The doctrine of Justification by Faith,
through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ;
explained, confirmed, and vindicated
by John Owen
This etext is in the public domain.
Search the Scriptures--John 5:29
Contents
Prefatory Note
To the Reader
General Considerations, previous unto the Explanation of the Doctrine of
Justification
First, The general nature of justification--State of the person to be
justified antecedently thereunto, Rom.4:5; 3:19; 1:32; Gal.3:10;
John 3:18,36; Gal.3:22--The sole inquiry on that state--Whether it
be any thing that is our own inherently, or what is only imputed
unto us, that we are to trust unto for our acceptance with God--The
sum of this inquiry--The proper ends of teaching and learning the
doctrine of justification--Things to be avoided therein
Secondly, A due consideration of God, the Judge of all, necessary unto
the right stating and apprehension of the doctrine of
justification, Rom.8:33; Isa.43:25; 45:25; Ps.143:2; Rom.3:20--What
thoughts will be ingenerated hereby in the minds of men, Isa.33:14;
Micah 6:6,7; Isa.6:5--The plea of Job against his friends, and
before God, not the same, Job 40:3-5, 43:406--Directions for
visiting the sick given of old--Testimonies of Jerome and Ambrose--
Sense of men in their prayers, Dan.9:7,18; Ps.143:2, 130:3,4--
Paraphrase of Austin on that place--Prayer of Pelagius--Public
liturgies
Thirdly, A due sense of our apostasy from God, the depravation of our
nature thereby, with the power and guilt of sin, the holiness of
the law, necessary unto a right understanding of the doctrine of
justification--Method of the apostle to this purpose, Rom.1,2,3--
Grounds of the ancient and present Pelagianism, in the denial of
these things--Instances thereof--Boasting of perfection from the
same ground--Knowledge of sin and grace mutually promote each other
Fourthly, Opposition between works and grace, as unto justification--
Method of the apostle, in the Epistle to the Romans, to manifest
this opposition--A scheme of others contrary thereunto--Testimonies
witnessing this opposition--Judgment to be made on them--
Distinctions whereby they are evaded--The uselessness of them--
Resolution of the case in hand by Bellarmine, Dan.9:18; Luke 17:10
Fifthly, A commutation as unto sin and righteousness, by imputation,
between Christ and believers, represented in the Scripture--The
ordinance of the scapegoat, Lev.16:21,22--The nature of expiatory
sacrifices, Lev.4:29, etc.--Expiation of an uncertain murder,
Deut.21:1-9--The commutation intended proved and vindicated,
Isa.53:5,6; 2 Cor.5:21; Rom.8:3,4; Gal.3:13,14; 1 Pet.2:24;
Deut.21:23--Testimonies of Justin Martyr, Gregory Nyseen,
Augustine, Chrysostom, Bernard, Taulerus, Pighius, to that purpose-
-The proper actings of faith with respect thereunto, Rom.5:11;
Matt.11:28; Ps.38:4; Gen.4:13; Isa.53:11; Gal.3:1; Isa.45:22; John
3:14,15--A bold calumny answered
Sixthly, Introduction of grace by Jesus Christ into the whole of our
relation unto God, and its respect unto all the parts of our
obedience--No mystery of grace in the covenant of works--All
religion originally commensurate unto reason--No notions of natural
light concerning the introduction of the mediation of Christ and
mystery of grace, into our relation to God, Eph.1:17-19--Reason, as
corrupted, can have no notions of religion but what are derived
from its primitive state--Hence the mysteries of the gospel
esteemed folly--Reason, as corrupted, repugnant unto the mystery of
grace--Accommodation of spiritual mysteries unto corrupt reason,
wherefore acceptable unto many--Reasons of it--Two parts of
corrupted nature's repugnancy unto the mystery of the gospel:--1.
