Exposition of Romans 4, Exposition · Verse 3, 4, 5
VER. 3, 4, 5.
For what ſaith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteouſneſs: Now to him that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt: but to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that juſtfieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteouſneſs.
VVHether the words be conceived as proof of the Minor, or of the principall concluſion, it is not much materiall, the iſſue being all one: The argument proving it, is taken from the manner, or meanes of Abrahams juſtification, which was meerly gracious; the Scripture affirms, that Abrahams believing, was counted to him for righteouſneſs, Gen. 15.6. Ergo, he had no cauſe of boaſting; becauſe, that not to the worker, but to the believer only, faith is imputed unto righteouſneſs.
The conſequence of this Enthymeme, hath its proof from the place of unlikes; That the force of the proofe may be better conceived, let us view a little the terms of the compariſon: The perſons compared are; he that worketh, and he that worketh not but believeth: The things wherein they are compared as unlike, is the manner or means whereby theſe ſeverally obtain righteouſneſs: The worker that is, he that hath works to be juſtified by, he hath righteouſneſs reckoned to him as wages; not granted out of favour, but paid as of debt: He that hath no works but believes, hath righteouſneſs counted to him, not of debt, but of favour; as if he had ſaid, that yee may ſee how Abrahams having faith counted righteouſneſs, left him no cauſe of boaſting; obſerve this difference, betwixt the worker, and believer, viz. He that hath works to bring before God, hath righteouſneſs aſcribed unto him of debt, not of grace; becauſe that by his works, he hath purchaſed righteouſneſs as wages, and ſo by conſequence hath cauſe of boaſting: him that juſtifieth the ungodly, its otherwiſe; this faith is of grace imputed to righteouſneſs; Abraham therefore being of this latter ſort, not a worker, but a believer, and by conſequence, hath faith of grace counted to him for righteouſneſs; ſurely had no cauſe of boaſting, for this matter of juſtification: This, having the better judgment of the learned, I take to be the naturall reſolution of the text.
Let us now turn back to the words, and enquire their ſenſe, and what inſtructions they afford for our uſe.
In verſe the third, are two things.
1. The Judg whom Paul appeales unto.
2. The ſentence of the judg.
For what ſaith the Scripture] Holy Apoſtle, thou forgotteſt thy ſelf, that didſt appeal to Scripture to give ſentence, in a matter of dobut: For we are taught by men of unerring ſpirits; the Scripture is Mutus Index, a dumbe judg, not able to utter what may reſolue us in matter of doubt. Now, how much better were it that theſe men were dumb, then to uſe their tongues in manner ſo blaſpheouſly derogatory, to him that inſpires the Scripture: For, be it that in property of ſpeech the Scripture is ſpeechleſs, yet contains it not directions ſufficient to determine doubts? or needs it any more, then mans minde to conceive, and his tongue to publiſh what it contains? Or, hath the Church any other authority about the Scripture, ſave only to declare what Gods Spirit therein ſpeaks? Muſt the ſenſe needs be locked up in the Popes breaſt, and the Scripture taught to mean only what he determines?
2. Is it ſo ſtrange, and abhorrent from common language, that the Scripture ſhould be ſaid to ſpeak? In common aſſemblies what more uſuall? How ſaith your record? What ſaith the Law?
3. How ever, I hope, Gods Spirit may be ſaid in Scripto ſpeak to his Church, without any great foreign, inasmuch as he doth therein utter what his meaning is: And writing, doth the office of ſpeech thus far, that it ſerves to expreſs the conception of our minde: As David ſaid of his tongue, it was the pen of a ready writer, Pſal. 45.1. So may we ſay of the pens, that the Lords holy ſcribes uſed, they were the tongues of a ready ſpeaker.
Sitacet Chriſtus, quid ſibi volunt haec Evangelia? quid ſibi volunt voces Apoſtolicae? quid cantica Pſalmorum? quid eloquia Prophetarum? in his enim omnibus Chriſtus non tacet: S. Auguſtin. In Johan. tractat. 4.
The Scripture?] Fitly doth Paul conſult with Scripture, as the only Competent Iudg in-queſtions of his nature; without which, if we ſearch for reſolution in matters of this quality, we run into a Labyrinth: The adviſe that Conſtantine gave to the fathers in the Nicene Councell, ſhould have place with us; ſumamus ex dictis divini ſpiritûs explicationes quaeſtionum; Mark his reaſon; Evangelici enim, Thedoret. Hiſt. lib. 1. cap. 7.& Apoſtolici li…ri, nec non Antiquorum Prophetarum oracula, planè inſtruunt nos ſenſu Numinis: And truth is, howſoever in matters of Morality, there be to be found ſome good directious in nature; yet in this, and like matters touching reconciliation with God, and means of juſtification before him; how utterly not only blind, but oppoſite to what truth teacheth, is nature: yea, it may not be denied that the Fathers them ſelves, have ſome of them too naturall conceits in this buſineſs; and, if my judgment and obſervation in their writings be any thing, (as it is not much,) the attentive Reader ſhall finde much of the popiſh plot of juſtification, to be framed out of the errours and miſpriſions of ſome Ancients; here therefore eſpecially let it have place, that the Prophet adviſeth, to the Law, and to the Teſtimony, Iſai. 8.20.
See we now the ſentence of this Judg; What ſaith the Scripture? This, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteouſneſs.
In which ſentence, we have two particulars obſervable.
Firſt Abrahams act, with the object, he believed God.
