in Diuinitie, and minister of the Word of God at Pitmister in Somerset.

THE III. CHAPTER.

Verse 1. What is then the preferment of the Iew? or what is the profit of circumcision?

Verse 2. Much euery manner of way: for chiefely, because vnto them were committed the oracles of God.

THis Chapter, first, continues the allega∣tions of the Iewes in behalfe of them∣selues, and the Apostles answeres to the same; secondly, after resumes the assumption discontinued; that Iewes also are transgressours of the law; and thirdly, prosecutes the first conclusion; that man is iu∣stified by faith, without the workes of the law.

Their first allegation, propounded by way of que∣stion is verse 1. If the case be so, that Iewes equal∣ly with Gentiles, are lyable to condemnation for sin, belike then the Iew hath no preferment aboue the Gentile, neither is there any benefit of circumcision: but the Iewes haue prerogatiues aboue the Gentiles, and circumcision is sure profitable, Ergo. The Apostles answere consists, first, of a concession to the first mem∣ber; secondly, a proofe of it; and thirdly a deniall of the reason, as it serues to ouerturne the first conclusi∣on. verse 9.

The concession propounded, verse 2. much is the prerogatiue of the Iew, proued by instance, the ora∣cles of GOD were committed vnto them: the rest shall be shewen in order. Obserue here first, the excel∣lencie:

secondly, proprietie: thirdly, manner: fourthly, the title of their prerogatiue.

And hence obserue; first, [Obser.] that it is an excellent and chiefe priuiledge, to enioy the word and ministerie thereof; this is saith Paul primarium; for so I take that particle; to note rather the excellencie of the blessing, then the order of enumerationa. See Psal. 147. where the excellencie of it is showne, by attributes, effects, comparisons. First, it conuerteth the soule: secondly, it is sure, we may build on the truth of it: both in pro∣mise of mercie, and threatning of iudgement: thirdly, it giueth wisedome, and that to the simple: fourthly, it is righteous altogether, no errour in it: fiftly, reioyceth the heart: sixtly, pure in all points: seauenthly, en∣lighteneth the eyes; compared to gold for profit; to hony for sweetnes: eightly, maketh circumspect: first, in shewing the danger of sinneb: secondly teaching how to auoide, verse 10. ninthly it encourageth to obedi∣ence by propounding rewards, comforts our distressesc: instructs in righteousnes, discouereth errours; checks our steppings aside, which Dauid counted a great be∣nefitd: as the Arke amongst the Israelites, so this a∣mongst any people is a pledge of Gods presence.

How much then are we indebted to the maiesty and [Ʋse 1] bounty of our God, that hath graced vs with this pri¦•••• blessinge? but to see how coldly thankes for this be∣nefit comes from vs, is strange: our peace and plen∣tie, wee can sometimes thankefully acknowledge; but this blessing of blessings, the glad tydings of peace, wrought with GOD by Iesus Christ; and published in the Gospell; this plentie of the word, how seeme wee eyther to loath, as the Israelites Manna; or at least cold∣ly to commend and publish the rich grace of GOD to vs in that behalfe.

Reasons of it in many, earthly mindednes^f: first, be∣cause

it allowes none but lawfull profits, and in some, for that it restraines carnall libertie, and reproues cor∣ruptionsg.

[Ʋse 2] Is it such a blessing? then by the truth what ere it cost thee, sell it not, what ere it looseth theeh?

Sinnes depriuing vs of this blessing, first, con∣tempti; secondly, barrennesse of good fruitsk: third∣ly, persecution of the ministersl.

[Obser.] Next, note the appropriation of this blessing to the people of the Iewes in the dayes before Christ; com∣pare Psal. 76. & 1.147.20. Deut. 4.7.8. Act. 14.17. Ephes. 2.12 & 3. dim d.

The time of this appropriation, seemes to haue bin about their deliuerance out of Egypt; Iob an Edo∣mite, yet a true worshipper of God; Melchisedech also a Priest of the most high Godm.

Reasons of it giuen are: first, Gods vndeserued and speciall loue, secondly, truth of his promisen.

[Vse 1] Apparent therefore, that grace then was not so v∣niuersall as Papists would haue ito: sith knowledge of the meanes of saluation was denied to the nationsp.

[Vse 2] And secondly, this must be acknowledged for a sin∣gular blessing, that the Lord hath reserued vs for these last dayes wherein the word of God formerly limitted to the coasts of Iury and Palestina, is now published, vnto vs of the Gentiles; and let vs all praise God for his mercyq, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 entrusted with it, as with an excel∣lent treasure; where wee may obserue how the word is committed vnto the Church; and what our duetie is in respect thereof, faithfully to keepe it; and imploy it to the vses of the trustr: this that depositum, the doctrine of the Gospell & whole word of God, parts of faithful∣nesse: first, that we adde nothing theretos: which part of faithfulnesse how well our aduersaries haue dischar∣ged, he that knowes the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 adding of the Apocriphall

bookes to the canon, and equalling their owne traditi∣ons to the written word of God, except he will be blind cannot but acknowledge, with how seuere a charge we are adiured to take heed hereof: See Apoc. 22.18.19.

And to what purpose need we such a supply, sith what is written: first, it sufficeth to faith and saluationu: and secondly, is able to make the man of God compleatly perfect to euery good worke of his callingvv?

A second thing in fidelitie is; that nothing be dimi∣nished of what it hath pleased God to entrust vs vvith allx: herein also our aduersaries haue deceiued the trust reposed in them; shouldering out the second comman∣dement that they might make roome for Images, and scanting the sense of the law as the Pharisies their prede∣cessorsy: with them thoughts of sinne arising from cor∣ruption, are no sinnes; though it be commanded, that God be loued with all the thought; and the law hath said, thou shalt not lustz: and such motions draw away and entice the hearta.

A third part of faithfulnesse; that we keep it vnmin∣gledb, and not as deceitfull vintners, mingle this Wine of the Lords truth, vvith the water of humane fan∣cies.

A fourth part is to beautifie and adorne the truth in all thingsc.

The fift is that we be carefull and choise to whom we communicate: these holy things are not for dogges, nor these pearles for swined.

The sixt and last; that we defend, maintaine, and pub∣lish this truthe.

Last thing obseruable, is the Title giuen to the word; Oracles of God: partly because deliuered either by liuely voyce, or by immediate inspiration from God; in which respect, they are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, liuely Oraclesf, partly because they should be to vs as Ora∣cles,

whereto in all doubts vve should resort. There∣fore Isaiah cals vs to the law and to the testimonieg, and Dauid makes Gods statutes the men of his coun∣sellh.

[Ʋse 1] And if in steed of aduising with Councils and Fa∣thers, men had carefully enquired at these Oracles, for matter of faith: doctrine, no doubt, had continued much freer from corruption.

[Ʋse 2] And if those superstitious ones amongst vs, in steed of enquiring at spirits of diuinationi, and wearying themselues with consultations of Astrologers, would tye themselues to these Oracles, both the comfort and successe of doubtfull attempts, would be much the grea∣ter.

Verse 3. For what, though some did not beleeue, shall their vnbeliefe make the faith of God with∣out effect?

Verse 4. God forbid: yea, let God be true, and e∣uery man a lyar, as it is written, That thou mightst be iustified in thy words, and ouercome when thou art iudged.

BVt proceed we in the Text: For what though some dealt vnfaithfully, shall their vnfaithfulnesse abolish the faith∣fulnesse of God? God forbid, &c.

Their second obiection followes; well; yet this will follow, that either the Lord hath falsified his faith, or else, that all those great promises mentioned in the instrument of his co∣uenant, are become vnfruitfull and vnprofitable vnto vs. Ans. Neither of these; for first▪ that vnfaithfulnes was not vniuersall among the Iewes; some dealt vn∣faithfully,

and to them Gods promises were by their owne default, vneffectuall; but some others there were, and shall euer be in that people, to whom the Lord shall performe his couenant; secondly, yea though all men be lyars, and euen Gods owne children, through frailty, bewray particular vnfaithfulnesse; yet is God still true, both in himselfe, and to them, if they be his; rather pardoning their transgressions, then suffering his truth to faile. And mans vnfaithfulnesse serues ra∣ther to illustrate, then to ouerthrow the Lords fideli∣tie; in as much as he performes his promise, euen to those also, that in some part deale vnfaithfully with him in his couenant. And this is proued by instancek, I haue sinned that thou mightst be iustified, that is, I haue fallen through thy iust permission, and this thou hast suffered, that thou maist be iustified: that is; de∣clared and knowen to be iust, and faithfull in thy pro∣mise.

This, sauing the better iudgment of the learned: I take to be the meaning of the word. For that which some alleadge, that this exposition seemes to import, that how euer men cary themselues, they shall partake the promises. It followes not from it; nay this onely followes, that the Lord performes his promise, notwith∣standing the particular disobedience of his seruants, which is truel, and the promises of God haue their effect to the beleeuing Iewes, notwithstanding the vn∣faithfulnesse of some others amongst them.

Now that we may hence obserue, is this; [Obser.] The vn∣faithfulnesse of vngodly ones in the Church of God, hinders not the accomplishment of Gods promises made to the faithfull: see the Lord auowing this to the Iewes Ezech. 18. by reasons; first, all soules are Gods, equally his creatures, equally deare vnto him; secondly open profession, the soule that sinneth, and

that onely dieth; thirdly, more particular explication; handled in a comparison of equals; as the rebellious sonne hath no immunity by his fathers righteousnes; so neither doth the innocent sonne receiue any detriment by the disobedience o•• the fathern. The Iust liues by his owne faitho, euery man beares his owne burden.

[Vse.] I will apply it to some particulars, as may most con∣cerne the state of our owne Church: this ground me thinkes affords sufficient euidence for determination of those many controuersies, so vntimely raised, so hote∣ly pursued, by Brownists, that haue separated, and Se∣mi-brownists, that still liue after a sort in the communi∣on of our Church. It is first enquired betwixt vs, whe∣ther the malice of the minister impeach the sufficiency or efficacy of the Sacraments to a beleeuing communi∣cant. This question containes these three branches ac∣cording to the seuerall parts of malice or euilnesse in the minister. First, heresie; secondly, lewd life; thirdly, ignorance.

For heresie, the question is auncient; whether bap∣tisme ministred by an heretique be baptisme or no: so of the supper. Ans. Here I take it is this answere, nec a quouis, nec quouis modo.

Perhaps there are Heretiques, whose administration is frustrate; take for instance those, that in the mayne doctrine of the Sacraments, and Trinity of persons, erre fundamentally, as if saith Zanchee, some heretique should teach the party baptised, that the Father alone is God, the Sonne a meere creature; the holy Ghost nothing else but the action of God in our soules; this baptisme thus administred, thus receiued, according to Zanchee his iudgement, is no baptisme. Reason: because not administred according to the doctrine by Christ deliuered, and therefore wants the very forme of baptisme.

Augustine thinkes otherwise; I leaue it in medio: so likewise if any thing essentiall to baptisme be wanting, as matter, or forme, such baptisme is no baptisme. Nicephorus makes mention of a minister that in the want of water baptised with sand; the party was againe baptised; and as I iudge rightly.

But if the Heritique baptising keepe the doctrine of the Sacrament sound in substance, faile not in other things essentiall to the Sacrament; iudgement of the Church now long continued is, that such Sacraments are Sacraments; and need not to be iterated.

I wil propound the reasons of the Ancients, breifly, and as breifly answere the contrary obiections: first, Augu∣stine; thus, a pari as he thinkes; baptisme may as well be giuen out of the Communion of the Church, as it may be had; but it may be had out of the Communion of the Church, by consent euen of Donatists themselues, that vse not to rebaptise repenting reuoltes. Ergo.

Secondly, truth taught by Heritiques is Gods truth, and auaileable to edificationp. Augustine saith well, Sic eorum fictionem fugit spiritus sanctus, vt eorū non deserat ministerium. Iterū, et si non castè annunciabant, sua quaerentes, non quae Iesu Christi; castum tamen erat quod annunciabant, &c. Iterum, si ipse non regeneretur; castum tamen sit quod annunciat, nascitur credens non ex ministri sterilitate, sed ex veritatis foecunditate. If this be true of their preaching, why not also of their administration of Sacraments.

Againe, circumcision administred by Samaritanes was circumcision; and not repeated; why not baptisme ministred by an heritique?

Reasons of Cyprian, keeping euer my reuerence to that glorious Martyr, proue not his purpose; and let it be no imputation of pride to dissent from him herein, sith himselfe professeth, hee desired not to fore iudge

or prescribe to any man; but leaues to euery one, li∣bertie of contrarie both iudgement and practise: his reasons are these; Heretiques cannot giue remission of sinnes or the holy Ghost, sith themselues lacke them. Ergo, giue not the sacrament. Ans. First, the state of the question is changed, for we enquire not so much of the efficacie to the receiuers, as of the sufficiencie of the sacrament in it selfe: secondly, some answere thus; that euen heretiques may be said to haue remission of sinnes, and the holy Ghost; though not formally, yet instrumentally: thirdly, most directly; the consequence is nought; the sacrament may be entier in it selfe, though the grace of the Sacrament be not giuen by the minister. Iohns baptisme was a Sacrament; yet profes∣seth he not to be giuer of the holy Ghost: that digni∣tie was his whose seruants we all areq. Ob. Heretiques cannot pray to be heard, for God heares no sinnersr. Ergo, Ans. Augustine hath three answeres: first, that it is not the speech of our Sauiour, but of the blind man; secondly, that if vniuersally vnderstood, it crosseth o∣ther scriptures, as Luke 18.13 14.

Thirdly, that good prayers put vp by euill men, haue audience with God: non pro p••••uersitate propositorum, sed pro deuotione populorum. Balaam blessed the people, though an euill man, and speaking against the desire of his heart, yet were his words good, and heard of the Lord in behalfe of the peoples.

Ob. But will it not hence follow, that haeretical con∣gregations are Churches of God, since they haue sa∣craments sufficient?

Ans. Not so. Austine well saith, they haue baptis∣mum ligitimum, but not legitime; as the theefe hath the true mans purse. And the Sacraments meerely proue not a Church: if seuered from doctrine sound in the foundation.

And our people may here arme themselues against Anabaptisticall dreamers; that would nullifie Popish Baptisme, and vrge rebaptization.

It is true, they neuer felt fruit of Baptisme, till they left communion with Rome; but had the sacrament in it selfe entier, and potentially fruitfull to seale vp for∣giuenesse to beleeuers.

Now if heresie of the Minister impaire not the na∣ture of the Sacrament, much lesse shall it hinder the office and efficacie of the Sacrament in the heart of the beleeuer, vvhich hangs vvholly vpon the pro∣mise of God; and faith of the recipient, wrought by the spirit.

From heresie let vs passe briefely to other lewdnesse of the Minister, and see whether the lewd life, or vn∣sanctified heart of a Minister any whit diminish the per∣fection of the sacrament in it selfe, or hinder the effi∣cacie thereof to vs.

These questions I rather propound, because I see they are such as at this day much trouble the church of God. And Lord, that our church were so happy as to cut off such stumbling blockes from the vveake. It is too true of our Ministers, many of them, that is said of Elyes sonnes they haue occasioned the people to abhorre the offerings of the Lordt: I say not, but it is the peoples sinne to abstaine, yet withall I am sure it is the heauy sinne of such Ministers, that occasion such abstinence, from the Lords holy ordinances. To the question.

Some of the reasons before alledged may hether be applyed, to proue that the lewdnesse of the Minister, detracts nothing from the substance or efficacie of the sacrament.

To these adde these reasons: first, Iudas ministred baptismeu sufficient in it selfe, I doubt not also but

effectuallvv to the beleeuing suscipient, yet himselfe a secret infidell, yea a diuell incarnatex.

Secondly, Leuites and Priests amongst the Iewes offered sacrifices, celebrated Sacraments; vvhich to Gods people were seales of the Couenant; meanes to nourish faith; yet themselues many of them vnsanctified men. Thirdly, otherwise there could be no assurance at all to Gods children that any time they receiued a sa∣crament; because that sanctification of the heart, though it must be presumed to be, where the life is but out∣wardly reformed; yet cannot be knowne certainely, ex∣cept by speciall reuelation. And what difference there is in this behalfe, betwixt a secret, and open prophane man; I see not. Fourthly, instruments haue their effici∣ency from vertue of the principall mouer; neither can the euilnes of the Minister frustrate the vertue of Gods ordinance, in the making, or working of the sacrament.

Ancient Diuines haue expressed this in sundry simi∣litudes; as by water that passeth through a channell of stone into a garden, though the channell it selfe re∣ceiue no benefit, because of its owne indisposition, yet the garden is made fruitfull. So, &c.

Againe, as in sowing it matters not whether with cleane hands, or foule, the seede be sowen, so it selfe be good, the soyle fertile, receiue the heate of the Sunne, and benefit of rayne. So &c.

As the light of the sunne is not defiled, though it passe through the dirtiest place, so neither the dignitie nor vertue of Sacraments hindered by lewdnes of the minister.

And therefore though I loath such Ministers as by their lewd life cause Gods people to abhorre the Lords sacrificesy: yet I cannot see, with what comfort the people can refuse Sacraments for the ill demeanour of the Ministers. Doth any man refuse a Kings Donation,

because a lewd Lawyer drawes vp the conueyance, or deliuers it sealed in the name of the King?

But I hasten to the third branch, which is ignorance; and here thus propound the question; whether the negligence or vnabilitie of the Minister to preach, im∣peach the sufficiencie or efficacie of the Sacrament to the beleeuing communicant. This question hath long troubled the Church of God amongst vs, and yet dis∣quieteth some men weake in iudgement.

I wish with my heart, our Church were so happy as to cut off occasion of this question, by furnishing it self with able pastours in euery congregation. But to the purpose. The negatiue seemes to mee most probable; and with all that heate of inueighing, I see not yet one argument soundly prouing, their actions nullities. And for my iudgement I propound these reasons.

First, it hath been proued that the ill life of the Mi∣nister preiudiceth not the sufficiencie of the Sacrament, therefore neither their ignorance: for it is as much re∣quired of a Minister that hee be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; vnre∣prouable in his life; as that hee be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; able and fit to teachz.

Secondly, Baptisme hath been administred by some that had no calling to preach: yea, and that warranta∣bly, and with Christs owne allowance the Disciples of Christ; before euer they were sent out to preach, admi∣nistred Baptismea. And that this was before their sen∣ding to preach, appeares by this, that Christ himselfe began not publikely to preach: till Iohns imprison∣mentb; and at this time when Christs Disciples bap∣tized; Iohn was not imprisonedc. Ergo.

Thirdly, some auncient Diuines are of opinion that those to whom Peter enioyned the baptising of Corne∣lius and his company) were no preachersd. (Ambrose saith) that Peter had not so much as Deacons vvith

him, nor did himselfe baptise Cornelius, and those with him, but commanded the brethren, which came vvith him from Ioppa to Cornelius to baptise: And the reason of his coniecture is more then probable; for as yet besides the seauen Deacons, there was none ordained: The same Ambrose his authoritie in this place is not to be despised by men of the aduerse part, for as much as themselues alleadge him as authenticall for them in the point of Bishops calling.

Other reasons will appeare in answere to the obiecti∣ons of the aduerse part; which are on this manner.

First, euery ministerie of the new testament, is a preaching ministerie, and therefore sacraments are nullities that are deliuered by no preachers; for Mini∣sters onely can giue sacraments. Ans. First, it will trou∣ble these men, I suppose, to proue that euery ministe∣rie of the new Testament is a preaching Ministerie: holding their owne

• 1 Principles: For what thinke they of Deacons and gouerning Elders, must they also be preachers?
• 2 What of Doctors, who sure, if their description of preaching be sound (as I thinke it is) come not within the compasse of preachers?
• 3 What of those 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉e, which why I should vnderstand of assistent preachers rather then of assisting readers and ministers of Sacraments, I see no reason.

The consequence will not easily be proued; for be it granted that by Gods ordinance none should be mi∣nisters, but who are preachers, will it thence follow; that the action of a no preacher is a nullity? by Gods or∣dinance none should be a Minister, but who is a sancti∣fied man; now if an vnsanctified man haue by bribe∣rie or fraud thrust into that holy calling, are his acti∣ons therefore meere nullitiesf?

Their second Argument whereby they proue them no Ministers; is because they wait not on their officeg: namely on preaching, the onely essentiall propertie of a minister.

Ans. And doth this proue them to be no Ministers by calling, because they neglect execution? Kings then are no Kings if they vse not the sword to punish; and their lawfull iniunctions are nullities to the subiect, because they faile in the principle worke of their calling, shew a desparitie betweene the two; or else learne, they may be Ministers by office that neglect the execution of their office.

Their third obiection is, that vnpreaching Ministers sinne in medling with administration of Sacraments, because that is a pastorall function.

Ans. First, I demaund whether the action it selfe for the matter of it be a sinne in him; or is it his sinne one∣ly because of the faultie manner of performing? If it be in the latter respect onely; that I am sure will not make his action a nullitie to vs; and that materially it is no sinne in him, me thinkes is euident; because eue∣rie man in place of a pastour is bound to administer Sacraments; yea and by omitting any pastorall office he layes open himselfe to Gods wrath, come he in how hee will, whether ordinately, or by intrusion: for in e∣uerie pastour hath the Lord laide necessitie of doing pastorall offices. Secondly, it remaines yet to be pro∣ued, that administration of Sacraments is so appropri∣ated to the person of the pastour, that no other but a compleat pastour may deale in it.

Certainely in the ancient church Deacons vvere as∣sistents to the Bishops and Presbyters, in administrati∣on both of Baptisme and Eucharist.

And many stiffe in the opinion forenamed, vse help of others in publike reading, praying, catechizing, who

by office are no pastours. Lastly, I would gladly haue this consulted of by my Brethren differing from vs in iudgement. What the word of God hath against this; the ordayning and setting a part of some persons, to pub∣like reading, praying, administration of Sacraments, who yet should not be permitted to deale in publique preaching. Surely, some such order appeares to haue beene a∣mongst the Leuites and Priests of the old Tabernacle. And M. Iunius seemes to acknowledge the employ∣ment of Deacons this vvay in the primitiue Church, partly for ease of pastours, partly, for their owne triall.

