The Preface to Socinianisme.

FOr the cleare understanding of the state and drift of the question, something would be premised, which for the evidence sake might be privileddg and exempted, from passing under much dispute and contradiction: yet if any thing be not sufficiently prepared for assent in the briefe proposall of it, the ensuing discourse will labour to reconcile the disproportion; And in the progresse make satisfaction for what it shall receive upon curtesie in the beginning.

The Answer to the Preface.

THis short Preface doth by the affected stile, and phrase of it discover the Author to bee one, who hath studied to preach himselfe more then Christ, and to set forth his owne absurd conceits in the entising words of carnall wisedome, not to declare the Testimony of GOD in Apostolicall plainenesse, nor in demonstration of the Spirit,1 Cor. 2.12. and of power as Saint Paul did. The loftie words, and short cut speech which hee useth here, and in this ensuing discourse, are so farre beyond the capacity of his rude unlearned followers, that his wooden pulpit shall assoone as they understand them, unlesse he first teach them his Grammaticall skill, before hee admit them into his Theologicall auditorie. But belike hee knowes the ready way to catch the wavering, unstable, and giddie multitude, those wandering Starres of these last times, who are like clowdes without water▪ carried about with windes of every new and strange Doctrine, and of all people are the fittest to bee his disciples. For the mouth which speaketh great swelling words, is admired of them who have mens persons in admiration; and farre fetcht phrases are fine fooleries to tickle the itching eares, and win the hearts of such as desire to seeme and bee counted something, when indeed they are nothing but bubbles, and empty bladders, who as they admire every bewitching Simon Magus, as the great power of GOD, and extoll to the Skies his most cursed errours: So they abhorre and revile all sincere and godly Preachers, rebukers of their madnesse, blaspheme GODS word in their mouthes, and speake evill of the good things, which they understand not, untill in the gainsaying of Core they utterly perish.

Moreover, to give him his due, he appeares to mee in his stile and phrase, a very skilfull Artist in his owne way, as cunning as the subtle Serpent, in cloathing and trimming his strange Doctrines, with strange conceited words fited to them, by which they who affect strange novelties, may easily be allured and insnared. But when the children of truth hunt him by the smell, and strong savours of his rankling errours (which stink as well as fret like an eating Cancer) and are ready to catch him; hee doth by his inkhorne termes so obscure and darken his meaning, that onely they who have a sharp, quick and strong sight, can lay fast and sure hold on him. Wee may well resemble him to the crafty fish Sepia of which we read, that when she is pursued and ready to be taken, she spueth forth a black inke wherewith she darkneth the waters round about, and so escapes away in thick darknesse, through which she cannot be seene and discerned.

But to omit his stile, and to come to the matter of his preface, it is a promise and pretence of somewhat by him premised, which shall serve for the cleare understanding of the state of the question, and for evidence sake might be priviledged, from passing under much dispute and contradiction; but hoc aliquid nihil est, this something is nothing, we find no performance of promise nor truth, in what hee pretendeth; neither his briefe proposall, nor his ensuing discourse gives us any satisfaction; neither can his beginning, progresse, or ending receive from us any thing upon curtesie. For if any come to us and bring not the true Doctrine of Christ, but damnable Socinianisme, errour, and heresie, we must not show so much curtesie, as to bid him God speed. 2 Iohn 10.

The Analysis of his first Chapter in generall.

THe first Chapter of his Socinianisme, which he cals his premising of somewhat for cleare underderstanding of the state, and drift of the question, consists of sixe parts. In the first part he goeth about to rehearse the severall significations of the words justification and justifying, and to determine in what sense the words are used in those Scriptures, which speake of the justification of a sinner before GOD.

In the second he layes downe 4. Propositions, which he takes for granted on all hands, and by none denyed but Heretikes.

In the third he comes to speak of imputation of righteousnesse, for justification, or rather of somewhat which God in the act of every mans justification doth impute, for or instead of righteousnesse, to invest him in all priviledges of a man perfectly righteous; and withall to shew the reason of this imputation, and afterward to determine that Faith is that somewhat imputed.

In the fourth part hee shewes first negatively, how Faith is not imputed, and excludes out of his question fiue severally quaeres. Secondly affirmatively, that Faith (as he holds it to be imputed) is opposed to the righteousnesse of Christ, as to a competitor which receives the repulse.

In the fift part (to cover the shame and scandall of his Hereticall opinion) he doth admit Christs righteousnesse into part of the honour for peace, and fashion sake, as Esau was admitted unto some vanishing participation▪ of some temporary blessings with Iacob. For he forgeth a strange and false kind of imaginary imputation of Christs righteousnesse, unto which he laboureth to wrest the words of Luther, Calvin, and the Homilies and Articles of our English Church.

In the last part hee undertaketh to shew more light, that it may be seene to the bottome clearely, what he affirmes and what he denyes in the question propounded; The particulars whereof we shall see when I come to the answer of them. But first I will begin with the first part, and will proceed to answer the rest in order.

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 onely 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.

Christianisme.

IN this first part here are onely three significations of the word Justification, and Iustifying, rehearsed. The first is Naturall, or Physicall; that is, making a man just with habituall inhaerent righteousnesse.

The second is a Iudiciary sense, properly so called, when a subordinate Iudge doth according to the strict termes, and rules of the Law, acquit, and absolve a man from punishment (which is due by the Law to him being a transgressor) and doth pronounce him just.

The third is a Iudiciary sense, lesse properly so called, when a supreme Iudge, by soveraignety of power, doth acquit and absolve a man, and remit the penalty of the Law, which he deserves, upon weighty consideration, knowne to himselfe, and doth deliver him, and discharge him, as if he were an innocent, and righteous man.

The first Physicall sense, he rejects, and playes upon Bellarmine, for reteining, and using the word Iustifie, in that sense: And yet he himselfe immediatly acknowledgeth, that GOD upon a mans Iustification, begins to Iustifie him Physically, by infusing into him habituall, and inhaerent righteousnesse: But this (he saith) is in Scripture called Sanctification.

The second sense he also disclaimes, and in this dispute embraceth the third sense, to wit, that Iustification signifies GODS forgiving a man freely all that he hath done against the Law; and his acquiting, and discharging of a man from the guilt, and punishment, due by the Law, for such offences; not for any consideration which can be pleaded for him, according to the Law, but for somwhat done for him in this case, to relieve him out of the course, order, and appointment of the Law: His reason why he embraceth this sense, is because he conceives Iustification to stand in forgivenesse of sinne, which belongs to the Law in no respect at all.

In all this part, and passage, I find not one particle of solid truth, but many grosse errors, and falshoods; for of all the three significations, of the word Iustifie, by him here named, onely the first may passe in some tollerable construction, but not in his sense: for though GOD in the creation made our first Parents after his owne Image and similitude, in perfect righteousnesse, indued with a naturall, and habituall uprightnesse, conformable to his revealed will, and Law; and in this respect may be said to have Iustified, that is, made them upright, as the wise Preacher saith, Eccles. 7.29. GOD made man upright: Yet whether this act of creation was a Physicall act of GOD, or rather a voluntary act of his will & of his wisdome, and counsell, and so may be called Artificial, is something disputable. As for the framing and making of the man Christ, the blessed seed, by the power of the holy Ghost, pure, holy, upright, and iust from his first conception; this was a spirituall and supernaturall act, and the holinesse and righteousnesse was a supernaturall gift given from above, not introduced by naturall generation, nor raised from naturall principles. That making of men righteous in their sanctification, which Bellarmine speaks of, is not iustification in a naturall, but in a spirituall sense▪ For the spirit of GOD worketh those habits, and graces of holinesse in men, whom GOD hath begotten of his owne will in the word of truth. And therefore when Bellarmine or Goodwin, or any other call this a Physicall iustifying, they erre grossely. For if it be any iustification at all, it is spirituall and morall. But for my part, I finde not that by the Spirit of GOD in Scripture, any habituall holinesse of men begun in this life, is called righteousnesse simply in it selfe. But as the Saints regenerate, and faithfull are called righteous in respect of their communion with Christ, and participation of his righteousnes: So their sanctity or habituall holinesse, is called righteousnesse, not simply in it selfe, but by coniunction with the righteousnesse of Christ, the head of the body: which as it iustifies them by constituting and making them righteous: so also it iustifies their rectified holy actions, which they performe by the mo • ions of the spirit, and by Faith in Christ, (as learned Beza well observed, and truth affirmeth. Lib. contra Anonymum,) and their sanctification cannot be called iustification, but by reason of coniunction with iustification in the same person. For if it were possible for a sinfull man to be made perfectly holy, and conformable to GODS Law, in his owne person: yet having formerly transgressed the Law, and failed in many things; • his n • w conformity to the Law, by reason of those sinnes, and failings will prove a lame righteousnesse, not fit to satisfie the Law, and to be accepted for perfect righteousnesse to justification, because if a man keepe the whole Law, and faile in one point, he is guilty of all. Iam. 2, 10. No righteousnesse can justifie, which is not a perfect obedience, and conformity of the whole man, to the whol, law in his whole life, frō the beginning to the end. Secondly, that signification of the word Iustification, which hee calls a judiciary sense, properly so called, is, (as he describes it) a foolish fiction of his owne braine: for never did any but a mad-man dreame of Iustifying sinners by a subordinate Judge, absolving them from punishment, according to the strict termes, and rules of the Law; for that were to give a false sentence, and to pronounce a man free from all transgression of the Law, and a perfect fulfiller of it in his owne person. All our learned, and Iudicious Divines, doe hold that the full satisfaction and obedience of CHRIST being communicated, and imputed to true believers, they are absolved, and have their sinnes pardoned, and are counted, and iudged righteous by GOD: as men who have satisfied the Iustice, and iust Law of GOD, by CHRIST their head, and surety, not in their own persons, which the Law in strict termes requires, & this is justification in the Iudiciary sense, which is approved by the learned.

Thirdly, that Iudiciary sense, improperly so called, which he approves, & allows in this dispute, is an Hereticall, and Socinian conceipt; for so long as GOD the supreme Iudge of all the world, is immutable, and infinite in Iustice, he neither can, nor will dispense with his eternall iust Law, in any iot, or tittle, but will have it perfectly fulfilled either by our selves or some sufficient surety in our behalfe, and will forgive no sinner, without a full suffering, and satisfaction, made to the Law in the same kind which the law requires, though not in every mans person; and this full satisfaction must be communicated to every one, and made his owne by union, with CHRIST his head; before that GOD will iudge or account him righteous, and pardon al his sinnes. To imagin a somewhat, in consideration whereof GOD forgives sinners, and accepts them as if they were righteous; besides, the full satisfaction of GODS Justice, and just law, is to conceive GOD to bee mutable, and not the same in his infinite justice at all times; and to affirme it, is Samosatenian, and Socinian Blasphemy.

Fourthly, in arguing against the second sense by him propounded, he wrestles with his owne shadow, and fights against a fiction of his owne braine, and discovers his blindnesse, and ignorance of the dictinction, and difference betweene Legal, and Evangelicall justification, and righteousnesse: Legal righteousnesse is the condition of the first covenāt of works, and consists in perfect conformity, and obedience to the law, performed by every man in his owne person, and no man can be legally justified but by his owne personall righteousnesse. Evangelicall righteousnesse, is CHRISTS perfect righteousnesse, and fulfilling of the Law in the behalfe of all the elect and faithfull: It was not the Law, nor our works of the Law, which moved GOD to give CHRIST to be our surety and redeemer; but he of his owne free love and bounty gave Christ, and Christ the Sonne of GOD out of his love, humbled himselfe to become man, and to fulfill the law for us. Neither doe wee obtaine Communion of Christs satisfaction and righteousnesse, by the workes of the Law; but by the Gospell preached & believed as the Apostle teacheth, Gal. 3.2. And therefore though Christ his righteousnes be a perfect fulfilling of all obedience, which the law requires of man; & GOD did exact of him every farthing, of our debt, both in active, and passive obedience, and in respect of the matter and substance, his satisfaction may be called after a sort legall, and is so called by Luther: yet as it was for us, not for himselfe, and performed by him our head, not by every one of us in our owne persons, and is received and applied by Faith, not by our workes of the Law, and is brought unto us by the Gospell, not by the Law, and is given to us freely by GODS grace, not merited or procured by any thing in our selves; so it is not legall but Evangelicall, and GODS justifying of us, and counting us righteous by it, is not a proceeding upon legall grounds, nor pronouncing us legally just, as this calumniator doth, either foolishly imagine, or falsely slander and misreport our Doctrine.

Fiftly in arguing for his owne false, and forged sense of the word Justification, he hath three reasons all which are for us, and prove our Doctrine not his opinion. For if this make a sense of the word Justification, good, because it doth intimate the former guiltinesse of him that is justified, as wel as it doth discharge him from all punishment, (which is his first reason) then is our Doctrine of justification by imputation of Christs satisfaction for all our sinnes, very good and sound, for it intimates a guiltinesse in him who is to bee iustified, as well as a discharge from punishment. Secondly we doe not plead for our iustification, any consideration according to the Law, that is, wee doe not plead our owne innocency, nor satisfaction and righteousnes performed in our own persons; but we plead more then somewhat done for us, even all Christs obedience active and passive, by GODS free grace communicated to us, not obtained, or merited by our works of the law. Thirdly though the law iustifies no sinner, but threatens the curse, death▪ and condemnation as the due reward of the transgressors of it: Yet it iustifies all who are free from all sinnes committed against it, and are made righteous by the perfect fulfilling of it to the utmost. And therefore when the Gospell hath brought us to the Communion of Christs full satisfaction, by which we are made free from all sinne, and perfect fulfillers of the law in him our head; as GOD doth forgive us our sinnes, and counts us righteous: so the law is no more against us, 1 Tim. 1.9. but is witnesse for us, that in Christ we are worthy of remission and iustification. By this are manifest the grosse errours, and absurdities which he uttereth in this first part of his preparative Chapter.

But that his ignorance in the Doctrine of justification, may more fully appeare, I will lay downe the severall significations of the words, justification, and justifying, wherein the Spirit of God doth use them in the holy Scriptures.

First the word iustifie, and iustification signifie, making men righteous, or constituting or seting them in the state of righteousnesse. This signification is justified by several testimonies of Scripture, as Rom. 5.19. Where many are said to be made, or constituted righteous by the obedience of Christ, even as by Adams disobedience many were made sinners, and 1 Cor. 1.30. and 2 Cor. 5.21. Where Christ is said to bee made unto us righteousnesse, and wee are said to be made the righteousnesse of God in him. And Rom. 3.24. and 4, 5. Where we are said to be iustified freely by his grace, through the redemption which is in Christ. And God is said to justifie the ungodly, which cannot be meant of counting judging, and pronouncing, but of making them righteous by the Communion of Christs righteousnesse. For to iustifie the wicked by judging and pronouncing them righteous, without making them such, is ao • mination to the LORD, Prov. 17.15. And in this sense Preachers of GODS Word are, as instruments under GOD, said to iustifie many by bringing them unto righteousnesse, and are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 iustifiers, Dan. 12.3. This iustifying wee may very fitly call radicall, or fundamentall iustification. This Luther and other learned Divines call actionem individuam, because it is GODS action of communicating Christs righteousnesse in a moment, and not by degrees successively, and in it men are mere patients, and do not worke with GOD, no more then Adam did in GODS first creating of him upright, in his Image: Even regenerate Infants may thus be iustified, and are iustified before they actually beleeve.

Secondly the word iustifie, signifieth GODS iustifying of men by Faith, that is, his counting and reputing them righteous, upon their actuall beleeving, and his enableing them to feele themselves partakers of the righteousnesse of Christ, and to enioy it by Faith, in this sense the word is used, Rom. 4. Where GOD is said to iustifie us by imputing righteousnesse, and counting Faith for righteousnesse, that is, counting a true beleever a righteous person. And thus the word is to bee taken, where we are said to bee iustified by Faith, without the workes of the Law. The Apostle doth much urge, and presse this iustification, Rom▪ 4 and Gal. 3. because though in this taken actively, GOD onely acteth: yet taken passively as it is received of us, and we by Faith feele and discerne in what account we are with GOD, and by beleeving enioy Christs satisfaction for remission of sinnes, and for righteousnes, wee may be said to worke with GOD, by way of receiving, as a begging hand doth in receiving gifts freely given, and put into it. This iustifying doth necessarily presuppose the former, and doth assure us of it. For the iust GOD, whose iudgement is according to truth, cannot r • pute us righteous, till we have communion of Christs righteousnesse, and be thereby truly righteous. And this Justification Divines call imputative. It springs from the former as from the root, and is builded on it as on the foundation.

Thirdly, this word iustifie, signifies a manifesting and declaring of men to be righteous and iustified, and that three wayes. First in foro conscientiae, in the court, or iudgement of our own conscience, when a man being troubled in his conscience with the sight of his sinnes, and his want of righteousnesse, after humble prayer, and poenitent seeking, receives either the inward testimony of the Spirit, and is enlightned by GOD, to see that he is in the state of righteousnesse absolved and iustified; or by inward sense of his sanctification, Faith, and other graces proper to the righteous iustified; is declared and made manifest to his owne conscience, that he is justified and righteous, and hath all his sinnes pardoned, and is accepted of GOD for a righteous man. This is that which wee are taught by Christ to pray for in that petition, forgive us our debts or trespasses, that is, pacify and cleare our consciences, by manifesting to us that we are justified, and have remission of all our sinnes by thy free grace, and by communion of Christs full satisfaction; and thus wee are to understand the word, wheresoever it is opposed to the accusations of Satan, and the horrours and troubles of conscience, as a remedie against them, as Rom▪ 8.33.

Secondly it signifies declaring, and proving men righteous in foro humano, in the judgement and sight of men openly, and that by outward fruites of Faith, and externall workes of righteousnes, and holinesse. When GOD enableing us, and moving us to doe such workes, and bring forth such fruites as are by his word continually pronounced, and proclaimed to be righteous, and holy works and evidences of justification, doth thus declare, and prove us to be faithfull and righteous, hee is said to justifie us before men. In this sense the word is used, Iob 13.18. where Iob saith that if hee may plead before GOD the integrity of his life, he knoweth hee shall be justified: as afterward he did cap. 31. and was thereby declared to be righteous, and so justified. And Iam. 2.21. where it is 〈◊〉 that Abraham was justified by workes, that is, declared to be a righteous man.

Thirdly it signifies judging, and declaring men to bee persons justified, and righteous in the universall judgement at the last day, when the LORD Christ shall by the evidence of their workes of love and charity, done to him in his members, declare them to bee his faithfull servants, and children of his Father, justified by the communion of his righteousnes, and in him worthie of eternall life; and also adjudge them unto the inheritance of the kingdome of Glory. In this sense the word is used, Rom. 5.16.18. where it is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Justification of life, and is opposed to the sentence of everlasting condemnation. These are all the significations of the word (iustifie) recorded in the Scriptures; And this great promiser here sheweth himselfe ignorant of them all: and therefore how little satisfaction he hath given to any, but such fooles as delight to fill themselves with huskes, let the learned iudge.

Socinianisme.

2 Part. THat Iesus Christ the naturall sonne of GOD, and supernaturall sonne of the Virgin Marie, ran a race of obedience with the Law, (as well Ceremoniall as Morall) and held out with every letter, iot and title of it, as farre as it any wayes concerned him, dureing the whole continuance of his life in the flesh; no mans thoughts ever rose up to deny; but those that denyed him the best of his being, (I meane his God-head) which of you can convince mee of sinne? was his chalenge to the nation of the Iewes, whilst he was yet on earth, Iohn 8.46. And remaines through all ages, as a challenge to the whole World. He that can cast the least aspersion of sinne upon Christ, shall shake the foundation of the peace and safety of the Church.

That this Christ offered himself as a Lamb, without spot in sacrifice upon the Crosse, to make an atonement for the World, and to purge the sinnes of it, I know no spirit at this day abroad in the world that denyes, but that which wrought in Socinus formerly, and still workes in those that are baptized into the same spirit of errour with him.

I conceive it to bee a truth of greater authority amongst us, then to meet with contradiction from any, that Iesus Christ is the sole entire meritorious cause of every mans iustification, that is iustified by GOD; or that that righteousnesse or absolution from sinne, and condemnation which is given to every man in his iustification, is 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 somewhat, yea a principall part of that great purchase, which Christ hath made for the world: even as GOD for Christs sake freely forgave you. Forgivenesse of sinnes, or iustification is from GOD for Christs sake, hee is worthie to be gratified or honoured by GOD, with the iustification of those that beleeve in him.

It's a truth which hath every mans iudgement concurrent with it, that Faith is the condition appointed by GOD, and required on mans part, to bring him into communion and fellowship of that iustification, and redemption which Christ hath purchased for the children of men, and that without beleeving no man can have part, or fellowship in that great and blessed businesse.

Christianisme.

IN this second part he doth promise foure severall propositions, which hee conceives to bee out of question, and undenyable. By the first proposition hee makes a faire shew in words, but his heart is farre removed, and his meaning is wicked, and so will appeare, if we observe how hee in another place afterwards explaines himselfe. First though hee seemes to acknowledge Christ to bee GOD, yet he takes away the use of his being, GOD as well as man in the worke of our redemption. For if GOD by his supreme sovereigne power can dispense with the law of his iustice, and instead of Christs full satisfaction made for us to the law, and imputed to us, and made ours, can and doth accept our weake Faith for the perfect righteousnesse of the Law; what use is there of Christs being GOD in our nature? For all Orthodox Divines doe give this reason, why it was necessary that Christ should be GOD in our nature. viz. That his suffering and righteousnesse performed in our nature, might be of value to iustifie all the sonnes of men, who have communion of them, and to whom they are imputed. This communion and imputation while he denyeth, hee takes away the use of Christs being GOD in our nature.

Secondly, in affirming that Christ obeyed the whole Law in every letter, jot, and title, he doth mock, and delude his hearers, and readers; for he doth not hold, that he fulfilled the Law onely for us, but primarily for himselfe; his words imply so much, for he saith, he obeyed the Law, as far as concerned himselfe, while he continued in the flesh: and he dorh hereafter roundly affirme, that Christ was bound to fulfill the Law for himselfe, which is in effect, a denying of his eternall God-head: for if he be GOD, infinite in glory, and excellency, his God-head must needes exempt the Manhood personally united to it from all bondage of the Law, and make it worthy of glory at GODS right hand, from the first assumption of it. He continued in the flesh, and obeyed the Law, onely for us without all doubt, as the Prophet foretold, Esa. 9.6. saying, To us a Child is borne, and to us a Son is given.

Thirdly, as he denies the satisfaction of Christ to be imputed to us, so he denies the imputation of our sinnes to Christ; and that very closely, and cunningly, under colour of that challenge which Christ made to the Iewes, which of you can convince me of sinne? For our Saviour speakes of sinne committed by himselfe, and such aspersion none can say upon him; But all our iniquities GOD laid upon him, and he bare all our sinnes, Esa. 53. And was made sinne for us, 2 Cor. 5, 21. and to cast this aspersion of all our sinnes on him, is a sure foundation of the peace, and safety of the Church.

In the second proposition, hee doth most notoriously aequivocate, and play the Hypocrite; First in that he seemes to acknowledg the sacrifice of Christ to be an attonement, and satisfaction for the world, and a propitiatory sacrifice for the sinne of it. Secondly, in that he denyeth his Lord, and Master Socinus, and calles the Spirit which wrought in him a Spirit of error; whereas indeed he himselfe is lead by the same Spirit, and doth deny Christ to be the propitiatory sacrifice for our sinnes, as far as Socinus ever did: For in a propitiatory sacrifice, offered to purge sinne, and to make attonement, there were three necessary requisits: First, the thing offered, must be of his owne proper goods, for whom it was offered, so the Law required, and therefore David durst not offer for his sinne, that which was not his owne, Purchased with his money, 2. Sam. 24, 24. Secondly, the owner, whose expiatory sacrifice it was, did lay his hand upon the head of the Beast which was to be offered, and thereby in a type imposed all his sinne, and guilt upon it, so that it became 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 his sin, & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 his guilt, Levit 5, 6. and Exod. 30.10. and did beare upon it all his sins, Lev. 16.22. Thirdly, this sacrifice offered up by the Priest in that manner which GOD praescribed in the Law, GOD accepted as a propitiation for him, it was set on his skore, and covered his sinne, as the Hebrew words signifie, Levit. 1.4. He who denies any one of these, overthrowes the sacrifice of attonement. Now this dissembler doth with Socinus deny all these things in Christs offering of himselfe a sacrifice of attonement to purge sinne. First he denies the true reall Spirituall union betweene Christ, and the persons pardoned, and justified; by which Christ, and they are made one body, and hee is their head, and they his members; For if he, and the faithfull be one, then all his goods are theirs, and their debts are his, and his satisfaction, and righteousnesse is theirs, and is set on their skore, which he denyeth, and altogether opposeth, and so denyes their interest, and propriety in Christ, and their union with him, as his Master Wotton did, in expresse word: In his Essayes of Justification. Secondly, he also denieth that the sinnes of the faithfull, were layd on Christ, and imputed to him; and in this he chargeth GOD, with notorious injustice, who laid the punishments of all our sinnes on Christ, without the sinnes: For he saith, that Christ bare the punishmēts, though hee had no share in our sinnes by any imputation. Thirdly, he denyeth that the sacrifice of Christs suffering, and obedience offered up by him, is imputed to us, set on our skore, and accepted for us. And thus in the doctrine of Christs sanitisfaction, and attonement, he declares himselfe a true disciple of Socinus, lead by the same spirit of error, and of the same opinion, though in words he denyes it. And what he here seemes to grant, is no more but what all Socinians yeeld unto.

In the third proposition, viz. that Christ is the sole, and entire miraculous cause, of every mans justification, &c. Hee doth aequivocate, and delude the simple, and while hee deceives them, hee is deceived himselfe, as the Apostle saith of wicked seducers, 2 Tim. 3, 13. For if he doth understand his owne words, that Christ is the sole meritorious cause of every mans justification, that is justified by GOD, he must needs grant that Christs satisfaction, made to GODS justice, and his perfect righteousnesse, as it is meritorious, and of great value in it selfe; so it is appropriated, communicated, & imputed to him; that is, it is made actually meritorious for him, and makes him worthy to be counted righteous, and to be iustified; for his words signify so much, though hee is in his purpose and meaning, as contrary, as darknesse is to light: for he meanes no more, but that Christ meritted for himselfe, that GOD should gratifie, and honour him with the justification of those that believe in him, so hee explaines himselfe in the last words. It is certaine that a thing may be merritorious in it selfe, for the worth of it, but it cannot be meritorious to any particular person, till it be appropriated to him▪ and set on his skore. Wotton his Master, (this point being proved to his face with undeniable arguments) was driven to disclaime the word (merit) denyed Christs meritting, for the faithfull, and rejected it as a thing not named in Scripture, in his Essayes of Justification. Besides this deceiving of himself • , and misconceiving of his owne words, I find here much absurdity: First, in that he is wavering, and not setled in his Iudgment, for in many places he holds faith to be the righteousnesse of a man justified; and here he calles absolvtion from sinne, and condemnation, the righteousnesse which is given to every man in his justification: I grant that in a man iustified, there is no righteousnesse inhaerent, but his cleanenesse from guilt of all sinnes, both of commission, and omission, and in this sense, Calvin, Luther, and others say that all the righteousnesse, in a man iustified, is the remission of his sinnes, that is, his cleanenesse from the guilt of them, but this is not the righteousnesse which iustifieth him, and which is communicated to him, to make him cleane, and to worke this cleannesse from the guilt of his sin, that is, the righteousnesse inhaerent in Christ, which makes him cleane, and puts him in a stare of righteousnesse before GOD: but this profound Doctor, with that stamp, and superscription of rationall authority, which hee conceiveth to be set on him, hath not yet searched into the deep things o • GOD.

Secondly, he is most absurd in imagining that Christ hath purchased favour, and honour, wit • GOD, that he might iustifie the •… that believe in him by Procuring, that faith in a proper sense should be accepted for righteousnesse: For Christ as he was GOD, & man, was infinitely of himselfe in favour and honour with GOD, and humbled himselfe onely for us▪ and in our behalfe fulfilled the Law; not to purchace honour, and favour, to himselfe, nor to make himselfe worthy to be gratified, and honored by GOD, as hee affirmeth. Thus wee see his absurdities, and his deceiving of himselfe.

The fourth proposition is, that faith in the judgement of every man, is the condition required by GOD, on mans part, to bring him into that communion of justification, and redemption, which Christ hath purchased &c. In which I finde delusion, and falshood: First hee doth not meane a gift, grace, or Spirituall qualification, appointed by GOD, by which as by the hand of the soule stretched out, wee must lay hold on Christs satisfaction, and righteousnesse▪ for justification, and redemption, (though his words pretend so much) but hee meanes that faith is the condition of the new covenant, which man must on his part performe, in stead of all righteousnesse, which the Law requires; and so it is in the new covenant, the condition of life; as workes of the Law, and of righteousnesse, were the condition of the old covenant: This is the very haeresie, and damned error of Socinus. Secondly, he doth here make the covenant of grace, a covenant of life, not freely, but upon a condition▪ performed on mans part, and so a covenant of workes, contrary to Scripture, Rom. 11.6. Thirdly, hee erres grossly, in imagining faith not to be a free gift of grace, but a worke performed on mans part, as workes were required in the old covenant. Fourthly, hee falsely chargeth all honest, and godly men, to be of his judgment. I know that all Orthodox Divines, abhorre and detest this opinion. Fiftly, hee affirmes a manifest untruth, in saying, that without beleeving, none can have part in justification, and redemption; for no regenerate Infants, which die in their Infancy, do actually believe▪ and yet being by the Spirit of regeneration engraffed into Christ, they have communion of his ransome and righteousnesse, are justified before GOD, and saved.

Socinianisme.

