Of Free Justification by Christ, Book 3 · Part 4
An Explication of the Parable of the Wedding Garment.
THE Minor must be denied: Answ.Though works of Charity are of no small advantage, to adorn and beautifie faith in the exercise fo Civilty and Morality; yet a Garment suitable to the Heavenly Marriage-feast, cannot be made of such Cloth; but of other Materials. What that is, whereof this Garment must be Rom. 13. Galat. 3.made, Paul the Apostle teaches us, Put on the Lord Iesus Christ. And again, whosever of you are Baptized, ye have put on Christ. Because we put not on him by Charity, but by Faith only; Therefore faith is the Garment, made white with the Blood of the Lamb, which Cloaths us for this Marriage-feast, not Apoc. 7.Charity, nor the filthy ragged apparel of our Works. Which that it may appear the more evident, let us diligently consider both the Parable and the signification thereof.
First, He that compares our The Parable of the Marriage, and Marriage-Garment considered and explained.great happiness in Christ to a Marriage-feast, How could he more significantly set forth that, which is the most joyful of all things? For what is more joyful, or suitable to Mirth than a Marriage-feast? Where all things resound with Ioy, and Dancing, where there is no sign of Sorrow, where no Lamentation is heard, no Tear is seen, yea all Tears are wiped away Isa. 25.from the Eyes. Unhappy is he, that partakes not of the great felicity, and unspeakable Ioy of this blessed Marriage-feast. He that unworthily dishonours it, deserves to be abhorred, and he that disgraces it with Sackcloth and Ashes, or any other Garment, and comes to it without the wedding-garment, is not worthy to enjoy so great a blessedness.
Now consider, besides the joyfulness of the time, the greatness of the benefit; both which are Infinite and Eternal. For The Marriage of the Lamb of God with his Bride.as there is no firmer, nor nearer Bond amongst Men, than that of Marriage: So nothing is more Divine, nothing is more Glorious, than that Bond, whereby the Miserable, and Mortal Daughter of Adam is joyned unto the Immortal Son of God, the frail Church to the Heavenly Bridegroom, that they both become one flesh, and have God to be one Father to them both, and have the same Family, the same House, the same society of Life, and the same The Guests of the Marriage.possession of all Goods. Which thing is so exceedingly wonderful, that it surpasses all human understanding. Iust as if a great King, being desirous to shew forth the Riches of his munificence should invite Beggars, and the Blind, and the Cripple, and every one that was least worthy, and entertain them with a Feast, and enrich them The Guests of the Marriage Feast.with abundance of his best gifts; Is it possible, that any Man among them durst imagine, that this was due to his own Vertues, or Merits?
It remains that we should view the Guests themselves, and also the garments of the guests, whom he invites to this Marriage banquet, and not only invites, Luk. 14.but compels them to come in. Call the Poor, saith he, and the Lame, and the Blind, and compel them to come in, that my House may be filled? Who are these Poor, and Blind, Who are the Blind, and the Lame, that are invited to the Marriage.and Feeble, and Naked, but such as have no provision of their own Works? Who have nothing in themselves, whereof to Glory, but only in the Lord. Such as were the Publicans of Old, and Sinners of the Gentiles, and Pagans, concerning whom Paul Discourses in words of great weight.
The Gentiles that followed not after Righteousness, laid hold on Righteousness, that is, the Righteousness that is of Faith. But contraryways, Israel that followed after the Righteousness of the Law, attained not thereunto: Wherefore? Because Rom. 9.they sought it not by Faith, but as it were by the Works of the Law. How great stupidity then and abominable impudence is this in vain glorious Men, who being by Nature wretched, and Blind, and Naked, and most miserable Beggars, notwithstanding all this, are exalted to the highest dignity of union with God, and Against the Righteousness of Works.that not for any merit of their own, but the free donation of Christ, that yet they neither acknowledge their own nakedness, nor testifie their thankfulness to God for the Riches of his Grace, but think themselves abundantly beautified with their own ornaments, and sufficiently furnished with merits to attain unto Righteousness: But what a Righteousness is this of theirs? If it be the Righteousness of Works? Who then are those poor and needy, that are admitted to the Marriage? They that are adorned with the beauty and glory of Merits, and abound with Riches of good Works, How can we account such to be poor, and blind, and lame? And if they are said to be compelled to come in, where is the free will of the Tridentines? Or its co-operation? But on the contrary if by the poor here be understood such as have no good works that can commend them, nor any help of free will, that are decked with no ornaments, but are admitted, or rather drawn to the Marriagefeast by the grace of Christ only, How then can Charity abounding The Wedding-garment.with the works of the Law, be truly called the Wedding-garment?
Howbeit, I know there are some great Divines, that rather approve of this interpretation, that the wedding-garment here mentioned Should signifie Charity. But when I consider exactly the circumstances of the Parable, if without offending those, that have better Iudgments, I may freely profess, what is my Opinion, I do rather suppose, that our Lord's design was, to signifie the same, that Paul the Apostle expresly Philip. 3.speaks of himself, that I may be found in him, not having my own Righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the saith of Christ; the Righteousness, which is of God by faith. And if we are not blind, we all see evident proof of the same, not only by words, but by the example of the Israelites. Wherefore if none are entertained in this Marriage-feast, but they that have on the wedding-garment, and if Israel that followed after Righteousness is said to be rejected upon no other account, but because they sought it by works, and not by faith; can it be doubted, that this Nuptial ornament consists not in works, but in the faith of Christ? I know, there are many kinds of garments, as also there are many differences of things, Agreeableness should be every where observed, according to the circumstances of places, times, and things.of Men, and of places: But all things agree not with all places, nor with all Kingdoms.
One thing is suitable to a Court of Iustice, another thing to a banquet. Iudges sitting on the Bench, and Guests at a Marriage feast, do not only differ in the frame of their Spirits, but also in their outward Garb. A suitableness of things, places and times, should be observed. The Law hath its own The Kingdom of the Law, and the Kingdom of the Gospel. The difference between the Law and the Gospel.Kingdom, and Christ also hath his; and both have their own Inhabitants: As the Kingdom of the Law receives none but the righteous; so the Kingdom of Christ rejects none, though they be wicked, if they are brought to Repentance by believing. And though both Kingdoms belong to God, and are under his dominion, yet the manner of administration of both Kingdoms is not the same: For in the dominion of the Law God was pleased to manifest his Righteousness; but the Kingdom of Christ is the gift of Grace and Mercy: And as by the free gift of God it is offered to all that believe, so it receives none but such, as are glad, freely and willingly to embrace the Grace offered. And for the same reason chiefly, this Kingdom of Christ is by a very fit similitude compared to a Marriage Feast and a wedding garment: And not without cause; for if in a Marriage Feast all things abound with mirth and joy, how much more should we rejoyce, and be glad in Christ, by whose procurement we obtain the manifold riches of Everlasting Salvation and Glory?
