A Treatise of Justification, Book 7 · Chapter 3
CHAP. III. Bellarmines answers to the forenamed places of Scripture refuted.
§. I.
FRom these three things thus premised, Bellarmine De iustif. l. 1. c. 19. §. Ex his.saith, it will bee easy to answere all those places which were alleaged. And first to Rom. 3. 27. he shapethHis answere to Rom. 3. 27. an answere, unto which I have sufficiently replyed before; saving that here hee addeth, that not all glorying is excluded, but only, that which ariseth from such workes as are only done by the strength of … mans owne freewill. And that hee proveth, because the Apostle saith, Ubi est gloriatio tua, Where is thy boasting? that is, that boasting whereby thou gloriest in thy selfe, and not in the Lord. Whereunto I reply: that the word tua thine is not in the originall. And if it were, yet that glorying whereby thou dost glory, though it bee in the Lord, though in the grace and favour of God, though in thy workes proceeding from grace, is thy glorying. As the Apostle saith, this is our glorying even the testimony of our conscience, &c. 2 Cor. 1. 12. and 1 Cor. 9. 15. it were better for m… to dye, than that any man should make my glorying void. 1 Cor. 15. 31. By our rejoycing which I have in Christ Iesus our Lord.
§. II. The second testimony recited by Bellarmin…, was from theHis answer to the second testimony, Rom. 4. 2. from the example of Abraham. example of Abraham, Rom. 4. For if Abraham, who was a most excellent precedent of faith and obedience, and is propounded as a patterne for the matter and forme of justification, was not justified by his works, which proceeded from his faith; but notwithstanding that he abounded with workes of grace, hee was justified by faith without workes: then all the faithfull in like manner, though abounding with workes of grace proceeding from faith, are not justified by their workes of grace, but are justified by faith without workes: but the antecedent is evident by the testimony of the Apostle, therefore the consequent is a certaine truth.
Bellarmine answereth, that Abraham was justified by faith, not by workes going before faith, because they could not bee truely just, unlesse it were in respect of externall righteousnesse: and therefore if he had beene justified by them (which he could not have beene, unlesse they were truly just) hee should have had glory, but with men, not with God. But when we reply, that Abraham at that time, whereof the Apostle speaketh, that he was justified by faith and not by workes, and that righteousnesse was imputed unto him without workes, was a man regenerate excelling in the grace of faith and abounding in good workes which he wrought by faith: And therefore when hee denieth him to bee justified by workes, he plainely teacheth, that the faithfull are not justified by workes proceeding from faith, but although they abound with workes of grace proceeding from their faith, yet they are justified by faith without workes.
To this unanswerable argument taken from the example of Abraham, Bellarmine frameth two answeres, but such as men use to make when they are brought to a meere non-plus. First, he saith, that Abraham indeed at that time, whereof the Apostle speaketh, was regenerate, and through faith wrought many good workes: Notwithstanding the Apostle, when hee saith that hee was justified by faith and not by workes, doth not reject his workes wrought by faith; but affirmeth, that they were not wrought without faith, because if they had beene such, they would not have justified him. Therefore he excludeth the workes which Abraham might have wrought not by faith.
§. III. Where Bellarmine first taketh that for granted, which the ApostleBellarmines first answere refu…ed. professedly disputeth against, and concludeth the contrary: namely that Abraham was justified by workes. As if the meaning of the Apostle, when he argueth, that Abraham was justified by faith without works, had beene this; that he was justified by workes, but yet such, as were not without faith.
Secondly, he inverteth the question, and perverteth the disputation of the Apostle for the mainetenance of his owne errour. As if the question were not, whether faith doe justifie without workes, which the Apostle affirmatively concludeth: but whether works doe justifie without faith: which question the Apostle doth not once mention, which I desire the readers to take notice of. For if the question which the Apostle disputeth, be not this, whether works doe justifie without faith; but this, whethe… faith doth justifie without workes, then are the Papists evidently confuted by the disputation of the Apostle.
3. He supposeth that faithfull Abraham endued with abundant grace, might doe good workes without faith, and without grace: and that the Apostle excludeth such workes, not which Abraham did, but such as the might have done, but did not. For it is certaine that the faithfull, as when they sinne through infirmity, doing that evill, which they would not doe, may say with the Apostle Rom. 7. 17. Not I, but sinne that dwelleth in me: so when they performe any good worke they may say with the same Apostle, 1 Cor. 15. 10. Not I, but the grace of God which is with me.
