The Protestant Doctrine of Justification by Christs Righteousness Part 2, Tract · Chapter 5

The Protestant Doctrine of Justification by Christs Righteousness Part 2 · Tract · Chapter 5

p. 103CHAP. V. The adverſe Opinion propounded and examined: Pelagius and Arminius the Authors of it.

OF all that ever troubled the Church with their Errours, the Pelagians and their …ate Off-ſpring the Arminians have moſt perplext it with their Opinions, partly by their importunity, reviving them and urging them …afreſh from time to time, ſo that the Church hath had little quiet from them for the laſt twelve hundred years, though their Opinions have been moſt frequently and moſt fairly examined and unanimouſly refuted above any Errours whatſoever, and that both by particular Writers of all Ages, and alſo many Sy…ods greater and ſmaller: But principally by their diſhoneſt Art of miſrepreſenting the Orthodox Doctrine to perſwade the Simple that they oppoſe particular mens Sentiments, not the Doctrine of the Church, and by covering their own Opinions, propounding them plauſibly and ambiguouſly, that the Falſhood may …ot be eaſily diſcern'd, that at once they may …nſinuate with the Simple, and have retreats …o avoid the Arguments of the Learned, wherein they do like thoſe that ſculk in Woods and Thickets, whom it is as hard to find out as it …s to conquer. It was a ſit Epithite that Hie…om gave Pelagius, Coluber ille Britannus, that p. 104Britiſh Snake: For he had his many windings and foldings, and for his advantage could caſt his Skin to. When he was taxed to deny Grace, aſcribing all to mans free Will, he proteſted to aſcribe all to Grace, and yet meant thereby nothing but Nature or Free Will, which he called Grace becauſe it was the Gift of God;Voſſius Hiſt. Pelag. lib. 1. pars 1. Joh. Latius Hiſt. Pelag. lib. 1. par. 1. and when all his Opinions were ſummed up and objected to him in the Synod of Dioſpolis or Lydda, he openly and ſeverally renounct them all with Anathemas, and all by equivocal words, keeping the ſame meaning. The like did his Scholar Caeleſtius, when called to an account before the Biſhops of Rome and Africa; Fostus and Caſſianus the Semipelagian Leaders trod in their ſteps, as the ſame Authors out of Auguſtin and Proſper have ſhewed. Arminius and his Followers have not come behind them in this Art. The Preface to the Synod of Dort and Lubertus ſufficiently inſorm us how Arminius ſtrove to cover his Opinions,contra Berſium. till he might by ſecret inſinuations gain a party to ſtand on his defence: When he was ſuſpected of novelty by the Presbytery of Amſterdam, Sancté proteſtatuseſt, &c. he ſolemnly profeſt that he knew no man in the Low-Countries, that had a mind to bring in Innovations in Religion. His Diſciples were of the ſame temper, which they ſhewed both in the Synod and in their own Writing. By the ſame Art their Followers amongſt us at this day create us much trouble, eſpecially in this point of Juſtification by Chriſt's Righteouſneſs imputed, about which p. 105they had their Doctrine from Arminius: Popular Inſinuations is the beſt of their Rhetorick; Generals, Equivocation and Tergiverſation is the greateſt part of their Logick, which we ſhall make now to appear by enquiring what is their Opinion concerning the Effect of Chriſts death and obedience, who deny us to be properly juſtified by it, or it to be imputed to us: They do agree to retain the Term of Imputing Chriſt's Righteouſneſs. Juſt. Evang. p. 51.The notion of Imputation in general (ſaith one of them) is no way to be oppoſed, it being impoſſible that we ſhould receive benefit by, and the effects of what another doth without ſome kind of Imputation. But thus Socinus will ſay, What Chriſt did was imputed to us, i. e. it was noſtro bono, for our good and benefit. Mr. Baxter chargeth Dr. Tully with the breach of all that is Sacred,Anſw. to Dr. Tully p. 18, 172. for ſaying that he denyeth all Imputation of Chriſts Righteouſneſs, and telleth us that he doth not only hold it in ſome ſence, but in a larger ſence than many do, viz. That not only his Paſſive Obedience is imputed to us, but his Active alſo, yea his Habitual and Divine Righteouſneſs ſo far as influential to give merit to his Obedience; and yet all this is but words. For whoſoever aſſerteth the infinite value of the death of Chriſt, muſt and doth acknowledge the concurrence of his Active, Habitual,Papaeus. and Divine Righteouſneſs, to make his death an infinite Prize, which it could not be unleſs the perſon dying, were God, of a perfect, holy Nature, and of perfect holy Life till the time p. 106of his death. But he that uſeth a common word (as this of Imputation is) and in that Queſtion and Matter to which it belongeth properly, and uſeth it in a ſence quite different from the common acception and ſtate of the Queſtion, doth but equivocate in retaining that Term. Though Proteſtants have differed about the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt imputed, whether it be the Paſſive only or the Active alſo, yet till of late there hath been no queſtion among them about the meaning of the term Imputation; all underſtanding thereby that we were juſtified and accepted to Life Eternal for the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt intended and wrought for us. But it is more ſtrange that he who is ſo earneſt to be accounted a maintainer of Imputation, ſhould no better defend himſelf from the accuſation of denying it. For when a few lines would have expreſſed any mans meaning in this point, who was willing to be underſtood, he gives us many diſtinctions, diviſions,chap. 2. p. 48, &c. and ſub-diviſions, and fifty Propoſitions to explain in what ſence he holdeth Chriſt's Righteouſneſs imputed, and in what not, and yet confeſſeth after all theſe that he doubteth he hath not made his meaning plain enough, to thoſe who are not exerciſed in the Controverſie, who had moſt need of his Explication, and therefore addeth more diſtinctions and propoſitions to make his meaning plainer,chap. 3. p. 79. which is as well performed as if a man endeavouring to waſh an Aethiopian white, ſhould firſt plunge him into a River of Water and afterwards into a Veſſel of Ink: He goes p. 107…n with the ſame Art and