That which would reduce it unto the private reason of men--Thence
the Trinity denied, and the incarnation of the Son of God; without
which the doctrine of justification cannot stand--Rule of the
Socinians in the interpretation of the Scripture--2. Want of a due
comprehension of the harmony that is between all the parts of the
mystery of grace--This harmony proved--Compared with the harmony in
the works of nature--To be studied--But it is learned only of them
who are taught of God; and in experience--Evil effects of the want
of a due comprehension hereof--Instances of them--All applied unto
the doctrine of justification
Seventhly, General prejudices against the imputation of the
righteousness of Christ: --1. That it is not in terms found in the
Scripture, answered--2. That nothing is said of it in the writings
of the evangelists, answered, John 20:30,31--Nature of Christ's
personal ministry--Revelations by the Holy Spirit immediately from
Christ--Design of the writings of the evangelists--3. Differences
among Protestants themselves about this doctrine, answered--Sense
of the ancients herein--What is of real difference among
Protestants, considered
Eighthly, Influence of the doctrine of justification into the first
Reformation--Advantages unto the world by that Reformation--State
of the consciences of men under the Papacy, with respect unto
justification before God--Alterations made therein by the light of
this doctrine, though not received--Alterations in the Pagan
unbelieving world by the introduction of Christianity--Design and
success of the first reformers herein--Attempts for reconciliation
with the Papists in this doctrine, and their success--Remainders of
the ignorance of the truth in the Roman church--Unavoidable
consequences of the corruption of this doctrine
I. Justifying faith; the causes and object of it declared
Justification by faith generally acknowledged--The meaning of it
perverted--The nature and use of faith in justification proposed to
consideration--Distinctions about it waived--A twofold faith of the
gospel expressed in the Scripture--Faith that is not justifying,
Acts 8:13; John 2:23,24; Luke 8:13; Matt.7:22,23--Historical faith;
whence it is so called, and the nature of it--Degrees of assent in
it--Justification not ascribed unto any degree of it--A calumny
obviated--The causes of true saving faith--Conviction of sin
previous unto it--The nature of legal conviction, and its effects--
Arguments to prove it antecedent unto faith--Without the
consideration of it, the true nature of faith not to be understood-
-The order and relation of the law and gospel, Rom.1:17--Instance
of Adam--Effects of conviction--Internal: Displicency and sorrow;
fear of punishment; desire of deliverance--External: Abstinence
from sin; performance of duties; reformation of life--Not
conditions of justification; not formal disposition unto it; not
moral preparations for it--The order of God in justification--The
proper object of justifying faith--Not all divine verity equally;
proved by sundry arguments--The pardon of our own sins, whether the
first object of faith--The Lord Christ in the work of mediation, as
the ordinance of God for the recovery of lost sinners, the proper
object of justifying faith--The position explained and proved, Acts
10:43; 16:31; 4:12; Luke 24:25-27; John 1:12; 3:16,36; 6:29,47;
7:38; Acts 26:18; Col.2:6; Rom.3:24,25; 1 Cor.1:30; 2 Cor.5:21;
Eph.1:7,8; 2 Cor.5:19
II. The nature of justifying faith
The nature of justifying faith in particular, or of faith in the
exercise of it, whereby we are justified--The heart's approbation
of the way of the justification and salvation of sinners by Christ,
with its acquiescency therein--The description given, explained and
confirmed:--1. From the nature of the gospel--Exemplified in its
contrary, or the nature of unbelief, Prov.1:30; Heb.2:3; 1 Pet.2:7;
1 Cor.1:23,24; 2 Cor.4:3--What it is, and wherein it does consist.-
-2. The design of God in and by the gospel--His own glory his
utmost end in all things--The glory of his righteousness, grace,
love, wisdom, etc.--The end of God in the way of the salvation of
sinners by Christ, Rom.3:25; John 3:16; 1 John 3:16; Eph.1:5,6; 1
Cor.1:24; Eph.3:10; Rom.1:16; 4:16; Eph.3:9; 2 Cor.4:6--3. The
