Of Free Justification by Christ, Book 3 · Part 5
The Answers of the Adversaries, which they oppose against the eight Arguments of St. Paul, together with a Refutation of those Answers.
BY the Works of the Law, shall no flesh be justified before him; for by the Law comes the Knowledge of Sin: But now the Righteousness of God is manifessed without the Law, being testified by the Law and the Prophets; to wit, the Righteousness of God, by the Faith of Iesus Christ upon all that believe, &c. Which is also confirmed by these Words, Gal. 3. Knowing that a Man is not justified by the Works of the Law, for by the Works of the Law no flesh is justified, &c.
I Appeal unto thee, Courteous and Pious Reader, what Man is there (if he duely consider these Words of Paul,) that can gather any other thing from Free Iustification by Faith is proved by the Words of Paul.them, but what their genuine Signification holds forth? Which is this: That the Works of the Law should be utterly excluded from having any hand in Iustification. And if Works are excluded, what can be a more undoubted Truth, than that we are justified by Faith only?
What is more solid than this Argument of Paul? What can be more plainly expressed? What Words are more familiar. if so be they are not darkned by a Sophistical Interpretation? If according to the Testimony of Paul, we are not justified by Works, or obedience to the Law, but by Faith without Works; who can deny that our Iustification consists of Faith only, unless he desperately oppose himself, not only against Paul the Apostle, but also the Holy Spirit God?
But behold here the Deceit, or rather the Malice of sinful Men. They do not openly reject the Words of the Apostle, but wrest the sense and meaning of them to serve their own purpose. They deny not, that Works should be excluded: but pray, take notice of the captious Snares of Sophisters, who endeavour by a cunning way of distinguishing, to baffle the simplicity of Apostolical Doctrine: For they divide asunder Works, and their Iustification into two parts, calling the one, Works of the Law, and the other Works of Grace: And they say, the Works of the Law are unprofitable to Iustification; but the other they account very necessary. Therefore, they Answer to the Words of Paul with this Distinction: By the Works of the Law shall no Flesh be justified, &c. The meaning of these Words (say they) is this: No Man shall be justified before God, for his own Works, which he hath done, as by the Vertue and Merit thereof, but by the Vertue and Merit of Grace infused. For, according to Paul's manner of speaking, then a thing is said to be done by Works, when it is done by Works, when it is done as a Andr. Vega de just. pag. 751.due Debt, or for the Works. Wherefore there being a twofold Iustification, (as they say) one by Grace infused, and another by the Obligation of the Law without Grace: In this Case, Iustification by VVorks, and every thing that is contrary to Iustification by Grace is excluded: And so the saying of the Apostle holds true, as they Interpret: to him that worketh, the Reward is not imputed according to Grace, but according to Debt, as if he should say, that what is given by Rom. 4.VVorks or for them, is not given according to Grace, but according to Debt; therefore that Iustification which is separated from Grace, is excluded, but not the Iustification that comes by VVorks with the Assistance of Grace, &c. VVhat else should I Answer to these Sophisters, but that I pray God to give them Repentance, and a better frame of Spirit, that they may not always resist the Holy Ghost, and overspread the Truth with darkness. VVhat Man is there, but clearly perceives, that it is altogether contrary to the VVords and Meaning of the Apostle, to build the Hope of Salvation upon any VVorks; when he doth so manifestly teach and protest against it, denying that we are justified any other way, but by Faith without the VVorks of the Law. Yea, they themselves deny not that the exclusive VVord is understood of the Works of the Law, though not of the Works of Grace, but now what are these Works of Grace? those (forsooth) which the influence of the Grace of Christ, performs in the Souls of the regenerate; but were not the Romans to whom the Apostle wrote, regenerate in Christ? VVere they not partakers of the same Grace? Did they not abound in the VVorks of Grace? VVhom yet the Apostle denies to be justified by their own VVorks. It is true indeed (say they) if you understand it of their own VVorks, which are called VVorks of the Law, but not those VVorks which are Christ's. How ridiculous is this! as if those things that are planted The Distinction of the Papists is idle and Impertinent.