Aphorisms of Justification, Thesis 74 – Thesis 78
THESIS LXXIV.
SO that they both justifie in the same kinde of causality, viz. as Causa sine quibus non, or mediums and improper Causes; or as Dr Twisse) Causae dispositivae: but with this difference: Faith as the principal part; Obedience as the less principall. The like may be said of Love, which at least is a secondary part of the Condition: and of others in the same station.
EXPLICATION.
I Know this is the doctrine that will have the loudest out-cries raised against it: and will-make some cry out, Heresie, Popery, Socinianism! and what not? For my own part the Searcher of hearts knoweth, that not singularity, affectation of novelty, nor any good will to Popery, provoketh me to entertain it; But that I have earnestly sought the Lords direction upon my knees, before I durst adventure on it: And that I resisted the light of this Conclusion as long as I was able. But a man cannot force his own understanding, if the evidence of truth force it not; though he may force his pen, or tongue, to silence or dissembling.
That which I shall do further, is, to give you some proofs of what I say, and to answer some Objections. Though, if the foregoing grounds do stand, there needs no more proof of these assertions.
1. If Faith justifie as it is the fulfilling of the Condition of the new Covenant, and Obedience be also part of that Condition, then obedience must justifie in the same way as Faith: But both parts of the Antecedent are before proved.
The other proofs follow in the ensuing Positions, and their Explications and Confirmations.
THESIS LXXV.
THe plain expressions of Saint James should ternifie us from an interpretation contradictory to the Text; and except apparent violence be used with his Chap. 2. 21. 24, 25, &c. it cannot be doubted, but that a man is justified by Works, and not by Faith only.
THESIS LXXVI.
NEither is there the least appearance of a contradiction betwixt this and Paul's doctrine, Rom. 3. 28. If men did not through prejudice, negligence, or wilfulness overlook this; That in that and all other the like places, the Apostle doth professedly exclude the Works of the Law only from Iustification; but never at all the Works of the Gospell as they are the Condition of the new Covenant.
EXPLICATION.
IN opening this I shall thus proceed: 1. I will shew the clearness of that in Iames for the point in question. 2. That Paul is to be understood in the sence expressed. 3. How this differeth from the Papists Exposition of these places: and from their doctrine of Justification by Works. 4. And how from the Socinian doctrine.
1. The ordinary Expositions of St. Iames are these two: 1. That he speaks of Justification before men, and not before God. 2. That he speaks of Works, as justifying our Faith, and not as justifying our persons: or (as Mr. Pembles phrase is) the Apostle when he saith Works justifie, must be undestood by a Metonimy, that a working Faith justifieth. That the former Exposition is falfe may appeare thus.
1. The worlds Justification freeth us but from the Worlds Accusation, to which it is opposed: And therefore it is but either a Justifying from the Accusation of humane Lawes; Or else a particular Justification of us in respect of some particular facts; or else an usurped Judgement and Justification: For they are not constituted our Judges by God: And therefore we may say with Paul, It is a small thing with me to be judged of you, or of mans Iudgement: And so a small thing to be Justified by men from the Accusations of the Law of God.
But the Justification in Iames is of greater moment: as appeares in the Text. For, 1. It is such as: salvation dependeth on; vers. 14. 2. It is such as followeth onelyonly a living Faith: but the world may as well Justifie us when we have no Faith at all.
I therefore affirme, 1. The World is no lawfull Judge of our Righteousness before God, or in reference to the Law of God. 2. Neither are they competent or capable Judges. They cannot possibly passe any certaine true sentence of our Righteousness or unrighteousnesse. 3. If they could, yet Works are no certain medium, or evidence, whereby the world can know us to be Righteous: For there is no outward work which an Hypocrite may not perform: and inward works they cannot discern: nor yet the principles from which, nor the ends to which our works proceed and are intended. There is as much need of a divine heart-searching knowledge, to discern the sincerity of Works, as of Faith it self. So that if it be not certain, that the Text speaks of Justification before God, I scarce know what to be certain of.
Once more: 1. Was Abraham justified before men for a secret Action! 2. Or for such a… Action as the killing of his onelyonly Son would have been? 3. Was not he the justifier here, who was the imputer of Righteousness? But God was the imputer of Righteousness, vers 23. therefore God was the Justifier, So I leave that interpretation to sleep.