With what vvarrant of the word they may be cal∣led to a Pastours office that know not how in some measure to diuide the word aright, I see not; but if some men lacking the gift of prophesie be admitted to some other inferiour subordinate seruice in the Church, I see not what the church doth herein repugnant to the scriptures, prouided alwayes they possesse not the place of pastours.

Thus farre of these controuersies, entred into as God can witnesse with my soule, not to iustifie the bold∣nesse or ignorance of such as haue without gifts thrust into the pastours office; but to remoue the vniust and causelesse scruples of vveake consciences, that deeming their actions nullities, haue almost resolued of rebaptization; and vtterly refuse Sacraments at the hands of vnpreaching Ministers. Their desire to haue true seales set to their pardon, I blame not; but their refusall of Gods seales for ignorance or negligence of the keepers, who can defend?

To these may be added, that other quaere betwixt vs and Brownists, whether a man may vvith com∣fort of conscience partake the Sacraments with those assemblies wherein open sinners are tolerated to parti∣cipate;

so that he shall not partake with them in their sinnes, nor any way hinder his owne benefit by these and like workes of religion.

Here againe I could wish the executours of Church Discipline would be awaked, and not suffer the pro∣phane drunkard and adulterer to touch things so ho∣lieh. And my Brethren the Ministers to discerne be∣twixt the precious and the vilei: that the hearts of the righteous be not made sad by such promiscuous pro∣mising and sealing vp life to the wicked: howbeit, it should be farre from euerie honest heart; to separate from assemblies wherein such abuses are tolerated through negligence; or therefore to refuse to vse their owne right, because vsurpers vniustly intrude thereon.

For the question; best Diuines both auncient and moderne thus resolue, that in assemblies, vvhere the word and worship of GOD is kept pure for substance, there may be a comfortable participating of Sacra∣ments; yea though by conniuence of gouernors some inordinate walkers be admitted.

Reasons, some of them are these: First, Paulk, pre∣scribing an order of due preparation to sacraments, wish∣eth vs to examine our selues, not others: now if hee had thought it vnlawfull to communicate with others that are vnworthy, he would haue giuen charge, with as great circumspection, to looke to others as to trie our selues: secondly, the same Apostle limites the crime and penalty of vnworthy receiuing, to the persons selfe that partakes vnworthily, verse 29. By vnworthy com∣municating he brings iudgement on himselfe not vpon others: thirdly, examples of Prophets liuing in cor∣ruptest times of the Church; yet not separating from the publike assemblies, where was the word of GOD, and ceremonies of Gods owne Institution; but in the

middest of a polluted people lifting vp pure hands and pure hearts vnto God: fourthly, practise of Christ & his Apostles, in extremitie of Pharisaicall licence and su∣perstition; yet assembling to the same temple with the wicked themselues, vnto publique exercises of reli∣gion. More I will not adde. The obiections of the ad∣uerse part shall haue a short solution; and so a passage to the next.

Obiect. They alleadge, 1 Cor. 5 11. with such eate notl: 2 Cor. 6.17. Isay 52.11. come out from among themm, touch no vncleane thingn.

Ans. Our Diuines thus answere; first, that the places some of them speake of fellowship with them in workes of darknesseo, by comparing, Ephes. 5 7.11. secondly, that they are meant of priuate familiaritie or amitie with such; and thirdly, that onely as it tends to countenance them in their euill.

It is true saith Augustine; that the Prophet said plainely, come out from amongst them, separate your selues, touch no vncleane thing. Ego vt intelligam quid dixit, attendo quod fecit, by his fact hee expounds his speech. He said depart; to whom said hee it? surely to the righteous: from whom should they depart? sure∣ly from sinners and vniust. I enquire whether himselfe departed from such, and I finde, that he departed not. Therefore hee meant otherwise, viz. then of a bodily separation: for sure hee would be the foremost in do∣ing, that himselfe commanded: he separated in affecti∣on; obiurgauit at{que} arguit: continendo se a consensu, non tetegit immundum obiurgando autem exijt liber in con∣spectu Dei, cui ne{que} sua Deus imputat peccata; quia non fe∣cit; ne{que} aliena quae non approbauit; neque negligentiam, quia non tacuit, neque superbiam quia in vnitate mansit. Sic ergo fratres mei quotquot habetis inter vos, &c. If you haue any amongst you loden with loue of the

world, couetous, periurers, adulterers, &c. as much as in you lyes improue them, that in affection and heart ye may depart from them. Reproue them, that ye may goe out from amongst them: and consent not vnto them, that ye may touch no vncleane thing.

Thus farre Augustine against old Donatists, whose proud schisme Brownists amongst vs haue reuiued.

Yea, let God be true, and euery man a lyar.

The former conclusion is here proued by a reason, as I take it, a fortiori: God is true in his promise and couenant; though euery man be in part vnfaithfull; therefore the vnfaithfulnesse of some few in the church abolisheth not the fidelitie of God in his promise. The Antecedent is proued by a speech of Dauidp. The ac∣commodation of this place is diuers, some referre it to Dauids petitionq, wash me &c. that thou mayest be iu∣stified, id est: that thou mayest be acknowledged iust and true in thy promises. Some to Confiteor, I acknow∣ledge my wickednesse, &c. that thou mayest be iustifi∣ed. Some to peccaui, I haue sinned, that thou mayest be iustified

And this sauing other mens better iudgement, I take to be the connexion agreeablest to the Apostles pur∣pose, and the words of the obiection following.

Quest. Was this then Dauids end in sinning? Ans. Not so: not Dauids end in committing; but the Lords end in permitting his sinne: secondly, the particle (that) notes not alwayes the intention but the euent. Ʋt sit sen∣sus, I haue sinned by thy iust permission; out of which sinne, this one thing hath followed, the illustration and magnifying of the glory of thy truth, in as much as euen to me dealing vnfaithfully in thy Couenant, thou kee∣pest promise and mercie. And this mee thinkes first a∣grees with the Apostles scope, and hath an argument a fortiori to proue the conclusion of the Apostle; mans

infidelitie abolisheth not the truth of God, nay which is more it serues to illustrate and commend it, as one contrarie set by another: secondly, it suites with the obiection ensuing; which is this, our vnrighteousnes commends the righteousnes of God.

[Obser. 1] See we what may hence be gathered: first, I thinke it is hence soundly collected, that particular vnfaithful∣nesse cuts no man off from the Couenant of grace: GOD is true in performing his promise, though eue∣rie man; yea his own children be in part vnfaithfull.

Particular vnfaithfulnesse; I thus interpret; that which is showne in some particular acts of vnfaithful∣nesse: as in Dauids adulterie and murther, &c. grosse fals, and such as deserued vtter reiection from Gods loue, yet through Gods pardoning mercy, no separa∣ting sinnes: secondly, such as wherein the committer is in part a patient as Bernard interpreteth; because with the whole heart he sinneth not, but hath euer some re∣luctation against the temptation; some dislike after the committingr: See the reasonss.

[Ʋse.] Therefore they are iniurious to the comfort of Gods Saints, that teach euery grosse sinne wasting the Conscience, to throw them for the present, vtterly out of Gods fauour. It is true that till repentance, sense of fauour is lost: yet euen then when the Lord turnes towards vs the anger of his countenance, is he a graci∣ous God and father vnto vs. Yea, his very anger ari∣seth from loue, and tends to good.

Now if any should hence emboulden himselfe to commit sinne; let me say what I thinke; hee giues e∣uidence that he neuer yet came within Gods Couenant; but if by infirmitie any haue been ouertaken; let him not from particular slips conclude his throwing out of the Couenant; God is still a father, and Christ an aduo∣catet.

That thou mayest be iustified, &c.] Very sinne it selfe [Obser. 2] turnes in the issue to the glorie of God: had we euer had so glorious a monument of Gods power and iu∣stice, had not Pharaoh in his pride and obstinacie pro∣posed to Gods commandu? It was foelix culpa, saith Gregory of Adams fall (iudging of it by the issue) that made way for such a redeemer as was Christ the Lord. In a word; God glorifies his mercie in pardoning, his iustice in punishing, his power in ouer-ruling, his wisedome in ordering the very sinnes of men and di∣uels.

May he not then, [Vse.] without impeachment of his good∣nesse, permit sinne to be? that knowes out of it to bring so much glory to himselfe? It is true that Au∣stin hath, the omnipotent God would neuer so much as suffer euill to be done, but that he knowes to bring good out of euill.

There is nothing so absolutely euill, but eyther hath or may admit some respects of goodnes. And whether they more dishonour God, that teach an idle speculati∣on of the euill deeds of men, and erect a power of com∣mitting sinne, countermaunding Gods power in preuen∣ting it, or they that ascribe to him a voluntarie permit∣ting of it for his owne glorie, let Gods Church iudge.

Verse 5. Now if our vnrighteousnesse commend the righteousnesse of God, what shall wee say? Is God vnrighteous which punisheth? (I speake as a man)

Verse 6. God forbid: else how shall God iudge the world?

NOw follow certaine obiections, occasi∣oned by this present doctrine, and al∣legation out of the Psalme. Ob. If this be so (as thou seemest to alleadge out of Dauid) that our vnrighteousnes, com∣mend, id est, sets out, and makes more conspicuous the righteousnesse and fidelitie of God; then is God vniust that punisheth for vnrighteousnesse. Ans. Of three members; first, a Caution: I speake as a man; that is, in person of a carnall and prophane man: secondly, a detestation; GOD forbid: thirdly, confutation of the consequent; by a reason from the act or office of God; God is not vniust; for then could he not be iudge of the world, &c.

In this obiection note we two things: first, the man∣ner of propounding: secondly, the substance of it: manner, by way of question; and that after a sort inter∣rupted in the very vtterance; the Apostle me thinkes, therein residencing the state of godlesse cauillers a∣gainst Gods truth.

[Obser.] How they are sometimes appaled and euen at a stand in vttering their blasphemous conclusions. Reasons: first, naturall conscience sometimes is weakened in themvv: secondly, remembrance of iudgements infli∣cted on others causeth trembling: thirdly, GOD him∣selfe sometimes immediately strikes with fearex.

And it were to be wished they had grace to stop; [Vse.] where conscience checkes; that if the minde haue had libertie to conceiue, the tongue yet may be bridled from vttering blasphemies, which consci∣ence recoyles against: how often, doe I perswade my selfe, haue our aduersaries of Rome such con∣troulements, while they are labouring to make Gods truth odious, by deducing thereout blasphemous infe∣rences? it is fearefull to breake through impedi∣ments that GOD layes in our way to withhold from sinne.

Substance of the obiection. If our vnfaithful∣nesse serue to illustrate Gods truth, and to make it more glorious; then is GOD vniust that punisheth vnfaithfulnesse. But the first is true: Ergo. Now the direct answere is not here expressed by the Apostle, partly for that the cauill was so odious, that it requi∣red rather detestation, then answere; partly because the answere vvas so obuious, that any man might frame it; see we vvhat it is: the answere is on this man∣ner, that it followeth not, because that the illustra∣tion of Gods glorie flowes not from our sinnes, ey∣ther by nature of them, or by intention of the com∣mitter, but by accident rather. See wee therefore a little how sinnes set forth and commend Gods truth, and promote his glorie. Ans. First, as one contra∣rie sets forth the nature of another, by comparison and iuxta-position. Sicknesse commends health, peace, warre; and mans vnrighteousnesse Gods righteous∣nesse, thus onely by making it appeare more glo∣rious, when they are compared together. Health receiues no bettering from sicknesse naturally, yea ra∣ther it ouerthrowes it: so secondly by accident, be∣cause GOD takes occasion thereby eyther to shew mercie in pardoning, or iustice in punishing.

Whence followeth this doctrine:

[Obser.] That though mans vvickednesse redound in the issue to Gods glorie, yet is GOD iust in punish∣ing it.

Reasons: first, sinne in its owne nature tends to Gods dishonoury: secondly, the sinner in it intends not to honour GODz. Augustine showes how in wilfull murther, though it be true, that GOD after a sort giues the innocent into the hand of the slayer, yet God is iust, and the murtherer, doing the secret vvill of God, is iustly punished.

Deus non nisi iustè, homo autem poenâ dignus; non quia illum occidit quem deus nollet occidi: sed quia per iniquitatem. Non enim ministerium Deo iubenti praebu∣it, sed suae malignae cupiditati seruiuit. In vno igitur eo∣dem{que} facto; & Deus de occulta aequitate laudatur; & homo de propria iniquitate punitur, &c. hee addes the instance of Iudas, vt alibi.

[Ʋse.] Therefore let no man please himselfe in this that his euill deedes haue turned in the euent to the glory of God.

It is true that there is not the lewdest action of the prophanest miscreant, but GOD brings some good out of it: their iudgement is neuer the lesse, not∣withstanding GOD be thereby accidentally glorifi∣ed. There was neuer more hellish sinne then that of the Iewes in crucifying the Lord of glorie; nothing by which God euer reaped greater glory then by the death of his Sonne: yet is the wrath of GOD come vpon them to the vtmosta: and that most iustly.

It is true that Pauls bands turned in the issue to the furtherance of the Gospellb: yet woe to that Ly∣on that bound him. True, that persecutions of Gods children turne to their benefitc, bringing quiet fruit of righteousnessed: working vnto them an incompa∣rable

waight of gloriee: yet shall God in his iust iudge∣ment recompence tribulation to them that trouble hisf: but proceed we in the Text.

In the Apostles answere, occurres first this Caution: I speake after or according to man: first, not in mine owne person; as if I eyther approued or deuised such a deduction; but I Anticipate onely the cauils of prophane carnall men; readier to blaspheme then to beleeue the truth.

So charie ought Gods children to be in obiecting against the truth, and euen in propounding the ca∣uils of others, neuer to owne them for theirs; such protestations were seasonable in the scholasticall dis∣putations; especially where rude nouices are admit∣ted to be Auditors; I speake what I know, the verie omission of such cautions, and ouer great heat in pres∣sing obiections, though but personately, hath tain∣ted the iudgements of some through their igno∣rance.

Secondly, his detestation. Ab sit: God forbid; the forme of Apostolicall detestation: and as Caie∣tane saith; it shewes how hee euen abhorred to heare mention of the iniustice of God. And should teach vs not vvithout trembling and detestation to reiect ca∣uils especially blasphemous against GOD, and iniu∣rious to his truth: instances in this Epistle are di∣uers.

And if there were no other thing to proue our key-cold loue of Gods truth, and zeale for his glorie; this one were sufficient; our lentitude in reprouing those many blasphemies of Gods holy name, which in com∣pany of prophane men we cannot but heare.

Thirdly, his confutation: (else how shall God iudge the world.) The manner of answere may in logick seeme absurd, but is in Christianitie the best that can be

shaped to denyers of principles; neither was it vvant of skill that made the Apostle deny the conclusion; but Wisedome rather to direct Gods children, how to car∣rie themselues towards such as question vndoubted principles: still hold euident truthes, yea though thou know not how to assoyle doubts raysed by men of corrupt mindes and destitute of the truth.

In Philosophy it is receiued, not to dispute against such as deny principles; in Diuinitie it is most safe e∣specially for meaner men; to hold conclusions eui∣dently taught in despight of all cauilsome premisses.

If any shall question the being of my GOD, in whom I liue, moue, and haue my being; whom, if I were blind, I may euen palpably feele: I may perhaps pittie his Atheisme, and deplore the abuse of wit, but shall choose to confute rather with a club, then with an argument, though plenty want not. If Arius or Antitrynitaryes, shall oppose against the Trinitie of persons in the vnitie of Diuine essence, detest their blas∣phemie; but though their contradictions seeme neuer so plausible and vnanswerable, hold still the conclusi∣on that there are three bearing witnesse in heauen, and that these are oneg.

Verse 7. For if the veritie of God hath more a∣bounded through my lye vnto his glorie, why am I yet condemned as a sinner.

Verse 8. And (as wee are blamed, and as some affirme that we say) why doe we not euill, that good may come thereof? whose damnation is iust.

BVt see wee here other cauilling in∣ferences from the same grounds: The Apostle brings in the cauiller thus yet inferring: If Gods truth hath been much more aboundant∣ly manifested by my lye, and vn∣faithfulnesse to his glory, not onely God shal be vniust in punishing, but God and man both iniurious in censuring my action of sinne, yea more then that; these euill things (as they are deemed) should be exhorted vnto and done as good, that so great a good as Gods glorie might come thereby: This the obiection; answere followeth; first, these are but slan∣ders and scandalous imputations; for we teach no such thing, neither will these conclusions follow vpon our doctrine; secondly, by denuntiation of iudgement, their damnation or iudgement is iust. The direct an∣swere to all these cauils see in verse 5. they haue all a manifest fallaci accidentis.

Obserue the common lot of Ministers to be subiect to slanders (as we are slanderedh.) [Obser.]

Reason; thorough our sides Sathan wounds the truth; and by disgrace of our persons aliens from re∣spect of our doctrine.

Let neither Ministers nor people thinke it strange if [Ʋse 1] this betide vs at this dayi. The diuell is still a Diuell;

as the accuser of the brethrenk: so especially the slan∣derer of the ministerie.

[Ʋse 2] Be not hastie to admit an accusation against an El∣derl: not vnder two or three witnesses and those au∣thenticall. The reason of which caueat, is thus giuen by some; for that Sathan hath speciall enuie at such, and none more exposed to calumnyes then they, none whose disgrace brings greater preiudice to passage of the truth.

[Obser.] As our persons escape not slanders; so neither our doctrines scandalous imputations Christ accused as a destroyer of the lawm: what neede wee seeke further then our owne experience? hee that hath leasure, let him see that f••rraginem blasphemiarum scraped together by Kellysson out of Bellarmine against not ours, but Pauls doctrine of Predestination; certainety of saluati∣on, iustification by faith onely, &c.

This onely let me admonish our people, as not to be offended at this when it fals out, so withall to com∣pare what wee teach of the Articles with the writings of the Prophets and Apostles, yea this withall let mee more say, that the cauils against our doctrines are no other then what Gods spirit hath preuented, and plen∣tifully answered in the scripturesn.

And let these slanderers well waigh what the Apostle here speakes of their issue; (their damnation is iust) and sure if for idle words wee are countableo, how much more for blasphemies against Gods holy truth ^p?

Verse 8. And (as wee are blamed, and as some affirme that we say) why doe we not euill, that good may come thereof? whose damnation is iust.

LEt vs doe euill that good may come of it. This resolution here reproued, af∣fords vs this instruction:

That euill may not be done, that good may come of it: no not the least euill to procure the greatest goodp: Will you speake wickedly for Gods defence, and talke deceitfully for his cause? may I not lend God a lye for his glorie? much lesse doe any other euill, for any o∣ther good whatsoeuer. Sauls pretended intention vvas good, yet his action censured of rebellion, and com∣pared with the sinne of witchcraftq; and how did Gods wrath burne against Ʋzzah, notwithstanding his zealous intention, to preserue the Arke from fallingr.

What Apologie therefore can Papists haue for their vvarranting rebellions and treasons against Princes haereticall, as they tearme them, [Ʋse.] and tyran∣nous? And how will the reference and ordering of such foule actions in Deum, and good of the Church warrant such attempts to conspiratours? It is a good saying of Caietane, vpon this place; secundum sanam veram{que} doctrinam peccata non sunt eligenda vt media ad quemcum{que} bonum finem. Heare his reason. Quia suapte naturâ repugnat peccato quod sit eligibile; & propterea nec propter se nec propter aliud bonum est eligibile. And i•• no sinne, sure then not the murther of the Lords annoin∣ted, howsoeuer hereticall; tyrannous, excommuni∣cate.

I say nothing of the whole frame of their religion, that hath no other foundation in the world much of it, but good ends and intentions; such as are stirring vp of deuotion alluring of the people, abating of cor∣ruptions, and see in what esteeme such wise ordinances are with the Lordt.

Now I could wish our people had this principle tho∣roughly fastened in their vnderstanding; that good intentions make not good actions, and that as well the meane, as the meaning must be good: if wee desire to haue our actions pleasing vnto Godu. Sathans ad∣uantages are many from hence; euils by this meanes being not onely bouldly committed but stoutly de∣fended.

I will passe from this place with a question or two; first, what if two euils be propounded? may not the lest be chosen to auoide the greater? Ans. Euils are of two sorts: first, euils of paine: secondly, euils of sinne: If both be euils of paine, the olde rule is E malis mini∣mum, though perhaps there are cases,x wherein it is not safe to be our owne caruers. If both be sinnes, the rule is this; E malis nullum: no not the least to auoide the greatest. Caietane reasons well, if no euill may be done that good may be procured, much lesse that euill may be auoyded: seeing that to auoide an euill is a lesse good, then to procure a thing truely good.

Secondly, what if euils of both natures offer them∣selues; perhaps a little sinne (if any may be little) and a great paine? as an officious lye or cruell death, may not the lye be aduentured, that death may be auoided? Ans. If thou mayest not lye for Gods gloriey, much lesse for thine owne life, that should be as dung vnto thee, compared with the glorie of God.

May sinnes be tolerated to auoide inconueniences? as vsurie to maintaine traffique; Idolatry to preserue

peace of kingdomes, &c. Ans. This rule well weighed sufficiently assoyles these doubts; whatsoeuer sinnes we haue power to hinder, and hinder not, become ours by iust imputationz. And for toleration of strange worship, if it hath been the blemish of good kings to to∣lerate instruments of Idolatrie, though not the vse of them; if secondly, commendation of others to remoue them; if thirdly, Asa did wel in not tolerating his mother to haue her Idola: if fourthly, he & others be commen∣ded for commanding and compelling their people to serue the Lord, and to doe after the law and the com∣mandementb; mee thinkes they cannot scape blame that tolerate euils so odious: and I could wish all Chri∣stian politiques to consider, that righteousnesse is the best vpholder of states, and transgression in the issue proues their ouerthrowc. May a lesse sinne be tolera∣ted, to preuent a greater. Ans. where meanes are not to hinder bothd: though in Moses perhaps there was something extraordinarie: and that onely till God giue meanes and opportunitie to reforme all.

