Of Free Justification by Christ, Book 1 · Part 31
How the Papists and Protestants What the Papists, & what the Protestants understand by the word Grace.agree and differ in understanding the word Grace.
Now whereas both Papists and Protestants seem to attribute Man's Iustifaication to grace, herein they both agree. But they say this after their manner of speaking, & we after ours. For this is the difference between these and the Protestants, that the Papists by the name of grace understand only gifts, that are conferr'd upon those that are justified, to wit, habits, which they call infused, and excellent Endowments of lovely Vertues, and other things of that kind, wherewith the Elect are adorned by the free gift of God. But the contrary party being otherways taught by the Scriptures, and confirmed by the sayings of the Fathers, perceiving these very gifts of the Spirit of God, as long as they live in this flesh, are imperfect, through our default; they deny that men can be justified by these, because Divine Iustice cannot at all be satisfied by these. And therefore it is, that After what manner, and in what sense the Grace of God justifics us.they attribute Iustification only to the grace and mercy of God; which consists not of any remuneration of Vertues, but rather imputation of Righteousness, and forgiveness of sins. For we do not find fault with this in them, that they do rightly affirm, that all our good works should be referred to the grace of God; which neither the Iews themselves nor the Turks will deny. But A definition of Grace according to the Schoolmen.we justly disapprove, that they do not define this grace according to Scripture. For whereas grace is so defined by this sort of men, that it is nothing else but a habit infused by God, like his own goodness and love, whereby he that hath it is rendered acceptable to God; and it makes Works acceptable to him and meritorious: It is easily demonstrated both by Scriptures and Reason, how faulty this definition is, because the thing defined is of a larger extent than the definition: For the grace whereby God loved Iacob, and hated Esau, before they did either good An infused Habit.or evil, was grace; which ye… …as not any Habit, either begotten in The refutation of the definition. Iacob, Esau. The Examples of the Thief, Publican, the Leper, &c.them by the power of Nature, or infused by grace, whereby Iacob, that had it, that I may use their words, was render'd acceptable to God. After the like manner the grace which in the midst of his persecution of Saints changed Paul into an Instrument in the hand of Electing grace, was not an infused Habit, but went before an infused Habit, and first made him a man acceptable to Christ, before the Habit making acceptable was infused. The same should be said of the Thief, the Publican, the Leper, and many others in the History of the Gospel, who were not saved by an infused Habit, but only by an infused Faith; for otherways what did that word so often repeated in the Gospel signifie; Thy Faith hath saved thee? Which word, if it be true, then either Faith is Righteousness, or else Righteousness can by no means save us. And the same reason is to be given of the Conversion of the Gentiles; whom of old the grace of God brought from impure Paganism to the Communion of the Gospel; not for any Inherent Righteousness, but for his great Love wherewith he loved the unworthy and the wretched sinners.
Moreover, what shall be said of the Apostles themselves, whom Christ verily chose not being just, as Augustine speaks, but to be justified, when he said; I chose you out of the World? What if Christ chose them out of the World; that they might be just; then they were first unjust in the World, whom he chose out of the World, that they might be just. If they were first just, and not sinners of the World, whom Christ chose out of the World; then they first chose Christ, that they being just, might be chosen by him. But it was not so; for he himself says to them; Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, &c.
These things said Augustine; by which it evidently appears how our Election and Iustification purchased by Christ is perfected not by any Righteousness of Works, but only by the free gift of Grace; whence it is called by Paul the Election of Grace, not of Righteousness, to wit, by this Argument: What if it is by Grace, saith he, it is not now by Works, or else grace is not grace; but if it is of works, then it is not grace; Romans 11. There was a remnant according tothe Election of Grace, &c. Osor. lib. 5. p. 127, 128.or else work would not be work, &c. Which things being so, it necessarily follows, that the Righteousness, which is wholly exercised in the Observance of Works, is not rightly called Grace by Osorius.
Therefore take the Argument of Augustine.
Argument.
Ma. It is grace which both elects and justifies the ungodly.
Mi. Inherent Righteousness doth Aug. Epistola 10. ad Alipin. It is grace whereby the unjust are justified, of which it is unlawful for us to doubt.not justifie the unrighteous; for if he be ungodly, how is he just? If he is just, how shall he be called unjust?
Concl. Therefore righteousness is not grace; otherways according to St. Paul; If righteousness is of works, then grace is not grace.