4. It is against sense to make the Apostle dispute that Abraham was not justified by such works as he might have done, but did not: but more senselesse when he maketh the Apostle to dispute that Abraham was not justified by his sinnes. For how doth he prove that they who have faith may worke sometimes without faith? by two instances, as namely, first, when they sinne. As if the Apostle had said, though Abraham were a faithfull man, yet some workes he might doe not of faith, as namely when he sinned (for sinnes are not of faith) and by such workes hee was not justified. And the like is his second instance, when they doe workes purely morall without relation to God, for such, if they be not of faith, are sins. But these morall duties in the faithfull, because they are not workes of the flesh, must needs bee the fruits of the Spirit, Gal. 5. 19. 21. and although perhaps performed to men, yet are done in obedience to God.
5. Neither doth the Apostle distinguish betwixt Abrahams workes, as if hee were justified by some, and not by others; but in generall denieth him to have beene justified by any workes at all. And that hee proveth because his faith was imputed for righteousnesse. As if hee had said: to whom faith is imputed for righteousnesse, he is not justified by workes: to Abraham faith was imputed for righteousnesse, therefore Abraham was not justified by workes. The proposition is thus proved: to him that worketh, that is, to him that fulfilleth the Law, righteousnesse is not imputed or reckoned of Grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, that is, that doth not fulfill the Law, but beleeveth on him that justifieth a sinner (as all are and as hee acknowledgeth himselfe to be) who therefore can merit nothing but punishment, his faith is counted or imputed for righteousnesse.
6. By this example of Abraham, Bellarmine is notably confounded in two other respects.
§. IV. For first, whereas justification before God is but one, whereinBellarmine confounded in two respects. The first. the Lord by imputation of Christs righteousnesse to a beleeving sinner, doth absolve him from his sinnes, and also accepteth of him as righteous in Christ, not onelyonly in the first moment of justification, wherein being a sinner in himselfe he was first constituted righteous in Christ: but also in the continuance of justification; wherein the beleever, being still a sinner in himselfe, is continued in the favour of God by the merits and intercession of Christ: and though a sinner in himselfe, yet beleeving in him, that justifieth a sinner, is made the righteousnesse of God in Christ. Bellarmine notwithstanding maketh two justifications, the first, wherein a sinner is made righteous by infusion of habituall righteousnes: the second, when a just man maketh himselfe more just by the practise of actuall righteousnesse, that is to say, of good works (which two are degrees of sanctification, and not of justification) and saith, that the Apostle in the Epistle to the Romans speaketh only of the former, wherein workes going before faith are excluded from the act of justification. So that in Bellarmines conceit, when the Apostle saith, that a man is justified by faith without workes, his meaning is, without workes going before justification. But what the Apostle speaketh of other men, hee affirmeth of faithfull Abraham, at what time he was a man regenerate, as Bellarmine consesseth, and abounded with good workes, which as the same Apostle testifieth, Heb. 11. 8. &c. he wrought by faith. And yet of him the Apostle saith, that he was justified by faith and not by works; that the Lord imputed unto him righteousnesse without workes; that his… justification or blessednesse consisted in the remission of his sinnes, and imputation of righteousnesse: and being a sinner in himselfe, as all mortall men are, hee was in Christ the promised seed made blessed through faith. By the example of Abraham therefore we learne first, that that distinction of justification is forged. For Abraham, as when hee first beleeved was justified by faith without workes: so afterwards, when hee abounded with good workes hee was justified by faith and not by workes. And undoubtedly if ever any man attained to the second justification which the Papists ascribe to workes, Abraham had it then, when the Apostle affirmeth that he was justified without workes. Secondly, that workes are excluded from justification, not onelyonly those which goe before faith, but also those that follow, and are wrought by it.
§. V. The second respect: when Bellarmine endeavoureth to reconcileThe second respect. the seeming difference, betweene the Apostle Paul Rom. 3. & 4. and Saint Iames Chap. 2. hee saith, that Paul speaking of the first justification, saith, that a man is justified by faith without workes, namely going before justification: but Saint Iames speaking of the second justification, saith, that a man is justified by workes and not by faith onelyonly.
But both the Apostle use the example of Abraham for the proofe of their assertion: Paul proving that a man is justified before God by faith without workes, demonstrateth his assertion by the example of Abraham; who, though hee were most fruitfull of good workes, yet he was justified by faith without workes. And as Abraham was justified, so are all the faithfull. Saint Iames, concluding that a man is justified, that is declared and knowne to be just by workes, and not by profession of faith onelyonly; proveth also his assertion by the example of Abraham, who demonstrated his faith by his workes. By which though he were declared and knowne to be a just man, as Saint Iames saith; yet by them he was not justified before God, but by faith only, as Saint Paul teacheth. This example therefore of Abraham doth prove, that the Apostle Paul doth not speake of the first justification which is habituall, nor of workes onelyonly going before justification, for Abraham was a man long before regenerated and justified, and his workes were such as hee wrought by faith. But that this is a false and counterfeit distinction of justification it may further be proved. For if this be true, that the Apostle excluding workes from justification, speaketh of the first justification, which they say is meerely habituall, then the Apostle must bee thought to… have taken all these paines to prove, that to habituall righteousnesse good workes doe not concurre, or that habituall righteousnesse is not actuall, which needeth no proofe. And againe if onelyonly workes going before grace be exculded from justification, then the Apostle must be thought to have … boured seriously to prove, that we are not justified by such workes, as are not good: which needeth no proofe, for how should a man be justified by that which is not just? This example therefore of Abraham is as Chrysostome speaketh foreign, abundant matter of much victory, wherein we may truely and seriously triumph.
