Socinianism in the Fundamental Point of Justification Discovered, Chapter 1 · Socinian position 1
Socinianisme.
THat the termes of Justifying,1 Part. Justification, &c. are not to be taken in this question, (nor in any other that are usually moved about the Justification of a sinner) either 1. Physico sensu, in a Physicall sence; as if Justification signified to make just with any habituall, actual, or any positive, or inhaerent righteousnesse. 2. Sensu forensi proprie dicto, in a juridicall, or judiciary sense, properly so called, when the Judge hath onelyonly a subordinate or derived power of judging, and is bound by oath, or otherwise, to give sentence according to the rule of the Law; as to justify were to pronounce a man just▪ or to absolve him from punishment, according to the strict termes or rules of that Law wherof he was accused, as a transgressor, though this sense be received, and admitted by many. But 3. and lastly, Sensu forensi improprie dicto, in a Iudiciary sense lesse properly, and usually so called. viz. Where he that sits Judge, being supreme Magistrate, hath an Independency, and Soveraignety of power, to moderate, and dispense with the Law, as reason and equity shall require: So that justifying in this question, imports the discharging or absolving of a man from the guilt, blame, and punishment of those things, whereof he is or might justly be accused; not because he is cleare of such things, or justifiable according to the letter and strictnesse of the Law, (for then he could not be justly accused) But because the Judge having a sufficient, and lawfull Soveraignety of power, is willing upon sufficient, and weighty consideration, knowne unto himselfe, to remit the penalty of the Law, and to deliver and discharge him, as if he were an Innocent, and righteous man. As for that Physicall sence of making just by inhaerent righteousnesse, though Bellarmine and his Angels, earnestly contend for it, yet till the Scriptures be brought low, and Etymologie exalted above them; til use and custome of speaking, deliver up their Kingdome into the Cardinalls hand; that sense must no way be acknowledg'd, or receiv'd, in this dispute: yet, (to give reason and right, even unto those that demand that which is unreasonable) Its true, that GOD, in, and upon a mans Justification begins to justifie him Physically, that is to infuse habituall, and inhaerent righteousnesse into him. But here the Scriptures, and the Cardinall, are as far out in termes, as in 1000. other things they are in substance and matter: That which hee will needs cal Justification, the Scripture will as peremptorily call Sanctification. Concerning that other sense of judiciary Justification, usually so called; wherein the Iudge, or justifier, proceeds upon legall grounds, to acquit, and absolve the party guilty, and accused, neither can this be taken in the question propounded, except the Scripture be forsaken, because the Scripture constantly speakes of this act of GOD, Iustifying a sinner, not as of such an act whereby he will either make him, or pronounce him legally Iust, or declare him not to have offended the Law, and hereupon justifie him, but as of such an act whereby he freely forgives him all that he hath done against the Law, and acquits him from all blame, and punishment due by the Law, for such offences: So that in that very act of GOD, by which he justifies a sinner, as there is a discharge from all punishment due unto sinne, so there is a profession withall, or plaine intimation of the guiltinesse of the person, now to be justified, according to the Law, and that he is not acquited, or discharged, upon any consideration that can be pleaded for him according to the Law: but that consideration upon which GOD proceeds to justifie him is of another order: the consideration of somewhat done for him in this case, to relieve him out of the course or order and appointment of the Law. He whose Justification stands (whether in whole or in part, it's not materiall here) in the forgivenesse of sinne, can in no construction be said to be Iustified according to the Law, because the Law knowes no forgivenesse of sinne, neither is there any rule for any such thing, nor the least intimation of so much as any possibility of any such thing there. The Law speakes of the curse, death, and condemnation of a sinner; but for the Justification of a sinner, it neither takes knowledge nor gives any hope thereof.