3. Part. IT's evident from the Scriptures, that GOD in the act of every mans justification doth impute, or account righteousnes to him, or rather somewhat for, or in stead of righteousnes, by meanes of which imputed, the person justified passeth in account as a righteous man (though hee be not properly, or perfectly such) and is invested accordingly with those great priviledges of a man perfectly righteous, deliverance from death and condemnation, and acceptation into favour with GOD. The reason of which imputation, or why GOD is pleased to use an expression of righteousnesse imputed, in or about the justification of a sinner, seemes to be this, the better to satisfie the naturall scruple of the weake, and feeble conscience of men, who can hardly conceive, or thinke of a justification or of being justified, especially by GOD, without a perfect legall righteousnesse. Now the purpose and counsell of GOD in the Gospell, being to justifie men without any such righteousnesse: the better to salve the feares of the conscience touching such a defect, and to prevent and stay all troublesome thoughts, or quaeres which might arise in the mindes of men, who when they heare of being justified, are still ready to aske within themselves, but where is the righteousnesse▪ conceiving a legall righteousnes to be as necessary to justification, as Isaac conceived of a Lamb for a burnt offering, Gen. 22. He (GOD I meane) is graciously pleased so far to condescend to men in Scripture treatie, with them about the weighty businesse of justification, as in effect to grant and say to them, that though hee findes no proper or perfect righteousnes in them, no such righteousnesse as passeth under the name of righteousnes with them: yet if they truely beleeve in him as Abraham did; this beleeving shall be as good as a perfect compleat righteousnes unto them, or that hee will impute rihteousnes to them upon their beleeving.

Christianisme.

THe first thing in this passage, to wit, GOD imputing righteousnesse to every man in his justification, is a thing evident by the Scriptures, and I willingly grant it. But I abhorre and detest as heresie, that which he adds out of his owne conceit, to wit, that GOD doth rather impute somewhat in stead of righteousnes, which cannot make a man properly or perfectly righteous. This is a blasphemous imagination, that GOD can iudge falsly, and account a thing for righteousnes which is not, and esteeme a man righteous who is not properly righteous. Secondly that which immediately followes is no lesse blasphemous, to wit, that a man may be invested by GOD, with the great priviledges of a man perfectly righteous, namely deliv • rance from sinne and condemnation, and acceptation, into favour with GOD, though he be no such man. For hereby GOD is charged either with injustice and iniquitie, or with errour in his judgement. Thirdly his taking upon him to give a reason of GODS purpose, and counsell, is Luciferian pride and presumption. For who knoweth the minde of GOD, or hath beene of his counsell, Rom. 11.34. Saint Paul who was taken up into the third heaven, could never finde out any such counsell of GOD, neither durst give a reason of GODS purpose and counsell, but onely the good pleasure of his owne will. Fourthly in the declaration of his reason I find many errours, and untruths, as first, that a mans conscience can hardly thinke of being justified by GOD, without a perfect legall righteousnesse. Every regenerate man and true beleever can upon his owne knowledge, and experience give him the lye, and tell him that the weakest conscience of any, who hath true Faith, being taught by the Gospell, can very easily thinke and beleeve, that GOD justifies him by an Evangelicall righteousnesse, even Christs perfect fulfilling of the Law, which is farre more perfect then that legall righteousnesse, which the Law requires of every man in his owne person. This Abraham beleeved, and was fully perswaded of it, this David professes, and Saint Paul preached, and I know no true Christian, who doth not both thinke and beleeve it. If any man be found doubting of this, it is because the spirit of Antichrist and Socinus doth worke strongly in him. Secondly the thing which he imagineth, being so notoriously false there can be no reason given of it, but a reason as false as the thing it self. And indeed so it is here. For first hee assure, most falsely that GODS purpose in the Gospell, is to justifie men without any such righteousnesse, as the Law requires in every man, that is the perfect fulfilling of the Law. For though GOD doth not purpose to iustifie men by their owne fulfilling of the Law, every one in his owne person: yet by Christs righteousnesse and his fulfilling of the Law in their stead, and by communicating and imputing that righteousnesse to them, he purposeth in the Gospell, and professeth that men shall bee and are by him iustified, and this is in Christ such a righteousnes as the Law requires, for proofe of this see Rom. 8.4. and 10.4. Secondly the fathers upon GOD his own false and wicked conceits, to wit First, that GOD goeth about to cure an infirmity in his people, which is not to be found in any of them, after they are called to beleeve in Christ, and to be his people; for then they bid their owne workes of the Law adiew, and do no more dreame of iustification by them. Secondly, that GOD for the cure of their weak consciences tells them in the Gospell, that if they beleeve in Christ, this beleeving shall bee as good as a perfect compleat righteousnesse: by this hee would make GOD a pure Socinian, one who takes the Crowne from Christ, and the righteousnes from GOD and man, and sets it on the head of mans Faith, which in the best beleevers, and even in Abraham himselfe was mingled with much doubting, and many infirmities. In a word, though all Orthodox Divines doe according to the Scriptures, acknowledge that upon a mans beleeving truly in Christ, GOD doth impute to him the perfect, and compleat righteousnes of Christ, which is made his before he can truly apply it by Faith. Yet it can never enter into the heart of a true Christian, but his soule will abhorre to thinke, that any mans beleeving should bee to him as good, as perfect compleat righteousnes, or that GOD should accept it in stead of perfect righteousnesse, and rather then the righteousnes of Christ GOD and man, who is made unto us of GOD righteousnes, 1 Cor. 1.30. and in whom we are found to have the righteousnes of GOD by faith, Philip. 3.9. To conclude this passage, let me adde this as a foule absurdity. For if hee speake by experience, that conscience leads men naturally to thinke that there can be no iustification without righteousnesse, which is a perfect fulfilling of the Law. Which I confesse my conscience and my reason tell mee, and GODS word teacheth▪ mee plainely: Then what is become of his conscience, who contrary to all truth and reason, and the common conscience of all men, will teach iustification, without any true righteousnesse at all either of Christ, or our owne, and will crowne mans weak Faith with the Crown of righteousnesse, which onely belongs to Christ and his perfect obedience.

4. Part. Socinianisme.

SO that now the state and drift of the question is, not either First whether Faith without an object or as separated from Christ, bee imputed for righteousnesse; for such a Faith (doubtles) in the point of justification was never dreamt of by any man, that kept his 〈◊〉 company; men may as well fancy a living man without a soul • , or a wise man without his witts, as a Faith without an object; much lesse was such a Faith conceived by any man, to bee imputed for righteousnesse.

Christianisme.

IN the fourth part, or passage, he first propounds five foolish quaeres, which he denieth to concerne the state of the question. Secondly, he propounds a sixt quaere, and that in plaine, and precise termes hee affirmes. I will first particularly answere the 5. quaeres: and after lay downe the • i • t at large, and addresse my selfe to the confutation of his discourse upon it.

And first, whereas he pronounceth him a mad man, who dreames of faith without Christ the object, or thinks that faith which believes not in Christ, should be imputed for righteousnesse: Here I must be bold to put him in mind; that thus he dreames in the next Chapter, where he boldly affirmes and by divers arguments laboureth, to prove that the Faith of Abraham which was imputed to him for righteousnes, was not a beleeving in Christ, neither was Christ and his righteousnes the object of it. And therefore by his owne confession and his owne wordes; hee doth there play the mad man, and keepes not his wits company, but his fancy runs wild, while he strives to prove that Abrahams Faith imputed to him for righteousnesse was not a beleeving in Christ.

The second Quaere.

NEither is it any part of the intent of the question, to enquire, whether Faith bee the meritorious cause of a mans justification. For both they that affirme, and they that deny the imputation of Faith for righteousnes; deny the meritoriousnes of Faith every way▪ how ever it is true, that they tha • would seeme most to disclaime it, and cast it further from them, doe yet in some of their most beloved tenets draw very neare unto it (as will afterwards appeare.)

Answer.

HEre behold either grosse ignorance or wilfull lying against knowledge, and conscience. For all the learned know that Faith and beleeving are held by the Church of Rome, to be a principall part of mans righteousnesse, and workes which GOD imputes and accounts meritorious, of justification, and of eternall life ex condigno. Yea he himselfe in the passage next before hath plainely affirmed, that Faith to him that beleeveth as Abraham did, is as good as perfect and compleat righteousnes; which if it be true, then Faith must needs be, (as perfect and compleat righteousnesse is) the meritorious cause of justification. And therefore that which he here saith is verified in himselfe, though he would seeme most to disclaime the merit of Faith, and to cast it furthest from him, yet in some of his most beloved tenets, hee drawes very neare to it, yea hee embraceth it with his heart in his whole discourse, the maine drift whereof is to exalt Faith into the place of Christs most meritorious righteousnesse, and to put the Crowne upon it. For what can be imagined more meritorious of justification, then that which GOD in a proper sense judgeth and counteth for righteousnes, and for which he doth justifie men, and counts them righteous.

The third Quaere.

NEither is it the question, whether faith be the formall cause of justification, that is, whether GOD doth justifie a man with his faith, as a Painter makes a wall white with whitenes, or as a Master makes his Scholler learned with knowledge, or learning conveyed into him; for both parties make the forme of justification to be somewhat really different from Faith (which is the genuine tenet of Arminius ▪)

Answer.

THis quere is very ridiculous, for to imagine a quality or act in man, to be the formall cause of justification which is GODS act, is the fancy of a distempered braine, and the conceit of a mad man. His exposition of his quaere shews his want of Logicall skill. For the whitenesse wherewith the Painter makes a wall white, is a forme introduced into the wall, it is not the formall cause of his action of painting; and so learning produced in a scholler, is forma docti, the forme of a Scholler as hee is made learned, not the formall cause, of his masters teaching, surely his expounding of his quaere, by such dissonant similitudes, sheweth that hee had need of a Master to teach him some better knowledg, and learning, and to set on him some better stamp, and superscription, of rationall authority. His phrase (of learning conveyed) is somewhat improper, for learning is not conveyed, into a Scholer, but produced, and begotten, in him. Let him not therefore condemne tropes of speech, seeing he himselfe can, and doth often speak tropically, and improperly.

But to come home to his quaere. If by justification hee meanes imputative justification, in which GOD justifies a man, by imputing righteousnesse to him; and man is justified by believing that GOD counts him righteous in Christ; then wee deny not that faith in some respect, is the formall cause of justification: For in this justification taken passively, as it is mans receiving by faith, that which GOD imputes to him; that is, as it is a mans believing, that God reckons him among the righteous, and counts him to be in the state of a justified person; so his actuall faith, and believing, is the forme of his justification: But take Justification, according to his owne opinion, for GODS imputeing faith in a proper sense, for righteousnesse; Then is faith that somewhat, by which a man stands in the state of a person Justified before GOD, even his formall righteousnesse, or that at least, which is in stead of formall righteousnes. Thus he is every way taken, and entangled in his owne words. Lastly, what that is, which hee saith is the genuine tenet of Arminius; hee doth not expresse whether it be, that faith is really different, or not different, from the forme of Justification; for his words are included in a parenthesis, which might very well be left out: onely this I know, that Arminius professeth this to be his genuine tenet; That faith is imputed to the beleever, for righteousnes. sensu proprio, non m • tonymico, in a proper sense, without a trope, In Epist. ad Hippolitum de Collibus, If elsewhere hee alters his tenet, and writes otherwise; It is but the common disease, the vertigo, and giddinesse of the Socinian faction, to doe as here their fellow disciple doth in this his hovering, and wavering discourse; that is, to say, and gainesay, affirme, and deny, the same things, through the inconstancy of their windy braines, and mindes unsetled.

The 4 Quaere.

NOr yet doth the question make any quaere at all, whether Christ be the sole meritorious cause of justification of a sinner, for both they that goe on the right hand of the question, and they that goe on the left hand, are knit together in the same mind, and iudgment concerning this.

Answere.

WHosoever denyeth such a Spirituall union, & communion between Christ, and the penitent, and believing sinner iustified, as doth make Christs righteousnesse, and satisfaction to become his ransome, and righteousnesse, and to be imputed by GOD to him, and to make him accepted by GOD, as one cleane from the guilt of sinne, and righteous in his sight, This man denyeth Christ to be the meritorious cause, of the Justification of a sinner: For till Christ with his satisfaction, be communicated, and appropriated to the faithfull, yea, till his righteousnes be so made theirs, and set on their skore, that they have a right, and interest in it: Christ is no more meritorious of Justification to them, then hee is to Infidels, and reprobates: for it is as impossible for Christ to be actually meritorious of Justification to any man who hath not an interest in him, as for one mans money to ransom another, who is a captive, upon whose skore it was never set, no • so much interest therein given to him, that it is paid for him and accounted for his ransome.

5 Quaere.

NEither doth the question as it is here propounded, int • nd any dispute at all, whether the active obedience of Christ, falling in with the passive, and considered in coniunction with it, be that whereby Christ merited the Justification of sinners, or that which GOD hath a principall respect, and recourse unto, in the Justification of sinners, for this also is acknowledged on both sides (at least by the greater partie of both)

Answere.

BVt while he denyes GODS communicating, and imputeing Christs whole obedience▪ hee denies the merit of them in our Justification; and when hee affirmes, that faith, and not Christs righteousnesse, is the thing imputed for righteousnesse, to iustification, he denies Christs obedience active, and passive, to be that which GOD hath a principall respect, and recourse unto in the iustification of sinners, and therefore here he contradicts himselfe, and saith untruely▪ that all sides hold the merit of Christs whole obedience, when in his Doctrine he utterly overthrowes it.

The 6 Quaere, which he alloweth, and affirmeth.

BUt lastly the question in plaine tearmes is this, whether the faith of him that truly beleeves in Christ, or whether the righteousnesse of Christ himselfe, that is that obedience that Christ performed to the morall Law (consisting of all those severall and particular acts of righteousnesse, wherein he obeyed in the letter and propriety of it) bee that which GOD imputes to a beleever, for righteousnesse in his justification, so that he that beleeves is not righteous onely by account, or by GODS gracious reputing and accepting of him for such: but is rigidly, literally, and peremptorily righteous, constituted and made as perfectly and compleatly, and legally righteous as Christ himselfe, no difference at all betweene them, quoad veritatem, but onely quoad modum, the justified every whit as righteous as the iustifier, both righteous with the selfesame individuall righteousnes, onely this difference betweene one and the other; the iustified weares i • as put upon him by another by imputation; the iustifier weares it as put upon him by himselfe, or by inherency. That the Scriptures no where countenance any such imputation of the righteousnes of Christ, I trust (the spirit of truth directing and assisting) to make manifest in the sequele of this discourse, and to give good measure of truth to the Reader, heaped up by testimonies from the Scripture, pressed downe by the weight of many arguments, & demonstrations running over, with the cleare approbation of many Authors learned and sound, and every way greater then exception.

Multa fidem promissa levant.

Answere.

TO this question laid downe in plaine, and precise termes, I answer. First that to move this question, except with purpose to discover and oppose Socinus, and his followers who affirme it, and stand for imputation of faith in a proper sense; for righteousnes is not to be tolerated among true Christians: but to dispute for that damned errour, which takes the Crowne from the all-sufficient righteousnes of Christ, and sets on the head of mans weake faith, is most hereticall impudency (as in my whole answere I shall prove aboundantly. Secondly his absurd expounding of Justification by Christs righteousnes imputed; and how in this question the righteousnes of Christ, and the iustifying of men by it, are to be understood; is a notable point either of calumny in slandering our doctrine, and reporting it corruptly, or of subtilty, that when his opinion is proved to be blasphemous, hee may have some starting holes, through which hee may shift away, and make an escape, pleading that hee mistooke our Doctrine of being righteous by Christs righteousnesse imputed, and ignorantly did oppose it.

First no man standing for the imputation of Christs righteousnes, doth affirme that every particular act of Christ which hee performed, was necessary to make up a perfect and sufficient righteousnes: but that his righteousnesse containes in it all his acts of obedience, none denyeth. For suppose our Saviour by reason of imprisonment, or some other restraint and impediment, had beene hindered from doing divers of those workes of mercy, charity and piety, which hee did performe being at liberty, this had not diminished his righteousnes, so long as he had a ready will to doe good upon all occasions, and did good workes when liberty and opportunity served. Secondly none of our Divines doe thinke or write, that Christs righteousnes imputed, and communicated to beleevers, doth make them rigidly, literally, and peremptorily righteous, constituted and made us perfectly compleatly and legally righteous, as Christ himselfe, for though they are iustifi • d by the Communion of Christs satisfaction, and have so much interest in it, as to make them truely righteous, yet they have it not as Christ hath it performed legally by himselfe in his owne person; neither have they power to give the Spirit, whereby they may communicate it to others to justifie them, & to make them righteous. The Wife is endowed with her Husbands honours and riches, and made honourable and rich, but she is not endowed with her Husbands Lordship and dominion over them, so far that she may give them away at her pleasure: but onely posseseth them in him and with him, for her owne use. And so it is betweene Christ and the faithfull, he is righteous rigidly and legally, according to the letter of the Law; They are righteous Evangelically by the Communion of his righteousnes, that is, originally righteous, as the head in a naturall body is sensitive, and hath sense and motion in it as the root and fountaine: They are righteous by Communion from him, and possesse his righteousnes as all the rest of the members, in a living body possesse life by derivation from the heart, not in the same degree as the heart doth, to communicate it to others; but every one so far as to be a living member. Therefore all that hee here saith is but subtilty, calumny, and falsehood, neither Scriptures nor any sound and learned Authors will minister arguments, or demonstrations to him to prove any thing contrary to our Doctrine, concerning the imputation of Christs righteousnes for iustification. The more he strives to wrest and abuse testimonies of Scripture, and learned Authors, the more evident demonstrations will he give of his wickednesse, and wilfull contending against GODS sacred truth.

Socinianisme.

GIve me leave here to mention that by the way, which prevents many mistakes (yea and offences too) in reading the writings of many later Divines (especially of other Churches) touching this point of Justification. If we take the phrase of imputing Christs righteousnes unproperly, and out of the usuall and formall signification of it (as Luther and Calvin, and other Divines of the reformed Churches sometimes doe in their writings) viz For the giving out and bestowing (as it were) the righteousnes of Christ in the returne of it, that is, in the priviledges, blessings and benefits, that are procured and purchased by it for men: So a beleever may be said to be justified by the righteousnes of Christ imputed. But then the meaning can be no more but this. A beleever is justified by the imputation of Christs righteousnes. That is, GOD justifies a beleever for Christs righteousnes sake, and not for any righteousnes of his owne. Such an imputation of the righteousnes of Christ as this is, is no wayes denyed or once questioned. And thus such passages as those in Calvin, GOD freely justifies us by imputing the obedience of Christ unto us, Instit. 1. c. 3.11, and againe a man is not righteous in himselfe, but because the righteousnes of Christ is communicated, or imparted to him by imputation, these and such like expressions in this Author, are to be interpreted by such passages as these (which are frequent in the same Author) Christ by his obedience, procured and merited for us, grace and favour with GOD the Father, and againe Instit. 1.2.17. and againe, 1.3. c. 11.12. Christ by his obedience procured, or purchased righteousnes for us. And againe, in Gal. 3.6. All such expressions as these import the same thing, that wee are justified by the grace of GOD, that Christ is our righteousnesse; and that righteousnes was procured for us by the death, and resurrection of Christ. By all which passages and many more of like importment, that might be produced out of the same Author, its fully evident, that where he mentions any imputation of the righteousnes of Christs in justification, the meaning is onely this, that the righteousnes of Christ is onely the meritorious cause of our justification, and hee hath procured and purchased this for us at GODS hand; that upon our beleeving we should bee accounted righteous by him; or (which is but the same) that our faith should be imputed for righteousnes to us. To which purpose hee speakes more significantly, and expressely in the place last mentioned, Gal. 3.6. men not having righteousnes lodged in them, they obtaine it by imputation, which imputation he thus explicates and interprets. Because GOD doth impute or account their faith unto them, for righteousnes. Divers like passages might be drawne together out of other Authors, which must be seasoned with the same salt of interpretation, to bee made savorie and meet for spirituall nourishment. In the Homilies of our Church, there are severall passages that mention the imputation of Christs righteousnes in justification, for the genuine sense whereof if wee consult with the 11. article of Religion (which is concerning justification) and is framed with all possible exactnes this way (that so few words are capable of) that will lead us directly to the same interpretation of them. Wee are accounted righteous before GOD, (saith our Article) onely for the merit of our LORD, and Saviour Iesus Christ by faith, and not for our owne workes or deservings. Where its to be observed, that we are not said to bee constituted, or made righteous before GOD in justification, but onely that we are accounted or reputed such. 2. Its not said that wee are accounted righteous with the righteousnes, nor yet with the merit of Christ, but onely wee are accounted righteous before GOD, onely for the merit of our LORD Christ by faith. The merit of Christ or of his righteousnes, hath so farre prevailed with GOD on our behalfe, that by our faith we shall bee accounted righteous before him; which is in effect the same truth wee maintaine. viz. that GOD for Christs sake, or for Christs merits sake doth impute our faith for righteousnes unto us. And thus Musculus expresseth himselfe roundly. Faith is accounted for righteousnes for Christs sake; And againe Loc. com. de justifica. This faith ought to be esteemed of us, as that which GOD purposeth for Christs sake, to impute for righteousnes to those that beleeve in him. So Luther also ad Gal. 3.6. GOD for Christs sake accounts this imperfect faith for perfect righteousnes. And Chamier calls remission of sinnes, the righteousnes which is imputed to us. Therefore wheresoever, whether in the Homilies of our Church▪ or in other Authors we meet with any such expressions of the righteousnes of Christ imputed in justification; wee must not understand this righteousnesse of Christ in the letter, propriety, and formality of it, but in the Spirit, or merit of it to be imputed. And this manner of speech to put the name of a thing in the propriety of it, instead of the value, worth, benefit, and returne of it, is both usuall, and familiar in ordinary passage, of discourse amongst us, and very frequent in the Scriptures; when we say, a Merchant grew rich by such, or such a commodity, our meaning is, that hee grew rich by the gaine, or returne of it, hee may be made rich by the commodity, and yet have never a whit of it with him; so when we say, such a man grew rich by his place or office, our meaning is, that he grew rich by such gaine, or profit, as his office afforded him; we do not meane that the place it selfe, or office, were his riches; so it may be said, that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ, and yet not have the righteousnesse it selfe upon us by imputation, or otherwise, but onely a righteousnesse procured, and purchased by it, really, and essentially, differing from it, viz. remission of sinnes, as will appeare in due time: Thus in the Scriptures themselves there is no figure, or forme of speech more frequent, then to name the thing it selfe in the propriety of it in the stead of the fruite of it, good or bad, benefit, or losse, vantage or disadvantage, merit, or demerit of it. Thus Iob 33.26. GOD is said to render unto man his righteousnesse, the fruit and benefit of his righteousnesse in the favour of GOD, and manifestation of it in his deliverance, and restauration; the righteousnesse it selfe in the propriety of it, cannot bee rendered unto him: So Ephes. 6.8. Whatsoever good thing, any man doth, the same hee shall receive of the LORD: hee shall receive benefit, and consideration from GOD for it▪ so Reve. 14.12. and 13.10. here is the patience and faith of the Saints, that is, the benefit, and unspeakable reward of the faith, and patience of the Saints to bee seene; when the Beast, and all that worship him shall bee tormented in fire, and brimstone for evermore, and those that have constantly suffered for not worshiping him, shall be delivered from drinking of that bitter cup: so Psal. 128.2. Thou shalt eate the labour of thy hands, that is, the fruite of thy labour. So on the other hand Heb. 9.28. To those that looke for him, hee shall appeare the second time without sin; without the guilt or punishment of sinne charged upon him. Gen. 19.15. Least thou be destroyed in the iniquitie of the citie: that is, in that judgement which fell upon them by meanes of their iniquity: In such a construction of speech, as the holy Ghost himselfe useth in these, and such passages in Scripture, the righteousnesse of Christ may be said to be the righteousnes by which we are justified, or which is imputed unto us in justification.

Christianisme.

THis fifth part, or passage, is nothing else, but first the propounding of a new, and strange imputation of Christs righteousnesse contrary to sense and reasō, & to the common signification of the phrase of imputing righteousnesse, or counting a thing for righteousnesse. Secondly, a wresting, and abusing, of some speeches of Scripture, and learned writers, that hee may father on them, an opinion, which they abhorred, and in expresse words, disclaimed, and confuted.

First, hee saith, that the phrase of imputing Christs righteousnesse, is by Luther, Calvin, and other Divines, taken unproperly, and out of the usuall, and formall signification, for the giving, and bestowing of the returne, that is, the priviledges, blessings, and benefits, which are purchased by Christs righteousnesse, for men; and the meaning can be no more but this; that GOD justifies a believer, for Christs righteousnesse sake, and not for any righteousnes of his owne. To this I answere, First, that this signification of the phrase, is so unproper, unusual, & deformed, that it is never found in all the Scriptures, nor any approved Author (as hereafter I shall make manifest) onely Socinus, & they of his faction are coiners, and forgers, of such strange barbarismes. Secondly, it is so contrary to common sense, and reason, that if any man should say, the Sun, the ayre, or other Elements are imputed to us by GOD, because GOD hath given us the benefit of them; every man would laugh at such a barbarisme, even the most simple would discerne it to be ridiculous. If Master Goodwin, or any of his disciples, comeing into some country house for shelter from some cruel tempest, which overtooke him as hee travelled on his journy, should for the benefit which hee received under the mans roofe, presently chaleng, that the house is imputed to him, and is to be counted his, and set on his skore, it is a thousand to one, that the owner of the house, would take him for a mad man, and put a fooles feather in his cap, or cast him out of the doores, by the head and shoulders, for a sawcy companion: hee had not best therefore use such speeches, nor write such phrases with his pen, for if they once proceed out of his mouth, and come to other mens eares, hee will thereby purchase to himselfe much scorne and derision. But let us proceed to examine the instances, by which hee goeth about to proue this strange signification, of the word imputing righteousnesse, wherein righteousnesse is put for the fruit of it by a metonymie of the cause for the effect; imputing is put for bestowing by a new Socinian trope, and GODS bestowing, for mans receiving, by a monstrous metonymie, of one opposit for another: I wonder here by the way, how this man (who disclaimes in the next Chapter, the Apostles using of tropes and figures in the waighty Doctrine of justification, and calles it a monster of speech to use two tropes in one phrase) dares here make in this one phrase, so many tropes, and monstrous figures.

The first instance, which hee brings to prove that Calvin did use the phrase in this signification is this; GOD freely justifies us, by imputing Christs obedience to us: and againe, a man is not righteous in himselfe; but because the righteousnesse of Christ is communicated, and imparted to him by imputation. I might here blame his false quotations, to wit, Instit. 1. c 3.1.11. and 1.2.17. and 1.3.14.17. In which places no such wordes are to be found; but I willingly embrace these words as Calvins, for they are most cleare, and manifest to prove that GOD not onely give us the returne or benefits of Christs righteousnesse, but also doth by imputation communicate, and impart to us the righteousnesse it selfe: so that if this man had studied all his dayes, to contradict his owne opinion, and to confute his forged signification, hee could not have found more ful, plaine, and p • rspicuous words then these of Calvin; for if a man bee not righteous in himselfe, then is hee not righteous by faith in a proper sense, for his faith in a proper sense, is in himselfe. But let us not bee too hastie to insult over his folly; it may bee his impudency will catch at some other words of Calvin, which do not so expressely contradict him, but are more obscure, and them hee will wrest, and abuse to expound Calvins plaine words in a contradictory sense. It is even so indeed, for hee cites in the next place, some more generall and obscure speeches of Calvin, to expound his plaine words, and to make them contradictory to themselves. I have heard absurd fellowes derided for going about to shew obscurum perobscurius, that is, to make men see dark things through greater darknesse, and for running (as the proverb is) out of GODS blessing, into the warme sun: But that any should goe about, to make others see the sun, when it shineth in full strength, by the dimme light of a candle, and to perswade them that the sun is the moone; this is madnes, & deserves that the Lunatike, & Melancholike person so doing should be sent to the Iland of Hellebore, there to inhabit till hee recover his wits. And doth not he so who seekes to make Calvins plaine words, to contradict themselves by citing words, wherein he speakes neither so plainely, nor so fully as in them. But let us see those other speeches of Calvin, which hee brings for this purpose: one is, that Christ by his obedience hath merited, and procured for us favour with GOD his Father. These words doe not prove that the imputing of Christs obedience, and righteousnesse signifies the bestowing of the benefit of it on us, that is GODS favour: but shew clearely the contrary to that which he intends, namely that Christs obedience is made ours, and imputed to us, because it procures to us the favour of GOD, which we cannot enjoy, nor appeare gracious in his sight, unlesse wee bee cloathed, with Christs rich robe of righteousnes, and washed cleane from the guilt of sinne, by his satisfaction imputed to us. Another is, Christ by his obedience hath purchased righteousnes for us; the true and plaine sense of which wordes, is no more but this, that Christ by his obedience hath fulfilled the Law of GOD for us, and we by that obedience are constituted & made righteous, as the Apostle expressely affirmes, Rom. 5.19. Another is that, when we are said to be justified by the grace of GOD, and that righteousnes was procured by the death, and resurrection of Christ: these expressions import the same thing with those, that Christ is our righteousnes, that is by union with him and communion of his righteousnes, which he purchased by his death and resurrection, and which GOD graciously gives to us, wee are justified. Another is, men having not any righteousnes in themselves, they obtaine it by imputation, that is, neither a mans owne workes, nor faith taken in a proper sense, for a gift grace or worke in him, can be his righteousnes, but onely that which is obtained by imputation, to wit, Christs righteousnes apprehended by faith, which when true beleevers have laid hold on, then GOD doth account them righteous, and in this improper sense GOD is said to impute faith for righteousnes. Thus every speech of Calvin which he brings against Calvin himselfe, is like a stone cast against a brasen wall, and rebounds against the caster, and dasheth out the braines of his hereticall opinion. And therefore it was his safest course, onely to tell us of more such passages, but not to recite any more out of Calvin, or other Authors. For being seasoned with the salt of their owne interpretation, they will prove gravell in his mouth, choake him, (and if it be possible) put him to shame and silence.