Secondly, The fruit, or benefit thereof; It was counted to him for righteouſneſs.
Touching the firſt, Abrahams act, he believed God: Let us here a little largely, enquire what is the nature of juſtifying faith; ſo much the rather, The nature of juſtifying faith explained.becauſe the controverſie is famous, betwixt us and our adverſaries.
Concerning it, two queſtions ſhall be handled:
Firſt, whether it be an [aſſent] to the promiſe; Or, an [Affiance] rather, and truſting in the promiſe: Or, in plainer terms; whether this [to believe] in this queſtion, ſignifie, to give Credence to God ſpeaking; or elſe, to put confidence in God.
The opinions both of them have great Authors, both Popiſh, and Proteſtant: For our better underſtanding, it ſhall not be amiſs to fetch the conſideration ſomewhat higher; even from the generall notion of theſe two habits, as they are conceived by Philoſophers and others, according to reaſon.
Faith therefore or beliefe, hath this generall deſcription: It is an habit of the underſtanding, inclining us to a firm, and undoubtfull aſſent to ſomething as truth, for the authority and credit of the ſpeaker, or witneſs. I call it firſt an habit of the underſtanding, becauſe, the proper object thereof is truth, and the act thereof an aſſent to truth; or, a perſwaſion and acknowledgment of the truth propounded: The difference ſtands, partly in the meaſure of aſſenting, partly in the cauſe moving to aſſent: for as touching abſolute doubtfulneſs, when the minde hangs in aequilibrio, giving no aſſent either way, its quite oppoſite to the nature of faith.
Now, the aſſent of the minde hath three degrees:
The firſt is, when the minde hath ſome, though weak, inclination, and hath a propenſion to aſſent to a thing propounded, perhaps moved by ſome ſlight ſign, or by apprehenſion of poſſible truth; ſome call this ſuſpition, more fitly perhaps, conjecture.
The Second is, when the aſſent is more ſtable, and reſolute; yet not without fear, that the contrary may be true: this called opinion.
The Third and higheſt, is a perfect and peremptory acknowledgment, that the thing propounded is of infallible and certain truth; of this laſt ſort, is the aſſent that faith yields.
Now, this certain and perfect aſſent is of four ſorts, according to a fourfold means ſwaying the minde: The firſt is, that which is cauſed by ſenſe; as when the minde acknowledgeth a thing for truth, becauſe it hath received perfect intelligence from the ſight, hearing, &c. or, other ſenſes not hindered or deceived: The ſecond is, that which is cauſed out of the clear light and evidence of the thing, without arguments of any kinde to perſwade it; as in principles clear of themſelves, and that need no demonſtration or evidence, but their own light to convince; as that, omne totum majus eſt ſuâ parte: The third is, that which is cauſed by certain diſcourſe, and demonſtrative arguments, which they call ſcience: The laſt is, that which is procured by the authority and credit of him, that propounds a thing to be received for truth; which authority (being without exception,) breeds perſwaſion as firm, as any can be raiſed by argument, ſenſe, or if there be any other means more forcible with the minde to perſwade: And of this laſt ſort is faith.
Now Fiducia, confidence or affiance, is that habit, or act of the will, whereby we hopefully repoſe our ſelves upon the power, truth, and goodneſs of the promiſer, for receiving of ſome good thing promiſed.
It differs from belief. 1. In the proper ſeat; belief being in the underſtanding, affiance in the will. 2. In the object which its carried unto, which is bonum, not verum. 3. As the effect from the cauſe; this repoſing of our ſelves on, ariſing from a perſwaſion of the power, truth, goodneſs of him we truſt in: And of the general notion of theſe two qualities thus far.
Their difference we ſhall better yet ſee, if we conſider the divers phraſes of ſpeech, wherein the Scripture expreſſeth their actions, fittingly to that uſuall diſtinction received from Auſtin, putting difference betwixt theſe two acts of; S. Aug. Trict. in Ioh. 29. and Serm. 61, de verb. Domini.Credere deo, & Credere in deum: The firſt being the act of beliefe, properly ſo called; the other expreſſing the act of that other habit which we call fiduciam.
To apply this Praemiſſa to the purpoſe; the queſtion is, of whether ſort that faith which we call juſtifying is; whether a giving credit to God promiſing us remiſſion of ſins in Chriſt; or a relying on his mercy, and the merits of Chriſt, for pardon of ſins and life everlaſting.
The ſeverall opinions ſhall be propounded and examined, that the truth may the better appear.
Papiſts, well nigh all that I have ſeen, Reſolve of the former, and thus determine; Bellarm. de Iuſtif. lib. 1. cap, 5. & 9. See Kemnit. Exam. lib. 1. cap. de Fide juſtific.That Faith juſtifying is no ſuch Affiance, or Confidence in Gods mercy, as Proteſtants teach; but a general aſſent to all things contained in the Word of God, and a perſwaſion of their Truth.
Of our own Divines, ſome not of loweſt rank, judg, that it is meerly an aſſent to the truth of the Goſpell, or Evangelicall promiſe made to us in Chriſt, And they would thus be underſtood; not that it excludes beliefe of the reſt of Gods word, but that (as it juſtifies,) it reſpects only the Goſpel: And further, this aſſent they make of two ſorts; one generall, whereby we believe the Goſpel to be true; another ſpeciall, whereby we believe it to be true to (us.)
A third ſort there are, that make it meerly an affiance or confidence in God, and his Chriſt for pardon of ſins, and ſalvation.