Thus farre of these cauils by way of digression; of purpose vsed by the Apostle, to preuent the scandall of weake, and stop the mouthes of prophane cauillers.

This wisedome let it be imitated of vs all in our mi∣nisterie, in doctrines that may by mistaking proue of∣fensiue; prudently preuent whatsoeuer a cauiller may obiect, though sometimes wee be censured to shake hands with our Text.

Verse 9. What then? are wee more excellent? No, in no wise: for wee haue already proued, that all, both Iewes and Gentiles are vnder sinne.

Verse 10. As it is written, There is none righte∣ous, no not one.

Verse 11. There is none that vnderstandeth: there is none that seeketh God.

Verse 12. They are all gone out of the way: they haue been made altogether vnprofitable: there is none that doth good, no not one.

Verse 13. Their throate is an open sepulchre: they haue vsed their tongues to deceit: the poy∣son of aspes is vnder their lippes.

Verse 14. Whose mouth is full of cursing and bit∣ternesse.

Verse 15. Their feete are swift to shed bloud.

Verse 16. Destruction and calamitie are in their wayes.

Verse 17. And the way of peace haue they not knowne.

Verse 18. The feare of God is not before their eyes.

LEt vs now proceede to that that fol∣loweth; verse 9. Where the Apostle preoccupates what Iewes might in∣ferre vpon his former concession of priuiledges graunted them aboue the Gentiles. verse 1.2. Ob. Thus much then you grant; that Iewes haue something more then Gentiles; and therefore are not equall in the case of iustification. Ans. Not so; saith the Apostle, for vve

haue already proued, that all both Iewes and Gentiles are vnder sinne.

First, see we how this seeming contradiction may be reconciled, the Iewes haue preheminence aboue the Gentiles many wayes, and againe, Iewes excell not Gen∣tiles. Ans. Both true in diuers respects: if wee regard fauours vouchsafed of God; so Iewes exceede Gentiles; if wee view them in nature, and consider them in the point questioned of the breach of the law; so no oddes betwixt Iew and Gentile; for all are equally vnder 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sinne; all equally therefore excluded from possibilitie of being iustified by vvorkes: This is the plainest reconcilement; though there be others conceiued in o∣ther tearmes.

Now whereas Iewes so readily take hold of vvhat Paul grants, touching their preheminence. [Obser.] Obserue wee how propense our proud nature is, to owne her excellencies, though hardly brought to acknowledge infirmitiese. Reasons, First, nature sicke of selfe-loue; and loth to seeme nothing in her selfe; the lesson hard to deny our seluesf: Secondly, and the cunning diuell first wounded in himselfe by pride; labors by pride to keepe possession against grace; GOD resisteth the proudg: this is well knowne to the Diuell.

This may wee easily take our selues withall euer by a little obseruance; labour wee to correct it, [Vse.] by dwel∣ling vpon meditation of naturall frailety.

The Lord vseth these meanes to remoue it: first, Affliction after greatest fauoursh: secondly, permitting graces to ebbe and flow in vs: thirdly, sometimes lea∣uing vs to our selues,i that by experience of frailetie we may learne to beare lowly conceits of our selues in nature.

For this cause let vs consider the obseruation this verse next affordeth, that is, [Obser.] that whatsoeuer difference

grace or prouidence hath put betwixt vs, in this we are all equall, whether Iewes or Gentiles, bond or free, king or beggar, if wee be sonnes of Adam, wee are all vnder sinne. That fountaine hath poysoned all the streames thence issuing. Now so wee are said to be in three respects: first, vnder guilt of sinne: secondly, vnder curse of sinne: thirdly, vnder raigne of sinne.

The two first are here chiefely meantk, and the glose of Rhemists, that will haue this saying of Paul, and the testimonies annexed, to be restrained to the multitude and more part of the Iewes, not vnderstood of euery particular; as Zacharie and Elizabeth; the blessed Virgin, and others, is absurd; for who can ima∣gine Paul, or rather Gods spirit so bad a logitian, as out of a particular to conclude a generall.

No lew can be iustified by the law; for the most part of them are vnder sinne: is this trow we Pauls best logicke?

Ob. Zacharie and Elizabeth &c. were iust. Ans. by grace, not by nature, whereof the Apostle here con∣cludes. And Pauls wisedome is obseruable, reckoning himself amongst these that excell not by nature though God had by grace, put difference betwixt him & others.

[Ʋse 1] Now brethren this state of our nature, let vs all take notice of; and labour, not onely to acknowledge it in our iudgement; but euen to feele it in our hearts: first, it is that must be in vs before wee can be fitted for gracel: secondly, it hath a gracious promise of refre∣shing, vbi supram; thirdly, lacke of it hindereth all solide comfortn: fourthly, the first step to Gods kingdomeo: Meanes, first, view our selues in the looking glasse of the lawp: it is the end why it is giuen, to shew miserie, by reason of sinne; and to implead vs guiltie before Gods iudgement seateq: secondly, apply to our selues the curses, which are without partialitie threatned to euery

transgressour, for euery transgressionr: thirdly, con∣sider of how pure eyes the Lord iss: how hee hates iniquitiet: and suffers no transgression to passe vnpu∣nishedu: hath appointed a day wherein to iudge the world in righteousnesvv: brings euerie worke to iudge∣ment, and euery secret thing whether it be good or euillx: fiftly, aske but thine owne soule, thou hast a thousand witnesses in thine owne bosome of this guilti∣nes and subiection to the curse of sinne. Conscience (if it be not seared) I perswade my selfe trembles, in most men, at the sight of particular hearing, of generall iudgementy: if seared, this a heauier iudgementz: and it selfe an argument of our being still vnder sinnea:

Lastly, I vvould but know the reason, vvhy a∣mongst-men in their pure, or rather impure natu∣rals, the doctrine of the law is so distastefull, as in experience ministres finde? No doubt conscience in them guiltie of transgression, flyes that arraigne∣mentb.

Hence learne we to cleare Gods iustice, in iudgements [Ʋse 2] executed vpon such as to the ignorant, seeme innocent. Exempl.c We reade of a iudgement executed vpon A∣chan and his children, for reseruing part of what GOD had deuoted to execration.

With what iustice, saith an Atheist, dies the infant for the fathers sinne? Ans. Many answeres are giuen: first, that it was a worke of Gods absolute 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for terrour of others: secondly, that children are parts of their parents, and in them their parents are punished: thirdly, some, that perhaps they sinned by conceale∣ment; the scripture no where mentioning that they were infants: fourthly, let it be granted they were in∣fants; yet were they sonnes of Adam, and therefore vncleaned: and as Paul here speakes, vnder sinne.

That God defers execution of wrath, but for the

least moment, it is his great mercie; that hee inflicts death at any time vpon men vnder sinne, what iniustice is it?

[Ʋse 3] Let it teach vs not to murmure against God in our afflictions; be they neuer so violent, wherewith the Lord afflicts vs; if we consider our estate naturall; wee shall be forced to say of our crosse as the the theefe of his punishmente: wee are iustly here; and receiue things worthy of that we haue done.

Here followes proofe of that formerly taught; that all sonnes of Adam, whether Iewes or Gentiles, are vnder sinne: it is taken from place of testimonies, out of the Psalmes and Prophets, as the margine well notes them: touching accommodation of these testimonies to the Apostles purpose: some doubt there may ••e made, in as much as the Prophets, Dauid and Isay, seeme to apply them to particular persons and times. Some an∣swere; that these being the purest times of the Iewish church, vnder Dauid and Ezekiah, they may well con∣clude the rest, by an argument from the greater to the lesse: secondly, some, that Paul meant to proue his purpose, by induction of particulars, which vpon the former ground of the puritie of these times, more then of other, he brake of, thinking the purpose by these particulars sufficiently proued; but thirdly, it is appa∣rant to him that reades the Psalmes especially, that they are vniuersallie to be vnderstoode of all persons and times. Vt Psal. 14. &c. To which let this be added; fourthly, that howeuer some particulars of actuall sinnes, shew not themselues in all and euery man, yet the fountaine and seede, as it were of all, is in all men, none excepted; and by these particulars that wee see eminent in some, we may see to what we are all inclined, were it not that the Lord by grace, eyther restraines, or corrects.

But here let vs obserue, [Obser.] how all men naturally are in all parts subiect to all sinnes.

Consider but the testimonies alledged, and you shall see an Anatomie of the whole man naturall; I spare particularly to handle them, for that they are odi∣ous to the considerate reader.

This onely consider, how hee iustly taxeth vs of vvant of all goodnesse: pronesse, and execution of all euill, &c.

Ob. If any shall say that euen in men naturall▪ we see abstinence from some euils, performance of some good duties, and as euerie earth beares not euerie weede; so neither is euerie mans heart full of all sinnes.

Ans. That any man is exempt from any one sinne, and extremitie thereof, it comes not of na∣ture, but of restraining gracef, man is borne (saith Iob) as a wilde asse colt in the wildernesse, and as the horse rusheth into the battell, so a naturall man, more then it pleaseth God to bridle, runnes headlong into all extremitie of prophanenesseg.

And this should teach vs iealousie and watchful∣nesse [Vse 1] ouer our owne hearts, that no man presuming of any power in nature, throw himselfe into tempta∣tions; but pray God daily, not to leade vs into themh: fearefull are examples euen of Gods Saints, this way: see Peterl, and Salomonk: sundry particulars might be instanced.

That one I vvill presse vvhich is common in practise at this day; regardlesnesse of choyse in marriage; the common enquirie is how beau∣tifull how vvealthie, how friended; religion that should principallie be eyed, not once thought of: they hope, though neuer so prophane or superstiti∣ous, to be a meane to gaine them. It is a holy speech of Nehemiah. Cap. 13 26. vpon this occasion; did not

Salomon king of Israell, sinne by these things? yet among many Nations there was none like him; for hee was beloued of his GOD, and GOD had made him King ouer Israell; yet strange women cau∣sed him to sinne: Compare 2 Reg. 8.12.13. see an ex∣hortation, Phil. 2.12.13.

[Vse 2] If GOD hath exempted thee from dominion of any one sinne; let his grace haue the glorie; thou seest euerie day examples of detestable trans¦gressions, thefts, murthers, treasons, adulteries, &c. out of question they are the beast streames that issue from a gracelesse heartl: In them as in a looking glasse, thou mayest see thine owne nature: Let euery grosse sinne seene in another, be vnto thee a Sermon of thank∣fulnesse vnto God; by whose grace thou hast been vp∣holden and kept from like enormitiesm.

[Vse 3] Feare to insult ouer the sinnes of others; rather pit∣tie their forlorne nature; and if Brethren; in meeke∣nesse restore them, considering thy selfe that thou al∣so mayest be temptedn.

Verse 19. Now wee know that whatsoeuer the Law saith, it saith it to them which are vnder the Law, that euery mouth may be stopped, and all the world be culpable before God.

IN this verse the Apostle preoccu∣pa••es the exception of the Iewes Ob. These testimonies conclude not vs, but Gentiles. Ans. First, the records out of which they are drawne proue the contrarie; that Iewes especially are here meant: what soeuer the law saith, it saith to them in the Law:

but these things the law saith, therefore Iewes who onely had the giuing of the Lawo, here especi∣ally are intended: secondly, à fine: the ende of these and like speeches in scripture, is that euery mouth may be stopped, and the whole world be culpable before God. But except Iewes be here concluded; their mouthes are not stopped. Ergo.

Sense. What the Law saith: Law: first, Scripture; Synecdochically; as Psal. 19. & 119. &c. to them in the law, that is, to that people to whom God gaue his word written; such were Iewesp.

Now that wee may here obserue is; how desirous nature is to shift off from it selfe the stroke of the word of Godq: especially where it censureth and condem∣neth of vnrighteousnesse; first, such hypocrites are we by nature; secondly, and so desirous to seeme some∣thing, more then our brethren.

This that we haue dayly experience of in our mini∣sterie; [Vse.] let a Minister deale in reproofe of any particu∣lar sinne, our peoples vse is to share out to others their portion; he met with such a one and told him his owne; vvhereas alas, if we had wisedome to propound the question, as the disciples in that indefinite speech of our Sauiour, one of you shall betray mee, and aske, is it I? vvee should finde our selues the person meant; at least by what is reproued in others; might see old Adam reproued in our selues; and take occasion by correction of other mens breaking out into action, to bewaile and striue against our owne inclinations.

For this cause, consider wee, [Obser.] what the Apostle ad∣deth; what the law saith, it saith to them in the law; to them onely and to them all; vnderstand it generallie; first, of prescription: secondly, reproofe: thirdly, in∣ditement; fourthly, of commination: fiftly, condem∣nation. Duties equally prescribed to all; breaches of

duties equally reproued in all: transgressions equallie accused in all: punishment equallie threatned to all: sentence of death equally passed on all that trans∣gresser.

[Vse.] And I could wish, and doe pray, this might sincke into the mindes of those, that pleade exemption from obedience, and fondly expect immunitie from punishments threatned in the law. Who is the Lord (saith Pharaoh prophanely) that I, a King as I am; should heare his voice, and let Israel goes?

Thus minded as Pharaoh, alas, how many are there? Deuotion is fit for Church-men; and religion for idlers, that haue nought else to doe; Amaziah vvill haue Amos dismissed from Bethelt: sinnes in the coun∣trey, are no sinnes in court. Prophecie in Iudah, &c. would GOD this corruption stayed onely in Kings Courts; though they also should remember their Lord is in heauen; that Rex Regum and Dominus Domina∣tum; whose law imperiall, reproues, accuseth, threate∣neth; condemneth the sinnes of all without partiality.

That euery mouth may be stopped, &c. whether this, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, That, declare the intention of God, in thus con∣uincing vs of sinne by the law, or the euent onely, there is some doubt, it is sometimes put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, so that; a note of illation rather then of intention.

I haue in the Analysis interpreted in the first sense, with other expositors; and leaue it in medio; because the oddes is not much in the substance of the conclu∣sion. Euery mouth might be stopped Metaphora; that is, that all men might be put to silence, for any claime they can make to righteousnes or saluation by the law; or as others, from boasting of their own righteousnes as verse 27. or for iustifying themselues in Gods sight.

And all the world.] First, not Gentiles onely but Iewes also, all sonnes of Adam be obnoxious or cul∣pable

before God. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; impleadable as guilty of transgression, and so subiect to condemnation.

Now hath the Lord sufficiently conuicted vs of transgression, [Vse.] and stopped the mouths of all men from clayming righteousnesse by the law? Then how dares flesh and bloud, open their mouth once to plead for iu∣stification by the law? why doe wee not rather lay our hand vpon our mouth, and supplicate to our iudge; be our righteousnes in shew neuer so greatu? are we so loth to be beholden to our God for righteousnes? had we rather magnifie the power of Nature, then tran∣scribe glory of righteousnes and saluation to the grace of our God? Surely, saith Paul, they must iudge, ac∣cuse, condemne themselues, that will escape the seueri∣tie of Gods iudgementvv 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; impleadable as guilty; and subiect to condemnation; that this is the state of all men, see testimoniesx: and if there vvere nothing else, yet that trembling of the conscience at the least euidence of Gods wrath, vvould sufficiently euince ity: and Examples. Gen. 4.13.14. Mat. 27.4.

Now Lord that wee had eyes to see, [Vse.] and hearts to feele this miserie wherein we are by naturez: wee had gone a good step towards our happinessea: and let vs all pray God to giue vs that eye salue of his spirit; to see how miserable, wretched, poore, blinde, and naked vve are by natureb.

Verse 20. Therefore by the workes of the law shall no flesh be iustified in his sight for by the law ••m••••th the knowledge of sinne,

LEt vs now proceede. Therefore by the w••rkes of the ••aw, &c. The assump∣tion of the principall syllogisme is here concluded: 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that by workes of the law no man is, or can be iusti∣fied in the sight of God; where a new reason is added; from a contrarie vse and effect of the law: ••y the la•• c••mm••th 〈◊〉〈◊〉 k••••wl•• ••f ••nne. In the words are two things; first, a conclusion; no flesh sha•• be 〈…〉〈…〉 the workes of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the sight of God: se∣condly, a reason, confirming the conclusion: for by the law c••mm•• the knowledge 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sinne. Wee will a little at large explane the conclusion; that the state of the question betwixt vs and iusticiaries, may the better be perceiued. What flesh? What iustified? What workes ••f the law?

Flesh in Scripture syneedochycally sometim••s sig∣nifies man at largec: sometimes corruption of nature drawne by Adams falld: sometimes mans nature with the corruption adioynede the first and last sense, are pertinent to this place. No flesh, that is no man; as P••al. 143 2. to vvhich place the Apostle seemes to allude.

An••] No flesh; vvee may vnderstand it formally, and so it implyes a reason for the conclusion: as if hee should say, no man can be iustified; because euery man is flesh: that is, corrupted with originall sinne.

Shall be iustified.] In the right explanation of this terme, lyes almost the vvhole substance of the con∣trouersie.

Our aduersaries vrging the Grammatical Etymolo∣gy, ••••ke it Physically and with them, to be iustified, is to be made righteous by infusion of habituall righte∣ousnesse.

They vrge: first, Grammar Etymologie: secondly, Texts 〈◊〉〈◊〉: thirdly, Aequipoll••nces, or explanations by other tearmes.

Iustificare, signifies to make righteous, as the com∣position shewes; Ans. first, let that be yeelded, doth it thence follow that this making righteous, is by infusi∣on of habituall righteousnes? Secondly, Bellarmine himselfe in another place blameth those that vrge Grammar against receiued vse of words; de poenitent. lib. 1. cap. 7. In eo erran•• multi (saith he) quod v••cum signifi∣cati ••es ex Etym••l••gia por••us ducunt, quam ex communi scripturae & bonorum authorum vsu.

Texts are these, Dan. 12.3. They which iustifie ma∣ny. Ans. And is it Bellarmines iudgement that Mar∣tyrs; Ministers, or other Christians, doe iustifie by infusion of righteousnesse? I cannot thinke it. Now if they be said to iustifie, as they are said sometimes to forgiue sinnesf, to couer a multitude of sinnesg: to saueh, as instruments, by whose ministerie the Lord iustifies, remits, saues; what is this to the sense by them vrged? or what against our explication.

By his knowledge shall my righteous seruant iustifie manyi. Ans. And why must this scripture signifie iusti∣fying after a Physicall, rather then after a iudiciall man∣ner? The Chapter hath a propheticall description of Christs humiliation; and the blessed effects thence is∣suing vnto vs; the mayne amongst them, is iustifi∣cation, explaned in this verse; first, by the authour, me∣ritoriously procuring it vnto vs: secondly, by subiect, or persons to whom its vouchsafed: thirdly, the instru∣ment or meanes in vs; he shall iustifie many, that is,

procure by his humiliation to all that know him: that is, acknowledge him for their mediatour, absolution from sinne and condemnation. And that this is the sense ap∣peares by the reason adioyned. For hee shall beare their iniquities, that is, the punishment of their sinnes.

The exposition of Bellarmine and the reasons brought to approue it, are to any indifferent reader friuolous.

By his knowledge: that is, doctrine; Ans The words best reade thus, out of the originall; by the knowledge of him; making Christ the obiect knowne, rather then the subiect of knowledge. Ob. my righte∣ous seruant, Ergo, by iustice & seruice he iustifies. Ans. First, what necessitie to take these Epithetes formaliter? Secondly, it was needfull for him that vndertooke as a mediatour to procure our absolution, at the barre of Gods iudgement; himselfe to be holy, harmelesse, se∣parate from sinnersk: Ob. seruus: he iustifies therfore by doing seruice to his father, in the worke of iustifica∣tion; not by iudging. Ans. first, that is not here taught: secondly, how tarre fetcht is this conclusion? the Pro∣phet sheweth here the effect of Christs humiliation: viz. that hee, as the meritorious cause, shall pro∣cure our discharge from sinne; neither doe any of vs contend, that to iustifie alwayes is put for actus iudicis: but is sometimes▪ Metonymically giuen; to Authour, meanes, instrument, of iustification.

Ob. Apoc. 22.11. Qui iustus est, iustificetur adhuc: Ans. First▪ their owne Authentique Greeke, hath not iustificetur; but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, secondly, what necessitie to interpret Physically, rather then iudicial∣ly? May not the sense be this? he that is iust by accepta∣tion in Christ, let him indeauour to preserue himselfe, in that blessed condition.

Thirdly, yeeld that glosse, will it hence follow that in the question of our iustification in the sight of God, it must be so taken? Saith their owne Caelius Pannonius: this is spoken Prophetando non optando. By way of pro∣phecie, rather then of desire or exhortation; And then what hinders but the iudiciarie acception of the word, may stand?

Ob. 1 Cor. 6.11. Ye are iustified; that is, ex iniust••s iusti effecti. Ans. first, be it granted; what is that to making righteous by infusion of inherent righteousnesse? se∣condly, the Apostle directly distinguisheth betwixt san∣ctification and iustification, which Papists in this whole controuersie confound. Ob. Equipollence or explanati∣on: Rom. 5.19. Many shall be made righteous in Christ, as many were made sinners in Adam: hee vrgeth first the phrase made righteous: secondly, the comparison &c.

Ans. Some interpret the phrase thus; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, shall be presented iust. But contra: first, no example can be brought eyther out of scripture, nor for ought I know, out of classicall authour, where this verse, ioyned to a word, whereinto his signification pas∣seth, signifies to be presented; but to be constituted or made: secondly, why translate wee here presented: and in the former clause, made? for there to interpret other∣wise, were harsh.

Secondly, therefore I answere; first, that they can∣not shew that the Apostle here entended to interpret the word iustified: secondly, we yeeld that wee are by the obedience of Christ made righteous; but vvill it thence follow, that it is by infusion of inherent righ∣teousnesse? and not rather by Donation or imputa∣tion?