From Calvin hee comes home to the Homilies allowed in our Church, and they by his owne confession teach, that we are justified by the imputation of Christs righteousnes. But to prove that by the righteousnes of Christ, they meane faith taken in a proper sense, that is, as it is the gift of faith in us, and the operation of it in us, even our beleeving: hee brings the words of the 11. Article of Religion allowed in our Church by Law. viz. we are ac, counted righteous before GOD onely for the merit of our LORD and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, not for our owne workes or deserts; where note, that whereas the Articles send us to the Homilies, as being very profitable, & plaine expositions of them; hee on the contrary sets the cart before the horses to draw them after it. Hee brings the text to expound the commentary or plaine exposition of it. But hee gets no advantage by doing so, for the words of the Article are very exact indeed, and make much for us against his opinion, they shew that the merit of Christ apprehended by faith, is that for which wee are accounted righteous before GOD, and that faith is not our righteousnes, for then wee should bee accounted righteous for a grace in our selves, and for a worke of our owne, performed by us, even our owne beleeving. Oh but the Article doth not say that wee are constituted, and made, but onely accounted righteous: True indeed, the Article doth not speak of fundamentall justification mentioned, Rom. 5.19. but of imputative justification, of which the Apostle speakes, Rom. 4, 3. which necessarily presupposeth the other: For GOD whose judgement is according to truth, cannot judge, and count us righteous, till hee hath communicated Christs righteousnesse to us, and by it, constituted, and made us righteous; which when we by faith, receive, and apply by the assistance of his Spirit, which dwells in us, and makes us one Spirituall, and mysticall body, with Christ; then GOD accounts us righteous, and by our faith, and believing, we obtene, as Abraham did, this testimony from GOD, that we are righteous, as Iustine Martyr saith in the words cited in the next Chapter.

From the Article, and Homilies, hee proceedes to Musculus, Luther, and Chamier, who, though in their Doctrine they are opposit to his opinion, as heaven is to earth, yet hee snatcheth here, and there, some improper speeches out of their writings, which hee wresteth to his purpose; though they doe most plainely expound their owne meaneing to bee contrary to his mind. The words of Musculus are these, Faith is accounted, for righteousnesse for Christs sake: That is, faith is accounted for righteousnesse, and the true believer is counted a righteous man: not sensu proprio, nec per se, sed propter Christum. That is, by reason of Christ, and his righteousnesse, whom the believer apprehendeth, and by faith possesseth his righteousnesse; and againe, this faith ought to be esteemed of us, as that which GOD purposeth for Christs sake to impute for righteousnesse, to those that believe in him, in which words Musculus folowing the phrase of the Apostle, intends no more but this, that wee are not to seeke righteousnes by our owne workes, but by faith in Christ for if wee can obtaine grace to believe in him, and to lay hold on his righteousnesse; wee are for Christ and his righteousnesse sake, upon our believing counted righteous before GOD, because by our communion which wee have with Christ by the Spirit dwelling in us, and enabling us to believe, The righteousnesse of the Law is fulfilled in us imputatively, by the righteousnesse of another, even of Christ, which is also ours, for we are flesh of his flesh, that is▪ one with him; these are Musculus his owne words, in which, hee roundly expresseth himselfe in Rom. 8.4. and 10.3.4▪ Luthers words, at which hee catcheth in vaine, are to the same purpose, in Gal. 3.6. GOD for Christs sake, accounts this imperfect faith, for perfect righteousnesse. Here Luther doth not charge GOD with error, or iniquity in judgement, by judgeing, and accounting, that for perfect righteousnesse, which is imperfect; for his speech is tropicall imitating the phrase of the Apostle; by imperfect faith hee meanes a true believer, by a weak faith, laying, hold on Christs righteousnesse, and by perfect righteousnesse a man set in a state of perfect righteousnesse by communion with Christ; and this is the sense of the words, that if a true believer doth lay hold on Christ by faith, which in the best of us, is but weake, and imperfect; yet GOD accounts him perfectly righteous, with the righteousnesse of Christ, which is most perfect, and compleat. Thus Luther expounds himselfe, 1 Tom. pag 32. Editionis Ienensis: Christ (saith hee) is in us by faith, yea, one with us, but Christ is righteousnesse, and a fulfiller of all GODS commaundements, therefore wee also doe by him fulfill all GODS commandements, when hee is by faith made ours: And 2 Tom. pag. 515. Faith puts us upon Christs workes of righteousnesse, without our owne workes, and translates us out of the exile of our sinnes into the Kingdome of his righteousnes▪ And Tom. 1. pag 106. By faith, our sinnes are made no more our owne, but Christs, upon whom GOD hath laid the iniquities of us all? and againe, all Christs righteousnesse is made ours, for he layeth his hand on us: If a man had the tongue of men and Angels, hee could not speake more fully for the communion, and imputation of Christs righteousnes to believers, for justification, and of their sinnes to Christ for remission: then Luther doth in these, and divers other places, as I shall more fully shew in the second Chapter. As for Chamiers words, who calles remission of sinnes, the righteousnesse which is imputed to us; they shew that faith is not that imputed righteousnesse, for faith, or believing, is our act; remission is GODS act▪ who can forgive sinnes but▪ GOD ▪ But indeed▪ the meaning of Chamier is the same with Calvin, to wit▪ that our cleannesse from the guilt of sinne, which is Passive, remission, or justification, is that which GOD lookes upon in us, when hee counts us righteous in Christ, as I have before shewed: wherefore I conclude with the contradictory of his conclusion (which hee inferres upon the speeches of our Homilies, and of other learned Authors) to weet thus; That wheresoever we find in the Scriptures, or any Authors of sound learning; this phrase of faith, or believing, imputed for righteousnesse, we must not understand faith in a proper sense, but the righteousnesse of Christ, even his fulfilling of the Law for us, which together with the power, and merit of it, so far as every believer hath need, is communicated to him, and imputed to him for justification: For as a Merchant cannot be, said to be enriched by the gaine of a commodity, which never was his owne, and in which hee never had any interest, or propriety, nor any man by an office which was never his owne, nor by him executed: So none can have the merit, and benefit of Christs righteousnesse, nor be said to bee thereby justified, neither can any such thing be imputed to them, except they have a propriety in it, and communion of it. Thus his instances, and similitudes, are turned against himselfe, to the confusion of his haereticall opinion. But that his sinne may appeare out of measure sinfull, hee doth not content himselfe, with his abusing, wresting, and perverting of the godly sayings of other Authors, and using similitudes which are most contrary to his purpose; but hee also layeth profane hands, on the holy Scriptures. That excellent saying, Iob 33, 26. which Master Perkins learnedly expounds to be meant of Christs righteousnesse, which when men humbly seeke to GOD, by repentance, and faithfull prayers, GOD renders unto them by renuing their sense and assurance of their communion with Christ in his whole satisfaction. This Doctor novice most Popishly applyes to a mans owne righteousnesse, and saith, that GODS rendring to a man his righteousnesse is giving him the benefit of it, not the righteousnesse it selfe: And yet if wee should grant what hee perversely seekes, it will availe him nothing; for as the fruite, and benefit, which GOD renders to a man, is not the fruit of a righteousnesse, in which he hath no propriety, or interest, but is his righteousnesse, so the fruite, and benefit, which we receive of Christs righteousnesse, GOD renders to us when that righteousnesse is become ours in the propriety of it: That place Ephes. 6.8. whatsoever good a man doth the same hee shall receive of the LORD: it is for us, and against himselfe, for as the good which a man receives from GOD for well doing, is the good fruite of his owne well doing, so is the fruite, and benefit which wee receive in our justification▪ the fruite of Christs righteousnes made ours, and imputed to us: Those speeches Revel. 13.10. and 15.10. here is the faith and patience of the Saints, &c. are not to be understood of the fruite, and reward of their patience (as the circumstances shew, which are killing, and slaying, and leading into captivitie) but of the patience, and faith themselves, that in such times they are seene, tride, and proved, and GOD at such times gives them patience, and faith, by threatning, and foretelling the finall destruction of their enemies; as learned Brightman truely expounds the wordes. Besides if patience and faith were here used to signifie the fruit, and benefit of patience and faith: yet he cannot say it is the fruit of any patience, or faith, but of the Saints themselves who receive the benefit. Likewise if wee grant, that in the other places Psal. 128.2. Labour signifies the fruit of labour, and Heb. 9.28. Sin signifies the punishment of sinne, and Gen. 19.15. iniquitie signifies the judgement of GOD on Sodom for iniquitie, by a trope or Metonymie of the cause for the effect. This proves that faith which is the hand, or instrument of the soule, receiving Christ with his righteousnes, may by the same trope be used to signifie that state of righteousnes, which we receive by it as by an hand or instrument. Thus while he runs against the invincible rocke of the holy Scriptures, and seekes to turne them like a rowling stone against a barke, they rowle and rebound back, and tumbling upon him grind him to powder· For if hee had ten thousand instances of Scripture, wherein the fruite and benefit which men receive, are signified by the names of the things which are the causes, and meanes of them▪ yet still it will appeare that the fruite is not received except men have first an interest, and propriety in the causes and meanes of it. And thus you see his fift part, or passage proved to bee a rotten heap of stinking lyes, absurdities and grosse errors.

Socinianisme.

WHerefore to draw towards the close of this first Chapter, and withall to give a little more light, that it may bee seene to the bottome cleerely, both what wee affirme, and what we deny in the question propounded: First when we affirme the faith of him that beleeveth to be imputed for righteousnes; The meaning is not either, 1o. That it should be imputed in respect of any thing it hath from a man himselfe, or as it is a mans owne act, nor yet in respect of any thing it hath from GOD himselfe, or from the spirit of GOD producing, & raising of it in the soule (though it be true, it requires the lighting downe of the mighty arme of GOD, upon the soule to raise it. Neither 3o is it imputed for righteousnes in respect of the object, or as, or because it layeth hold upon Christ, or his righteousnes (though it be also true that that faith that is imputed for righteousnes must of necessity lay hold upon Christ; and no other faith is cable of this imputation besides) because if faith should justifie or be imputed as it layes hold upon Christ, it should justifie out of the inhaerent dignity & worth of it and by vertue of that which is naturall and intrinsecall to it, there being nothing that can be conceived more naturall, and essentiall to faith, then to lay hold upon Christ: this is the very life, and soul of it, and that which gives it its specificall being, and subsistence. Therefore to make the object of faith, (as such) the precise, and formall ground of its imputation, is to make hast into the midst of Samaria, whilest men are confident, they are travailing towards Dotha • . Its the giving of the right hand of felowship, to the Romish justification, which makes faith the meritorious cause of it (in part.)

But lastly, when with the Scriptures we affirme that faith is imputed for righteousnesse: our meaning is simply, and plainely this, that as GOD in the first covenant of workes required an absolute, and through obedience to the whole Law, with continuance in all things, for every mans justification, which perfect obedience had it beene performed had beene a perfect righteousnesse to the performer, and so would have justified him:

So now in the new covenant of grace, GOD requires nothing of any man for his justification, but onely faith in his Sonne, which faith, shal be as availeable, & effectuall to him for his justification, as a perfect righteousnes should have beene under the first covenant: this is that which is meant when faith is said to bee imputed for righteousnes, which is nothing but that which is taught generally by Divines, both ancient and moderne. Sic decretum dicit a Deo, ut cessante lege solam fidem gratia Dei posceret ad salutem. Ambrosius. In Rom. 4. that is, that the Apostle saying, that to him that beleeveth his faith is imputed for righteousnes, affirmeth that GOD hath decreed that the Law ceasing, the grace of GOD will require of men onely faith for salvation: and again upon Chap. 9. of the same Epistle, Sola fides posita est ad salutem, onely Faith is appointed to salvation. Calvin writing upon Rom. 10.8. hath wordes of the same importance, and somewhat more cleare, and full, ex hac distinctionis nota colligimus, sicut lex opera exigit, Evangelium nihil aliud postulas, nisi ut fidem afferrent homines ad recipiendam Dei gratiam: that is, from this distinction we gather, that as the Law exacted workes; so the Gospell requires nothing else, but that men bring faith to receive the grace of GOD. If GOD requires faith in the Gospell, for that same end for which he requireth workes, or perfect righteousnes in the law; it necessarily followes that he shall impute this faith for that righteousnes, that is accept from men upon the same termes, and bee countable unto them the same favours, rewards, and priviledges upon it, that should have beene given unto men, in regard of that righteousnes, had it beene performed or fulfilled: otherwise he should require it for such an end, or upon such tearmes as hee would refuse to make good unto it, when the creature hath exhibited and tendered it unto him. To require it for righteousnes, or in stead of righteousnes, and not to accept it for righteousnesse, when it is brought to him, should bee as apparant a breach of Covenant with GOD, as it would be in a rich creditour, that should compound and agree with his poore debtors for 1. in the pound, or the like, but when they brought the mony to him, should refuse to take it upon any such tearmes, or to discharge them of their debt, and give them out their bonds.

Christianisme.

IN this last part or passage which is a meere confusion, and distraction of wordes, hee gives more then a little light, that his Socinian heresie in this point of justification maintained with much non sense, may bee seene to the bottome cleerely. First, hee takes upon him to shew that faith is imputed, and how it is imputed. Secondly hee strives to shew that Christs righteousnes is not imputed. The first is in the wordes before recited. The second followes hereafter. First I will sift his wordes already rehearsed, And after proceed to the second. The summe of his speech last recited, may be reduced into a Syllogisme of non sense, without forme mood or figure. The proposition and assumption whereof are contradictory. And the conclusion damned Socinian heresie, so that here I may say with the Poet. Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici?

His proposition runnes thus. Faith is neither imputed for righteousnes, in respect of any thing which it receives from man, the proper subject of it, nor as it is mans act who useth it, and performes the acts of beleeving, nor in respect of any thing which it hath from GOD, or his spirit in the production of it, nor in respect of the object Christ and his righteousnes, nor in respect of the life and soule of it, which gives to it the specificall being, and subsistence, to wit, the application of Christ, and laying hold on him.

The Assumption.

BVt faith is imputed to men, and is counted, and accepted as sufficiently for justification, and upon the same tearmes under the Gospell, as perfect righteousnes of workes and of obedience to the whole Law, was in the first covenant and under the Law: So all Divines hold both ancient and moderne.

The Conclusion.

THerefore upon mens beleeving, GOD shall bee as countable to them, to give them the same favour, rewards and privileges, that should have beene given unto them in regard of the perfect righteousnesse of workes, and of the Law, if they had fulfilled it.

First for his negatives heaped up in the proposition, wherein wee have a narration of what he holds not: if we lay them altogether, they will conclude, that faith is no way at all imputed for righteousnes, for neither in respect of the subject in which the habit of it resteth, nor in respect of the actes which man performes by it, nor in respect of any thing, which GOD by his spirit gives it in the production of it, that is, for no quantity quality, or vertue in it, nor in respect of the object Christ, nor in respect of the life, soule, or forme which gives it the specificall being, and subsistence, so hee plainely professeth, and besides these there is no other respect in which it may bee imputed, as al reasonable men do know. Therefore the conclusion is, that it is not imputed at all.

But yet in affirming nothing, but denying all respects, which reason can conceive in faith, and in roming from himselfe and us, he kicks at us, and by the way snarls and bytes at the truth. For it is most certaine, that faith is said to be imputed in respect of GODS production of it by his spirit, and in respect of the object Christ, and his righteousnes which it doth lay hold on and apply. For the spirit of regenerarion being shed on us through Christ, dwelling in us, and making us one body with Christ, & partakers of his whole satisfaction, doth worke iustifying faith in us, and this union and conjunction, which in order of nature, goeth before faith and concurres to the production of it, is the ground, and reason, of the imputation of it. If Christ were not made ours, and his satisfaction communicated to us, faith could not truely believe in Christ, nor truely apply his righteousnesse, therefore the two last of his negatives are false, and haereticall. Besides, it is not to be passed over in silence, that here againe he contradicts himselfe, and grants that Christ, with his righteousnesse, is the object of faith, and laying hold on him, is the life, and soule of faith; which hee utterly denyeth, and disputes to the contrary in the next Chapter, as I have touched before.

As for his assumption, the sum whereof is, that faith is imputed, and accepted of GOD, for righteousnesse, upon the same termes, that perfect righteousnes of works should have beene in the first Covenant; This is Socinian haeresie, in the highest degree; so grosse, and palpable, and so openly, and expressely affirmed by him, that no salt of interpretation can keepe it from stinking in the nostrills of any true Christian. Here also wee may note his ignorance, absurdity, and nonsense; for instead of shewing in what respect faith is imputed, hee affirmes, that hee holds it to be imputed instead of perfect righteousnesse of our owne workes, and that it is in the new Covenant a condition answerable and every way as sufficient and availeable to procure all favours, rewards, and priviledges, to us from GOD, as the righteousnesse of workes, was in the Covenant of workes: and both here, and in the conclusion, hee makes faith as meritorious, and as strong a bond to tye GOD, and make him countable for all favours, rewards, and priviledges, under paine of being counted a covenant breaker; as the perfect fulfilling of the Law, by every man in his owne person, was in the covenant of workes, and here doth more then give the right hand of fellowship, to Popish justification, for hee transcends them, and makes GOD more obliged to men for them, and more countable then any Papists ever did. As for the testimonies which hee brings, out of Ambrose, and Calvin, they are nothing to his purpose; they onely affirme, that as the Law was mans onely guide to salvation, and the rule of righteousnesse in the old covenant; So faith in the Gospel, is the onely way to salvation in the new covenant, and the meanes by which we receive the grace of GOD▪ and the righteousnesse of Christ offered to us for justification, and salvation.

Socinianisme.

SEcondly, when we deny the imputation of Christs righteousnes in justification, we neither deny the righteousnesse of Christ in it selfe, we rather suppose and establish it, neither 2o doe wee deny the absolute necessity of it, both to the justification, and salvation of a sinner: neither 3o do wee deny a meritorious efficiencie, and causalitie in that righteousnes in respect of the justification of a sinner, but verily believe and conceive, that GOD justifieth all that are justified, not simply or barely, for Christs sake, or for his righteousnes sake (for a man may doe a thing for his sake whom he much loves, and respects, though he hath not otherwise deserved it at his hands) but for the righteousnesse of Christ, his death being taken into the consideration with it, why GOD should justifie those that believe in him. But 4o and lastly, that which we deny in denying the imputation of Christs righteousnesse, is this, that GOD should looke upon a believing sinner, and account of him, as one that hath done in his owne person, all that Christ did in obedience to the morall Law, and hereupon pronounce him righteous: or: (which is the same) that GOD should impute unto him those particular acts of obedience which Christ performed in that nature, and property of them, so that hee should stand as righteous before GOD, as Christ himselfe, or (which is the same) righteous with the selfe same righteousnesse wherewith Christ was righteous, and so GOD make himselfe countable to him for such obedience imputed in as great matters of rewards as he would have beene for the like obedience personally performed by himselfe; in a word, this is that which we deny, and this is that which we affirme, concerning the righteousnesse of Christ, in the justification of a sinner, that GOD cloathes none with the letter of it, but every man that believes with the spirit of it. 1. that this righteousnes of Christ, is not that, that is imputed unto any man for his righteousnesse; but is that for which righteousnes is imputed to every man that believeth: a justified person may in such a sense be said to be cloathed with Christs righteousnesse, as Pauls necessities were relieved, and supplied by his hands. Act. 20.24. these hands (saith hee) have ministred to my necessities. Paul neither eate his fingers, nor spun out the flesh of his hands, into cloathing, and yet was both fed, and cloathed with them: So may a believer be said to be cloathed with the righteousnesse of Christ, and yet the righteousnes of Christ it selfe, not to be his cloathing, but onely that which procureth his cloathing unto him, and so Calvin calls that clothing of righteousnes wherewith the beleever is cloathed in his justification, Justitiam morte & resurrectione Christi acquisitam, a righteousnes procured by the death, and resurrection of Christ. This righteousnes of Christ may be said to be the righteousnes of a beleever, in such construction of speech, as the knowledge of GOD and of Christ, is said to be eternall life. Iohn 17.3. viz. in way of causality, not in that formality of it, and againe the righteousnes of a beleever in his justification, may be tearmed the righteousnes of Christ in such sense, as the favour of GOD in deliverance of a man out of trouble, is called a mans righteousnes. Iob. 33. verse 26. or as the nation and people of the Jewes are often in the Scriptures called Iacob, they were not Iacob in the propriety of his person, but in his descent and propagation; so may the righteousnes of a beleever bee called the righteousnes of Christ, because it is a righteousnes descended from it, and issuing as it were out of the loynes of it. What hath been affirmed, and what hath beene denyed in the question, wee come now to prove and demonstrate the truth of both. 1o From the authority of Scriptures. 2o From the grounds of reason; as for the third way of proofe and confirmation by consent of Authors, we shall not assigne a peculiar place for that by it selfe, but interlace our other proofes occasionally with such testimonies as we have received from learned, and judicious men for confirmation of our point to be discussed.

Christianisme.

THe second thing in this last part or passage is a profession of his meaning in denying Christs righteousnes to be imputed in justification.

First because he would have an adversarie for him to triumph over, and least his admired sophistry should be idle, for want of an opposite against which it might magnifie it selfe in the eyes of senselesse sectaries; hee suffers Christs righteousnes to have a being, and doth not deny it in it self, but doth approve and establish it, and so by good hap hee escapes one base absurdity in his disputing, to wit, denying of the subject of the question.

Secondly, because he would have his competitor, or corrivall to be of some great note, the more to glorifie his victory over him, hee doth not deny an absolute necessity of Christs righteousnes, both to the justification and salvation of sinners; we thanke him, that for saving of himselfe from the hatred and skorne of the world, he would grant so much of truth openly testified in Scripture. Thirdly he doth not deny a meritorious efficiency, or causality of Christs righteousnesse in respect of the justification of a sinner. In this hee comes somewhat neere to us, but I doubt it is not in sincerity and truth, but rather in show, to make the ignorant to conceive better, or at least, not to judge so hardly of his opinion, for marke his slubbering, and dawbing, with untempered morter, I verily believe (saith hee) that GOD justifieth them that are justified, not simply, or barely, for Christs sake, or for his righteousnesse sake, but for the righteousnesse of Christ, his death being taken into consideration with it: here you see a plaine contradiction, for Christs righteousnesse, his death, being taken into consideration with it, is no more but his perfect righteousnesse, because his active obedience, without his passive obediēce to death, is no perfect fulfilling of the Law; so that here is a contradiction, even an affirmation, and negation of one, and the same thing, in one continued sentence. The parenthesis also, which hee inserts to trouble the reader, is false, and frivolous, to wit, (for a man may doe a thing for his sake, whom hee much loves, and respects, though hee hath not otherwise deserved it at his hands.) First let mee aske him what is his drift in these words? It seemes to mee, either to be wholly superfluous, or to intimate that Christs righteousnes did not deserve our justification at GODS hands, but that GOD out of love and respect to Christs person, without the merit of his righteousnesse, doth accept us, and count us righteous. Secondly, let mee tell him, that when a man doth any thing for another out of love, without desert, hee doth it for his owne loves sake, and for the magnifying of his kindnes, and free bounty▪ and thus GOD did in giving his Sonne for us, undeserving sinners: But when justice doth stand up in strength and pleades for right, as in the justification of sinners, then a full satisfaction must come between, & love can no otherwise be rightly, and lawfully shewed, but by making a satisfaction, or by apposing one who is sufficient to make satisfaction, that no evill but good may be done to the party loved, and respected: and thus the case stands in justification of sinners. Thirdly, though a man out of his corrupt, and carnall love, may doe a thing for his favorite, without desert, or just consideration, yea contrary to justice, yet it is not so with GOD, who is no respecter of persons, in matter of justice, and justification: Hee doth never out of his free love decree to doe any thing, but withall, hee decrees, and ordeines a just consideration, why hee should doe it; so that this is a frivolous parenthesis, both false and from the matter.

In the fourth place hee sheweth what hee denies in denying the imputation of Christs righteousnesse, viz. That GOD lookes upon a believing sinner, and accounts him as one that hath done in his owne person, all that Christ did in obedience to the morall Law, and hereupon pronounceth him righteous, so that he doth stand as righteous before GOD, as Christ himselfe, because righteous with the same righteousnesse; and so GOD makes himselfe countable to him for such obedience imputed in as great matters of reward, as hee would have beene for the like obedience, particularly performed by himselfe. In this expression of himselfe, here is much calumny, error, and untruth. First he doth calumniate, and slander the true Doctrine of Christ professed by us concerning the imputation of Christs righteousnesse; for no man in his right wits did ever hold that imputation of Christs righteousnesse to believers, is GODS accounting them to have performed in their owne persons, every act of obedience, which Christ performed to the Law▪ This is a manifest contradiction, fitter for a giddy fancy to imagine, then for any true Christian to professe. The truth which wee professe is this, that true believers being by that one spirit which workes faith in them, united to Christ, and made partakers of his righteousnesse, and believing, and applying by faith to themselves, his satisfaction particularly are accounted truly righteous before GOD by communion, and imputation, not by legall performance in their owne persons: And though the righteousnesse by which they are justified, is the very same which is in Christ, and which hee performed, yet it doth not follow, that they thereby are as fully righteous as Christ himselfe, for he is originally righteous, by his owne personall righteousnes, as the justifier; they are righteous by communion, and imputation, as justified: And as the hands and feet, and other inferior members, live by the same life, and are sensitive by the same sense which is originally in the heart, and head of the same body; yet they are not so lively, and sensitive, as the heart and head, but in a competent measure, and proportion, fit for every one of them. So it is in the mysticall body of Christ, betweene him the head, and them his believing, and justified members, as I have before touched. So that here we have an intollerable calumny, and slander, laid upon GODS sacred truth, and the true professors of the same. Secondly, he utters a notorious untruth when he saith, that to bee righteous by the same righteousnes which Christ performed, is nothing else, but to be performers of every act of his obedience in our persons. Thirdly, it is a wicked error to thinke (as hee doth) that obedience and righteousnes, ether performed by ourselves or communicated to us, should make GOD countable to us▪ that is, bound to give us the greatest rewards. For the righteousnes of justification and the holynes, and obedience of sanctification, are onely free gifts which GOD gives to make us capable of eternall life, and fit to stand in his presence, and to see and enjoy his glory; not bands to tye himselfe, and to make him countable to us; for if we be righteous what give we to him, or what receiveth he at our hands? Iob 35.7. eternall life, though by Christ purchased for us; yet is the free gift of GOD in Christ. Rom. 6.23. Here therefore this sublimate Doctor doth bewray his owne ignorance in the maine mysteries of salvation, and is as David saith, Psal. 14. become filthy, stinking, and abominable in his thoughts, and imaginations, concerning GOD himselfe, while hee doateth after Socinian subtilties, and sets himselfe to be singular, by preaching his fond errors, and heresies. Lastly, after all this, in conclusion, hee takes upon him to elude, and evacuate those most plaine testimonies of holy Scripture, wherein Christ is sayd to cloath, and cover us with the garments of salvation, and the robe of his righteousnesse Isa 61.10. that our sinnes and staines, being thereby covered, Psal. 32.1. sinne might no more be imputed to us; but we in the robes of his righteousnesse may stand cloathed as with long white linnen robes, Revel. 19.8. And like Iacob in the garments of the first borne, yeelding a sweet smelling savour, may be accepted of GOD our heavenly father. First hee saith, that GOD in the justification of sinners, cloathes none with the letter of Christs righteousnesse, but every man that believes with the Spirit of it: that is, not with the righteousnesse it self, but with the fruite and benefit of it: that is, with faith counted for righteousnesse, where note, that (in his conceipt,) the righteousnesse of a justified man, is a thing inhaerent in himselfe, and a worke performed in his owne person, not communicated to him from another, ab extra, as garments are, and so no cloathing: here is one grosse absurdity, like as if one should say, a mans cloathes are not on him, but in him. That speech of Paul, these hands have ministred to my necessitie, Act 20.34. are nothing to the purpose, for he doth not say his hands were his necessary meat, and cloathes, but by working did get him necessaries; and so Christ by his obedience procured righteousnesse for us, which he doth communicate to us, and cloathes us with, and by GOD it is imputed to us: and this Calvin calles righteousnesse gotten by Christs death and resurrection: and all this is for us, and against himselfe.

The other instances which hee brings from Scripture to prove that Christs righteousnesse is by a metonymie of the cause for the effect, used to signifie the fruite and effect of it in us, prove no such thing at all. The first of them Iohn 17.3. (this is eternall life, to know thee the onely true GOD, &c. It is mistaken, for to know GOD, and Christ (that is, to have experimentall knowledge of GOD, and Christ, and to enjoy GOD in Christ, as the word (know) by an Hebraisme signifies) is not there mentioned, as the efficient cause of eternall life, but as the thing wherein it doth formally consist: So also that speech, Iob 33, 26. (as Master Perkins truely expounds it) doth not speake of the fruite of a mans righteousnesse, which GOD renders to him; but of the righteousnesse of Christ, which GOD renders to a man a fresh, and after temptation, doubting, and distresse, makes him feele and enioy it in himselfe, when by repentance, and humble and faithfull prayer hee seekes it.

And although the nation of the Israelites are often (as hee alledgeth) called by the name of Jacob in Scripture, because he was their Father, and they his naturall progeny: yet this proves onely, that the Scripture useth tropes of speech many times, which we acknowledge willingly, and in the next Chapter will prove fully. Where hee forgetting, and contradicting himselfe, utterly disclaimes tropes and figures, and exclaimes against all the learned, who hold that Saint Paul useth a trope in saying that faith is imputed for righteousnesse: Well, for the present wee will grant him, that our cleannesse from the guilt of sinne, and the state of righteous, and justified persons, wherein we stand before GOD, being the issue and fruite of Christs satisfaction communicated to us, may very well be called by a trope the righteousnesse of Christ; but this doth not overthrow, but rather strongly prove the communion, and imputation of Christs righteousnes to us. Thus we see how hee labours in the fire, and in vaine beats his braines, and out of the confusion, and distemper of them, doth say, and gainsay, affirme and deny the same things oftentimes; being like a clowd without water, carried about with winds, sometimes one way, and againe the contrary way, and never settling upon solid truth, nor building upon a sure foundation. Now what he promiseth in the conclusion of this Chapter▪ you shall see how hee performeth by my answer, to his second Chapter, wherein as he begins here, so he goeth on entangling and beating himselfe, forging and falsifying, and in every passage discovering his ignorance and folly, mingled with much impudency & hereticall perversenesse and pravity, which that it may better appeare, and that we may see his Socinian heresie to the bottome clearely, I will lay downe the chiefe heads of the Doctrine of Justification, as it is taught in the Scriptures, and maintained by all Orthodox Divines, both ancient and moderne.