nature of faith thence declared--Faith alone ascribes and gives
this glory to God.--4. Order of the acts of faith, or the method in
believing--Convictions previous thereunto--Sincere assent unto all
divine revelations, Acts 26:27--The proposal of the gospel unto
that end, Rom.10:11-17; 2 Cor.3:18,etc.--State of persons called to
believe--Justifying faith does not consist in any one single habit
or act of the mind or will--The nature of that about which is the
first act of faith--Approbation of the way of salvation by Christ,
comprehensive of the special nature of justifying faith--What is
included there in:--1. A renunciation of all other ways,
Hos.14:2,3; Jer.3:23; Ps.71:16; Rom.10:3.--2. Consent of the will
unto this way, John 14:6--3. Acquiescency of the heart in God, 1
Pet.1:21.--4. Trust in God.--5. Faith described by trust--The
reason of it--Nature and object of this trust inquired into--A
double consideration of special mercy--Whether obedience be
included in the nature of faith, or be of the essence of it--A
sincere purpose of universal obedience inseparable from faith--How
faith alone justifies--Repentance, how required in and unto
justification--How a condition of the new covenant--Perseverance in
obedience is so also--Definitions of faith
III. The use of faith in justification; its especial object farther
cleared
Use of faith in justification; various conceptions about it--By whom
asserted as the instrument of it; by whom denied--In what sense it
is affirmed so to be--The expressions of the Scripture concerning
the use of faith in justification; what they are, and how they are
best explained by an instrumental cause--Faith, how the instrument
of God in justification--How the instrument of them that do
believe--The use of faith expressed in the Scripture by
apprehending, receiving; declared by an instrument--Faith, in what
sense the condition of our justification--Signification of that
term, whence to be learned
IV. Of justification; the notion and signification of the Word in
Scripture
The proper sense of these words, justification, and to justify,
considered--Necessity thereof--Latin derivation of justification--
Some of the ancients deceived by it --From "jus", and "justum";
"justus filius", who--The Hebrew "hitsdik"--Use and signification
of it--Places where it is used examined, 2 Sam.15:4; Deut.25:1;
Prov.17:15; Isa.5:23; 50:8,9; 1 Kings 8:31,32; 2 Chron.6:22,23;
Ps.82:3; Exod.23:7; Job 27:5; Isa.53:11; Gen.44:16; Dan.12:3--The
constant sense of the word evinced--"Diakaio-oo", use of it in
other authors, to punish--What it is in the New Testament,
Matt.11:19; 12:37; Luke 7:29; 10:29; 16:15; 18:14; Acts 13:38,39;
Rom.2:13; 3:4--Constantly used in a forensic sense--Places seeming
dubious, vindicated, Rom.8:30; 1 Cor.6:11; Tit.3:5-7; Rev.22:11--
How often these words, "diakaio-oo" and "dikaioumai", are used in
the New Testament--Constant sense of this--The same evinced from
what is opposed unto it, Isa.1:8,9; Prov.17:15; Rom.5:116,18;
8:33,34--And the declaration of it in terms equivalent, Rom.4:6,11;
5:9,10; 2 Cor.5:20,21; Matt.1:21; Acts 13:39; Gal.2:16, etc.--
Justification in the Scripture, proposed under a juridical scheme,
and of a forensic title--The parts and progress of it--Inferences
from the whole
Distinction of a first and second justification--The whole doctrine of
the Roman church concerning justification grounded on this
distinction--The first justification, the nature and causes of it,
according unto the Romanists--The second justification, what it is
in their sense--Solution of the seeming difference between Paul and
James, falsely pretended by this distinction--The same distinction
received by the Socinians and others--The latter termed by some the
continuation of our justification--The distinction disproved--
Justification considered, either as unto its essence or its
manifestation--The manifestation of it twofold, initial and final--
Initial is either unto ourselves or others--No second justification
hence ensues--Justification before God, legal and evangelical--
Their distinct natures--The distinction mentioned derogatory to the
merit of Christ--More in it ascribed unto ourselves than unto the
blood of Christ, in our justification--The vanity of disputations