The laſt is of them, that make it partly an aſſent particular, partly affiance; of theſe, let us enquire which comes neareſt unto the truth.
As touching that of Papiſts, making it only a generall aſſent to the truth of the whole word of God, without any particularlizing either of the object, or of the aſſent:
The reaſons are forcible againſt it.
Firſt, For that by this means, juſtification is extended to ſundry reprobates, yea, after a ſort, to divells; for if this be the faith that juſtifyeth, namely, whereby men aſſent to the truth of the word of God; Iam. 2.19.then muſt all in whom ſuch faith is, be partakers of juſtification: but only the *Rom. 8.30.predeſtinate are juſtified; reprobates and divells not ſo; Ergo.
Secondly, Our next reaſon is, from the effects of faith juſtifying; one ſpeciall whereof is, that it makes our ſervice all *Heb. 11.6.acceptable to God, through Ieſus Chriſt: Now, how a generall aſſent to the truth of Gods word, without a particular perſwaſion of his love to us in Chriſt, ſhould thus ſweeten our ſervices; I would have them explain, ſith none pleaſeth, 1 Ioh. 4.19.but what iſſues from love of God; and that again flowes from our perſwaſion of Gods love to us in Chriſt.
Add unto this, thoſe other gracious effects or faith juſtifying; as, that it breeds peace of conſcience, Rom. 5.1. Patience, yea joy in afflictions, under hope certain of glory; boldneſs of appearing before God in prayers, &c. yea in the day of judgment: Can theſe be imagined to flow from generall faith? Theſe, and many the like reaſons, ſufficiently overthrow that dream of generall faith.
Let us examine theſe Reaſons; the ſumme of them I will briefly propound.
The Firſt lyes thus; the faith deſcribed by the Apoſtle, Heb. 11. is not a ſpeciall perſwaſion of Gods ſpeciall mercy, or an affiance therein; but only a generall aſſent, to the truth of the whole word of God. But the faith there deſcribed is juſtifying faith: Ergò, Juſtifying faith is not a perſwaſion of Gods ſpeciall merciemercy, or a confidence therein but a general aſſent to the truth of the whole word of God?
Anſw. To the minor I thus anſwer; that its eaſily confeſſed, that the Apoſtle in that whole Chapter, deſcribes that faith that juſtifies: But, whether he intend an exact definition of the nature of it, (as it juſtifieth) or rather a ſetting out, and commendation thereof, by the effects and properties, is the queſtion: And its apparent, that the Apoſtles purpoſe, is not ſo much to give us an exact definition of the nature of it; as to exhort to continue therein, by arguments drawn from the properties, and wonderfull effects that were wrought by it in the Saints that have gone before us, as appears there; and in Hebr. 10. and 12.1.2. For, firſt, think we the Apoſtle ſo ill an Artiſt, as to compoſe his definition of Terms amoſt all figurative as, ver. 1. if he deſired exactly to ſet down the nature of it to our underſtanding? Beſides, that ſome of the effects aſcribed there to faith, are particular, and almoſt perſonally belonging to the Saints there mentioned, and which we cannot but fooliſhly expect to be wrought by our faith: Now had the Apoſtle there intended to deſcribe that faith that juſtifieth, ſo as to ſhew us the nature thereof, (as it juſtifieth) impertinently, had thoſe works as miraculous, and of perſonall obedience been there inſerted.
To the Major, it is denied: Even the faith there deſcribed, is a ſpeciall perſwaſion of Gods ſpeciall mercy, and an affiance therein: For what though there be no mention made of any ſuch ſpecialty, either of the perſwaſion or of the object, or of the affiance; cannot it therefore be ſuch, becauſe its there deſcribed by effects and properties? The Apoſtle, 1. Cor. 13, deſcribes unto us at large true Chriſtian charity, by Neceſsity, Effects, perpetuall endurance: ſhall we now ſay, that Charity is no benevolous, or wel-wiſhing affection towards our neighbour; becauſe there is no expreſs mention made thereof, where it is purpoſely deſcribed? Adde unto this, That this ſpeciall perſwaſion of Gods love in Chriſt, and affiance in his mercy, is there neceſſarily included; it being impoſſible, that any of theſe works of obedience could have been, either ſo couragiouſly undertaken, or ſo acceptably performed, had they not had even ſuch faith as we now enquire of.
Their ſecond reaſon lies thus: The faith which Chriſt required, commended, exhorted unto, approved with miracles, was onelyonly a generall aſſent to the truth of the word of God; as Matth. 9. and 16. Luke 7. Ioh. 1. &c. But that faith which Chriſt ſo required and commended, &c. was faith juſtifying; Ergò, Juſtifying faith is onelyonly a generall aſſent to the truth of the word of God; or, as Bellarmine himſelf inferrs the concluſion, Kemnit. qua ſuprà.it hath for the object ſomething elſe beſides Gods ſpeciall Mercy. Anſw. If that be the concluſion, it was never denied by our Divines, but that the faith that juſtifieth, hath for the object, not ſpeciall mercy onelyonly, but the whole word of God: If that therefore be the concluſion, the Adverſary proves what is not denied: For we grant (if they will needs have it) that its the ſame faith which believes both the Hiſtory in generall, and which receives, and reſts on the ſpeciall merciemercy of God for juſtification.