Justification taken in a full sense is that act of GOD, by which he justifies his elect, and faithfull in his son Iesus Christ by the communion of his spirit; that is, doth make them righteous by Christs perfect righteousnes, and full satisfaction spiritually made theirs, and doth count them righteous by imputing the same unto them, and doth declare them to be righteous inwardly to their owne consciences by the inward testimony of his spirit, and the inward sense and experience of inward grace; and outwardly in this life before men, and publiquely in the last judgements by their good workes, which are evidences of their faith, and of their union and communion with Iesus Christ, and of their regeneration by his spirit, and adoption unto GOD in him.

First GOD the father is the primary efficient cause of our justification. Rom. 3.26.30. and 4.5. and 8.33. Secondly the inward moving cause is GODS owne free grace favour and love Rom. 3.24. Tit. 3.7. The outward moving or impulsive cause is Christs mediation Isa 53.11. Iohn 1 • .21. 1 John 2.2.

The instrumentall cause is Christ the mediatour communicating his whole obedience to us, when by the spirit which GOD sheds on us through him, wee are made one body with him, 1 Cor. 12.13. Tit. 3.6. The meanes by which wee come to bee justified are, either principall; viz. the lively operation of the spirit, spirituall union with Christ, the pure and holy humanity of Christ, or lesse principall▪ the word and ministery thereof, the Sacraments, faith and the like, as appeares, Rom. 3.25.28. and 10.14. Gal. 3.8. Heb. 9.14. 1 Iohn 1. • . Dan. 12.3.

The materiall cause, that is, the righteousnesse it selfe by which they are justified, that is, made, counted, and declared to be righteous, is Christs perfect righteousnes obedience and satisfaction, which he, GOD and man performed in our nature, in the state of humiliation, Rom. 3.24.25. Rom. 5.19. and 8.4. The formall cause of justification is that communion between Christ and us, and that reciprocall imputation of our sinnes to Christ, and of his righteousnes, and full satisfaction to us, which communion ariseth, and floweth from the spirit which GOD sheds on us through Christ, which spirit dwelling in us (in some measure, so as he dwelleth in the man Christ, from whom hee is derived to us) doth make us one spirituall body with Christ, and works in us faith and all holy graces, & affections by which we adhere and cleave to Christ, and apply and inioy his righteousnes, so that it is our formall righteousnes not inherently, but imputatively, and by spirituall communion, for it is that which doth constitute, and make us righteous, Rom. 5.17, 18, 19. and 8.4. and • 0.4. and 2 Cor. 5.21.

The immediate fruit and benefit of our iustification, is the state of righteousnes and of cleanenesse from the guilt of sinne, and acceptation with GOD, Rom. 3.25. and 4.2. also peace with GOD, Rom. 5.1.

The end and use of our iustification is the satisfaction and declaration of GODS iustice, in that he iustifieth us by the full satisfaction of Christ, and not otherwise, neither by it till he communicates it to us and makes it ours; Also the manifestation of his mercy, free grace and bounty, in that he would give his sonne to become man, and to make satisfaction to the full, when no other could bee found able to satisfie for us, neither could his iustice by any other meanes be satisfied, also in that hee would give us his spirit to unite us to his sonne, and to bring us to a true communion of his righteousnes, and to worke faith in us by which we receive and enioy Christ with all his benefits, Rom. 3.24.26. Tit. 3.4. Ephes. 1.6.12.

The contrary Doctrine of Socinus ▪ and his faction.

THough they grant that GOD is the chiefe efficient cause, and his free grace, mercy, and love, the inward moving cause; yet they erre in the impulsive and instrumentall cause, and make Christ and his righteousnes no otherwise meritorious, but by procuring that GOD should count faith in a proper sense, for righteousnes to them that beleeve, neither any other way an instrument of iustification, but by bringing faith to this honour, to be accepted for, or in stead of righteousnes.

Secondly they deny all causality of Christs righteousnes in justification, except onely by way of efficiency: whereas indeed and in truth it is the matter about which justification is exercised, for what is justification but the communicating of that righteousnes to men, and the imputing of it, and declaring of them to be thereby righteous? the very name of justification signifies so much: and what is the forme of a justified man as he is righteous, but righteousnes? to imagine a righteous, and justified man without righteousnes, is as if one should dreame of a living man without life or soule.

Thirdly they deny the principall ground of justification, to wit, spirituall union and communion with Christ, which cannot stand without imputation of Christs righteousnes; for communion and union doe necessarily bring with them imputation. If wee have communion of Christs satisfaction and righteousnesse, GOD must needs judge and count them to be ours, for his judgement is according to truth. And faith which is an inferiour and subordinate meanes, they set up in the place of Christs righteousnes.

Fourthly as they deny the materiall cause of iustification, by reiecting Christs righteousnes from being the proper matter about which it is exercised; so also the forme or formall cause, even the mutuall communion, and reciprocall imputation of our sinnes to Christ, and Christs satisfaction and righteousnes to us, whereby it is made our formall righteousnes not inherently, but spiritually and imputatively, for they acknowledge no formality, but inherency.

Fiftly they deny the immediate fruit and benefit of justification, to wit that state of righteousnes, cleannesse from the guilt of sinne, and acceptation with GOD, wherein the justified are firmely established before GOD, and stand in his sight, which is the chiefe honour and prerogative of GODS Saints, and their greatest comfort in all their afflictions, and temptations.

Lastly, they take away the true end, and use of justification, to wit, the revelation of GODS infinite justice, mercy, bounty, and free grace; for they overthrow his infinite justice, while they teach that GOD by his soveraign power puts his justice to silence; and without Christs full satisfaction, made to it, for us, and made ours by communion, and imputation, doth accept our weake faith in stead of it, and makes himselfe as countable for it in all rewardes, as hee would doe for the perfect fulfilling of the Law by our selves, or by Christ in our stead. They extenuate and vilifie GODS mercy, bounty, and free grace; by setting up faith in stead of Christs perfect righteousnes, and making it the condition of the new covenant. For whatsoever is given or promised to us, upon a condition to be on our part performed, is not a gift of free grace and bounty. And when justice may bee turned out of doores, without a compleat satisfaction; there is nothing left for mercy wherein to shew the power of it. The infinite mercy of GOD doth appeare in this, that, when his infinite iustice required that wee should all be damned without a full satisfaction (which none could make but the sonne of GOD in our nature) and that performed for us, and made ours; Hee would give his onely sonne for us to satisfie in our stead, and his holy spirit to unite us to his Sonne, and to bring us to communion of his satisfaction.

Thus wee see that they shut up the doore of Heaven, and stop that onely way to eternall life, by overthrowing justification, which is the making and accounting of men righteous, by that onely righteousnes of Christ, besides which there is not any other to be found sufficient, and able to beare us out before GODS tribunall of justice. Now let all true Christians well weigh and consider the difference, betweene truth and errour, life and death, true Christianity and Antichristian infidelity; for such is the damned Socinianisme before discovered. And if any man in the midst of the light of the Gospell shining so clearely, and discovering so plainely cursed heresie, will be blind; let him bee more blind still; and if any will be filthie, let them bee more filthie still. And if any love not the LORD Jesus, but hate and blaspheme his truth, let him be Anathema Maranatha. Amen.

THE PREFACE.

WHat it is that should be imputed for righteousnesse in justification; all the wisdome, and learning under heaven, is not so fit or able to determine, as the holy Ghost speaking in the Scriptures, being the great Secretary of heaven, and privie to all the wayes, and counsels of GOD: and therefore there is none to him, to take up any difference, or to comprimise betweene the controverters, about any subiect in Religion.

All the difficulty, and question is, because though hee speakes upon the house top, yet hee interprets in the eare: all the Christian world either knowes (or readily may know) what hee speakes in the Scripture: But what his meaning and intent is in any thing, he leaves unto men to debate, and make out amongst them. To some indeed hee reveales the secret of his counsell, the Spirit of his letter, in some particulars; but because these are not marked in the forehead, therefore their apprehensions and thoughts (though the true begotten of the truth) are yet in common esteeme, but like other mens, till some stamp or superscription of rationall authority be set upon them to make the difference, yea many times, the nearer the truth, the further off from the approbation of many, and sometimes, even of those, that are greatest pretenders to the truth.

The Answere.

THe first part or speech, is a solid truth, to wit, that no wisdome, and learning under heaven, is so fit or able to determine what is imputed, for righteousnes in justification, as the holy Ghost speaking in the Scriptures. But this truth he contradicts in the next words which follow immediately, where he saith, that the holy Ghost leaues his meaning, and intent to men to debate, which if it be true, then men are to determine, and to take up every difference about any subject in Religion. This beginning with contradiction is very ominous, and prodigious: and from hence we may gather, what we are likely to find in his ensuing discourse.

The rule by which men are to judge of, the Spirits meaning is the stamp, and superscription of rationall authority, set upon them: so hee here expressely affirmes, and in this hee openly professeth himselfe, to be of the faction of the Socinian, and Arminian remonstrants, who doe teach that the best judge of the meaning, of the Scriptures is, recta ratio, that is, their owne carnall reason, rectified by the art of Sophistrie. Againe, hee affirmes, that all the Christian world knowes, or readily may know, what the holy Ghost speaks in the Scripture. If this be true, then they are all taught of GOD, and the Spirit leaues not his meaning to men to debate, and to promise betweene controverters. Here is another contradiction.

Hee proceeds yet further in his absurdities, and tells us that the holy Ghost reveales not to all the Christian world, but to some, the secret of his counsell, the Spirit of his letter: this is a contradiction to that which went next before. And whereas before hee saith, that all the Christian world knowes what the holy Ghost speakes in Scripture, that is all saving truth: here hee saith, that hee reveales the secret of his counsell, but in some particulars: thus in every thing he contradicts himselfe, and like a lunatick broken out of Bedlam, he raves, first saying, and affirming, and immediately denying, and gainesaying, in the same things. But yet a lunatick persons have high conceits of themselves, that they are of noble, and royall blood, right heires to Crownes, Kingdoms, and Empires: or if not the holy Ghost himselfe, yet persons wonderfully illuminated, and inspired by him. And many times they will not utter their conceits in expresse words, but tell you of such great persons, and complaine of your blockish dulnesse, and stupidity, if you doe not presently discerne that they speake of themselves, and they are the men. So here doth this illuminated Doctor deale with us: He tells us of some speciall ones, to whom the Spirit interprets in the eare, and reveales the secret of his councell, the Spirit of his letter, who are the true begotten of the truth: and that hee takes himself to be a chiefe among these, it appeares, first by his undertaking to give a reason of the counsell and purpose of GOD in his former Chapter, (as I have there noted.) Secondly, by his taking upon him, here to determine this question, which none but such illuminated ones can be able to do. And hee breakes off his prologue with a kind of complaint, and exprobration full of disdaine, namely this, that because they, (meaning himselfe, and his fellowes) are not marked in the forehead, by the Spirit of illumination; therefore their thoughts, and apprehensions, are yet in common esteeme like other men (you see, non sapit humanum, nec est mortale quod optat) till some stamp, and superscription, of rationall authority, be set upon them to make the difference. Here hee seemes in this last clause, to take courage, and to conceive some hope, that by the rational authority, of his new coined Logick, (of which he lately gave us a tast, whē he told us, that causes are opposit, ex diametro & therefore the efficient, impulsive instrumentall materiall, formall, and finall causes, of mans justification, and salvation, cannot all, or the most of them concurre in one person Christ, though GOD and man) hee will make the difference knowne betweene his excellency, and other mens ignobility, and obscurity.

The last clause of his complaint, wherewith hee concludes his Preface, is an overthwart blow to some, where speaking of those first begotten of the truth, he saith, yea many times the nearer the truth, the further off from the approbation of many; and sometimes even of those, that are the greatest pretenders to the truth. A shrewd nip (if you marke it) to you learned Doctors, & Preachers of the Citie of London, who are great pretenders to the truth: and yet the nearer that hee is come to the truth, and makes his unlearned followers able to see it to the bottom (as he hath often told us) the further off hee is from your approbation. If hee be thus bold, and ready to nip you who doe not approve his opinion, it is no marvaile that his rude followers, doe lay all slaunders, reproach, and aspersions on us, who oppose him, and charge him with Socinian haeresie, and blasphemy, whom they admire, and proclaime to bee the great light of GODS Church in these last dayes.

Socinianisme.

Foure things there are especially, which much commend an Interpretation, when they are found in conjunction, and establish, it like that King upon his Throne Prov. 36.31. against whom there is no rising up. First if the Letter, or Grammar of the Scripture will fairely and strongly beare it. 2o If the scope of the place will close directly and intirely with it. 3o When the interpretation which is set up against it, cannot stand before the circumstances of the text. 4o And lastly, when the judgement of able, learned, and unpartiall men are found in concurrence with it. If these foure be sufficient to furnish out an interpretation with authority, and power, then shall wee need no more Scriptures, to prove the innocency of our affirmative. viz. the imputation of faith for righteousnes (the truth of the negative inseparably accompanying it) but that one Chapter onely, Rom. 4.

Christianisme.

IN these wordes hee makes his enterance, into the disputing of the point before propounded, to wit, faith in a proper sense is imputed for righteousnes in justification; which speech excludes the righteousnes of Christ from being the onely righteousnes by, which being communicated, and imputed to true beleevers, they are justified and stand righteous before GOD.

First he propounds foure things, which when they are found in coniunction, with an interpretation of any Scripture, they commend and establish it (as he saith) like that King upon his Throne against whom there is no rising up, Prov. 30.31. These foure things. First the literal sense strongly bearing it. Secondly the scope of the place concurring. Thirdly the inconsistence of the circumstances of the place, with the interpretation which is contrary. Fourthly the Judgement of able learned men agreeing with it, these I say may passe for current. But whether that one place of Scripture, in the interpretation whereof these concurre, bee alone without more Scriptures, sufficient to prove the innocency of an assertion which is agreeable to that interpretation, is a question, many interpretations seeme to have all these, and yet are contradicted by other Scriptures, as that place Hosea 11.1. When Israel was a child, out of Egypt have I called my Sonne, being interpreted of the Nation of the Israelites, was borne up by the letter, concurred with the scope, and circumstances more then many contrary expositors, and all the learned and able Jewes so understood it: and yet the Gospell expounds it another way, Mat. 2.15. The place of Scripture upon the interpretation whereof established by these foure things, hee intends to build his whole dispute in this Chapter, is the fourth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans; so that his proofes by which hee goeth about to set the royall Crowne, which is due to Christ and his righteousnes, on the head of mans imperfect faith, are according to these foure things, divided into foure rankes. First he undertakes to prove, that the Letter of that Scripture, Rom. 4. doth beare up his interpretation, to wit, that faith in it selfe, and in a proper sense is said to bee imputed for righteousnes in justification. Secondly by the scope of the place. Thirdly by shewing that the circumstances of that Scripture, cannot beare the Doctrine of Christs righteousnes imputed. Fourthly by the judgement, and testimonies of able learned and unpartiall men. But how poorely he performes his undertakings, and how pitifully hee faileth in them, wee shall in the progresse shew. That his disputation is like to be very Illogicall, we may gather from the foule flaw which appeares in his Logicke, in this his first enterance, where hee saith wee need no more Scriptures, to prove the innocency of our affirmative, viz. the imputation of faith for righteousnes (the truth of the negative inseparably accompanying it) but that Chapter onely, Rom. 4.

First it is against all true reason and Logicke, that the affirmative should be innocent from untruth, and that the negative which is opposed to it, should have truth accompanying it. If his affirmative (faith is imputed for righteousnesse, in a proper sense) be true, then the negative must needs be false, to wit, faith in a proper sense is not imputed: But perhaps by the negative, he doth not meane the negative of his affirmative, but some other negative proposition, the subject whereof, is different from the subject of his affirmative. His hatred and envy, against Christs righteousnesse, least it should get the Crowne from faith, is so great, that wee may well conceive, that by the negative hee in heart meanes, this (Christs righteousnes is not imputed in justification) which if hee doth, wee cannot but blame him for speaking ambiguously, which Logick in a disputation abhorreth. But I leave his trifling, and come to the ground and foundation of his discourse, even that fourth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, on which he labours to build his hereticall opinion. The words of that Chapter which seeme most to favour him are these. Verse 3. Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was counted to him for righteousnes, and verse 5. To him that beleeveth, his faith is counted for righteousnes, and verse 9. For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousnes.

That the truth may more plainly appeare, and the contrary falshoode, and errour be made more fully manifest, I will first lay down the true orthodoxe exposition of the words, which is according to the common judgement of the most godly, learned, and judicious Divines, of the best reformed Churches.

Secondly I will truely rehearse the corrupt exposition of the Apostles wordes, made by the hereticke Socinus, and his followers the Arminians, and other fanaticall Sectaries, unto which this adversary adheres, and grounds his whole disputation upon it. The orthodox exposition I will illustrate and confirme by the scope, and circumstances of the rext, and by arguments drawne from other Scriptures. The corrupt exposition also I will prove to be false, and hereticall. And afterwards I will proceed to answer this adversaries discourse in every particular.

The true Exposition explained.

FIrst these wordes, that Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was counted to him for righteousnes, are generally held to be improper, and tropicall, and that the meaning of them is not, that Abrahams faith, or act of beleeving by it selfe in a proper sense, was counted to him for righteousnes: but that the object of his faith even that which he beleeved, to wit, Christ promised for righteousnes and salvation, was that which by GOD was (upon Abrahams beleeving) counted to him for righteousnes. It was not his faith simply considered in it selfe, but his faith embracing Christ promised, and possessing him with his righteousnes, and satisfaction which was reckned to him for righteousnes, and as to him, so to every one that beleeveth his faith is counted to him for righteousnes. For all true beleevers who by faith lay hold on Christ, the promised seed of Abraham, and beleeve GOD to be their shield, and exceeding great reward in him, they are by one spirit baptised into one spirituall body with Christ, united to him their spirituall head, and made his lively members, and sensible partakers of his perfect obedience, righteousnes and full satisfaction, for redemption, remission of sinnes, justification, and perfect salvation; and need not any more to seeke the reward of blessednes, by the righteousnes of their owne workes▪ performed according to the tenour of the Law, by every man in his owne person; but in the LORD Iesus Christ (who is Iehovah Zid-kenu the LORD our righteousnes, Ier. 23.6. and the end and fulfilling of the Law for righteousnes to every one that beleeveth, Rom. 10.4.) they have perfect righteousnes. And in him GOD is become their reward, and the lot and portion of their inheritance, Psal. 16.5. And that gracious and free favour which GOD shewed to Abraham, when hee beleeved in Christ promised, and firmely without staggering applyed to himselfe, the blessing promised, being fully perswaded that GOD who of his free grace promised, was by his power able to performe, though by the course of nature, and by reason of the deadnesse of Sara's wombe he himselfe seemed to bee, and indeed was uncapable of that blessing; The same hee will shew to all true beleevers, who are Abrahams faithfull seed, and children of promise, that is, as hee reckoned Abrahams faith for righteousnes; so hee will count their faith to them for righteousnes; that is, he will accept and account them for righteous persons (as indeed they are) not for any workes of their owne, nor by any righteousnesse performed according to the letter of the law in their owne persons, but by the righteousnes, which is through the faith of Christ, and is called the righteousnes of faith, because it is the righteousnes of Christ GOD and man, given to them of GOD, and of them apprehended, and applyed by faith. For being thus justified by faith, and having communion with Christ of his full satisfaction and righteousnes, GOD whose judgement is according to truth doth certainely judge and count them (as truly they are) righteous in his sight, & becomes in Christ their shield, and exceeding great reward. This is the Orthodox exposition of the Apostles wordes in this Chapter, generally received by all, both ancient and moderne Divines, famous for learning and godlinesse.

The corrupt and hereticall exposition of the Apostles words, made by Socinus, and maintained by his followers the Arminians, and other fanaticall Sectaries.

THey of the Socinian faction, doe generally hold and obstinately affirme, that Abrahams beleeving and his faith, taken in a proper literall sense without any trope, is here said by the Apostle to be counted to Abraham for righteousnes, in stead of all righteousnes which either Abraham himselfe, was by the Law bound to performe in his owne person, or any surety could performe for him. And in like manner to every one that beleeveth, his faith is in a proper sense said to bee counted for righteousnes, even his faith by it selfe, and not the righteousnes of Christ with it. This is their exposition. And upon these wordes of the Apostle thus falsly, and corruptly interpreted, they build all their hereticall opinions, and doctrines concerning justification of the faithfull before GOD, namely these following. First that faith, as it is in every beleever, even as it is inherent in him, and is his owne faith and beleeving; is the onely thing which GOD of his grace and mercy, and out of his absolute soveraigne power and dominion, is pleased to ordaine, appoint, and account for all the righteousnes, which a man shall have for his justification; though in truth, and according to Law and the rule of justice, it is not righteousnes, being weak oftentimes and full of imperfections.

Secondly that the Spirit of GOD in these wordes of the Apostle, did not intend or meane any communion of the righteousnes, and perfect obedience performed by Christ to the Law, as our surety, and in our stead, nor imputation of that righteousnes to every true beleever for justification, nor GODS accepting of the faithfull for righteous by that righteousnes communicated to them, and of them applyed possessed and enjoyed by faith.

By faith, and believing, they do not understand that applying faith, which is a gift and worke of GODS Spirit, in the elect, regenerate, and sanctified, by which they do believe and are perswaded, that they are in Christ, and Christ is their head, and they as lively members of his mysticall body▪ have communion of all his benefits, even of his full satisfaction and perfect righteousnes, for justification, and full remission of all their sinnes. But by faith, and believing, they understand onely a confidence in GOD, that hee will performe his promises made in Christ, and an assent unto his word that it is true. The tenour of which word, and promises, they conceive to be this; That Christ in his pure unspotted humane nature, hath by his righteousnesse, suffering and obedience, unto death, meritted, such high favour with GOD; that GOD in honour to him is pleased to accept and account the faith of them that believe in him, and rest on him for their Saviour, for perfect righteousnesse, and requires no other righteousnesse to constitute, and make them in any sort formally righteous in their justification.

When they acknowledge that the perfect righteousnesse, and satisfaction of Christ, is the meritorious cause of our justification: they do not meane that they are communicated to us, and so apprehended, and possessed of us by faith, that we are thereby indeed, and in GODS account righteous before GOD, and justified; or that they deserve and are worthy, that GOD should so account us for them. But their mind, and meaning is, that Christ by his righteousnesse hath merited, that GOD for his sake, and in favour to him should account faith to us for righteousnesse, without either our owne workes, of the Law, or Christs righteousnesse imputed to us and made ours by communion. And when they say that faith is imputed for righteousnes as an instrument, they doe not meane as the instrument or spirituall hand, applying Christ his righteousnes to bee after a sort, the formall righteousnesse of the believer, but that faith, as it is the instrument by which the believer doth believe that Christ hath purchased this favour, that his believing should be the only thing, accounted to him for righteousnes; so onely and no other way, GOD reckons to him for righteousnes.

The orthodox exposition I will in the first place prove, and confirme, frō the words of the Apostle himself, & by other strong reasons▪ & afterward confute & overthrow the Socinian, hereticall exposition.

The true Exposition proved and confirmed.

FOr the right understanding of the Apostles wordes, three things come first to be considered, and explained. 1. What is here meant by faith, and believing. 2. What righteousnes is here meant. 3. What is meant by imputation.

First, by faith in this text, wee must not understand, that naturall habit and power, which is common to all reasonable men; who upon their apprehension, and knowledge of things spoken, and promised, do give willing assent unto them that they are true, either for the authority of the speaker whom they doe respect and judge to bee faithfull, or because they see good reason in the things spoken and promised: And if the things spoken and promised bee such as tend to their owne good; they rest upon them confidently, and perswade themselvs, that they are sure and certaine of them already, or shall receive and enjoy them in due time without faile. But here by faith we are to understand that supernaturall gift, and grace of beleeving wrought in the elect, regenerate by the spirit shed on them abundantly through Iesus Christ, Tit. 3.6. which is therefore called most holy faith, Iud. 20. verse. This faith agreeth with the other in foure points. First as that is an habit and power of beleeving, so is this. Secondly as that containes in it, notitiā in intellectu, and assensum in voluntate, that is, both a notice and knowledge of the things spoken and beleeved, and an assent of the will, so doth this also. Thirdly as that faith when it goeth no further then knowledge and assent is called hlstoricall; so this also. Fourthly as that faith when it reacheth to good things promised to our selves particularly, to apply them, and to rest on them, hath also fiduciam in corde et affectionibus, a trust and confidence of the heart and affections in it; so hath this also, and is called a firme perswasion, trust and confidence. But they differ in divers things. First that is a naturall power or habit, this is a spiritual wrought in men by the spirit of GOD dweling in them, and uniting them to Christ in one mysticall body. Secondly, that hath in it no knowledge, but naturall, arising from light of naturall reason, nor any assent of the will, or confidence in the heart and affections, but such as are drawne, stirred up and wrought by meanes of naturall light, and common causes. This hath in it a spirituall knowledge arising from the spirit of GOD, inlightning the understanding; the spirit also inclines and moves the will to give assent, and confirmes the heart with confidence, and firme perswasion. Thirdly that is common to all reasonable men; This is proper to the elect regenerate and sanctified by the holy Ghost, shed on them through Christ, and is the first and as it were the radicall grace and vertue of renovation. Fourthly that hath for the object or things beleeved, either naturall and worldly things onely; or things heavenly and supernaturall, seene, and discerned through the dimme mist of naturall reason, and assented to and rested on with a carnall and unsanctified will and heart. This hath for the object things supernaturall, heavenly and spirituall, discerned by supernaturall light, assented to with an holy and sanctified will, confirmed to the heart by a spirituall sense, and sweet taste of the things promised, wrought by the holy spirit in the true beleever apprehending and applying them.

But to come nearer to the text, the believing which the Apostle speakes of in 3.9. and 22. verses, is the faith and believing of Abraham, who divers yeares before this act of believing, which it here said to be counted to him for righteousnesse, was called out of his owne country, and by faith obeyed GOD calling, and went and soiourned in the land, promised to him, and his seed, as appeares, Heb. 11.8, 9. He had overcome and slaughtered foure mighty Kings, and their victorious armies, by faith and confidence in GODS promises. And Melchizedek, King of Salem, the Priest of the most high GOD, had blessed him, as we read, Gen. 14. And after these things, the LORD appeared to him, and sayd, feare not Abraham ▪ I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward; and withall hee renued the promise of the blessed seed, by meanes of which seed, all the families of the earth should be blessed in Abraham, and should become his faithfull Children; besides, his naturall seed, and posterity, which should come of the Son, and heire of his owne bowels, as appeares, Gen. 15. verse 1.4. These were the promises which GOD made to Abraham, and which Abraham believed to be true, and resting upon the LORD by firme faith, and beliefe, for the performance of them, the LORD counted it to him for righteousnesse. Gen. 15.6. or as the Apostle expresseth the same sentence, in the same sense, though in words somewhat different, it was counted to him for righteousnesse. verse 3. even faith was reckoned to him for righteousnes, verse 9. Now this faith was first an holy and spiritual beliefe, and the faith of a man, long before called of GOD, sanctified by his Spirit, and made obedient to GOD and his word. Secondly, it was a beliefe not onely of the promise of Christ the blessed seed in generall, but more specially, that Christ the blessed seed, should according to the flesh come out of his owne bowels, and that by Christ the Son of GOD, made man of his seed, the redemption both of him, and of his faithfull seed, all true believers should be wrought, and performed, GODS wrath appeased, the Law fulfilled, and justice satisfied, and perfect righteousnes brought in for their justification; and by his, and their union with Christ by one spirit, and communion of all his benefits, they should have GOD for their portion, and reward, and for their shield and defence, and should not need to seeke the blessing and reward from their owne workes, or their righteousnesse, and fulfilling of the Law in their owne persons, but merely from the free grace of GOD, and of his free gift in Christ as a reward of Christs righteousnesse, freely given to them, and of them apprehended by faith, and believing. Thirdly, this faith of Abraham was not a weake, but strong faith and beliefe, without staggering, even a full perswasion that GOD who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not, as if they were, was able to make good, and to performe what hee had promised, yea, it was a believing in hope, against hope, that GOD could out of a dead body, and womb raise up a lively seed, and make them spiriritually righteous, which are by nature, and according to the Law wicked sinners. All these things are manif • st by the place before cited. Gen 15. and by the expresse words of the Apostle in this Chapter, from the tenth verse, to the end of the Chapter. And thus it is plaine what is meant by faith, which is here said to be imputed for righteousnesse.

Secondly, the righteousnesse here meant, is not the righteousnes which is according to the strict termes, and tenour of the Law, that is, righteousnes of a mans own workes, performed by every man in his owne person to the whole Law of GOD, for the Apostle doth dispute altogether against that righteousnes, and proves that neither Abraham was justified, or counted of GOD righteous for it, as appeares in the 2.5.6. and 13. verses; nor any other at any time, as he shewes in the Chapter next before, and in the Chap. 8.3. and 9.32. and 10.3. But here is meant an Evangelical righteousnes which doth not consist in any worke, or workes performed by man himselfe in his owne person, nor in any grace or vertue, inhaerent in himselfe, but is a righteousnes which GOD of his owne free grace, doth impute to the true believer, who by one spirit is united to Christ, and hath communion with him, and which is called the righteousnes of faith, (because by faith men lay hold on it) and doth exclude legal justification by righteousnes of a mans owne workes▪ as appeares by the Apostles whole discourse in this and the former Chapter, and in divers other places of this Epistle, especially verse 13, of this Chapter, and in Chap. 3.27.28.

Thirdly the phrase of imputing or counting a thing to one, signifies both in the old and new Testament, an act of judgment and estimation, by which a thing is judged, esteemed, reckoned, and accounted to be as it is indeed, and then it is just according to truth; or else judged thought, and esteemed to bee as it is not, and then it is unjust and not according to truth. GODS thoughts are alwayes right and just, and his judgement is according to truth. Rom. 2.2. And therefore a just counting and imputing is here meant, for GOD doth account, and judge of persons, and things so as they are.