… us by the Spirit of Christ, were not also oftentimes called ours. Yea Faith it self, which is most especially reckoned amongst those Gifts, it is usual to Scripture to give it the Epithet of ours and yours. Paul expresses himself thus, [By the Communion of my Faith and yours] and again [Hearing of your Faith] and in another place [Your Faith which is in Christ, &c.] Is it not evident that he speaks of that Faith, which we have in Christ through the free gift of God? How much more then may this be understood of VVorks, which when Paul excludes from Iustification, it cannot be doubted, but he understands it not only of VVorks, that are ours wholly, Rom. 1. Eph. 1. Colos. 2.and done by our own Strength, but also of those VVorks that are done by the help of Grace operating in us; so that there is nothing in the Works either of the Law, or of Grace, except Faith only, but what rather contributes to Destruction than Iustification: (What is commanded in the Law of God, that we can do without Grace?) Therefore seeing Paul removes all Works from the Office of justifying, it must needs be, that he understands it of the Works of Grace, as well as of our own Works, or the Works of the Law: What shall we say of the Works of Christ, were not they Works of the Law: For he himself hath said, that he came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it; were not the things which he performed in fulfilling the Law, VVorks of Grace? VVhat difference then is there between those VVorks, that are called VVorks of the Law, and those other that are called VVorks of Grace? So that it appears, that he who excludes the VVorks of the Law, excludes also the VVorks of Grace from Iustification. Though I acknowledge there is great difference between Wherein the difference between the Law and Grace consists.the Law and Grace, in respect of the manner of Doing, and the ends of their Offices: For what the Law exacts, that, Grace performs; but in respect of the things themselves, and the Actions unto which they are directed, seeing both the Law and the Grace of God are exercised in the same subject Matter, there is no difference between them.
The Law commands us to Love our Neighbour, and lays a Punishment on him, that disobeys. But Grace communicates Strength and Ability to perform what the Law commands. VVhichWhich when we perform, we are said to do not only a VVork of Grace, but also a VVork of the Law by Grace; so that it is a matter of small concernment, whether it be called a VVork of the Law, or a VVork of Grace, a VVork of our own, or a VVork of Faith. Therefore if the Scripture denies, That a man is justified, and attributes his Iustification to another cause, that is Faith, what should be inferr'd from hence, but that Man's Iustification comes neither by the VVorks of the Law, nor the VVorks of Grace. A Similitude.Iust as if a Man writing to his Friend, should say thus: This Benefit was procured for him by no Money, or charge of his own: VVhat matter is it, whether it was his own Money, or borrowed of some other Man, when the meaning of the VVriter was to signifie, that this Benefit, whatsoever it was, was not bought by any Price of the Receiver, but obtained by the free Bounty of the Giver.
So Paul desiring to set before the Eyes of all Men the boundless Immensity of Divine Grace toward Mankind, that they might behold and embrace it, expresly denies, The Distinction of Hosius.that Man is justified by the VVorks of the Law. But here the Distinction of Hosius (as I have said) presents it self. It is true, saith he, in respect of the Works that are of the Law, and belong to our own Free-will, which being attended with Imperfection, can avail nothing to Iustification: To which I Answer in a Word. Give then that Grace, which may furnish frail Nature with Strength, to yield perfect Obedience to the Law, and may restore us to perfect innocency in this Life, and you have won the cause. But in the mean while, let those Disputants consider, how many gross and pernicious Absurdities proceed from this kind of Doctrine; for hereby the infinite greatness of the free Grace and Mercy of God towards us is taken away and abolished, this also destroys our thankfulness to him for his goodness, and withholds Consolation from afflicted Consciences so that very great injury is done to him, that hath freely communicated so many and so great Benefits, and much greater injury is done to those, on whom they are bestowed: Hereby also it comes to pass, that there remains no Assurance in the Promise of God, no firmness in our Faith, no soundness in the Doctrine of Religion, nor Comfort or Refreshment in the Suffering of the Saints.
A second Argument out of St. 2. Arg. out of Paul. Rom. 3.Paul.
Being justified freely by his Grace, through the Redemption, which is in Christ Iesus, whom he hath set forth to be a Propitiation by Faith in his Blood, to declare his Righteousness at this time, that he may be Iust, and the Iustifier of him, that is of the Faith of Iesus Christ; and again, we reckon that a Man is justified by Faith without Works.