Therefore what remains, but that we should with thankful hearts gladly receive these great benefits, of our dear Saviour; and What the wedding garment signifiesespecially because by the wedding garment, in this place, nothing else can be understood. For as a wedding garment is a token of the joyfulness of the mind at the Marriage Feast; so by this weding garment is signified with what joy and gladness, with what holy reverence and thankfulness, the Guests of this Banquet will enjoy the heavenly benefits. Whereunto the Apostle exhorts more than once with so much vehemency, that we should not be over-sollicitous for any thing, but always rejoyce in the Lord, and glory in nothing, but in the Cross of our Lord Iesus Christ, praising God in our hearts, as it is expressed in that sacred Hymn; Not unto us, Lord, not unto us, but unto thy Name give glory. But how do those superstitious Papists glory in the Lord, who trust to their own Works, whose rugged and burdensom Religion consists wholly in Watchings, Vows, Ordinances of Men, sleeping on the ground, and such like hardships, and an affected austerity of life. But let us proceed to the Arguments that remain.
Another Argument.
There are also many other Scriptures, which they have wrested abominably for the defence of their Opinion about Inherent Righteousness. As for example, where the Lord says, That he came not to destroy Matthew 5.the Law, but to fulfil it: Hence they infer, that all that would be saved, must of necessity keep the Law. That I may answer this Objection, I acknowledge that saying of the Lord to be very true, and I know what he professed in words, he performed in the practice of his Life: For he came not to destroy the Law, but perfectly The sense of thatScripture, I came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it.to fulfil it, and that not so much upon his own account, as upon ours. But it is not therefore a right consequence, which they draw from an ill formed Argument.
Argument.
Christ came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it.
Therefore there is no Salvation to any, but those that perform the Law.
This is a false consequence; for there is more in the conclusion, than in the antecedent: For this should have been the conclusion, Therefore should we diligently endeavour to fulfil the Law, according to his Example, especially in those things that belong to us; for we are not subject to the same Ceremonies of the Law, that he was: As when he was circumcised, and went to the Feast at Ierusalem thrice a year, abstained from things that were ceremonially unclean, and from things strangled, and blood, and celebra-ted the Passover according to the Law; and many things of that kind, whereunto we are not now obliged.
But, though it be very true, that he came to fulfil the Law; yet we are not therefore obliged to the fulfilling of the Law, as a thing necessary to our Salvation. For the Office of Christ is distinguished by a twofold end: For he was sent by his Father partly for this purpose, that in our stead he might yield perfect Obedience unto the Law, to which impossibility we our selves had a woful Obligation, and that he might stir us up unto Vertue by his own Example; but the Office of the Mediatour consists chiefly in this; That he hath delivered A twofold Office of Christ the Mediatour.us from the dreadful Curse of the Law, and by his Death made full satisfaction to Divine Iustice for all our Debts, and translated us from our bondage and slavery into a blessed state of liberty: Which makes us now to rejoyce in the hope of the glory of God. Therefore The Errour of those who take Christ for theirLawgiver.it is seasonable here to give notice, that they who upon this account take Christ for a Lawgiver, as if he had been sent by God for no other cause but to make new Laws in the World, are in a great Errour: For though he made a sound and right Interpretation of his Countrey Laws, which were commanded by God, and given by the Ministry of Moses, yet he was not sent principally for this purpose, to make new or old Laws, but rather to bring help to those that were under the Curse of the Christ is not a Law-giver, but a Redeemer.Law, and thereby in peril of damnation.
Another Argument.
Unless Christ had kept the Law, he had neither saved himself, nor others.
Therefore we cannot be saved, unless we keep the things that are commanded in the Law.
Answer.
Under this similitude there lies Christ is one way under the Law, and we that are in Christ another way.hid a great disparity: For there is no small disproportion between us and Christ. If he had failed in any thing commanded by the Law, there was no other Redeemer, that could have interposed for him. The same may be said of the Angels if they had sinned: But if we through infirmity go astray, the blood of our Lord Iesus Christ is in readiness for our Redemption, to raise us up when we are fallen, to procure the pardon of our offences, and to restore us unto a blessed state.
Argument.
Unless a man be born of Water Andr. Vega, de Iustif. pag. 741.and the holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God, Iohn 3. Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of God, and drink his blood, ye shall have no life in you, Iohn 6.
Therefore Faith only is not sufficient for Salvation.
Answer.
Verily there is no other Weapon put into our hands, that we can retort with greater advantage upon Enemy, than this very Argument: For the Mystical signification of both these Sacraments, Baptism, and the Lord's Supper, is nothing else but Faith in Christ Iesus: for as Baptism is called a Sacrament of Faith, and therefore is sometimes by Augustin put for Faith; so those that are well instructed in the knowledge of Christ, understand, that to eat the flesh of Christ, is the same with believing in him. If we rightly consider the nature of this Sacrament, there cannot be a more evident demonstration that we are justified by no other thing but Faith only. For by what Argument could it be more manifestly set before our Eyes, how great benefit redounds to us from the shedding of the blood of Christ, than by the Institution of the Sacramental Bread and Wine, for a memorial of his Body and Blood? Or by what other thing could he more effectually represent unto our Faith the powerful efficacy of his Death, than by the Institution of this Sacrament?
First; Pious Reader, call to mind, and consider with your self this miserable and mortal Nature; which how void and destitute it is of all things, and how empty of Divine Grace, and laden with iniquities, you cannot be ignorant. Thou who in thy self art a wretched and destroyed man, comest to the Banquet, where thou art commanded to take the Sacramental Bread and Cup in the name of him that was slain for thee, and then thou art bid, Eat; for otherwise to what purpose should you hold the Bread in your hands when it is broken, and reached forth unto you, unless it be The glorious resemblance between the Bread of the Sacrament, and the Lords Passion.received inwardly for digestion. Eat, saith he, and drink ye all of it; for this is my Body, and this is my Blood, that was shed for you. What was his design in expressing himself thus, but to make us understand, that his Death would be like a great Supper to his whole Church, in which, sinners, that in themselves were wretched and miserable, and empty and hunger-bitten, might be refreshed with an everlasting Feast of fat things, according as the Lord had long since promised by the Prophet Isa. 25.Isaiah. For as this mortal Life cannot continue without daily nourishment; so neither hope of Eternal Life, nor any other Grace can endure, unless it be supported by Faith in the Lamb of God, and thereby receive spiritual nourishment. Iohn 6.And therefore unless ye eat, saith he, the flesh of the Son of Man, &c. Whence it is evident, that there is no Iustification for miserable sinners, but that which consists in Christ only, who was slain for us. Yea there is no Iustification in him neither but by Faith, which receives inwardly, and digests this Bread that came down from Heaven; according as we are taught in the Gospel. He that believes in me hath Life eternal; that believing, ye may have life through his name. Unless ye believe that Iohn 6. Iohn 2. 38. Luke 8.I am he, &c. Thy Faith hath made thee whole. Wherefore, there can be no surer demonstration that Faith only justifies, than is held forth in these very words of the Sacrament, whereby the flesh and blood of Christ is represented in that holy Banquet under the similitude of Bread and Wine.
Another Argument.
Unless your Righteousness exceed Matth. 4.the Righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.
Therefore, not Faith only, but also Works of Righteousness exalt us to the Kingdom of Heaven.
I answer.