Of uniust counting, and imputing falsely, we have some instances in Scripture, as 1 King 1.21. where Bethsheba saith to David, I and my sonne Salomon shall bee counted offenders, that is usurping Adoniah, and his wicked company will esteeme and iudge us, and use us accordingly,

Of reputing and counting truely as the thing is, wee have examples also, as Nehem. 13.13. where it is said of the chosen Levites that they were counted faithfull, viz. upon former experience of their faithfulnesse, and therefore the office of distributing to their brethren was committed to them. And Levit. 17.4. where it is said, blood shall be imputed to that man, he hath shed bloud, and shall be cut off from among his people, and Psal. 22.30. a seed shall serve him, it shall be counted to the LORD for a generation.

Moreover this word impute, or count, signifies sometimes in the most proper sense, a bare act of judgement and thought. Prov. 17.28. where a foole is said to bee counted wise, when hee holdeth his peace, that is, men for the present so thinke, and judge him to be at least in that point of silence. Sometimes it signifies in a more full sense not onely thinking, counting and judging persons to bee good, or bad, just or unjust, innocent or guilty; but also dealing with them, and using them accordingly, as in the place before named, I King 2.21. Neh. 13.13. Psal. 22.30. and 1 Sam. 22.15. where Ahimilech purging himselfe before Saul, from the offence of conspiracy with David against him, as Doeg had falsely accused him, saith, let not the King impute any thing to his servant, that is, let him not count his servant guilty, nor use him as a conspiratour. Sometimes it signifies by a Metonymie of the cause, for the effect condemning, and punishing an offence in a guilty person as hee hath deserved, and to deale with him as hee is justly thought and judged to have deserved, as Shimei said, 2 Sam. 19.19. Let not my LORD impute iniquitie to mee, hee doth not desire that David would not thinke, nor count his iniquitie to bee no iniquitie, that had beene against all reason: but that for the satisfaction which hee had made in comming, first before all the house of Joseph to meet David, and to bring him againe to his Kingdome, David would graciously pardon his offence, and not proceed against him and punish him according to his fauit, though guilty and worthy of punishment. Sometimes it signifies by a Metaphore to count one thing, as if it were another, or no better then another, or of the same value, as Prov. 27.4. where a flattering salutation, or blessing given with a loud voice is said to be counted a curse, that is, esteemed no better then a curse. Sometimes to use one as if he counted him of another condition, as Gen. 31.15. where it is said that Laban counted his daughters strangers, that is, used them as he had counted them strangers, and Iob 31.10. where Iob saith that GOD counted him for his enemy, that is, afflicted and plagued him as if he had counted him his enemy. Sometimes the word signifies to skore up, or put upon a mans account, either the offence or debt which he runs into himselfe, as Rom. 5.13. where it is said, that sinne is not imputed where there is no Law, that is, it is not so skored up, that they are punished for it, it is not judged and punished in them; Or the debt which he takes upon him for another, as Philemon verse 18. If hee hath wronged thee or is indebted to thee, put that on mine account, that is, impute and count it to me, set it on my skore. Now the severall significations of the severall wordes being thus laid open, I proceed more particularly to every word to shew the true sense, and meaning of it in these speeches of the Apostle, and to shew how farre the speeches may bee extended. And first by faith and beleeving which is counted to every true beleever, and was counted to Abraham for righteousnes; I here understand (according to the judgement of the most Orthodox Divines) the true holy, spirituall faith and beliefe, which is before shewed to have beene in Abraham, and which is proper to the elect regenerate, and is said to be imputed for righteousnes. By righteousnes is here meant Evangelicall righteousnes (which is opposed to the legall righteousnes of workes, which is inherent in every man, and is every mans fulfilling of the Law in his owne person) even the righteousnes and perfect satisfaction of Christ, GOD and man, our mediatour and surety, which he the sonne of GOD in mans nature performed to the Law, and which is apprehended by every true beleever, and applyed to himselfe by a lively faith, whereof also he hath true communion, and is truely made partaker by his spirtual union, with Christ, of whose mysticall body, hee is a member, being thereinto engraffed and baptized by one spirit. By the imputing, and counting of that faith for righteousnes to Abraham, and to every one of his faithfull seed, is here meant GODS setting of Christs righteousnes on every true beleevers skore, and putting it on his account, and judging, counting, and esteeming him no more guilty of sinne, but perfectly righteous by that Evangelicall righteousnes, which is called the righteousnes of GOD, 2 Cor. 5.21. because GOD performed it in mans nature; and the righteousnes of faith, Rom. 4.13. and not of workes, because it is applyed and enjoyed by faith, Philip 3.9.

For the confirmation of this exposition and iustifying of this truth, wee need seeke no other arguments, but such as may bee gathered from the Apostles owne words as in other of his Epistles, so especially in this to the Romans.

argument 1 The first argument is drawne from the 2. Chapter of this Epistle; v. 26. where this word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as it signifies to bee imputed or counted, is first used by the Apostle in the very same phrase, as here in this Chapter 4.3.5▪9. If (saith he) the uncircumcision keep the righteousnes of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? By uncircumcision, in the first clause, we must necessarily understand a Gentile uncircumcised (as learned Beza in his notes observes) and that by a trope of speech which is called Metonymia adjuncti, for with some reason it may be supposed that an uncircumcised man, may observe the precepts of righteousnes contained in the law; but it is against common sense, to suppose that the fore-skin of any mans flesh not cut off, should performe the righteousnes of the Law, no man in his right wits will father such a senseles meaning upon the learned Apostle. The same word in the second clause (as Beza also well observes) cannot with any reason bee thought to signifie the foreskin of mans flesh not cut off, that is uncircumcision in a proper sense, for that cannot but most falsely be reputed, and counted for circumcision, because they are contradictories one to another. But here by a trope or Metonymie (called Metonymia signipro re signatâ) the word uncircumcision signifies the state of Gētilisme. Neither doth it signifie that state barely considered by it selfe, but as comprehending in it the righteousnes of the Law, which the uncircumcised man hath kept and performed in that state, as the wordes necessarily imply, for the Apostle doth not say that uncircumcision simply, but uncircūcision which hath kept the righteousnes of the Law, shall bee counted for circumcision. So that here is a Metalepsis or double trope, to wit, first uncircumcision put for Gentilisme, of which it is a signe or adjunct, and secondly put not onely for that state of a Gentile, but also for the righteousnesse of the Law, kept by the man in that outward state of a Gentile, uncircumcised which is a Metonymie of the subject containing for the thing contained. Yea if wee looke thoroughly into the phrase, wee shall see that the state of the man uncircumcised, or the man in that estate, put for that which hee hath done, and performed even the righteousnes of the Law.

By circumcision we cannot with reason understand, the outward cutting away of the foreskin of mans flesh, neither taken literally and carnally as the corrupt & blind Iewes did take it, for a worke of righteousnesse and obedience to the Law for justification. The Apostle affirmes, Galatians 5.3. that so taken it was an obligation, by which the circumcised was bound, under paine of cutting off for ever, to performe the whole Law. And for a righteous Gentile to bee brought under this bondage was no benefit, but a miserable condition an ill reward of his keeping the Law.

Neither can circumcision be here taken sacramentally as it was an outward signe and seale of the righteousnes of faith, and of mortification, and all vertues of holynesse by which men are sanctified to GOD, and become his peculiar people. For Ishmael, Esau, and all the Sonnes of Belial in Israel, even Elies wicked Sons, and the rest were partakers of the outward signe and sacrament of circumcsion, and yet being destitute of the inward grace, signified, their circumcision was no reward to them, but was a witnes to condemne them. But the circumcision here mentioned by the Apostle is an honour, benefit, and a good condition, and therefore undoubtedly signifies, the inward circumcision of the heart in the Spirit, and not in the letter, so the Apostle doth expound himselfe, verse 29. that is true mortification, and sanctification.

The word ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) shall be counted, signifies here in a full sense, judging, counting, approving, accepting, and using accordingly. Now all laid together, the meaning of the Apostle must necessarily be this, without any contradiction. That if a man uncercumcised, do keep and observe with all holy endeavour the commandements of GODS Law, and the righteousnesse thereof, his state of Gentilisme, and of outward uncircumcision comprehending in it a conscionable observing of GODS holy commandement, shall be accounted, and judged by GOD and by all who judge aright, (as it is indeed) the state of mortification, and sanctification, which by the Prophets is called circumcising of our selves to the LORD, and puting away the foreskin of our hearts Ier. 4.4. And this man though uncircumcised in the flesh and a Gentile in outward estate, shall be counted of GOD for a true Israelite, without guile, circumcised with circumcision of the heart in the Spirit, whose praise is not of men, but of GOD.

This sense and meaning of the words of this phrase is so cleare, and manifest, and so perfectly agreeable to all true reason, that no man can deny it, unlesse hee will set himselfe to rebell against the light And this phrase being the same with that which is made the ground of this dispute, Rom. 4. where the same Apostle saith, that faith, and believing, were counted to Abraham, and so are to every true believer, for righteousnes: yea, being the onely place in all this Epistle wherein the Apostle useth the phrase of imputing, or counting, except onely in this 4. Chap. and once in the 5. Chapter, where hee saith, sinne is not imputed, it must needs give light to these speeches, and words, in controversie, and as it hath the first place in this Epistle, so it deserves to goe before as a guide to lead us to the understanding of the rest. Wherefore if we will follow the Apostle himselfe, and tread in the same steps after him, being the surest guide, and best expounder of his owne meaning: we must by Abrahams believing, by a Metalepsis, or double trope (with our learned Divines) understand Abraham setled in the state of a true believer, united by one Spirit unto GOD in Christ, and having communion of his satisfaction, and righteousnes, which were of force and efficacy from the beginning, to save & justifie all the faithfull, and to make GOD their reward. And by faith imputed we must not understand faith by it selfe in a proper sense, but the state and condition of a faithfull man, and also that which faith comprehends, and includes in it, even the perfect righteousnesse, and full satisfaction of Christ, GOD and man (for there is a metalepsis or double trope, as in the place before expounded) By righteousnes we must understand the state of a man justified, and made righteous by the communion of Evangelicall righteousnesse, and by counting, and imputing, we must understand, the accepting, approving, esteeming, and judging of Abraham and every true believer, to bee in the state of a man justified, and GODS setting on his skore, and imputing to him being faithfull, the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith, which no man can truely by faith lay hold on untill by one spirit he be united to Christ, and have communion with him. Heare then the true sense and meaning of the speeches in question, parallelled with the sentence and speech before expounded Chap. 2.26. which I thus lay down paraphrastically.

Abraham upon a true inward spirituall sense of his union, and communion with Christ did believe and was surely perswaded that GOD was his reward, and this beliefe, and faith apprehending Christ, and after a sort containning in it, as by a fast holding and possessing hand of the soule, Christs righteousnesse, GOD counted it to him for righteousnes, that is, set it on his skore, and reckoned to him for justification, and judged, esteemed, and accepted him for a man truely righteous, as indeed hee was by Evangelicall righteousnes. And so, whosoever doth not rest on his owne workes for justification, nor seeketh thereby to be iustified, but by faith feeling himselfe by nature ungodly, fleeth to Christs righteousnesse, and by faith feeles himselfe to have communion of it, and holds it fast, and applies, and enioyes it. His faith is to him an evidence of his righteousnes, and GOD▪ who iudgeth according to truth knowing him to have share in Christs righteousnes, doth accept it for him, and counts him righteous, and useth him as a man truely iustified. Thus you see how the Apostles former using of this phrase in the second Chapter, doth shew the true meaning of it here where it seemes to be more doubtfull. The summe of the argument reduced into a short syllogisme is this.

That exposition of a doubtfull phrase, which is most agreeable to the manifest sense and meaning of the same phrase used by the same Author, in the same discourse, is the best: Our exposition of the phrase in question, to wit, faith and believing is imputed for righteousnesse, is most agreeable to the manifest sense of the same phrase of speech used by this same Apostle Cap. 2.26 in this same Epistle. Therefore undoubtedly, our exposition is best.

argument 2 Secondly, wheresoever the Apostle useth the phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, of imputing one thing for another, there the thing imputed differeth from that, for which it is imputed, and cannot in any proper sense be called the same, as in the place before cited, Rom. 2.26 Rom. 9.8. and so it is, Psal 106.31. where Phineas his executing of judgement, is said to bee counted to him for righteousnesse. And wheresoever a thing is said in a proper sense to be counted, or imputed, or set on ones skore, it is said simply to be counted, imputed, set upon a mans account, as Rom 4.4. where the reward is said to be counted of debt to him that worketh, and verse 6. and 8. where GOD is said to impute righteousnes, and not to impute sinne▪ and verse 11. that righteousnes might be imputed unto them. and Rom. 5.13. sinne is not imputed when there is no Law. & 2 Cor. 5.19. not imputing their trespasses to them, & 2. Tim. 4.16. I pray GOD it may not be laid to their charge, or counted to them ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Philem. 18. put that on my account. Now here in the speeches controverted faith and believing are not said simply to be imputed to believers, but to be imputed for righteousnes, and therefore faith is not said to be imputed in a proper sense, neither can it truely be counted or called righteousnes by it selfe, and in a proper sense; but the speech is tropicall, and improper.

A third argument is drawne argument 3 from the Apostles words in the 4. verse where hee saith to him that worketh the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt; these words imply, that the righteousnesse here said to be imputed brings the reward of blessednes to the believer, which reward is of grace, and not of debt. Now there is nothing which can bring the reward of blessednesse in eternall life to him unto whom it is counted and set on his skore, but the perfect righteousnesse, and satisfaction of Iesus Christ. That all do grant to be meritorious of eternall life to all that are partakers of it, and because the communion, and imputation of it is of GODS free grace, and the faith by which we receive and apply it is GODS free gift, therefore the reward of it, to wit, eternall life is of free grace, and not of debt, as the Apostle here saith, whereupon the conclusion followes, that the righteousnes which GOD accepts, and imputes, is properly the righteousnes of Christ apprehended by faith.

Fourthly, the Apostle teacheth, argument 4 expressely, verse 6. and 7. that the thing imputed simply, and properly, by GOD, is righteousnes, and such a righteousnes, as being imputed, brings forgivenes of iniquity, & covers sinnes, and so makes the believer blessed. Now there is no righteousnes to be found among all mankind but Christs perfect righteousnes, and satisfaction, and that is a perfect propitiation for all sinnes, and an expiation of all iniquity to them, who by faith have put on Christ, therefore it is the righteousnes which is imputed to every believer for justification.

Fiftly, that which is said to be imputed to Abraham, and to every true believer, is righteousnes, argument 5 to justification: for the discourse of the Apostle both here, and in the Chapters next going before, & that which next followeth is altogether of justifying, as appeares, Chap. 3.24 25.26, 28, 30. and Chap. 5.1, 16, 17, 18, 19. in all which places, he names expressely justification, & justifying: and here in this 4. Cap. he brings Abrahams example, and Davids testimony, to shew how we are justified. Now there is nothing which doth serve to us for justification, but that which is found in Christ our mediator, even his righteousnes and perfect fulfilling of the Law, so he plainely affirmes and teacheth Chap. 5, 19. and 8, 3, 4. and 10.3, 4. and therefore his righteousnes upon the true believing of Abraham, and the faithfull, is counted, and imputed to them, and set on their skore, and they by it are justified.

argument 6 Lastly, as the imputing of any thing for righteousnes, is to be taken in other places of Scripture, wheresoever it is mentioned, so undoubtedly, it is here to be taken. For the Scripture is the best expounder of it selfe; and the spirit of God therein speaking doth best understand & shew his own meaning. Now the onely place in all the Scripture where any thing besides faith, and believing is said to be counted to man for righteousnes, is that place of the Psalmist, Psal. 106. and 31. where the godly zealous act of Phinees, in executing just judgement on Zamri, and Cosbi is said to be counted to him for righteousnes. Now the meaning of the wordes there cannot be, that this act of Phinees was accepted of GOD, and counted to him for righteousnes to justification. For then it will follow that a man may bee justified before GOD by one act, or worke of his owne. Which the Apostle here utterly condemneth as a grosse errour, and bends his whole discourse against it. The true sense and meaning of the phrase is no more but this, that Phinees performing such an act of godly zeale, as is proper onely to a faithfull righteous man, who by the spirit of regeneration, dwelling in him is so united unto Christ, that by faith he was a true partaker of his righteousnes. GOD upon this act gave him the testimony of righteousnes, and declared and judged him to bee a righteous man truly justified. Therefore the Apostles phrase of counting faith to the beleever for righteousnes, which he often useth in this Chapter, signifieth after the same manner, GODS counting a true beleever for a righteous man, and giving him the testimony of righteousnes, because he is righteous indeed by communion of Christs righteousnesse which hee hath apprehended, applied, and enjoyeth by faith.

The confutation of the false hereticall exposition of the Apostles wordes maintained by the Socinian faction.

FIrst whereas they hold that faith considered by it selfe in a proper literall sense, without consideration of the object, or laying hold on Christ, and his righteousnes, is counted to the beleever for righteousnes to justification, and GOD requires in and of us, no other thing for righteousnes, neither our owne workes performed in our owne persons according to the Law, nor Christs perfect righteousnes and fulfilling of the Law made ours by spirituall union and communion with Christ, and accepted of GOD for us. This I prove to bee false hereticall and blasphemous, by these arguments following.

First faith taken in a proper sense is a part of our conformity, and argument 1 obedience to the Law of GOD, which above all things requires that wee give honour to GOD by beleeving him and his word, and by trusting in him as our onely rock, & the GOD of our strength, and salvation. They therefore teaching that faith in a proper sense is counted for righteousnes, doe teach that wee are iustified by a worke of obedience, to the Law performed in our owne persons, and GOD requires on our behalfe, no other righteousnes for justification, which Doctrine the Apostle utterly condemnes. Therefore their opinion and exposition is hereticall, and more impious then the Pelagian and Popish heresies concerning iustification.

Secondly that which was properly argument 2 imputed to Abraham, and is so imputed to true beleevers is righteousnes, so the Apostle in plaine wordes expresseth, verse 6. and 11. but faith in a proper sense is not righteousnes. For righteousnes is perfect conformity to the Law, as sinne is transgression of the Law, yea humane righteousnes is a mans keeping of the whole Law, and his observing to doe all GODS commandements with his whole heart all the dayes of his life, as wee read Deuteronomie 8.

Thirdly that which chargeth argument 3 GOD with errour and falshood, in his iudgement is blasphemous. This opinion that GOD counts faith for righteousnes, that is, thinketh, iudgeth, and esteemeth it to bee righteousnes, in a proper sense, chargeth GOD with errour and falshood in his iudgement. For faith is not any true righteousnes properly. Therefore this opinion is blasphemy, If they plead that GOD by his absolute soveraignty of power, may accept and repute that for righteousnes which is not true righteousnes: This doth but more entangle them and involve them in errour. For GOD and his soveraigne power are all one: as GOD cannot lye, nor make contradictories true, so his sovereignty of power, cannot either make that to bee righteousnes which is not, or truely iudge it so to bee. Neither can his infinite iustice bee satisfied without perfect fulfilling of his Law, nor allow any man to bee iustified without righteousnes, nor will his truth suffer him to count any iust who is not iust. Therefore by this base shift, and wicked pretence devised to hide, and cover their blasphemy, they do runne further into blasphemy, and make his soveraigne power, a tyrant and oppressour of his iustice and truth.

argument 4 Fourthly that opinion which taketh away, and denyeth the meanes by which GOD is revealed to be infinitely iust, mercifull and wise, and makes the satisfaction of Christ, and his perfect fulfilling the Law, a vaine and needlesse thing, is most hereticall, impious, and blasphemous. This opinion, that GOD by his sovereigne power can, and doth accept and count imperfect faith for perfect righteousnes, takes away the meanes by which GODS iustice, mercy, and wisdome are revealed to be infinit, yea it extenuates and vilifies GODS iustice, mercy, bounty, and wisdom, and makes Christs full satisfaction, a vaine, superfluous and needlesse thing. Therefore it is an impious and blasphemous opinion.

First that which reveales GOD to be infinitly iust is, that he cannot be reconciled to men that have sinned without execution of iustice to the full, and a full satisfaction made according to his iust Law, if not by men in their owne persons, which is impossible, yet by their mediator and surety, in their behalfe, and by him communicated to them, and made theirs, as truly as if they had fulfilled the Law in their owne persons. And though this satisfaction be of infinit value, yet it cannot profit them, nor actually merit for them till they be partakers of it truely, and really by spirituall communion. This is that meanes by which GOD is known to be infinitly iust.

Secondly, when GODS infinite iustice was so strict, that nothing could satisfie it, nor redeeme mankind, but a satisfaction of infinite value made for them. And when all the world was not able to find such a satisfaction; that his wisedome should finde one out, and have it ready before hand in her eternall treasures, even a full satisfaction performed in mans nature, by GOD the eternall son, and also the meanes to make it truely and really the satisfaction of every man truely beleeving, that is, by the Holy Ghost shed on them through the Sonne Christ, and making them one spirituall body with him. This reveales GOD to be infinite in wisedome.

Thirdly in that GOD the Father would in this case give his onely begotten sonne, to be humbled in our nature, and to obey, suffer, and make such a satisfaction for poore miserable men, in that the sonne would willingly take all this upon him▪ to doe and suffer whatsoever iustice could require, and in that the holy Ghost, when this satisfaction could not otherwise profit men nor bee made theirs, doth not disdaine to take up for his constant dwelling, the earthly tabernacles of mens bodies, and to worke in them all graces needfull, to conforme them to Christ, and to make them sensibly to enjoy him with all his benefits. This most wonderfully shewes GODS infinite mercy, bounty and free goodnesse. And all these meanes which are manifested and maintained by our Doctrine of justification, this wicked opinion of the Socinians doth utterly take away. First it denies GODS justice to require mans communion of such an infinite satisfaction made by Christ for him: it treads GODS justice under foote by his soveraignty of power, and maugre justice, it makes mans imperfect faith to go current for righteousnes, and to be accepted for perfect righteouses, to justification. Secondly if GOD by soveraignty of power can beare downe justice, and make any weak and imperfect thing such as mans faith is; serve in stead of Christs full satisfaction and perfect righteousnes: Then hee might by the same power have appointed the sacrifice of a Lamb, or any cleane beast, or the satisfaction of any mere man, and so it will follow that the giving of his son to bee made man, was no point of wisedome, but a going farre about, and spending much, even Christs blood, when lesse might have served the turne. As for GODS goodnesse mercy and bounty, they are hereby made painted shewes and shadowes, yea needlesse prodigality, and Christs satisfaction is made vaine and superfluous. Therfore this opinion which brings in such impious consequences, is blasphemous and hereticall.

Fiftly, that opinion which overthrowes the sacraments of the Gospel, and takes away the true use of them, is heriticall, prophane, and impious. This opinion that Christs righteousnesse is not imputed to the faithfull, doth so. For the sacraments are seales of our union, and communion with Christ: Baptisme seales our engraffing into Christ in our new birth, by which we become one with him. The LORDS Supper is such a lively seale of our communion with Christ, in the benefits of his death, passion, and full satisfaction, expressed under the termes of eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, that it is commonly called, the communion of the faithfull, when it is rightly received. But these Hereticks while by imputing faith in a proper sense, they exclude the imputation of Christs righteousnes to the faithfull, they deny their communion, and union with Christ, they take away the truth and the use of the Sacraments, for if the faithfull are regenerate, and by one spirit ingraffed into Christ, and united unto him, as Baptisme signifieth, and sealeth: and if they have spiritual communion with Christ of his righteousnes, and all other benefits which the LORDS Supper signifieth, and is thereof a seale to them: Then GOD whose judgment is according to truth, cannot but impute Christs righteousnes to them, and accept it for them, and account it theirs. They who deny GODS imputing of it do either charge GOD with injustice, and error of judgment in not counting, and iudging that to be theirs in which they have communion, and interest, or else they deny the union and communion of the faithfull with Christ, and make the sacraments lying signes, and seales of false things, and things which are not. Therefore their opinion is most abominable, profane, impious, and blasphemous.

argument 6 Sixtly, that opinion which is invented, and maintained by Heretiks, who deny the eternall Godhead of Christ, and tends mainely to perswade that there is no use of Christs being GOD, and man, in one person, is Hereticall and blasphemous. Such is this opinion of the Socinians, it is an invention of Haretiks, and tends to take away the use of Christs being GOD, and to perswade men that there is no necessary use of his being GOD, and man in one person. For all Orthodox Divines give this reasō, why it was necessary that Christ the mediator should be GOD in our nature, even that the obedience & suffering which he did under goe in mans nature, might be the obedience and suffering of GOD, and so of infinite value, and though of him alone, and but for a time, yet of more worth, then if all men in their owne persons had obeyed as much as hee did and suffered for ever in Hell. They teach also, that first for the removing of so great evils, as the infinite wrath of GOD, eternall death, and torment in Hell: and secondly, for purchase of so great a good, as is the state of righteousnesse, and of grace, and also of eternall glory in Heaven. GODS justice could require no lesse satisfaction, and righteousnes, nor be satisfied with any other, but that which is performed by him, who is GOD and man, in one person, that is the perfect righteousnes and satisfaction of Christ which alone by the infinite value which it receives from his God-head, is fit to remove so infinite an evil, and to procure so infinite a good to men▪ But the maintainers of this Socinian opinion by denying that GODS infinite justice stands in strength to exact such a satisfaction being over-ruled, and oppressed, by absolute soveraignty of power; and by teaching that mercy, and bounty run beyond reason, freeing men from all need of such an infinite satisfaction to be communicated & imputed to them, and justifying them freely without righteousnes, they do take away the use of Christs God-head in his mediation, and the causes, and reasons, for which it was necessary that he should be GOD as well as man: And in conclusion, in places where they dare be bold to disclose the secret thoughts of their hearts, they roundly deny Christ to be the Sonne of GOD, of the same substance with GOD the Father. Therefore this their opinion is most impious, blasphemous, and Hereticall: And indeed it is never found in Histories, to have been maintained by any but Samosatenian Heretiks, deadly enemies to Christs deity.

Lastly, that opinion which is builded upon an Hereticall, and blasphemous ground, and is upheld, and maintained by blasphemous arguments, which do shake, and even raze the maine foundations of true Religion, must needs be most wicked and blasphemous: and such is this opinion; for it is builded upon this blasphemous ground, that GOD by his soveraigne power may do and will, things contrary to his justice, that is, count and accept that for righteousnes, which is no righteousnes, nor worthy to be accounted an act of perfect righteousnes, for such is the faith of fraile man taken in a proper sense.

The arguments by which it is commonly maintained are also blasphemous, and wicked; to wit▪ First they argue, that Christs righteousnes is not imputed to true believers, neither can be made or counted theirs by GOD. Because Christs righteousnes is the righteousnes of another far different from them: and GOD cannot iustify one, by anothers righteousnes, and therefore we are not iustified by Christs righteousnesse, neither is it imputed in iustification. Now what is this but a denying of the union, of the faithfull with Christ, for if he be one with us, and we one with him, then are our sinnes made his by communion, and in him satisfied, and his righteousnes and satisfaction is made ours, and we thereby are pardoned, and iustified, by it as it, is made ours, and is not the righteousnes of a stranger, nor of one who is another so different from us, but that he and we are one spirituall body, and all his benefits are ours, and we have an interest in them, and possesse them, and enioy them; so far as every one hath need of them. As this argument tends to overthrow our union with Christ, so A. Wotton in a manuscript of essayes, doth professe that our union with Christ is onely metaphoricall. Secondly, they argue that the righteousnes of Christ cannot be sufficient for the elect, nor counted to them for all righteousnesse which is in effect a denying of Christ to be GOD and man in one person, for if they acknowledg him to be GOD, they must needs hold that his righteousnes and fulfilling of the Law, is of more worth and value, then if all men in the world had fulfilled the Law, in their owne persons without failing in one point.

Thirdly, they argue that if Christ his righteousnes, and satisfaction be so made ours, and imputed to us that the Law may be said to be fulfilled in us, & we may said to have satisfied GODS iustice, in him our head, and by him our surety, then is there no place left for pardon, and free forgivenesse of our sinnes, for pardon and satisfaction are contrary. By which they overthrow the Doctrine of redemption, and of Christs satisfaction for us, and deny Christ to be our redeemer, and to have paid our ransome, and made a full satisfaction to the justice of GOD for our sinnes, contrary to the Scriptures, and the judgement and beliefe of all Christian Divines, who teach that Christ hath paid our ransome, is our 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and properly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 our redeemer. And though GODS justice exacted of Christ our surety a full ransome, and did not abate him the least farthing of our debt, yet we are freely pardoned, and have free forgivenesse, and are freely iustified by GODS grace, because hee did freely give his owne son to satisfy & fulfill the Law for us, & doth freely by his grace, and the free gift of his spirit unite us to Christ, and make us partakers of his satisfaction, & imputing his satisfaction freely to us doth for it freely forgive our sinnes, and justifie us. Fourthly while they argue that faith in a proper sense is all the righteousnes which the faithfull have for justification; and yet faith is not any formall righteousnes, by their owne confession, yea they deny that any formall righteousnes is required in justification; hereby they deny the Saints justified to be righteous contrary to the Scriptures which call them the righteous, and the generation of the righteous, Psal. 1.6. and 14.5. and the righteous nation, Isa. 26.2. and in many other places, which title GODS spirit would never give to them, if they were not formally righteous, by righteousnes, communicated to them after a spirituall & heavenly manner. For to hold as they doe, that men are justified and counted righteous without any formall righteousnes, which doth constitute and give being to a righteous and justified man, as he is righteous and justified, is a monstrous opinion contrary to reason.