Unless the Hearts of these our Adversaries were fully set in them to pervert the ways of the Lord, it could not otherways be, but these clear and evident sayings of the Apostle must be sufficient to satisfie them, and prevail upon them to beware lest they kick against the Doctrine of the Apostles, and exalt themselves in their proud Imaginations, and vain Conceit of their own Righteousness, against such clear Manifestation of Divine Grace. But here the Roman Legions make a fresh incursion again. and the Ring-leader of them is Andraeas Vega, who fights against the Andraeas Vega.Righteousness of Faith: Whom there is no need of answering in this World: For he hath been removed out of this Life a great while since, that he might answer to God his Iudge. And because he denied, that he was justified by the Faith of Christ only, let him look to it, what he must answer his Iudge in that Iudgment, wherein he must give account of his whole Life, where of necessity he must either overcome or fall. If he overcome, where is the Truth of Scripture, in which it is said, God only overcomes, when he is judged? But if he fall, where then is the Righteousness of Works? What if David, so great a King and Prophet could not endure that God should enter with him into Iudgment. If Iob, a Man of so Holy a Life, yet durst not answer to one of a thousand. What will our Vega say, what will he bring? his Cowls, his Fastings, his lyings on the Ground, his Night Watches, his Vows, his Liturgick-Prayers, his Propitiatory-Masses, his Mumbled over Confessions, his Penances and Satisfactions? But who hath required these things at your Hands? Nay, but Isa. 1.he will defend himself, and take Sanctuary in the Law, which he hath fulfilled, not by the Strength of his own Free-will, but by the help of Divine Grace. Say you so? David, being guarded with as much Grace, as any Man was, yet sunk down under the weight of the Law of God. I suppose Iob wanted not Divine Grace, and yet he dares not appear before God in Iudgment. Aug. de perfect. just. But when the highest Lord shall sit on the Throne, who will boast that he hath a clean Heart? And who will boast that he is pure from his Sin? Unless it be those that Glory in their own Righteousness, and not in the Mercy of the Iudge?And will Vega nevertheless hope to bring such an account of his Life before the Tribunal of God; that if God strictly Mark it, and weigh it in the balance of his Iustice, he will not find more Sins than Merits therein?
But I need not ask him, what he will answer to God his Iudge: To whom I know he can make no satisfaction with all his inherent Righteousness: But this is that which I ask him, and not him only, but all the other Tridentines also, what they will answer the Apostle Paul, who openly pronounces a Curse both on Men and Angels, if any of them should dare to preach any other Gospel than he had preached. And what Gospel is it, that we have received by the preaching of Paul? Is it not the same that he taught so often in all his Epistles, with frequent Repetitions, and great Care and Diligence, and also confirmed it with Miracles? Now the summ of the Gospel, which he preached, is this: That Man is justified freely without Works by the Grace of God, through the Redemption, which is in Christ Iesus, whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation, through Faith in his What manner of Gospel Paul preached. Rom. 3.Blood. Is not this evident in the writings of Paul, &c. And yet Vega not being contented with this Gospel, nor deterred by the Curse which the Apostle denounced, hath arrived at so great an impudence, that he takes upon him to contradict, what the Apostle hath confirmed with so great Authority. The Apostle says, freely without Works, but he says, freely, but not without Works; but how .is it freely, if not without Works? Paul says, the Righteousness of God by the Faith of Iesus Christ, unto all and upon all that believe. But what says Vega and Hosius the enemy of Paul? This universal Term [all] saith he, is not here by the Apostle applied to every one of the kind, but to every kind of every one: So that the meaning is this: Righteousness is communicated to them that believe, whether they are Iews or Gentiles. Thus said Vega.
