A Treatise of Justification, Book 7 · Chapter 2
CAP. II. That we are not justified by Workes.
§. I.
HAving thus avoided the calumniations of theIn what sense we deny works to justifie. Papists, wee are now to dispute the question: which is to bee understood, not of justification before men, whereby we are declared or knowne to bee just: but of our justification before God, whereby hee maketh us just: nor of workes, as fruits and consequents, but as of causes of justification. For we doe confesse, that men are justified declarativè, that is declared and knowne to be just to themselves or others by good works, as the proper fruits of faith, and undoubted consequents of justification: but wee deny that we are justified before God by good works, as any causes therof. And this our assertion we will first prove by necessary arguments, and then defend the same against the objections of the Papists.Proved, first from all the five articles before handled.
§. II. And first I prove it by all the arguments which I used before, to prove the five severall points already handled. For first, if justification is not to be confounded with sanctification, as if it consisted in a righteousnesse inherent in our selves, or performed by our selves; then are we not justified before God by workes, But the former hath beene clearely proved; therefore the latter is to be confessed.
.2 If wee bee justified by the meere grace of God, and that freely, without respect of any workes done by us; then are we not justified before God by works. For the holy Ghost maketh such an oppositionaRom. 11. 6. Ephes. 2. 8, 9. betweene grace and workes, that if we be justified by the one, we cannot be justified by the other. But the antecedent hath beene formerly proved, therefore the consequent cannot be denyed.
3. If we be not justified before God by righteousnesse inherent in, or performed by our selves, but onelyonly by the righteousnesse of Christ through f…ith, then are we not justified by workes. But the first I have demonstrated by many undeniable arguments: therefore the second must be granted.
4. If we be justified by imputative righteousnesse, that is to say by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to them that beleeve, the Lord imputing righteousnesse unto thembRom. 4. 5, …. without workes; then it is evident, that wee are not justified by workes, but that is most true, as hath plentifully beene proved; therefore this.
5. If we be justified by faith alone, then not by workes. But we are justified by faith alone, as hath beene proved; therefore not by workes. The arguments reduced to these five heads, which were very many, and impregnable, might satisfie any reasonable man, who is not wilfully addicted to his owne erroneous conceits, though I should adde no more: but because wee have to deale with men unreasonable I will adde some.
§. III. And first out of Rom. 4. 4, 5, 6. He that worketh not, is notFoure other reasons. justified by workes: he that beleeveth, worketh not, as the Apostle there sheweth. And againe, to whom faith is impured unto righteousnesse without workes, they are not justified by workes: to all the faithfull faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes, therefore none of the faithfull are justified by workes. The assumption is thus proved: If to Abraham his faith was imputed for righteousnesse without works, then are all the faithfull justified without workes: for Abraham is by the Apostle propounded as a patterne: therefore as he was justified so are we, Rom. 4. 22, 23. 24.
But to Abraham his faith was imputed for righteousnesse, as the Apo stle teacheth, Rom. 4. 3, 4, 5. Therefore all the faithfull are justified without workes.
2. The true doctrine of justification is taught in the Scriptures: justification by workes is not taught in the Scriptures: for the justification taught in the Scriptures, is an action of God justifying a sinner, but this by workes, is neither an action of God, neither is it the justification of a sinner, but the action of the justitiary himselfe, who by the exercise and practise of good workes increaseth his inherent justice, or fanctification: which hath no affinity with that justification, which is taught in the Scriptures.
3. None that are justified by faith are justified by workes; all the faithfull are justified by faith, therefore none of the faithfull are justified by workes. The proposition is evidently proved by that opposition which the Apostle constantly maketh betweene faith and workes in the question of justification: asfirming that men though abounding with works of grace, are justified by faith without workes, and saved by faith and not by workes, Rom. 3. 28. & 4. 3, 4, 5. Ephes. 2. 8, 9. Tit. 3. 5.
4. If any be justified by workes, then either the regenerate man or the unregenerate: but neither the unregenerate, as the Papists confesse: nor the regenerate, for they are justified already. Neither doe the Scriptures acknowledge any sorts or degrees of justification before God.
§. IV. 5. All that are justified by workes, are justified by that obedienceOur sifth argument. which they performe to the Law: But none are justified by the obedience which they performe to the Law: therefore none are justified by workes.
The proposition is manifest. Because the Law being a perfect rule of all inherent righteousnes, there neither are nor can be any good works, which are not prescribed in the Law. Yea, whatsoever worke is not conmable to the Law is sinne.