Fiftly while they deny that the faithfull are constituted and made formally righteous by the obedience of Christ communicated, and imputed to them, which the Apostle in expresse wordes doth affirme, Rom. 5.19. and 8.4. and Rom. 10.4. they in heate of argument fall into the Pelagian heresie, and are forced to deny, that Adams sinne and disobedience is communicated and imputed to his posterity, so as that they are formally sinners by it. And rather then they will yeeld that infants which dye before they commit actuall transgression in their owne persons, are punished with death, because they are guilty of Adams sinne; they doe blasphemously affirme, that GOD being offended and moved to wrath, by the sinnes of parents, will out of the magnificence of his judgement, and rage of his iustice, destroy innocent babes with their sinfull parents, for terrour to others; which is contrary to GODS word, and Law which teach that children shal not dye for the sinnes of their parents, unlesse they bee partakers with them, either by communion and imputation, or by imitation and approbation. Whereas they bring for instance, that the children of Korah were destroyed with their father, though they were innocent, and not partakers in the sinne; herein they contradict the Scriptures, which expressely affirme that the children of Korah dyed not. numb. 26.11. For they undoubtedly upon Moses his threatning of sudden destruction, fled from their fathers tents and escaped, and onely they perished who would not be admonished by Moses, to separate themselves from the congregation of Korah, but adhering to him were partakers of his conspiracy, and sinne of rebellion.

Sixtly when they to colour their heresie, proclayme Christs righteousnes to bee the meritorious cause of iustification, and yet deny communion and imputation of it to true beleevers; what is this but to hold that Christs righteousnes is meritorious to them, who have no interest in it? which being granted it, will follow, That Christs righteousnes doth merit for infidels and damned reprobates, and doth as much for the justifying of them, as it doth to justifie the Elect and faithfull. For true reason can conceive no cause, why Christ doth merit more, or conferre more to the justification of the elect and faithfull by his righteousnesse, then hee doth to Infidels and reprobates; but onely this, that he communicates it to the elect, gives them a proper interest in it, and makes them truely partakers of it, so that it is imputed to them, and made their meritorious ransome: this while these men deny, they deny Christs righteousnes to merit any more for the faithfull, then for damned reprobates. And thus their bent is to set up Pelagian and Arminian free will, and to make this the onely difference betweene them that are justified and them that are damned, that whereas both alike have equall share in Christs merits, and Christ hath merited as much for the one, as the other, and given as much grace for iustification: the one having power of free will doth use it, and will beleeve, and so is iustified by his faith imputed for righteousnes; the other will not use the universall grace given to him, nor beleeve, which he might doe if he would; and therefore is damned: which is a most horrible and abominable Doctrine, and hereticall opinion.

Lastly they argue, that as in the first Covenant, GOD required workes of the Law performed by every man in his owne person, and this was the condition which man was to performe for iustification, and eternall life, and so that Covenant was not free, but conditionall. So in the new Covenant GOD requires faith and beleeving, which wee on our part must performe for iustification, life and salvation. And hereby they abolish the freedome of the new Covenant, and make it a Covenant conditionall, and not of free grace. For what soever is covenanted-and promised, upon a condition to be performed, is not absolutely free nor freely given; and so according to their Doctrine, they that are iustified by faith are not freely iustified by grace, whereas they plead Scripture for their errour, and alledge that iustification and life is promised upon condition of beleeving. If you beleeve, you shall be saved. I answer that, this is a grosse and absurd mistake. For every conditionall proposition doth not propound the conditition of a Covenant, which the party to whom a thing is promised, must performe, that the promise may bee made good to him; for such a condition whensoever it is performed, makes the thing covenanted a due debt which the promiser is bound to give.) But oftentimes a conditionall proposition propounds the meanes, by which a free gift is received; or the qualification by which one is made capable, and fit to receive, and enjoy a free gift, as for example, it is often said in Scripture. if yee will heare and hearken, yee shall eate the good of the land, and shall live, and not be destroyed. Isay 1.19, Ier. 26.3. and many other places. If we love one another, GOD dwelleth in us. 1 Iohn 4. If we walke in the light, we have fellowship one with another. 1 Iohn 1.2. If we confesse our sinnes, hee is faithfull, and just to forgive. 1 Iohn • .9. If a man be just, and do that which is right he shall surely live. Ezech 18.5.21 In all which, and the like places, there is no condition of the Covenant propounded, but onely the way and meanes to receive blessing, or the quality & condition, by which men are made capable and fit to enjoy the blessing, and somtimes the signes, tokens, and effects of them, that are in a blessed estate. And even so when GODS word saith, If you believe, yee shall be saved, There is no condition of the Covenant, propounded to be performed on our part, for justification, and salvation, but onely the qualification; by which GOD of his free grace doth qualify, and fit us to be iustified, and saved, and the meanes by which hee enables us to receive righteousnes, and to lay hold on salvation, which is freely given to us in Christ. Vpon these particulars severally observed out of their owne words, and writings, I strongly conclude, that this opinion being builded upon such a blasphemous, and Hereticall ground, and upheld, and maintained by such blasphemous arguments, must needs be most impious, Hereticall, and blasphemous.

Having already proved the Socinian and Arminian opinion, to be most false, and abominable, I proceed to answere the particular arguments, contained in this 2. Chapter, which was by the Authors owne hand delivered unto me to be answered: And because he and his followers shall not complaine, of misrelating any of his words▪ I will (as I have done in the former Chapter.) first lay downe his owne words.

Socinianisme.

THe first argument brought to prove that faith and believing are in a proper sense, Rom. 4. said to be imputed to the believer for righteousnes in justification, and not the righteousnes of Christ.

First, the letter of this Scripture speakes what we affirme plainely, and speakes no parable about it: yea, it speakes it once, and twice, yea, it speakes it the third, and fourth time, and is not ashamed of it. Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousnes verse 3. Againe to him that worketh not, but believeth in him that justifieth, the ungodly his Faith is counted to him for righteousnes, verse 5. And yet againe verse 22. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnes. The same phrase and expression is used also verse 23.24. Certainely there is not any truth in religion, not any article of our beliefe, that can boast of the letter of the Scripture more full, expresse and pregnant for it; what is maintained concerning the imputation of faith, hath all the authority, and countenance from the Scriptures, that wordes can lightly give, whereas the imputation of Christs righteousnes (in that sense which many magnifie) hath not the least reliefe either from any sound of wordes, or sight of letter in the Scripture.

Christianisme.

HIs first argument reduced into the forme of a syllogisme, runs thus. That opinion which hath the Letter of the Scripture, more full expresse and pregnant for it, then any truth in religion, or article of our beliefe, and hath all the authority and countenance from the Scripture, that wordes can lightly give, is certainely true.

This opinion concerning the imputation of faith in a proper sense is such. Therefore it is a true and sound opinion.

That this imputation of faith, may boast of the letter of Scripture, and of all the authority and countenance that wordes can give, hee proves, because the letter of the Scripture speakes it once, twice, yea thrice and foure times, to wit, in this Chapter, Rom. verse 3.5. 22, 23, 24. to which I will adde a fift time verse. 9. Ans.

The more true that the proposition is, the more false is the assumption, wherein hee assumes most falsely to his opinion, that which in no wise belongs to it, and thereupon inferres a most false conclusion. I answere therefore that his assumption is an heap of impudent lyes. First the killing letter of the Scripture may give some countenance to it, that is, speeches of Scripture understood, and urged literally, which are spoken by GODS spirit tropically and in a figure. This Saint Austin calls the killing letter, because they who take the words properly, and so urge them obstinately, they slay their owne soules. But the true literall sense of the wordes, which are improperly literall, will never give any countenance to this hereticall opinion, as I have shewed before most fully.

2 I cannot but accuse him here of most intollerable impudency in that he affirmes, that this most Hereticall opinion hath more full expresse, and pregnant testimony from the letter of the Scripture, then any truth in Religion, or any article of Religion, and hath all the authority and countenance from the Scripture, that words can give, when as in all the Scripture, faith is not once said to be imputed for righteousnes, in a proper sense, in all the word of GOD, and is onely seven times said to be counted, or imputed for righteousnes, and that tropically; while the Apostle useth the phrase borrowed from that improper speech which is spoken of Abraham, Gen. 15.6. That when Abraham believed GOD, he counted it to him for righteousnes. For it is manifest that in this. Chapter, he altogether insists upon that speech, and doth but repeat it six times: and so likewise Gal. 3.6, Saint Iames also once useth it, speaking of declarative justification, to prove that Abraham was justified by workes, Iam. 2.23. that is, declared before men to be righteous, because the Scripture saith, Abraham believed GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousnes. So that of Saint Iames may be believed, faith is not the righteousnesse for which man is accepted with GOD, (as the Socinians teach) but that by which man obteines the testimony of righteousnes, as Iustine Martyr understands this phrase. Now that Christ, and his fulfilling of the law is truely, and properly, the righteousnes by which all believers are justified, constituted, and made righteous before GOD: the Scriptures do in proper literall speech, as well as improperly more often affirme, as Isa. 61.10. Rom. 3.24. Rom. 4▪6. Rom. 5.17, 18, 19· Rom. 8.4. and 10.3.4. and Phil. 3.9. and 1 Cor. 1.30. and 2 Cor. 5.24. these twelve places do plainely teach and affirme, that the righteousnes by which men are made and constituted righteous in iustification, is Christs obedience and satisfaction, made to the Law, for our redemption, and nine of them are proper speeches; so that here wee see the communion of Christs righteousnesse which hee opposeth, hath more authority, and countenance from the Scripture, and more full expresse, and pregnant testimony from the letter of it. If I should instance in other truths of Religion, as that there is one true GOD, even Jehovah, and none beside him; or that hee created all things, or concerning the deity of Christ, and of the holy Ghost, or concerning redemption by Christ, or the last Iudgment, resurrection and life eternall: ten expresse, and pregnant testimonies of Scripture might be brought to prove any one of them; for every one wherein imputation of faith is named. So that here we see what he cannot proue by argument, he goeth about by impudent outfaceing to impose upon his hearers, and readers.

But let us examine the proofe of this bold assertion even his assumption, which certainely is as poore weake, and begerly, as his forehead is strong, like brasse, in impudent affirming it. The letter of the Scripture, (saith hee) affirmes it plainely once and twice, yea a third and fourth time. Therefore it is most certainely true. To this I answere, that the letter of the Scripture affirmes that faith and believing was counted to Abraham, and is to other believers, but not in a proper sense, but tropically; and so many things are often affirmed by the letter of the Scripture, which if we understand them in a proper sense, are most false, as for example. GOD is said to repent Gen▪ 6. two severall times, to wit▪ ver. 6.7. and Ier. 26. three severall times, viz. ver. 3, 13.19. and Amos▪ 7.3, 6. and Iud 2.18. and 1 Sam. 15.11. Psal. 135.14. Ier. 18.10. with many more. So likewise an hand, and armes, and eyes, and mouth, are often attributed by the letter, of the Scripture to GOD, which speeches if wee should understand in a proper sense they would prove a killing letter to us; therefore this is a most absurd and ridiculous proofe well beseeming the thing which it is brought to prove. And as he falters in his Logick and his reasons, so he shewes ignorance of rhethorik, for he takes it for a certaine truth, that one phrase foure times used must needs be taken in a proper literall sense. But rhetorik would have taught him that to use divers tropicall speeches together, is an Allegory, and elegancy of speech often used in Scripture, as the places last cited shew. To which let me add one most pregnant instance, Gal. 3. where the word faith in a discourse of justification is used ten times in an improper sense, for the Gospel which is the word of faith, and teacheth iustification by Christ, and by believing in him, and not by our owne workes, which the Law requires, to wit, verses 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 22, 23, 25.

Now it may be he perceived little strength in his argument brought for his imputation of faith, notwithstanding, his great braggs, and therefore he shootes one fooles bolt against the imputation of Christs righteousnes, which is an argument or syllogisme, consisting of an assumption without a proposition, or a conclusion expressed: but I can coniecture what he meant to conclude, namely, that the imputation of Christs righteousnes in iustification, is a mere faction, and ought not to be believed.

The imputation of Christs righteousnesse, (in that sense which many magnifie) hath not the least reliefe, either from sound of words, or light of letter in the Scripture.

To which I answer, first that if this were granted (which is most false) yet it doth not follow that faith alone in a proper sense is imputed. Ridiculum caput (saith he in the Comedie) quasi necesse sit, si justitia Christi non dicitur imputari, fidem reputari pro justitia. It is a ridiculous conceipt, to thinke that if Christs righteousnes be not imputed, therefore faith alone in a proper sense must be said to bee imputed. David tells us that Phinees his executing of iudgement, was imputed to him for righteousnes, and Saint Iames saith that Abraham was iustified by works, & not by faith alone: why then are not works as well as faith imputed?

But secondly I answer that his assertion is most false, and I prove it from the very wordes of the Apostle in the 4. Chapter, verse 6. where he saith that to the blessed man righteousnes is imputed without workes, and verse 11. where he gathereth that to the beleeving Gentiles, though uncircumcised, righteousnes shal be imputed. Now faith is not righteousnes (as hee himselfe confesseth) for righteousnes is perfect conformity to GODS law; & this is not to bee found in all the world, but only in Christ, he alone hath in mans nature fulfilled the law. As for faith, evē in Abrahā himselfe it was stained with many doubtings, and feares at some times as when he called his wife his sister for better safety: and so it is in the best beleevers. Beleeving also is but a dutie and a worke of obedience to the Law; but this which is here said to bee imputed, is a righteousnes without workes, or any thing performed in our owne persons; therefore faith is not the righteousnes which is here said to be imputed; but the righteousnes of Christ apprehended by faith, and couched under the name of faith and beleeving.

Socinianisme.

SEcondly the scope of the place rejoyceth also in this interpretation, that faith should be taken properly in all those passages cited, and from tropes and metonymies it turneth it selfe away. It is apparent to the circumspect Reader, that the Apostles maine intent and drift in this whole discourse of justification, was to hedge up with thornes (as it were) that false way of justification which lay through workes, and to put men from attempting any going that way, and to open and discover the true way of justification, wherein men shall not faile to attain that Law of righteousnes before GOD: that is, in plaine speech, to make knowne unto them what they must doe, and what GOD requireth of them to their justification, and what he will accept at their hands this way, and what not? Now that which GOD precisely requires of men to their justification, in stead of the works of the Law, is their faith, or to beleeve (in the proper and formall signification.) He doth not require of us the righteousnes of Christ, for our justification, this hee required of Christ himselfe; that which hee requires of us for this purpose is our faith in Christ. Therefore to certifie or say unto them, that the righteousnes of Christ should be imputed to them for righteousnes, would fall short of his scope and intent this way, which was plainely and directly this, to make known unto them the counsaile and good pleasure of GOD, concerning that which was to be done and performed by them to their justification, which he affirmeth from place to place, to be nothing else but their faith in Christ or beleeving, whereas to have said thus unto them that, they must be justified by Christ, or by Christs righteousnes, and withall not to have plainely signified, what GOD requires of them and will accept at their hand to give them fellowship in that righteousnes. For justification which is by Christ, and without which they could not be justified, had beene rather to cast a snare upon them then to have opened a dore of life, and salvation unto them.

Christianisme.

His second way of arguing to proue his opinions from the scope of the place, and the intent of the Apostle in this discourse of justification. His maine argument reduced into forme runs thus.

The scope of the place, and intent of the Apostle is to hedg up with thornes, the false way of justification which lay through works, and to turne men from it; as also to discover the true way to them, to wit, what they must do, and what GOD requireth of them, to their justification, and what hee will accept at their hands, instead of the workes of the Law: and that is it which he here saith is imputed for righteousnesse.

But faith, and believing (in a proper and formall signification) is that which they must do, and performe to their justification, which also GOD requires of them, instead of workes of the Law, and will accept at their hands instead of them. Therefore faith in a proper sense, is here said to be imputed

To this argument I answere, First, that in the first proposition there is some truth affirmed, but immediately contradicted, and many falsehoodes intermingled. That the Apostles scope and intent is to hedge up the false way of, justification, which lay through workes, and to discover the ture way, we grant for truth. But like a mad, or drunken man, he immediately contradicts the truth which he had affirmed, and tels us that the right way is doing, and performing, something which GOD requires at our hands to our iustification. And what is this, but the way which lyes through workes? For to doe and perform somthing required of us, that it may be accepted of GOD at our hands to our justification, is to seek justification by the way of working in the judgement of men, that are sober and in their wits.

Besides this manifest contradiction, I find also much falshood and evill meaning. 1. In saying the truth, that the false way lyeth through works, that is, works performed in obedience to the Law by every man in his own person (which is the true intent and meaning of the Apostle) he hath a further wicked meaning, namely, that our seeking after the righteousnesse of Christ, which consists in his works of obedience to the Law, is the way which lyeth through works to justification, and therefore the false way. And this he declares to be his meaning in that he immediatly after labours to beat men off from Christs righteousnesse. Wherfore, I justly tax him here, not onely of blasphemy, in calling the righteousnesse Christ (who is the way, the truth, and the life) and seeking justification through it, a false way: but also of stupidity and blindnesse, in that he cannot see the difference between our seeking justification by the righteousnesse offered to us in the Gospel to be apprehended by faith, even Christs righteousnesse; and our doing works of the Law for our justification; or Christs performing works of the Law in his own person. For Christs righteousnesse as it was performed by himselfe, was legall and according to the strict termes of the Law: but as it comes to us by communion, and is applyed by faith, it is Euangelicall. 2. In that he saith God requires somthing to be done of men for their Justification, which God imputes to them, and accepts at their hands instead of the works or righteousnesse of the Law. Hereby he sets up justification by some thing which a man doth, and performeth, which the Apostle altogether opposeth in this discourse and his whole scope is bent against it; and his whole intent and drift is to shew, that we are justified, not by giving or doing, but by receiving that which is freely given of GOD, and reputed for righteousnes, even the righteousnesse of him, who is GOD, and is called therfore the righteousnesse of God, Chap. 3.21. and 10.3. Hereby also he brings in a doing and performing of somthing by men, which is accepted of God, over and above that which the Law requireth, which is a meere Popish fiction, tending to dishonour the Law, and to make it an imperfect rule of mans wel doing. And withall he makes the new Covenant a condicionall Covenant, and not of free Grace, promising justification and salvation upon condition of mens doing.

In the second place, his assumption, wherein he affirms that faith and beleeving in the proper and formall signification, is that which men must doe and performe, and which God requires and will accept at their hands instead of works of the Law for justification: it contains in it most grosse Socinian errour, and much absurdity and untruth. First, in that he calls faith and beleeving a thing done and performed by men, this is directly contrary to the Apostle, who teacheth, that faith is not of our selves, but is the gift of God, Ephes. 2.8. and that we of our selves are not sufficient to think much lesse to do that which God can accept: but our sufficiencies of God, 2 Cor. 3.5. and it is God which worketh in us both to will and to doe of his good pleasure, Phil. 2.13. so that faith and beleeving are not a condition performed by us to oblige God; but a part of the Grace freely promised in the Covenant, and given to us, even the worke and motion of his Spirit in us.

Secondly, in that he sets up faith instead of all righteousnesse and perfect fullfilling of the Law: hereby he doth professe himselfe a Socinian Hereticke in plain terms, and conspires with those Heretickes to overthrow the justice of God in our justification, and to make Christs satisfaction vaine and needlesse, as I have before shewed.

After his arguing for the imputation of faith, he proceeds here in his second way of arguing, as he did in the former, to dispute against Gods imputing of Christs righteousnes in iustification. His reasons are 3. First, because God required Christs righteousnes of Christ himselfe, and therefore it is not required of GOD for our righteousnesse, to iustification. Secondly, because the scope of the Apostle is to shew what must be done, and performed by us, and what GOD requires at our hands, to iustification, and Christs righteousnesse is not any thing performed by us, and therefore is not here said to be imputed. Thirdly, if the Apostle had said that we must be iustified by Christ and his righteousnesse, without any other thing performed by us, this had beene to cast a snare upon us, rather then to open to us a dore of life, and salvation.

To which I answere, that as his denying of Christs righteousnes to be imputed, is Hereticall, so also are his reasons brought to confirme his opinion. First in that he saith GOD doth not require of us the righteousnes of Christ, for our iustification; this phrase is not onely harsh, and unsavory, but also full of calumny, and close slander. It is harsh and absurd, like as if one should say, that GOD requires the same particular, and individuall act, done by another, to be not done by him, but by us, which implies a grosse contradiction. It is also full of close calumny, for hereby he goeth about to make men beleeve, that the orthodox doctrine of iustification by the communion, and imputation of Christs righteousnes, is a teaching, and supposing, that GOD requires of us for iustification, that we be performers of the same individuall works of the law, in the propriety, and formality of them, which Christ performed, and so he openly expresseth his mind in another place, which is a base slander, as I have before shewed.

Secondly, in that he saith, God required Christs righteousnesse of Christ himselfe, and not for our iustification; This implies, that Christ had need of iustification, and was bound to fulfill the righteousnesse of the Law, as a thing requisit for himselfe, and it savours very rank of the Samosatenian, and Socinian heresie, which denyeth Christs eternall deity, for if Christ his humane nature, being from the first conception most pure, upright, and holy, was personally united to the eternall Son God, equall with the father, and so was the Son of God, and heir of all things: who can doubt but that he in himselfe was worthy of glory at Gods right hand from his birth; as his taking of our nature upon him was altogether for us, so his infirmities, sufferings, death, and continuance on earth for the performance of all righteousnes and obedience to the Law was for us, and for all the elect, both them who of old before his comming beleeved in him promised and to come; and also for them who now doe beleeve in him already come exhibited and exalted to glory in his humanity. To say or thinke that he had need to iustifie, and make righteous himselfe by his workes, and to merit glory in heaven by his righteousnes; is in effect to deny that hee is GOD infinitely worthy of all glory, as he was the onely begotten sonne of GOD, and heire of all things.

His second reason is a manifest falshod, to wit, that the scope of the Apostle is to shew what is to be done, and performed by us, which GOD may accept at our hands to our justification. For the Apostles scope is to shew that wee are justified freely by GODS grace, by the things which Christ did for our redemption, cap. 3.24▪ and that obedience, righteousnes, and satisfaction of Christ, we must not obtaine by any workes of our owne according to the Law, it is freely given us of GOD, and faith is the hand by which wee receive it, and our evidence, that we are justified by it.

His third reason is blasphemy, and contradiction of Christs owne words. For our Saviour professeth and affirmeth that he alone is the dore, John 10.7. & the way, Iohn 14.6. and hee who makes him the way and dore, and seeks justification life and salvation by the way of his righteousnes, hee is a true disciple of Christ, and his Apostles. But to call the teaching of men in this way, the casting of a snare upon them is blasphemy. Far be it from me, and from all true Christians not to detest and▪ abhorre such impiety, and not to thinke him worthie of the curse of Anathema Maranatha, who with his mouth proclaimeth, and with an obstinate heart maintaineth, that teaching of iustification by Christ and his righteousnes is casting of a snare on men, and not of the dore of life and salvation to them.

Socinianisme.

THirdly that interpretation which is set up against it, and contendeth for the imputation of Christs righteousnes, is cleerely overthrowne by severall circumstances, and passages in the context;

First it hath no appearance of a likelyhood in it, that the Apostle in the great and weighty point of justification, wherein (doubtlesse) he desired, if in any subject besides, to speak with his understanding, as his owne phrase is, that is, that what hee himselfe conceives and understands may bee clearly understood by others, should time after time and in one place after another without ever explaining himself, or changing his speech throughout the whole disputation, use so strange & harsh and uncouth an expression, or figure of speech, as is not to be found in all his writings besides, to say that faith and beleeving is imputed for righteousnes, but to meane that indeed it is the righteousnesse of Christ that is imputed; were to speake rather that he might conceale his mind then reveale it.

Christianisme.

IN this third way of arguing he layeth downe his arguments against the true Orthodox interpretation of Saint Pauls speeches, concerning imputation of faith for righteousnes; which interpretation he goeth about to overthrow by severall circumstances, or passages in the context. I will first sift his first argument here laid downe, and then propound and answer the rest.

Answer to the first argument.

IN this argument there are more impudent lyes then full pauses, or sentences. The first impudent lye is, that the Apostle expressing the state of righteousnes, or of a man justified by Christs righteousnes; by the name of faith, and beleeving imputed for righteousnes to him, should use an harsh strange and uncouth speech, and expression: what is the man so ignorant of the first grounds of Rhetorick, that a trope or figure of speech, is harsh strange and uncouth with him? It is but a Metonymie to expres by the name of Faith, and beleeving, the state of a beleever or a faithfull man, or the object of faith, which faith hath laid hold on so fast, that they cannot be separated, but he who hath the one hath the other also, and by righteousnes to expresse the state of a righteous man justified. And when we say faith is imputed for righteousnes, to meane that the state of a beleever is counted the state of righteousnes, or of a man justified; or that faith as it comprehends Christs righteousnesse, is counted to him that hath it righteousnes: and Christs righteousnesse which the beleever by faith possesseth, is set on his skore for iustification.

A second notorious untruth is, that such a figure of speech as this, is not to be found in all the Apostles writings besides. For the same expression and figure of speeches used by this Apostle, Cap. 2.26. as I have before plainely shewed. Yea foure times in the foure last verses is the same trope used, uncircumcision first for a man uncircumcised, and secondly for the state of an uncircumcised Gentile, and circumcision for a circumcised Iew, and againe for inward sanctification whereof circumcision was the signe and Sacrament, and ten severall times doth he tropically by faith meane the Gospell, and Doctrine thereof, which is the obiect of faith, Gal. 3 (as I have before noted, where he discourseth about this weighty point of iustification.

A third impudent lye, and manifest falshood is that the Apostle time after time, and in one place after another useth the word faith or beleeving imputed, without ever explaining himselfe, or changing his speech. For that which he calls faith and beleeving, and faith it is imputed for righteousnes, vers. 3. and 5. he explaining himselfe, and changing his speech, v. 6.11. calls it righteousnes, and saith GOD imputeth righteousnes, and righteousnesse is imputed. In a word I doe challenge him to shew one place in all the writings of this Apostle, wherein he useth this phrase of faith, or beleeving, imputed for righteousnes, except onely here in this Chapter, and in Gal, 3. In both which places he cites that testimony of Moses, concerning Abraham, that GOD counted faith to him for righteousnes, and urgeth it in the phrase of Moses, but in all other places, where he writes of iustification, he useth his owne expressions, and saith that wee are iustified by Christs satisfaction made for our redemption, as Rom. 3.24. and by his obedience and fulfilling of the Law Rom. 5.19. and 8.4. and 10.3.4. and that Christ is made to us righteousnesse, 1 Cor. 1.30. and we are made the righteousnes of GOD in him, 2 Cor. 5.21. If he cannot shew any place besides these, then let him bee ashamed of his doings, in that he hath bent his tongue and pen like a bow for lyes, and shootes out in every passage so many notorious untruthes, that hee may bee suspected to have full furnished his quiver, from the armorie of the father of lyes, the Prince of darknesse.

The second Argument.

SEcondly verse 5. it is said, that to him that beleeveth his faith is imputed to him for righteousnes. From which clause it is evident, that that faith (whatsoever we understand by it) which is imputed is his, somewhat that wayes truely, and properly called, his, before such imputation of it bee made unto him. Now it cannot be said of the righteousnesse of Christ, that it is any mans before the imputation of it to him, but faith properly taken is the beleevers before it be imputed (at least in order of nature, though not in time.) Therefore by faith which is here said to be imputed, cannot be meant the righteousnesse of Christ.

Answer.

THe righteousnes of Christ by spirituall union, and communion, which every true beleever hath with Christ, is as truely his, as his faith. For Christ is made unto him righteousnesse, 1 Cor. 1.30. and he is made the righteousnesse of GOD in Christ, 2 Cor. 5.22. and that in order of nature before it is counted his righteousnesse. For GOD whose judgement is according to truth, doth not count that to the beleever, which he hath not before communicated, or at the same time doth communicate to him. Secondly I answer, that if faith which is here called his faith, be faith in a proper sense, and be imputed for righteousnesse to justification, then is man justified by his owne inherent righteousnesse, and by a worke done and performed in his owne person, which every Orthodox Divine will tell him is flat popery or worse.

The third Argument.

THirdly granting a trope, or Metonymie in this place, and that by faith is meant the object of it, or the thing beleeved; yet it will not follow from hence, that the righteousnesse of Christ should be said to bee imputed here, but either GOD himselfe, or the promise of GOD made to Abraham For it is said verse 3. that Abraham beleeved GOD, not that he beleeved Christs righteousnes, except we set up another trope to maintaine the former, and by GOD will say is meant the righteousnes of Christ, which would bee not a trope or figure, but rather a monster of speech. Therefore the righteousnesse of Christ is not here said to be imputed for righteousnesse, but faith properly taken. Yea whereas the object of faith as justifying, is expressed with great variety of words, and termes in Scripture, in all this variety there is not once to bee found the least mention, of the righteousnes of Christ: as if the holy Ghost foreseeing the kindling of this false fire, had purposely withdrawne, or withheld all fuell that might feed it. Sometimes Christ in person is made the obiect of this faith, Iohn 3.16. besides many such expressions. Sometimes Christ in his Doctrine, or the Doctrine and word of Christ, Iohn 5.46. had yee beleeved Moses, yee would have beleeved mee. Sometimes Christ in the relation of his person, and that either as he stands related unto GOD as his father, Iohn 20.31. or else as hee stands related to those ancient promises of GOD made unto the Iewes concerning a Messiah, to be given and sent unto them, Iohn 8.24. except yee beleeve that I am hee, yee shall dye in your sinnes. Sometimes the raising up of Christ from the dead, as Rom. 10.9. Sometimes GOD himselfe is made the obiect of faith. 1. Pet. 1.21. Sometimes the record or testimony of GOD concerning his sonne, is made the obiect of faith, 1. Ioh. 5.10. In all this variety or diversity of expressing the obiect of faith, as iustifying, there is no sound or intimation of the righteousnes or active obedience of Christ. Not but that the righteousnesse of Christ is, and ought to bee beleeved as well as other things revealed, and affirmed in the Scriptures: yea it is of nearer concernment to the maine to beleeve it, then the beleeving of many things besides comprehended in the Scriptures as well as it, but the reason I conceive) why it is not numbred or reckoned up among the obiects of faith, as iustifying is, because though it ought, and cannot but be beleeved by that faith which iustifyeth, yet it may be beleeved also by such a faith, which is so farre from iustifying, that it denyeth this Christ (whose righteousnesse notwithstanding it beleeveth) to be the sonne of GOD. Thus some of his owne nation (the Iewes) have given testimony to his righteousnesse and innocency, who yet received him not for their Messiah, nor beleeved him to be GOD. And this is the frame & constitution of the Turkish faith (for the most part) at this day.

