Defense of Perkins Book Called a Reformed Catholic, Point 4 · Section 1
I. Our consent and difference.
speaker W. P. Now let vsus come to the points of difference betweene vsus and them touching iustification.
The first maine difference is in the matter thereof, which shall bee seene by the answere both of Protestant and Papist to this one question: What is the very thing, that causeth a man to stand righteous before God, and to be accepted to life euerlasting: wee answer, Nothing but the righteousnesse of Christ, which consisteth partly in his sufferings, and partly in his actiue obedience in fulfilling the rigour of the law. And here let vsus consider, how neere the Papists come to this answere, and wherein they dissent.
Consent I. They graunt, that in iustification sinne is pardoned by the merits of Christ, and that none can be iustified without remission of sinnes: and that is well.
II. They graunt, that the righteousnes whereby a man is made righteous before God, commeth from Christ, and from Christ alone.
III. The most learned among them say, that Christ his satisfaction, and the merit of his death is imputed to eueryevery sinner that doth heleeue, for *Bellarm. de Iustif. lib. 2. c. 7.his satisfaction before God: and hitherto we agree.
The very point of difference is this; wee hold that the satisfaction made by Christ in his death, and obedience to the law, is imputed to vsus, and becomes our righteousnesse. They say, it is our satisfaction, and not our righteousnes, whereby we stand righteous before God: because it is inherent in the person of Christ as in a subiect. Now the answer of the Papist to the former question is on this manner; The thing (saith hee) that maketh vsus righteous before God, and causeth vsus to bee accepted to life euerlasting, is remission of sinnes, and the habite of inward righteousnes, or charitie with the fruites thereof. We condesend and graunt that the habite of righteousnesse, which wee call sanctification, is an excellent gift of God, and hath his reward of God: and is the matter of our iustification before men; because it serueth to declare vsus to be reconciled to God, and to bee iustified: yet wee denie it to bee the thing, which maketh vsus of sinners to become righteous, or iust before God.
speaker D. B. P. The point of difference is this: that the Protestants hold that Christs Passion and obedience imputed vntounto vsus, becommeth our righteousnes: (for the words of iustice and iustification, they seldome vse,) and not any righteousnes, vvhichwhich is in our selues. The Cathòlikes affirme, that those vertues povvred into our soules, (speaking of the formall cause of iustification) is our iustice, and that through that, a man is iustified in Gods sight, and accepted to life euerlasting. Although as you hauehave seene before, vve hold that God of his mecre mercy through the merits of Christ Iesus our Sauiour, hath freetie be…lovved that iustice on vsus.
speaker A. W. The word iustification wee vse continually, the cauill about our not vsing iustice, but righteousnes, for our aduantage, is sufficiently answered by pFulk against Martins discouerie, chap. 8. Against the Rhem. Luc. 1. 6.Doctor Fulke, against Gregory Martin, and the Rhemists. The true reason why our translators chose rather to say, righteous, and righteousnes, than iust and iustice, was, because the former words are more generall, the latter (for the most part) restrained in common vse to one particular vertue betwixt man and man. We denie not that Christians being iustified, are truly righteous by inherent righteousnes; but that wee are to pleade our owne imperfect righteousnes before God, to our iustification.
speaker D. B. P. Note that M. Perkins comes to short in his second rule, vvhen he attributeth the merits of Christs sufferings to obedience; vvhereas obedience if it had been vvithout charity, vvould hauehave merited nothing at Gods hands.
speaker A. W. Master Perkins comes as neere the marke, as you: acknowledging the louelove of Christ in his obedience, distinctly both to God and vsus. And indeed it were ridiculous to imagine obedience without louelove, though the qPhil. 2. 8.Apostle mentions the one without the other.
speaker W. P. And this is the first point of our disagreement in the matter of iustification: which must be marked; because if there were no more points of difference betweene vsus, this one alone were sufficient to keepe vsus from vniting of our religions: for hereby the Church of Rome doth race the very foundation.