2. That it is the Person and not his Faith onelyonly, which is here said to be justified by Works, is as plain in the Text almost as can be spoken, vers. 21. Abraham (not his faith) is said to be justified by works. Vers. 24. By Works a man is justified: If by a man were meant, a mans Faith, then it would run thus sencelessely: By Works a mans Faith is justified, and not by Faith onelyonly, so Vers 25,
3. For Mr. Pembles interpretation, That by Works is meant a Working Faith.
I Answer, I dare not teach the holy Ghost to speak; nor force the Scripture; nor raise an exposition so far from the plain importance of the words, without apparent necessity: But here is not the least necessitie: There being not the least inconvenience, that I Know of, in affirming Justification by Works, in the fore-explained sence. Men seldom are bold with Scripture, in forcing it; But they are first bold with Conscience inforcing it. If it were but some one Phrase dissonant from the ordinary language of Scripture, I should not doubt but it must be reduced to the rest. But when it is the very scope of a Chapter, in plain and frequent expressions, no whit dissonant from any other Scripture; I think he that may so wrest it, as to make it unsay what it saith, may as well make him a Creed of his own let the Scripture say what it will to the contrary: what is this but with the Papist to make the Scripture a Nose of wax? If Saint Iames speak it so oft over and over; that Justification is by works, and not by Faith onelyonly, I will see more cause before I deny it; or say, he meanes a Working Faith.
If he so understand a Working Faith as that it justifieth principally as Faith, and lesse principally as working, then I should not differ from him, only I should think the Scripture Phrase is more fafe and more propert; But he understandeth it according to that common assertion and exposition, that Fides solum justificat, non autem fides sola: Faith alone justifieth, but not that faith which is alone. The question therefore is, Whether Works do concur with Faith (as part of the Condition) in the very businesse of Justifying? or whether they are onelyonly Concomitants to that Faith which effecteth the business without their assistance? The ground of the mistake lyeth here: They first ascribe to much to Faith; and then because that nimium which they give to Faith is not found agreeable to Works, therefore they conclude, that we are not justified by works at all. They think that Faith is an Instrumentall efficient cause of Justification (which that properly it is not, I have proved before:) when if they understood that it justifieth but as a Causa sine quanon, or condition, they would easily yeeld, that Works do so too. I will not say therefore that Works do effectually produce our Justification (For faith doth not so: Nor that they justifie as equall parts of the condition: For faith is the principall. But that they justifie as the secondary lesse-principall part of the Condition, (not onelyonly proving our Faith to be sound, but themselves being in the Obligation as well as Faith, and justifying in the same kind of causality or procurement as Faith, though not in equality with it) I prove thus: 1. When it is said that we are Iustified by Works the word By, implyeth more then an Idle concomitancy: If they only stood by, while Faith doth all, it could not be said, that we are Justified by Works.
2. When the Apostle saith, By Works, and not By Faith onelyonly, he plainly makes them concomitant in procurement, or in that kind of causality which they have: Especially, seeing he saith not, as he is commonly interpreted, not By Faith which is alone; but not, by Faith only, foreign.
3. Therefore he saith that Faith is dead being alone, Because it is dead as to the use and purpose of Justifying: for in it self it hath a life according to its quality still. This appears from his comparison in the former verse 16. that this is the death he speaks of. And so Works make Faith alive, as to the attainment of its end of Justification.