to this purpose--All true justification overthrown by this
distinction--No countenance given unto this justification in the
Scripture--The second justification not intended by the apostle
James--Evil of arbitrary distinctions--Our first justification so
described in the Scripture as to leave no room for a second--Of the
continuation of our justification; whether it depend on faith
alone, or our personal righteousness, inquired--Justification at
once completed, in all the causes and effects of it, proved at
large--Believers, upon their justification, obliged unto perfect
obedience--The commanding power of the law constitutes the nature
of sin in them who are not obnoxious unto its curse--Future sins,
in what sense remitted at our first justification--The continuation
of actual pardon, and thereby of a justified estate; on what it
does depend--Continuation of justifications the act of God; whereon
it depends in that sense--On our part, it depends on faith alone--
Nothing required hereunto but the application of righteousness
imputed--The continuation of our justification is before God--That
whereon the continuation of our justification depends, pleadable
before God--This not our personal obedience, proved:--1. By the
experience of all believers--2. Testimonies of Scripture--3.
Examples--The distinction mentioned rejected
VI. Evangelical personal righteousness, the nature and use of it--Final
judgment, and its respect unto justification
Evangelical personal righteousness; the nature and use of it--Whether
there be an angelical justification on our evangelical
righteousness, inquired into--How this is by some affirmed and
applauded--Evangelical personal righteousness asserted as the
condition of our righteousness, or the pardon of sin--Opinion of
the Socinians--Personal righteousness required in the gospel--
Believers hence denominated righteous--Not with respect unto
righteousness habitual, but actual only--Inherent righteousness the
same with sanctification, or holiness--In what sense we may be said
to be justified by inherent righteousness--No evangelical
justification on our personal righteousness--The imputation of the
righteousness of Christ does not depend thereon--None have this
righteousness, but they are antecedently justified--A charge before
God, in all justification before God--The instrument of this
charge, the law or the gospel--From neither of them can we be
justified by this personal righteousness--The justification
pretended needless and useless--It has not the nature of any
justification mentioned in the Scripture, but is contrary to all
that is so called--Other arguments to the same purpose--Sentential
justification at the last day--Nature of the last judgement--Who
shall be then justified --A declaration of righteousness, and an
actual admission into glory, the whole of justification at the last
day--The argument that we are justified in this life in the same
manner, and on the same grounds, as we shall be judged at the last
day, that judgement being according unto works, answered; and the
impertinency of it declared
VII. Imputation, and the nature of it; with the imputation of the
righteousness of Christ in particular
Imputation, and the nature of it--The first express record of
justification determines it to be by imputation, Gen.15:6--Reasons
of it--The doctrine of imputation cleared by Paul; the occasion of
it--Maligned and opposed by many--Weight of the doctrine concerning
imputation of righteousness, on all hands acknowledged--Judgment of
the Reformed churches herein, particularly of the church of
England--By whom opposed, and on what grounds--Signification of the
word--Difference between "reputare" and "imputare"--Imputation of
two kinds:--1. Of what was ours antecedently unto that imputation,
whether good or evil--Instances in both kinds--Nature of this
imputation--The thing imputed by it, imputed for what it is, and
nothing else. --2. Of what is not ours antecedently unto that
imputation, but is made so by it--General nature of this
imputation--Not judging of others to have done what they have not
done--Several distinct grounds and reasons of this imputation:--1.
"Ex justitia"; --(1.) "Propter relationem foederalem;"--(2.)