The assump…ion may bee proved by many undeniable arguments. First, by all those places, which plainely testifie, that by the workes of the Law, that is, by obedience done to the Law, no man living shall be justified, Rom. 3. 20, 28. Gal. 2. 16. For by the workes of the Law wee understand all duties prescibed, and all that obedience which is required in the Law.
2. Those that are accursed by the Law are not justified by their obedience of it. For to bee justified, is to bee blessed, Rom. 4. 6. and therefore to be justified, and to be accursed, are things repugnant.
But all men whatsoever, even those which seeke to bee justified by their obedience to the Law, are by the Law accursed. Therefore no man is justified by his obedience performed to the Law. And this is the Apostles argument, Gal. 3. 10. as I have shewed beforecLib. 4.. All transgressours of the Law, are by the Law accursed.
All men since the fall are transgressours of the Law, Christ onelyonly … excepted; this assumption the Apostle omitteth, because hee taketh it for granted, as being a truth received among the faithfull in those times, though in these dayes denied by the justitiaries of Rome, but elsewhere it is by the Apostle expressed, as Rom. 3. 23. all have sinned. Wherefore as God hath concluded all under sinne, Rom. 11. 32. Gal. 3. 22. so the Law hath concluded them under the curse.
3. All that are justified by their obedience to the Law doe perfectly fulfill it, by a totall, perfect, and perpetuall obedience: for he that doth not so fulfill it, by doing the things commanded, though he did nothing that is forbidden; by doing all, though he did the most; by continuing in doing all, and in that measure and degree, which the Law requireth, though he sinned but once in all his life, and that either by omission, or comming short of his duety, is a transgressour of the Law, and therefore subject to the curse of the Law, because hee hath not continued in all things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them. And he that offendeth in one is guilty of all, Iam. 2. 10.
To whom the perfect fulfilling of the Law is impossible by reason of the flesh, they cannot be justified by their obedience performed to it.
To all, even the most regenerate, the perfect fulfilling of the Law is impossible by reason of the flesh, Rom. 8. 3. Gal. 5. 17. as elsewhere I prove at large. Therefore none though regenerate can bee justified by their obedience performed to the Law.
§. V. Sixthly, That Doctrine which is repugnant to the Scriptures is false.
The Doctrine of justification by workes, is repugnant to the Scriptures.
Therefore it is false.
The assumption is thus proved, because the Scriptures in all places where they treat of justification before God, doe from the act of justification exclude workes. The places of Scripture which we produce to this end, Bellarmine reciteth (at least some of them) with purposedDe justif. li. cap. 19 to answere them.
Rom. 3. 27. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what Law?Rom 3. 27, 28. Of workes? No, but by the Law of faith.
Verse 28. Therefore wee conclude that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law; to which hee might have added, verse 20. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified.Rom. 9. 20.
Rom. 4. 2. If Abraham were justified by workes, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. To which he might have added vers. 5. & 6.Rom. 3. 2, 5, 6. To him that worketh not, but beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousnesse: even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man, unto whom God imput…h righteousnesse without workes.
Gal. 2. 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the workes of theGal. 2. 16. Law, but by the faith of Iesus Christ: to which adde the words following in the same verse, for by the works of the Law shall no flesh bee justified: adde also, Chap. 3. vers. 10. & 11. as many as are of the worksGal. 3. 10, 1…. of the Law, that is, who seeke justification by the workes of the Law are under the curse. For it is written cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them. But that no man is just…fied by the Law in the sight of God, it is evident; for the just shall live by faith.
Ephes. 2. 8, 9. By grace are yee saved through faith, not by workes,Eph. 2. 8. 9. lest any man should boast.Phil. 3. 8. 9.
Phil. 3. 8, 9. I account all things but losse, and dung that I may gaine Christ, and may be found in him, not having mine owne righteousnesse which is of the Law, (as all inherent righteousnesse is,) but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousnesse, which is of God by Faith.
Tit. 3. 5. Not by workes of righteousnesse, which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us.Tit. 3. 5.