§. VI. Bellarmine second answere is, that the Apostle speaketh with condition; Bellarmines second answere refuted.if Abraham was justified by workes not proceeding from the grace of faith, as they thought who to their owne strength attributed righteousnesse: then surely he had glory, but not with God. And because it is evident enough, that Abraham had glory even with God: thence hee gathereth, that hee was not justified by workes without faith, but by faith from which good workes truly proceed: hee should have said, by workes which proceed from faith, if he meant to contradict us: for we doe confesse, that he was justified by faith from which good workes did proceed; but withall we say, that he was justified by his faith and not by his workes.
But in this senselesse answere of Bellarmine, there are many absurdities: for first by incredible impudencie hee taketh for granted, that which the Apostle disputeth against, namely that Abraham was justified by workes, viz. such workes as proceeded from faith: secondly, hee perverteth the question, as if the Apostle disputed, that Abraham was not justified by workes without faith, or not proceeding from the grace of faith, as they forsooth thought, who to their owne strength attributed righteousnesse. As though either Abraham had any good workes which did not proceed from grace, or the Apostle would busie himselfe to prove that he was not justified by such as he had not, or as if the justitiaries among the Iewes did attribute righteousnesse to their owne strength, when the Pharisee himselfe, Luk. 18. 11. gave thankes to God for it, or as if they thought that Abrahams righteousnesse proceeded from his naturall strength; when they knew, that God did chuse aNehem. 9. 7.Abraham, and by his preventing grace called him out of Ur of the Caldeans, where bIos. 24. 2.they served other gods. Thirdly, hee doth againe contradict the Apostle, in saying that Abraham had glory with God, which the Apostle plainely denieth: the word in the originall is foreign, which signifieth not glory, but glorying or boasting. If Abraham, saith the Apostle, was justified by works, then had he wherof to glory or to boast: but he had no cause to glory or to boast before God. Fourthly, his contradicting of the Apostle maketh against himselfe. For if Abraham had beene justified by workes done without grace, hee had more cause to glory and that before God, than if his workes proceeded from grace. For in that case it might have beene said to him: what hast thou, which thou hast not received? And if c1 Cor. 4. 7.thou hast received it, why dost thou glory or boast, as if thou hadst not received it? wheras therfore the Apostle denyeth, that Abraham had whereof to glory before God, he is to be understood, as speaking of his workes proceeding from grace; by which if Abraham had beene justified, he had whereof to glory, but not before God. But being justified by faith without workes, all matter of glorying was taken away. By what Law? of workes? No, but by the Law of Faith, Rom. 3. 27. For by grace we are justified and saved, not by workes, lest any man should boast, Ephes. 2. 8, 9. And that this contradiction maketh against himselfe, appeareth further by that which himselfe saith d§. excludi.in the same Chapter out of Rom. 4. 4. But unto him that worketh the reward is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt. Whence he proveth, that by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification, he meaneth such workes, whereto not grace is given but wages rendred. And such are onelyonly those, saith hee, which are wrought by the onelyonly strength of free-will. For to the workes which are wrought by grace, that which is rendred is not simply merces wages, but it is also grace, yea grace rather than wages. If therefore Abraham had beene justified by workes done by the power of his owne free-will, and not by grace, hee might have gloried, that he had made God a debtour unto him. But to Abraham his faith was imputed unto righteousnesse, and therefore his reward was of grace and not of debt. For to him that worketh, that is, fulfilleth the Law of God, the wages is not reckoned of grace, but of debt, as being due ratione pacti in respect of the covenant, Doe this and thou shalt live. But to him that worketh not, that is, that fulfilleth not the Law, (which the Apostle maketh to have beene Abrahams case) but beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousnesse, Rom. 4. 4, 5.