speaker D. B. P. And vvhereas M. Perkins doth say, that therein vve raze the foundation, that is as he interpreteth it in his preface, vve make Christ a Pseudochrist, vve auerre, that herein vve doe much more magnifie Christ, then they do, for they take Christs merits to be so meane, that they do Are they meane merits, that appease Gods vvrath, and procure e…lasting glorie?but euen serue the turne to deface sinne, and make men vvorthie of the ioyes of heauen. Nay it doth not serue the turne, but onelyonly that God doth not impute sinne vntounto vsus. We contrarivvise, doe so highly esteeme of our Sauiours inest…mable merits, that vve hold them vvell able to purchase at Gods hands, a farre inferiour iustice, and such merits as mortall men are capable of, and to them doe giuegive such force and value, that they make a man iust before God, and vvorthy of the Kingdome of heauen, as shall be proued.
speaker A. W. This slander was answered before. We acknowledge the power of Christs death, as to iustification, for the forgiuenes of sinnes, so to sanctification for inherent righteousnes; and that such righteousnes, as is sufficient to make vsus pure and holie in the sight of God, though we attaine not to the perfection of it, as long as we liue in this mortall bodie.
speaker D. B. P. Againe, they do great iniurie to Gods goodnes, wisdome, and iustice, in their iustification, for they teach, that inward iustice, or sanctification, is not necessary to iustification; Yea their Ring-leader Luther saith, VVhere?That the iustified can by no sinnes whatsoeuer, (except he refuse to beleeue) lose their saluation. Wherein, first they make their righteous man, Like (as our Sauiour speaketh) to sepulchers vvhited on the out side, with an imputed iustice, but within, full of iniquitie, and disorder. Then the wisdome of God must either not discouer this masse of iniquitie, or his goodnes abide it, or his iustice either wipe it away, or punish it: But (say they) he seeth it well enough, but couereth it vvith the mantle of Christs righteousnes. Why? can any thing be hid from his sight? it is madnes to thinke it.
speaker A. W. We doe God no wrong in maintaining his truth, that sanctification followes iustification, in nature, though in time they come together. Luther saith, as the truth is, that he which beleeues shal be saued; and that faith is not destroyed by any sinne, but infidelitie. A man iustified (as I hauehave said often) is righteous by inherent righteousnes, and therefore not like a whited sepulchre. Our corruptions and sins God seeth, and mislikes: but hauing punisht them in Christ, he laies them not to our charge.
speaker D. B. P. And why doth he not for Christs sake deface it, and wipe it cleane away, and adorne with his grace that soule, whom he for his sonnes sake He doth, but not all at once.loueth and make it worthy of his louelove and kingdome. What? is it because Christ hath not deserued it? So to say, were to derogate from the infnite value of his merits. Or is it, for that God cannot make such iustice in a pure man, as may be worthy of his louelove and his kingdome? And this were to deny Gods power in a matter that can be done, as we confesse that such vertue was in our first Father Adam, in state of innocency. And M. Perkins seemes to graunt, That man in this life at his last gaspe, may hauehave such righteousnes. If then we had no other reason for vsus, Pag 77.but that our iustification doth more exalt the power, and goodnesse of God, more magnifie the value of Christs merits, and brigeth greater It exalts mans pride aboue Gods merciemercy.dignity vntounto men: our doctrine were much better to be liked, then our aduersaries, who cannot alleadge one expresse sentence, either out of holy Scriptures, or auncient Fathers, teaching the imputation of Christs righteousnes vntounto vsus, to be our iustification, as shall be seene in the reasons following, and doe much abase both Christs merits, and Gods power, wisdome, and goodnes.
speaker A. W. It is enough for vsus to know what God doth, without inquiring curiously into the reason of it. Yet in this case wee may answere, that God doth not make vsus perfectly righteous at once, that wee may continually depend vponupon him, and not thinke too highly of our selues, as you, by reason of that conceit, doe, ascribing the best part of your second iustification to your owne merits, proceeding from your will: which grace, as you say, hath wholy freed. But of this also I spake before, and must say more hereafter.
speaker W. P. Now let vsus see by what reasons wee iustifie our doctrine; and secondly answere the contrarie obiections.