Chap. 4.p. …9. inſtead of oppoſing the Drs. ſence of Imputation and de…ending his own, he thruſts together all the …ences of Imputation, which he denieth both …he ſound and the unſound, and then diſputes againſt Imputation with 43 Reaſons, but againſt what or in what ſence he would not have …he People but only his Friends to underſtand. … this be reconciling to devize new terms and …ew queſtions, if confounding things be clearing of them, if hiding ones meaning with mul…itudes of words be to explain onesſelf, then …his Author hath acquitted himſelf well. I will …dd another inſtance of his Explications: I did aſſert that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs (even habi…ual, Appeal to the Light, p. 1.active and paſſive exalted by his Divine …ighteouſneſs) being the fulfilling of his Law and Covenant of Mediation, hath perfectly me…ited Reconciliation, Pardon, Adoption, San…tification, Glory, and all the good which ever …e receive, to be given us freely in his own time, and on his own terms, by his New Covenant, by …is Spirit, and by his Providence; and that we are as juſtly and certainly juſtified, pardoned, and ſaved by and for this meritorious Righteouſneſs and Sacrifice of Chriſt, as if we had done and ſuffered all our ſelves, and that he ſuffered for us and in our ſtead, that we might not ſuffer, and fulfill'd all Righteouſneſs for us that were Sinners, to thoſe proper uſes we have and need no other Righteouſneſs, and though it be not Scripture Phraſe, we may truly ſay that thus Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed to us, &c. This was writ to avoid the charge of denying p. 108Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, and therefore worded in Proteſtant Phraſes as much as could be, and yet a different ſence couche in them, viz. in thoſe words, to be given us on his own terms, and by his New Covenant whereby is intended that Chriſt merited … Reconciliation, Juſtification, &c. to be given to us as the immediate Effects of his Purchaſe, but to be given us upon the fulfilling the Commands of the Goſpel, ſo that it is … Chriſt's Righteouſneſs that juſtifies us, or … imputed to us to Juſtification, but it did only merit a New Covenant or Law by fulfilling whereof we ſhould be juſtified. We ſhall not endeavour to make plain what theſe men would obſcure and hide, viz. the difference betwin… them and us in the point of Imputation. It is the uſual Proteſtant Doctrine that Jeſus Chriſt undertook to fulfill that Law which men broken and to bare that Puniſhment which their Since deſerved in the behalf of his Elect, and that God accepting this undertaking of his from Eternity, and the performance of it in time did therefore promiſe and grant pardon of ſin, right to eternal life, and his Spirit, and all ſpiritual bleſſings to be conferred upon each of theſe Elect Perſons, when by the Grace of Chriſt they ſhould claim them, and put their truſt in him: Hereupon we ſay, when a man is actually pardoned and intituted to life by virtue of this undertaking and grant, that Chriſt's Righeouſneſs is imputed to him, i. e. that theſe benefits are beſtowed upon him, for that Righteouſneſs which Chriſt wrought and p. 109…d accepted, and he flyeth to for Salvation …d for no other reaſon: And hereupon ari…h in juſtified perſons an immutable right to …e and the Grace of God to bring them to it; …ereupon they may be certain of their Perſe…rance and Salvation: But on the contrary …eſe men teach, firſt, That though Chriſt …d materially fulfill the Law broken by men, …d bore the Puniſhment due to their ſins, …. did many things which the Law comman…d, and ſuffered many things which it threat…d againſt Sin, yet that he did not intend directly and properly to ſatisfie that Law by o…ying the Precepts and undergoing the Penal…s of it, but did only fulfill the Law of a Me…ator impoſed upon him and peculiar to him, which was to do and ſuffer ſuch things as God …eaſed to enjoyn him. 2ly. That this which …hriſt did and ſuffered did reſpect and was intended, not for any particular perſons, but …r all mankind equally as Adam's Sin did. …y. That therefore this Obedience or Righ…ouſneſs of Chriſt did not purchaſe Pardon, …ſtification, or any of the Fruits of it for all … for any man immediately. 4ly. But that … procured this only, That God being content …ot to inſiſt upon the Law of Innocency, and … hold man to that which was now become …poſſible through the weakneſs of ſinfull …eſh, he ſhould grant a Covenant of ſincere …bedience to them, that would repent of their …rmer ſins and receive Chriſt for their Lord …nd Saviour, that they ſhould be ſaved as …ertainly as if they had not broke the Law of p. 110Innocency, or had ſatisfied it when broken 5ly. And therefore their Juſtification muſt be mutable as their ſincere obedience is. 6ly. This is then that which they mean by Impu… tion of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, and its p… chaſing Juſtification for us, viz. That it wa… a means of taking the Covenant of Works on of the way, and of procuring a New Covenant of ſincere Obedience, which if men do perform, they ſhall be juſtified or live by it, notwithſtanding their ſins and imperfections, a… much as they ſhould have been juſtified b… doing the Law of Works; ſo that this Co… nant being the Effect of Chriſt's Death, … the Benefits of it, Juſtification, Adoption &c. are to be reckoned the Fruits of it al… and when we enjoy theſe Benefits, his Righteouſneſs is imputed to us, i.e. we receive the Benefit of that Covenant which his righteou… neſs purchaſed. Now I demand what it is th… juſtifyeth or giveth us a right to life immediately and properly? By this Doctrine it is our fulfilling of the New Govenant, the Chriſt's Righteouſneſs doth not properly … ſtifie us, or immediately procure our Pard… or Life; then this Righteouſneſs is not imp… ted to us for Juſtification. To call this Imp… ting of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs to us is a ſence ſo remote from the ſtate of the queſtion, which is, By what Righteouſneſs we are juſtified immediately before God; and from the very Notion of the word Imputation, and imp… ting or reckoning to one, that I cannot call… leſs than equivocation or trifling.