Ob. It must be by inherence, for so is Adams sin con∣uayed to vs, and thus did Adam make vs sinners.

Ans. Comparisons must not be stretched beyond the intention: there can no more be hence collected, but that wee are made righteous by Christs obedience, no lesse then by Adams disobedience wee vvere made sinners: or that Christ is herein like to Adam; that as he conuayed sinne to his posteritie, so Christ righ∣teousnesse to his children.

Touching manner of conuayance or communicati∣on, the Apostle speakes not. Therefore in this sense, the terme is not vsed in this question.

Let vs see now how the scripture vseth the word: and especially, how in this place and question the Apo∣stle vnderstands it? The word to iustifie, or to be iustifi∣ed▪ signifies sometimes to acknowledge iust, and giue commendation of righteousnes: as Luk. 27.19. Rom. 3.4 so men are said to iustifie GOD. Sometimes to ap∣proue, maintaine, defend as iustl. so to men in respect of themselues or others. Sometimes Metaphorically, or by Senecdoche, to free or deliuer; as Rom. 7. Some∣times to absolue and acquit from crimes whereof a man is accused, whether iustly, or vniustly: or to pro∣nounce iust, and giue commendation of righteous∣nessem, so Pro. 1 &c. callat. cum. Pro. 24.24. Isay 5.23. Sometimes to giue testimonie and reward of righte∣ousnessen. Sometimes to esteeme, accept, pronounce, righteouso. These significations are many of them co∣incedent. Let vs enquire in what sense the Apostle in this question takes it: vvee shall best vnderstand it: first, by scope of the Apostle: secondly, by vse of the word in this question.

The scope of the Apostle is this, to shew how a poore sinner guiltie of transgression, and thereby ex∣cluded from hope of heauen, and lyable to condem∣nation, may obtaine righteousnes, such as for which the Lord shal at the barre of his iudgement pronounce,

and account him righteous, and so acquit him from condemnation.

That this is the Scope, appeares by that formerly in the Epistle; where the Apostle hath conuinced all sons of Adam of vnrighteousnesse; to this end, that they might seeke righteousnesse out of themselues in Christ. And willing to giue refreshing to the wearie soule pres∣sed with conscience of sinne, and priuitie of lacke of righteousnesse; he sets downe, what that righteousnes is, for which God will accept and account vs righteous: according to this scope, then to be iustified is to be pronounced & accounted as righteous. Now this being granted to be the Apostles drift; see we▪ what in expe∣rience of a Christian, is that that troubles the conscience arraigned? what that that giues it peace? I speake now in generall: that that first affrights, is feare of condem∣nation; because of the sentence of the law, and seueritie of the iudge; this first in sensep; but if a man be deman∣ded why he feares condemnation, his answere will be, because he lackes righteousnesse, and knowes GOD to be of pure eyes, hating iniquitie, and not holding the wicked innocent: and till hee see some righteous∣nesse in which he may stand before God, he can neuer be freed from feare of condemnation. Therefore the Apostle purposeth here to shew by what meanes a man may obtaine righteousnes, such as for which the Lord shall accept and account him righteous.

Secondly, vse of the Word. The word in this Epistle is first vsed. Rom. 2.13. the hearers of the law are not righteous with God; but the doers of the law shall be iu∣stified: where I thinke the word must thus be rende∣red; are not accounted and holden righteous: for, what he in the latter clause cals iustified, in the former hee tearmes being iust with God; that is, in Gods ac∣count and estimation.

I spare heaping vp of testimonies for breuities sake: To be iustified then, here, is to be accounted or ap∣proued for righteous: that which some vrge, that to be iustified here signifies to be acquit ••rom sinne, that is, to haue pardon of sinnes; though the acception be frequent, yet is not pertinent to that place, as the clause 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, intimates; compare Rom. 2.13. as also the reason of the Apostle this; euery man a transgressour, therefore no man iustified by the law; that is workes of the law; that is, obedience to the law; or secondly, per∣formance of duties therein prescribed.

The sense then is this; that no man borne of Adam can by workes of the law procure account and esteeme of righteousnesse before GOD: so that in this con∣clusion, hee remoues this effect. (Iustification) from this cause (workes of the law) in respect of euery sonne of Adam.

Hence then, let vs obserue this conclusion; that workes of the law cannot procure the esteeme of righ∣teousnesse with GOD, to any child of Adam. First, reason of the Apostle collected from the illatiue parti∣cle therefore; and stands thus, if we looke back to the Apostles discourse. No transgressour of the law can be iustified, that is approued as righteous before God by the workes of the law; but all flesh, that is, euery sonne of Adam is a transgressour of the law: therefore shall no flesh be counted righteous before God, by vvorkes of the law. The assumption hath beene at large proued: cap. 1.2 & 3. see wee the reason of the proposition; it is this. The law to iustification requires continuance in euerie thing therein vvritten, to doe it. Wherefore, seeing he that transgresseth continues not in all things written in the law to do them; apparent that by workes of the law no flesh can be iustified.

Second reason: or rather the same iterated in other

words, is in the latter end of the verse, from a contra∣rie effect of the law: that is, conuiction of sinne: thus: If by the law vvee be all conuicted of sinne; then by vvorkes of the law, can none be iustified; but by the law comes knowledge of sinne; that is, we are conuicted of sinne: Ergo. The assumption againe is euident, set downe in the Apostles words, reason of the consequence; vt supra.

Knowledge of sinne; not so much, quoad naturam peccati; for so by the law comes the knowledge of righteousnesse; but quoad inhaerentiam in nobis; that is, if vve looke to the law wee shall see our vnrighteous∣nes discouered, and be forced to acknowledge that we are sinners; therefore can wee neuer looke to obtaine righteousnesse by doing of the law: for euen one trans∣gression anihilates righteousnesse, in respect of righte∣ousnesse by the law: Gal. 3.10.

Now wha•• (trow we) can our aduersaries obiect to e∣lude this so direct testimonie of the Apostle? They distinguish: first of the law: secondly, workes: thirdly, iustification. Workes of the ceremoniall law, say Rhe∣mists, are here excluded, not those of the law morall. Contra: marke then how vvorthy a disputer they haue made the Apostle: euery man is a transgressour of the law morall; Ergo. no man can be iustified by the workes of the law ceremoniall. Hee meanes by workes of that law, wherof they are transgressors; that was the law mo∣rall: secondly, he concludes of all men both Iewes and Gentils that neither Gentiles by workes of the law of na∣ture, nor Iewes by workes of law written, can be iustified. Now to the Gentils was not the law of ceremonies giuen: thirdly, hee meanes workes of that law, by vvhich com∣meth knowledge of sin, but that is the law moralq, & that of ceremonies, doth not directly, but secondarily, & by accident conuince of sin, fourthly, he meanes that law

by which the true meanes of iustifying a sinner is not reuealed, verse 21. but the law of ceremonies, in sacrifices and other types, though obscurely, reueale Gods righteousnesse; namely, Christ the ende of the law for righteousnesser. It remaines then: that he con∣cludes of all workes, of all law, whether ceremoniall or morall.

Of workes they distinguish thus, according to their principle, and time of doing: de iustitia & operibus lo∣quitur, quae fidem & gratiam dei praecedunt: so Bellar∣mine, so Rhemists, of workes Moral done without faith, and the grace of God: that is, as they must be vnder∣stood; of workes done by infidels, and such as are not yet members of the church: but contra. Gal. 2.15.16. directly preuents this cauill: secondly, the Apostle hath of purpose conuinced the people of God of transgressi∣on, ver e 19. to shew, that euen they could be iustifi∣ed by their workes, though done in faith: thirdly, the reason of the Apostle will conclude workes of grace; for if whosoeuer transgresseth the law cannot be iustifi∣ed by workes of the law, then neither they that haue faith, and are in state of grace; sith they also are trans∣gressors: fourthly, vvorkes done in grace and faith follow iustification. Ergo, cause it not.

Of iustification: this is of two sorts, or hath two degrees; first, whereby a sinner is made iust inherently: secondly, whereby a man being now iust is made more iust inherently too: that is, hath inward righteousnesse encreased in him. Ans. First, scripture is not acquain∣ted with the first and second iustification; for iustifica∣tion, as in this question the scripture vseth it, is actus indiuiduus: secondly, that which they call iustification: scripture termes sanctification; and distinguish it from iustification thirdly, it is apparantly the Apostle pur∣pose, to shevv how a sinner a may attaine righteousnes,

not how he may encrease it: here therfore the place for that distinction: we conclude then, that no man can be iustified by any workes of the law. [Vs]

Now I could wish our people had learnt, but this one lesson thoroughly, amongst those many other, ne∣cessarie to saluation: but so naturall is Poperie in this point, to the sonnes of Adam, that though they can∣not but acknowledge themselues sinners, yet they haue hope of iustification by their workes; their good pray∣ers, and their good seruing of God, the very pillar of their confidence, for righteousnesse and saluation. It is true, they confesse they are sinners, and haue of∣fended; but their good workes they hope will ouer∣come the bad.

Poore soules, if they had eyes to see their miserie: first, how euen one transgression, takes away all possi∣bilitie of being iustified by the laws: and wherewithall wilt thou come before God, to appease his wrath, for thy innumerable transgressions? secondly, can nature poysoned vvith sinne yeeld any fruit pleasing vnto God? thirdly, or our imperfect good vvorkes, ••••ay downe our perfect and consummate sinnes? Holy Da∣uid had many good workes; and except in the case of Vrujah, not noted of any notorious crime; yet depre∣cates iudgementt, vpon this ground; he knew no man liuing could, by his best workes, endure the censure of iustice; and Iob resolues to supplicate to his iudge: and Paul, counts all his owne righteousnes dung and drossevv: and Daniel dares not present himselfe to God in his owne righteousnesse: and who are vve, that we should once dreame of our good vvorkes, o∣uerprising our sinnes, in the ballance of Gods iustice? but see, yea pray GOD thou mayest see, the cunning of the Diuell; first, to robbe vs of righteousnesse by bringing vs into transgression; and then to flat∣ter

vs vvith hope of righteousnesse by the law, that he may keepe vs from Christ.

Now before I passe from this place, the question fit∣ly offers it selfe to be discussed, whether workes of the law, are here wholly and absolutely excluded from power of iustifying: or onely our workes of the law, as done by vs; briefely whether hee exclude as well the obedience of Christ to the law performed for vs: as our owne obedience and doing the workes enioyned in the law. This question hath been but of late moued, and was neuer thought off by the first restorers of our faith, though exercised long in the question of iustifi∣cation: the more I wonder at the peremptorinesse of those that now presse the affirmatiue; and sure if the case were mine owne, I should a little suspect my selfe of singularitie and be iealous of mine eye-sight, least it∣ching after noueltie, had something dazeled me. And for the opinion generally receiued, let me say thus much in generall; that it sufficeth to the Apostles pur∣pose to exclude vvorkes of the law done by our selues; first, hereby is man as much abased, as Rom. 3.27. se∣condly, Gods grace as much magnified, as Tit. 3.5.6.7. thirdly, necessitie equally laid on vs to seeke righ∣teousnesse out of our selues in Christ: fourthly, heart as much inflamed to loue God: fiftly, conscience as well setled in a sweet peace: sixtly, obiections as suffi∣ciently answered: seauenthly, shall I adde, (vvhich I presume is all the aduerse part can plead) scripture as easily and currently explaned; all vvhich so being, though I vvould haue no man for pretense of noueltie, to reiect a truth clearely euidenced in the word; nor am so prophane as to choose to erre with many, rather then to thinke truth vvith few: yet sure, I should much sus∣pect my selfe in such a case, vvhere I goe alone, and vvould not easily be brought to diuulge my conceits

supposedly true, considering what an ope I should giue to aduersaries, to taxe of leuitie and vncertaintie in foundations: though I know this taken at worst, is but hay or stubble, built on the foundation.

Now to the point; I take it, it cannot be shewen to be the Apostles purpose to exclude workes of the law absolutely, but onely as done, or to be done by vs. Rea∣sons; first, this sufficeth to the Apostles purpose; vt supra: secondly, this particle (done by vs) is in some Texts directly expressed; in some others by good consequence deducedy: not hauing mine owne righ∣teousnesse, which is by the law; that is, as I thinke, by the law, as performed by me; for in other sense, Paul could not call the righteousnes by the law, his owne righteousnes, but in respect of his owne performance: thirdly, if I should define righteousnesse, I could not doe it but in these termes, a conformitie to the law of God; if vnrighteousnesse; no otherwise then thus, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 1 Ioh. 3. but righteousnes wee haue by iustification, and that such, as whereof wee are de∣nominated iust and righteous; therefore iustice of the law, not simply excluded, but onely in respect of our performance: fourthly, the Apostle giuing a reason, why it vvas impossible to the law to iustifie vs, saith, it vvas onely because it vvas vveake, by meanes of the fleshz: intimating thus much, I thinke, that vve are excluded from iustification by the law onely in respect of our disabilitie to performe it: fiftly, consent of Di∣uines, teaching that the righteousnes of the law, and that of the Gospell, differ not in matter and forme; but onely in the efficient and end, so Iunius Thes. Theolog. 36. Polanus in Daniel: cap. 9. verse 24. Zan∣chius ad Ephesios.

And that Christs obedience to the law, is not exclu∣ded from office of iustifying; me thinkes is more then

probable by these reasons: first, because it seemes to be performed by him, as a duetie for vs, or in our steede: which by this reason I thinke is euident: performed it vvas by Christ; eyther vice sua, or nostra; or neutra, or v••ra{que} the third is absurd, if the second and fourth be granted, we haue the purpose. And that he did it not vice sua, or as a duetie vvhich himselfe ought to God appeares; first, then could it not haue been meritori∣ous, no not for himselfea: but it was meritorious: se∣condly, hee was no meere creature, neither vvas the law giuen to him.

Againe, our vvhole debt vvas to be paide by Christ, our suretie: and to say the punishment vvas our whole debt, me thinkes is vnreasonable: for shall wee say the diuels and damned in hell, pay all they owe to the ma∣iestie of GOD, in bearing the punishment due to their sinnes? are they not, euen in hell, bound still, not to blaspheme &c. else how could those sinnes of theirs be sinnes; sith euery sinne is transgression of some law? I omit other reasons because others will occurre in pro∣cesse of this Epistle, and obiections fitlier answered in other places. Now we will proceede.

Before God, or in the ••ight of God.] Diuines hence gather that distinction of iustification in foro human••, before man: and in foro Diuin••, before God. Compare Rom. 4 2. and thus generally expound the place, Iam. 2. of iustification before men: how fitly we shal see hereaf∣ter, if the Lord giue life & strength to publish my notes on that Epistle. It is true, that vvorkes iustifie in the sight of men; vvhen vve see them, wee are, in chari∣tie, to esteeme them as fruits of faith; and for them to allow them esteeme of righteousnesse; till it please GOD to discouer hypocrisie: but not so in the sight of Godb: who iudgeth not after outward appearance but pondereth the heart.

By law commeth the knowledge of ••inne]

De sensu. Of what law meaneth the Apostle? Ans. Chiefly of the law written and deliuered in Tablesc com∣meth knowledge of sinne.

Quest. Whether this the originall vse of the law to manifest sinne? Ans. The law taken for substance of doctrine contained therei••, was originall giuen. First, for a rule of life. Secondly, for a meane o•• saluation by keeping thereof. The writing of the law after the fall, had this, as one principall end, to conuince of sinnee. Whence it appeareth that conuiction of sinne is rather an accident, then a naturall and proper worke of the law. Kn••wl•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vnderstand, not so much of a speculatiue notice as of a feeling ackno••ledgement.

Here t••••n we see one principall vse and effect o•• the law, to the sonnes of Adam, [Obser.] since the fall, to manifest sinne, and to conuince thereofa. Therefore called the ministerie of condemnation, not of lifeb.

How Popishly then doe Papists vse it, as a glasse to behold their perfections▪ rather then their blemishes in? And suppose it, euen since the fall, to be propoun∣ded as a meanes of iustification at least, in the sight of God: shall wee heare their reasons? The principall is this: It is (say they) improbable, that the Lord would giue a law, which no man is able to keepe, and promise life vnder an impossible condition; yea, most tyran∣nous were he, to damne for breach of that law, which is impossible to be kept. Ans. To all these cauils, this Answere serues: First, that when God first gaue the law, the law was possible to be kept by man: strength by creation was giuen to man, proportionate to the duties enioyned in the law: And we are not to thinke that the morall law was first giuen at the promulgation in Synai; the very same law for substance, was giuen to Adam in innocencie; Loue God aboue all, and thy neighbour as

thy selfe, and particulars of it also, as appeares by that precept of the Sabbathc. Secondly, that the law is im∣possible to vs is not Gods fault, but oursd. Thirdly, no vniustice, much lesse tyrannie, to exact debt at the hands of an vnable debter, that by wilfulnesse hath dis∣abled himselfe: Fourthly, especially when the Lord, by this exaction, aymes at this onely, to bring vs to ac∣knowledgement of our misery, that so in Christ he may haue mercy on vse. But thus haue Papists peruerted the law.

[Ʋse 2] Another sort of Heretiques, as Antinom••, haue vt∣terly taken away all vse of the law, and the doctrine thereof vnder the Gospell: we are not vnder the law: And yet Christ professeth, he came not to destroy the lawf. Paul, that faith is so farre from abolishing, that it rather stablisheth the lawg. And is it nothing? think wee, that hereby, first, naturall misery is discouered: secondly, the heart humbled: thirdly, hunger and thirst after righteousnesse in Christ wrought in vs: fourthly, heart enlarged to thankfulnesse to God, for deliuerance from that yoake, and burthen importable: fiftly, actions of life directed and ordered: sixtly, olde man more and more destroyed in vs?

[Ʋse 3] Learne we therefore (brethren) as not to seeke righ∣teousnesse by the law with Papists; so neither to abolish it vtterly with Antinomi: but to vse it rather, as a loo∣king glasse, to behold our manifold blemishes naturall and actuallh. This is one of the best vses, wee sinners can make of the law: and let no man through preten∣ded feare of despaire, distast either publique ministerie or priuate meditation of the law. God hath propoun∣ded a remedie in his sonne Christ Iesusi; but requires vs first to be prepared by the law. A methode of con∣uersing in the law, see in M. Perkins ad Gal. 3^o.

Verse 21. But now is the righteousnesse of God made manifest without the Law, hauing witnesse of the Law and of the Prophets.

THus farre hath the Apostle stablished his negatiue assumption, and proued that by workes no childe of Adam can be iusti∣fied: Now it remaines hee should inferre the other part of his disiunction, [Therefore by faith:] which also he doth Ver. 28, directly. And to the con∣clusion passeth by oblique answere to a supposed que∣stion: If not by workes, how then? If they be no cause or meane of iustification, how then are wee iustified? and where shall wee haue such righteousnesse as may steede vs at Gods iudgement seate? Ans. Ʋer. 21. The righteousnesse of God is made manifest without the law, &c. In which words, and those that follow to Ver. 27. is set downe a description of that righteousnesse, whereby a sinner is iustified in the sight of God. Particulars of the description these:

First, efficient; Righteousnesse of God.

Secondly, meane of reuelation, negatiue: Without law.

Thirdly, adioyned: approbation and testimony of law and Prophets.

Fourthly, Instrument: Faith in Christ.

Fiftly, Subiect: Beleeuers all, and onely.

Sixtly, Causa 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Grace of God.

Seauenthly, Causa. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or meritorious: Redemption in Christ.

Eightly, endes subordinate Ʋer. 25.26.

[Righteousnesse of God:] Sense of the words. Righ∣teousnesse [unspec 1] of God, is diuersly taken in Scripture:

First, for that vniuersall holinesse, that is in Gods na∣ture, vvhereof he is denominated iust.

Secondly, as opposed to mercie, it signifieth particu∣lar iustice distributiue, whereby hee rewards euery man after his workes.

Thirdly, for the truth of GOD, and his fidelitie in performing promise.

Here none of these meant: and it was a dreame of Osiander. That the Lord should in iustification commu∣nicate vnto vs his essentiall righteousnesse, vvhich is incommunicable. Wee shall best see the meaning by comparing this place with others: asa vvhere wee see it opposed to our owne righteousnesse. Now so is that righteousnes termed, vvhich is vvrought by our selues, in doing the duties prescribed by the law: Gods righ∣teousnesse then is that, whereof GOD is the vvorker, donour, approuer.

[Obser.] From this part of the description then, this may be obserued. That the righteousnesse whereby a sinner is iust in the sight of GOD, is such a righteousnesse, as vvherein man himselfe hath no vvorke, but GOD onely in Christ: It is ours indeede in respect of possessi∣on, being giuen vs of God, but Gods onely in respect of operationb: And least any iusticiarie should obiect: that God is indeede the vvorker of it, but by inhe∣rence in vs, vsing vs as instruments to worke it, see Rom. 10.3.4. vvhere vve are remitted to the person of Christ, as the onely store-house vvhere the Lord hath laide it vp for vs.

[Ʋse.] Learne wee therefore to renounce our owne, and to submit to the righteousnesse of Godc, and heauie is the doome, passed by the Apostle, on all that seeking to stablish their owne righteousnesse, refuse that wrought for vs by God in Christ, and tendred to vs in the Gospell.

See vvee meane of reuealing negatiue: (Reuea∣led [unspec 2] without the law:) Law, here taken strictly for law morall; more largely in the latter part of the verse, for the writings of Moses.

