A Key to the Key of Scripture, Chapter 3 · Exposition of verse 24
Verſe 24. And are iustified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Chriſt Ieſus.
BEing iustified freely, &c. The Apoſtle goes on in deſcribing the bleſſing of iuſtification; by cauſes impulſiue; which are on our part none. Freely: inward in God the Father; his grace; outward and meritorious; Redemption in Christ Ieſus.] Final to declare his righteouſneſſe, &c. And to this explication he paſſeth by prolepſis: if wee hauehave 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. Senſe.How freely when not without ſo great a price and ſatisfaction as the bloud of Chriſt? Anſ. Freely in reſpect of vsus, quia nihil operantes, Ambroſ. ad loc.ne que vicem reddentes ſola fide iustificati ſumus dono Dei, ſaith Ambroſe, not without price and ſatisfaction performed by Chriſt. And ſo Bellarmine: De iustificat. lib. 2. cap. 3.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 iuſtified: 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,Rhemenſ. in Act. 10. v. 2. 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 GodnHeb. 11.6.: ſecondly, that the Tree muſt be good before the fruit be goodoMat. 12.: thirdly, that God accepts not the offerer for the gifts, but the gifts for the offererpGen. 4. Greg. lib. moral. 22. cap. 12. De iuſt. lib. 5. cap. 12.: fourthly, that to do good works is required not eueryevery 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 vncleaneqTit. 1.15.: 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 merit ſo much as of congruitie, any thing towards iuſtification. That wee may a little ſee the miſterie of their iniquity in this point, we muſt vnderſtand, that of merit, they make two kindes: one ex condigno; the other ex congruo. Ioan. Bunder. à Gaud. Tit. 6. Art. 5.That of condignity; they thus deſcribe; it is any voluntary action to which a reward is due, in iuſtice, for the equality of the worke, and the reward according to due eſtimation. And thus forſooth, before ſtate of grace, we hauehave 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 donour. 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 giuegive 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 recompence: 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 vsus but conſider, what the things are in man, wherevpon this congruitie is built; they are, firſt well vſing gifts of nature: and ſecondly, that for God, or in reference to him. Now, how can we imagine in an vnregenerate man, ſuch a well vſing of the gifts of nature? the frame of whoſe heart is euill onelyonly and continuallyrGen. 6.5. Gen. 8.21., in whom till he be ſanctified and hauehave felt Gods louelove in his heart, there can be no motus charitatis in deum s1 Ioh. 4.: 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;De iustif. lib. … cap. 3. Bellarmine by this grace of God vnderſtands righteouſnes giuen of God, and infuſed into vsus, 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 vsus in Chriſt: as being not the formall, but the inward impulſiue cauſe, mouing the Lord to iuſtifie vsus. The reaſons of Bellarmines interpretation are theſe: firſt, for that the fauour of God ſeemes ſufficiently to be expreſſed in the former terme gratis. Anſ. As who ſay it were ſtrange, for the ſpirit of God, to vſe diuerſity of termes for foreign; 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 louelove 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 motiue; but onelyonly ſhewes eyther formall, meritorious, or inſtrumentall cauſe. Anſ. Firſt▪ Aquinas otherwiſe iudgeth;Part. 1. Quest. 36. Act. 3. that it may ſignifie any thing, that is cauſe to the agent of working: whether it be finall, formall, effectiue, or motiue cauſe. And how will Bellarmine interpret the place, Act. 18.27. they beleeued through grace; for whether of the three doth his per there import? 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 notwithſtanding his right vſe of (per) grace may, for all that, ſignifie the impulſiue as well as the formall cauſe of iuſtification.
His third reaſon; becauſe whom God fauours, and wils well vntounto, him he makes ſuch as hee would hauehave 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 without his effect in vsus? we yeeld that this effect, iuſtification, flowes from this cauſe, the grace of God. Wee are iuſtified by grace: but how doth this proue the concluſion; that by grace we are here to vnderſtand righteouſneſſe infuſed, and not rather the free fauour and louelove of God? ſecondly, we yeeld that by this fauour of God wee are made iuſt indeede, before euer we be iudicially reputed, and approued for righteous: this queſtion will fall out fitlieſt to be handled, Cap. 4. Here only it ſhall ſuffice, briefely to propound our iudgement, how or in what order we come to eſteeme and reputation 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 vsus: 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 vsus, though that accompany iuſtification: but by donation of Chriſts righteouſnes vntounto vsus.
Wherefore, for ought they hauehave yet alledged, grace may here ſignifie the fauour and free louelove 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 hauehave made, of faith and workes, grace and merit, in this article of iuſtification, things ſimply incompatible, if the Apoſtle could iudge. Rom. 11.6. to vvhichwhich place, the larger handling of this queſtion ſhall be reſerued.
In the meane while, let vsus learne to admire the riches of Gods grace towards vsus 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 occupauit.
Followes the cauſe meritorious: Redemption in Ieſus Christ. Where are two things: the cauſe meriting righteouſneſſe; the ſubiect in whom it reſideth; in Ieſus Christ.