"Propter relationem naturalem;"--2. "Ex voluntaria sponsione"--
Instances, Philem.18; Gen.43:9--Voluntary sponsion, the ground of
the imputation of sin to Christ. --3. "Ex injuria", 1 Kings 1:21. -
-4. "Ex mera gratia," Rom. 4--Difference between the imputation of
any works of ours, and of the righteousness of God--Imputation of
inherent righteousness is "ex justitia"--Inconsistency of it with
that which is "ex mera gratia," Rom.4--Agreement of both kinds of
imputation--The true nature of the imputation of righteousness unto
justification explained--Imputation of the righteousness of Christ-
-The thing itself imputed, not the effect of it; proved against the
Socinians
VIII. Imputation of the sins of the church unto Christ--Grounds of it--
The nature of his suretiship--Causes of the new covenant--Christ and
the church one mystical person--Consequents thereof
Imputation of sin unto Christ--Testimonies of the ancients unto that
purpose--Christ and the church one mystical person--Mistakes about
that state and relation--Grounds and reasons of the union that is
the foundation of this imputation--Christ the surety of the new
covenant; in what sense, unto what ends--Heb.7:22, opened--Mistakes
about the causes and ends of the death of Christ--The new covenant,
in what sense alone procured and purchased thereby --Inquiry
whether the guilt of our sins was imputed unto Christ--The meaning
of the words, "guilt," and "guilty"--The distinction of "reatus
culpae", and "reatus poenae", examined--Act of God in the
imputation of the guilt of our sins unto Christ--Objections against
it answered--The truth confirmed
IX. The formal cause of justification, or the righteousness on the
account whereof believers are justified before God--Objections
answered
Principal controversies about justification:--1. Concerning the nature
of justification, stated--2. Of the formal cause of it--3. Of the
way whereby we are made partakers of the benefits of the mediation
of Christ--What intended by the formal cause of justification,
declared--The righteousness on the account whereof believers are
justified before God alone, inquired after under these terms--This
the righteousness of Christ, imputed unto them--Occasions of
exceptions and objections against this doctrine--General objections
examined--Imputation of the righteousness of Christ consistent with
the free pardon of sin, and with the necessity of evangelical
repentance--Method of God's grace in our justification --Necessity
of faith unto justification, on supposition of the imputation of
the righteousness of Christ--Grounds of that necessity--Other
objections, arising mostly from mistakes of the truth, asserted,
discussed, and answered
X. Arguments for justification by the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ. The first argument from the nature and use of our own personal
righteousness
Arguments for justification by the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ--Our own personal righteousness not that on the account
whereof we are justified in the sight of God--Disclaimed in the
Scriptures, as to any such end--The truth and reality of it
granted--Manifold imperfection accompanying it, rendering it unmeet
to be a righteousness unto the justification of life
XIV. The exclusion of all sorts of works from an interest in
justification--What is intended by "the law," and the "works" of it,
in the epistles of Paul
All works whatever are expressly excluded from any interest in our
justification before God--What intended by the works of the law--
Not those of the ceremonial law only--Not perfect works only, as
required by the law of our creation--Not the outward works of the
law, performed without a principle of faith--Not works of the
Jewish law--Not works with a conceit of merit--Not works only
wrought before believing, in the strength of our own wills--Works
excluded abso1utely from our justification, without respect unto a
distinction of a first and second justification--The true sense of
the law in the apostolical assertion that none are justified by the
works thereof--What the Jews understood by the law--Distribution of
the law under the Old Testament--The whole law a perfect rule of
all inherent moral or spiritual obedience --What are the works of
the law, declared from the Scripture, and the argument thereby
confirmed --The nature of justifying faith farther declared
XV. Faith alone
Of faith alone
XVI. The truth pleaded farther confirmed by testimonies of Scripture.--
Jer.23:6
Testimonies of Scripture confirming the doctrine of justification by
the imputation of the righteousness of Christ--Jer.23:6, exp1sined
and indicated
XVII. Testimonies out of the evangelists considered
Testimonies out of the evangelists considered--Design of our Saviour's
sermon on the mount--The purity and penalty of the law vindicated
by him--Arguments from thence--Luke 18:9-14, the parable of the
Pharisee and publican explained and applied to the present
argument--Testimonies out of the gospel by John, chap. 1:12; 3:14-
18, etc.