4. The Analysis which Piscator and Pemble give, contradicteth not this Assertion. If in stead of a Working Faith, they will but keep the Apostles own words, I shall agree to most of their Analysis. (Though conclusious drawn from the Analysis are often weak, it is so easie for every man to feign an Analysis suited to his ends) onelyonly the explication of the 22. vers. they seem to fail in. For when the Apostle saith, that Faith did, foreign, work in and with his works, it cleary aimeth at such a working in, and with, as maketh them conjunct in the work of Justifying: And when he saith that Faith was made perfect with Works, it is not (as they and others interpret) only a manifesting to be perfect. But as the habit is perfected in its Acts, because they are the end to which it tendeth; And as Marriage is perfected per congressum & procreationem: or any Covenant when its conditions are performed. Faith alone is not the entire perfect Condition of the New Covenant: but Faith with Repentance and sincere Obedience, is; A condemned Gally-slave being Redeemed, is to have his deliverance upon condition that he take his Redeemer for his Master: This doth so directly imply, that he must obey him, that his conditions are not perfectly fulfilled, except he do obey him as his Master: And so taking him for his Redeemer and Master, and obeying him as his Master, do in the same kind procure his continued freedom. Indeed his meer promise and consent doth procure his first deliverance, but not the continuance of it. So I acknowledg, that the very first point of Justification is by Faith alone, without either the concomitancy or co-operation of Works; for they cannot be performed in an instant: But the continuance and accomplishment of Justification is not without the joynt procurement of obedience. As a woman is made a mans wife, and instated in all that he hath, upon meer acceptance, consent, and contracts; because conjugall actions, affection, the forsaking of others, &c. are implyed in the Covenant, & expressed as the necessary for future; therefore if there be no conjugall actions, affections or fidelity follow, the Covenant is not performed, nor shall the woman enjoy the benefits expected. It is so here, especially seeing Christ may dis-estate the violaters of his Covenant at pleasure.
This sheweth us how to answer the Objections of some: 1. Say they, Abrahams Faith was perfect long before. Answ. Not as it is a fulfilling of the Covenants Condition, which also requireth its acting by Obedience.
2. Abraham (say they) was justified long before Isaac was offered, therefore that could be but a manifesting of it. Answ. Justification is a continued Act. God is still justifying, and the Gospell still justifying. Abrahams Justification was not ended before.
3. Mr Pemble thinks, that as a man cannot be said, [to live by Reason] though he may be said, to live by a reasonable soul, and as a plant liveth not per augmentationem, & si per animam auctricem: So we may be said to be justified by a working Faith, but not by Works.
I Answ. Both Speeches are proper. And his simile doth not square or suit with the Case in hand: For Justifying is an extrinsecall consequent, or product of Faith, and no proper effect at all: Much lesse an effect flowing from its own formall essence, as the life of a man doth from a Reasonable soul, and the life of a Plant from a Vegetative. I hope it may be said properly enough, that a Servant doth his work, and pleaseth his Master, by Reason, as well as by a reasonable soul: And a Plant doth please the Gardiner by augmentation, as well as per animam austricem. So that a man pleaseth God, and is Justified by sincere Obedience, as well as by a working Faith.
3. How this differeth from the Papists Doctrine, I need not tell any Scholar who hath read their writings.
1. They take Justifying for Sanctifying: so do not I. 2. They quite overthrow and deny the most reall difference betwixt the Old Covenant and the New: and make them in a manner all one: But I build this Exposition and Doctrine, chiefly upon the clear differencing and opening of the Covenants.
3. When they say, We are Justified by VVorks of the Gospell; they mean only, that we are sanctified by Works that follow Faith, and are bestowed by Grace, they meriting our inherent justice at Gods hands. In a word, there is scarce any one Doctrins, wherein even their most learned Schoolmen are more sottishly ignorant then in this of Justification▪ so that when you have read them with profit and delight on some other subjects; when they come to this, you would pitty them, and admire their ignorance.
They take our Works to be part of our Legall Righteousness: I take them not to be the smallest portion of it: But onelyonly a part of our Evangelicall Righteousness; or of the Condition upon which Christs Righteousness shall be ours.
5. But what difference is there betwixt it and the Socinian Doctrin of Justification? Answ. In some mens mouths, Socinianisme is but a word of reproach, or a stone to throw at the head of any man that saith not as they. Mr. Wotton is a Socinian, and Mr. Bradshaw, and Mr. Gataker, and Mr. Goodwin, and why not Piscator, Pareus, &c. if some zealous Divines know what Socinianisme is. But I had rather study what is Scripture-truth, then what is Socinianisme: I do not think that Faustus was so Infaustus, as to hold nothing true: That which he held according to Scripture is not Socinianisme. For my part, I have read little of their writings; but that little gave me enough, and made me cast them away with abhorrence. In a word: The Socinians acknowledge not that Christ had satisfied the Law for us; and consequently is none of our Legall Righteousness: but onelyonly hath set us a copy to write after, and is become our pattern, and that we are Justified by following him as a Captain and guide to heaven: And so all our proper Righteousness is in this obedience. Most accursed Doctrine! So farre am I from this, that I say, The Righteousness which we must plead against the Lawes accusations, is not one grain of it in our Faith of Works: but all out of us in Christs satisfaction. OnelyOnly our Faith, Repentance, and sincere Obedience, are the Conditions upon which we must partake of the former. And yet such Conditions as Christ worketh in us freely by his Spirit.