O Saint Paul, What Ignorance was this in thee, or unskilfulness of Speech? Thou mightst learn of Vega to speak more curiously, and to polish thy Stile according to the elegancy of the Roman Court, after this manner. The Righteousness of God by the Faith of Iesus Christ unto all, and not only all, but also unto every one, and upon every one present and to come, that believe, so that thereby you might comprehend not only the kinds of every one, but also every species of the kinds, and every individual of the Species. But that I may answer seriously to the vain-glorious Spaniard. It was your Duty, O Vega, to correct your Spirit of Errour, by the divinely inspired Words of Paul; and not to pride your self in such vain and empty Notions. For who sees not the clear and perspicuous simplicity of this Speech of Paul, whereby he proclaims a common Interest in Eternal Life and The popish comment about the universal Sign is overturned.Righteousness, not only to Iews and Gentiles in the general, but to every one of them in particular, whether they be Iews or Gentiles, that believe in Christ? Unless the Apostle had together with the universal Term set down the proper Mark of Distinction, that is, the peculiar Condition of attaining to Righteousness, you might have some colour of Reason for what you pretend. As for Example, when the Scripture speaks thus. They shall be all taught of God: God would have all Men to be saved, and come to the Knowledge of the Truth, in such a Case a Man may interpret the universal Term. (As Augustine did) in such a manner as you speak of: To wit, that it is not every one of all, but some particular Persons of all kind of Men and Nations, that attain unto the Knowledge Aug. de praedest. Sanct. lib. 1. cap. 8.of the Truth; but the Case is otherways in this Expression of Paul, where the Apostle together with the universal Term, adds also a peculiar and proper mark of Distinction: So that he doth not only make the Righteousness of God common to all in the general, but also expresly sets down a certain manner, whereby all do attain unto it, and to whom it peculiarly belongs; in these Words: By the Faith of Iesus Christ unto all, and upon all that believe. Whence of necessity it follows, that every Mans Righteousness consists in his believing in Christ by Faith unfeigned, and embracing of him according to the saying of the Prophet, Hab.The just shall live by Faith.
But let us again hear what the Prating Sophister hath to say for himself.
But whereas (saith he) the Iust shall live by Faith, and God is said to justifie Man by Faith, it doth not therefore follow by consequence, that Works are not necessary; for it is one thing to live by Faith, and another thing to live by Faith only; One thing to be justified by Faith, and another thing to be justified by Faith only; and if these Words [Faith only] are sometimes found in the Books of Catholick Doctors, by the Word (only) good Works are not excluded, but all other Sects and Ways to Salvation, except Faith only, and the Christian Religion. Thus said Vega.
To whom that I may answer, First, whereas he inferrs, that good Works are not necessary, because the Iust live by Faith, he may as reasonably gather Thistles No Man denies Works to be necessary.from the Vine; for this is no good consequence: The Iust shall live by Faith, therefore Works are not necessary: Which we also with Paul, do notwithstanding account to be necessary. And in the next place, whereas he says, that it is one thing to be justified by Faith, and another thing to be justified by Faith only: Though we grant this to be true, yet I see no great difference between these two Expressions: To be justified by Faith without Works, and to be justified by Faith only. Thirdly, Whereas he Cavils about the Word Only, what it excludes, and what it excludes not in the Books of the Catholicks, we do not trouble our selves much about that; but this is manifest in the Writings of Paul, that Works themselves, though otherways they are very excellent, and also necessary upon other accounts, yet in this free Gift of Evangelical Iustification, they are excluded without all Controversie. Though that also is an untruth, which he asserts of the Books of the Catholicks: For Basil (that I may produce one of them instead of a great many) expresses the same in manifest Words, taking away from every Man all occasion of glorying in his own Righteousness, and testifies that each one of us is justified by Faith in Christ only. And therefore he presently produces the Example of Paul to confirm the same, and Paul Glories (saith he) in the Contempt of his own Righteousness. I may also add the VVords of the same Basil upon the 32. Psalm, where giving a Description Basil. in Psal. 32.of a perfect Man, he says he is such a one as puts no trust in his own good deeds, but hath his whole hope and reliance on the Mercy of God alone. I think it is not amiss to joyn unto Basil his intimate Friend Nazianzen, who assents and subscribes to the words of Basil Nazian.on this manner: Faith only is our Righteousness.
But let us proceed unto the remaining Testimonies of Paul. For (as I have said before) Vega with his Associates heaps together eight Assertions for Iustifying Faith out of Paul.
But the other five Assertions of the Apostle, together with the Answers of the Adversaries, do follow in this order.
3 Assertion. Rom. 4. If Abraham was justified by the Works of the Law, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. For what says the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for 3 Argum. St. Paul, Rom. 4.Righteousness. To him that worketh, the Reward is not reckoned according to Grace, but according to Debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth in him that justifies the ungodly, Faith is imputed unto him for Righteousness. As David also declareth the blessedness of the man, to whom the Lord imputeth Righteousness without Works. And likewise Rom. 11. If it is by grace, then it is not of works; and if it is of works, then it is not of grace.