p. 111Object.But they ſay that Faith and Repentance or …ur fulfilling of the Goſpel-Covenant is a means …f applying Chriſt's imputed Righteouſneſs, 4 diſp. of Juſt. p. 264.…nd ſo is a Righteouſneſs ſubordinate and ſubſervient to his, not at all derogating from ….

Anſw.By applying Chriſt's Righteouſneſs they …ean that then we have the Benefits and Effects of Chriſt's ſatisfaction, when we have fulfilled the Terms of the Goſpel. As when a Man hath ſerved his Apprentiſhip in a Corporation, then he enjoyeth the Privileges of the Charter, which was boutht or given many …ears before; but will any man ſay that then …he buying or procuring of the Charter is …mputed to him? They teach that God hath …romiſed to pardon and ſave them that obey …is Goſpel, what is it then that gives the immediate right to Pardon and Salvation, that …s conſtitutive of a man juſtified in Law, is it …ot this Obedience to the Goſpel? Then this …s it which is imputed to a man for righteouſneſs, but Chriſt's righteouſneſs is not applied is that which doth conſtitute us righteous, for which we are juſtified, but when we are juſtified by our obedience to the Goſpel, this is a favour which we ſhould never have had, if Chriſt had not purchaſed it: To call this applying or imputing of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, …s to hide a Heterodoxie with uſual and Orthodox terms.

p. 112Object.But the ſame Author acknowledgeth that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is our only legal righteouſneſs, or rather pro-legally,p. 274. Ibid. a righteouſneſs inſtead of our righteouſneſs or obedience to the Law: & paſſim.

Anſw.If Chriſt fulfilled the Law of Works in our ſtead ſo that his Righteouſneſs is accepted for our fulfilling it, then muſt we be juſtified by his righteouſneſs without any further righteouſneſs or conditions. For the Law being fulfilled for us, muſt acquit us and give us life; this we defend: but he means not ſo, Chriſt is our legal righteouſneſs with him, not by proper fulfilling the Law of Works for us, but by taking it out of the way, ſo that no ſuch perfect innocent righteouſneſs ſhould be required of us to Salvation; and this he mean by pro-legal inſtead of our legal righteouſneſs. This is ſtill hiding his ſence with ambiguous words. It remains then that by imputing Chriſt's Righteouſneſs they intend nothing elſe but that Chriſt procured a Covenant of Grace, by fulfilling whereof we ſhall be juſtified and ſaved though ſinful and imperfect, which Juſtification and Salvation we muſt originally yet remotely aſcribe to Jeſus Chriſt, becauſe he procured this mild Covenant for us; but the righteouſneſs which conſtituteth us Juſt in Law, and for which we ſhall be pronounc'd righteous and Heirs of the Kingdom at Judgment is our own ſincere Obedience, not Chriſt's Obedience, as appears at large from this Author.

p. 113It is pretended that Luther in the heat of his Spirit and Zeal againſt Popiſh Superſtitions,Object. let fall ſome words which ſounded as if he thought Chriſt's Perſonal Righteouſneſs was every Believers righteouſneſs,Anſwer to Dr. Tully p. 15. § 11. and their Sins were made his, which afterwards he qualified, ſhewing that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is …urs, and our Sins his only in the Effects.

Anſw.But that Luther maintained the ſame Imputation as we do, in oppoſition to all works, his Sermons and Comments on the Gal: ſufficiently ſhew, and all both Papiſts and Proteſtants do acknowledge: And if by imputing Chriſt's Righteouſneſs in the Effects be meant its Immediate Effects, viz. that we ſhould be juſtified immediately by that righteouſneſs truſted in immedietate formae, without the interpoſition of any other righteouſneſs to be wrought by us, it is the Doctrine we contend for: but …f this be meant (as the drift ſeems to be) that …t is imputed ſo as to merit a New Covenant by performing of which we ſhall be juſtified, and ſo it be imputed only in its remote Effects, it is manifeſtly untrue.

Object.It is ſaid again, That moſt of our Reformers rightly aſſerted that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs was ours by the way of meriting our righteouſneſs,Ibid. p. 16. § 13. though ſome of them followed Luther's Expreſſions of the Imputation of Chriſt's Perſonal Righteouſneſs.

p. 114Anſw.Calvin and Melancthon who do not much follow Luther's Expreſſions, affirm, That our Juſtification conſiſteth in remiſſion of ſins for the Merit of Chriſt received by Faith only, and it is moſt untrue that any of our Reformers talked, That Chriſt only merited that we ſhould be juſtified by our own Righteouſneſs according to the Goſpel Covenant (as is here meant.)Problem. loc. de Juſt. 6.25. Aretius Melancthon's Scholar defineth Juſtification by the Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, and doth charge Thammerus once his fellow Pupil under the ſame Maſter, with deſerting his Maſters and the Doctrine of all Reformers, for teaching, That Faith in the buſineſs of Juſtification includeth Obedience to the Goſpel, and that we are juſtified by it as the Fulfilling of the Goſpel, and that the Works which St. Paul excludeth from juſtifying, are the Works of the Law, not the Works of the Goſpel, alſo that gratis per gratiam, being juſtified freely by his Grace, was meant only that for Chriſt's Sake our imperfect obedience is accepted to Juſtification and ſinleſs obedience not inſiſted on; where the Reader may find Thammerus his Arguments and interpretation of Scripture there cited at large, for ſubſtance the ſame produced by our Authors, and ſharply taxed as a deſerting from the Reformation.

Object.It is farther ſaid, The Papiſts faſtning upon thoſe Divines who held Imputation of Chriſt's Perſonal Righteouſneſs in its ſelf,Ibid. § 16. in the rigid ſence, did hereupon greatly inſult againſt the p. 115…roteſtants, as if it had been their common …octrine, and it greatly ſtopt the Reformation.

Anſw.Thus Bellarmin pretended that amongſt the …roteſtants there were ſeveral Opinions about …e Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, one … Luther, another of Calvin, a third of ſome …hers, beſides that of Oſiander, de Just. cap. 22. p. 312.to which B. …avenant anſwers, Secundam ſententiam illo…m commemorat, qui Chriſti obedientiam, ju…tiam, nobis imputatam, statuunt eſſe formalem …uſam juſtificationis, at haec communis eſt noſtro…m omnium ſententia, neque quod ad ipſam rem …tinet, quicquam é noſtris aliter aut cenſit aut …ipſit: He reckoneth this a ſecond Opinion our Writers, That they ſay Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is the formal cauſe of our Juſtification, (i. e. its ſelf is our Righteouſneſs) but …is is the common opinion of all of us, nor did …er any of us write or ſpeak otherways, as to …e ſubſtance of the thing: He alſo affirms, …at all the difference betwixt our Reformers …as only in the manner of expreſſing themſlves, and that Calvin who placeth Juſtification in Remiſſion of ſin, did yet mean that Re…ſſion to be granted for the Imputed Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, and that to be the Immediate Cauſe of it; and therefore adds as the …mmon Proteſtant Doctrine,p. 313. Abſque imputa…ne obedientiae Chriſti, nulla remiſſio peccatorum …inetur— haec cauſa eſt remiſſionis, haec cau… acceptationis, haec cauſa tranſlationis à ſtatis …rtis ad ſtatum vitae, i. e. without the Imputation p. 116of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs there is no forgiveneſs; this is the cauſe of Pardon, this is the cauſe of our acceptance with God, and of our tranſlation from the ſtate of death to the ſtate of life.

