A Treatise of Justifying Righteousness, Book 2 · Aphorism 102 – Aphorism 103
Aphorism.
THe Apostle doth professedly exclude the Page 293.Works of the Law only from Justification, but never at all the Works of the Gospel, as they are the Conditions of the New-Covenant.
Animadvers.
1. All Works, if they be Good-works, are Works of the Law, i. e. Works which the Law requireth; the Law (I mean the Moral Law) being as to Works the eternal Rule of Righteousness, there being no sin, but that which is forbidden by the Law, and which is a transgression of it, 1 John 3. 4. And therefore that in the Ephes. 5. 15. See that ye walk circumspectly, or exactly, foreign, Beza doth well expound, quam proximè ad Legis Dei praecepta.
2. The Apostle doth simply and absolutely exclude Works from Justification: For, 1. He sheweth that Abraham was justified by Faith, and not by Works: Now Abraham did the Works of the Gospel, as well as of the Law, yet was he not justified by Works, but by Faith only. 2. He sheweth, that if a man be justified by Works, of what kind soever, his Justification is not of Grace, but of D…bt. 3. To prove that a man is justifiedly Faith, and not by Works, he alledgeth the word, of David, Blessed is the man wh…se iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. Now that must be understood of Work▪ simply considered: For who doth any Works so, but that he hath need to have his iniquities forgiven, his sins covered, and not imputed to him? Fraeclare Calvinus, (saith B. Dav. de Just. Act. c. 30. p. 394) seligat ex totà suâ sanctus D…i s…rvus, quod in …jus cursu maximè eximium s…putabit edidisse, deprehendit alicu…i quod carnis putredinem sapiat.
Reply.
1. All Works are Works of a Law, but not [the Law] which the Apostle speaks of. The Moral Law distinct from the Sanction really, that is, as part of neither the Old Covenant or New, is a non ens, a Chymaera.
2. To your Reasons, that the Apostle excludes all Works simply and absolutely: I answer particularly, 1. He speaks only of Justification coram De… Legislatore veteris Legis; and not of Justification against the Accusation of final Ʋnbelief. 2. He speaks of Justification against a true Charge, which is the same with Remission of sin; and not of Justification against a false Accusation. 3. He speaks of Works, as Competitors with Christ; and not as subordinate to him. (James contrarily.) For the Question that Paul debates is, Whether we are justined by the Works of the Law, or by the Righteousness of Christ received by Faith? Where he principally in his Question opposeth Works and Christ as in point of Merit; and Faith is but collaterally put in the opposition. 4. He speaks against Works justifying meritoriously, and not as Conditions of the continuance of a free-given Righteousness. This I could bring multitudes of our Divines that affirm, that the Apostle speaking against Justification by Works, means in point of Merit; and that this is the Controversie between us and the Papists. 5. He doth so usually add, [The Works of the Law] as if he had foreseen this Controversie, and of purpose let them know, that it is not Obedience to the Redeemer that he excludes from justifying as a Condition, in subordination to Christ; but Works done in Opposition, Competition or Co-ordination with Christ. 6. He expresly speaketh only of those Works which make the Reward to be of Debt, and not of Grace, and of no other. So much in general to be premised.
Now particularly to your first Argument, I say, 1. Abraham's Gospel-works cannot be set in competition with Christ's Righteousness, that is against their nature; and therefore could not so justifie: Which is all Paul says. But yet they might justifie as Conditions under Christ. 2. Your Conclusion unlimited, is expresly against the words of Scripture, James 2. 24.
To your second I answer, 1. There is no such words as yours, [of what kind soever,] either expressed or intimated by Paul. To him that worketh, in the sense Paul speaks of (that is, ut operarius, to have the wages for the worth of the work) the Reward is not of Grace, but of Debt. 2. Else you fully do feign it, to contradict the whole scope of the Scripture, that promiseth the Reward to the Obedient. For the Apostle there speaketh of [Working,] and not only trusting in them; and he speaketh of the [Reward] and not only of Justification only. And do you think, that every man that obeyeth Christ, yea that obeyeth praemii gratia, doth make the Reward to be not of Grace? Then ☞fair fall Antinomians and Rebels. 3. Faith is as truly a Work, as Love or Hope, &c. Yet it is not by Paul excluded; therefore not all Works.
I have followed this so far with another Reverend Brother, that I will say the less of it now. The two too common Answers are, 1. That this is Bellarmine's Answer; which I think not worthy a Reply. 2. That Faith justifies not as a Work, but as an Instrument. And so I say (more truly) Love, Hope, sincere Obedience, justifie not as Works, but as the Conditions on which God hath given the Confirmation, Continuation and Consummation of Justification. There is a third Answer of a Learned man, that credere is not agere, but Pati: But I think I have confuted that sufficiently.
3. To your third I say, 1. That plainly shews that Paul speaks only of the Justification I first mentioned. 2. We have need of pardon for the imperfection of Faith, Love, and every Work; therefore we have need to be justified coram Deo Legislatore Legis operum, by Remission of sins through the Sacrifice of Christ: This is all your words will conclude, or Paul intends; and this is easily granted, and I hope should be faithfully maintained against any Adversary, if there were occasion. But, 4. We need not pardon for performing the Conditions of the New-Covenant; not for being Believers, loving Christ, obeying, &c. but only for doing it no better. 5. If this be your Argument, [Whatsoever Work is imperfect, and needeth pardon, cannot justifie, &c.] I answer, By way of Merit it cannot: But as a Condition of free-given Pardon, an imperfect work may justifie; or else Faith could not. To Calvin's words and Davenants, I willingly subscribe.
Aphorism.
FOr Mr. Pemble's Mr. W. Thomas Answer to Speed, saith not amiss, that [by Faith we are justified, as sinners; and by Works as Believers:] Though the matter require more for its Explication.Pag. 297.Interpretation, that by [Works,] is meant [a working Faith.] I answer, I dare not teach the Holy Ghost to speak, nor force the Scripture, nor raise an Interpretation so far from the plain importance of the words, &c.
Animadvers.
1. All this is no more than the Papists object against the Exposition of those words, This is my Body.
2. That all this, or any part of it, doth follow on the admitting of Mr. Pemble's Exposition (which as I have shewed, is no other than that which Cajetan doth imbrace) is only supposed, but not proved. We do not teach the Holy Ghost to speak, nor force Scripture, nor raise an Exposition far from the importance of the words, when we interpret Scripture by Scripture, and shew the meaning of one place by another, yea the meaning of a place by the very circumstances of it.
Reply.
It is not Mr. Pemble's inclusion, but exclusion, that, as I shewed you, I speak of. And it is an ill way to interpret Scripture, by denying it: When you prove your Interpretation (in the point opposed) indeed by any other Scripture, or the circumstances of this, you will do more, I think, than I have yet seen done. But it is very easie to feign or suppose an Analysis according to our own conceit, and thence to force a sense on each particular Verse.