§. VI. Bellarmine, before he maketh answere to these testimonies,Bellarmines preamble to his answere, in which he noteth three things: first, what is meant by the Law of workes and by the Law of faith. noteth three things. First, what the Apostle meaneth, by the Law of workes, and by the Law of Faith. Secondly, what difference there is betwixt the justice of the Law: and the justice in the Law. Thirdly, what the Apostle meaneth by workes, when he saith a man is justified without workes. For the first: he cavilleth with Calvin and Chemnitius and others, as though they understood simply by the Law of workes, that which requireth workes, and by the Law of faith, which requireth faith: as if the Law of faith did not also require workes, and the Law of workes did not also require faith: whereas our writers distinguish the two covenants of God, that is, the Law and the Gospell, whereof one is the covenant of workes, the other, the covenant of grace: doe teach, that the Law of workes is that, which to justification requireth works, as the condition thereof: the Law of faith that, which to justification requireth faith, as the condition therof. The former saith, doe this, and thou shalt live, Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Mat. 19. 17. the latter, beleeve in Christ, and thou shalt be saved, Iohn. 3. 16. Act. 16. 31. But the Papists, whiles they teach that in the Gospell perfect righteousnesse is required in us to justification and salvation as the condition thereof, as much or rather more than in the Law: they doe either confound the Law and the Gospell, making either of them to be the Law of workes;Gal. 1. 6, 8, 9. or else as the Apostle speaketh of the false teachers of the Galathians, they teach another Gospell than that which Christ and his Apostles taught: which whosoever doth, though he were an Angell from heaven, he ought to be held accursed. But you will say, is not obedience to the Law required in the Gospell? I answere, it is not required unto justification and salvation as the condition: but the ability of performing obedience is the grace of the New Testament, which is promisedeLuk. 1. 74. Jer. 31. 33. Heb. 8. 10. to those that beleeve. And therefore our new obedience is required, as the fruit of our redemption, and as the way wherein wee being justified are to walke towards our glorification, and as the cognizance of them that shall be saved.
§. VII. Bellarmine having rejected our exposition, setteth downeBellarmines exposition. his owne, the summe and effect whereof in plaine termes is thus. That the Law of workes is the letter or the doctrine, whether of the Law or of the Gospell prescribing what is to be done, but affording no helpe to performe the same. And that the Law of faith is the Spirit, or the grace of the New testament promised to those that beleeve, whereby they are enabled to performe that which is commanded. Which distinction betweene the letter and the Spirit, as it is propounded by SaintfDe spir. & lit. Augustine, is true, but cannot bee applyed to this place, Rom. 3. 27. where, by Law on both parts is meant Doctrine, according to the proper signification of the Hebrew word Thorah. The Law of workes signifying the Morall Law, which unto justification requireth workes: the Law of faith, signifying the Gospell, which to justification requireth faith onelyonly, and is therefore called thegR…m. 10. 8. word of faith, and the Law of faith. For although Bellarmine elsewherehDe jus…is. l. 4. cap. 2. seemeth to make this to be a principall difference betweene the Law and the Gospell: that the Law is the letter commanding: the Gospell is the Law of faith, meaning thereby the grace of the New Testament, which is the Law written in our hearts, wherby we are enabled to performe obedience to the Law: yet hee confesseth, that the Gospell in the Scriptures doth ever signifie the doctrine of the Gospell, and withall confesseth, the doctrine of the Gospell, as it commandeth any thing, to be a Law of workes. So that lex fidei (the Law of faith) according to this exposition, is as well opposed to the Gospell, as it signifieth the doctrine thereof, as to the Law. But the difference betweene the Law of workes, which is the morall Law, and the Law of faith which is the Gospell, in the question of justification, whereof the Apostle treateth, is to bee fetched from that righteousnesse, which either of them requireth to justification. For both of them require righteousnesse therunto. The Law requireth the righteousnesse of workes: the Gospell, in which without the Law is revealed the righteousnesse of God (by which we are justified) teacheth the righteousnesse of faith, foreign:iIn Rom. 3 27. homil. 7. saith Chrysostome upon this place, foreign what is the Law of saith? to be saved by grace. And this explication fitly agreeth to the scope of the Apostle, teaching that by the doctrine, not of the Law but of the Gospell, all boasting is excluded. As if the Apostle had thus argued: The true doctrine of justification excludeth all boasting. See Ephes. 2. 8, 9. but the Law of workes, that is, that doctrine which teacheth justification by workes doth not exclude all boasting. See Rom. 4. 2. which the Law of faith doth, teaching that wee are justified by remission of sinnes, and saved by grace, therfore that doctrine, which teacheth justification by works, is not the true doctrine, but that which teacheth justification by faith without workes.