But the queſtions be, 1. Whether generall faith alone ſuffice to juſtification? 2. Whether the object of faith juſtifying (as it is juſtifying) be the promiſes of the Goſpel, as they concern us? The firſt of theſe we deny; the ſecond we avow, and prove, ut ſuprà: there is none of us, that ever denied, but that its the ſame faith, which aſſents to the truth of the word of God, in generall, and which juſtifieth us in the ſight of God: But if we ſpeak of faith (as its juſtifying) ſo we ſay, it reſpects particularly the promiſe of the Goſpel. I illuſtrate what I mean by this ſimilitude: Its the ſame ſoul, whereby a man lives, moves, exerciſeth ſenſe, and uſeth reaſon; but yet, if the queſtion be, What it is in the ſoul that forms a man to his particular nature: We ſay, its the ſoul, not as it gives life, motion or ſenſe; but as it uſeth reaſon: Even ſo, &c. Now to the proofs of the adverſe part, I anſwer that the Major is untrue; The faith which Chriſt required, was not onelyonly, a generall aſſent to the truth of the word of God, concerning his perſon, power, offices &c. but principally, it was particular aſſent, and affiance alſo in him, as the Meſſiah promiſed: as by view of ſome of the principall obligations will appear: For, think we the acknowledgment of this propoſition in generall; [That Jeſus Chriſt is the Son of God] is that, See Joh. 20. and 1 Ioh. 5.that juſtifieth and ſaveth: Then how fail Divells of juſtification? yea, and of eternall life, that ſenſibly acknowledg him to be Jeſus, the Son of the living God, Mark 2. Beſides, what means our Saviour ſo often to invite us unto him; and propounding the condition of eternall life, to utter it in a phraſe importing affiance? as, Ioh. 6.40. yea, particular acknowledgment of him to be a Saviour unto us.
Laſtly, Thus I reaſon, A Pari; other parts and concluſions of Scripture propounded generally are to be believed, not only as they concern the generall, but particularly as having their truth in us: Why not then, theſe, that propound remiſſion of ſins, righteouſneſs and ſalvation, to be obtained by Chriſt? For inſtance, when the Scripture teacheth, that every one is accurſed that keeps not the Law; that the wages of ſin is death. &c. Binds it not me alſo to believe, that I alſo for (my) ſins, am by nature ſubject to the curſe? that the proper wages for (my) ſins, is death. When it propounds promiſes of temporall bleſſings as it doth to them that ſeeks Gods Kingdome, and his righteouſneſs: ought not I to acknowledg this promiſe to belong to (me,) and to place confidence in God for the performance? Why then, when the promiſe of remiſſion of ſins is made to believers, binds it no (me,) and every believer, to aſſume that (my) ſins are pardoned? when it teacheth Chriſt to be the Saviour of the world, and Author of Righteouſneſs to thoſe that obey him; ſhould I not ſay, that Chriſt requiring generall faith, intends alſo a particular applying of this generall to my ſelf, for my comfort and ſalvation? More I add not in this kinde.
Two paradoxes only of Bellarmine, Bellarm. l. 1. de juſtific. cap. 8.I will briefly propound and ſo leave them:
The firſt is, that faith is juſtifying, though it have no reſpect to Gods ſpeciall mercy.
The Second, That it is not juſtifying, if perhaps it have reſpect thereto.
The proofes have in them the quinteſſence of Ieſuitical acumen: The Leprous mans faith, Mark 1. was a juſtifying faith; and yet had no reſpect to ſpeciall mercy. Ergò, Faith not reſpecting ſpeciall mercy is juſtifying. Anſw. The propoſition needs proof; inasmuch as many had faith for obtaining Miracles, that had none at all, touching the perſon of the Meſſiah, Luk. 17. 2. How proves he, that he had no ſpeciall faith, concerning remiſſion of ſins by Chriſt? What, becauſe he doubts of his will, for his cure! As who ſay, there may not be ſpeciall faith, touching pardon of ſins, even where there is doubt of obtaining ſome remporall bleſſing: the one having a promiſe for Gods children to reſt on; the other not ſo, but with limitation to expediency.
But will you ſee how he proves, that faith is not juſtifying, if it have reſpect to ſpeciall mercy: The Phariſee having it, even becauſe he had it, was not juſtified? Ergò, Anſw. And, was the Phariſees affiance in Gods ſpeciall mercy, the Reaſon, why he was not juſtified? Nay, rather the vain boaſting of his own righteouſneſs; as appears by the drift of the parable expreſſed, Luk. 18.9. Vacuus proindè rediit, Bernard. de Annuc. Ser. 3. ad calcem.quia plenitudinem ſimulavit, as S. Bernard: and therefore failed he of juſtification; not becauſe he truſted on Gods ſpeciall mercy to obtain it, but for that he truſted in himſelf that he had it.
Some Ancients let us hear in this point, Bernard de Annuc. Serm. 1.ſaith Bernard: Si credis pecoata tua non poſſe deleri, niſi ab eo cui ſoli peccâſti, & in quem peccatum non cadit, benè facis: Sed adde adhuc, ut & hoc credas, quia per ipſum (Tibi) peccata donantur; hoc eſt, Teſtimonium, quod perhibit in corde noſtro ſpiritus ſanctus, dicens; dimiſſa ſunt tibi Poccata Tua.
The Second opinion, touching the nature of ſaith juſtifying, (as it is juſtifying) is this, that juſtifying faith is an aſſent not ſo much to the truth of the whole word of God, as to the promiſes of the Goſpell, and that, as having their truth in (us.) The difference betwixt this and the Popiſh opinion, ſtands in two things.