Morall law then so farre from procuring, [Doct.] that it doth not so much as reueale, the meanes of a sinners iusti∣fication in the sight of Godd. That vve erre not, let vs a little inquire the sense: vvhether must this be vni∣uersally vnderstood, or onely in some respect? Some take it vniuersally; those especially that exclude Christs actiue obedience from iustification, thinking that nei∣ther matter, nor efficiencie of righteousnesse is reuea∣led in the law. Now I take it, that is more then can be collected; for it is confessed on all sides, that bea∣ring the curse of the law is required to iustification and that the law reueales and vrgeth. I take it therefore, this is to be limitted to the vvorker, and manner of effici∣encie, vvhich the law neuer reueales; that euer pres∣seth obedience to be vvrought by our selues; satisfacti∣on to be made by our selues. Hath no word of obedi∣ence, or satisfaction to be wrought for vs by our me∣diatour Christ Iesus; which is that meane of iustifica∣tion that the Lord hath ordained, and reuealed in the Gospella. If any shall hence thus reason; Law re∣ueales not the righteousnesse, vvhereby a sinner is iu∣stified; and it reueales Christs actiue obedience to the law: Therefore Christs actiue obedience, is no part of that righteousnesse vvhereby a sinner is iustified. Ans. First, ad maiorem: if it be vnderstood of the matter of our righteousnes, false; if of the authour and manner of efficiencie, true; and serues not to proue the con∣clusion. Secondly, ad minorem: Law reueales not Christs actiue righteousnes: viz. as done by Christ, or as to be performed by him in our steede; but it re∣ueales, that righteousnesse for the matter of it, which

vvas to be performed by him, that vndertooke to procure iustification for vs in the sight of God.

[Vse.] And me thinkes this one reason, if there vvere no more, vtterly ouerthrowes all that righteousnesse, that any man can expect by his owne performing, the law: for if the law neuer knew the meanes of a sinners iusti∣••ying in the sight of God, and yet teacheth (hypo••hetice) all that vvill be iustified by the law, to doe themselues the things in the law enioyned, apparent it is, that vve can neuer be iustified by our owne performance of the law.

[unspec 3] Followeth now the approbation it hath from Law and Prophets; that is, from Scriptures Moysaicall and Propheticall; asb: The truth hereof, viz That Mo∣ses and Prophets send vs out of our selues, to a righte∣ousnesse of Gods working, and donation, I might proue by a large inductionc: Types of law many; Passeouerd, Inscription on the High-priests plate. Ho∣linesse of the Lord: brasen serpent: In a vvord sacrifices all prefigured Christ: for Prophets, see Dauid: Psal. 32. Isay cap. 53. Ier. 23.8 &c. Conferre like speech of Pe∣ter. Act. 10.43.

[Ʋse] And is it not strange? this meanes of Iustification, should be reiected for noueltie, or that any Papist should be so brasen-faced, as to affirme, it vvas neuer heard of till the dayes of Luther? out of question, one of the two is true; eyther Moses and the Prophets vvere Lu∣therans; or else Luther, in this, as in many other points of doctrine, a disciple of Moses and the Prophets.

Verse 22. To wit, the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Iesus Christ, vnto all and vpon all that beleeue.

EVen the righteousnesse of God by faith of Iesus Christ.]

Sense: Whether this (by faith) must [unspec 4] be vnderstood materialiter, as if faith were the matter of our righteousnes; or instrumentaliter, because it is the instrument by vvhich the righteousnesse of GOD in Christ is apprehended, may be questioned: Mo∣derne interpreters (all that I haue read) take it in the last sense; and till of late, I thinke it neuer came into any mans head, that faith should be the matter or thing) vvhereof the righteousnesse of God consisteth, which me thinkes may thus be euidenced: First, then should the thing vvhereof our righteousnesse consisteth be in our selues: Secondly, that almost continuall annexing of Christ, or his bloud, or some such like, as it vvere knitting the instrument with the obiect, makes me be∣leeue, the spirit of God would teach vs, (as all our Di∣uines accord) that it is not faith, but the obiect of faith, Christ his bloud, and obedience, for and by vvhich we are iustified: Therefore leauing these quiddities to men that delight in nouelties, insisting in the olde broad vvay of the Saints, this plaine truth I propound.

That faith is the sole instrument, or thing in vs, [Obser.] whereby true righteousnesse is apprehended: vt sen••us sit: And if you vvould know how this righteousnes is obtained, it is by faith of Iesus Christ; that is, by faith receiuing, and applying Christ, as he is tendered vnto vs in the promise of the Gospel: that is, by particular

acknowledgement of the truth of this proposition, Christ loued me, and gaue himselfe for mee ^a. My pur∣pose is, to reserue the questions touching the nature, and qualitie of Faith iustifying, to a place more pro∣per; here onely it shall suffice to giue reason, vvhy no other thing in a Christian, can serue, so much as instrumentally, to iustification: And it is this, ren∣dred by our Diuines. Because there is no other gift of God in vs, vvhere by the matter of our righteousnes, Christs obedience can be receiued; as is required Ioh. 1.12. But hereof also more largely hereafter.

By faith of Christ.] As in vvhom righteousnesse vvhereby wee are iustified is resident as in a subiect. Something further might here be obserued, if I would be curious to presse euery word (as this is indeed the priuiledge of the Scripture, no vvord but hath his waight:) This onely I point at, and proceede.

[Obser.] That not euery beliefe, but that which apprehends Christ, is the meane of iustification.

[Ʋse.] And it is an errour, sauouring of more pittie, then pietie, that euery man may be saued by his reli∣gion and faith: Turkes by theirs, Pagans by theirs, &c. so they liue accordingly. First, now sure then said the Apostle in vaine, that there is no other name giuen vnder heauen, by which a man can be saued, but the Name of Iesus. Secondly, and Paul, ill makes it a part of hea∣thenish miserie, to be without Christ: thirdly, and as ill rankes them with Atheists, that apprehend, or with Idolaters that worship GOD out of Christ, ibid. and Gal. 4.8. and fourthly, our Sauiour was deceiued, when hee taught the kingdome of GOD should be taken from Iewes, euen for erring obstinately in the person of the Messiah: but enough of these.

Fiftly, the Subiect followes; (••o all and on all that be∣leeue.) Not to be curious about these particles (to and

vpon,) betwixt vvhich I see no difference more then betwixt Aarons beard, and the beard of Aaron: The ingemination is eyther for stronger auouchment, or else for interpretation and restraint: (to all) as if he should say: yea and I say againe to all, without exclu∣ding any, eyther Iew or Gentile All: (to all) as if he should say, but thus limmit the vniuersall particle; all that beleeue. But the first sense seemeth fitter in re∣spect of the reason annexed: For there is no diffe∣rence, &c.

There is then no enclosure of this blessing of righteousnesse, to any nation, person, sexe, [Doct.] or con∣dition of men: but in euery nation, in euery state, and order of men, hee that beleeueth in Christ is ac∣cepted with GOD, and approued as righteous: And note in this whole Epistle, the generall particle, often and purposely vsed.

This point a long time sounded harsh in Iewish [Vse 1] earesa: vvhich made the Apostle so often inculcate it, and so largely insist on it; so enuious is our nature, and so gladly vvould we make seuerall Gods common fauours. Not much vnlike Iewes in this behalfe, are the now Romish clergie: willing to pen vp truth, righ∣teousnesse, and saluation, within the precincts of the Romish Church; forgetting the Catholiquenesse of the Church Christian, to consist in this; that now the heathen are giuen Christ for his inheritance, and the vt∣termost parts of the earth for his possession.

And let vs Gentiles praise God for this mercie.

And will you see the cunning of Sathan, whereby he robs Gods children of much of their comfort? As he hath giuen Rome seizure of the keyes of heauen, so himselfe hath reserued power to widen or straighten heauen gate, as may best serue for his aduantage: with prophane men, any faith, be it neuer so blinde or im∣plicite,

neuer so doubtfull or faithlesse, the very sha∣dow and lip-profession of it, serues turne for saluation: with Gods children, none doth the deede, but what ca∣ries vs full sayle to the Mediator of righteousnesse. Let Gods children carefully remember, what the Apostle here teacheth. To all beleeuers reacheth Go••s righteous∣nesse; If thou walke in the steps of Abrahams faith, though thou keepe not pace with him, to thee also shall thy faith be imputed for righteousnesse: little faith is faith, as a little sparke is fire: And we know who hath promised, not to quench, either flame or coale, or sparke, no nor smoake of faith, if it be in sincerity.

[Obser.] [To all that beleeue▪] The vniuersality of grace then, at least in respect of efficacie, admits restraint, and li∣mitation to beleeuing. There is a world of men, whom Christ came to saue, but it is the mundus credentium, the world of beleeuers, as an auncient Diuine interprets it. These limitations are so frequent in Scripture, that they need no euidence by instance; and it is confessed by the very Aduocates of vniuersall grace, that though Christs righteousnesse hath a sufficiencie in it, to pro∣cure saluation to all: yet in respect of efficacie, it is ap∣propriated to beleeuers, and their seede.

This onely it shall suffice here to touch, by way of enquirie: what kinde of beliefe that is, to which righ∣teousnesse is extended. Our aduersaries generally ac∣cord, that a generall faith sufficeth, and beliefe of the truth of poynts of faith, without particularizing is e∣nough to iustification. Now surely the Diuell is behol∣ding to them, that in generals, I dare say▪ goeth as farre as most Papists; yea, vpon better euidence beleeues the History of the Gospell, then most formall Papists doe. And I would haue Papists tell me, what hinders euen diuels from iustification, if not this; that they cannot particularize the generals of faith to themselues: it is

vaine to say, they want charity, the fruit of faith: for in this very poynt of beleeuing there must be something, wherein Gods children goe beyond the diuella.

But let vs heare their reasons: One of their princi∣pall aduocates thus pleadesb: First, from testimonies: Mat. 9. & 16. Iohn. 1. & 6. & 19. Act. 8. Rom. 4. & 10. &c.

It was all Christ required to iustification. All that Philip required to baptisme of the Eunuch, &c. There∣fore sufficeth to righteousnesse and saluation. Ans. 1. It will trouble these men, I thinke, out of these promi∣ses to draw their conclusion: for generall faith might suffice, to procure a cure miraculous; and profession of faith, giue interest to baptisme; and yet not be suffi∣cient to iustification in Gods sight. Ans. 2. Our Diuines well answere, that beliefe of many the particulars here specified, implyed particular assurance of Gods loue in Christ: And that, howsoeuer profession is made of be∣leeuing particulars onely here specified, according to the present occasion; yet it is to be presumed, the rest was also beleeued; it being one faith that apprehends all particulars propounded in the word. Ans. 3. That what is not expressed is implyed: as 1 Iohn. 5. Ʋer. 1.2.

Their reasons.

Ob. 1. No particular word of God declaring par∣don of sinnes, or saluation to belong to such or such particulars: Ergo.

Ans. First, that the generall compriseth vertually all particulars: and that out of the generals rightly as∣sumed, may the particular conclusion be well deduced for faith to rest on. Ex. gra. As out of this generall, Euery reasonable Animal•• a man. Socrates, rightly as∣suming, may conclude, that he is a man: so out of this generall, Whosoeuer beleeues in the sonne of God, hath life,

and shall neuer come into condemnation, Iohn. 3. Whoso∣euer can rightly assume, may conclude that hee hath life. Secondly, that we haue it in the equiualent, God hauing made a promise generall, and giuing a com∣mand of particular applying. Thirdly, Sacraments at least particularize the generality of the promise.

Ob. 2. Faith iustifying goes before iustification, as the cause thereof: but fa th speciall followes iustifi∣cation: because I cannot beleeue my sinnes to be for∣giuen, till they be forgiuen: secondly, euery acte de∣pends on his obiect, not con••••a.

Ans. 1. If they speake o•• pr••ority of nature, it is true, faith is before iustification actually enioyed the sentence of absolution not being passed on any, till hee beleeue: if of priority of time, so we affirme them to be simul, neither before or after other: for as soone as euer I beleeue, so soone am I by the Lord approued as righ∣teous. And secondly, whereas they talke nicely of the obiects praecedence to the act, & the acts dependence on the obiect. Ans. First, that the obiect, qua obiectum, is simul cum actu; for it is no actuall obiect, till the act be exercised there about. Exemp. gra. Colour though it be by fitnesse Naturall, obiectum vi••us; yet cannot be said to be obiectum actu, till some act of sight be exer∣cised there-abouts: so much of the generall. Secondly, it is harsh, that the obiect is said to giue essence to the act, except it be thus vnderstood, that without it the act cannot be exercised. Thirdly, more directly to the purpose: the obiect of faith iustifying, which we will suppose to be this proposition: thy sinnes are forgiuen thee; we are to consider, in what sort it is propounded to a sinner: and that is, sub conditi••ne fidei, in respect of the actuall truth thereof, that though the minde haue an ••n••uitus of this obiect before iustification; yet it ap∣prehends the truth of it, but in proposito Dei, & sub con∣ditione:

neither hath it actuall and categoricall truth, till the Hypothesis be performed: And thus though the obiect be before this act of the minde (considera∣tion,) yet it is not before the act of beleeuing it, in re∣spect of execution, and reall fruition of it.

Ob. 3. This speciall faith takes away prayer, vse of Sacraments, good workes, therefore is not iustifying faith, but rather destroying: And will you heare their reason? For if I must certainly beleeue, that my sinnes be forgiuen me, how can I pray, Forgiue me my sinnes? nay, I shall be an Infidell, to pray for forgiuenesse, as well as if I should pray, that the word might be made flesh. A••s. This argument hath beene often answe∣red by our Diuines. The summe of the answere is this: That though sinnes be knowne to be forgiuen, yet is not prayer for forgiuenesse vnnecessary: first, for that assurance of pardon is but in part obtayned: secondly, because new sinnes are daily committed; which, though in the purpose of God they be forgiuen; yet is not sen∣tence of forgiuenesse past in the conscience, till act of faith, & repentance be renewed, and by all means testifi∣ed. To that of Sacraments: Read but what is R m. 4.11. and thou shalt see reason, why Sacraments are necessary euen for men iustified Viz: as Seales: that is, meanes to work farther, & more plentiful assurance of iustification.

Ob. 4. Confidence that sinnes are forgiuen, de∣pends vpon good conscience, and perseuerance in loue of God▪ and good worksc: and therefore presupposeth iustification, but workes it not. Ans. First▪ we must distinguish betwixt iustification it selfe and the manife∣station of it: the euidence of iustification depends vpon good conscience, because no man can know himselfe to be iustified but he that hath good conscience, yet the act of iustification ex parte Dei is performed simul cum fide. Secondly, or otherwise thus, iustification depends on

good conscience and good works, onely as ex signis not as ex causis. Thirdly, good conscience is not after faith in timed, but onely in nature; and so soone as faith is giuen, so soone is the heart purified; and purpose of new obedience resolutely determined by the beleeuer.

Obiect. 5. Because this speciall faith breedes no∣thing but perturbation, disquietnesse, and euen despe∣ration in the minde: because a man may be deceaued in his speciall perswasion; and Caluin requires a cer∣taine knowledge of remission of sinnes, and predesti∣nation to life in euery iustified man. Ans. First, it is not faith speciall, but lacke of it that breedes disquiet∣nessee Secondly, and though some men are deceiued in their opinion and perswasion of iustification and electi∣on to life as M. Caluin at large sheweth, that haue no∣thing but Laruam fides, yet will it follow thence, that none other may haue infallible perswasion of their iu∣stification and adoption? that in deede haue the spirit to witnesse it vnto themf. Thirdly, if there be doubt∣ings, arise they from faith? and not rather from re∣maines of infidelity? Fourthly, where teacheth M. Cal∣uin that faith considered in subiects, as it is in Gods children, is free from doubtings? nay, sheweth he not that the dearest of Gods Saints haue conflicts with in∣fidelity? Fiftly, and yet sith faith is in the issue conque∣rour, might he not iustly ascribe vnto it certainty and infallibility of perswasion? Briefly all that M. Caluin teacheth of faith, amounts to this; that it is certaine and infallible naturâ suâ and secondly, that it is so in a mea∣sure in Gods children: and thirdly, ought to be ende∣uoured by such as desire solide comfort: fourthly, is conquerour in the end in all conflicts, no where teach∣eth, so much as by dreame, that there can be no assu∣rance of election or adoption, but where is fulnesse of perswasion, euer free from conflicts with doubting.

Verse 23. For there is no difference: for all haue sin∣ned, and are depriued of the glory of God.

THus much of the subiect of iustifica∣tion, beleeuers, and of the quality of that faith that iustifieth: followeth now the reason, prouing necessity of faith to iustification in all both Iewes and Gentiles. And is taken from the equall state of guiltinesse in all for transgression of the law. Summa est; if all be equally guilty of transgressing the law, then is faith necessary for all to iustification: but all haue sinned; Ergo. Reason of the consequence see Annot. capit. 1. ver. 17. declaration of the assumption: see cap. 3.9. Now the assumption is amplified by a con∣sequent or effect of sinne? all haue sinned, and by sinne are depriued of the glory of God.

Sense: By glory of God, some vnderstand the glori∣ous image of God, standing in our likenesse vnto him in righteousnesse and true holinesseg, but not so fitly: for, first, glory of GOD is neuer put in Scripture for image of God: Secondly, it seemes not so pertinent to the question of iustification, here, almost to mention the image of God: some others, by glory of God; that glorying or boasting in the presence of God, that, as they suppose, man not sinning, might haue had in in∣nocencie: but first, glory of God, no where signifies boasting before God: secondly, euen man in innocen∣cie, had had no cause of such glorying, saue onely in God; and therefore I take it, by glory of God, wee may best vnderstand, that glorious estate whereof through grace in Christ we shall be partakers in the kingdome of heauen. Compare Rom. 82. & 2.7. and from enioy∣ing

whereof we were iustly excluded by our disobedi∣ence.

[Obser.] Hence then me thinkes the collection is sound; that man, if he had stood in innocencie, should haue had fruition of heauenly happinesse; the same ••or substance, which Gods children now partake through Christ. The Lord propounded it to man as the price of his obedi∣ence, had he continued that course; and that man lacks it, comes to passe for his breaking of that courseh: the law was giuen for life; that is, that through obseruing thereof, we might obtaine eternall lifei. And surely if death not onely bodily, but eternall and hellish was threatned to transgression, me thinkes it is more then probable, that life not onely earthly, but heauenly, was promised to obedience in the legall couenant. It is cu∣riositie to enquire how or in what time man should haue had admission to that reward prom••sed; perhaps by a kinde of translating, such as was vouchsafed to Henoch, and Elias; or, not vnlike that assumption of our Saui∣ourl; or answerable perhaps to that change of surui∣uers at the second comming of Christ 1 Thes. 4.17. 1 Cor. 15.51.52.

And me thinks they are too idle quiddities of some, that with a preface of non constat è scripturis (a cunning tricke of conuaying errours into the Church) spread this, and like nouelties amongst their admiring Audi∣tours; that man th••ugh he had stood in inno••encie, should not haue had possession of the kingdome of heauen: quor∣sum ista? surely their end I know not; the fountaine me thinkes I see; the good olde way, euen for oldnesse dislikes vs; nouelties though neuer so odde or im∣pertinent, must be hunted after, if we will seeme great in the eyes of the people.

But let vs see the punishment of losse, inseparably accompanying transgression; how heauy and fearefull

it is; depriued of the glory of God: not to enquire curi∣ously as schoole-men, whether be the greater punish∣ment, that of sense or this of losse; how vexeth it re∣probatesm, to behold the admission of Saints into the kingdome of God, and themselues thrust out of dores?

Verse 24. And are iustified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus.

BEing iustified freely, &c. The Apo∣stle goes on in describing the bles∣sing of iustification; by causes im∣pulsiue; which are on our part none. Freely: inward in God the Father; his grace; outward and me∣ritorious; Redemption in Christ Ie∣sus.] Final to declare his righteousnesse, &c. And to this explication he passeth by prolepsis: if wee haue all sinned and be depriued of the glory of God, how then come we to righteousnesse and saluation? Su••: we are iustified freely, &c.

Touching terme of iustifying see Annot. in ver. 21. Freely. Quest. How freely when not without so great a price and satisfaction as the bloud of Christ? Ans. Freely in respect of vs, quia nihil operantes, ne{que} vicem reddentes sola fide iustificati sumus dono Dei, saith Am∣brose, not without price and satisfaction performed by Christ. And so Bellarmine: wee are iustified of God freely, that is, of his meere liberality, as touching our merits; for by no worke of ours deserue we to be iusti∣fied: see Tit. 3.4.5.6. 2 Tim. 19.

And is it not strange, that these very men should talke of workes done before iustification, by generall

grace, that should be acceptable preparatiues to the grace of iustification, and such as moue God to mercy; yea, that deserue at Gods hands of congruitie towards iustification? surely if these grounds be true; first, that without faith it is impossible to please Godn: secondly, that the Tree must be good before the fruit be goodo: thirdly, that God accepts not the offerer for the gifts, but the gifts for the offererp: fourthly, that to do good works is required not euery grace, but such as makes a man a member of Christs body, as Bellarmine proues ex Ioh. 15. Fiftly, that where the conscience is defiled, all things are vncleaneq: sixtly, that of Augustine de fide & operibus, Cap. 14. sequuntur bona opera hominem iustificatum, non praecedunt iustificandum; what place is there left for workes done before iustification? to me∣rit so much as of congruitie, any thing towards iustifi∣cation. That wee may a little see the misterie of their iniquity in this point, we must vnderstand, that of me∣rit, they make two kindes: one ex condigno; the other ex congruo. That of condignity; they thus describe; it is any voluntary action to which a reward is due, in iu∣stice, for the equality of the worke, and the reward ac∣cording to due estimation. And thus forsooth, before state of grace, we haue no merits. Merit of congruitie, is any action, whereto a reward is giuen, not as due by nature of the worke, but as of the liberalty of the do∣nour. And thus they teach a man vnregenerate, may merit at Gods hand, the grace of iustification: in as much as it is very meet and congruent, that to a man well vsing the gifts of nature for Gods sake; God which is so bountifull, should giue gifts of grace. But if it be true that in merit largely taken there must be Debitum; and something to which the rewarder owes a recom∣pence: secondly, if recompence mentioned depend wholly of the liberality of the donour, as themselues

confesse in this merit of congruity; what doe we with the terme of merit in workes before regeneration? It is strange circling they vse in this question; In gratuitis they say nullum est debitum: in merito verò debitum asserimus: In this kinde of merit there is no debitum; and the recompence depends meerely of the liberality of the donour; and yet forsooth these works must be called merits, not so properly in deede, as themselues confesse, in truth most absurdly, and impiously. And let vs but consider, what the things are in man, where∣vpon this congruitie is built; they are, first well vsing gifts of nature: and secondly, that for God, or in refe∣rence to him. Now, how can we imagine in an vnrege∣nerate man, such a well vsing of the gifts of nature? the frame of whose heart is euill onely and continuallyr, in whom till he be sanctified and haue felt Gods loue in his heart, there can be no motus charitatis in deums: nor any other ends, or motiues propounded to doe good things, but dulce, decorum, honorificum: nor any propension to any good action, but what ariseth either from ambition, or seruile feare: but leaue we these merit-mongers and proceede in the text.