Moreover the grace of God, There pardon is free where vengeance might be just.which is his free Indulgence, because it hath no place properly, but where vengeance would be just; neither is there any just vengeance, where perfect righteousness flourishes; Therefore it must be false, which Osorius assumes; That it is either righteousness which makes us acceptable to God, and that Osor. lib. 5.it is grace, or it is nothing. But now that we may grant this to Osorius for the sake of disputing; that it is perhaps possible, that this observance of righteousness and glorious furniniture of most holy Vertues, wherewith the divine grace adorns us, receives this name, being given to it by some Writers, so that in some respect it is called grace: But what then? what relation hath this to our Controversie? seeing that it is not the grace, which justifies us before God, but there will be need of another grace whereby that same grace may be justified: For it is not a doubtful case in this place, whether all that we have should be referred to the grace and bounty of God: For who is so ignorant as to doubt thereof? neither is it a matter of doubt, whether the pious works of Christians are pleasing to God? but whether Christians do so please God upon the account of their pious works, that they are therefore The Papists err from the scope of the Question. Osor. lib. 3. p. 68, 69. Osor. lib. 4. nu. 103, 104.justified; that they escape wrath, that being dead they revive; that they put on Immortality, that they are received into heavenly glory. This your whole discourse contends for, as if there were no other way, or manner of turning away the wrath of God, and purchasing eternal life, but by the continual exercise of Charity, and pious and holy actions. And because all instruction of living well, proceeds not only from the strength of our nature, but from the grace of God, which is … by faith; Therefore whatsoever you any where in reading the holy Scriptures of God meet with of the words grace and faith, presently you wrest that as a most sure Testimony to confirm the Righteousness of good Works, and also to the defence of Grace and Faith. Which that the Reader may perceive the more evidently, and also admire the sharp … of this sweet Interpreter; I thought good, to bring forth one out of many and almost innumerable, for an Example. As where Paul says these Words: Not by Works which we have done, but according to his own Tit. 3. Hosius. Osor. lib. 4. Nu. 104.mercy he saved us, &c. Osorius having followed his own Hosius, interprets this place, as if these words of the Apostle should not be otherways understood, than of Works, not those which are peculiarly ours, but those which are performed by faith … in vigour and stirred up, &c. We have heard Osorius: Receive also Hosius, who makes a noise out of the same Ex Hosio confut. lib. 5. pag. 451.Tridentine Oracle. The works, saith he, which they do, are good in this respect, as they are Christ's Works, not theirs. For in as much as they are tbeirs, though they seem to be good Works, they conduce nothing at all to Eternal Life: But in as much as they are God's, and the Works of his hands, so through bis bounty they are esteemed worthy both of the title of Righteousness, and the reward of the Heavenly Kingdom, &c. Whence all their reasoning and discourse of good works is of this kind: God doth not see and Hosius ibid.Crown our Works in us, but his own. And moreover the same Hosius adds, pleading after his own manner, that the reward of the Heavenly Kingdom will be given to the Works, which indeed are ours, but not for their dignity as they proceed from us, but for Christ's sake, whose handy-works they are, as Aug. says: For he that lives and dwells in us works them. And for that cause (which is more ridiculous) this Phormio goes on to rail at the Lutherans as Enemies of Grace; Who, forsooth, as he says, do much more grievously detract from the Glory of Christ, Ex Hosio lib. 5. Nu. 452.than they, and make void his Cross, and diminish the price of his blood. For when they detract from the Works of the regenerate, they do not derogate from their merits, but from Christ, whence all their dignity derives, &c.
These things said Hosius, to whom Andradius agrees in a Speech not Andra. lib. 6. pa. ibi. Orthod. Explic.much differing; writing these words: When we say that Righteousness is inherent in us, we do not at all derogate Power and Authority from the Righteousness and Merits of Christ, to whom we are beholden for all the Ornaments of the mind. But we rather augment and amplifie them: When we say he hath merited for us not a feigned and imputative Righteousness, whereby those who are really wicked; are esteemed just, but are not so; but a Righteousness that is true, solid, express, and engraven wonderfully upon the mind, &c. And a little lower, he said: Yea, indeed ye Lutherans are injurious to the Son of God, the Saviour of Mankind, ye, I say, Endeavour to lessen and depress his very gracious benefits: Who say that those Sins remain, which, he hath washed away in the laver of his own Blood; ye judge those to be defiled with pollutions, whom he hath cleansed by his infinite Vertue, and you endeavour to take away from us that Righteousness, which he hath merited for Mankind with many labours and Blood. Hitherto spake Andradius.
I need not here warn you, Pious Reader, what should be judged An Answer to the Adversaries.of the designs and discoursings of those Men, and what you your self must beware of: with what deceit they prevent the simplicity of the Apostolick Doctrine, with what darkness they cover their own deceits, what Man is so void of understanding, or hath been so little exercised in the Reading of Sacred things, but The Roman Church is a Pseudocatholick.may with his Eyes shut discern, how these things are not at all agreeable to the mind of the Apostle? By which there is an easie opportunity given to judge, what should be judged of this whole Generation of Men and their Church, which they by a false Name boast to be Catholick, which broaches amongst the common People, these so great monsters of errours, and tares of Opinions, defends them in Schools, Preaches them in Churches, which sends forth into the midst of us such Dogmatists, and Artificers of Enemies of Faith and Grace under the Vizard of Religion.deceits, who not only corrupt the small Veins and Rivulets of sincere Doctrine, but also proceed to the Fountains themselves, and Invalidate the Foundations of Apostolick Institution, and cut and tear the very sinews of the simple verity. For what greater injury can be done to the Scriptures of God? What more cruel against the Grace of Christ, what more Hostile against the mind of Paul, and more gross against the soundness of the Christian Faith can be said or devised, than what those Roman Potters have contributed by their commentitious deceits, to the plague and ruine of the Christian Common-wealth? For, what may we judge should be hoped for concerning the common Religion, the Sins of every one, and the state of the Christian Common-wealth, if the matter come to this, that this largeness of Evangelical mercy being taken away or contracted, we must be called back again to the account of good Works.