Firſt in the object, which they make the whole word of God; theſe only the Doctrine of the Goſpel.
Secondly, In the manner of aſſenting, which they make generall, without any particular applying to our ſelves theſe particulars: They conſent in this, that it is an act of the underſtanding, rather then of the will; perſwaſion rather then conſidence; aſſent, rather then affiance: And for this they have theſe Reaſons.
Firſt, For that the faith that juſtifieth, is ſo often expreſſed in a phraſe importing aſſent, or giving credit, as in this Scripture; Abraham believed God; that is, gave credit to God promiſing to be his reward, &c. Similia vide, Mark 1.15.
Their Second Reaſon is, becauſe the object thereof, is uſually made the propoſitions of the Goſpel, and that which they call Terminum complexum; or, as Thomas ſpeaks, ſomething propounded; per modum enuntiabilis: or, to ſpeak more plainly, and agreeably to the phraſe of Scripture; a teſtimony which God gives in the word, and in the heart; See Rom. 8.16 Gal. 2.20.
A Third Reaſon, Becauſe it ſeems ſtrange, that faith juſtifying ſhould have divers ſeats, or ſubjects; The underſtanding as an aſſent; the will as an affiance: From hence and the like reaſons, it is concluded, that faith juſtifying is an aſſent, rather then affiance.
Now, that it hath not for the proper object, the whole word of God; but rather, only the doctrine of the goſpel, (as it is juſtifying) theſe Reaſons evince.
Firſt, For that our Saviour preſcribing the act, limits out alſo the object, and makes it the Goſpel, rather then any other part of the Scripture, Mark 1.15.
Secondly, Kemn it. in Exam. part 1. de Fide juſtiſic.For that in other parts of the word of God; faith findes not what it may lay hold on, for reconciliation, remiſſion of ſins, and juſtification but only in the Goſpel; that is, the word of reconciliation; there is Chriſt the Mediatour propounded, there remiſſion of ſins promiſed.
For the Third branch, that its a particular aſſent; particular I mean, not only in reſpect of the Subject, but of the Object, Examples prove, Gal. 2.20. Chriſt loved (me,) gave himſelf for (me:) The generalls of the Goſpel thus particularized, are that which faith juſtifying (as it is juſtifying) reſpects; by this faith Paul lived.
Secondly, In point of believing, there can elſe be no difference betwixt faith of Reprobates and that of the Elect; betwixt faith of Divells, and of juſtified men: For, its an idle tenant of theirs, that they make charity the form of faith; a gift diſparate from it not in act and office only, but in the very ſubject and ſeat where it reſides: More ſee to this purpoſe, Suprà.
The Third opinion is of them, that make it only an affiance and reſting on God, and his Chriſt, as propounded in the goſpel for juſtification, and remiſsion of ſins. And for this opinion theſe Reaſons are brought.
Firſt, For that the phraſe wherein uſually it is expreſſed, imports rather confidence and affiance, then aſſent or perſwaſion, as Ioh. 12. & alibi: But finde we it not, as often expreſſed in a phraſe, that ſignifies aſſenting?
Secondly, Becauſe, they cannot elſe finde a difference betwixt faith juſtifying, and that which may be in hypocrites and divells: What ſay they to that particularity of aſſenting, Gal. 2.20. and appropriating the generals to our ſelves; a thing as impoſſible for hypocrites or divels to perform, as that other of affiance; and what to that, Eph. 3.12. that makes this confidence a fruit of faith juſtifying.
The laſt tenant is of thoſe, that make it partly an aſſent particular; partly an affiance; and, for that opinion are theſe Reaſons.
Firſt, For that the phraſes of ſpeech wherein it is expreſſed, ſeem to import both.
Secondly, They are both required as neceſſary to juſtification; not only as diſpoſitions, but after a ſort as ingredients; not only as qualifications of the perſon, but our means of juſtifications.
Thirdly, Becauſe they concur in every perſon juſtified, as he is juſtified.
Now, Of theſe three laſt, which is the truth, I dare not peremptorily determine: For my part, I profeſs my ſelf to think with them, that make faith juſtifying and aſſent, rather then affiance; eſpecially for that place Eph. 3.12. Howbeit, I may not deny but that the affiance ſpoken of, in an inſeparable companion of that aſſent; perhaps alſo, as conferring ſomething to juſtification: yet this I am well aſſured of. Firſt, Faith properly ſo called, hath its ſeat in the underſtanding. Secondly, According to Etymology, imports a perſwaſion. Thirdly, In uſe of Scripture, moſt frequently ſignifieth giving credit, rather then putting confidence. Fourthly, And, if there be any truth in that our Divines affirm, concerning the office of faith, [in applying Chriſt to our ſelves,] moſt likely it ſhould be an aſſent, rather then affiance; applying or appropriating of Chriſt to us, being no more but this; an acknowledgment that Chriſt is ſuch to us, as the Scripture deſcribes him, a Redeemer, a Saviour, a Mediatour of reconcilement, and Author of righteouineſs and ſalvation; which acknowledgment is an act of the underſtanding, not of the will. Fiftly Beſides this, the oppoſites or defects of faith, are apparently in the underſtanding, and import defect of aſſenting, as doubting. Sixtly, The perfection and foreign (as I may term it) of this grace, is foreign, fulneſs of aſſent and perſwaſion; the grace it ſelf for ſubſtance, therefore, is of the ſame nature.