It is ſuggeſted that this offence of the Papiſts occaſioned the German Divines to deſe… the Queſtion of Imputation,Object. So Dr. Tully, § 17. q. 17, 18and to diſpute what Righteouſneſs of Chriſt it is by which we are juſtified, and many Learned Men maintained that it was the Paſſive only.

Anſw.This Queſtion aroſe and was agitated among themſelves as Paraeus informs us in his Miſcellanies, nor did it at all concern the Papiſ… who are Enemies to the proper Imputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs paſſive as well as active, againſt his bearing our ſins as well as performing the Law for us: And theſe Divines who maintain the Imputation of Paſſive Obedience only, yet maintain that to be our Formal Righteouſneſs, by and for which we are juſtified, and not that it procured a Covenant of Grace only.Th. Theol. de Juſtif. Thus Ʋrſin, Juſtitia Evangelica eſt poena peccatorum noſtrorum quam Conſtus pro nobis ſuſtinuit, credentibus à Deo gr… tis imputata: So Paraeus in the Treatiſe alledged, and Windeline alſo in his Theologia, capde Juſtif. Theſ. 6. he ſaith, That the inſtrumental cauſe of Juſtification is Faith or Affiance in that thing, for which we are acquitted in the Judgment of God and taken into favour, even the Merit of Chriſt. Inſtrumentalis of p. 117ſides, h. e. fiducia, qua id amplectimur & nobis …pplicamus per & propter quod in judicio Dei abſolvimur à maledictione legis, & in gratiam re…ipimur, nempe Chriſti meritum: And Theſ. 7. That the ſatisfaction of Chriſt for our ſin, or his Paſſive Righteouſneſs is that for which or by which we are juſtified; Materia ejus eſt id …er quod & propter quod coram tribunali divino …maledictione legis abſolvimur & innocentes & …uſti reputamur; eſt id perfecta Chriſti pro nobis ſatisfactio, qua poenas propter peccata nobis de… it as noſtro loco ipſe fuit, &c. And that Mr. Gataker hereafter quoted, was of the ſame mind …s evident from his learned poſthumons Trea…iſe of Juſtification. In all this here is no footſtep of our Author's Notion of Imputation: …or the queſtion is not What, Righteouſneſs of Chriſt is imputed, but How it is imputed, whether formally, properly and immediately, as all theſe Divines affirm, or remotely only, …mediately and metaphorically, as ſome of late …contend.

In England moſt Divines uſed the Phraſe,Object. Ibid. § 18. That we were juſtified by the Forgiveneſs of Sin and the Impputation of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, and being accepted as righteous unto life thereon; but the Sence of Imputation few pretended accurately to diſcuſſe, &c.

Anſw.True, they did not diſtinguiſh away the ſence of Imputation, & leave only an equivocal term. Our Homilies ſpeak expreſly that we may be ſaid to have obeyed and ſuffered in what Chriſt p. 118hath done and ſuffered for us.ut ſupra. cap. 2. The Doctrine of the Church of England hath been conſtantly that we are juſtified by Faith, as an Hand receiving, as an Inſtrument applying the righteouſneſs of Chriſt, as is manifeſt by the Homilies: King Edward's Catechiſm compoſed by Dr. Ponet B. of Wincheſter, where the Phraſe of Faith, being an hand is extant; by the 39 Articles, with Articles of Lambeth; the whole Univerſity of Cambridge in the Recantation which they enjoyned Barret; by the Articles of Ireland compoſed by Engliſh men moſtly; and by the publick Queſtion diſputed in both Univerſities, collected out of their publick Records by Mr. Prin in his Antiarminianiſm; and ſure this is nothing to Chriſt's procuring a Covenant of Obedience and juſtifying us by that: Nor do Mr. Wotton's three Aſſertions, as here alledged overthrow the ſubſtance of our Doctrine. We grant there is an over rigid ſence of theſe words, We are juſtified by Chriſt's fulfilling the Law, as if we had fulfilled it in him: Yet this proveth not, That we are not juſtified immediately by Chriſt's fulfilling the Law, as intended and wrought for us. Pag. 24, 25. the Author gives us his own ſence, viz. That all the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, habitual, active, paſſive, and divine, as advancing them in value, is the meritorious cauſe of our Juſtification. But are we accepted and juſtified immediately for this Righteouſneſs? No: Yet that is the Imputation all former Divines maintained. How then? Why, for this Righteouſneſs God maketh a p. 119Covenant of Grace, in which he freely giveth Chriſt, Pardon, and Life to all that accept the Gift as it is; ſo that the Accepters are by his Covenant or Gift as ſurely juſtified and ſaved by Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, as if they obeyed and ſatisfied themſelves, &c. viz. That the conditions of the Gift in the Covenant of Grace being performed by every penitent Believer, that Covenant doth pardon all their ſins (as God's Inſtrument) and giveth them a right to eternal life for Chriſt's Merit. This is a confeſſion of what we repreſented before, ſc. That the fulfilling the Goſpel-conditions of faith, repentance, &c. is the righteouſneſs which gives us the immediate right to pardon and life, and that Chriſt's righteouſneſs only merited this grant of life upon thoſe conditions. It might be expected by this Hiſtory of the controverſie that ſome Divine ſhould have been quoted which taught this Doctrine, but alas here is not one ſince the Reformation! Therefore I ſhall quote the true Authors of this Opinion after I have vindicated B. Davenant and Mr. Bradſhaw, who are here and elſewhere ingeniouſly repreſented as laying the ground of this Opinion, and as maintaining Imputation in another ſence than all had done before them.