§. VII. And this also confuteth the doctrine of the Papists concerningMerit confuted. the merit of good workes proceeding from grace: unto which Bellarmine here saith the reward is not rendred as of debt, but onelyonly to such as are wrought by strength of nature. But he and his fellowes, when they treat of merit, ascribe to works of grace merit of condignity. In respect whereof the reward of eternall life is due unto them in justice, not onelyonly in respect of Gods promise or covenant, but even in respect of the workes themselves. For every good worke proceeding from charity absolutely deserveth, as they teach, eternall life: insomuch that heaven is no lesse due to the good workes of the faithfull, than hell to the sinnes of the wicked.
§. VIII. As to the example of Abraham, so to these three places, Gal. 2. 16. Ephes. 2. 8, 9. Tit. 3. 5. wherein all workes of all men are generally excluded from the act of justification, Bellarmine answereth that in them all those workes onelyonly are excluded, which are done before faith. But we will speake of them severally.
And first to that Gal. 2. 16. Bellarmine saith, that in that Epistle there are two questions handled: the former speciall, whether the ceremonies of the Law doe belong to Christians, so that without them they cannot be saved. The other generall, whether by the Law and strength of Nature justification can happen to any man without grace and without the faith of Iesus Christ. VntoUnto both which the Apostle answereth negatively. And afterwards he saith, that the state of the Question in that Epistle is, whether workes doe justifie without faith.
Whereunto I reply, that no such question is mentioned in that Epistle, nor the contrary concluded; as being altogether heterogeneous, and besides the purpose of the Apostle, which was to reclaime the Galathians from their errour: who thought that besides faith the workes of the Law must concurre to justification. For both the false teachers, cAct. 15. 5.who seduced them were Christians, who, lest they should suffer persecution for the Crosse of Christ, perswaded them to bee circumcised, Gal. 6. 12. and the Galathians themselves, who were seduced, did not cease to bee Christians, neither were they perswaded to renounce the faith of Christ, but were made to beleeve, that unto their faith in Christ they were necessarily to joyne the workes of the Law, that by them both they might be justified. Against this assertion the Apostle disputeth directly, proving that a man is justified by faith, and not by the workes of the Law. But if he had disputed against the other, that workes without faith in Christ doe justifie, or that workes done by the knowledge of the Law only by the strength of nature doe justifie without faith in Christ; his disputation had beene to no purpose. For the Galathians and their Teachers would in their owne defence have answered, that they did not from justification exclude faith in Christ, (God forbid!) but did adde unto faith the observation of the Law, desiring (as the Papists now doe) to bee justified not by faith alone, but both by faith and workes together. And therefore as in the Epistle to the Romanes, so here, the question is not, whether wee bee justified by workes without faith in Christ (which asser…ion never any Christian held) but whether by faith without workes, which the Galathians and their teachers would have with faith to concurre unto the act of justification. To which purpose call to minde the words in the very place alleadged. Wee saith the Apostle, speaking of himselfe and Saint Peter knowing that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law, but onelyonly *See l. ib. 6. c. 8. §. 7. n. 2.by the faith of Iesus Christ, even we have beleeved in Iesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the workes of the Law. For by the workes of the Law shall no flesh be justified. For if the faithfull, such as Peter and Paul, bee justified by faith, and not by workes: then are they justified without workes: Neither doe the workes of the faithfull concurre unto their justification.
§. IX. But for all this Bellarmine will prove, that in the Epistle toB…llarmines argument from the consequences in the epistle to the Galatians. the Galathians, the workes only done without faith are excluded from justification, by certaine consequences, which the Apostle inferreth, which, saith he, are most strong against workes done without faith but most weake against workes wrought by faith.