Let us view a little how the Apoſtle in this Chapter, expreſſeth that faith of Abraham, which to him was imputed to righteouſneſs: In this verſe its thus enunciated, Abraham believed God; that is, gave credit and aſſent, to what the Lord promiſed touching a ſeed; and verſ. 22. He was fully aſſured, or perſwaded, that he which had promiſed, was able to perform: and this perſwaſion was imputed to him for righteouſneſs: All which laid together ſway my judgment to theirs, that teach faith juſtifying to be ſuch an aſſent, as in the third opinion is expreſſed, rather then affiance; and of the nature of faith juſtifying, thus far. There remains yet one thing, before we proceed to the fruit of Abrahams faith, expreſſed in the next member: And that is, to enquire how fitly this teſtimony is alledged, to the purpoſe of juſtification; the promiſe being in ſhew only of a temporall bleſſing; namely, a numerous ſeed, and no mention made of Chriſt the Mediator, whom faith juſtifing (as it is ſuch) reſpects. Anſw. Anſwers here are diverſly conceived; the likelieſt I will propound.
Firſt Its thus anſwered, that Abrahams faith whereby he believed the promiſes, both touching the reward, verſ. 2. and touching the ſeed, cannot be imagined to have been, without reſpect to Chriſt the Mediator; inasmuch as all the the promiſes of God, are yea, and Amen in Chriſt, 2 Cor. 1.20. That is, have their accompliſhment and ratification in, and for Chriſt.
Secondly, That the ſeed mentioned in the promiſe, is rather to be underſtood of the ſpirituall ſeed, then of the carnall poſterity of Adam; and the head thereof is Chriſt, as the Apoſtle interprets, Gal. 3.16.
The fruit of Abrahams faith follows: [It was counted to him for righteouſneſs.]
The difference in the reading out of the Hebrew originall, is little or nothing: Hebrew thus; he imputed, or counted it for righteouſneſs: out of the ſeptuagint, its rendred poſitively, it was counted for righteouſneſs.
For the ſenſe of the words, if it be enquired, What was it, that was counted righteouſneſs? Its anſwered, faith; as appears both by the text, Gen. 15.6. as alſo, verſ. 5.
Was counted unto him for righteouſneſs] For better underſtanding the text, let us conſider the word; firſt ſeverally and alone, according to the native ſignification, and uſe of Scripture. 2. Conjunctly, according as thereof ſundry phraſes are raiſed,
The word, foreign, or, foreign, it ſignifies uſually two things: Firſt, To repute or eſteem, and make reckoning of. Secondly to impute or aſcribe: In the firſt ſenſe, Pſal. 8.4. What is man, that thou reputeſt, or eſteemeſt him? Chriſt was reckoned amongſt the wicked; that is, eſteemed as they, Iſai. 53.12. In the ſecond ſenſe, the uſe is alſo frequent; Philem. verſ. 18. If he hath wronged thee, or oweth the ought; impute, that is, aſcribe it to mee, and ſet it as it were upon my ſcore: the ſpeech being borrowed from Merchants.
The phraſes of ſpeech, ariſing from conjunction of this word with others, are divers in Scripture.
In this Chapter, faith is ſaid to be imputed to righteouſneſs, or, reckoned for righteouſneſs; wages is ſaid to be reckoned, or imputed; righteouſneſs to be imputed to a man; ſins to be imputed, or not imputed to the committer.
The Firſt phraſe is, of all the reſt, of moſt difficult explication: Conjectures of others, that have any probability, I will propound: ſome thus; Faith was (counted) for righteouſneſs; that is, inſtead of righteouſneſs; as if it ſupplyed the ſtead of the righteouſneſs of the Law, in this point of juſtification: and this expoſition they would approve, by likeneſs of phraſe in other things, as they conceive it; As Rom. 2.26. Uncircumciſion is (counted) for circumciſion, that is, inſtead of circumciſion, Rom. 9.8. The Children of the promiſe are (counted) for the ſeed, that is, inſtead of the ſeed: But, why not thus rather? they are (counted) the ſeed: for ſo they are apparently, not reckoned iuſtead of the ſeed, but counted or eſteemed the leed; they being the ſeed, with which the Covenant is made.
Others thus; Faith is (imputed) to righteouſneſs; that is, aſcribed unto them, and taken notice of ſo far, as that he was for it (eſteemed) righteous: We ſhall beſt underſtand the meaning, by comparing the ſelf-ſame phraſe as it it is extant Pſal. 106.31. Phineas his executing judgment, was (counted) to him for righteouſneſs, to all generations for evermore; that is, he for that fact, or, by means thereof, had the (eſteem) of a righteous man amongſt men, unto all poſterity: So, Abrahams faith was (counted) to him for righteouſneſs before God; that is, he for believing; or, by means of faith, was eſteemed or reckoned righteous before God: This, as far as I conceive, is the proper meaning of the phraſe.
If that hypallage ſeem harſh, thus conceive it: His believing was reckoned unto him to righteouſneſs; that is, came into reckoning ſo far with God on his behalf; or, for his benefit, that thereby he obtained righteouſneſs.
Faith then is of that reckoning with God, as that to Abraham; yea to every man endued thrrewith, he allowes the eſteem of a righteous man; underſtand faith as its before deſcribed.