§. VIII. As touching the difference which hee putteth betweeneIustice Of the Law. In & by the law. the justice of the Law, or that which is in it, or by it. I have spoken beforekLib. 4. cap. 8. §. 2, 3, 4. in the third question of this controversie: where I shewed, that if it be admitted, according to Augustines meaning, who was the Author of it, it maketh wholly against Bellarmine. For though a man could performe justitiam legis considered in the abstract, (as it is described in the doctrine of the Law, and as Bellarmine himselfe, De justif. lib. 1. cap. 1. doth consider it,) would justifie him, because it is perfect: yet considered in the concrete for that righteousnesse, which men attaine unto in or by the Law, doth not justifie, because it is unperfect. And therefore that righteousnesse which men have in or by the Law, doth not fulfill the righteousnes of the Law, which the Apostle calleth foreign. These two distinctions Bellarmine hath devised to shift off onelyonly two of the places cited, viz. Rom. 3. 27. and Phil. 3. 8, 9. both which, distinctions being rightly understood, make against himselfe, as I have shewed.
§. IX. Now he commeth to the third thing, viz. what is meant byThirdly, what is meant by workes. workes. For saith he, our adversaries by workes, which the Apostle excludeth from justification, understand all works, whether done before or after faith; yea; faith it selfe considered as a work, which opinion to be most absurd, and proceeding from the ignorance of the Scriptures, Augustine, saith hee, teacheth. lDe gratia & lib. arb. c. 7.Men not understanding what the Apostle saith, we make account that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law, have thought, that hee had said, that faith is sufficient to a man, though he live wickedly, and have no good workes, which, be it farre from that Vessell of Election to thinke. And farre bee it also from us so to thinke. But although faith alone doth not suffice unto the perfection of a Christian who is to bee saved, yet it alone sufficeth unto justification: wherein wee have had the consent of many of the Fathers. And although to the act of justifying nothing in us concurreth with faith, but it alone sufficeth: yet in the party justified, there must concur with faith, both inward graces and also outward works. But here the Papists are divided among themselves. Some of them thinke that by the workes of the Law, are excluded, not the workes of the morall but of the ceremoniall Law: others, that the workes of the morall Law are also excluded; not all, but such as goe before faith, such as are done by the strength of nature without grace and without faith. I answere first to both joyntly, that not onelyonly the workes of the Law are expressely excluded, but all workes whatsoever indefinitely, Rom. 4. 2, 6. & 11. 6. Eph. 2. 9. and more specially, the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse, Tit. 3. 5. the workes which God hath prepared for the regenerate, that they should walke in them. Ephes. 2. 9, 10. Againe, in him that is said not to worke, workes are not to bee distinguished, but all are understood to be excluded: but hee that is justified by fai…h, is said not to worke, Rom. 4. 4, 5. and to have righteousnesse imputed to him without workes, verse 6. Therefore his workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded.
§. X. To the former severally, I answere, first, that when the holySome of the Papists understand the ceremoniall Law onelyonly. Ghost nameth the Law indefinitely, he meaneth either the whole Law which is calledmDeut. 11. 1. Mishmereth the observation of the Lord or his charge, containing three branches, the morall; the ceremoniall and the judicial Law, or the chiefe part, which is the morall Law. And that the Apostle meaneth it especially, because he speaketh of that Law, by which commeth the knowledge of sinne, and which was common both to Iewes and Gentiles, unto which the whole world was subject. Rom. 3. 19, 20. whatsoever the Law saith, it saith to them who are under the Law, that every mouth may bee stopped, and all the world may become foreign obnoxious to the judgement of God. Therefore by the deedes of the Law there shall no flesh, that is, neither Iew nor Gentile be justified in his sight: for by the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne.nRom. 7. 7. Moreover it is evident, that the Apostle in that place speaketh of that Law, which forbiddeth morall offences mentionedoRom. 3. 10, &c. from the tenth verse to the ninteenth, and by which all both Iewes and Gentiles are convicted to be under sin, ver. 9. & 19. Secondly, it is unreasonable to be thought, that any man, who was a transgressour of the morall Law, should looke to bee justified by the observation of the ceremoniall Law which was but a by-law, being but an appendice of the first table of the morall Law, as the judiciall was an appendice of the second table. And further, the Apostle professeth, that whosoever would be circumcised, was bound to the performance of the whole Law. Therefore the observer of the ceremoniall law, could not be justified, without the observation of the morall law. Thirdly, this answer which is given by some of the Pontificians, is rejected by Bellarmine oDe justis. l. 1. cap. 19.and the greater part of learned Papists, who with us following the interpretation of Augustine and other of the ancient Fathers, doe confesse that by the workes of the law, which the Apostle excludeth from justification, are meant theBellarmine and others understand also the workes of the morall law, but yet such onelyonly as goe before …. workes of the morall law, as well as of the rest.