duplicate page duplicate page That they are strong against the workes of nature, I doe confesse: but that they be weake against justification by workes of grace, they being equally strong against all, I doe deny. For the Apostle when in the question of justification hee excludeth workes, doth not distinguish of workes, whether proceeding from nature, or from grace, as if by the one wee were justified, and not by the other; but generally excludeth all even those, which are commanded in the Law of God, thereby meaning all inherent righteousnesse whatsoever, even charity it selfe which is the f1 Tim. 1. 5.end of the Law, and proceedeth from faith unfained. For the Law is a perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse, whencesoever it proceedeth. Neither are the Papists able to produce any one place of Scripture, wherein the Apostle, either affirmeth, that wee are justified by workes proceeding from grace; or propoundeth this question to bee disputed, whether workes doe justifie without faith: but even whether faith doth justifie without workes; alwaies concluding the affirmative, that wee are justified by faith without workes; thereby, teaching, that workes doe justifie before God, neither without faith, nor yet with it,
§. X. For the better understanding of this needfull point worthyThat the consequences make against justification by works of grace. to be insisted upon, and for the satisfying of Bellarmines objections, wherein hee pleaseth himselfe; wee are to take notice, that there are two wayes to life eternall, which God hath propounded to man: the one in the state of innocencie: the other, after his fall. The former, was the covenant of workes, or of inherent righteousnesse to be performed by himselfe; the Sacrament whereof was the Tree of life. But when man had broken this covenant and was fallen from the state of integrity, into the state of disobedience and corruption, it being now not possible that he should be justified or saved by inherent righteousnesse, according to the covenant of workes: the Lord therefore in his infinite merciemercy and love of mankind made with man, being now a sinner, the covenant of grace in the promised seed; that whosoever truly beleeveth in him (though in himselfe a sinner, as since the fall all are) should bee justified and saved by his righteousnesse. The faith in this covenant concerning the justification of sinners and salvation by Christ, was professed from the beginning after the promise was once made, by all the Patriarches and ancient beleevers, who had testimony that they pleased God, gHeb. 11.and by faith in the Messias wrought those things which were pleasing to God, which without faith in Christ they could not have done. And it was represented and figured in the sacrifices, which were types and figures of Christs sacrifice, even from the hGen. 4. 9.beginning. And the same was afterwards confirmed by Sacraments: viz. Circumcision which was ordained to bee a seale iRom. 4. 11.of that righteousnesse which is by faith: and the passeover, which was a type of Christ our passeover, k1 Cor. 5. 8.who is immolated for us; and prefigured by the propitiatory, which covered the Arke, in which were the two tables of the Law; by the Scape-goate, which did beare away the sinnes of the people, by the high Priest, who was a type of Christ in many respects; but most plainely by the brasen lIoh. 3. 14, 15.Serpent, &c. But lest men should either through ignorance, or pride neglect the benefit of the Messias, and consequently their owne salvation, which is the common corruption of all naturall men; it pleased the Lord to renew the covenant of workes, by publishing the Morall Law: not with purpose that any should by the obedience thereof be justified or saved which Bellarmine himselfe mDe justis. l. 4. c. 4 di…fer. 6. Lex Mosis non erat data, ut justificaret, sed ut mo… bum ostenderet, & ad qu… rendum medicum excita…et.confesseth: but partly that to naturall and unregenerate men it should bee a Schoolemaster unto Christ, discovering unto them their owne damnable estate in themselves, both in respect of their sinnes, and of the curse belonging unto them for the same, that so they might be forced to seeke for salvation out of themselves in Christ: and partly, that to men regenerated and justified it should bee a rule whereby to frame their lives, and as it were a councellour and a guide to direct them in the way, which God hath appointed them to walke in towards our country in heaven.
§. XI. Those therefore which looked to be justified by the observationAll the consequences alleaged by Bellarmine are strong against justification by works of grace. of the Law, as the Galatians were taught by their false teachers, were in a pernicious errour: both because none can bee justified by the obedience of the Law, all men without exception being sinners, and subject to the curse: and also because there is such an opposition betweene these two covenants in the matter of justification, that to bee justified according to the Covenant of workes by inherent righteousnesse, is a disanulling of the covenant of grace: which cannot bee disanulled in it selfe, though to him that seeketh to be justified by works, it is made void, as the Apostle proveth, Gal. 3. and therefore with him I say, nGal. 3. 17, 18.that if justification be by the works of the Law whatsoever, then the covenant of grace is disanulled and made void, then is the promise made of none effect, then Christ died in vaine, Gal. 2. 21. then is the inherent no more of promise, Gal. 3. 18. but faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect, Rom. 4. 14. then men are made debtours to the whole Law, and consequently Christ is become of none effect to them. And finally, they that seeke to be justified by the Law are fallen from grace, Gal. 5. 2, 3, 4. according to all the consequences alleaged by Bellarmine. From when I argue thus.
To them that are debtours to the whole Law, Christ is become of none effect, to them the covenant of grace is disanulled, and the promise made of none effect, &c.
They that seeke to be justified by the workes of the Law, that is, by righteousnesse inherent whatsoever, whether before or after grace are debtours to the whole Law.
Therefore to them that seeke to bee justified by righteousnesse inherent, Christ is become of none effect, &c.