For the better underſtanding of this concluſion; let us ſee a little, how faith obtains this bleſſing of righteouſneſs at Gods hands; or, what is the reaſon of the connexion of righteouſneſs with believing? Bellarm. de juſt if. lib. 1. cap. 17.Divers are the explanations: Papiſts impute it, ſometimes, to the merit and worth of the very habit or act of faith; as if it deſerved at Gods hands juſtification, and had the force of a proper efficient cauſe meritoriouſly to procure it: Againſt it are theſe Reaſons.
Firſt, Bernard Ser. 1. de Annunciat.Hereof we may ſay, as Bernard of other good works; or, as he terms them, merits, that its not ſuch, as as that (for it) righteouſneſs ſhould be due to the believer of right; or, as though God ſhould do us wrong, except he gave to us believing righteouſneſs; for this, as all other good qualities, or actions, is the gift of God; and therefore man is rather a debtor to God for it, then God to man.
Secondly Beſides this, how holds the difference aſſigned by the Apoſtle, betwixt the worker, and the believer, in the manner of obtaining righteouſneſs, if righteouſneſs belong to the believer as a reward of debt?
If righteouſneſs belong to the believer, of debt, as a reward of believing, then, vainly doth the Apoſtle alledg this as a difference, betwixt the believer, and the worker; that the one hath righteouſneſs paid as of debt, the other given as of grace: but, the difference is ſure authenticall. Ergo. Their arguments will be fitlyeſt anſwered, when we come to ſet down the opinions of our own Divines.
Sometimes they thus conceive it that faith is the beginning of righteouſneſs, Bellarm. qua ſupra.and the inchoate formall cauſe of righteouſneſs; that is, part of that righteouſneſs, whereby we are made formally righteous: and that they would prove out of this text; becauſe to him that believeth in him that juſtifyeth the ungodly, his faith is counted to righteouſneſs: But, they would deceive us with a falſe gloſſe; for, that is not the meaning that faith is (counted) our righteouſneſs; but that its taken notice of ſo far as that to the believer righteouſneſs is imputed. A (mean) therefore it is of obtaining righteouſneſs, not righteouſneſs it ſelf; except by righteouſneſs, they will underſtand that of ſanctification 1 Ioh. 3. Wherefore we acknowledg it to be a part: but, what is that to the righteouſneſs of juſtification, whereof the queſtion is? 2. After their own gloſſe, its righteouſneſs only aeſtimativè, not therefore formally.
Sometimes again, they make righteouſneſs depend on faith, as a preparation thereto in part, neceſſary to diſpoſe the ſubject to receive juſtification; that is, as they term it, the infuſion of charity and other graces, whereby we are made formally righteous: Verſipelles! Where may we finde you? Is it the form of righteouſneſs, and yet but a preparation to righteouſneſs?
Ob. The form inchoate, not compleat.
Anſw. But I demand; Is it before the other graces of God in time? Or, are they togethes with it infuſed? If ſo, how then make you yet a preparation only to righteouſneſs; when as together with it, other gifts which make up righteouſneſs compleate, are infuſed? Let us leave them, and come to explications of our own Divines.
Some thus, Righteouſneſs or juſtification, hath its connexion with faith, by an order that God hath been pleaſed to ſet down, in the Covenant of grace; which is this, that whoſoever ſhall believe in Chriſt, ſhall be juſtified and ſaved. This condition now performed on our parts, juſtification is ours; and we are as righteous in Gods eſteem, as if we had all the righteouſneſs of the Law performed by our ſelves: Now, this is an evident and clear truth, that, in the Evangelical Covenant, faith is the condition of juſtification: But firſt, if faith juſtifies us, as a condition performed by us; fain I would know, how we may maintain that doctrine of our Churches, concerning ſole faith, and its being the only thing in us, that avails to the attainment of juſtification: for, if we view the tenour of the Covenant of grace, faith is not the only condition required of us to juſtification, and remiſſion of ſins; for repentance alſo is a condition required, in that covenant to the ſame end, Mar. 1.15. Repent, and believe the Goſpel; Act. 2.38. Repent and be baptized, for remiſsion of ſins; but, faith muſt ſo juſtifie, that (in that work) no other thing may ſhare with it, no not repentance it ſelf. Ergo, Beſides this, if the act of faith (qua actus) be that for which we are juſtified; how doth the Apoſtle deſcribe our righteouſneſs to be without works? verſ. 6. How ſets he the worker and believer in direct oppoſition, in the articles of juſtification? Perhaps, it will be ſaid, that works of the law only are excluded, not this, which is a worker of the Goſpel? Anſw. It ſhould ſeem, that not only works of the law, but univerſally all works are excluded; becauſe, whatſoever may occaſion boaſting in man, is exclnded Rom. 3.27. Now, as great occaſion of boaſting is left to man in the act of faith, as in any work of the law whatſoever: Nay, may ſome manſay, for faith is the gift of God, and the exerciſe of faith meerly his work. Anſw. The ſame may as truly be ſaid of love, patience, &c. Theſe being alſo gifts infuſed of God, and their actions, even every act of them, meerly his works in us, even as meerly as the act of faith.
It remains then, that we enquire, whether in the other explanations of our Divines, more likelihood may be found.
Uſully, its thus conceived to juſtifie; namely as it is an inſtrument to apprehend that righteouſneſs for which we are juſtified, even the *1. Cor. 1.30.righteouſneſs of Chriſt; whether of this life, or death, or both, it is not pertinent to this place to enquire; but in this reſpect, righteouſneſs is aſcribed unto it.