For the moſt Learned and Pious Biſhop, It is ſaid, p. 18, 19. That though he moſt ſtifly defended Imputation in words, yet when he telleth what Proteſtants mean by it, he ſaith, That our own Actions, and Paſſions, and Qualities may not only be imputed to us, but alſo p. 120ſome extrinſecal thing neither inherent in us, nor done by us; de facto autem imputantur, quando illorum intuitus & reſpectus valent nobis ad aliquem effectum, aequè ac ſi a nobis aut in nobis eſſent, i.e. They are imputed, when the ſight or reſpect of them doth profit us for any effect, as much as if they were in us or done by us: [Note that he ſaith but ad aliquem effectum non ad omnem, i.e. to ſome, not to every effect.]

Anſw.By this we are to underſtand that the Biſhop meant Chriſt's Righteouſneſs was imputed for ſome certain Effect, viz. To procure a New Covenant, not immediately to juſtifie us. I ſee I need not deſpair, but my Books hereafter may be quoted for metaphorical imputation. In truth the Biſhop doth not ſay, ad aliquem tantùm, but to ſome effect, but aliquem effectum, ſimply meaning quemvis, any effect, ſc. That things without us (he intends Chriſt's Righteouſneſs) may be imputed, i.e. profit us to any effect, as well as things in us or done by us; and that the following Similitudes ſhew, of a ſlothful perſon promoted for the Merits of his Anceſtors, or a Malefactor pardoned by anothers ſuffering in his ſtead, which in both caſes is done by the immediate imp…tation of ſuch merits and ſuffering, without performing conditions by the Parties. But that the Biſhop maintained imputation in the ſame ſence that we do, and almoſt in the ſame words, is ſo evident that I am aſhamed to produce the Proofs in ſo clear a p. 121caſe. His 37th Determination is, That Juſtifying Faith is fiducia, affiance in God for the remiſſion of ſins through the ſatisfaction of Chriſt, that this is the very formal Act of Juſtifying Faith. His 8th Determination is, That the Sanctified may be ſure of Salvation, which will not conſiſt with conditional Juſtification, and one Proof is Arg. 4. As it is moſt certain that Chriſt paid a ſufficient price for all men, ſo it is no leſs certain hanc ſatisfactionem omnibus fidelibus & paenitentibus imputari & applicari, quaſi ab illis ipſis Deo oblata & praestita fuiſſet, i.e. That this ſatisfaction is imputed to all Believers, as if they themſelves had made it and offered it to God. But I ſhall confine my ſelf to that Book which is miſrepreſented. Chap. 22. he propoſeth the Queſtion,de Juſt habit. & actual. Whether we are juſtified by the Obedience or Righteouſneſs of Chriſt imputed to us, and that be the formal cauſe of Juſtification? Where he explaineth the Nature of Juſtification, of Imputation, the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, and the Formal Cauſe of Juſtification, in the ſame terms as we do and without any difference in ſence. He gives us the Sum in theſe words, p. 313. Ʋno verbo, utcunque Deus ſanctificatos nos reputat, at que inchoatè juſtos per impreſſam & inhaerentem qualitatem juſtitiae, tamen juſtificatos, i.e. à peccatis abſolutos & ad vitam aeternam acceptatos per & propter juſtitiam Mediatoris, nobis ab ipſo Deo donatam, hac ſide ſpiritúque applicatam, i.e. Though God reputeth us inchoatively righteous, or holy by the habit of holineſs wrought in us, yet he p. 122accounts us juſtified, acquitted from ſin, and accepted to life by and for the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt given to us by God and applyed by his Spirit and our Faith. Then he layers down two Propoſitions oppoſite to the Papiſts, which he purſueth to the 30th Chapter. The one excludeth Works as the Papiſts maintain them, the other affirmeth that the moſt perfect Obedience of Jeſus Chriſt dwelling in us and uniting himſelf to us, is the formal cauſe of our Juſtification, for as much as it is made ours by Faith and by the Gift of God. Prop. 1. Chriſti Mediatoris in nobis habitantis, atque per ſpiritum ſeſe nobis unientis perfectiſſima obedientia, Ibid.eſt formalis cauſa juſtificationis noſtrae, utpote quae ex donatione Pei & applicatione fidei fit noſtra: Obſerve he doth not ſay Chriſt's righteouſneſs doth in ſome ſence juſtifie us, or is ours for or in ſome effects, but he ſaith we are juſtified for that very righteouſneſs or obedience of Chriſt, this is the form whereby we are made righteous or juſtified in oppoſition to our own Holineſs; and that becauſe it is our righteouſneſs from Gods Gift, from our Union to Chriſt and Faith in him; and then he lays down the contrary Poſition of the Papiſts to be refuted, and anſwereth their Calumnies againſt our Doctrine of Imputation, which are much the ſame that are ſcattered in our late Authors. The Propoſition is Theſis 2. Papiſtarum, Mediatoris obedientia ſive justitia non donatur aut applicatur credentibus, vice aut per modum cauſae formalis, Ibid.cujus virtute & fiducia stant juſtificati, aut Deo ad aeternam p. 123vitam acceptati. The Biſhop goes on, and Chap. 24. anſwereth 11 Arguments of Bellarmin againſt Imputation, moſtly the ſame with thoſe alledged Chap. 4th. Chap. 25.ut ſupra, he anſwereth Bellarmins Citations out of the Fathers againſt the ſame Doctrine. Chap. 27. He further explaineth the Nature of Imputation, and what we mean by a Formal Cauſe, juſt as we do. Chap. 28. He proveth that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed as that very Righteouſneſs which juſtifieth us, which he doth by 11 Arguments, and by all the ſame Scriptures out of the New Teſtament, which have been cited above Chap. 3. and by ſome others, all in the ſame ſence which we take them. Chap. 29. He alledgeth the Fathers for our Doctrine. Chap. 30. He refuteth the Papiſts ſlanders in ſaying that this Doctrine taketh away the neceſſity of good works, where he hath