§. XI. But then say I, all good workes whatsoever are excluded. For in the Law, which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse, all good workes are prescribed: and therefore those which proceed from faith. For if charity, which is the fulfilling of the law, proceedeth from faith unfained, 1 Tim. 1. 5. pEsponc. in 1 Tim. 1. the end, that is, the fulfilling and consummation of the Commandement, that is by … doche of the law, is …ove both of God and our neighbour, out of a pure heart, that is purisied by faith. Salmero, the end, that is, the complement or fulfilling of the precept, that is, of the law, is the love of God and our neighbour proceeding from faith unfained, wherby a man beleeveth in Christ from his heart.then doe those good workes which the law prescribeth, proceed from faith also, or else they are not such as the law requireth. And therefore frivolous is the distinction of Bellarmine and other Papists, who by the workes of the law excluded from justification, under…tand workes done before or without faith by the strength of nature, not workes proceeding from faith, or workes of grace. The absurdity of wh…ch distinction being applyed to the question in hand, may further appeare.
1. If workes going before justification bee excluded from being any cause thereof; then much more those workes which follow justification: for causes doe not use to follow after, but to goe before their effects, at least, in order of nature.
2. The question concerning justification by workes, must of necessity be understood of good workes: for of those which are not good, no question ought to be made. But workes done before or without faith are not good. For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne: and without faith it is impossible to please God. Neither can the fruit be good, whiles the Tree is bad. Neither can it be imagined that a man should bee justified by the workes of the law going before faith, unlesse it bee presupposed, that a man without faith and before grace, is able to fulfill the law. For hee that doth not fulfill the law transgresseth it, and hee that transgresseth it, is cursed, not justified by it.
3. When the Apostle termeth those workes which hee excludeth from the act of justification, the workes of the Law, the word Law is added not by way of extenuation, as if hee spake of such as are not good, or devised by men, but of those good workes which God himselfe hath commanded, and to the perfect performance whereof hee hath promised justification, Rom. 2. 13. And life, Gal. 2. 12. Rom. 10. 5.
4. The holy Ghost speaketh generally of all men, whether regenerate or unregenerate, and of all workes, whether going before faith, or follo…ing it, that a man, that is, every one, who is justified, is justified by faith without the workes of the law, Rom. 3. 28. that a man is not justified (that is, that no man is justified) by the workes of the Law, qGal. 2. 16.but by the faith of Iesus Christ, for by the workes of the Law no flesh, that is, as the Psalmist rPsal. 143. 2.speaketh, no man living shall be justified. Gal. 2. 16. For as in the first act of justification wee are justified by faith without respect of workes; so our justification is continued unto us without respect of our workes. And this appeareth most plainely in the examples of Abraham, of Iob, of David, of Paul, &c. as I shewed before sLib. 4. c. 8. §. 15.who, though they abounded with good works which they wrought by faith, tHeb. 11. 8, 9. …7.yet were not justified by them, but by faith onelyonly. For that which Chrysostome saith of Abraham, is also verified of all the godly: for, saith hee, that a man having not workes should bee justified by faith, it is no unlikely thing: uIn Rom. 4. 1. hom. 8.foreign, but this, that a man flourishing in good workes, should not thereby be justified, but by faith, it was wonderfull, and very much setteth forth the force of faith.
5. When the Apostle excludeth workes from justification, hee cannot bee understood to exclude them from the first justification only of the Papists, for that as themselves teach is meerely habituall, consisting in the habits of grace. Now it is a senselesse thing to imagine, that the Apostle would so seriously labour to prove, that habituall Iustice is not actuall, or that good works are no part of habituall righteousnesse, nor doe concurre to habituall justification.
§. XII. Notwithstanding Bellarmine will prove that good workes only going before faith are excluded, first, out of Rom. 4. 4. To him that worketh the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt. N…w, saith hee, such onelyonly are those which are wrought by the strength of free-will: for to works done by grace, that which is given is not simply merces, wages, but grace also, yea grace rather than wages.
Answ. First, the meaning of the Apostle is this, to him that fulfilleth the Law whether it bee by strength of nature, or by helpe of grace, if any such were, to him the reward of justification and salvation would bee due by Gods covenant, Doe this, and live. But to him that fulfilleth not the Law (which was the case of Abraham, and still is the case of the best) but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly (such as he doth judge himselfe to be in himself) he is justified gratis, or of grace, his faith being imputed unto him for righteousnesse without workes: this place therefore proveth justification by faith without workes.