And here we are asked, whether we finde faith to have any ſuch act, or office, as to apprehend and receive Chriſt, and his righteouſneſs. Anſw. Amongſt other places that is pregnant, Rom. 5.17. foreign, id eſt, oblatam foreign, fidei (videlicet) manu. Beza.Where believers are deſeribed to be ſuch as [receive] the abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteouſneſs; that [receive] to wit, by faith as by a hand; the gift of righteouſneſs; that is, the righteouſnes of Chriſt given unto us. After this ſentence, we ſee how faith alone juſtifieth, namely, becauſe faith only hath fitneſs to receive the gift of righteouſneſs: This laid alſo for a ground, boaſting is excluded in every reſpect; which after all other explanations, is left in ſome reſpect unto men.
Thus alſo is the comfort of conſcience left provided for, when Gods children ſhall be taught, out of the word of God, that the righteouſneſs whereby they are juſtified before God, is ſo abſolute, and every way perfect, as is that of Chriſt; and that it ſufficeth them to juſtification, that they [receive] it, whether by ſtrong, or weak Faith; the virtue of Righteouſneſs being ſtil the ſame, when it is received, in what meaſure ſoever it be received. As, the alms given is of the ſame benefit, whether the hand that receives it be ſteady, or ſhaking, ſo it be received.
The ſumme of all is this; ſith Faith is accepted to Juſtification, neither, in reſpect of the [Worth] of it, to procure it; nor yet, as being the [Form] of righteouſneſs; nor, as a [Preparation;] nor, as a [Condition:] It remains, that it juſtifieth [Inſtrumentally] onelyonly; or, becauſe, it [apprehends] that, [for] which we are juſtified, namely, the merit, and Righteouſneſs of Chriſt.
For Uſe of this point, let it be this: It affords Comfort to every weary ſoul, groaning under the burthen of ſinne, and preſſed with the Terrours of the Almighty, and affrighted with the Curſe of the Law due to Tranſgreſſions: If thou believe in the Lord Jeſus, and haſt received this grace, by faith to receive his righteouſneſs offered in the Goſpel, thy ſins are forgiven, and ſhall never be imputed to Condemnation; Thou ſtandeſt as juſt, in Gods ſight, as if thou hadſt, in thine own perſon, performed exactly the whole obedience, that the Law requires. And, let no man ſay, it is true, if they could (firmly) believe, as Abraham; but, their faith is ſo weak, and wavering, that even, for it, Condemnation is due them.
Anſw. For this, Conſider, that it is not the ſtrength of Faith that juſtifies; not Faith, as an Act, wherein our Righteouſneſs ſtands: but it is that, which Faith apprehends, that juſtifies, even the obedience, and righteouſneſs of Chriſt: That apprehended truly, in what meaſure ſoever, covers all defects, not onelyonly of Legall obedience, but even of Faith it ſelf.
A ſecond thing here obſervable, is this; That whereas to Abraham, that had now, long time, been Regenerate, and in ſtate of grace, had done many works of Piety, and obedience; Yet Faith is ſtill counted to Righteouſneſs: it follows well, that [whole] juſtification is abſolved in Faith; and that Faith is not onelyonly the beginning of Righteouſneſs, but the very complement thereof.
And, Bellarm. qua ſupra.it is to be obſerved againſt that errour of Romaniſts, that, to evade the direct teſtimonies of Scripture, againſt Juſtification by works, and for that by Faith alone; have deviſed a diſtinction of Juſtification: It is, ſay they, Concil. Trident. Seſſ. 6.of two ſorts; The Firſt, whereby a man of unjuſt is made juſt; and that ſtands in two things. 1. Remiſſion of ſins. 2. Infuſion of gracious habits, whereby the heart of man is diſpoſed, and inclined to actuall juſtice: The Second is that, whereby a man, of Righteous becomes more righteous, encreaſing the habits infuſed, by exerciſe of them, in doing good works: The Firſt of theſe is aſcribed to Faith; The Second, to good works.
Now, To omit, that, in this Doctrine, they confound things to be diſtinguiſhed, namely, Juſtification, and Sanctification: There is no ground for this diſtinction of juſtification in Scriptures; nay, grounds many againſt it.
For 1. If good works have this force, to make us more juſtified in the ſight of God; how comes it to paſs, that Abrahams Iuſtification is ſtill aſcribed to faith? For that the place, Gen. 15.6. is to be underſtood. de ſecunda juſtificatione, Sasbout confeſſeth.Sasbout, ad locum.
Beſides this; the Apoſtle, Phil. 3.9. apertly declares his whole juſtification, both in his firſt Converſion, Kemnit. in Exam.in that time wherein he wrote, yea, at the day of Reſurrection, to be wholly, and meerly abſolved in Faith. And ſurely, if there were ſuch virtue in the exerciſe of Good works, as to make us more juſtified in the ſight of God; Saint Paul did fondly count ſo baſely of them, as to call them foreign, and foreign, dung and loſs.
Add hereunto, that the Apoſtle, 1 Cor. 4.4. ſpeaking of the righteouſneſs wherein he lived, after his Converſion; yet plainly diſclaims opinion of juſtification thereby; he was privy to himſelf of no inſincerity in his calling, having ſince his calling, lived in all good conſcience; yet, ſaith he, I am not hereby juſtified. What, ſhall we ſay, he ſpeaks of his firſt juſtification? as if it could poſſibly be thought, that the works not yet extant, could be the means of that juſtification which he had before he had works. More I adde not.
We will now proceed to that which followeth.