4 Assertion. Rom. 10. If thou shalt 4 Argum. Rom. 10.confess with thy mouth the Lord Iesus, and believest with thy heart, that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved; for with the heart man believeth unto Righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation. For the Scripture saith, Whoever believeth in him, shall not be ashamed. There is no difference between Iew and Greek: For every one that calleth upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
5 Assertion. Acts 13. Be it known 5 Argum. Acts 13.unto you, Brethren, that through this Man remission of sins is preached unto you, that through him every one that believes may be justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses.
6 Assertion. Acts 10. To him all 6 Argum. Acts 10.the Prophets bear witness; That all that believe in him, do receive through his name remission of sins.
7 Assertion. 1 Cor. 3. For other 7 Argum. 1 Cor. 3.foundation can no man lay, than that which is already laid, that is, Christ Iesus. But if any man build upon this foundation Gold or Silver, &c. If any man's work is burnt, he shall suffer damage, but himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire, &c.
8 Assertion. The eight Argument 8 Argum.is gathered from many Examples of those, who were justified by Faith only, and admitted unto Baptism: As three thousand of those that believed at the Preaching of Peter on the day of Pentecost, were baptized, Acts 2. and the Eunuch, whom Philip baptized, Acts 2. The Iaylor and his family, whom Paul baptized, Acts 16. &c. By which Examples it may be rationally proved, that the Apostles judged Faith to be sufficient to qualifie a man for the receiving of Baptism, and therefore also for receiving of Iustification.
By these proofs of Scripture this Doctrine is sufficiently confirmed, which attributes the Iustification of the ungodly, not to Works joyned with Faith, but to Faith simply without Works. But because I am not now dealing with men of moderate Principles, but with cunning Sophisters, let us for a while bring the Apostle out of the Church into the School, that he may fight hand to hand against them with their own weapons, and confute Arguments out of S. Paul.them with their own Arguments.
The Righteousness of the Law or of Works, and the Righteousness of Faith, are so contrary to one another, that they cannot consist together; but the one of necessity makes void the other.
But we look for Righteousness by Faith.
Therefore not by the Righteousness of Works.
Again.
If according to Grace, then it is not according to Debt.
But according to Grace it is imputed to us for Righteousness.
Therefore not according to Rom. 4.Debt.
Again.
That whereunto blessedness is ascribed, to the same also is ascribed Iustification.
Our blessedness is attributed unto the remission of sins.
Therefore our Iustification also Rom. 10.is attributed to the same.
Another Argument.
If Works are necessary to Salvation, then Salvation would not consist in the belief of the heart, and the confession of the mouth.
But our Salvation consists in confessing the Lord Iesus with the mouth, and believing in him with the heart.
Therefore Works are not necessary Romans 4.unto Salvation.
Another.
If Works had been conducible to justifie Abraham before God, then he should have had cause of glorying before God, Rom. 4.
But Abraham had nothing wherein he could glory before God.
Therefore Works do not avail Acts 13.to Iustification.
Another.
By the Law of Moses no man can be justified.
All Doctrine of Works belongs to the Law of Moses.
Therefore no Salvation comes by any Doctrine of our Morals, or Works.
Another.
Whosoever builds upon Christ 1 Cor. 3.the Foundation, Gold, or Hay or Stubble, shall be saved, either without fire, or through fire.
Therefore Faith only without Works procures Salvation.
An Induction from Examples.
The Scriptures tell us of many An argument taken from Examples. Acts 2. Acts 8.that were justified and baptized without making any mention of Works. On the day of Pentecost three thousand were baptized; Acts 2. The Eunuch was baptized by Philip; Acts 8. The Iaylor with his family; Acts 16. The sinful woman, Acts 16. Luke 7. Luke 18. Luke 23. Luke 18.whom faith saved; Luke 7. The prodigal Son; Luke 18. The Thief on the right hand; Luke 23. The Publican; Luke 18. And a multitude of others obtained Salvation without any condition of Works.
Therefore, only Faith in Christ justifies the humble and broken hearted sinner.