6. Lastly, let us see whether St. Paul, or any other Scripture do contract this. And, for my part, I know not one word in the Bible that hath any strong appearance of Contradiction to it. The usuall places quoted are these, Rom. 3. 28. & 4. 2. 3. 14. 15. 16. Gal. 2. 16. & 3. 21. 22. Ephes. 2. 89. Phil. 3. 8. 9. In all which, and all other the like places, you shall easily perceive. 1. That the Apostles dispute is upon the question, What is the Righteousness which we must plead against the Accusation of the Law? or by which we are justified as the proper Righteousness of that Law? And this he well concludeth, is neither Works nor Faith. But the Righteousnesse which is by Faith; that is, Christs Righteousnesse.
But now St. Iames his question is, What is the Condition of our Justification by this Righteousness of Christ? Whether Faith onelyonly? or Works also?
2. Paul doth either in expresse words, or in the sence and scope of his speech, exclude onelyonly the works of the Law, that is the fulfilling of the Conditions of the Law our selves. But never the fulfilling of the Gospell-Conditions that we may have part in Christ. Indeed, if a man should obey the Commands of the Gospell, with a Legall intent, that it might be a Righteousnesse conform to the Law of Works; this Obedience is not Evangelicall, but Legall obedience: For the form giveth the name.
3, Paul doth by the word, Faith, especially direct your thoughts to Christ beleeved in; For to be justified by Christ; and to be justified by receiving Christ is with him all one.
4. And when he doth mention Faith as the Condition, he alwayes implyeth obedience to Christ. Therefore Beleeving and obeying the Gospell, are put for the two Summaries of the whole Conditions. The next will clear this.
THESIS LXXVII.
THat we are justified by sincere obedience to Christ, as the secondary part of the Condition of our Iustification; is evident also from these following Scriptures. Mat. 12. 37. Mar. 11. 25. 26. Luk. 6. 37. Mat. 6. 12. 14. 15. 1 Joh. 1. 9. Act. 8. 22. Act. 3. 19. & 22. 16. 1 Pet. 4. 18. Rom. 6. 16. 1 Pet. 1. 2. 22.
THESIS. LXXVIII.
OVr full Iustification, and our everlasting Salvation have the same Conditions on our part. But sincere Obedtence is without all doubt, a Condition of our Salvation: therefore also of our Iustification.
EXPLICATION.
THe Antecedent is manifest, in that Scripture maketh Faith a Condition of both Iustification and Salvation: and so it doth Obedience also, as is before explained. Therefore we are justified, that we may be saved. It would be as derogatory to Christs Righteousness, if we be saved by works, as if we be justified by them. Neither is there any way to the former but by the latter. That which a man is justified by, he is saved by. Though Glorification be an adding of a greater happinesse then we lost, so justification is not enough thereto: Yet on our part, they have the same Conditions.
Yet here I say still, Our full Iustification because, as I have shewed our first possession of it is upon our meer Faith or Contract with Christ. But I think our Glorification will be acknowledged to have the same Conditions with our finall Iustification at the barre of Christ. And why not to our entire continued justification on earth? You may Object. Perseverance is a condition of our Glorification; but not of our Iustification here. I Answer, 1. Perseverance is nothing but the same Conditions persevering. 2. As the sincerity of Faith is requisite to our first possession of justification; so the perseverance of Faith, is the Condition of persevering Iustification. See Hebr. 3. 14.
2. That Obedience is a Condition of our Salvation is undoubted, Hebr. 5. 6. Christ is the Author of eternall Salvation to all them that obey him; so fully, Rom. 2. 7. 8. 9. 10. Revel. 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his commandements, that they may have Right to the tree of Life, and may enter by the Gates into the City. And hath that no hand in their Iustification, which giveth them right to the tree of Life? Iam. 1. 22. 23. 24. 25. Mat. 5. from the 1. to the 13. especially the 19. 20. Mat. 7. 13. 21. 23. 24. with the multitude the like. Besides all those under Posit. 22. which prove a personall Righteousness, so called from the conformity to the Gospell. See Rom. 8. 4. 13.