By these words the Lord gives us serious Instruction, what manner of lives they ought to live, that are justified: But he doth not thereby signifie, what is the proper cause of Iustification; one Iudgment should be made of the causes of things, and another of their effects. If you enquire for the cause of Iustification, the Lord hath resolved that doubt; Thy Faith hath saved thee. This is Life eternal, that they should know thee, Iohn 17.the only true God, and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent. In like manner Paul expressed himself: If thou confess the Lord Romans 9.Iesus with thy mouth, and believe with thy heart, that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. But if you enquire, what manner of lives they ought to live, that make sincere profession of the Faith of Christ, we are taught in this place, and many other sayings of Scripture, that they ought to differ much from the lives of the Scribes and Pharisees; to wit, that they who are created in Christ Iesus, should behave themselves without a Pharisaical Vizard of external Holiness, or a proud conceitedness of their own Righteousness; but that they should be adorned and beautified with sincerity and uprightness of mind, and persevere in the practice of good Works, which God hath prepared, that we should walk in them; he said not, that we should be justified by them, but that being justified by his Grace, we should walk in them, bringing forth fruits worthy of our Vocation.
Another Argument.
Every Tree that bears not good fruit shall be cut down, and cast into the fire, Luke 3.
Therefore, Faith only is not sufficient to Salvation without Repentance.
I acknowledge the Divine Authority of that Prophecy, which is true, as it is generally known to all that have heard of the Gospel: For who would endure an Unfruitful Tree, that cumbers the ground, and beares either no Fruit at all, or such as is hurtful to the Husbandman? But suppose it brings forth good Fruit, and beautiful to look upon, I would ask them, whether the abundance of Fruit be the cause, or whether it is not rather the demonstration of the Tree's Fruitfulness; and whether the Fruits do not rather receive their growth from the Root, whence they come? Therefore, if Repentance is reckoned amongst Fruits, it doth not make the Man, in whom it receives its first beginning, perfect and good, but only evidences what manner of Man he is now, and hath formerly been. For unless a wicked Life had gone before, no Repentance had followed after. Moreover, Repentance doth not make a Sinner perfect, but evidences what he is.Repentance could do no good, unless Faith be joyned therewith, by which a broken hearted Sinner may get access to the Throne of Grace. But you may say, Are not grief and remorse for Evil deeds, and resolutions to the contrary, things very acceptable to God, and are not only conducible to the amendment of former miscarriages, but also a great cause of future Reformation?
I Answer, The sorrow of an afflicted Conscience, which we call The material of Repentance.Repentance, is a lovely effect, but it proceeds from an Evil cause: yet I deny not, that it is a very excellent thing, and never too late, but always acceptable to God if so be it is accompanied with Faith in Christ. Neither do I deny that by means thereof Men are deterred from their customary Evil courses, and stirred up to the exercise of Vertue. Which though we grant to be true, what doth all this avail towards the justifying of a sinner from those Sins, that he hath formerly committed?
If a Man hath transgressed the Laws of the Commonwealth, and being arraigned before a Iudge is forced to give account of all the actions of his Life; will it be enough for him to say, I was in an errour, or I repent of my fault? Will fear of judgment, or shame, set a Man free from the condemnation due to sin, unless the Righteousness of a bleeding Saviour, apprehended by faith, do interpose, and ward off the stroke of Divine vengeance from the guilty Sinner? Without Heb. 9.shedding of Blood, saith the Apostle, there is no remission.
Now then, if neither Holiness of Life, nor Prayers, nor Tears; nor the Blood of all the Saints can avail any thing towards the mitigation of the bitterness of this Iudgment, and the only remedy be the death of the only begotten Son of God, what will your Repentance do in this case? Indeed, I acknowledge that the Scripture attributes much to Repentance, and there are glorious promises annexed thereunto; but two things must be considered here. First, Of how large an extent the Promises are, and How far the Promises reach and to whom they belong.next, to whom they do belong: for there are some rewards given in this Life, and others that are reserved for Life Eternal. Verily Eternal Life, which is the benefit of Redemption, as it could not be purchased by any works of ours, so likewise it is not promised as the reward of Repentance or if in any Scripture it seems to be so promised, it is not simply upon the account of Repentance, but for another cause; To wit, the faith of the worker, and not the work it self.
Therefore these things should be put each of them in their own places, and comprehended within their own bounds. That it may be understood aright, what Faith does, and what Repentance, and what efficacy is in both, and how they are distinguished from one another, and also how they being joyned together do contribute mutual assistance to one another in the Iustification of the Ungodly. For though we deny What Faith does, and what Repentance.not that both are very pleasing to God, yet the one is acceptable to him one way, and the other another way. For faith is acceptable through Christ, but Repentance only upon the account of Faith. And it is also a certain truth, that, though by faith only, as the procuring cause, we obtain Iustification in the sight of God: Yet this very faith doth not put forth its power of Iustifying upon any, but penitent and broken-hearted Sinners, and therefore in the Gospel we are so often invited to Repentance. Not that it is not true faith only, which justifies without Repentance; but because faith, if it be true, justifies no others, but them that have turned from their Sins in sincerity, and are converted unto God by Repentance. For such as have no trouble of Conscience, nor sorrow for Sin, but run on obstinately against their Conscience, and continue in their Evil courses, it is a vain thing for them to hope for Iustification by Faith, whereof they falsely boast, for all such stouthearted Sinners are far from Righteousness. None need the Physician, but they that are Sick, neither doth Christ invite any to come unto him, but such as are heavy laden: Come unto me, saith he, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. But what is coming to Christ, but believing in him according to the saying of Augustin?
Therefore, as Christ rejects none, that come unto him, that is, such as return to him by believing, but revives and justifies them; so faith in Christ, in which only our Salvation consists, is no where of a saving efficacy, but only in those whom it finds August. de … & gratia, cap. 7. To come to Christ, is to believe in him, for he himself says, No Man cometh to me, unless it be given him of my Father.burdened and afflicted.
Another Objection.
If Faith only were sufficient to Iustification, it would follow Andrad. Vega, de Iust. 2. p. 741.that good Works are not necessary.
But the Consequent is false.
And, Therefore the Antecedent also is false, That Faith ony is sufficient.
Vega confirms the Minor with this Argument: Unless good Works had been necessary in all respects, Paul had not so carefully given Instructions about Vertue, and rebuked Vice, and so mightily commended good Manners, and Integrity of Life; but we shall afterwards enquire into the Minor.
I come now to the Argument: And,
First, I deny the Major; for this is not a necessary Consequence.
Salvation is obtained by Faith in Christ only.
Therefore, good Works are not necessary.
The necessity of Vertue, and honest discipline is, and always hath been, very great in all respects both private and publick; yet this necessity doth not at all detract from the peculiar dignity of Faith, that it should not be the only cause of Iustification; as on the other side, the Iustification of Faith doth not take away the necessity nor lessen the care of a Godly Life. Therefore both Faith in Christ, and the practice of Holiness are necessary; the one, to justifie Sinners in the sight of God, and the other to exercise them that are justified in this World.
Therefore, There is need of a distinction in this case: for according to Philosophy, a thing is said to be necessary two manner of ways.