By his grace:] For the sense; Bellarmine by this grace of God vnderstands righteousnes giuen of God, and infused into vs, to establish his dreame of inherent iustice, as the formall cause of our iustification. Our Diuines by grace of God, vnderstand the free fauour and good will of God bestowed on vs in Christ: as be∣ing not the formall, but the inward impulsiue cause, mouing the Lord to iustifie vs. The reasons of Bellar∣mines interpretation are these: first, for that the fauour of God seemes sufficiently to be expressed in the for∣mer terme gratis. Ans. As who say it were strange, for the spirit of God, to vse diuersity of termes for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and explanation: secondly, is it so strange to affirme?

that liberality may be exercised without fauour; or, that the Lord may of liberality bestow a blessing, where loue and beneuolence is not the fountaine. Mat. 5.

But heare we his second reason; the particle (per) is not rightly giuen to the fauour of God, the cause mo∣tiue; but onely shewes eyther formall, meritorious, or instrumentall cause. Ans. First▪ Aquinas otherwise iudgeth; that it may signifie any thing, that is cause to the agent of working: whether it be finall, formall, effe∣ctiue, or motiue cause. And how will Bellarmine inter∣pret the place, Act. 18.27. they beleeued through grace; for whether of the three doth his per there im∣port? formall, meritorious, or instrumentall cause? any or none? Secondly, but what if his (per) be not found in the Text? as in deede it is not; then notwith∣standing his right vse of (per) grace may, for all that, signifie the impulsiue as well as the formall cause of iu∣stification.

His third reason; because whom God fauours, and wils well vnto, him he makes such as hee would haue him: otherwise Gods beneuolence should be a vaine and emptie good will: therefore to be iustified by grace is not to be reputed iust, when wee are not; but to be indeede iust, holy, and immaculate. Ans. Now what when all this is granted, that Gods grace, is not with∣out his effect in vs? we yeeld that this effect, iustifi∣cation, flowes from this cause, the grace of God. Wee are iustified by grace: but how doth this proue the con∣clusion; that by grace we are here to vnderstand righ∣teousnesse infused, and not rather the free fauour and loue of God? secondly, we yeeld that by this fauour of God wee are made iust indeede, before euer we be iudi∣cially reputed, and approued for righteous: this que∣stion will fall out fitliest to be handled, Cap. 4. Here on∣ly it shall suffice, briefely to propound our iudgement,

how or in what order we come to esteeme and reputa∣tion of righteousnes before God; first, therefore, in execution of Gods purpose to iustifie and saue, is that worke of GOD, effectuall calling; whereby faith is wrought in vs: to beleeuers, is Christ, with all his righteousnesse giuen, so that whatsoeuer Christ hath or vvrought, becomes ours, by free yet true donation: thus enioying Christ and his merit, we are presented to Gods iudgement seate; and there receiue the sentence of absolution and approbation for righteous: truely therefore are we made righteous, before we be esteemed righteous; yet not by righteousnesse inherent in vs, though that accompany iustification: but by donation of Christs righteousnes vnto vs.

Wherefore, for ought they haue yet alledged, grace may here signifie the fauour and free loue of God: and couple this grace with gratis, freely by grace; mee thinkes, it is as much as if hee had said, meerely by grace, vvithout any concurrence of vvorkes, so much as of adiuvant causes to iustification: which also other scriptures affirme. Ephes. 1.7. Tit. 3.4.5.6.7.

That wee may see how ill a medley Papists haue made, of faith and workes, grace and merit, in this ar∣ticle of iustification, things simply incompatible, if the Apostle could iudge. Rom. 11.6. to vvhich place, the larger handling of this question shall be reserued.

In the meane while, let vs learne to admire the ri∣ches of Gods grace towards vs in Christ, and take heed, how we attempt sharing in the glorie of iustification: remembring vvho said, agreeably to the Apostle, Gal. 5.4. non est quo gratia intret vbi iam meritum oc∣cupauit.

Followes the cause meritorious: Redemption in Ie∣sus Christ. Where are two things: the cause meri∣ting

righteousnesse; the subiect in whom it resideth; in Iesus Christ.

Sense: Redemption, is that act of Christ the media∣tour, whereby hee hath ransomed vs from our spiritu∣all enemies; in this place by a Metonymie of the end, put for the meane destinied thereto: it signifies the sa∣tisfaction, made by Christ to the iustice of his Father: and this satisfaction, some well distinguish on this manner; it is eyther Legis or Crucis. Vnder the first, they comprise the obedience of his life, performed to the law: by the second they vnderstand his whole pas∣sion, that had consummation vpon the Crosse: and this did the order of Diuine iustice require which could not haue beene kept, if God by his owne power and will without satisfaction for sinne, had repared mankinde; as Thomas well saith. Compare Heb. 2.14.13.

Which is in Christ Iesus.] Whither this preposition (in) here note the cause efficient, as often; or subiect, in which this redemption resideth, or both, it matters not much to enquire.

If we take it in the first sense, me thinkes it excludes all humane satisfactions from power of iustifying; for if by the price paide by Christ onely, wee be iustified, then not by any price paide by our selues; or any other meere creature for vs: and in truth, how can we, dust and ashes, once conceite such a power to be in vs? sith our weldoing reacheth not vnto Godt: secondly, nor can be proportionate to the offence of that endlesse maiestie: thirdly, and must be, if it be a satisfaction, a worke or passion more then duetie: for by doing due∣tie, can we satisfie for breach of duetie?

Is it not then a strange conclusion of our aduersaries? that man in grace, may make some kinde of satisfacti∣on for the sinne of his soule? Let vs see their opinion, as they haue nicely minced it out, and propounded it

vnto vs by parcells: of satisfaction therefore, they make two kindes or degrees rather: the one is absolute, and euery way perfect; wherein is rendered, a satisfacti∣on completely answering to the perfect equalitie of di∣uine iustice; the other imperfect, answering but im∣perfectly to the breach of some iustice; and that, be∣cause it pleaseth God to accept it, for full satisfaction, at the hands of his children, being reconciled vnto him. Touching the first kinde or degree of satisfaction, they seeme to confesse, that it is quite out of the power of any meere creature; partly, because whatsoeuer wee are or haue, we are and haue from God; partly because them m iestie offended, is infin te, and all that wee are or haue, is finite: so that, except there be some accepta∣tion, or donation on Gods part, there can be no satis∣faction made by men; but if wee speake of a satisfacti∣on, that is such by Diuine acceptation or donation, this is in the power of euery iustified man: besides this, in sinne they consider two things; culpam & poenum; fault and punishment; now, that for fault they make meerely free, in respect of vs; and ascribe it onely to Christ, the mediatour: for punishment, they make two sorts; eternall and temporall; for eternall punish∣ment, Christs passion onely satisfies; for temporall power is giuen vs, by grace, to make acceptable satis∣faction.

Next, they assigne what these workes satisfactorie are; namely prayer, fasting, almes deedes: so that now, if wee summe vp their doctrine of satisfactions it a∣mounts to this: that a iustified man, may by fast∣ing, prayer, almes deedes, make such satisfaction as GOD vvill accept, for the temporall punishment of sinne.

Shall we heare their proofes? First Dan. 4.24. Re∣deeme thy sinnes by righteousnesse. Sinnes therefore

may be satisfied for. Ans. Our Diuines well answere, that they ill render the originall vvord; vvhich in no vse of Hebrewes, or Chaldees, signifies to redeeme, but to breake off; and let them if they can shew instance to the contrarie: secondly, that the phrase is neuer read in scriptures, to redeeme sinnes; redemption being al∣wayes applyed to persons: thirdly, it is me thinkes not a little crossing to their owne doctrine, that make their satisfactions proper to iustified men; in number where∣of, they cannot place Nabuchadnezzar: fourthly, that if satisfaction vvere here intimated, no necessi∣tie it should haue reference to Gods iustice, but to mens iniuries.

Their second testimonie is Luk. 3. bring forth meete fruits of repentance: that is, now, they cannot be meete or vvorthy fruits of repentance, except they be suffici∣ent, to recompence the wrong done; if not inequalitie of quantitie, yet at least in equalitie of proportion, and according to the acceptation of him that was wronged: and here they lay on loade with testimonies of Fathers. Ans. But what the fruits of repentance are, vvho can better expound, then Iohn Baptist himselfe? ver. 11. ad 14. Which if ye reade, ye shall finde, to be nothing else, but a ceasing to doe euill, and a learning to doe vvell: and they deceiue the world with the homonymie of their Latine poenitentiae: the Greeke word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, signifies nothing else, but a change of the minde: and so proportionally, the fruits of a changed minde, are nothing but actions of a new life, beseeming and testi∣fying a changed heart.

The third testimonie is 2 Cor. 7.11. Where amongst fruits of a godly sorrow, is reckoned vp, reuenge or punishment. Ans. First, whither this punishment, be that that the repentant partie takes of himselfe, or which the Church inflicted on the incestuous person, is

questionable: their owne Caietane so interprets, refer∣ring it to the sentence of excommunication passed on the incestuous person: the end whereof, who euer taught to be satisfaction to Gods iustice? Secondly, be it granted, that it signifies reuenge, which the penitent takes of himselfe, by barring himselfe of his lawfull re∣freshings, in respect of his immoderate pursuit of vn∣lawfull pleasures, and the like; is this a satisfaction to God for former sinnes of his soule? what scripture; what Father so teacheth?

The next testimonie Leuit. 4.5. & 6. Where are ap∣pointed sacrifices of diuers value, according to the mea∣sure of offences: and these sacrifices were satisfactions, and expiations of the guilt of temporall punishment. Ans. That they may iustly be termed expiatorie sacri∣fices, wee yeeld; yet in this sense onely; quatenus the name of the truth signified, may be giuen to Types, signifying the truth: a phrase of speech vsuall in scrip∣tures, when matters Typicall or Sacramentall are enun∣ciated.

The onely true expiatorie sacrifice, was that of Christ on the crosseu: signified by these types, in the Leui∣ticall law. Neither can it be proued, that the actes of offring them, purged otherwise then legally. Heb. 9. Christes bloud, which in these types their faith beheld, alone hauing power to purge the conscience, Heb. 9.14. Their other testimonies I spare mentioning; and come now briefely to examine their distinctions, out of which, they haue nicely framed, this their carnall do∣ctrine of satisfactions.

Satisfactions then they would haue to be of two sorts; some euery way aequable to the offence of Di∣uine iustice; such they gently yeeld, there are none per••ormable by any meere man: but an other sort there is, which they call acceptable; that is, such as

God accepts for satisfactions, and amends made to his iustice for the sinne of our soules. And will you heare what effect they ascribe vnto them? they haue not po∣wer, they say to restore, or recouer amitie with God; but yet this they can doe, satisfie his iustice; at least for guilt of temporall punishments, to be suffered in purgatorie.

Now first, where finde they eyther tearmes, or grounds of this distinction? we reade indeed, that our seruices of new obedience are sacrifices acceptable vn∣to GOD through Iesus Christvv: but that they are satisfactions to his iustice, eyther by absolute corres∣pondence, or acceptable proportion wee finde not. Secondly, see how in explication of their di∣stinction, they confound themselues. Can they satis∣fie iustice? then sure they may remoue offence: can they remoue offence? they can also restore fa∣uour, and amitie with God. For is there any thing that is offensiue to God, but the violation of Iustice? satis∣fie his iustice, thou shalt sure haue him propitious. Thirdly, tell vs I pray you, without halting, whither is first, in order of nature satisfaction to Gods iustice, or reconciliation? If our olde bookes faile vs not▪ if the scripture deceiueth vs not, satisfaction euen plenarie goes before as the meane; reconcilement followes, as the end whereto that tended. Therefore, if wee be re∣conciles perfectly, satisfactions are performed; if sa∣tisfactions plenarie be not performed, wee are sure not reconciled.

And that they prattle of temporarie punishment, reserued for vs to suffer for satisfaction for veniall sins; vvhat doth it but impeach the al-sufficient sacrif••ce of our Sauiour? that with his one oblation of himselfe, hath perfected for euer them that are sanctifiedx? or secondly, thrust vs into fellowship of Christs mediati∣on,

and make him a Sauiour by vs; of whom the scripture teacheth, that by his owne selfe hee hath made a purgation of our sinnesy: or thirdly, according to their grounds, lay crime of iniustice vpon the Maiestie of God: that hauing receiued perfect satisfaction in the bloud of his sonne, and thereby as themselues, cleared vs from all fault, should yet punish vs being vvholie faultlesse, at least by imputation.

Their instances, whereby they would proue that the fault being pardoned, punishments temporarie are reserued, and that for satisfaction to Gods iustice, are of no value; to them all wee answere with Austi••. Ante remissionem esse illa supplicia peccatorum; post re∣missionem autem certamina exercitationes{que} iustorum. Be∣fore remission, they are punishments of sinners; after forgiuenesse, exercises of iust men. And of Dauid, 2 Sam. 12. the example vvherein they triumph, pardon was giuen him that hee might not be hindered from life eternall: but the effect of that commination follo∣wed Wherefore? to satisfie Gods iustice? No, but in that humiliation to exercise & proue mans pietie. ••t pie∣tas hominis in illa humilitate exerceretur, at{que} probaretur.

Thus Austin iudicially; consonantly to whom, our Diuines teach that temporall paines, and afflictions of this life, though they remaine for substance one and the same, before and after reconciliation, yet is their habit and vse changed vnto Gods children: remay∣ning onely, as chasticements, as reducements, as pre∣uentions, as admonitions as prouocations to diligence in good duties, as meanes to mortifie corruption, and to humble vs for our sinnes; &c. And surely, if they are therefore inflicted, that God iustice may, after re∣mission be satisfied, ••hat a kind of pardon call ••e this? that hath not a release, but a mitigation of punishment only, or as themselues pract se, in their pro poenitentiali,

a commutation of an heauier for a lighter punishment and is this the Lords pardon? but enough if not too much of this heresie.

Verse 25. Whom God hath set forth to be a recon∣ciliation, through the faith in his bloud, to de∣clare his righteousnesse, by the forgiuenesse of the sinnes that are passed, through the patience of God.

Verse 26. To shew at this time his righteousnes, that he might be iust, and a iustifier of him which is of the faith of Iesus.

IN these wordes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. is ••ot onely a further illustration of our iu∣stification, by causes efficient, and finall; but a proofe of that immediately forego∣ing: iustified wee are by redemption in Iesus Christ. And if any man aske a reason, why by that meanes, ra∣ther then by any other? the answere is, because God hath purposed or proposed him as the meane of re∣concilement: in them consider wee these things: first, the agent: secondly his action: thirdly, the subiect: fourthly, his office and worke whereto he is designed; fiftly, the condition required on our part, for partaking in this blessing of r••conciliation.

The agent is God: whether we take it personally, or essentially, it matters not: if personally, we must referre it to the Father, as to the originall, in a sort, of this pur∣pose and decree: if essentially, so also it is true; the whole Deitie, as it were, sitting in counsel of the meanes of mans reconcilement, resolued of the second per∣sons designement to this worke of propitiation, in that manner that wee now see it in execution.

The action followeth; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, whether we render purposed, or proposed, it matters not: the word beares both; and both perhaps are intended, the proposing of Christ, both in types of the law, as also in the cleare re∣uelation of the Gospel, being a consequent of that pur∣pose; howbeit, perhaps it is best vnderstood of Gods purpose, to which vsually the workes of redemption are assigned, as to their cause and measure. See Ephes. 1.9.

The subiect of this purpose and designement, is Christ Iesus; as the meetest person, both to assume a son-ship of man, and to impart vnto vs, the honour of his own son-ship, by taking vs into fellowship of that his prerogatiue: His worke & office, wherto he is designed, is propitiation, that is, to bring vs againe into fauor and grace with God; by satisfying his iustice, & so remouing the offence & iust displeasure of God; as also by purcha∣sing vnto vs, al other the testimonies of loue: as adoption gift of the spirit, possession of the kingdom of heauen, &c

Thus farre of the sense; out of all which ioyned to∣gether, me thinkes we may well frame answere, to those curious questions, rise amongst schoole Diuines: as, whether there could not haue beene another meane of reconciling man to God, then the incarnation and passi∣on of the sonne of God; whither this meane was the most conuenient; to first, whereof the vsuall answere is, that the infinite wisedome of God, might haue found out, and resolued of so me other meanes of attonement, had it so pleased him: but secondly, this was the meanes most conuenient, whether wee respect the ends, the Lord propounded to himselfe; or the things requisite to those ends: the ends were to manifest his loue, and rich grace towards man; and that secondly in such sort, as that no iot of his endlesse iustice, might be impea∣ched, by extending such mercy to man transgressingz. Now wherein could the Father haue shewen more loue?

then in this demitting his owne, and onely sonne out of his bosome, to assume our nature, and in it to me∣diate betwixt God and vs. And could men and Angels haue deuised a meanes to shew mercy, without im∣peachment of Diuine iustice, as herein we see manife∣sted? thus mercifully to saue, thus seuerely to punish those that he determined to saue, except by these means who could haue deuised?

Consider we againe, the things requisite to our re∣conciliation; such as are vndue obedience, perfect sa∣tisfaction; things both of them requiring an infinite person, to giue both infinite value: that wee may very well say, there was not any meane of prop••i••tion more conuenient then this, according to God, eternall pur∣pose exhibited in Christ: hee which would see more to this purpose let him read S. Augustine de Trinitat. lib. 13. cap. 10. Anselm. lib. cur Deus hom••. Aquinas part. 3. 9. 1. Act. 20. And generally schoole-men in 3. Sentent. Distinct. 20. but in all such quaeries this rule should be remembred; that the conueniencie of meanes to their ends, must be measured by their choyse and designe∣ment in Gods purpose and counsell.

[Vse.] And here, let vs learne in our distresses arising from conscience of Gods displeasure for sinne, to seeke vnto Christ onely, as the store-house of comfort. Our Saui∣our vpon this ground thus exhorts; in him to seeke refreshing in our spirituall hunger, which Christ incar∣nate onely can giue: because him onely God hath sea∣leda, that is, designed by his eternall counsaile, to this office of reconciling vs to God.

The office or worke whereto Christ is designed fol∣loweth; that is, to be our propiatour or mediatour of reconcilement vnto God. And this office be thus per∣formed: first, submitting himselfe to the whole curse of God, deserued by our sinnes, and standing in the

gap, as it is said of Moses, so bearing the brunt of Gods fiery wrath and indignation: and by that meanes remo∣uing from our persons all whatsoeuer wrath or iustice could be offended at. Secondly, by the merit of his obedience purchasing vnto vs the donation of Gods spirit, to worke faith, whereby we might be brought in∣to the couenant of grace▪ &c.

Which office thus performed by our propyatorie; [Vse.] first, giues conscience comfort, against infirmities daily renewed by Gods seruants: in as much as they haue an aduocate with the Father; Iesus Christ the righteous, who is also the propitiation for their sinnes. 1 Ioh. 2.

And withall, assures vs of our preseruation in state of grace, till full possession of that glorious life purchased for vs by the merit of Christ: For if when we were ene∣mies, we were reconciled, &c. Rom. 5.

The condition required of vs, to make this propi∣tiation effectuall to vs, is faith; declared by the obiect, Christs bloud: as if he should say, by resting and rely∣ing on the death and obedience of Iesus Christ.

Herein tryumph the patrones of iustification by the sole passion of Christ; making his bloud the ad aequatum obiectum of faith iustifying; how fitly let them iudge by this, that they cannot choose but acknowledge here a Synecdoche; for will they exclude soule passions from the satisfaction of Gods iustice? or make the sufferings of his life, onely preparatiues to compassion, and not also for their part expiations for sinne? let him beleeue that listeth; for my part, I know nothing in the whole humiliation of our Sauiour, but was not onely a depo∣sition necessary, but euen a part of his expiation. And had almost rather define with schoole-men, that Christ merited from the first instant of his conception, then thus limit his meritorious and expiatorie satisfaction to his last act in death. Reasons of this Synecdoche, seeme

these: first, because in his death was the complement of his humiliationb: secondly, it serued best for oppo∣sition to Iewish opinion, of legall sacrifices offered in bloud of beastsc: thirdly, most sensibly answered to the types of Iewish law, &c.

But here obserue we, that to partaking in Gods fa∣uour procured by Christs humiliation, faith is required; what kinde of faith whither generall or particular hath beene already declared; whither also as a disposition preceding, as feare, loue, hope, &c. or as an instrument to apprehend Christs merit, hath beene also shewen; here onely it shall suffice to note, that faith is here put metonimically, for the consequent or effect of it; which we call fiduciam; that is, confidence, or affiance, which me thinkes the particle (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) sufficiently noteth: so that if our aduersaries would learne, to leaue that point of their skill, in diuerting the stroke of our arguments in this point, to a controuersie of words; many there needlesse disputes, about the nature of faith iustifying, would soone haue end: for my part I iudge with them in this point, that faith, properly so called, is in the vn∣derstanding, not in the will; and may better be rende∣red, a perswasion then affiance. But yet this is true, that affiance in Christes merit, is a fruit of faith iustifying; and the very act of affiance or putting trust in Christ, required of vs, to our iustification, which if no other Scripture affirmed, yet this euidently auoucheth: and can we thinke this floweth from a generall beleeuing of the history of the Gospell? yea, can it arise from any thing, but particular euidence of our title to Christs merit.