The proposition is thus proved: Those that are debtors to the whole Law are subject to a double yoake of most miserable bondage opposite to the liberty of justification: the former, in that they are to be subject to the fearefull curse of the Law, if at any time they transgresse it, though in the least degree, as wee doe very often, and sometimes in an high degree: the other, to be excluded from justification, if they doe not …otally perfectly and perpetually fulfill it, which by reason of the flesh is utterly impossible to us. Now Christ came to free us from this double bondage of the Law, himselfe being made a curse for us, and performing all righteousnesse in our behalfe, that by the imputation of his sufferings and of his obedience, wee might not onelyonly bee freed from the curse, but also bee entituled to the Kingdome of heaven. And therefore to him that remaineth under this double yoake of bondage, Christ profiteth nothing. I come to the assumption: those that seeke to bee justified by the workes of the Law, that is, by righteousnesse inherent, are debtours to the whole Law; for neither are they free from the curse, if they breake it, as all doe. And therefore the Apostle concludeth oGal. 3. 10.them who are of workes, that is, who seeke justification by righteousnesse inherent, are under the curse. Neither can they be justified, unlesse they perfectly keepe it. Therefore they, who seeke to be justified by the workes of the Law, that is by inherent righteousnesse whatsoever, whether going before, or following grace, to them Christ is become of none effect, to them he dyed in vaine, to them the covenant of grace is disanulled, to them the promise is of none effect, &c. So that whether you conceive of workes as going before, or following grace, the consequences of the Apostle are one and the same.
§. XII. Indeed if the popish doctrine were true, that Christ hathChrist hath not merited for us that we should be justified by our owne righteousnesse, or saved by our owne merits. merited for us the infusion of that righteousnesse by which we are justied, as hee hath done that by which wee are sanctified, and that hee hath merited for our workes to make them meritorious of eternall life: then those consequences would not be so strong against the workes of grace, as of nature. But the Scriptures teach us, that Christ doth justifie and save us, by his blood and by his obedience, that is by his owne personall righteousnesse and merits, and not by any satisfaction of ours purchased by him, nor by any merit of ours by him made meritorious. For if his satisfaction and merits for us be full and perfect, what need we to patch to them the ragges of our owne satisfactions and merits? But if that were the end why Christ died for us, that wee by his merits should obtaine both inherent justice whereby we should be justified, and also merits of our owne whereby we should be saved, as the Papists teach: then, either that righteousnesse and those workes w…ich wee have by grace, are sufficient to justifie and to save us, or else Christ died in vaine for us. But neither is that inherent righteousnesse, which we have from Christ sufficient to justifie us, nor those good workes of grace which wee performe sufficient to merit eternall life, as I have in this treatise abundantly proved; neither did Christ dye in vaine, for that to imagine were blasphemy. Therfore that was not the end why Christ our Saviour died for us. I say againe, if Christ dyed to this end, that he might merit grace for us, whereby we might in our owne persons satisfie the Law, and so be justified thereby; then he merited not onelyonly that we should perfectly and perpetually without any omission or intermission in all our life fulfill the Law, and be alwayes and altogether without sinne, which by reason of our sinfulnesse is utterly impossible, wee having beene sinners from the wombe, yea in the wombe: but also that wee should in our owne person… satisfie the penalty, which cannot be done but by punishment eternall, or that which is equivalent, for where hath beene guilt of sinne, as in all hath beene, there the Law cannot be satisfied without the punishment threatned in the Law. And therefore if this were the end of Christs death, it must be confessed, that he died in vaine: but this consequent is Blasphemous, and therefore the antecedent is Antichristian.
§. XIII. To the fourth place which is Ephesians 2. 8, 9. Bellarmine His answere to Ephes. 2. 8, 9.vouchsafeth no severall answere, but sleights it over with that common answere, that it excludeth onelyonly workes done before faith.
But this place ought not so to bee sleighted. For it doth ex professo teach, that salvation and all the degrees thereof, as namely justification, are to bee ascribed wholly to the grace of God in Christ through faith, and not to any workes or deserts of ours whether going before or following justification. For first, it may seeme needlesse, that the Apostle should tell the Ephesians, whom before in the same Chapter hee had convicted to have beene before their conversion children of wrath as all are by nature, dead in sinne, bondslaves of Satan, living according to to the course of this world in all manner of sinne, untill God in his abundant mercies in Christ (by whose grace they were saved) quickned them together with Christ: that hee I say should tell them, that they were not justified by the workes which they had wrought before their conversion. Secondly, when the Apostle saith, you are saved by grace and not by workes, will they say hee excludeth onelyonly workes going before salvation? why then hee excludeth all. And that distinction with which Bellarmine contenteth himfelfe, as a sufficient answere, cannot be fitted to this place. If it be said, that the Apostle by Salvation meaneth justification. I confesse that among the degrees of Salvation hee doth specially meane justification, whereby we receive the right to our inheritancepTit. 3. 7., and are intitled to the kingdome of heaven, and saved in hope. But from hence it is inevitably proved, that by what wee are justified, we are saved; and by what we are saved we are justified. But we are saved, as the Apostle here saith, by the free grace of God through faith, not of any workes of ours whatsoever, or whensoever performed: therefore in the like manner we are justified. What then? will you say, if we bee neither justified by good workes nor saved for them, are they therefore to bee neglected? I answere in the third place, that good workes, though they be excluded from the act of justification, or merit of salvation: yet they are not excluded from the conversation of the faithfull, but are therein required, as necessary fruits of our regeneration and consequents of our justification, as also being the way, wherein wee are to walke towards our glorification. As the Apostle sheweth in the next words, vers. 10. for wee are, saith he, Gods wo…kemanship created in Christ Iesus unto good workes, which God hath preordained, not that wee should bee justified by them, or saved for them, but that wee should walke in them, as the way to eternall life: where we are to observe that those words being a prevention of a secret objection, viz. if wee be not justified by good workes nor saved for them, are they therefore to be neglected? No, saith the Apostle, they that are justified are the workemanship of God created unto good workes, which God hath prepared, that we being justified and regenerated should walke in them. And therefore the Apostle speaketh manifestly not of workes going before grace, but of such good workes as are consequents of our justification and fruits of our regeneration, wherein we being regenerated and justified are to walke, as in the way, to our glorification.