First, Absolutely and simply, when one thing is so necessary to A twofold necessity, 1. Absolute.another, that it cannot be done or consist without it.
Secondly, In respect of Consequence, when a thing is of such a 2. In respect of Consequencee. How are good Works are necessary to Salvation.Nature, that as soon as it begins to be, other things also are joyned with it. or at least soon follow after, and thus good works in persons justified, are necessary to Salvation, not simply, but in regard of Consequence.
By what I have said, any Reader that is not void of Sense, may easily discern, that we seek not to banish good Works out of the World, that they should not be necessary, but we only remove them from being a cause of Iustifying: That so both Faith and Works may be put each of them in their own place, and contained within their own bounds. For Paul did not in vain, nor without great necessity exhort with much Paul was a Zealous Exhorter to a Holy Life.vehemency to the Godly practice of a Christian Life. For what is more glorious in it self, or more worthy of the profession of Christianity, or fitter to adorn the Doctrine of the Gospel, than that those, who are called by the Name of Christ, should resemble him exactly in their manners, and the practice of their lives: And as they profess themselves to be Citizens of the Heavenly Kingdom, they should according to their power endeavour to lead a Life like Heaven, upon Earth? On the contrary what is more abominable or odius, than if those, who have been engaged by so many benefits, exalted to so great dignity, and are joyned to him into so near an union by so many Covenants and Obligations, if yet they do not follow his Foot-steps, nor imitate him in the practice of their lives?
Therefore in this we and they agree, that Works of Piety are very necessary; but we must consider, wherein this necessity lies: For they are effects which of necessity depend upon their cause, from whence they proceed, but the cause hath no dependance upon them by any necessity.
By the like Consequence, we call many things necessary in common Offices of Civility and Humanity; as when Kindnesses are received, what is more necessary, and according to Iustice, than a thankful remembrance of a Favour received, and a readiness of Mind, to give evidence of thankfulness, not only in Words, but also by repaying Kindness with Kindness, if there be Opportunity? Which thankfulness was nevertheless Necessity of Consequence.no cause of the Kindness that was done. Let us here compare other kinds of Offices: Who knows not, that a Son and Heir ought of necessity to be dutiful to his Father? But again, who can be ignorant, that this is no cause in him, why he should receive the Inheritance? The same also may be observed in Marriage, where the Wife being tyed to her own Husband, of necessity owes Subjection to him, which nevertheless she shews to him, not so much for any Law of necessity that extorts it, as of her own accord, and willingly, being provoked by a Principle of Love; moreover when she shews him the greatest Subjection, this necessity is no cause of the Marriage bond: Iust so it is in the performance of Godly Works, which Paul commands us to maintain for necessary uses, not that necessity of Tit. 2.Works is any cause of Iustification, but because it cannot otherways be, but that where true Faith is, there of necessity good Works are required, and yet they are not so much required, as they are a necessary Consequence; for who was ever endued with the true Knowledge of Christ the Son of God, or had the secret breathings of his Spirit, or had a lively sense of his unsearchable Power, and the unspeakable Glory of his Majesty, but is drawn after him with the Cords of Love, and cleaves unto him with all his Heart, setting light by all the Vanities of this World? Moreover who hath a true savour of Christ, but he dispises the World, and all the things of the World, as the dirt under his Feet? So that now there is no need of any Law to exact Works of Righteousness of him, who is truly planted in Christ, because he is a Law to himself, and does more of his own accord, than can be commanded by any Compulsion.
An Argument of the Iesuites.
The Word [only] is not found in the Holy Scripture, therefore Faith only doth not justifie.
Though it is not true, that this exclusive Word is no where found in the Holy Scriptures, yet suppose we should grant it to be true, what would be the Consequence? Verily those things that follow from a necessary Consequence, though they are not expressed, yet they are implied. And therefore, ye also your selves admit many Words into your Confession of Faith, of which the Scripture makes no mention? But let us proceed, you say this Exclusive Word is not found in Canonical Scripture, I confess it is not, in so many Letters and Syllables. But seeing we meet with so many other things in sacred Writings, that exclude all these Accessory Works (which ye intrude) from having a share with Faith in justifying a Sinner, what hurt is it to sound Doctrine, if the Word Rom. 3. Ibid.[only] is not expressed; when you read such Scriptures as these; being justified freely by his Grace, Rom. 3. By the Works of the Law no Flesh shall be justified. The Righteousness of God is manifested without the Law, Rom. 3. a Man is not justified by the Works of the Law, but by the Faith of Christ, Gal. 3. Not of Works, Rom. 11. Without Works, Gal. 3. Rom. 11. Tit. 3. Eph. 2. 2 Tim. 1. Rom. 9.Rom. 4. Not of Works, Tit. 3. Not of Works, Eph. 2. Not according to Works, 2 Tim. 1. Without Works, Rom. 9. What is the Signification of such Expressions, but that, all Works being excluded, it should be understood that Faith only is the procuring cause of Iustification; for what else is Faith without Works, and without the Law, but Faith only? Therefore by the necessary Law of Consequence, we may argue thus, we are justified by Faith, and are not justified by any other thing inherent in us, according to the Scriptures: Therefore we are justified by Faith only. Or we may Confute the Adversaries with this Argument.
Argument.
That from which all other things are excluded, must of necessity remain alone.
The Scripture excludes all other things in Man from Faith:
Therefore of Necessity it is Faith only that justifies.
But whereas they deny, that this …. Rom. 3. now he demonstrates that Faith only hath in it self the Power of justifying. Oecumen. photi. in Cap. Rom. 3. only believing. Origen. Cap. 3. The only just cause of Glorying is in the Cross of Christ.exclusive Word is found in the Scripture; let them read, Mark 5. and Luke 8. where the Lord says, Only believe, and thou shalt be saved.
I come now to the Greek and August. de verb. domini Serm. 4. He would have this one thing imputed, whereby the others are gathered by Consequence. Amb. 1 Cor. 1 It is appointed by God, that a Believer should be justified by Faith only. Chrysost. Serm. 5. in Cap. 2. Eph. Paul professes him to be Blessed, who is supported by Faith only. Basil. de humil. by Faith only, which is in Christ. Hierom. in Epist. ad Gal. cap. 1. Nazianzen. de moderatione, Our Righteousness is Faith only. Bernard. our Righteousness is no other thing, but the Indulgence of God. Thom. Aquin. in 1 Tim. 1. Therefore there is no hope of Iustification, but in Faith only.Latin Doctors of the Primitive Church, Basilins, Nazianzen, Hilarius, Ambrose, Augustin, Hierom, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Photius, Bernard, to whom, if you please, you may add Thomas Aquin. who all Commenting on the same Words of Christ and Paul, do not only agree with us in the same Opinion, but also, in the same exclusive Word, as hath been evidently proved in our former Answer to Osorius.