Unto these things so very evident and clear, what do the Adversaries object? with what subtilties and distinctions do they defend their Popish Errour of Inherent Righteousness? Inherent Righteousness.Be pleased to hearken; though what they say is fitter for laughter and derision than instruction. And first as touching the distinction, that Paul makes between him that worketh, and him that worketh not; between Mercenary works, and Iustification imputed without Works; between Debt and Grace; between the Righteousness of the Law, and the Righteousness of Faith, let us observe how those Sophisters cloud and darken it with their vain janglings. For whereas the Apostle argues on this manner from the Rule of contraries. If it is of grace, then it is not of works; but if it be of works, then it is not of grace, &c. If the Inheritance is by the Law, then it is not of the Promise, &c. And again, Rom. 10. Gal. 3.distinguishing between the Righteousness of the Law, and the Righteousness of the Gospel, he so divides the one from the other, that difference appears evident. Of the Righteousness, that comes by the Law, saith the Apostle, the Law it self speaks on this manner; He that Rom. 10.doth these things shall live in them. But what saith he of the Righteousness that is of Faith? If thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Iesus. and believe with thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. What is more evident than this distinction? what words are more perspicuous? But what is there that can be so A Sophistical Pretence.well conceived in the mind, or expressed in words, but it may be wrested by the wrong Interpretations of such men as take delight to set themselves in opposition against the Truth? for thus they A Sophistical Objection.speak. Are not pious works the gifts of God? Doth not Charity shed abroad in the hearts of the Saints by the Holy Ghost, inflame the minds of Believers, and provoke them to all things that are honest and agreeable to the Will of God? Which Works of Charity, when God crowns and rewards them in us, they are not so much our works, as his gifts; for they are not our works, or performed by any strength of our own, but they are the works of How Grace justifies according to the Opinion of the Papists.God, which we perform by his help, and they should be wholly attributed to his Grace. Whence also they oft-times are called in the Scriptures by the name of Divine Grace. As Paul also, bearing witness of himself, says, By the grace of God I am what I am; for this grace of working not being attained unto by any human industry, or strength of our Nature, nor any precedent obedience to the Law, or works and merits of our own, but only by Faith in the merits of Christ. Therefore Paul says well, That we are justified by faith without works; speaking of such works as belong to nature, but not Works considered in a twofold respect, as they are either of grace or of nature.to grace; which are a man's own works, and not God's; and are called the works of the Law, not of Faith. But by the works of the Law, the Apostle understands such works as are performed by a man's own free will, or by the direction of the Law and Nature only, without the assistance of Grace. And this is the meaning of Paul, (as those Popish Doctors would have it) when he distinguishes between Iustification by Works, and Iustification by Grace or Faith: So that if it be by grace, then it is not of works, to wit, such works as are done by Nature, and not by Grace; but if it is of works, then it is not of grace; for then grace (saith he) would not be grace; which opposition must be thus understood, according to the Opinion of those Popish Teachers; so that grace doth not wholly overthrow all works, but those only, that are performed by the strength of Nature without the assistance of Grace. But contrarily, the pious works which proceed from Grace and Faith, their Righteousness is so far from being made void by Grace, or the Righteousness Aug. de spirttu & litera, cap. 30.of Faith, that it is rather thereby confirmed. For the Law (as Augustin speaks) is not made void by Faith, but rather established; for Faith obtains the Grace, whereby the Law is fulfilled. Therefore whereas Paul distinguishes between the Righteousness of Works, and the Righteousness of Faith. This is the Answer the Catholick Faction gives to this distinction. In this place the Righteousness of the Law, and the Righteousness of Faith, are not set in opposition one against another; (as they express themselves) but Righteousness by the Law, or in the Law, is that which is opposed to the Righteousness of Faith. And they say, The Righteousness What is righteousness by the Law. The righteousness of the Law, righteousness by the Law, or in the Law.that is in the Law, or by the Law, is that obedience which is performed to the Law by natural strength without the assistance of Grace: For these things differ not a little from one another; for the Righteousness of the Law is one thing, and the Righteousness by the Law, or in the Law, is another thing. From which distinction they draw this Inference; That the Righteousness of Faith, or by Faith, doth not exclude the Righteousness of the Law, but is exercised about it, and fulfils it: In as much as the Law signifies Obedience to the Commandments, which faith by obtaining grace performs: And because the Grace of God performs the Law, that is the certain cause why the works of the Law, which are the gifts of God, ought not to be excluded from Iustification, just as Faith it self cannot be excluded, because it is the gift of God, as much as the Works of the Law and Charity, which are infused by the Grace of God. This is the entangling Sophistry whereby Andraeas Vega, and others of his Association persuade themselves that they can break through the force of all the former Arguments.