§. XIV. The next place, viz. Tit. 3. 5. which is like to the former, Bellarmine shifteth off with the like common answere, that it speaketh of workes going before faith. But hee may not carry it so. For the Apostle having (as hee had done, Eph. 2.) signified, that all of us before our conversion lived in all manner of sinne: But after that the kindnesse and love of God our Saviour to man appeared: not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done, but according to his merciemercy hee saved us, &c. Where as in the former place he useth the phrase of saving, unto which, as I said, Bellarmines distinction cannot bee fitted. And secondly, the workes which he excludeth, hee doth expressely call the works of righteousnesse: which terme cannot agree to the works of such men as the Apostle describeth vers. 3. and such are all men unregenerate.
§. XV. The sixth and last testimony whereunto Bellarmine answerethHis answere to Phil. 3. 8, 9. is, Phil. 3. 8, 9. Where the Apostle in the question of justification renouncing his owne inherent righteousnesse, which not onelyonly hee had in his Pharisaisme, but which then hee had according to the Law, desireth to bee found in Christ, having that righteousnesse, which is through the faith of Christ. Bellarmine answereth, according to his distinction formerly used, that by the righteousnesse which is of the Law are meant workes done through the knowledge of the Law by the onelyonly strength of nature: which I have before confuted. Neither would Paul make any question of his justification by his works done before his conversion. For before his conversion, notwithstanding his Pharisaicall pro…ession of righteousnesse, hee doth confesse, that he was a blasphemer and injurious, and of all sinners the chiefe 1 Tim. 1. 13, 15. And whereas Chemnitius objecteth that Paul rejecteth, not onelyonly his workes before his conversion, which he si…nifieth speaking in the time past, ver. 7. (but what things were gaine unto me I counted losse for Christ but also the workes of his present condition, which hee noteth, speaking in the present tence, and using particles of amplification foreign, yea, doubtlesse, and … doe count all things but losse, &c. As if he should have said, nay, more than that, I even now doe count all things as losse,—and I doe count all but as dung &c. Bellarmine answereth, that as the Apostle in the beginning of his conversion had counted them losse, so hee did still. But if the Apostle had spoken of the same workes, whereof he spake ver. 7. the amplification used vers. 8. would have been but an idle repetition, and the exposition which we give, was long since delivered by pIn locum.Chrysostome. The Apostle, saith hee, having said, these things foreign I counted losse for Christ, he saith, foreign yea, that which is more I doe count all things losse, foreign he said all, both past long since and also present.
§. XVI. But here Bellarmine thinketh he hath Chemnitius at a great advantage, as if hee had spoken blasphemy, for saying that the Apostle calleth his workes done after his calling (which were the fruits of the Spirit, and for which he expected a reward 2 Tim. 4. 7. even a Crowne of righteousnesse, &c.) foreign dung. Whereunto I reply: in the question of sanctification wee doe highly esteeme of good workes: but in the question of justification, if they shall be obtruded as the matter, by which wee stand just before God, by which we are both freed from hell and entituled to heaven: if affiance or trust be put in them for our justification before God, then, seeme they never so glorious, they are to bee esteemed as things of no worth, yea, as losse. And in the like cause, as hath beene shewed, the godly qEsa. …4. 6.have compared their most righteous works to menst…uous clouts. And in this sense Chemnitius rExam. concil. Trid. part. 1. de jus…if. pag. 135.speaketh, that the Apostle quod attinet ad articulum justificationis did thus speake of his workes done after his renovation. Immo saith he, si fiduc… justitiae cor am Deo ad vitam aeternam illis operibus assua…ur, pronunciat ille esse stercora & detrimenta, But if the word foreign translated by the vulgar Latine stercora offend Bellarmine, hee may translate it quisquilias, as Hierome sAdvers. Pelag. l. 2. omnia pro Christ… ducit quisquilias.doth meaning thereby things of no value, such things as use to be cast to Dogges, or▪ Swine, according to the notation of the word. For as Suidas saith foreign or as others, foreign tI. Scapula.that which is cast to swine. And from hence is the verbe foreign which signifieth uHesyc…ius.to bee rejected as a thing of no worth. Chrysostome and Theophylact upon the place, by foreign understand foreign chaffe. Photius, foreign straw or stubble. But He…ychius expoundeth it by foreign dung. I conclude, as Bellarmine doth against Chemnitius; Eat nunc Bellarminus & queratur, &c. Let him complaine that wee are enemies to good workes, because in the question of justification, when men trust to them to bee justified before God by them, and so make Idols of them, which the holy Ghost calleth Deos stercoreos; *Gill…lim. Deut. 29. 17. Ezek. 22. 3.wee esteeme them not onelyonly as things of no …alew but also as losse.