this memorable paſſage concerning the difference of the two Covenants, Lex in conditione operum vitam habet ipſam vim & formam icti faederis, p. 396.at Evangelium in Mediatoris ſanguine fide apprehenſo collocat ipſam vim & formam, operum autem conditionem annectit ut ſubſervientem huic faederi Evangelico, non ut continentem aut conſtituentem ipſum faedus, i. e. the Covenant of Works includeth Works in the very form of it as the conditions of that Govenant, but the Goſpel placeth the form and force of the Covenant in Faith in the Bloud of Chriſt, but that it ſubjoyneth works as a ſubſervient condition, not as containing any part of the Covenant. Can any thing be more p. 124contrary to the Doctrine we oppoſe, that the Goſpel is a Covenant of ſincere Obedience, and that Obedience is the condition of the new Covenant whereby we muſt be juſtified? In all this here is not a word favouring this new Opinion: Chap. 31. There is ſomething which may bare a colour of ſome approbation of this Doctrine, but it is but a colour. He ſaith, that Works are in ſome ſort neceſſary to Juſtification and Salvation; but that the term neceſſary ought not to be uſed in Diſputes with Papiſts, or in Diſcourſes to the People, leſt they aſcribe too much to them. Concl. 2, 3. And in the 4th he ſaith, No works are neceſſary neither Legal nor Evangelical,p. 402. as a Meritorious Cauſe (but conditions of the Covenant are a meritorious cauſe) Nulla opera bona ſunt renatis ad ſalutem aut juſtificationem neceſſaria, ſi per neceſſaria intelligamus ſub ratione cauſae meritoriae neceſſaria, dico nulla, ut excludam non ſolummodò opera legalia, ſed etiam opera inchoatae juſtificationis. And then Concl. 5th, he ſaith, Bona quaedam opera ſunt neceſſaria ad juſtificationem, p. 403.ut conditiones concurrentes vel praecurſoriae— ut dolere de peccato, deteſtari peccatum & conſimilia, i. e. Some good works are neceſſary to Juſtification though not as efficient and meritorious cauſes, yet as previous or concomitant conditions, ſuch as ſorrow for ſin, humiliation, begging of mercy, hoping in it, and the like. But by this he meaneth not that theſe diſpoſitions have any direct influence on Juſtification it ſelf, but that they fit the Juſtified Perſon to uſe and improve his p. 125Juſtification: This we all acknowledge that ordinarily in perſons that can uſe their reaſon there are ſuch miniſterial preparations both for converſion and juſtification, and yet they are the cauſes of neither: Nor doth this hinder but that God may extraordinarily ſometimes work Grace, infuſe Faith, and juſtifie men without ſuch previous diſpoſitions: The reaſon following ſhews this was the Biſhop's ſence. For God, ſaith he, doth not juſtifie Stocks and Beaſts but Men, and thoſe humble, contrite, and tractable to his Word and Spirit:Ibid. Divina enim miſericordia non juſtificat ſtipites, h. e. nihil agentes, neque equos & mulos, h. e. recalcitantes & libidinibus ſuis obſtinatè adhaereſcentes, ſed homines, eoſdémque compunctos & contritos, ac verbi ſpiritúſque divini ductum ſequentes. vid. plura. To make it more plain he adds, When we ſay things are neceſſary it doth not preſently follow that they are neceſſary as cauſes, but for orders ſake: Not andum quandò dicimus aliquid neceſſarium ad hoc vel illud obtinendum, p. 404.ex ipſa vi verborum non ninuitur neceſſitas cauſalitatis ſed ordinis. Ibid.Concl. 6th. he ſaith further, Good works are neceſſary to preſerve the ſtate of Juſtification; Bona opera ſunt neceſſaria ad Juſtificationis ſtatum retinendum & conſervandum: But how? Not as cauſes that work or deſerve the continuance of Juſtification, but as means without which God will not continue it: Non ut cauſae quae per ſe efficiunt aut mereantur hanc conſervationem, ſed ut media ſeu conditiones ſine quibus Deus non vult juſtificationis gratiam in hominibus p. 126conſervare. He explaineth himſelf, That a life of obedience is neceſſary, that a juſtified man may improve and enjoy the Fruits of Juſtification, and alſo obtain the remiſſion of following particular ſins; and to prevent a courſe of ſin, which is contrary to the nature of a juſtified man: In a word, That they are no otherways neceſſary to the continuance, then they were to the beginning of Juſtification, ſc. by way of concomitance and order, not of influence: Nam ut nemo recipit Juſtificationem generalem, quae liberat à reatu omnium praecedentium peccatorum, niſi concurrente paenitentia, &c. ita nemo retinet statum à reatu liberum reſpectu peccatorum conſequentium, niſi mediantibus iiſdem actionibus, credendi, &c. Ratio eſt quod haec abeſſe non poſſint perpetuo ut non ad eſſe incipiant illorum oppoſita quae pugnant cum natura juſtificati. Ibid.Again, Quia Deus non vult carnales, &c. frui beneficio juſtificationis, requirit aſſidua opera fidei, &c. quorum praeſen. tiâ arcentur incredulitas, &c. aliáque gratiae juſtificationis venena, at que particularium peccatorum particularis condonatio obtinetur: p. 405.And Hae autem actiones non conſervant vitam gratiae propriè & per ſe attingendo ipſum effectum converſationis, ſed impropriè & per accidens excludendo & removendo cauſam deſtructionis. He acknowledgeth alſo, that the falls of the Godly do not loſe their Juſtification,Ibid. Concl. 7. Ʋtcunque juſtificati in via bonorum operum claudicare, atque aliquandiu extra hanc viam per abrnpta libidinum ſuarum aberrare poſſint, statu filiorum haud amiſſo.

p. 127Laſtly, He ſaith good works are neceſſary to …alvation and our coming to Heaven; Non neceſſitate cauſalitatis ſed ordinis, not as cauſes …f it, but as the order that God hath appointed, that we ſhould firſt glorifie him on earth, and then be glorified with him in Heaven. Now what they have gained by the Biſhop's Teſtimony; let the Reader judge: We willingly …ubſcribe to all this in ſubſtance.