[Vse.] Let vs therefore as many as desire to know our re∣conciliation with God through Christ, proue our selues whether we be in the faith or notd: that olde distin∣ction of Schoole-men borrowed of Augustine, in

question touching the extent of Christs merit, may in fit place be discussed: this once is agreed on all sides, except the Chiliasts, that howsoeuer there be a suffici∣encie of worth in Christs merit to reconcile all; yet the efficacie thereof reacheth onely to such as beleeue. It concernes vs therefore for our comfort, diligently to try and examine our confidence. Notes to discerne it, besides the feeling and experience euery man may haue of himself, are these. First, gathered by proportion from that of Salomon; Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and leaue not to thine owne wisedomee. Proportionally, it is true of euery man resting in Christs merit for pro∣pitiation, and fauour of God, that he leanes not on any thing in himselfe to procure it; but is so humbled with conscience of sinne, and terrour of Gods maiestie, is so well acquainted with naturall disabilities, imperfection of his owne righteousnesse, that he counts all dung and drosse for the knowledge of Christ, that he may be found in him not hauing owne righteousnessef, &c. I say not, that euery one renouncing himselfe in this behalfe, hath presently affiance in Christs bloud; (although me thinks truly to doe this, is a thing supernaturall) but nega∣tiuely I am sure it holdes; whosoeuer rests in himselfe, relieth not on Christ &c.

A second euidence of confidence in Christ, and his merit for righteousnesse, is detestation of all Teachers and doctrines in any sort rasing this foundation and pillar of our confidence. How stoutly the Apostle op∣posed against such, who so reades his whole Epistle to the Galathians may iudge, with what earnestnesse of affection enuies hee against those, that in this Article of iustification, desired to mingle Moses and Christ, faith and works of any sort? The like is the affection of all such, that haue learnt truly to rest on Christ.

But proceede wee. The end of this ordinance, and

decree of God, proposing Christ as mediatour of re∣concilement, through his bloud, and faith therein, fol∣loweth; that is, to declare his righteousnesse in for∣giuing sinnes, of both Testaments, &c.

Sense: To declare his righteousnesse.] As if he should say, If any aske a reason, why God ordayned Christ to propitiate, and that by his bloud; it was, to shew him∣selfe iust in forgiuing sinnes. To omit variety of inter∣pretations; by iustice of God, we may best vnderstand, his iudiciall iustice, which some call, remunerating, or distributiue; a property enclining him to reward obe∣dience; to punish disobedience. Now, for that his pur∣pose was to deale mercifully with man in forgiuing sinnes, and yet iustly too, in punishing disobedience; (for God cannot so be mercifull, as to impeach his iu∣sticeg) this way his Diuine wisedome deuised for mer∣cifull forgiuenesse; to deliuer his sonne to dye for our sinnes, that iustice might be satisfied; and withall, mer∣cie ouerflowe to the Elect in forgiuing iniquitie and sinne.

To declare his iustice in forgiuing sinnes:] That is, that he might be acknowledged iust, euen while of mercy he forgaue sinnes. To this sense agreeth that Ver. 26. where first, wee may learne to admire the mysterie of diuine wisedome, as in all other his workes conspicu∣ous, so in this of compounding endlesse iustice, with as infinite mercy most admirable; no meruaile if Angels so desirously buckle themselues to prie hereinto. It was that about which the Sophies of all times busied them∣selues, but were in all their deuises frustrate; by light of nature they knew iustice must receiue satisfaction, before euer mercy could haue passage, from that Father of mercies, to the sonnes of Adam. Hence were their fastings, sacrifices, sometimes offered in mans bloud▪ yea, in bloud of their owne sonnes and daughters;

intended to propitiate the diuine maiestie, fondly ima∣gined to reside in their Idols: but the true meane of propitiation, the Gospell onely hath reuealedh: and the matter of it Christ Iesus, opened out of the bo∣some of his Father.

Secondly, mee thinkes if there were none other ar∣gument this alone sufficiently ouerthrowes all that do∣ctrine of Popish satisfactions, for reconciliation: for can there be no meane of propitiation, but what yeelds satisfaction to diuine iustice? will not the Lord be mer∣cifull in forgiuing sinnes? Nay, can be not be mercifull in forgiuing sinnes, till iustice be satisfied? then sure, humane sufferings, and almes, and prayers, must needs be acknowledged to be no sacrifices propitiatorie for the sinnes of our soules. But hereof before.

Followeth now an amplification of the sinnes for∣giuen by a distinction or distribution of them, accor∣ding to seuerall times of committing; some vvere 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is, done or committed, in time be∣fore Christs exhibiting in the flesh; some after; to both which the merit of Christs passion extends itselfe.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Diuers are the inter∣pretations; that now specified. I iudge most probable, comparing this place with that Heb. 9.15.

Consent of other Interpreters, both Popish and o∣thers might be shewen Whence the collection is easie, that vertue of Christ passion reached vnto the Fathers of the olde Testament; and that the Lord gaue the plenarie forgiuenesse of their sinnes respecting the fu∣ture humiliation of his sonne. This point needed not much proofe, but that our Romish aduersaries by a consequent of their doctrine, seeme to denie it: for truth of it see these Sriptures. Acts 15.11. Ioh. 8.56. Heb. 13.8. Apoc. 13.8.

And what should let then to infer? that they were admitted to heauen properly so called, without detaine∣ment in their Limbus, the skirt of hell, vntill Christs comming thither to deliuer them.

That which they teach of this place is this; that it is a part of hell; and such a part▪ as betwixt which, and the place of the damned, there is no solide interstitium: that it was a prison, wherein, though the Fathers had an immunitatem poena sensibilis, freedome from all sen∣sible paine; yet were they depriued of the vision of God, and tormented at least with this that they hung in a suspensiue hope of that blessed glory, which they expected.

Now if it be true, their sinnes were remitted: se∣condly they iustified and reconciled vnto GOD, by faith in Christ to come: thirdly, were adopted for sonnes: how can it be imagined, that they were thus punished? Againe, S. Augustine professed, that he ne∣uer could finde hell in Scripture put for good; and the receptacle of soules, what euer it were, whither the Fa∣thers went, was sure good; wherein they had, not onely immunity from sensible paine, but receiued comfort. Luc. 16.25.

Thirdly, it is a ruled opinion of many their Diuines, that it is a greater punishment, to be depriued of Gods presence, then to feele any other the paines of hell; and that the anguish is more, to consider that depriuall of glory, then to feele the smart of any other infernall torment; which if it be so; then sure the greatest pu∣nishment was theirs that yet are confessed to haue liued and dyed high in Gods fauour. Heb. 11.

Adde vnto this, that the title giuen to their place of abode, is Paradise metaphoricalli: that with Paul is all one, with the third heauenk, the Palace of Gods prin∣cipall

residence; a place of pleasure sure, and free from all punishment, both of sense and losse. But let vs heare what they can say for maintenance of their Lymbus, they alleadge that Gen. 37.35. I shall goe downe sorrow∣ing to my S••nne in infernum. Ans. And why not in se∣pulchrum? to the graue: the word beares it wel enough, and the purport of Iacobs speech; wherein he expresseth a griefe that would neuer leaue him, till death: and compare Gen. 42.38. the like speech; yee shall bring my gray head with sorrow to the graue: the word is all one, and thinke ye his gray head went to Lym∣bus?

The second testimonie, is Luc. 16.23.26. betwixt the place of the damned, and the bosome of Abraham; there was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: a great hiatus: therefore no solide interstitium betweene them, but both soules in the same gulfe. Ans. Now sure a pretie collection. And if Bellarmine had beene to deale with Chemnitius; how scoffingly would he haue girded at such gramma∣ticall quiddities? But is it his opinion in deede? that this chasma is such an empty hiatus, wherein is no solide in∣terstitium? Then me thinkes, there should be no such impossibility of interchangeable passage, betwixt the spirits aboue and belowe; and how a Commeatus be∣tweene them, should in such an empty space, be more impossible for spirits, then sight or audience, I see not. But for answere he cannot forget their rule in schooles that Theologia symbolica, non est argumentiua; and that euery string of a parable is not to be strayned; nor can any thing be vrged thereout, beyond the principall intention. And for his empty 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, though it sig∣nifie properly, that hiatus oris in oscitation; yet is tran∣slated by a Synecdoche of the species, to signifie any distance or space of place. And so here is intended by

our Sauiour, in this parabolicall pro ••popaeia: his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, being nothing, for ought our aduersaries can proue, but that great distance, betwixt heauen, the seat of the blessed, and hell, the prison of the dam∣ned.

Thirdly, they alleadge 1 Sam. 28.13 The soule of Samuel was seene ascending out of the earth Ans. first, the text hath not the soule of Samuel, but Deos. And is it their opinion it was Samuels soule, came vp so wrap∣ped in a mantle verse 14. belike hee found cold com∣fort in that refrigerium, that Lymbus afforded, that hee was faine, thus to be-mantle his soule, to keepe heare: secondly, I thus reason: if this ascending were of the true Samuel & not of his spectrum; either of soule alone, or of body alone, or of both: not of his soule alone, for quid animae & pa••••io? what had his soule to doe with a mantle? if of bodie alone, an assent might be thereof out of the graue; if both; why might not his soule first descend out of heauen and in the graue resume the bodie? and so ascend: so that there is no necessitie of ascending out of hell, or any list thereof: but thirdly, what if not Samuel at all, nor nothing of his, but his spectrum: a phantasm, alone assumed, by an euill spirit, was that that appeared? surely, the reasons brought both by Fathers, and other late writers for this opinion, are not to be contemned.

For first, is it likely, that the Lord refusing to an∣swere Saul by meanes ordinarie, verse 6. vvould thus extraordinarily giue resolution by Samuel sent from the dead? Secondly, was Samuel soule thus at command of a Witch? to be called out of his rest, by her, verse 11. especially by Magicall meanes? but I perceiue, it is not for nothing they place ••ymbu so neere the hell of the damned; they should doe the Diuell great wrong, to

take his borderers out of his kingdome, or to imagine, that emptie Chasma could keepe them from his com∣mand. I omit answere to the arguments of the contra∣rie opinion: as that he is called Samuel: and second∣ly, that he foretold things to come; which being con∣tingent, were accordingly accomplished. Heare the an∣swere of some Fathers to these reasons, and thereby iudge of their opinions: to the first thus Theodoret, hi∣storia cum qui visus est, nominat Samuelem, propteria quod, sic crediderit Saul. The historie cals him that ap∣peared, Samuel, because Saul so thought of him: and this to be no strange kinde of speech, he proues, by the like in other scriptures; thus also it stiled the An∣gels, that appeared vnto Abraham, and the Lord of them (men;) because the Patriarcke supposing them to be such, set meate before them, &c. vide locum.

To the second, S. Basile thus; ad eum modum & daemones quae sententia ac decreto dei constituta e∣rant, iamque palam euulgata saepenumero annuncia∣runt bis, qui facile in fraudem illiciuntur. &c. After the same manner haue the diuels often declared such things as were appointed, by the sentence and decree of GOD and now openly diuulged vnto such as are easily brought into errour.

And then instanceth in this example, affirming them, to be Diuels, transforming themselues into the habit and person of Samuel: that hauing heard the sentence of condemnation pronounced against Saul, promul∣ged it, as their owne; I might glut the reader with like testimonies of others, but these may suffice.

Their third testimonie is, 1 Pet. 3.19. he preached vn∣to the spirits in prison; now heauen is no prison. Ans. The full opening of this place, will best be done, when we shall come by Gods grace, more purposely to han∣dle

it. Here only, as much as shall suffice, for loosing the hold, they haue here taken, for Lymbus, first, the spirits here preached vnto, if they were in pr son at the time of their preaching, cannot be intended to be the soules of the Fathers; for that they are described to haue been incredulous and disobedient; and so I hope they will not say of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, &c. Secondly, they will neuer be able to proue that this preaching was to them, at the time while they were in prison: for quorsum? But hereof more hereaf∣ter.

As touching their other testimonies, and reasons pretended out of the scriptures, they haue beene all sufficiently, and often answered, and the aunsweres stands to this day vnconfuted, as that Crambe Zach. 9.11. Thou hast brought the prisoners out of the lake where are no waters; the (••u) here mentioned, is to be applied to the Church, as the foeminine particles shew; the lake is not hell, but babilonish captiuitie: and the vvhole reading is corrupt, as appeares to any aduising with the originall.

Their reason: then Christ was not the first that as∣cended into heauen Ans. This seemed no great ab∣surditie to the auncients; whose iudgement it was of Elias, that hee was translated in to heauenm: secondly, for all this Christ might be the first, that in bodie and soule entred into fulnesse of that glorie, prepared for the elect in the kingdome of heauen. And thus much of that controuersie.

The remainder of this verse hath little else, then hath beene alreadie treated off, hee resumes onely the end of this ordinance of God to reconcile vs by the bloud of his Sonne; and secondly, explanes that which hee had said of the manifestation of Gods iustice; shewing

what he meant thereby: that he might be iust: that is, declared to be iust, and yet, a iustifier of him that is of the faith of Iesus; that is, although he did discharge from punishment, and guilt of sinne; and approued as righteous, such as renouncing themselues and their owne righteousnesse, expect iustification by beleeuing in Christ Iesus. Him that is of the faith of Iesus. Gal. 3.9.10. as if he should say, him that renouncing the sect of merit-mongers, embraceth the supposed heresie of so∣lifidians.

Hitherto, of the Apostles first argument against iu∣stification by workes, thus largely handled from cap. 1. verse 16. to this place. Followes now the position of the contrarie conclusion: that a man is iustified by faith, with new arguments to that purpose.

Verse 27. Where is then the reioycing? It is ex∣cluded. By what law? of workes? Nay: but by the law of faith.

Verse 28. Therefore wee conclude, that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the Law.

THe first reason is taken from the effect of this manner of iustification by faith, remoued from that other by workes, in this forme. If by the do∣ctrine of iustification by faith, boast∣ing be excluded and not by that which requires workes, then wee are iustified by faith and not by workes: but by the doctrine of faith, boast∣ing is excluded, and not by that of workes: therefore we conclude, that a man is iustified by faith, without the workes of the law.

The proposition is omitted, but easily collected out of the Apostles Enthymem••. The assumption is propoun∣ded, in a Rhetoricall Dialogisme, as is easie to be seene; the conclusion expressed in so many tearmes, verse 28.

The consequencë of the proposition depends vpon this ground; that man must be iustified by such a meane, as whereby he may haue no cause to glorie in himselfe. Ephes. ••.9. 1 Cor. 1.30.31.

The truth of which ground, as it is euident by the testimonies now alleadged, so will it further appeare,

by the vvhole proiect of Gods counsaile touching the saluation of his Church. Wherein it is euident he chose such a course, as vvhereby the vvhole glory might be his: none, mans: hee chose vs before vve vvere, freely, vvithout respect to any thing in vs▪ accor∣ding to the good pleasure of his owne vvill; for the glorie of his rich gracen: hee made vs vvith∣out our selues after his glorious Image: permit∣ted; yea, decreed to perm••t our fall, that hee might haue mercieo: and that the claime to saluation, might be by meere mercie; vvherefore? I demand vvould the Lord that had power to stablish vs, as hee did good Angels, shut vs vp vnder sinne? but that hee might make vvay, for the glorie of his mercie? he sent his Sonne to reconcile vs; made not vs our owne propitiatours: vvherefore? but that the vvhole glorie might be his? hee called vs freelyp, of grace inuiting, by his spirit opening our hearts to attend, and by the same spirit drawing vsq: ordayned meanes in themselues silly and vveake to conuert vsr: sanctifies indeede, but in part one∣ly; wherefore? but that, as the Apostle speakes, no flesh might glorie in his presences: all vvhich ioyned to the testimonies fore-cited, euidence the soundnesse of the Apostles ground: and thus farre furthers vs in discerning the meanes of our iusti∣fication in generall, that it must be such, as vvhere by all occasion of boasting may be taken from man.

Come we now to the particular assumed; but boa∣sting, doctrine of workes excludes not; doctrine of Faith excludes, and may wee not then conclude vvith the Apostle? that a man is iustified by faith, without the workes of the law.

Let vs a little examine the assumption: sense; law of workes: that is, doctrine of workes: that is, teaching that wee are iustified by workes. Law of faith, that is, doctrine of faith; as the Hebrew pro∣perly signifies; for the truth of it, both members are to be scanned; first, that doctrine of iustification by workes excludes not boasting: secondly, that that of faith excludes it.

For the first, consider wee vvhat it is, that by doctrine, requiring vvorkes to iustification, is to be performed by him, that will that vvay be iustified: and that is, a doing of the whole lawt, and that by the person himselfe, that lookes for iustification. And is not this, to puffe vp the proud heart of man vvith conceit of abilitie to iustifie himselfe? What prouder doctrine then that of Pelagians? teaching that by naturall abilities, the law might perfectly be kept to iustification. That of Papists, is not all out so grosse; they teach, that nature helped by grace, may doe this: and, that by workes done in grace, some iustification may be atchieued: they diminish boa∣sting, but exclude it not. It vvere long, to rake vp all they teach, touching power of will in nature: how it deserues ex congruo, euen before grace recea∣ued. But haply, by that they teach of the necessarie assistance of grace to iustification, they amend the matter. Surely little or nothing. For let a man view all they teach touching the efficacie of grace, in this point of iustification: hee shall finde it to amount to this summe onely: that grace doth little more then bring out that power, that is in nature, into act; or heale a little the wound, that sinne hath made; or confirme weakenesse naturall: so making nature, to goe cheeke by iole vvith grace, in the act of iusti∣fying:

and is this to exclude boasting? and not rather to occasion it?

Let vs see now vvhether the doctrine of faith ex∣cludes it; so saith the Apostle. But consider vvee how: viz. in as much as it teacheth to goe out of our selues for righteousnesse; and makes vs, no more but receiuers of that righteousnesse, vvhereby vvee are iustified; vvrought by Christ, giuen by GOD the Father, receiued by faithv, according to this doctrine, vvhat cause hath man to boast? Perhaps they vvill say of this, that he beleeued: and by be∣leeuing, accepted the righteousnesse offered? as if a beggar should boast of his vvealth, and ascribe it to his labour, whereas all hee did was but to receiue, what the li••eralitie of almoners pleased to bestow; yea in the case betwixt GOD and vs, man hath not so much to boast of, sith very power to receiue is also the gift of God. Ephes. 2.8.

The conclusion now may vvell be inferred, that therefore a man is iustified by faith without workes of the law.

And what haue aduersaries of grace, trow wee, to except against this round argument of the Apostle? Forsooth they labour by a distinction of boasting, to elude all. So Bellarmine: the Apostle excludes not all boasting, but that onely, vvhich ariseth of workes done by sole power of freewill; for hee saith not, vbi est gloriatio? Where is the boasting? but vbi est glo∣riatio tua? Where is thy boasting? the boasting wher∣by thou gloriest in thy selfe, and not in the Lord; now in respect of vvorkes done of faith, and so by grace, no man can glorie but in the Lord; and that boasting is not prohibited: for the Apostle saith, Let him that glorieth, glorie in the Lordvv.

The summe is this, that boasting in our selues onely is forbidden and not boasting in the Lord: and that is sufficiently excluded by this, that they af∣firme, workes done by power of nature, vvithout aide of grace, to be vnable to iustifie.

Ans. Plausibly. The distinction of boasting, wee graunt, if they yeeld vs thus much, that all glory∣ing in our selues, is excluded; for wee list not to con∣tend about quiddities; though Bellarmines (tua) be not found in the text. And thus propound the Apo∣stles ground; a man must be iustified by such a meanes as vvhereby hee may haue no cause at all to glorie in himselfe: but must transcribe the whole glorie of iustification, to the grace of GOD: and hence thus assume.

But by doctrine of workes, whether done by sole power of nature, or mixtly by grace and nature, all boasting is not excluded; Ergo, that not the meane of iustification. Our minor for the first part, is gran∣ted by aduersaries; and doe they not see, how their mingling of grace and nature, leaues still some cause of boasting to our proud nature? Am I a coworker with grace by power naturall, and depends the effi∣cacie of grace, vpon the assent of my will? then sure in respect of my coagencie, and assent, be it lesse or more, I haue some cause to boast of my selfe, and so, all boasting in my selfe is not excluded; but all boasting in our selues, must be excluded; therefore all workes vvhatsoeuer whether done by sole power of nature as Pelagians; or by nature and grace mixtly, as Popish Semipelagians now teach, are here excluded from iustification.

To conclude this argument: let all such as desire to informe themselues, in this weightiest point, wherein

errours are most daungerous, bring doctrines on both sides taught, to this touchstone. If Popish do∣ctrine, here hold current, let them embrace it, if it take away all boasting from man, hold it firme: but if it puffe vp the proud heart of man, in the least measure, as indeed it doth, reiect it as a doctrine of Diuels; and hold the teachers thereof, though Seraphicall, for euer accursed: it serues not the turne, to say, they ascribe Iustificatorie vvorkes to grace of God; for first, what doe they herein, more then the Phariseex: I thanke God (saith he) not my selfe, that I am thus and thus: and yet is dismissed vvithout iustification: and secondly, all they ascribe to grace, is but an assistance of nature; or a prin∣cipalitie at most, in workes that iustifie; and by associating nature with grace, giue vs at least some cause to boast of our selues? for sure, if we be eyther principals, or in the least measure ad∣iutours to our iustification, vvee haue some cause of boasting: but it is wholly excluded by the true Doctrine of iustification. Therefore wee may well conclude against vvorkes; they haue no po∣wer to iustifie in the sight of GOD. And surely were it not that I consid••r Gods secret, though iust iudgement, in sending them strong delusi∣ons; and compassionately ponder the pride of nature, both to become nothing in the vvorke of saluation; and the subtiltie of Popish teachers, in suiting this doctrine to the humour of nature; I should wonder how any man aduisedly reading this short Enthymeme of the Apostle, could in this point, ••erre in iudgement; It was vvell said of one, that Popish religion, it is a naturall religi∣on: leaue man to himselfe, hee falles on Popish

conclusions, and practise: in this one point it is more then euident.