Answere.

IN this third argument he undertakes to prove, that if faith were said to be imputed by a trope or metonymie, and that by faith were meant the object of it, yet Christs righteousnesse cannot be meant, because the object of that faith which is said to be imputed, is GOD himselfe, or the promise of GOD: But to understand, that by GOD is meant Christs righteousnes, would be not a trope or figure of speech, but a monster of speech. To which I answere, that Abrahams faith which was imputed, was a believing that GOD in Christ was his shield, and his exceeding great reward. Gen. 15.1. Now no man can in believing by a true faith separate the righteousnes, and full satisfaction of Christ GOD and man, from Christ himselfe. To beleeve GOD to be our reward is to believe that GOD is become our righteousnes, and so our reward; for the reward of blessednes is the reward of righteousnes, and is called the Crowne of righteousnes. 2. Tim. 4. So that the argument may be turned thus against himselfe. Whosoever truely believes GOD to be his reward, he believes that GOD is righteousnesse, and so Christ as he is IEHOVAH, his righteousnes. Abraham when his faith was counted to him for righteousnesse, believed that God was his reward: Therefore hee believed that God was his righteousnes, and so Christ as hee is IEHOVAH our righteousnes, was the obiect of his justifying faith. Secondly, he hath here one most grosse and absurd speech, which shewes either his palpable ignorance in Rhetorick, or desperat impudency. That is, that if one should speak of believing God, and meane believing Christs righteousnes; this were not a trope or figure, but a monster of speech. Here I will intreat him to tell me ingenuously whether he doth hold the Lord Christ (who appeared, and spake to Abraham, and the Fathers, and whom they believed) to be the true God. If he denyeth him to be the true God, then wee shall take him to be in all points of heresie a compleat Socinian: if hee grants that Christ is God, and his righteousnes performed in our nature, is the righteousnes of God and inseparable from his person; then hee who truely believes in Christ, and enjoyes him, must needs believe his righteousnes, and enjoy it, and to speak of believing in Christ God our shield, and reward, and to meane not his Godhead barely or his naked person, but his righteousnes also, and that he is IEHOVAH our righteousnes; this is but a metonymie of the subject, which non cane call a monster of speech, but hee who is ignorant in the grounds of Rhetorick.

Thirdly, in his denying, that Christs righteousnes is the object of justifying faith, he doth most openly contradict that which hee hath writ in the former Chapter, in the 6 part, where hee professeth that Christ and his righteousnes, is the object of that faith which is imputed; and if it doth not lay hold on Christ, it is not capable of imputation. His rehearsing of the variety of the objects of faith, mentioned in the Scripture, and denying Christs righteousnes to be any object, or thing beleeved: hee doth notoriously delude and gull his readers, and shewes great impudency; for what more often required in the Scripture to be beleeved, then that Christ is our true sacrifice for sinne, and our sacrifice of righteousnes, and that he is the end and fulfilling of the Law, for righteousnes to every one that beleeveth? yea, he gives himselfe the ly, and by his owne argument overthrowes his conclusion: For among the things which the Scriptures require that we should believe, he reckons Christ himselfe, and the doctrine of Christ, and the promise of Christ, the testimony which GOD hath given of his Son, and the resurrection of Christ, every one of which includes in it Christs righteousnes; for if wee believe in Christ aright, wee believe him to be the righteous servant of GOD, in whom his soule delighteth, who hath fulfilled all righteousnesse, is the end of the Law, for righteousnesse to every beleever, and is Iehovah, our righteousnes; such a one he was promised to be. The Gospel which is his doctrine, teacheth him to be such a one. The testimony which GOD hath given of him, is that in him we have eternall life, which is the crowne of righteousnes. His resurrection is the evidence of his righteousnes, and that the Law was fulfilled by him, and death therefore could not hold him captive: so that by rehearsing these as the objects of faith, hee confuts himselfe, and confirmes our doctrine. And lastly, he professeth vaine tergiversation, openly, by granting that Christs righteousnes is to be believed. But whereas hee saith that Turkes, and Iewes, believe not Christ, and yet believe his righteousnes; this is a monster in speech, sense, and reason; For how can a man beleeve that a person which is not is righteous, and that righteousnes may subsist without a subject. None can beleeve Christs righteousnes to be, as the Scripture calles it, the righteousnes of GOD, unlesse he believe Christ to be GOD. Some Turks acknowledg Christ to have beene a Prophet, but his perfect righteousnes performed to the whole Law for us, they do not believe. And the Iewes to this day blaspheme Christ and call him a lyar, an Impostor, a deceiver, and malefactor, justly crucified for his wickednes. And therefore in this argument he sheweth that his tongue and pen are applied to ly, and forge, to contradict himselfe, and to be constant in nothing but in holding obstinately his hereticall conclusions.

4 Argument.

FOurthly, that faith which is said to be imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse ver. 3. is that faith by which he believed in God, that quickeneth the dead, and calleth the things which are not as if they were. ver. 17. But the righteousnesse of Christ can in no tollerable construction or congruity of speech be called that faith by which Abraham beleeved in God, that quickeneth the dead. Therefore the righteousnes of Christ is not that faith which is here said to be imputed for righteousnesse.

Answere.

I Answere, first that a true believer may truely say, my righteousnes which I have in Christ is this, that I believe in God, who quickneth the dead, and graciously calleth and counteth me (who am not righteous in my selfe nor by my owne righteousnes) a righteous and justified person.

Secondly, that God did not quicken and raise up Christ, till he had perfectly fulfilled all righteousnesse, and satisfied the law for us as our surety. Neither doth hee quicken any dead but through his righteousnes and by his spirit communicating it to them, the debtor or his surety, layd up in prison, cannot be released, til the debt be fully discharged. And therefore Christs righteousnes is comprehended by that faith which believeth in God who quickeneth the dead, because quickning the dead, necessarily presupposeth their communion of the righteousnes of Christ, and under the name of that faith may by a metonimie be truely said to be imputed to justification.

5 Argument.

FIftly, the faith imputed to Abraham, ver. 3. is that faith wherein he is said not to be weak, ver. 19. and is opposed to doubting of the promise of God through unbeliefe ver. 20. But the righteousnes of Christ cannot be conceived to be that. wherein Abraham was not weak, neither doth the righteousnes of Christ carry in it any opposition to doubting of the promise, through unbeliefe, being a thing of a differing kind and nature from it▪ But betweene faith properly taken, or a firme beleeving, and doubting through unbeliefe, there is a direct and perfect opposition. And therefore it is faith in this sence, and not the righteousnes of Christ which is said to bee imputed for righteousnesse.

Answer.

I Answer, that though Christs righteousnesse bee a thing different from the beleevers faith: yet when the beleever by a strong faith, and without doubting possesseth Christ, and his faith doth spiritually comprehend in it Christs righteousnesse; then GOD counts it to him for righteousnes, that is, judgeth him a righteous man by communion of Christs righteousnesse, but doth not iudge his faith and Christs righteousnes to be one the same very thing. This argument is not to the matter. It may bee turned against himselfe thus. The more strong a man is in faith, and farre from doubting of the promise through unbeliefe, the more firmely he is united to Christ, and the more full communion hee hath of Christs righteousnesse, and with more reason may hee being so faithfull be counted righteous, and Christs righteousnes under the name of faith be imputed to him: This was Abrahams case he was strong in faith and doubted not, and therefore having firme union with Christ, and communion of all his benefits, GOD justly imputed faith to him for righteousnesse, and counted him so beleeving iustified, and righteous by Christs righteousnesse, and so in like case GOD will deale with other beleevers.

The sixt Argument.

SIxtly, that faith which was imputed to Abraham was that by which he was assured, that he who had promised, was able also to doe it, verse 21. and 22. But the righteousnesse of Christ is not capable of any such description as this, that by it Abraham was fully assured, &c. Therefore it is not that, which was imputed to Abraham.

Answer.

I Answer to this, as to the former. It is not to the matter, untill he first prove that the name of one thing, may not bee used by a Metonymie to expresse another, except these two things be both one, & the same thing; we wil deride such foolish arguments. Though Christs righteousnesse be not one and the same thing with faith: yet the more it doth assure us of the performance of GODS promise in Christ, the more closely it comprehends Christs righteousnes, and the more iust cause there is▪ that under the name of faith, Christs righteousnesse should be imputed by a Metonymie.

The seventh Argument.

SEventhly that which shall be imputed unto us, for righteousnesse is said to be our beleeving in him, that raised up Christ from the dead. verse 24. But the righteousnesse of Christ is not our beleeving on him that raised Christ from the dead, therefore it cannot be that, that is said to bee imputed for righteousnesse unto us.

Answer.

THere is no faith under the name whereof Christs righteousnesse may so fitly bee expressed, as that which is a beleeving on him who raised up Christ from the dead, for we cannot truely beleeve GODS raising of Christ from death, but withall wee must beleeve that GODS justice is by him our surety fully satisfied, and his Law fulfilled in our behalfe, and we being partakers thereof and enjoying it by faith, GOD may justly impute this faith to us for righteousnesse. Thus his arguments being all from his matter; are easily turned upon himselfe.

8 Argument.

EIghtly whereas the question, or point of imputation in justification, is handled onely in this passage of Scripture (for those other places Gal. 3. and Iames 2. onely mention it, but insist not at all upon any declaration, or explication thereof) it is no wayes probable but that the Apostle should speake somewhat distinctly, and plainely of the nature of it, otherwise hee might seeme rather to lay a stumbling block in our way, then to have written any thing for our learning and comfort. If wee take the word faith or beleeving so often used in this Chapter in the proper and plaine signification of it, for that faith whereby a man beleeves in Christ then the tenour of the discourse, is as cleere and full as may be, the streame of the whole Chapter runnes limpid and untroubled; but if wee bring in a tropicall, and metonymicall signification, and by faith will compell Paul to meane the righteousnesse of Christ, we cloath the Sun with sackcloath, and turne Pauls perspicuity into a greater obscurity, then any light in the Scripture knoweth how to comfort or to relieve. The word faith being a terme frequently used in Scripture, is yet never found to signifie the righteousnesse of Christ, the holy Ghost never putting this sword into that sheath, neither is there any rule of Grammar or figure in Rethorick, that knowes how to salve up the inconsistence of such an interpretation.

Answer.

THis argument is no more but his owne bare affirmation, that it is probable the Apostle in this place where he handles the point of imputation, would speak plainly, and it is more plaine to speak of faith, imputed in a proper sense: the tropicall and metonymicall sense or interpretation brought in, is a compelling of Paul to meane by faith the righteousnesse of Christ, and thereby we cloath the sun with sackcloath, in which multiplicity of words, wee finde much vanity. As for imputation in justification, it is not the maine and principall point which the Apostle insists upon, the maine and principall points of justification are in the 3. and 5. Chapter handled plainely, and in the 8, 9, and 10. Chapters, where he plainely teacheth that the righteousnes by which wee are constituted, and made righteous before GOD, is Christs obedience and fulfilling of the Law. The imputation of faith comes in onely by the way, being occasioned by that testimony of Moses concerning Abraham, which the Apostle brings to prove that iustification is not by our owne performance, or workes of the Law, but by a righteousnes which GOD gives, even the fulfilling of the Law by Christ for our redemption, which wee receive and enioy by faith so certainely, that if we bee faithfull beleevers in Christ, then are wee righteous euen in GODS account; for true faith cannot be nor subsist in any who hath not communion of Christs righteousnesse. This to all iudicious men is more plaine, and limpid and cleere, then to take faith in a proper sense, and to set on it the Crowne of Christs righteousnesse, especially seeing the Apostle in the 6. and 11. verses sheweth that the thing properly imputed is righteousnesse, and therefore not faith, which cannot properly be called or counted righteousnes: yea he tells us, it is a propitiation to cover our sins, which in no case can bee properly said of faith. As for his words wherein he affirmes, that there is more comfort in faith imputed, then in the righteousnesse of Christ imputed; they are most wicked and more hatefull then any poperie, yea blasphemous in exalting mans faith into the royall Throne of Christs righteousnesse, and calling the teaching of the imputation thereof, the laying of a stumbling block in our way. It is to be feared that he who thus speakes and writes hath stumbled at Christ the precious stone, which GOD hath laid in his Zion, as the Apostle intimates, speaking of them who make the righteousnes of Christ a stumbling block, and stone of offence. Rom. 9.33. In the next place after these frivolous arguments, hee takes upon him to answer some places of the Apostle which are produced by us and objected against him, wherein faith and hope are used to signifie their obiects, that is, the things beleeved and hoped for, as Gal. 1.22· and 3.23. and Colos. 1.5. And here he doth use notable trifling, and most absurd tergiversation. First hee grants the Apostle doth use in his writings such tropes of speech, which is a thing so manifest, that impudency it selfe is ashamed to deny it. And by granting this, he contradicts what hee hath before affirmed, to wit, that in all the Apostles writings such a trope is not to be found.

Secondly hee opposeth what before hee granted, by a forged and false distinction, affirming that the habit of faith may bee used to signifie the obiect, but not the act, Cujus contrarium est verissimum. For in the places obiected, the act as well as the habit, and especially the act of faith and hope are to be understood, for the habit is ordained to be exercised about the proper obiect, but it never is exercised about it, nor reacheth to it but by the act, faith by believing comprehends Christ and his righteousnes, and so doth hope by the acts of it, reach that within the vaile. And indeed, if wee observe it, we shall see in this discourse, that faith which signifies the habit, as well as believing which is the act, is here said to be imputed for righteousnes, as ver. 5. and 9. and therefore this distinction helpes him nothing at all.

Thirdly, hee contradicts himselfe againe, and grants that the act may be used to expresse the object, but then he flees to his old shift saying that Christs righteousnesse is not the object of justifying faith, or of faith as justifying, which error I have before confuted, and indeed it is contrary to all reason; for the proper object of faith, as it is an instrument of justification is nothing else but righteousnes.

Fourthly, he utters a notable untruth, when he saith, that the Scripture where it speakes of faith as justifying, makes not the least mention of Christs righteousnes, and fulfilling of the Law. Let him read Rom. 3.24. and 10.4. and tell me whether the believing of the man, to whom Christ is the end or fulfilling of the Law, for righteousnes be not justifying faith, & when we are said to be justified by the redemption which is in Jesus Christ, whether our beleeving of that our redemption be not a true justifying faith.

Lastly, he argues without reason, that though Christs righteousnes be a thing which is to be belived, & so is a partial object of faith, yet it is not the object of justifying faith, because creation of the world, & Christs being born of a virgin, and his ascention are partiall objects, and yet not of faith as it is justifying; but either Christ himselfe, or the promies of God, concerning the redemption and salvation of the world by him. To which I answere, 1 that his sylogism is without mood or figure: it is as if I should thus reason, That Master Goodwin, though he be a living creature, yet because some living creatures, as Asses, and Apes, are not reasonable creatures, therefore he is not a reasonable creature. 2. I must tell him there is but one true saving faith, and that is iustifying faith: and he who can by true holy faith beleeve aright the creation, or the nativity of Christ borne of a virgin, or his ascention, he hath iustifying faith, though when faith is acting about iustification, the proper obiect is righteousnes, even Christs full satisfaction for our redemption, and salvation, and the iustifying act, is beleeving that Christ is made unto us of God righteousnes, and we are made the righteousnes of God in him. And faith imputed for righteousnes, ver. 3. is righteousnes imputed. ver. 6. and 11. Thus you see all circumstances in the context stand up in contestation with his exposition, which by faith here said to be imputed, understands faith in a proper sense, and per se, not faith in respect to Christs righteousnes.

But that I may not seeme to conceale any thing, nor give any thing for his upon trust, I will set downe these tergiversations in his owne words.

Socinianisme.

IF it be obiected, that faith is sometimes put for the obiect of faith, as Gal. 3.23 before faith came, and Gal. 1.22. he preacheth the faith, &c. And may be so used with a good propriety of speech, (marke this bull, that faith put for the obiect of it, is a proper speech) as hope is put for the thing hoped for, which is an expression usuall in Scripture. To this I answere, first by concession, it is true, the name of the faculty is sometimes put for the obiect appropriated to it, neither is there any hardnes or cause of offence▪ or mistake in such an expression, but it rather addes a grace and countenance to the sentence wherein it is used seasonably, and with iudgement, as might be exemplified by severall Scripture instances, if it were pertinent. But 2. by way of opposition, I answer (Here observe how he playes Jack a both sides.) First though the faculty bee sometimes put for the obiect, yet the act is seldome or never (to my remembrance) the act or exercise of hope, is never put for the things hoped for; but hope it selfe is sometimes found in that signification, as Col. 1.5. for the hope which is laid up in heaven, so Tit. 2.13. looking for the blessed hope. Now that which is here said to bee imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse was not the habit of his faith, but Abraham beleeved GOD, that is exercised or put forth, an act of faith, and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse.

Secondly though it should bee granted, that as well the act, as the habit or faculty may be sometimes put for the object, yet when the act and object have beene named together, and the act expressed and specified by an object proper to it, and somewhat immediately ascribed to the act under that consideration, all which is plainely seene in this clause (Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse) in this case to conceive or to affirme, that what is so ascribed is neither ascribed unto the act it selfe, there mentioned (which is here Abrahams beleeving) nor to the obiect mentioned likewise with it (which is here GOD, Abraham beleeved GOD) but to something really differing from them both, & not so much as once mentioned in all the discourse (as namely to the righteousnes of Christ, what is this but to turne a mans back upon the text, to looke out an interpretation & to exchange that which is plainly affirmed, with what is not so much as is obscurely intimated, or implyed, & to make the Apostle to speake as never man spake besides, not for the wisedom and excellency of his speech, but for the uncouth abstrusenes of his meaning. Doubtlesse no instance is to be found of any Author whatsoever sacred, or prophane, who so farre abhorred to be understood in what he spake, as to put his mind into wordes of such a construction.

Thirdly and lastly, neither is the righteousnesse of Christ the object of faith, as justifying (as hath bin said) nor doth the Scripture where it speaks of faith, as justifying, which are places not a few, make the least mention, or give the least intimation of such a thing. It is true the Scriptures often propound the righteousnes of Christ, or his obedience to the law, as that which is to be beleeved, and so it may be termed a partiall object of faith, somewhat that is and ought to be beleeved: but so the creation of the world is propounded to bee beleeved, and that Cain was Adams sonne, is somewhat to bee beleeved. And generally whatsoever the Scriptures affirme, may be called a partiall obiect of faith. But the obiect of faith properly as it iustifieth, is either Christ himselfe, or the promise of GOD concerning the Redemption and salvation of the world by him. The righteousnes of Christ is no more the object of faith as iustifying, then either his being borne of a Virgin, or his ascending into heaven, or the like, and either the one or the other might as well be here said, to be imputed to Abraham for righteousnes, in that respect as his righteousnesse. Thus you see at large how many passages and circumstances in the context, stand up in contestation with that exposition which by Pauls faith in this Chapter, will needes understand Christs righteousnesse.

Answere.

THat which I have noted before gives light to see many tergiversations, and much trifling in this passage. Let mee onely here desire him to repeat the wordes which he chiefly stands upon, to wit, Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse, and tell mee whether righteousnes bee not named, which was imputed to Abraham ▪ and all who truely beleeve, as appeares, verse 6. and 11. and what righteousnesse can bee found fit to justifie a man before GOD, besides Christs righteousnesse?

Socinianisme.

FOurthly and lastly, this interpretation we contend for, according to which the word faith, or beleeving is to bee taken properly in all the passages mentioned, and not tropically or metonymically) was the common interpretation anciently received, and followed by the Church of GOD from the primitive times, and for 1500. yeares was never questioned or contradicted, neither did the contrary opinion ever looke out into the world, till the yesterday of the last age, I speak this somewhat above the analogie, and proportion of mine owne reading in matters of antiquitie, (which I confesse will not amount to any such confidence) but I am confident in this behalfe upon the undertaking of another, who searched diligently what interpretation of this Scripture ruled amongst the learned and Orthodox writers from time to time, so that it is but a calumny of evill report brought upon the opinion and interpretation of this Scripture which we maintaine, unworthy the tongue or pen of any learned or sober man, to make either Arminius or Socinus the Authors, or first founders of either. And for the last hundred yeares and upward, from Luther and Calvins times, the fairest streame of interpreters so runs, as to water and refresh the same interpretation: you will easily incline (I presume) to beleeve both the one and the other, that both former and latter times have beene friends and favourers to the interpretation given; if you will please with diligence, and without partiality, to examine these few testimonies, and passages following, as they stand in their severall Authors respectively.

Christianisme.

HEre he enters into his fourth & last way of confirmation, that is, to confirme his opinion, and interpretation, by testimony of learned Divines, both ancient and moderne writers, even from the Primitive times, to the yeare 150. after Christ. His beginning is with great swelling words, and with wonderfull confidence, though builded not upon any reading, or knowledg, of his owne, but upon the testimony of another, doubtles of some Socinian braggadogo, or impudent Arminian, whom hee is ashamed to name, who are all of this spirit, that when they build upon weakest ground, and are most strongly convinced by testimonies of Scripture, and unanswerable arguments, then they affirme and outface most impudently, and brag and ly, as if they contended to winne the whetstone: Nay, we think that this confession of his small reading, is out of modesty, or out of Satanicall subtilty? that as the Divel in the person of the Serpent vented his lies to our first Parents, so he may belch out desperate lies and forgeries under the person of another concealed Author, verily I feare the latter. because on anothers word, hee doth so boldly, and impudently, charge all the learned of the best note in this age with calumny, and false report, raised upon his opinion, (unworthy the tongue and pen, of sober and learned men) in that they make Arminius or Socinus, chiefe and first Authors of it, and with out blushing affirmes that the fairest streame of interpreters from the time of Luther, and Calvin runnes as water to refresh his interpretation. In both which I find such manifest falsehood, that no man of any reading can so speake and affirme, without a brasen face, maintaining wilfull and manifest lies against his owne conscience. First to the bold charge of our learned Divines with calumny, for taxing Socinus, and Arminius, as chiefe and first Authors of his opinion, I answere, That although that infamous heretick, Petrus Abailardus, who was gelded for his incontinence, by a man whose daughter hee had abused) laid the first ground of this opinion, that Christs satisfaction is not imputed to iustification: (as Saint Bernard shewes, Epist. 190.) Yet the first Authors who expressely affirmed that fides per se, that is, faith by it selfe in a proper sense, without a trope, is by the Apostle said to be imputed, for righteousnes, were Servetus, as Calvin shewes, in opusculis, Socinus, part 4. cap. 4 and 11. de Christo Servatore. And Arminius in Epist. ad Hippolitum de collibus. thes. 5. Secondly to his false pretence of the maine streame of writers, since Luther, and Calvin: so running as water to refresh his interpretation, I do answere and confidently affirme, that there is not one Orthodox writer to be found since that time, which ever held, that faith in a proper sense is imputed for righteousnes, and denyed the imputation of Christs righteousnes. Servetus, Socinus, Arminius and the rest of their sect, branded for hereticks, are the onely maintainers of that opinion.

To his testimonies and his impudent boasting of the generall consent of interpreters, I answere, First joyntly and in generall, That of all the testimonies which hee hath cited, there is not one which either affirmes that faith taken in a proper sense is imputed for righteousnesse, or denies the imputation of Christs righteousnes. Moreover, that all Divines who are the most zealous opposers of his interpretation, may say the same words which he cites out of Authors: and yet hold justification by Christs righteousnes imputed, yea and in proving that truth may with good reason presse and urge the same words rightly understood. Soe that a more odious example of folly and impudency cannot be shewed then hee here shewes himselfe by, making his folly strive for Mastery with his impudency.

Secondly, for the particular testimonies which he brings both out of ancient and moderne writers. They say no more but what Saint Paul saith, and wee all acknowledg and embrace for truth, viz. That Abraham beleeving that in Christ, and through his satisfaction, GOD was become his reward, was thereupon counted righteous, and GOD counted faith to him for righteousnes, and so are we all iustified, not by our owne righteousnes of workes performed to the Law in our own persons, but by faith laying hold on the righteousnes of Christ, which is counted for righteousnes, not in a proper sense, but relatively, as it comprehends Christ and his righteousnes, which Calvin calls apprehending the goodnes of GOD, and trusting in it. First for Tertullians words, I take them, as he doth render and rehearse them, and so the rest in order, and will take a light view of them, that wee may see his vanity, in citing testimonies which make nothing for him, but some directly against his opinion.

Tertulian Lib. 5. c. 3 against Marcion.

BVt how the children of faith? and of whose faith, if not of Abrahams? for if Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was deputed to him for righteousnesse, and hee thereby obtained the name of the father of many nations; wee by beleeving GOD are therefore much rather iustified, as Abraham was. And lib. de patientia cap. 6. Abraham beleeved and was deputed by him to righteousnesse; but hee tried his faith by patience, when he was commanded to sacrifice his sonne.

All this wee grant, Answer for here is not a word of imputing faith in a proper sense, onely an affirmation that Abraham by beleeving, obtained this at GODS hands, that he was accounted and reputed to be in the state of a righteous man, which we all professe.

Origen in Epist. ad Romanos, Cap. 4. verse 5.

IT seemes in this present place, that whereas many beleevings of Abraham werk before, now in this beleeving his whole faith was gathered together, and so was reputed to him for righteousnesse, and againe in the same place Abraham was not by GOD testified to bee righteous, for his circumcision, but for his faith, for before his circumcision, hee beleeved GODS and it was counted to him for righteousnesse.

If Origens meaning be, as Beza gathered from these, Answere and other wordes in that place, that Abrahams faith and all his acts of beleeving made up a perfect righteousnesse, and conformity to GOD, will and law; then is hee in as great an errour, as the Papists who set up iustification by a mans owne inherent righteousnesse, and his testimony is to be abhorred. But if his meaning bee that by his beleeving, and not by his circumcision, he obtained from GOD this testimony, that he was righteous by a righteousnesse beleeved, then he is full for us, and against his interpretation.

Justine Martyr Dialog. with Trypho.

ABraham not for his circumcision, but for his faith obtained the testimony of righteousnesse: for before he was circumcised, it is said of him, Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was counted to him for righteousnesse.

Wee grant that Abraham beleeving GOD to bee his reward in Christ; Answere this faith was the evidence of his being righteous by apprehension of Christ, and his righteousnesse, and therefore by it he obtained a testimony from GOD, that he was in the state of righteousnes. And Justine Martyres words say the same, and so he is cleare for us against them, who make faith the righteousnes imputed in a proper sense, and not the evidence of righteousnesse.

Chrysostome on Rom. 4.23. saith that the Apostle

HAving spoken many and great things concerning Abraham and his faith, saith, wherefore is it written but that wee might learne, that we also are justified as hee was, because wee have beleeved the same GOD? and on Gal. 3.6. For what was he the worse for not being under the Law? nothing at all, for his faith was sufficient to him for righteousnesse. All this we grant. For as Abrahams faith laying hold on GOD, as his reward in Christ by communion of his righteousnesse, was sufficient to him for righteousnesse, so is our faith also sufficient for us to iustification, because by it wee possesse Christs righteousnesse.

Augustine on the 148 Psal. saith,

FOr by beleeving wee have found what the Iewes lost by not by unbeleeving, for Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse, and on Psal. 140. for I beleeve in him who justifieth the ungodly, that my faith may be imputed to mee for righteousnes, and in his book de natura & gratia. For if Christ dyed not in vaine, the ungodly is justified in him alone, to whom beleeving in him that justifieth the ungodly, faith is accounted to him for righteousnesse, and in his 68. sermon de tempore, Abraham beleeved GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse. See that without any worke hee is iustified by faith, and whatsoever was possible to be conferred on him by his observation of the Law, his beleeving alone gave it all unto him, where note that beleeving gives righteousnes, and is not the righteousnes given in iustification.

Primasius on Rom. 43. saith.

ABrahams faith by the guift of GOD was so great, that both his former sinnes were forgiven, and this faith alone is said to be accepted before all righteousnes: that is, before all righteousnes of his owne, not instead of Christs righteousnes. For if it had not laid hold and possessed the full satisfaction of Christ, it could not have gotten pardon of his sinnes.

Beda's words which he citeth concerning the faith which is imputed, are onely these, not every faith, but that onely, which worketh by love. This is a certaine truth, for no faith can bring to us a true sense and assurance of our communion with Christ, but that which worketh by love.

Haymo on Rom. 43, saith, Quia credidit Deo, &c. Because hee beleeved GOD, it was imputed to him for righteousnesse, that is, for remission of sinnes, because by that very faith by which hee beleeved, he was made righteous: These wordes shew that faith by way of efficiency, and as an instrument makes men righteous, even as it brings remission of sinnes by applying Christs satisfaction to them.

Anselmes wordes are, that hee beleeved so firmely, this was by GOD counted to him for righteousnesse, that is, by this beliefe he was reputed righteous. And I say there was good reason, that he who by firme faith is partaker of Christs righteousnesse, should bee reputed righteous before God.

These are his testimonies which he cites out of the Ancients whose maine streame, as he boasted, did so runne as to water his opinion. But we see they so run as to overwhelme and wash away his muddie, and slimie opinion and interpretation. Not one syllable of faith in a proper sense counted for righteousnesse: Thus the mountaines have travelled of a child, and have roared out, and have made a terrible sound, and bustling, and when it comes forth in the birth, it is ridiculus mus, nay not so much as a poore drowned Mouse, in the eyes of judicious readers.

I proceed to his testimonies of moderne Divines.

LVther on Gal. 3.6▪ Christian righteousnes is an affiance or confident resting on the Son of GOD, which confidence is imputed for righteousnes, for Christs sake, and a little after, GOD counts that imperfect faith for perfect righteousnes for Christs sake, in whom I have begun to believe. We cannot desire plainer words to prove that faith is not the righteousnes by which we are justified, nor so in a proper sense counted, but propter Christum, that is, by reason, of him which it possesseth with all his benefits and full satisfaction.