Mr. Bradſhaw's Teſtimony will ſerve them to better;Praefat. de Juſt. they cite his Preface for their purpoſe: his words are, Quid enim prohibet quo minus …traque Chriſti obedientia ad peccati cujusque re…tum tollendum, & ad peccatorum noſtrorum omnium veniam conſequendam neceſſaria ſtatua…ur? quid obſtat? quo minus etiam ad imputationem utriuſque hoc ſufficere dixerimus, quod Deus utramque cum bono nòſtro admiſerit obedi…ntiam, & propter cam utramque nos acceptos …abeat, ac ſi nos ipſi eo quo par erat modo, legem …livinam impleviſſemus, qut paenas aeternas ex ea…em nobis debitas apud inferos ſuſtinuiſſemus. Here he endeavoureth to reconcile thoſe that contend for the Imputation of either the Active or Paſſive Obedience alone, and ſaith, That we may ſay they are both imputed, both performed for us, i. e. for our benefit, in that way that God thought fit, and that we are juſtified by both as much as if we had fulfilled the Law or ſuffered Eternal Death. But doth Mr. Bradſhaw here expreſs the manner how we are accepted by the Obedience of Chriſt? doth he at all derogate from our being p. 128juſtified immediately by Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, or doth he lay any foundation for Juſtification by fulfilling the Goſpel-Covenant? There is not a word of that here, or in all his Book: He doth indeed ſpeak more accurately and cautiouſly of the notion of Imputation, and what Obedience of Chriſt may be ſaid to be imputed and what not, than others do; yet in ſubſtance he agreeth with them, and aſſerteth the old Proteſtant Doctrine particularly Chap. 22, 23, 24. per totum: He affirmeth Chriſt's ſatisfaction to be the onelyonly matter of our Juſtification, Chap. 22. Th. 1. In ſatisfactione Chriſti ſupradicta, vera & ſola juſtificationis poſita est materia; And that by this Satisfaction we are not onelyonly freed from eternal wrath, but made truely righteous before God. Th. 2. Redemptio ſive ſatisfactio illa qua pretium ejuſmodi perſolvitur, cujus vi peccator non à debita tantùm poena liberetur, ſed etiam in foro divino vere juſtiſſiméque juſtus factus dicitur, non eſt fucata, metaphorica, &c. And that the form of our Juſtification is the alledging of Chriſt's Righteouſneſs, Chap. 23. Th. 2. Hujus Juſtificationis forma eſt ſatisfactionis ſive juſtitiae illius in gratiam ejus pro quo praeſtita eſt coram Deo factae vel alligatio vel declaratio quaevis. And laſtly, he ſaith, That the immediate effect of Juſtification is Reconciliation, whereby all ſins are forgiven, and God receives a Sinner into favour for the Satisfaction of Chriſt accepted in his behalf, Chap. 24. Th. 2. Hominis cum Deo reconciliatio ex vera juſtificatione orta eſt, p. 129qua Deus propter Chriſti ſatisfactionem gratioſiſſimè admiſſam cum peccatore in gratiam rediens, remittit eidem peccata univerſa ipſámque pro verè juſto habet. In the Concluſion of his Book he gives us the Sum of what he had delivered immediately touching the point of Juſtification.

1. Deus Pater juſtificat admittendo & imputando.

2. Deus Filius ſatisfaciendo & advocatum agendo.

3. Sacro-Sanctus Spiritus revelando & obſignando.

4. Fides apprehendendo & applicando.

5. Bona opera manifeſtando & declarando.

This is the whole and uſual Proteſtant-Doctrine.

We muſt now ſeek ſome other Authors of this Opinion.Art. 24. Arminius in anſwer to the 31ſt Article objected to him, ſaith, Chriſti juſtitia imputatur in juſtitiam mihi non probari dixi: Having in general terms as our Authors profeſs, to acknowledge that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed to us, and that we are juſtified by it; yet he here denyeth, That Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is imputed to us for Righteouſneſs, and gives this reaſon; Quicquid imputatur in juſtitiam, vel ad juſtitiam, vel pro juſtitia, ad ipſum non eſt ipſa juſtitia ſtrictè & rigidè ſumpta: At Chriſti juſtitia quam ille praeſtitit Patri obediendo, eſt ipſiſſima juſtitia ſtrictè & rigidè ſumpta: Ergò, non imputatur in juſtitiam; i. e. That which is imputed to us p. 130for righteouſneſs, muſt not be righteouſneſs ſtrictly and properly ſo called; But Chriſt's Righteouſneſs was a ſtrict and proper Righteouſneſs or obedience to his Father, Ergò. Arminius we ſee taketh imputing Chriſt's Righteouſneſs for nothing elſe, but that it procureth Juſtification for us, not that it ſelf doth juſtifie us or make us accepted; and that the righteouſneſs which is imputed to us, whereby we are juſtified, is not Obedience to the Law, but ſomething elſe which God for Chriſt's ſake graciouſly accepteth to our Juſtification:Declar. ſentent. oper p. 102. What this is he expreſſeth, having ſaid that Chriſt's Righteouſneſs is the onelyonly meritorious cauſe of Pardon: Statuo, hoc cenſeo benè & propriè dici fidem homini credenti in juſtitiam ex gratia imputari, quatenùs Deus Jeſum Chriſtum filium ſuum propoſuit tribunal gratiae, ſive propitiationem per fidem in ſanguine ipſius, h. e. Faith is imputed to us for righteouſneſs in as much as God hath made Chriſt the Tribunal of Grace, which is all one as to ſay with ours, Chriſt as a King and Judge doth juſtifie us by and for believing in him.

And again in anſwer to the 26th Article objected to him, he contendeth, That though Faith may be ſaid to concur as an Inſtrument to Juſtification; yet the Act of Faith doth juſtifie as it is graciouſly accepted for our Righteouſneſs: Apprehenſio Christi eſt proprior quam inſtrumentum apprehendens, vel quo objectum apprehenditur: Apprehenſio autem eſt actio, itaque fides non quà instrumentum, p. 131ſed quà actio, imputatur in juſtitiam, quanquam propter illum quem apprehendit.