Secondly, this assertion of Bellarmine is confuted both by other Papists, and by himselfe also in other places. For first there is no rewards due to him that fulfilleth the condition of the covenant, that is, to him that fufilleth the whole Law, for he that doth not fulfill the Law doth transgresse it, and to him that transgresseth, not reward but punishment is due. But to hold that a man before or without grace is able to fulfill the Law, is meere Pelagianismes. Againe, all men before or without grace are wicked sinners, and to such no reward is due but punishment. M…ritis impii (saith Augustine) non grati…, sed poena debetur. Secondly, the Papists and namely Bellarmine himselfe teach, that to workes of grace proceeding from Charity the wages of eternall life is as due, as the promised hire to the workeman; and that by workes of Charity men doe merit, and that condignely, not onelyonly ratione pacti by reason of the covenant, sed etiam ipsius operis for the worth of the worke it selfe: and yet forsooth the wages of their merit must be counted grace when the very place alleaged doth teach that the wages which is of debt is not of grace.
§. XIII. Secondly, from the scope of the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians, which was to perswade men, that without the faith of Christ neither the Iewes by the Law, nor the Gentiles by their Philosophie could bee justified or saved. Which is untrue. For the Apostle writeth not to unbeleeving either Iewes or Gentiles, but to Christians, who were already perswaded of that truth. Neither was there ever any beleeving Iew, who held, that they might be justified by the works of the Law without faith, neither any beleeving Gentiles, who thought that by their morall works they might be saved without faith. That question therefore the Apostle doth nowhere dispute. But whereas many of the beleeving Iewes being zealous of the Law, and many of the beleeving Gentiles being misse-led by the Iewes were perswaded, that they were to be justified not onelyonly by faith in Christ, but also by the observation of the Law that is to say by a righteousnesse inherent in themselves, and to bee performed by themselves: The Apostle therefore sheweth, that the righteousnesse, whereby we are justified, is the righteousnesse of God,*Rom. 1. 16, 17. 3. 21. and that neither Iewes nor Gentiles are justified by inherent righteousnesse wich is prescribed in the Law, to which end he proveth at large in the three first chapters of the Epistle to the Romanes, that both Iewes and Gentiles were sinners, and therefore were not to be justified by inherent righteousnesse, which is the observation of the Law, but were to be justified freely by the grace of God through the redemption which is in Christ, by or through faith that is to say, by the righteousnesse of Christ both active and passive apprehended by faith. This righteousnesse of Christ is that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified which is revealed in thexRom. 3. 21. Gospell as being the principall argument thereof, Rom. 1. 17. for so the Apostle saith,yRom. 3. 24. that we are justified through the redemption that is in Christ: that wee are justified by his bloud, Rom. 5. 5. reconciled to God by his death, vers. 10. and constituted or made just by his obedience, Rom. 5. 19. Of the scope of the Epistle to the Galatians I am shortly to speake. But Bellarmine in his whole disputation impudently perverteth the Apostles scope, as if the question, which he disputeth, were not this: Whether faith doe justifie without workes, which every where he affirmatively concludeth; but whether workes doe justifie without faith, which the Apostle never mentioned nor meant; though Bellarmine makes him to conclude it negatively, viz. that workes without faith doe not justifie. And to this scope hee maketh the whole discourse of the Apostle to aime. By this Sophisticall tricke Bellarmine seeketh to avoid the force of the Apostles arguments, as if he concluded not against them, we conclude that a man is justified by faith without workes; but thus, wee conclude that a man is not justified by workes without faith, neither the Iewes by the workes of the Law, nor the Gentiles by their morall workes without faith as if with faith they did justifie. And this he maketh to be the Apostles meaning, that workes done before or without faith doe not justifie; but proceeding from faith, they doe justifie: and so is not ashamed to make the Apostle to contradict himselfe. But the Apostle doth constantly teach, that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law; by faith, and not by workes, and maketh such an opposition betweene faith and works in the question of justification, that if we bee justified by the one, we are not justified by the otherzRom. 4. 3, 4, 5. 16. Rom. 11. 6. for if by faith, then of grace; and if of grace, then not by workes; or if by workes, then not of grace. It is therefore a most shamelesse and Antichristian perverting of the Apostles doctrine, to make him teach that works proceeding from faith doe justifie, and that we are justified both by faith and by workes: when hee plainely teacheth the contrary.