Thought it be manifest, that we assert nothing here, which the Orthodox Divines of the Primitive Church have not confirmed unanimously, and in the same Words; yet nevertheless these things so evident in themselves, do not satisfie those perverse Sophisters, who when they cannot deny the very Words of learned Men, yet they take occasion to contend with us about the Sense of the Words, in which they pretend that we do greatly err; for they have found out a curiously contrived Distinction: Saying, That by Faith A twofold Iustification … to the Papists.only is understood the first Iustification, but not the second. Thus these cunning Artificers of Words have turned one Iustification into two, one, that is obtained by the first Grace, as they call it, before all Works, as in Infants, when they are Beptized: And another, which is in Persons come to Years, by the practice of good Works.
That I may Answer this frivolous Distinction: First, I object this saying of Augustin, good Works that follow The second Iustification of Papisis overturned.him that is justified, do not go before him that is to be justified; which if it be true, what remains, but that they should either Confess, that there is no such thing as this second Iustification, which they have devised, or else that good Works go before him that is to be justified, contrary to the Doctrine of Augustin?
Moreover, if they think there is sufficient cause, why Faith only should not be admitted, because it is not expresly mentioned in the Holy Scriptures, why should not also this Distinction of theirs, (about a second Iustification by the practice of good Works) be rejected upon the same account, which is no where expressed in the sacred Oracles: But by a manifest Contradiction is opposice to Heavenly Truth? It is an Ancient and Famous Rule of Lawyers, That there A Rule of Law.is no occasion of distinguishing, where the Law makes no Distinction. In what place of Scripture can those Sophisters find this Distinction between a first and second Iustification; whereby Infants Baptized are otherways justified, than they that are come to years, for both were alike dead in their Sins, and they are both alike regenerated, and live by Faith in Christ the Son of God.
That we may briefly Consute this Sophistry, whereas neither the Holy Scriptures, nor the Godly Doctors of the Primitive Church ackonwledge any manner of justifying, but one only: How comes it to pass, that those men have devised a twofold Iustification? making two, of that which is but one: So that the first Iustification consists of Faith only, and the second is made up of Works? But it is easie to withstand this absurd device, by the Authority of sufficient witnesses; amongst whom Ambrose comes first into Ambrose in Cap. 3. ad Rom.Mind: who hath expressed himself thus; Because there is one God of all, he hath justified all after the same manner; and what that manner is, he shews in these Words, He justifies them no otherways, but as they are Believers. And presently after, he excludes all Merit of Works; For nothing, saith he, is the cause of Dignity and Merit, but Faith only: And again, Seeing that a Man is not justified before God, but by Faith only, &c. Therefore let us inferr It is proved out of Ambrose, that a twofold manner of Iustificatoin is impossible.from these Words of Ambrose, if there is one manner of justifying, as there is one God; Then no Distinction can make two Iustifications of that which is one only: As no Distinction can make the one only God, that justifies, to be two. Again, if Believers are no otherways justified before God but by Faith, according to the Testimony of Ambrose, and there is no other Dignity nor Merit, that God regards, but only Faith; what place is there for a second Iustification made up of the Merits of Works?
Hereunto let us add the Testimony Gregor. 2. lib. Moral. Cap. 40.of Gregory, which is very seasonable to confute the Forgery of those vain Sophisters concerning their second Iustification. These are the Author's Words: Grace begot me, being naked in the first Faith, and the same Grace will save me, being naked at my Reception. Thus Gregory spake of Nakedness: And what Nakedness is that, but the want of Vertue and good Works, (as he himself Interprets) which is the Condition of every gracious Soul, not only of Men come to Years, but also of Infants when they are Baptized in their first Regeneration? If we are found Naked in our Reception into Glory, where then is that second Iustification (made up) of good Works? but if it is not so, where is that Nakedness whereof Gregory speaks? How can these things so much disagreeing, consist together, that we should both be Naked and void of good Works, and also cloathed with good Works, and thereby Merit Gregor. ibid.a second Iustification? In the mean while this should not be omitted, which the same Gregory mentions of Grace, which he divides not into a first and second, as the Papists do now adays, but he shews, that it is one and the same Grace, which both first regenerates us, and also afterwards receives us into the Kingdom of Glory. By which it is evident, that there is but one manner of justifying, which consists not in the Merits of Works, but in Grace only, and the Hope of Mercy, unto which Men fly for refuge in their emptyness of Vertues, as he speaks.
But let us proceed.
Another Argument.
Evil Works deserve Eternal Destruction.
Therefore, Good Works Merit Eternal Life.
Answer.
Both are true indeed, if you consider things in respect of the just rewards due unto them. For as the vile Abominations of an Ungodly Life procure the Wrath and Vengeance of God, so Works of Righteousness would procure his favour, if we could perform good things with as great perfection as we do Evil things. But because we cannot do that, therefore of our selves, we can deserve nothing according to the rules of Iustice, but only Death and Damnation. But now by the right of Redemption through Christ, we are set free from the Law of Iustice, and translated into the Kingdom of Grace; by Vertue of a new Covenant, whereby it comes to pass, that God hath respect not to our Merits, but only to Christ, the price of our Redemption.
Therefore I answer, That this opposition of contraries is of force according to the strict severity of the Law, but not according to the Grace of the Gospel, for here there is a block put in the way; To wit, The Blood of the Redeemer, that frees us from the Law of Sin and Death.
Moreover, the Argument from contraries avails not, except the contraries are set equally in their full extent one against another. Now Evil Works in us are perfectly Evil, but good Works, though assisted by Grace, yet because of the refractary imperfection of the Flesh, in the sight of God are imperfect at the best, as they are performed by us. Wherefore Hierom says, The perfection of all Righteous Men in the Flesh, is Imperfection.
Another Argument.
The Grace of Iustification, is lost by Evil Works.
Therefore, it is retained by good Works:
Answer.
By the same Answer, the Fallacy of this Sophistical Argument is discovered, because our Sins and Vertues are not equally contrary to one another. But whereas it is said, that the Grace of Iustification is retained by Obedience, though this in some sense may be granted, yet Iustification is not thereby procured. Moreover when we say, It is retained by Works, that should not be so understood, as if this were done for the Merit of the Actions, but only for the sake of the Redeemer, upon whose account first the person is accepted, and afterwards the actions are well pleasing, which otherways would be unclean and of no value.
They say, that perseverance in Righteousness is lost by Evil There is a twofold consideration both of good and Evil Works.Works. But Evil Works, as they are in us, admit of a twofold consideration; either as they are inherent in us, as in all Saints, thro' the infirmity of the Flesh, and we presently rise up again by Repentance, and Faith. And such kind of Sins, (as Paul asserts) shall not have dominion over us, or in the next place, as we give up our selves to Sin, against our own Conscience; that we may serve it, and take a sinful delight therein: But such a Sin can by no means consist with this Faith, whereof Paul speaks, which hath place in none but those, that are turned from Sin, and returned to God.
Another Argument.
Faith Iustifies.
Faith is a Work. Therefore, Works Iustifie.
Answer.
I Answer; The Argument is faulty, because the middle term is of a larger extent in the Major, than in the Minor. For Faith in the Major is taken correlatively, for Christ, or the Promise, which is apprehended by Faith. In the Minor it is taken only for a quality of the Mind, as it is an act of our Will: Otherways if Faith is taken in the Minor just as it is in the Major, it is false, and the Minor should be denied; To wit, That Faith is a Work.