Bertius in his Epiſtles explaineth this that Faith is required by the Goſpel inſtead of perfect Obedience to the Law of Works,contra Lubbert. and ſo juſtifyeth us that ſhould have done, as the fulfilling of the Command of God, with this difference, That perfect Obedience needed no Pardon and Grace, but Faith per gratioſam accepti lationem; of God's Gracious condeſcenſion is accepted as a Man's Righteouſneſs, he being pleas'd to require no more of him, becauſe of his inability to keep the Law; ſo then Chriſt's Righteouſneſs hath purchaſed that we ſhould be juſtified by our Faith, but it ſelf doth not juſtifie us. But do the Arminians by Faith mean only the apprehending or truſting in Chriſt's Righteouſneſs in oppoſition to or contradiſtinction from all other Graces and Works in the matter of Juſtification: Nothing leſs. By Faith they mean Obedience to the whole Goſpel, and all good Works, they ſay, are intended in Faith, that Faith and Repentance are all one, though ſometimes they are ſeparated and ſpoken of apart for clearneſs ſake. Thus Hornbeck propoſeth their Opinion,Sum. Contro. lib. 8. Queſt. 20. Num coram Deo juſtificemur non fide apprehendendo Chriſti juſtitiam, quae ſola nobis imputetur in peccatorum remiſſionem, …ſed fide ut eſt actus & opus noſtrum, includens in ſe obedientiam operum Evangelicorum, propter quam, quamvis non ex ejus dignitate & merito juſtificemur? i. e. That we are not juſtified by Faith as it apprehendeth the Righteouſneſs p. 132of Chriſt, but as it is an Act or Work of ours, including Obedience to all the Commands of the Goſpel.Harm. Remonſtr. & Socin. Art. 12, 17. Joh. Peltius hath largely ſhewed, That by Faith the Remonſtrants mean Obedience to the whole Goſpel, and that this is it by which they would have us juſtified. Take 2 or 3 citations.

Art. 12. Parag. 6. p. 157. ex Remonſtr. confeſ. cap. 10. Hac ratione conſiderata fides, totam hominis converſionem Evangelio praeſcriptam, ambitu ſuo continet. Faith comprehends man's whole Converſion. Epiſcop. diſput. 22. Fides illa quae credenti imputari dicitur in juſtitiam, bona opera non tantum non tollat, ſed ea ipſa, aut eorum ſaltem faciendorum propoſitum natura ſua in ſe contineat & comprehendat; i.e. Faith which is imputed for righteouſneſs doth not exclude Works, but containeth them, or at leaſt a purpoſe of doing them. Joannes Geiſter. Confeſſ. Bona opera & gratia non pugnant inter ſeſe, & ſub fide etiam bona opera comprehenduntur; i.e. Grace and Works are not oppoſite, and Faith comprehends Works. Yea this Man was ſo ingenuous as to tell us, that we do not contend with the Papiſts, whether we be at all juſtified by Works (in this the Remonſtrants and Papiſts are agreed) the queſtion only is, By what Works we muſt be juſtified: Quando cum Papiſtis diſputatur, non eſt inquirendum, an per bona opera juſtificemur, ſed per quae opera. He would only exclude Popiſh ſuperſtitious Works, as our Authors would have, The Apoſtle Paul only excludes Jewiſh Works or Ceremonial Obſervations, from our Juſtification. p. 133Would you have the matter yet plainer, Adolph. Venator will put it out of queſtion: Juſtificamúrne etiam ex operibus? Certè ita, i.e. Are we juſtified by works alſo? Yes verily: And the Remonſtrants in their Apology boldly affirm, ex operibus hominem juſtificari iſtud non tantum non est abſurdum, ſed veriſſimum eſſe totidem verbis pronuntiat Apoſtolus, Jacob. 2. Nec evadent hunc ictum cenſores, cùm hunc locum pro ſuo more de declaratione juſtificationis intelligendum eſſe dicunt, i.e. It is ſo far from being abſurd that a man is juſtified by works, that it is moſt true; and the expreſs words of the Apoſtle James, which cannot be evaded by interpreting them of declarative Juſtification. Thus we ſee that the Arminians meant the ſame thing, when they ſaid the foreign credere, the Act and Work of Faith it ſelf doth juſtifie us, that our late Authors do when they aſcribe Juſtification to Faith and Obedience; both agree that Faith in its uſual acceptation and full latitude comprehendeth aſſent and obedience to the whole Goſpel, and that thus it juſtifies and no other way, and in this how the Remonſtrants do conſpire with the Socinians, Peltius doth clearly demonſtrate,ut ſupra, which alſo the Arminians do not deny, as in their Apology; Si quis dicat hanc ſententiam, Quod Fides quàtenus viva eſt, juſtificat, eſſe ipſiſſimam Socini ſententiam, is, dato quod id verum ſit, neceſſe eſt, ut fateatur tandem Socinum hac in parte conſpirare cum reformatis Eccleſiis quoad ſubſtantiam ipſam, i.e. If any man ſay that this is Socinus's Doctrine, p. 134he muſt confeſs that Socinus doth ſo far agree with the Reformed Churches in ſubſtance: And this alſo ſeemeth to have been the true ſence of Pelagius, vid. Voſ. Hiſt. Pelag. lib. 3. par. 1.viz. That men are juſtified and ſaved by their acknowledging and obeying the Goſpel, for as much as he taught that under the Goſpel men were ſaved by obeying it, as the Jews were by obſerving the Law of Moſes, and thoſe before Moſes by obſerving the Law of Nature: He alſo aſcribeth to the Death of Chriſt nothing but the pardon of ſins; acceptance with God muſt depend upon mens own obedience, Chriſt helping them in it, by the inſtructions and encouragements of the Goſpel and by his own Example; and this doth not much differ from the Doctrine in hand.

Thus we ſee that the Firſt Authors of theſe Opinions were the Pelagians and Arminians, and that herein the Socinians differ little from them. Let us now inquire, ſeeing we muſt not be juſtified by the very Righteouſneſs of Chriſt's Obedience and Death, to what End Chriſt died according to thoſe men.