A Treatise of Justification, Book 4 · Chapter 1
CAP. I. The state of the question concerning the matter of justification, it being the principall point in controversie.
§. I. THE third Capitall errour of the Papists in the questionThe state of the Question. of justification, is concerning that righteousnesse whereby we are justified: where, for prevention of Popish calumniations, I must desire the Reader to remember three things: First, that the controversie is not concerning our Sanctification, but concerning our Iustification: For wee confesse, that our habituall sanctification consisteth in our righteousnesse inherent; and actuall, in our new obedience. Secondly, that the question is not of our justification before men, but before God. For we acknowledge, that we are justified, that is, declared and knowne to be just, not onelyonly by profession of the faith, but also by good workes, as SaintaIam. …. 14. 24. Iames teacheth. Thirdly, that wee doe not deny, that there is a righteousnesse in the faithfull, as Bellarmine falsly chargeth us. For we professe, that there is no faithfull or justified man, in whom there is not inherent righteousnesse, more or lesse, according to the measure of grace received. And further we professe, that this righteousnesse which we have from God, and is inherent in us, is graciously both accepted of him, and rewarded by him; but wee deny, that any man is justified by it. This question therefore is concerning the matter of justification. For whereas justification, considered as an action of God is his making or constituting a man righteous, either by Christs righteousnesse imputed (as wee teach according to the Scriptures) or by righteousnesse infused as the Papists hold: It is therefore apparent, that as according to our Doctrine, the righteousnesse of Christ is the matter, and the imputation thereof the forme of justification: so according to their doctrine, inherent righteousnesse should be the matter of justification, and the infusion of it, the forme. But howsoever wee differ in respect of logicall termes in setting downe the state of this controversie, because they against reason make inherent righteousnesse the forme of justification: yet the true state of the controversie betweene them and us is this, whether wee bee justified before God by Christs righteousnesse, which is out of us in him, imputed to us: or by that righteousnesse, which being infused of God is inherent in us: whether it bee the righteousnesse of God, as the Apostle calleth it, that is, of Christ who is God, inherent in him; or a righteousnesse from God inherent in us: we hold the former; the Papists the latter.This, the principall point.
§. II. Now this is the principall point of difference betweene them and us in this whole controversie, and that in two respects: First, because the righteousnesse of God whereby wee are justified, is the principall matter contained or revealed in the Gospell, Rom. 1. 16, 17. For which cause wee, who maintaine justification by that righteousnesse of God which is taught in the Gospell, which the Pápists oppugne, are worthily called the professours of the Gospell, whereof the Papists are professed enemies. Secondly, because upon this all the other points of difference doe depend. For if wee were justified by righteousnesse inherent, then it would follow. First, that to justifie were to make just by infusion of righteousnesse inherent. Secondly, that wee are justified by the grace of God, or rather graces inherent in us. Thirdly, that the forme of justification were infusion of righteousnesse. Fourthly, that faith doth justifie as a part of inherent and habituall righteousnesse; and therefore also that it doth not justifie alone. Fifthly, that workes justifie as our actuall righteousnesse. But on the contrary, if wee bee justified by that righteousnesse, which is not inherent in us, but out of us in Christ: then it followeth, first, that to justifie doth not signifie making righteous by justice inherent. Secondly, that we are not justified by inherent grace, but by the gracious favour of God accepting us in Christ. Thirdly, that wee are not justified by infusion, but by imputation of righteousnesse. Fourthly, that faith doth not justifie as a part of inherent righteousnesse, but as the hand to receive Christ, who is our righteousnesse. Fifthly, that workes doe not justifie as causes to worke, but as fruits and signes to declare and manifest our justification.The other points prove this.
§. III. And as the proofe of this inferreth the rest: so the rest being proved, are so many proofes of this. For first, if to justifie doe never in the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse, then wee are not justified by inherent righteousnesse; neither is justification by inherent righteousnesse, that justification which the Scriptures teach. Secondly, if wee bee not justified by grace inherent then not by habituall or inherent righteousnesse, if by the gracious favour of God freely without respect of any cause of justification in us, then not by workes or inherent righteousnesse. Thirdly, if by imputàtion of Christs righteousnesse, then not by infusion of inherent justice. Fourthly, if by faith as it is the hand to receive Christs righteousnesse, then not by righteousnesse inherent. Fifthly, if not by workes as any cause, then not by inherent righteousnesse. But the two first I have fully and clearely proved already; the first in the second booke; and the second, in the third. And the rest I shall by the grace of God demonstrate in their due place.
§. IV. That, which hath already beene said, both here, andbLib. 1. c. 3. & 4. and lib. 2. & 3. This point to be proved, in the affirmative part, and in the negative, first joyntly, and then severally. heretofore, together with that which shall hereafter bee produced to prove the other three points remaining to bee proved, might bee a sufficient demonstration of this point. But because the proofe of this point, being the principall, doth prove all the rest, as I have shewed; therefore I will not onelyonly bring a supply of divers arguments, by disproving the popish assertion, and proving our owne, but also answere the cavills and objections of the Papists. And first, I will prove our assertion and disprove theirs joyntly and together: and then severally I will disprove their assertion, viz. that wee are justified by righteousnesse inherent in ourselves; and prove ours, to wit, that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ, which is out of us in him.