Another Argument of the Iesuits.
If Faith only Iustifies, it would Iustifie without Charity.
Faith doth not Iustifie without Charity.
Therefore, Faith only doth not Iustifie.
Answer.
I may oppose unto this Argument, another not unlike it, that the Fallacy of the one may appear the more easily by the other. Thus then by way of Instance a Man may infer, If the heat of Fire An Answer by way of Instance.only makes warm, then it makes warm without light.
But the heat of Fire doth not make warm without light joyned therewith.
Therefore, The heat of the Fire only, doth not make warm.
I doubt not, but by this mutual comparing of Arguments, it appears evident to the Reader, how like the one is to the other, Every Union of things doth not confound their Offices.and consequently how he should judge thereof; so that there is no need of any further Refutation. For all things that are joyned, and agree together in some respects, are not therefore engaged in the same Office.
He that hath Feet, Eyes, and Ears, though he hath not these Members in separation from one another, yet it is an untruth, if it is said, That he sees not with his Eyes only, or walks not with his Feet only.
Though I deny not, that in the performance of those duties, which belong to this Life, Faith is not separated from Charity: So if we look upward to things, that are Divine and Eternal, if we contemplate and view, what that is, which can help us at our appearance before the Dreadful Iudgment Seat of God, and appease his Wrath, and deliver us from Eternal Destruction, and conquer Death and the Devil, and regain the favour of God, and Iustifie us, and procure us the Crown of Life, Faith only in the Mediatour doth so bear rule in these affairs, and so fully performs all things requisite to our Salvation and Redemption, that here Charity hath nothing to do; for the Kingdom is not promised or due to you, because you love this or that Neighbour after your manner, but contrarily, because you neither love God as you ought, nor your Neighbour as your self, therefore unavoidable destruction is due to you, unless Faith only through the Mediatour should come in for your help, and set you free from the condemnation due unto you, notwithstanding your Charity. Faith is so far from needing to be joyned with Charity for Iustification, that unless Charity it self were justified by Faith, it could not stand, nor keep it self from falling to ruine and Destruction.
Of the like nature is that Argument, which they wrest out of the Writings of the Apostle Paul.
An Argument out of 1 Cor. 13.
If I have all Faith, so that I can remove Mountains, but have not Charity, I am nothing.
Therefore, Iustification comes by Faith, and good Works.
Answer.
Erasmus did write in his Exposition on the Second Chapter of Iames: Faith which is cold without Charity, and puts Erasmus & censurus Parisiensium Tit. 7. They of Paris argue that Faith can be without Charity.not forth it self, when the matter requires, it is not Faith, but only the Name of Faith, &c. They of Paris argue contray ways, that Faith can be without Charity, out of this place of Paul: If I have all Faith, so that I can remove Mountains; Erasmus following Basil, Interprets this Scripture on this manner; That we should take this to be feigned by the Apostle for Amplification, which is not, nor can be.
And seeing Thomas Aquin. here by [all Faith] understands perfect Faith; Therefore, because perfect Faith is not found without Charity, it is necessary that according to the Interpretation of Basil, we should here take notice of a Trope or Fiction, which Quintilian also reckons amongst the forms of amplifying.
Therefore, whereas we deny a Dead Faith without Charity, to deserve the name of Faith, we speak this by a very usual Trope, as we say, That an unprofitable and idle Man is no Man, or, Wine which is decayed, and hath lost its strength, is no Wine. Therefore that which is cited out of Paul: If I have all Faith, but have not Charity, &c. Must be understood thus: Not that Paul simply affirms Faith to be a gift of God without Charity: But he speaks Figuratively to amplifie the praise of Charity, as he that says: Though I have an hundred Tongues, and as many Mouths, yet I could not fully set forth the matter as it is, he doth not therefore presuppose, that there is any Man, who hath an hundred Tongues, and as many Mouths.
Paul useth the like Figurative Speech: Though I speak with the 1 Cor. 13.Tongues of Men and Angels, for Angels have no Tongues, but it is feigned by way of Amplification to signifie some excellent Tongues surpassing those that are human. Thus he said.
If what hath been hitherto said, doth not satisfie the Adversaries: I Answer thus: That this Speech of Paul belongs not to the manner of Iustification, but to the Life of the Iustified Person; If I have all Faith, saith he, But want Charity, &c. What then? Therefore Charity enters together with Faith into Iustification. But this is no good Consequence. But this is rather the consequence thereof. Therefore Charity is necessary in the Regenerate. Which must of necessity be granted, for Love is necessary and pleasing to God; To wit, In those that are in a state of Reconciliation, and for the sake of Christ. For God naturally delights in the Obedience of his own: Which though it be imperfect, yet he approves of any endeavours in those that are reconciled unto him by Christ. So then Faith, that is Christ apprehended by Faith Iustifies us freely. But on the other side, we must not receive this Grace in vain: But he receives it in vain, who is not obedient to the precepts and Chrysostom.example of Christ. Howbeit, there are also some that answer, that this Faith here mentioned by the Apostle should only be taken for the Faith of Working Miracles; amongst whom is Chrysostom, who calls this the Faith, not of Doctrine, but of Miracles.
Moreover whereas they urge this word of the Apostle, as if he had A cavilling about the Word [all.]used it in a general signification: To this it may be answered, that the Word (all) signifies often not the universality of a kind, but the perfection of a species, to which it is joyned, as 2 Cor. 9. God is able to make every good gift abound in you, that having all sufficiency in all things, &c.
In like manner in this place of Paul: If I have all Faith, that is, the most perfect Faith of working Miracles, so that I can remove Mountains, &c.
Another place out of Paul. 1 Cor. 13.
Now these three remain, Faith, Hope, and Charity; but the greater of these is Charity.
Argument.
Our Iustification flows from An Argument out of a place of … 1 Cor. 13.the more worthy cause.
Charity is a thing more worthy and great than Faith.
Therefore, we are justified more by Charity than by Faith.
Or if you would rather take it thus:
If we were justified by Faith, and not by Charity, Faith would be greater than Charity.
But Charity is greater than Faith.
Therefore, we are justified rather by Charity than by Faith.
Answer.
That I may briefly Answer both these Arguments, First let us rightly conceive not only the words of the Apostle, but in what sense he speaks them. These three remain, saith he, but the greater of these is Charity: in which words we hear the Apostle preferring Charity before Faith: And we acknowledge it to be true, but let us see in what sense it is true.
I will make use of an argument like it: There hath not risen a Mat. 11.greater than Iohn the Baptist amongst those that are born of Women: Therefore Iohn the Baptist must be greater than Christ. I answer, from the sense of the Scripture: Though Christ seemed less than Iohn the Baptist by the judgment of the World, and the general opinion of People, yet in the Kingdom of Heaven he was, and always will be, greater than Iohn; we may observe something like this in Faith and Charity. Though in this World, in Mens dealings with one another mutual Charity hath the preeminence: Yet in the Kingdom of Heaven, that is, in our concernments with God, against Satan, Death, Sin, the Iudgement of God, his Wrath and Vengeance, and the terrors of In the Kingdom of Heaven, Faith is greater than Charity.Conscience, Faith doth so far excel, that it only hath the Dominion not only above Charity, but also without it.