Senſe: Redemption, is that act of Chriſt the mediatour, whereby hee hath ranſomed vsus from our ſpirituall enemies; in this place by a Metonymie of the end, put for the meane deſtinied thereto: it ſignifies the ſatisfaction, made by Chriſt to the iuſtice of his Father: and this ſatisfaction, ſome well diſtinguiſh on this manner; it is eyther Legis or Crucis. VnderUnder the firſt, they compriſe the obedience of his life, performed to the law: by the ſecond they vnderſtand his whole paſſion, that had conſummation vponupon the Croſſe: and this did the order of Diuine iuſtice require which could not hauehave beene kept, if God by his owne power and will without ſatisfaction for ſinne, had repared mankinde; as Thomas well ſaith.Thom. Compend. Theolog cap. 200. 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 onelyonly, wee be iuſtified, then not by any price paide by our ſelues; or any other meere creature for vsus: and in truth, how can we, duſt and aſhes, once conceite ſuch a power to be in vsus? ſith our weldoing reacheth not vntounto GodtPſal. 16.2. Iob. 22.3.: 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 duetie, 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 ſatisfaction for the ſinne of his ſoule?Bellar. de de poeniten. lib. 4. cap. 1. Let vsus ſee their opinion, as they hauehave nicely minced it out, and propounded it vntounto vsus by parcells: of ſatisfaction therefore, they make two kindes or degrees rather: the one is abſolute, and eueryevery way perfect; wherein is rendered, a ſatisfaction completely anſwering to the perfect equalitie of diuine iuſtice; the other imperfect, anſwering but imperfectly to the breach of ſome iuſtice; and that, becauſe it pleaſeth God to accept it, for full ſatisfaction, at the hands of his children, being reconciled vntounto 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 hauehave, we are and hauehave from God; partly becauſe them m ieſtie offended, is infin te, and all that wee are or hauehave, is finite: ſo that, except there be ſome acceptation, or donation on Gods part, there can be no ſatisfaction made by men; but if wee ſpeake of a ſatisfaction, that is ſuch by Diuine acceptation or donation, this is in the power of eueryevery 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 vsus; and aſcribe it onelyonly to Chriſt, the mediatour: for puniſhment, they make two ſorts; eternall and temporall; for eternall puniſhment, Chriſts paſſion onelyonly ſatisfies; for temporall power is giuen vsus, by grace, to make acceptable ſatisfaction.
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 amounts to this: that a iuſtified man, may by faſting, 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. Redeeme thy ſinnes by righteouſneſſe. Sinnes therefore may be ſatisfied for. Anſ. Our Diuines well anſwere, that they ill render the originall vvord; vvhichwhich 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 alwayes 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 whereof, they cannot place Nabuchadnezzar: fourthly, that if ſatisfaction vvere here intimated, no neceſſitie it ſhould hauehave 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 ſufficient, 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 foreign, 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 teſtifying 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, referring 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 refreſhings, in reſpect of his immoderate purſuit of vnlawfull 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 appointed ſacrifices of diuers value, according to the meaſure of offences: and theſe ſacrifices were ſatisfactions, and expiations of the guilt of temporall puniſhment. Anſ. That they may iuſtly be termed expiatorie ſacrifices, wee yeeld; yet in this ſenſe onelyonly; quatenus the name of the truth ſignified, may be giuen to Types, ſignifying the truth: a phraſe of ſpeech vſuall in ſcriptures, when matters Typicall or Sacramentall are enunciated.
The onelyonly true expiatorie ſacrifice, was that of Chriſt on the croſſeuHeb. 9.10.: ſignified by theſe types, in the Leuiticall 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 hauehave nicely framed, this their carnall doctrine of ſatisfactions.
Satisfactions then they would hauehave to be of two ſorts; ſome eueryevery way aequable to the offence of Diuine 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 vntounto them? they hauehave not power, 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 vntounto GOD through Ieſus Chriſtvv1 Pet. 2.: but that they are ſatisfactions to his iuſtice, eyther by abſolute correſpondence, or acceptable proportion wee finde not. Secondly, ſee how in explication of their diſtinction, they confound themſelues. Can they ſatisfie iuſtice? then ſure they may remoue offence: can they remoue offence? they can alſo reſtore fauour, and amitie with God. For is there any thing that is offenſiue to God, but the violation of Iuſtice? ſatisfie his iuſtice, thou ſhalt ſure hauehave him propitious. Thirdly, tell vsus I pray you, without halting, whither is firſt, in order of nature ſatisfaction to Gods iuſtice, or reconciliation? If our olde bookes faile vsus not▪ if the ſcripture deceiueth vsus not, ſatisfaction euen plenarie goes before as the meane; reconcilement followes, as the end whereto that tended. Therefore, if wee be reconciles perfectly, ſatisfactions are performed; if ſatisfactions plenarie be not performed, wee are ſure not reconciled.
And that they prattle of temporarie puniſhment, reſerued for vsus 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 ſanctifiedxHeb 10.? or ſecondly, thruſt vsus into fellowſhip of Chriſts mediation, and make him a Sauiour by vsus; of whom the ſcripture teacheth, that by his owne ſelfe hee hath made a purgation of our ſinnes yHeb. 1.3.36.: or thirdly, according to their grounds, lay crime of iniuſtice vponupon the Maieſtie of God: that hauing receiued perfect ſatisfaction in the bloud of his ſonne, and thereby as themſelues, cleared vsus from all fault, ſhould yet puniſh vsus 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,De peccat. merit. & remiſſ lib. 2. cap. 34. are of no value; to them all wee anſwere with Austi…. Ante remiſſionem eſſe illa ſupplicia peccatorum; poſt remiſſionem autem certamina exercitationeſ que iustorum. Before 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 followed Wherefore? to ſatisfie Gods iuſtice? No, but in that humiliation to exerciſe & proue mans pietie. …t pietas 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 vntounto Gods children: remayning onelyonly, as chaſticements, as reducements, as preuentions, as admonitions as prouocations to diligence in good duties, as meanes to mortifie corruption, and to humble vsus for our ſinnes; &c. And ſurely, if they are therefore inflicted, that God iuſtice may, after remiſſion 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.