§. XVII. To these testimonies I added others out of the sameHis answere to Rom. 3. 24. Chapters or Epistles, no lesse pregnant than these, unto which more might bee adjoyned, as Rom. 3. 24. being justified freely by his grace, which text affordeth two arguments, from the words gratis and gratia, From the former I argue thus:
Those that are justified freely (gratis) are justified without workes.
All the faithfull are justified gratis, freely.
Therefore all the faithfull are justified without workes.
The assumption is proved out of the text. The proposition, because the word gratis is so expounded by all sor…s of Writers, both old and new, both protestants and Papists, gratis, id est, si…e …ueribus, sine meritis, as I have shewed heretofore xLib. 3 de gratia.Gratis, saith …, quia nihil …perantes, nec vicem reddentes, sola fide justificati sunt d…ne Dei, by which words hee excludeth all workes, as well following after, as going before. Oecumenius foreign. thou art saved freely without any good workes of thine, which words exclude all merits, as well from salvation, as from justification. And so doe those words of the Apostle, Ephes. 2. 8, 9. Tit. 3. 5. To avoid this evident truth yDe justif. l. 1. cap. 21.Bellarmine coyneth a twofold distinction. First, that the word gratis may bee understood, as opposed to merits of condignity, going before justification: and so it excludeth not the dispositions and preparations, which the Papists teach goe before justification which according to their doctrine, are but merits of congruity. But it is evident, that not onelyonly merits of condignity, but all merit whatsoever, yea and all respect of our owne worthinesse and well doing is excluded: so that gratis is as much as without any cause in us, or any desert of ours, or worthines in our selves. And thus the councill of Trent zSess. 6. cap. 8.it selfe expoundeth this word. We are therefore said to be justified gratis freely, because none of those things which goe before justification, whether faith for workes, deserve the grace of justification: for if it be grace, then is it not of workes: for i… it were of workes, then grace were not grace, as the same Apostle saith, Secondly, saith he, it may bee understood as opposed to our owne merits or good workes done without grace, for those that proceed from grace, are not opposed to grace, and therfore not excluded.
Whereunto I reply: we cannot have any good thing but by gift from God: and what good thing we have from God, that is called ours, as our faith, our Charity, our Hope, our good …orkes: Neither can wee without grace merit any thing but punishment. It is therefore absurd to understand the Apostle as excluding merits without grace, when as if we should doe all that is commanded (which cannot be done without grace) we must confesse that we deserve not so much as thanks, because we have done but what was our duty to doe. Neither can wee bee said to be justified gratis if there be any meritori…us cause of justification in our selves, though received from God In regard of our selves indeed wee are justified gratis: but it is not gratis in nor without paying a great price in respect of Christ. And therefore to those words justified freely by his grace, is added, through the redemption whi…h is in or by Christ. By the word gratis therefore the Apostle signifieth tha… in us there is no materiall cause, no merit of justification, but onelyonly in Christ. And where he saith that grace cannot bee opposed to grace: I say it may, as in that opposition which is of relatives, as of the cause and the effect. For the effect cannot be the cause of its owne cause, and therfore works which are the fruits and effects of justification cannot bee the causes thereof.
The other argument is from the word grace. For if our justification be of grace, then not of workes, as the Apostle teacheth, Rom. 11. 6. and if of workes then not of grace. So Ephes. 2. 8, 9. you are saved by grace not of workes. For to him that worketh, the reward, that is, justification or salvation is not imputed of grace, but it is rendred as of debt, but to him that worketh not, but onelyonly beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is imputed, namely of grace, to righteousnesse, Rom. 4. 4, 5. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes, verse 6.