If the dignity and excellency of any thing is discernable by its effects, and performances, as a Tree is known by its Fruits, let us now compare these Vertues with one another, that it may the better appear, what each of them can do, what is the efficacy of Charity, what Faith performs, and how much it excels.
And first, as touching Charity, and its Offices, let us hear how 1 Cor. 13. The Offices of Charity.greatly the Apostle commends it. Charity, saith he, is patient, and bountiful, and courteous, fitted for every condition of Life: Charity doth not envy, doth not behave it self unseemly, is not puffed up, seeks not its own things, but seeks the good of all; it is not easily offended, nor desirous of revenge; and though it suffer injury, it deviseth not to do evil to any man; it delights not in the wickedness of the wicked, but rejoyceth in the Truth; it suffers all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things, waiting for better, with an undefatigable expectation. Though other things Charity commended from its durationmay fail; though Prophecies, and Miracles, and Knowledge may cease, yet Charity will never fail; mutual Love will endure for ever.
Hitherto ye have heard the Apostle set forth the duties and offices of Charity, with deserved praise, which, though they are exceeding great and magnificent, and cannot be sufficiently commended by any man according to their worth; yet such is the nature of all these offices of Charity, that they pass How great things Faith doth in Heaven.not beyond the bounds of this mortal Life, and the mutual Communion of Christians with one another.
But now let us raise up our minds, as high as we can, to contemplate the power and efficacy of Faith, and what it doth, not only upon the Earth, but in Heaven in the presence of God. Whilst Charity is exercised in this inferiour World amongst men, Faith ascends into the Kingdom of God, where first by a sublime contemplation it lays hold on the Son of God the Mediatour at the right hand of Majesty, takes a view of his Kingdom, and the glorious Riches thereof, and is ravished at the admiration of the universal Power that is given to him over all Heaven and Earth; and searches for the Promises of the Father, that are ratified in his Son the Mediatour, and by search understands them, and in Heaven beholds them to be sure and infallible; wherewith the mind of a Believer being now confirmed, takes pleasure in them, and triumphs with great joy; and now Faith, by relying on these Promises, becomes fearless of danger, and invincible, and stands firmly against the fury of Satan, the power of Death, the terrours of a guilty Conscience, the Gates of Hell, the malice of the World, and the oppositions of the rebellious flesh. Hence flows a gladsome tranquility of Conscience, and Peace and Ioy in the Holy Ghost; and thence it is that Hope derives its fiducial Relyance, and Charity its fervent Zeal from Faith only.
For the mind being supported and safe guarded by Faith in Christ, what more can it wish for, to arrive unto the highest pitch of felicity? Moreover, who can fully express with words, or conceive in his mind all the good things, that Faith by means of the Mediatour prepares in Heaven for those, that are yet groveling upon the ground? This Faith is that which reconciles man (who was in a woful and wretched condition) unto God: Iustifies a sinner that was at the brink of despair, opens the Gates of Paradise to the penitent Malefactor: Obtains the Grace of the Holy Spirit for the Centurion, gives Peter the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, justifies the Publican, procures pardon to the man sick of the Palsie, heals the Woman with the bloody Issue, restores sight to blind Bartimaeus, procures us the Grace of Adoption, the hope of the Resurrection, and Life Everlasting, and overcomes Death, which can by no other power be conquered, and gets Victory over Satan, who cannot be subdued by any of our Vertues, nor by our Charity; but the Shield of Faith only drives him away, and puts him to flight.
Thus, pious Reader, I have given you some description both of Faith and Charity; you may take your liberty to judge, how you should account of both; and what should be attributed unto Charity, which, though it may seem to claim the principality in things belonging to this Life, yet in Iustification, and obtaining the pardon of sins, it is How Charity is greater than Faith; and how Faith is greater than Charity.so far from having the superiority, that in this case it can do nothing at all. What need is there of words to prove this? for Paul the Apostle explains himself abundantly, in what sense Charity is greater; to wit, because of its duration, which appears evident by these things that follow: For he draws this Inference from what he had said; Charity, saith he, never fails; though Prophecies and Miracles may be abolished.
Another Argument out of St. Iames, cap. 2.
Abraham was justified by Works.
Therefore Faith only doth not justifie.
Answer.
Paul furnishes us with an Answer to this Argument. Whereas that excellent Patriarch made no doubt of sacrificing his dearly beloved Son at the command Iustification before God, Iustification before men.of God; therefore the Apostle Iames says, That he was justified by Works. If they understand it amongst men, it is true, but not in the sight of God, unless we would give the Lye to Paul, that choice Instrument in the hand of Christ, who discoursing of the Works of the Patriarch; he says, That if he hath any thing to glory in, he hath it before men, but not before God. And why before men, and not before God? but because the Iustification What the Iustification is whereof Iames speaks.of men is one thing, and the Iustification of God is another; for men judge by the appearance, and the sight of Works moves them to justifie. Now the whole Epistle of the Apostle Iames, is taken up about this outward appearance of Works before men; and its whole design is, that by our good deeds, and Charity (which is inseparably joyned with saving Faith) we should give evidence, that the Faith, wherein we glory before God, is a lively Faith, and not counterfeit, nor unfruitful: Wherefore presently he adds; Shew me thy Faith without thy Works, and I will shew thee my Faith by my Works. By which it easily appears, what Iustification it is, whereof the Apostle Iames speaks to wit, that, which by works discovers it self before men.
Now as for this, neither Paul, nor any other man doubts of it. For what man is there but will confess that Charity and good Works must of necessity be joyned unto Faith, which unless they be seen by men, in those that make a profession of Faith, it is very evident, that such a Faith as they profess, is in reality no Faith at all, but an empty name and shadow thereof. But what does all this make against Iustification by Faith? That Faith appears not to be lively in the Eyes of men, out of which, as out of a living Root the blossoms and flowers of godly works do not grow. But does not Faith therefore justifie in the sight of God without works, because it is not evidenced by the Testimony of good deeds joyned therewith?
But suppose that good works are joyned with Faith, which give evidence to men that it is a lively Faith: Will Faith justifie thee? you will say, Why not? and I acknowledge the same my self. But I ask, wherefore doth Faith justifie before God? because of the works that appear unto men? or are the works rather acceptable because of Faith? But how many works seem to be excellent in the sight of men, to which human Reason gives applause, and men, because of them, are accounted holy and just, when yet the matter is far otherways? And this is that Human Human Iustification, which consists in the shewing of good works.Iustification, which I spake of, and the Apostle Iames hath written of, which, though someties it judges according to Truth, yet much oftener it is deceived in judging: Why so? because the Iudgment of God, and the Iudgment of men are of a different nature. What man looking upon the Lives of the Pharisees, their long Prayers, frequent Fastings and Washings, their holy-like deportment, and all their outward shews of Piety, but would have judged them to be men very near, and dear unto God? when yet none were greater An outward appearance is often deceitful.Strangers and Enemies to God than they? What man is there at this day, who looking upon the Orders of the Monks, their Vows, Fastings, Rules, Austerity, and Rigour of Discipline, but would reckon them amongst the chiefest of those that are justified, when yet they are no such men in the sight of God?