Let Gods children learne, to acknowledge their owne nothingnesse in this article of iustifi∣cation; that GOD may be all in all. Who so vvalkes, after this rule, peace shall be vpon him, and mercie, and vpon the Israel of GOD: and if any attempt sharing with the Lord in this glo∣rie; I testifie vnto him, with the Apostle, hee is abo∣lished from Christ▪ he is fallen from grace Gal. 5.4.

By faith, &c. It is vsually enquired how faith iustifieth: vvhether as an act or vvorke, or or∣ganicè, and correlatiue; as an instrument, recei∣uing that, for vvhich wee haue esteeme of righ∣teousnesse; and so in respect of that, vvhereto as an instrument, it hath relation: our Diuines hi∣therto, haue ioyntly resolued of the two latter; and as I take it vpon good reason: for that, other∣wise righteousnesse shall be inherent; which hi∣therto hath been holden an absurditie; the questi∣on wi••l come fitliest to be handled, cap. 4.3. and therefore to that place I reserue it.

By faith without workes: And is not the infe∣rence direct enough? therefore by faith onely. The inference is vsuall amongst our Diuines, both auncient and moderne: and thus wee explane our selues; that no grace of God, no worke, eyther of nature or grace in vs, concurreth, so much as instrumentally to iustification. Reason, because none other gift, or act but faith receiues that, for vvhich vve are accounted righteous in the sight of God.

What say our aduersaries to this collection? for∣sooth they charge vs with foysting in the terme

(onely.) Ans. And is it foysted in beyond the Apo∣stles intention? haue wee it not in the equiualent? by faith without workes; onely by faith, are they not equipollents. See Amb. in Rom. 3.9. Hierom. in Rom. 4. Basil in Concione de h••mil, &c. Fulgent de in∣carnat: cap. 16.

But how reconcile wee that of S. Iames? cap. 2. not by faith onely; with this of Paul, by faith onely; Iames iustified by workes; Paul iustified with∣out workes; Ans. The answeres are thus; that Paul treateth of iustification before God; so it is true, faith onely iustifieth in the sight of God; Iames, of iustification in foro humano, or before men; and so workes iustifie: that is, declare to be iust: Al: that Paul treateth of the effect or office of faith, in foro Diuino, Iame••, of the qualitie of that faith that iustifieth, and her effect before men; and all that Iames saith is this, as Ca••••tane truely, quod non fide ster••ls, sed fide foecunda operibus bonis iustifica∣mur. That wee are iustified not by a barren faith, but by such a faith, as is fruitfull in good workes: more of this Text of Iames, when by Gods grace we shall come to that Epistle.

Without workes of the Law, eyther naturall, ce∣remoniall, or morall; before or after grace, as plentifully is showen, ad verse 9.

Therefore say some, without workes of the law, euen done by Christ; for the exclusion is vniuer∣sall; except vvee can euidence a restraint. Ans. Restraints to workes done by our selues, mee thinks first; the whole purpose of the Apostle, implyeth; for the question is whether a man be to be iustified by his owne righteousnesse; that is, righteousnesse of his owne performance, or by the righteousnesse

of another: secondly, see Rom. 10.3.5. and tell me why hee cals the righteousnesse of the law, our owne righteousnesse? except in regard of our owne performance.

Verse 29. God, is he the God of the Iewes one∣ly, and not of the Gentiles also? Yes, euen of the Gentiles also.

Verse 30. For it is one God who shall iustifie circumcision of faith, and vncircumcision through faith.

A Second reason for iustification by faith without workes of the Law. From absurdities; if by workes of the Law, and not by faith onely; one of these two absurdities vvill follow; that eyther God is God of the Iewes onely, and not of the Gentiles also; or else that hee is variable in this action of iustify∣ing; iustifying the Iewes, by works of the law; Gen∣tiles by faith; but God is not the God of Iewes one∣ly, but of Gentiles also; and is one; that is, vnvaria∣ble in this act of iustifying. Ergo.

Is he God of Iewes onely? &c. That is, hee hath now vnder the new Testament accepted Gentiles, into his couenant of grace. The tenour whereof read Ier. 31.33, &c. But as touching the consequence of the proposition, it may be enquired how it flowes? Ans. Because that vnto Iewes onely was the Law giuen in writingy, the Gentiles were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with∣out the Law. If therefore iustification be by workes of the Law, Iewes onely shall be capable of that

blessing; and the Gentiles, whose God the Lord hath couenanted to be, shall lacke this principall blessing, promised in the couenant; iustification. But that is absurd. For God is one. This onenesse as I may terme it, of God, is not numerall, as in other placesz, but hath reference, eyther to the vn∣changeablenesse of God, and his keeping one sted∣die, and vnvaried course in iustifying all; or to the indifferencie, and vnpartiality of his affection to∣wards all, of all sorts. Within the couenant. If we take it in the first sense, they contayne a second absur∣dity, issuing from the doctrine of iustification by workes of law written, vrged by Iewes; in as much as then it will follow, that the Lord doth not, by one meanes iustificall. But Gentiles by faith, Iewes by works of the Law; but all are iustified by one and same meanes; sith God is one vnchangeable in his courses.

If wee take it in the other sense, as noting the in∣differencie of Gods affection to all in the couenant, it is a reason of the clause fore-going; viz. that God is God of Gentiles also.

Circumcision, that is, Iewes circumcised: vncir∣cumcision, that is, Gentiles vvanting circumcision. Metonimya adiuncti, as Rom. 2.26.

But that we may here note, is, that the blessing of iustification belongs to all in the couenant, vvhe∣ther Iewes or Gentiles beleeuing: see Ier. 31.33.34. Act. 15.8.9 10.11. See Annot. in Ver. 22. Reason: God is one.

Note to discerne whither wee be within the co∣uenant of Grace, principally is this; if wee haue performed our restipulation, carying our selues in all things, as the people of God. Zach. 13, 9.

Verse 31. Doe we then make the Law of none effect through faith? God forbid: yea we esta∣blish the Law.

DOe we then abolish the law by faith? God forbid, &c.] The words haue in them a preoccupation, of what might be obiected against the for∣mer doctrine, excluding workes of the Law, by auouching iustifi∣cation through faith onely.

Obiect. If we be iustified by faith onely, it should seeme the Law is vtterly abolished. Ans First, the consequent is denied and reiected vvith Apostoli∣call horrour, God forbid. Secondly, the contrarie is auouched: as if hee should say, we are so farre from antiquating the law, by doctrine of faith, that wee rather establish it. By faith vnderstand doctrine of faith, or teaching that we are iustified by faith.

Whence then, wee haue these two conclusions; first, that the doctrine of iustification by faith, abo∣lisheth not the Law.

Secondly, that same doctrine stablisheth the Law.

Now for the first of these, the explanation is not all out so difficult; for what though by teaching faith, wee make the law vneffectuall to iustification? followeth it thence, that it is in euery respect abo∣lished, and to all purposes vneffectuall? There are sundrie other ends of the law, for which it ought to stand in vse in the Church of GOD: As first, to

bring vs to knowledge of sinnea: secondly, to be a rule of lifeb: thirdly, to be meane of continuall humiliation, and sundry the like.

But how by this doctrine wee establish the Law, requires more diligent inquisition. Varietie of in∣terpretations, I am loath to cloy the Reader with∣all; yet some few of the most probable, it vvill not be impertinent to propound. Some thus; faith sta∣blisheth the Law, as it is a rule of life: vvhile it workes by loue, which is the fulfilling of the Law. But the question is as I take it, how the Apostle teaching that wee are iustified by faith, doth in so teaching, stablish the Law? Doe we abolish the Law? and wee stablish the Law: viz. wee that teach a man to be iu∣stified by faith, euen whiles wee so teach, or by this very doctrine, stablish the Law.

I therefore iudge with the best moderne interpre∣ters, that the Law is thus farre established by the do∣ctrine of faith; that the righteousnesse, which it requireth, quod ad materiam, is not abolished; but rather stablished. In as much as vvhat it requires, Doe this and liue, wee haue it in Christ by beleeuing. Faith finding in him, what man cannot finde in him∣selfe, the perfect obedience which the Law enioy∣neth.

And if any say, then belike we are iustified by righ∣teousnesse of the Law. Ans. It implies no absurdity to speake so in a sense. For according to iudgement of best Diuines, Legall and Euangelicall righteous∣nesse differ, not in matter, but efficiente & modo: wee haue the same righteousnesse vvhich the Law re∣quires; but yet in other manner, then the Law re∣quired it: the Law required it of our owne perfor∣mance; the Gospell teacheth, it sufficeth to righte∣ousnesse,

that it be for vs performed by our Media∣tour Christ Iesus, and apprehended of vs by faith.

And if this be Pauls meaning, then I hope it fol∣lowes; that Christs actiue obedience enters our iusti∣fication.

And then, there is some end of imputation; that it may become ours. And this I am sure is the olde way, and as I yet iudge, the good way: in it I finde as much rest to my soule, as in that other compen∣dium some haue framed.

In this point so weighty, I will be glad to learne; but can scarce be perswaded; the truth hath hitherto lien hid, from so many of Gods Saints, so purposely conuersant in this question. And though I am not so Popish, as to measure truth by multitude, yet sure me thinks, where other things are equall, as learning▪ industry; sincerity, prayer to God for reuelation; I had rather impute errour to one then many.

Their cut, they say, is shorter into Gods king∣dome; ours, I thinke, safer; and howsoeuer our cir∣cumference seeme larger, yet our center we are sure, is Christ. At{que} hic baculum fixi: though still I pro∣fesse with Augustine; Non p••gebit me, sicubi hasito, quaerere: nec pu••ebit, sicubi err••, discere. It shall neuer gre ue me, where I doubt, to en∣quire: nor shame me, where I erre, to learne and be better enformed.

Notes

• Excellencie.
• a

  Psal. 147.19.20. Deut. 4.8.9. Psal. 19. 2 Tim. 3. Rom. 15.4.
• b

  Rom. 6.25.
• c

  Rom. 15.4.
• d

  Psal. 141.5.
• e

  Psal. 147.19.20.
• g

  Ioh. 3.19.20.21. Am. 8.5.11.12.
• h

  Pro. 23.23.
• i

  Acts 13.41.46.51.
• k

  Isay 5.4.5.
• l

  Mat. 23.30.37 Mat. 21.28.
• Mat. 21.19.
• Proprietie.
• m

  Gen. 14 18.
• n

  Deut. 7.7.8.9.
• o

  Act. 14.17. Mat. 10.5.6.
• p

  1 Tim. 2.4.
• q

  Rom. 55.9.
• Manner.
• r

  1 Tim. 1.11. & 6.20.
• s

  Deut. 4.2. & 12.32.
• u

  Ioh. 20.31.
• vv

  2 Tim. 3.17.
• x

  Deut. 12.32. Apoc. 22.18.19.
• y

  Mat. 5.
• z

  Rom. 7.
• a

  Iam. 1.14.
• b

  2 Cor. 2.17.
• c

  Tit. 2.10.
• d

  Mat. 7.6.
• e

  1 Tim. 3.15.
• Title.
• f

  Acts 7.3.8.
• g

  Isay. 8.20.
• h

  Psal. 119.24.
• i

  Isay 8.19.
• k

  Psal. 51.
• l

  Mala. 3.7.
• n

  Hab. 2.4.
• o

  Gal. 6.
• Zanch. in precept. 2. de culta dei ex∣terno.
• August. de Bapt. con∣tra Don. lib. 3 cap 15. Niceph. hist. lib. 3. cap. 33.
• August. de baptis. contra. Donat. lib. 1. cap. 1.
• p

  Mat. 23.1.2.3. Phil. 1.18.
• August. cont. Epist. Par. lib. 2. cap. 11. & contra lit. Pet. lib. 2. cap. 5.
• Cypri. Epist. 72.
• Epist. 70.
• q

  Mat. 3.11.
• r

  Ioh 9.31.
• August. cont. Epist. Par. lib. 2. cap. 8.
• s

  Numb. 23
• t

  1 Sam. 2.
• u

  Ioh. 4.2.
• vv

  Mat. 10.
• x

  Ioh. 6.70.
• August. in Ioan. tract. 5.
• August. lib. 3. cont. Cres. Grani. cap. 8. De Bapt. lib. 3. cap. 10.
• y

  1 Sam. 2.
• z

  1 Tim. 3
• a

  Ioh. 3.22. Ioh. 4.2.
• b

  Mat. 4.12.17.
• c

  Ioh. 3.24.
• d

  Acts 10.48.
• Ambros. in Ephes. cap. 4.
• Ambros. in 1 Cor. 1.17.
• e

  1 Cor 12.
• f

  Mat. 23.
• g

  Rom. 12.6.7.8.
• Ambros. de officijs bib. 1 cap. 41.
• Animad∣uers. in cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 13. Bellar.
• h

  Mat. 7.
• i

  Ier. 15.19.
• k

  1 Cor. 5.11.28.29.
• l

  1 Cor. 5.11.
• m

  2. Cor. 6.17.
• n

  Isay 52.11.
• Calu. Instit. lib. 4 cap. 1. Sect. 5.
• o

  Ephes. 5.7.11.
• August. de ver. Dom. secundum Mat. cap. 18. sub finem.
• August. cont. Donat.
• Verse 4.
• p

  Psal. 51,
• q

  Verse 4.
• Bernard de Nat. & dig. Amoris di∣uini. cap. 6. patitur pecca∣tum non facit.
• r

  Rom. 7.
• s

  Mal. 3.17. Psal. 89.32.33.
• t

  1 Ioh. 2.1.2.
• u

  Exod. 9.15.16
• vv

  Rom. 2.15.
• x

  Ioh. 15.21.
• y

  Rom. 2.23.
• z

  Isay 10.6.7. Gen. 50.20.
• August. quaest. super Exod. quaest. 79.
• a

  1 Thes. 2.16.
• b

  Phil. 1.12.
• c

  Rom. 8.28.
• d

  Heb. 12.11.
• e

  2 Cor. 4.17.
• f

  2 Thes. 1.6.
• g

  1 Ioh. 5.7. &c
• h

  Acts 24.5. Ier. 15.10. & 18.18.
• Verse 8.
• i

  Mat. 5.10.11.12.
• k

  Apoc. 12.10.
• l

  1 Tim. 5.19.
• m

  Mat. 5.19.
• n

  Rom. 3.31. Rom. 9.14.19. &c.
• o

  Mat. 12.36.
• p

  Iob. 13.7.
• q

  1 Sam. 1••.20.21.23
• r

  2 Sam. 6.7.
• s

  Col. 2.21.22.23.
• t

  Mat. 15.19.
• u

  Mic. 6.8. Ioh. 26 2.
• x

  2 Sam. 24.13.14.
• y

  Ioh. 13.7.
• z

  Neh. 13.17.18. Ezech. 18.13.
• a

  1 Reg. 15.13.
• b

  2 Par. 14.4. & 34.31.32.33
• c

  2 Par. 15.2.
• d

  Mat. 15.8.
• e

  Luke 18.11.12.28.
• f

  Mat. 16.24.
• g

  1 Pet. 5.8.
• h

  2 Cor. 12.7.
• i

  Mat. 26.
• k

  Rom. 5.12. Gal 3.9.10. Ephes. 2.3.
• l

  Isay 61.1.2. Mat. 9.12. & 11.18.
• m

  Mat. 5.3. Isay 57.15.
• n

  Luke 1.5.3.
• o

  Acts 2.37.
• p

  Iam. 1.25.
• q

  Rom. 5.20.
• r

  Gal. 3.10.
• s

  Hab. 1.13.
• t

  Psal. 5.4.
• u

  Heb. 2.2.
• vv

  Acts 17.30.
• x

  12. Vlt.
• y

  Acts 24.26.
• z

  Exod. 7.3.
• a

  Ephes. 4.18.19
• b

  Acts 24 26.27.
• c

  Ioh. 7.24.25.
• d

  Ioh. 15.4. Psal. 51.5.
• e

  Luke 23.41.
• Verse 10.11. ad ver. 19.
• f

  Gen. 20.6.
• g

  Ephes. 4.18.
• h

  Mat. 26.41.
• l

  Mat. 26.33.70.71.74.
• k

  1 Reg. 11.1.2.4.
• l

  Mat. 15.19.
• m

  Gen. 20.6.
• n

  Gal. 6.1. Iam. 3.1.
• o

  Rom. 9.4.
• p

  Rom. 3.2. Psal. 147.19.20 Obser.
• q

  Ioh. 9.40.
• r

  Gal. 3.10.
• s

  Exod. 5 2.
• t

  Am. 6.12.13.
• u

  Iob. 9.15.
• vv

  1 Cor. 11.32
• x

  Gal. 3.10.
• y

  Isay 57.20.21.
• z

  Ephes. 2.3.
• a

  Mat. 5.3.4. Luke 18.13.14.
• b

  Apoc. 3.17.
• c

  Ioh. 4.14.
• d

  Gal. 5.17.
• e

  Ioh. 3.6.
• Bellar. de iustif. lib. 2. cap. 3.
• f

  Ioh. 20.23.
• g

  Iam. 5. vlt.
• h

  1 Tim. 4. vlt.
• i

  Isay 33.11.
• k

  Heb. 7.26.
• l

  Luke 10.29.
• m

  Pro. 17.15.
• n

  1 Reg. 8.32.
• o

  Rom 2.13.
• p

  Acts 16. & 2.37.
• q

  Rom. 7.7.
• r

  Rom. 10
• s

  Gal. 3.10.
• t

  P•• 14••.2
• Io ••9.1••
• vv

  Phil. 3.
• Dan. ••.••.
• y

  Tit. 3.5. Phil. 3.9.
• z

  Rom. 8.3.
• a

  Luke 17.10.
• b

  Psal. 143.2
• c

  Rom. 5.20. & 7.7.
• Leuit. 18.5.
• e

  Gal 3.29.
• a

  Rom. 5 20 Gal. ••.10.
• b

  2 Cor. 3.7.9 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• c

  Gen. 2.2.
• d

  Rom. 8.3.
• e

  Rom. 11.32.
• f

  Mat. 5.19.
• g

  Rom. 3.31.
• h

  Iames. 1.
• i

  Mat. 11. Rom. 10.4.
• 1 Iohn. 1.
• a

  Philip. 3.9. Rom. 10.2.3.
• b

  2 Cor. 5.19. Rom. 3.26.
• Rom 10.3.4.
• c

  Philip. 3.8.9.
• d

  Rom. 10.4.5.
• a

  Rom. 1.17.
• b

  Mat. 7.12.
• c

  Gen. 3.15. & 15 6.
• d

  Ezod. 12. Psal. 32. Isay. 53. Ier. 23.8. Act. 10.43.
• Gal. 2.20.
• Ioh. 1.12.
• Acts 4.12.
• Ephes. 4.12.
• Gal. 4.8.
• Acts 15.9.
• a

  Acts 13. & 15 & 28. Rom. 15. Ephes. 2.
• Psal. 2.
• Rom. 15.
• Rom. 4.23.24.
• Mat. 12 20.
• a

  Iam. 2.19.
• b

  Bellar▪ de iustif. lib. 1. cap. 8. & 10.
• 1 Iohn. 5.1.2.
• Rom. 4.11.
• c

  2 Pet. 1.10.
• d

  Act. 15.9. Heb. 9.14.
• e

  Rom. 5.1.
• f

  Rom. 8.
• g

  Ephe. 4.24. 1 Cor. 3.18.
• h

  Rom. 7.10.
• i

  Rom. 2.7. Leuit. 18.5.
• l

  Act. 1.
• m

  Luc. 13.28.
• Sense.
• Ambros. ad loc.
• De iustifi∣cat. lib. 2. cap. 3.
• Rhemens. in Act. 10. v. 2.
• n

  Heb. 11.6.
• o

  Mat. 12.
• p

  Gen. 4. Greg. lib. moral. 22. cap. 12. De iust. lib. 5. cap. 12.
• q

  Tit. 1.15.
• Ioan. Bun∣der. à Gaud. Tit. 6. Art. 5.
• r

  Gen. 6.5. Gen. 8.21.
• s

  1 Ioh. 4.
• De iustif. lib. •• cap. 3.
• Part. 1. Quest. 36. Act. 3.
• Thom. Com∣pend. Theolog cap. 200.
• t

  Psal. 16.2. Iob. 22.3.
• Bellar. de de poeniten. lib. 4. cap. 1.
• u

  Heb. 9.10.
• vv

  1 Pet. 2.
• x

  Heb 10.
• y

  Heb. 1.3.36.
• De peccat. merit. & re∣miss lib. 2. cap. 34.
• z

  Ephes. 1. Titus 3.
• a

  Ioh. 6.27.
• b

  Phil. 2.
• c

  Heb. 9.
• d

  1 Cor. 13.5.
• e

  Pro. 3.5.
• f

  Phil. 3.
• g

  Psal. 116.5.
• 1 Pet. 1.12.
• h

  2 Tim. 1.10.
• Catechis. Trident. in Art. descen∣det ad infe∣ros.
• August. Epist. 99. ad Euod.
• i

  Luke 23.43.
• k

  2 Cor. 12.2.
• Theodoret. in 1 Sam. 28.
• Basil. in Isay 8.
• See Heb. 11.93
• m

  Mat. 2.58.
• n

  Ephes. 1.4.
• o

  Rom. 11.32. Gal. 3.22.
• p

  Tit. 3.5.
• q

  Ioh. 6.44.
• r

  1 Cor. 3.
• s

  1 Cor. 1.29.
• t

  Gal. 5.3. Rom. 10.5.
• v

  Ioh. 1.12.
• De iustif. lib. 1. cap. 19.
• vv

  2 Cor. 10.
• x

  Luc 18.11.12.
• y

  Psal. 147. Rom. 9. Rom. 2.14.
• z

  1 Cor. 8.
• a

  Rom. 3. & 5.
• b

  Math. 5.
• Paraeus & Beza.
• Augustin. de Trinit. lib. 1.