Bucers wordes are, Abraham beleeved God, & he accounted this faith to him for righteousnes: & therefore (saith he) by beleeving he obtained this, that God esteemed him for a righteous man. These words shew, that his faith was not his righteousnes, but the thing by which he obtained the estimation of a righteous man. Peter Martyrs words are, To be imputed for righteousnes in another sense, signifieth that by which we our selves are reckoned in the number of the righteous, and this Paul atributs to faith onely, marke the words, hee doth not say, that faith properly is our righteousnes, but the onely thing by meanes of which we com to be reckoned in the number of the righteous Calvin on Rom 4.3. Abraham by beleeving, doth embrace the grace offered to him, that it might not be frustrate: If this be imputed to him for righteousnes, it followes, that he is no other way righteous, but because trusting in Gods goodnes he hath boldnes to hope for all other things from him. And againe▪ on verse 4. Faith is counted for righteousnes, not because it brings from us any merit unto GOD, but because it apprehends the goodnesse of GOD. These and such speeches of Calvin affirme no more, but that faith is imputed for righteousnes, not properly in it selfe, nor for any merit or worth of it, but meerely for that which it apprehendeth and embraceth when it is tendered. That is, GODS goodnes in giving Christ with all his benefits, and righteousnes.

Musculus in his common places. ss. 5. This faith ought to be commended, not in respect of any proper quality, but in respect of Gods purpose, by which he hath appointed, that it, to believers in Christ, should for his sake be imputed in the place of righteousnes. These words cut the throat of his interpretation; for they tell us, that faith is imputed for righteousnes, not for it selfe, or any proper quality in it, but for Christs sake, which is his righteousnes sake. Also on Gal. 3.6. What did Abraham that should be imputed to him for righteousnes, but onely this, that hee believed GOD? Indeed, believing is the onely meanes to receive Christs righteousnes, and therefore by beleeving onely we come to be counted righteous. Also on Gen. 15. Hee so speakes of Abrahams faith, that it is plaine hee disputes of that faith by which men do not simply believe GOD, but believe in him. That is, trust onely in GOD, and rely on the righteousnes of Christ, God and man.

Again afterwards: But when he firmely believed GOD, promising, that faith was imputed to him in the place of righteousnes, that is, he was reputed of God righteous for that faith, and absolved from all his sinnes. It is true, it must be an holy faith, and a firme beliefe which must so receive Christ and his righteousnes, that it may be reputed to us for righteousnes, and we may be reputed righteous, and absolved from our sinnes.

Bullinger on Rom 4.

Abraham committed himselfe to God, and that very thing was imputed to him for righteousnes. These wordes shew, that faith in a proper sense, is not imputed, but our committing of our selves wholly to GOD, by faith, and relying on his righteousnes, is that which is counted for righteousnes. He addes also on Gal. 3.6. That same faith of Abraham by which hee beleeved on GOD was imputed for righteousnes: And very well it might, for by that he laid hold on GOD, as his reward, and his righteousnesse, and shield.

Gualthers words on Rom. 4.4. are no more but the bare words of Moses Gen. 15.6. Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousnes. You see hee is put hard to it, when hee cites the bare words themselves to prove his interpretation of them.

Aretius his words prove, that faith is so acceptable to GOD, that he counted Abraham righteous upon his believing, by the righteousnesse of Christ, imputed and set on his skore, not inherent in him: For thus his words run, (as he here cites them) Rom. 4 He imputed righteousnes, that is, he so far accepted his faith, as thereupon to account him righteous, by a righteousnes which is imputative. That is, not by any righteousnes of faith, or other workes or graces inherent in him, but by Christs righteousnes, which is imputative, such as may be communicated spiritually, and set on the beleevers account. Also on verse 22. A faith so firme and pious, was imputed to Abraham for righteous. Hereby he notes that it must be a firme and godly faith which is accepted of GOD, for no other but a firme and pious faith can possesse Christs righteousnes, by reason of which it may be imputed to the believer for righteousnes.

Illyricus on Rom. 4.3.

That same beleeving was imputed to him for righteousnes, yea, for true righteousnes. These words shew that the righteousnes for which faith is said to be counted is true righteousnes, that is, onely the righteousnes of Christ onely, for faith of it selfe is no true righteousnes.

The wordes cited afterwards are directly against himselfe. That begging faith laying hold on Christs righteousnes, was imputed to him in the place of his own inherent righteousnes: It is not therefore faith per se proprio sensu, but faith holding fast Christs righteousnes, which is counted for righteousnes.

Pelican in Gen. 15.6.

Hee simply believed GODS word, and asked no signe of the LORD, and hee did impute that very faith unto Abraham himselfe for righteousnes, by which GOD is believed to be propense or ready for our good.

Hunius also saith, The faith by which Abraham believed GOD promising was imputed to him for righteousnes.

Beza saith, Here the busines is concerning that which was imputed to him, namely, his faith▪ Inius, and Tremellius on Gen. 15.6. GOD esteemed or counted him for righteous, though wanting righteousnes, and reckoned him to be in the state of righteousnes, because by firme faith he embraced the promises.

Paraus Rom. 4.3.

Wee understand by the word faith, which is said to be imputed for righteousnes, Abrahams resting, not in himselfe, or his owne merits, but in the promise and good will of GOD. These testimonies are brought to begge the question, for they onely affirme, that faith is imputed: and by believing, men come to be counted righteous: but there is not in any one the least intimation, that faith is imputed in a proper sense, but their owne words in the same places shew, That faith by reason of that which it beleeveth, and apprehendeth, that is, Christ with all his merits, and benefits, is counted for righteousnes, which is our true, genuine & Orthodox exposition of the Apostles words.

And thus I have answered all whatsoever hee hath said for his interpretation, onely his severall falshoods, and manifest untruthes in severall phrases, and boasting wordes prefixed before the testimonies, of every Author whom he nameth. I leave to the Reader to observe; For indeed they are most palpable, that every man of understanding may run and reade them.

But because I will not have such a forger, and false suborner of witnesses escape away without the iust brands of forgery, and notorious impudency. I will bring in the best learned of the Ancients and also of late Orthodox Divines, even those whom hee calls to witnesse for him; and will make them speake in their owne wordes, and testifie to all the world, that by faith imputed for righteousnesse, they understand not faith by it selfe in a proper sense; but the satisfaction and righteousnesse of Iesus Christ GOD and man, performed according to the Law, in our nature and in our behalfe, that through him the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who beleeve in him, and are lead by his spirit.

First Iustin Martyr testifieth that we being in our selves transgressors, and ungodly, cannot possibly bee iustified but in the onely sonne of GOD: now if onely by being in him, and by that union and communion which all have with him who are in him, then onely by his righteousnesse. For as the same Author saith in the same place, It is his righteousnes and nothing else, which can cover our sinne. Iustin Martyr in Epist. ad Diognetum. and in exposit • fidei, hee saith that Christ as well by his exact conversation of life (that is, his perfect righteousnes) as by his undeserved death hath abolished and covered our falls and failing which came in by Adam.

Irenaeus is so strict for our communion with Christ in his obedience unto death, and for our reconciliation and iustification therby, that he imputes Christs obedience to us, and saith. Jn secundo Adamo reconciliati sumus, obedientes usque ad mortem facti. In the second Adam wee are reconciled, being made obedient even unto death. lib. 4. c. 14. adversus haereses.

Athanasius in his 2 Tom. pag. 270. of Cornelius edition, saith that it is most necessary for us to beleeve the Scriptures, that Christ who hath freed us from the curse, is the first fruites of the masse of mankind who are by him redeemed, and that the perfect fulfilling of the law by him the first fruites, is imputed to the whole masse, his wordes in greeke are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . And in his booke de incarnat. verbi, hee affirmes that we shall live, and bee saved, because wee are partakers of the righteousnes without spot, which Christ GOD in the flesh brought into the world.

Gregory Nyssen Orat. 2. in Cantica saith, Christ having the filth or guilt of my sins transferred upon himselfe, hath communicated his perfect purity to mee, and made mee partaker of that beauty which is in himselfe.

Ambrose saith, as Adam is the patterne of death because of sin, so Christ is the patterne of life, because of his righteousnesse, in cap. 7. Lucae lib. 5. And our iustification by faith, and not by workes, he saith was prefigured by Jacobs getting of the blessing in sweet smelling garments. Iacob was a type of every true beleever under the Gospell, Rebecca of the Church. The garments of the first borne Christs righteousnesse. The Iewes of the elder testament, like Esau, sought righteousnesse by their owne workes, and true beleevers put on the righteousnes of Christ by faith, being so taught by the Church their mother, and obtaine by the merit of it the blessing.

Ambrose lib. 2. c. 2 de Iacob & vita beata.

CHrysostome saith, If a Iew aske thee how can all the world be saved by the righteous doings of one Christ? thou mayest answer him, even as all the world is condemned by one Adams disobedience, on Rom. 5. homil. 10.

And in his booke de recta fide, It is absurd (saith he) to thinke that wee should bee made heires of the punishment of the first Adam, by his disobedience, and should not bee partakers of the righteousnesse of the second Adam, who doth bring us to life by his most perfect obedience, Theodoret. Serm. 10. de curand. Graec. affect. saith, It is very convenient that he who highly praised righteousnesse, should in his comming in the flesh fulfill righteousnesse for men.

Augustine Enchirid. ad Laurent. c. 41. saith, he was made sin, that we might be made righteousnes, not our owne, but GODS righteousnesse; not in our selves but in him: even as he was sinne, not his owne sinne, but ours; not in himselfe, but in us. And serm. 6. de verb. Apost. he saith, GOD the father made him sinne, that wee might bee made the righteousnesse of GOD in him. Behold here two things: the righteousnesse of GOD not our own • 〈…〉 not in our selves.

Leo the 〈◊〉 , Epist. 70▪ saith▪ that, by the innocency of one we are all made innocent, and that by righteousnesse from him, derived unto men, who hath taken mans nature upon him.

Bernard. Epist. 190. as one hath borne the sinnes of all, so the satisfaction of one is imputed to all. It was not one which forfeited, and another which satisfied: for the head, and the body is one Christ. Also in serm. ad Milites templi he saith, Death is made to flee away in the death▪ of Christ, and Christs righteousnesse is imputed to us: and a little after, Hee who hath willingly beene incarnat, willingly suffered, and willingly crucified, will hee keep back his righteousnesse from us? and againe one man sinned, and all are made guilty, and shall the innocency of one (Christ) bee imputed onely to one?

Anselme on Rom 5. saith, that by the righteousnes of one, comming upon all the elect, they come unto justification, that they may bee justified by participation of Christs righteousnesse. These with many other testimonies which might easily bee gathered out of the Ancients from the primitive times, untill Luther, doe abundantly shew the impudency of this man, who so peremptorily affirmeth, that the communion and imputation of Christs righteousnesse for iustification, was never dreamed of among ancient writers, but onely faith imputed for righteousnesse in a proper sense, all these Ancients before named testifie the contrary. But to descend to Orthodox writers, of this last age since Luther: It is well knowne that they generally hold imputation of our sinnes to Christ, and of Christs satisfaction and righteousnesse to us for iustification, to bee the forme of iustification, by which beleevers are iustified.

Luther acknowledged, that it was the doctrine of Saint Bernard, concerning iustification by Christs righteousnesse imputed, and not by our owne workes; which moved him to suspect the popish doctrine, and to grow into dislike, and loathing of their religion.

And in his commentary on Galat. where he doth debase the righteousnesse of workes, and doth most highly extoll the righteousnesse of faith, he telleth us, that faith being weak in many of GODS children, cannot be accepted for righteousnesse of it selfe, that is, in a proper sense, and therefore there is necessarily required imputation of righteousnesse for iustification, on Galatians 3.6.

In editione Jenensi. Tom. 1. pag. 32. hee saith, faith obtaines what the Law commands, and what is that but obedience and righteousnesse? and againe, by faith Christ is in us, yea one bodie with us▪ but Christ is righteous and a fulfiller of the Law; wherefore wee all doe fulfill it, while Christ is made ours by faith.

Also Tom. 3. p. 539. when Paul ascribes iustification to faith, wee must of necessity understand, that hee speakes of faith laying hold on Christ, which makes Christ of efficacy against sinne and the Law.

Also Tom. 2. pag. 515. Faith settles us upon the workes of Christ without our owne workes, and translates us out of the exile of our sinnes, into the kingdome of his righteousnesse.

And Tom. 1. pag. 410. Sinne is not destroyed unlesse the Law be fulfilled, but the Law is not fulfilled, but by the righteousnes of faith, and page 437. To keepe the Law is to have and possesse Christ the fulfiller of the Law. And Tom. 4. pag. 44. Faith iustifieth because it comprehendeth and possesseth that treasure, to wit, Christ and page 45. wee say that Christ doth forme faith, or is the forme of faith. And Tom. 2. upon Genesis The laying hold on the promises is called sure and firme faith, and doth justifie, not as it is our work. These speeches shew plainely, that Luther conceived Christs righteousnes to be after a sort the formall righteousnes of the believer, though not formally inherent, yet formally possessed, and enjoyed by faith.

Concerning this justifying righteousnes Luther also teacheth, that it is not in our selves, but in Christ, even his fulfilling of the Law, for us, made ours▪ and imputed to us. Tom. 1. pag 106. By faith (saith hee) are our sinnes made no more ours, but Christs, upon whom GOD hath laid the iniquities of us all, and he hath borne our sinnes: And on the other side, all his righteousnes is made ours, for he layes his hand upon us. And pag 178. The righteousnes of a Christian is the righteousnes of another, and comes to him from without. It is even Christ, who is made unto us of God righteousnes; so that a man may with confidence glory in Christ, and say, Christ his living, doing, and suffering, is mine, no otherwise then if I had lived, done, and suffered, as he did: as the married man possesseth all that is his wives, and the wife all the goods which are her husbands, for they have all things common, because they are become one flesh: and so Christ and the Church are one spirit; by faith Christs righteousnes is made ours, and all his are ours, yea, himselfe is ours.

And Tom. 2. pag 86. The righteousnes by which we are justified before GOD, is not in our owne persons, but without our selves in GOD, because man shall have no cause to boast of his owne proper righteousnes before GOD.

And Tom. 2. pag 385. A Christian is not formally righteous, by reason of any substance or quality in him, but relatively in relation to Christ, in whom hee hath true righteousnes.

Melancthon in Epist. ad Rom. 8.4. saith, wherefore Pauls meaning is thus to be taken; that Christ is given for us, that we may be counted to have satisfyed the Law, by him, and that for him we may be reputed righteous; Although we our selves do not satisfie the Law, anothers fulfilling of it is freely given to us, and is imputed to us, and so the Law is imputatively fulfilled in us. And so when the Apostle saith that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnes, that is, hee who hath Christ is righteous, hee is reputed to have satisfied the Law, and hee imputatively hath that which the Law requires. And on chap. 10.4. upon these wordes (Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnes, &c) hee saith, this is the simple meaning, Christ is the fulfilling of the Law to the believer, and hee who hath Christ, that is, believes in him, is righteous, and hath imputatively, what the Law requires.

The Booke of concord subscribed by so many hundreds of Evangelicall Ministers, of the reformed Churches in Germany, in the Articles of justification saith, that when we speak of justifying, it is to be knowne that these three objects concurre, which are to be believed. 1. The promise of the benefit, that is, mercy for remission of sinnes, and justification, 2. That the promise is most free, which excludes our merits. 3. The merits of Christ, which are the price and propitiation, and a little after, faith doth not justify, because it is a worke worthy by it selfe, (that is, in a proper sense) but onely because it receives the mercy promised. And againe, How shall Christ be our mediator, if in justification we do not use him for our mediator: that is, if we do not feele that for him we are reputed righteous.

The Divines of the Augustane confession, condemned Osiander, who held that the righteousnes of faith, was the essentiall righteousnes of GOD, and also them who taught that Christ is our righteousnes, onely according to his humane nature. And in the Epitome of the Articles, controverted by some, they with one consent affirmed▪ that the righteousnesse of faith, is remission of sinnes, reconciliation, and adoption to be Sons of God, for the obedience of Christ onely which by faith alone of meere grace is imputed to all beleevers. Artic 3. de fidei justitia.

And this obedience of Christ which is imputed for righteousnes, they affirme to be the obedience which hee performed both in his death and passion, and also in his fulfilling of the Law, for our sakes. Ibid. Artic 3. And concerning faith, they teach that in justification before God, it trusteth neither in contrition nor love, nor any other vertues but in Christ alone, it is the onely meane and instrument which receives the free grace of GOD, the merit of Christ, and remission of sinnes, and resteth on Christs most perfect obedience, by which hee fulfilled the Law for us, which obedience is imputed to beleevers for righteousnes. Ibid Artic. 3.

Calvin is so zealous, and so plaine and perspicuous in teaching and maintaining the doctrine of justification, by the communion and imputation of Christs perfect obedience to the Law, even his full satisfaction, and righteousnes, that among Christians who read Calvins institutions, one would think the very Father of lyers, the Divel himselfe should, if not blush and be ashamed, yet in policy and subtilty be afraid, to call Calvin for a witnes on his side, in this point, least the most simple should see and discerne him for an open lyer, and forger, and abhorre and hisse him out with derision. The Doctrine of Calvin concerning justification, I will lay downe in certaine Articles, gathered from his owne writings, especially his Institutions. Lib. 3. cap. 11. and 12.

First hee affirmes in plaine wordes▪ that justification consists in remission of sinnes, and the imputation of Christs righteousnes. cap 11. ss 2.

As for the word remission of sinnes, hee useth it two wayes; somtimes in a large sense, for that act of GOD, by which he doth communicate, and impute the full satisfaction of Christ unto his elect, and faithfull, so that the whole guilt of all sinnes, both of commission, and omission, is thereby taken away, and they are no more accounted, nor appeare in his sight as sinners. In this sense he calls remission of sinnes in his comment on Rom. totum justificationis, and in his Instit. 3. cap. 11. sect 4 totam justificationem. For indeed when the guilt of all sinnes of omission, and commission are taken away by that part of Christs satisfaction imputed, which is called his passive obedience, or voluntary suffering of the penalties of the Law, and the defects which come in by the sinnes of omission, supplied by his active obedience, in fulfilling the righteousnes which the Law requires, which is the other part of Christs satisfaction imputed; so that now the elect are reputed, and esteemed as righteous men, who have the defects which came by omission supplied, and, have no more the sinnes of commission or omission imputed, the guilt being taken away: this is perfect and whole justification, and is very fitly called by the name of remission, to distinguish it from justification by our own workes, and by our owne inherent righteousnes.

But sometimes hee useth this word remission, in a more strict sense, for that part of GODS act of communicating, and imputing Christs satisfaction, which respects the passive obedience of Christ, which takes away the guilt of sinnes committed, but doth not supply the omission of righteousnesse, and in this sense he makes remission of sinnes, but a part of justification. And GODS imputing of the active part of Christs satisfaction, and counting the faithfull righteous by it imputed; hee makes the other part of iustification in the wordes before cited, Lib. 3. cap. 11. ss. 2.

Secondly he constantly teacheth, and affirmeth that there is no righteousnesse, by which a man can stand before GODS tribunall, and bee accepted for righteous in his sight: but onely the full satisfaction of Iesus Christ, and his perfect righteousnesse, which he GOD and man performed in our nature. For that which is not intire and absolute, and without all staine, and spot of sinne, such as never hath beene nor shall bee found in any meere man, can never be accepted of GOD, but is with him sleighted and vilified beyond all measure. And whosoever prate of any righteousnes in mens owne workes, or doings, they have no true thought, nor least sense of the justice of GOD, but make a mock of it. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 12. ss. 1.3. and 11.16.

Thirdly he affirmeth that man is justified by faith, when hee is excluded from the righteousnesse of workes, and by faith layeth hold on the righteousnesse of Christ, with which hee being cloathed doth appeare in the sight of GOD, not as a sinner but as a righteous man, Instit. 3. cap. 11. ss. 1.

And the same chap. ss.. 11. This is that admirable way of justifying, that being covered with Christs righteousnesse, men doe not feare the iudgement of which they are worthy, and while they deservedly condemne themselves, they are reputed righteous without themselves.

Fourthly concerning the office of faith in iustification, he teacheth, that faith being in it selfe weake, imperfect, and of no dignity, worth, price or value, is never able to iustifie us by it selfe, but by bringing Christ unto us, who is given to us of GOD for righteousnesse, it is not our righteousnesse, but it makes us come with the mouth of the soule wide opened, that we may bee capable of Christ. And it is as a vessell or pot; for as the pot full of money enricheth a man, so faith filled with Christ and his righteousnes, is said to iustifie us, and to bee counted for righteousnesse. It is a foolish thing to mingle our faith, which is onely the instrument of receiving righteousnesse, with Christ who is the materiall cause, and both the Author and minister of this great benefit, cap 11. ss. 7. And againe, ss. 17. Faith is hereupon said to iustifie, because it receiveth and embraceth righteousnesse offered in the Gospell.

Fiftly hee affirmeth that the righteousnesse by which beleevers are iustified, and stand righteous before GOD, is not in themselves, but in Christ, even his perfect obedience, and righteousnesse communicated to them by imputation. ss. 23.

Lastly hee sheweth how this righteousnesse comes to bee the righteousnesse of beleevers, and to bee so communicated to them, that GOD doth justly impute it to them for justification, and accepteth it as if it were their owne, to wit, by meanes of their spirituall union, and conjunction with Christ, by which they are made partakers of Christ, and with him and in him, possesse al his riches, Sect. 10.20.23. This is the summe of Calvins Doctrine, concerning iustification briefly comprised, and collected out of his wordes in the places before cited, where the Reader may bee fully satisfied.

Beza in the doctrine of iustification, by faith doth fully agree with Luther, and Calvin, in all the former articles. First he saith, that faith is not any such virtue as doth iustifie us in our selves before GOD, for that is to set faith in the place of Christ, who alone is our whole and perfect righteousnesse. But faith iustifieth, as it is the instrument which receiveth Christ, and with him his righteousnesse, that is most full perfection, and we say, that wee are iustified by faith onely; because it embraceth Christ, who doth iustifie us, with whom it doth unite and couple us, that wee may bee partakers of him and all his goods, which being imputed to us, are sufficient that wee may bee absolved before GOD, and deemed righteous. Confess. cap. 4. ss. 7. in notes on Romans 3.22.24.

Secondly, that faith sends to Christ for perfect righteousnesse, to justification, and that it assures us of salvation through his righteousnesse alone, because whatsoever is in Christ is imputed to us, as if it were our owne, if so bee wee embrace him by faith: The righteousnesse of Christ which is imputed, hee describeth to bee the greatest, and most absolute perfection of righteousnesse, consisting in these two things. First that he hath no sinne in him. Secondly that hee hath fulfilled all the righteousnesse of the Law. confess. cap. 4 ss. 8. in his notes on Rom 3.22.26. and Rom. 4.5. and 5.12. and Phil. 3.9.

Thirdly hee sheweth that wee come to have communion of Christs righteousnesse, by spirituall union, and mariage with Christ. If (saith he) wee bee united, and ioyned together into fellowship with Christ by faith, nothing is more properly ours then Christ, and whatsoever is Christs, confess. 4. ss. 9.

Fourthly hee pronounceth that it is no lesse then wicked blasphemie to denie the mutuall and reciprocall imputation of the sinnes of beleevers to Christ, and of Christs perfect satisfaction to beleevers, Lib. contra Anonymum de justificatione.

Fiftly hee affirmes, that righteousnesse which iustifieth men before GOD, must bee both a full satisfaction for sinne, and also a perfect fulfilling of GODS commandements in every part, on Rom▪ 3.20. Our learned Whitakers in his answere to Campions 8th. reason, pag • 8. and in the 8 Book against Duraeus pag 177.182 183. doth pithily dispute, and stoutly maintaine the Doctrine of the righteousnes of Christ imputed, which he proves to be the onely perfect righteousnes, able to justifie us before GOD.

Master Perkins also in his Golden Chaine. Chap. 37. makes the translation of the beleevers sinnes, to Christ, and Christs righteousnes to the beleever, by a mutuall & reciprocall imputation, the very forme of iustification.

Polanus in Syntagmate Theolog l. 6 c. 36. doth maintain the same d • ctrine with Luther, Calvin, Melā cthon, Beza, & Whitakers, & proves every point fully by plain testimonies, & invincible argumēts out of the holy Scriptures. And in his Symphonia catholica, he brings testimonies of the ancients affirming every article of our doctrine, and in his Theses de iustifi. hee shewes the consent of the most famous Orthodox Divines of the reformed religion since Luther.

As for Musculus and Junius, whom hee brings as favourers of his errour, with other later D • vines, let their owne writings speake, and declare how wickedly hee doth abuse them in bringing their wordes to overthrow the imputation of Christs righteousnes. Musculus on Rom. 8.4. expounds the Apostles wordes, (that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us) to be meant, first of all imputatively by the righteousnesse of another, even of Christ, which is also ours, for wee are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones, and Rom. 10.3.4. and by the righteousnesse which iustifieth beleevers, hee understands Christs perfect righteousnesse imputed to us. Also Iunius, thes. 35. and 36. doth affirme that the righteousnesse of faith imputed to beleevers, is the righteousnesse which the Law requires, performed by Christ, differing onely in this, that legall righteousnesse is every mans fulfilling of the Law, in his owne person; but this Evangelicall is the fulfilling of the Law by Christ, GOD and man, our surety and mediatour. And for this Socinian hereticall opinion of faith, imputed in a proper sense, for righteousnesse in iustification, No man can shew greater enmity against it, nor with greater detestation oppose and condemne it, then Paraeus in his commentary on the Romans, and in other his workes. Thus much for the vindicating of the best learned both Ancient writers, and moderne Divines from the foule slanders, most falsly belched out against them by this most impudent forger of false witnesses without any feare of GOD, or shame of men. And by their owne testimonies, and plaine wordes rehearsed out of their owne writings, I have made manifest their unanimous consent in the true Doctrine of iustification, by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to true beleevers, and of them apprehended, and applyed by faith. Now I leave it to all indifferent readers, and zealous Christians to consider whether it bee not their dutie, both to take heed to themselves, and also to admonish others, that they have no fellowship with so openly profest Socinian sectaries, as this man and his followers are: you see the Doctrine which they maintaine is wicked, and blasphemous heresie. And after many admonitions given by grave, & learned Divines & divers publick cōfuatations, & censures often passed in publique, against this errour, they still persist in their pestilent heresie, and are more mad to disperse it then before. And when truth cannot help them, they flee for aide to the father of lyars, and make lyes their refuge, and in forging lyes they sinne being condemned of themselves, even against their knowledge, and conscience, as the Apostle foretold of heretikes, Tit. 3.11.

How wilfully against the known truth, and his owne conscience, this desperate man hath proclaimed Luther, Calvin, Beza, Musculus, Iunius, and others to bee of his opinion, I have sufficiently proved; & if ever he hath looked into the writings of any of them, his own eyes have taught him how opposite they are to his heresie.

But it is no new and strange thing for heretikes to sin being condemned of themselves, when they are once subverted. The Apostle hath foretold us that we must expect no better from such, in that place before named. Tit. 3 11. Now in conclusion, I appeale to all Christian readers, and desire their opinion and judgement, in the particulars following.

First whether I have not in all this answere declared, and expressed what I meane by the righteousnesse of Christ, which I have proved to be imputed to beleevers for justification. If I have made manifest by plaine profession, that by the righteousnes of Christ, I understand his perfect fulfilling of the whole Law of God, and performing whatsoever the Law requires of man for righteousnesse, even a full satisfaction made in mans behalfe, to the Law of justice; Then I appeale to the judgement of all reasonable men, whether my adversary hath not most wickedly belyed me in word and writing: for he hath both wayes charged me, that I neither hold Christs habituall holynes, and uprightnes, of his humane nature, nor his active obedience to the whole Law, or any righteousnes of workes by him performed, nor both these together, to be the righteousnes of Christ imputed, and thereupon he clamours against me, that I hold and teach a righteousnes of Christ, which never was in Christ: I confesse I have ever taught and held, That neither the habituall nor actuall righteousnes of Christ, alone nor both together, without his satisfaction of justice, by bearing our sinnes, and suffering the punishments due to them, are a sufficient ransome to redeeme us, nor a compleat and perfect obedience and fulfilling of the whole, able to justifie us, in the sight of GOD, and to reconcile us to him. Now to affirme that all three together are imputed, is not to deny the imputation of the two first, though they that are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Calumniators may so wrest the words.

Secondly, whether hee who hath beleeved and preached, and in writing maintained, for 28 yeares last passed to this houre, what hee in this answere hath professed, held and maintained, can without wilfull lying, and more then Jesuiticall forging, be reported abroad, & confidently charged for a turnecoat, whom this Adversary by this his Socinian learning, and Sophistry hath so confounded, and convinced him, that hee is wholly turned to be of the same opinion, and hath vowed to maintaine his Socinianisme, both publikely, and privatly, to the utmost of his power. So this mans followers have reported, and have withall added, that so many as have come within his breath, are all illuminated by him, and being converted to his opinion, do rejoyce in the light, by which he hath shined into their hearts.

Thirdly, whether this Answer to his Socinianisme be such, that both it, and the Author of it have nothing in them but words and passion, and that herein hee is strangely, and monstrously metamorphosed from a Minister of Christ, into an Angell of darknes, besmearing the brightnes of his face, with the foot and grease of Hell, that the words and phrases of this answere, are the black Princes coine, and there is little in it besides cursing, and rayling. For many such fiery darts hath this Adversary throwne against the Answerer in a scurrilous Libel fraught with lies, forgeries, absurdities, contradictions, and blasphemies, and sent forth under the name of a replie; which is also confuted by the Answerer, and the filthynesse thereof so plainely discovered, that all true Christians, and modest men, will say of it, that the reciting of it, is a full confutation. From all such wicked spirits, the GOD of truth defend his Church and People, and grant a free passage to his Gospel, and to his faithfull Ministers, a doore of utterance, that they may preach among all men every where, the unsearchable riches of Christ. To this GOD of truth, let us consecrate our tongues, and pens, and resolve with both to maintaine his truth, by his grace, and the assistance of his Spirit, so long as strength, breath, and life shall last. And to him let us give all glory, now and ever, Amen.