And yet in the mean while I deny not this to be true, which Iames writes: For he that being endued with no Vertue, or Love to Vertue, makes an outward profession of Faith in Christ, and leads not a Life suitable thereunto, I say, according to the Apostle Iames, that such a man's Faith is little worth. But if such a man in the last hour of his Life, come to himself, and fly to Christ for Refuge by an unfeigned Faith, and beg for Mercy, and cast himself wholly upon Christ, what would the Apostle Iames say in such a case, Will not Faith only without Works justifie such a man as this? The penitent Malefactor is an evident proof of the truth of this, who had no other thing but Faith only, to commend him to Christ, and so to be admitted into Paradise: Like unto which there are many Examples daily of them that die on Gibbets; so that the Iudgments of God are very wonderful, who hath mercy on whom he will have mercy.
But now let us return to what we were saying of Abraham. If we look upon his Faith, what was more sincere? If we consider his Works, what was more glorious and wonderful? Therefore upon both accounts he was certainly an admirable man. Now let us compare his Faith with his Works. And because it is evident that he was justified before God, let us enquire whether he was justified by Faith, … Works; because he could not be justified upon both accounts, as the Apostle witnesseth; If it is of Faith, then it is not of Works; but if it is of Works, then it is not of Faith. What shall we say then to these things? let the Scripture answer. Abraham Gen. 15.believed God, when he promised, and it was accounted to him for Righteousness. And the same Abraham obeyed God, when he commanded; and why doth not the Scripture in like manner add, That this was imputed to him for Righteousness? Gal. 3.Let us hear what the Apostle answers. The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the Gentiles by Faith, he first told the glad tydings to Abraham: and what glad tydings was this? That he and his Seed should be Heirs of the Romans 3.World. A great Promise indeed. But how did he obtain this Promise, by Faith, or by Works? There is an answer ready made to our hand by the Apostle: The Promise came not by the Law to Abraham, or to his Seed, that he should be Heir of the World, but by the Righteousness of Faith. Why so, Paul? why, not by the Law? and why by the Righteousness of Faith? That he might be the Father of all the faithful, who walking in the footsteps of the Faith, which was in the Uncircumcision of our Father Abraham, shall have. Faith in like manner imputed unto them.
But here. St. Iames is represented as fighting with all his might against this Doctrine. For the Adversaries say thus. Did not the Apostle Iames assert with great Authority, That Abraham was justified by Works? and will ye deny it? God forbid, that any man should undervalue the Authority of that holy Apostle. And yet I suppose St. Iames would not have us to disbelieve the Scripture, which teaches us far otherways, attributing the Iustification of Abraham, not to Works, but to Faith: For Abraham believed God, and we read, it was imputed unto him for Righteousness. But God hath not said in his Word concerning Abraham's going to sacrifice his Son, That it was imputed to him for Righteousness. Or let us grant the assertion of St. Iames; That Abraham was justified by Works. But where and how was he thus justified? before God? St. Iames says not so. Then it is before men. And Paul himself denies not that: So that there is no real disagreement between Paul and Iames.
But this doth not satisfie some Sophisters, who account it is not enough, that the holy Patriarch is justified by Works before men, as Paul teaches, unless he be also thereby justified before God: For though he was first justified by Faith, (as they say); yet nothing hinders, but that afterwards he might be yet more justified by Works, and this they call a second Iustification. But Reason shews that to be an utter impossibility, for it implies a manifest contradiction; for it is a contradiction not to be justified by Works, and again to be justified by Works. And Reason 1.seeing one of those is denied by the Apostle: How can they maintain and plead for the other. But hereunto may be added another Reason. If there is a twofold Iustification, Reason 2.one by Faith and another by Works, it would follow, that there is a twofold manner of Iustifying: But there is one and the same manner of Iustifying, as there is one God, as hath been proved out of Ambrose. Therefore it appears, that there is not a twofold Iustification. A third Reason is this, seeing Iustification Reason 3.consists of the Remission of Sins, and God forgives no Man his Sins, to whom he doth not perfectly forgive them: Therefore it follows that the Iustification of those, that are justified, is compleat and perfect, and cannot be made more perfect than it is already. Now in the next place, let them prepare to answer this Argument of Paul.
Whosoever is justified by Works, Reason.hath whereof he may Glory before God, Rom. 4. Abraham hath not any thing whereof he may Glory before God.
Therefore Abraham is not justified by Works before God.
By these things which we have quoted out of Paul, and other sacred writings; I suppose, it appears evident enough, what we should judge of the Works of Abraham: Which, though they were excellent, and worthy to be admired before men, yet they found no place for glorying before God, according to the Testimony and Interpretation of the Apostle.
We need not be at any great trouble to find out the cause thereof. Tiletan.Tiletan and other Iesuits produce a cause thereof out of Augustin: Because the Works of Abraham, were not of the Law, but of Faith, not of the Flesh, but of Grace, which because they were not done by the Power of Free-will only, but in the Faith, and (expectation) of Christ, therefore all Praise and Glory was due to Christ, and none to them; which Invention of theirs though it savours more of Wit than Solidity, yet though we grant all this to them, there is no inconvenience in it, seeing both of us acknowledge with Paul, that the Patriarch Abraham found neither matter of glorying, nor Iustification before God by Works; and therefore that he had no cause of glorying, because he was not justified by Works; for otherways, if he had been justified by Works, he should have had, wherein to Glory, as the Apostle Paul speaks. But now he hath not any thing, wherein he may Glory before God, therefore he was not justified by Works. And thus hitherto we have treated of the Arguments of the Adversaries, as much as may suffice not only to discover, but also confute their Sophistical Wiles, and captious Deceits, who fight with so great eagerness for their inherent Righteousness, against the Testimony of the Holy Scripture, and the Sacred Gospel of Iesus Christ, and the bright shining Light of Grace, yea and against their own Salvation. It remains in the next place, that we should hear, what those Men on the other side answer and oppose to the Arguments, and most approved Reasons manag'd, not only by us, but by St. Paul, and with what Cavillings and fraudulent Devices, they darken and baffle the clear meaning of the Apostle's Words, and with what deceit they wilfully wrest and deprave the genuine Signification of his Words by their most absurd Interpretation, to the intent they may maintain their own erroneous Doctrine. If they did this only in Ignorance, they should not be so much the Objects of our Anger, as of our Pity and Commiseration, as being Men misled into Errour. But they behave themselves as if they were unwilling to be undeceiv'd. And though they cannot but see the Truth in such a clear Light of the Scripture: yet they wilfully shut their eyes, because they are not willing to see, or at least believe the clear shining Light of the Truth; which that it may appear the more evident unto all Men, let us now produce the Answers and deceitful Shifts of the Adversaries, whereby they maintain their own Cause against our Arguments. And because there are eight Arguments out of St. Paul, which we oppose against the Papists, we think it is not unprofitable in this place to set down, what the Papists answer unto these.