XVIII. The nature of justification as declared in the epistles of St.
Paul, in that unto the Romans especially.--Chap. 3 [4,5,10; 1
Cor.1:30; 2 Cor.5:21; Gal.2:16; Eph.2:8-10; Phil.3:8,9.]
Testimonies out of the Epistles of Paul the apostle--His design in the
fifth chapter to the Romans--That design explained at large, and
applied to the present argument--Chap.3:24-26 explained, and the
true sense of the words vindicated--The causes of justification
enumerated--Apostolical inference from the consideration of them--
Chap.4, design of the disputation of the apostle therein Analysis
of his discourse--Verses 4, 5, particularly insisted on; their true
sense vindicated--What works excluded from the justification of
Abraham--Who it is that works not--In what sense the ungodly are
justified--All men ungodly antecedently unto their justification--
Faith alone the means of justification on our part--Faith itself,
absolutely considered, not the righteousness that is imputed unto
us--Proved by sundry arguments
Rom.5:l2-21--Boasting excluded in ourselves, asserted in God--The
design and sum of the apostle's argument--Objection of Socinus
removed--Comparison between the two Adams, and those that derive
from them--Sin entered into the world--What sin intended--Death,
what it comprises, what intended by it--The sense of these words,
"inasmuch," or, "in whom all have sinned," cleared and vindicated--
The various oppositions used by the apostle in this discourse:
principally between sin or the fall, and the free gift; between the
disobedience of the one, and the obedience of another; judgment on
the one hand, and justification unto life on the other--The whole
context at large explained, and the argument for justification by
the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, fully confirmed
Rom.10:3,4, explained and insisted on to the same purpose
1 Cor.1:30--Christ, how of God made righteousness unto us--Answer of
Bellarmine unto this testimony removed--That of Socinus disproved--
True sense of the words evinced
2 Cor.5:21--In what sense Christ knew no sin--Emphasis in that
expression--How he was made sin for us--By the imputation of sin
unto him--Mistakes of some about this expression--Sense of the
ancients-- Exception of Bellarmine unto this testimony answered,
with other reasonings of his to the same purpose--The exceptions of
others also removed
Gal.2:16
Eph.2:8-10--Evidence of this testimony--Design of the apostle from the
beginning of the chapter--Method of the apostle in the declaration
of the grace of God--Grace alone the cause of deliverance from a
state of sin--Things to be observed in the assignation of the
causes of spiritual deliverances--Grace, how magnified by him--
Force of the argument and evidence from thence--State of the case
here proposed by the apostle--General determination of it, "By
grace are ye saved"--What is it to be saved, inquired into--The
same as to be justified, but not exclusively--The causes of our
justification declared positively and negatively--The whole secured
unto the grace of God by Christ, and our interest therein through
faith alone--Works excluded--What works?--Not works of the law of
Moses--Not works antecedent unto believing--Works of true
believers--Not only in opposition to the grace of God, but to faith
in us--Argument from those words--Reason whereon this exclusion of
works is founded--To exclude boasting on our part--Boasting,
wherein it consists--Inseparable from the interest of works in
justification--Danger of it--Confirmation of this reason, obviating
an objection--The objection stated--If we be not justified by
works, of what use are they? answered
Phil.3:8,9--Heads of argument from this testimony--Design of the
context--Righteousness the foundation of acceptance with God--A
twofold righteousness considered by the apostle--Opposite unto one
another, as unto the especial and inquired after--Which of these he
adhered unto, his own righteousness, or the righteousness of God;
declared by the apostle with vehemency of speech--Reasons of his
earnestness herein--The turning point whereon he left Judaism--The
opposition made unto this doctrine by the Jews--The weight of the
doctrine, and unwillingness of men to receive it--His own sense of
sin and grace--Peculiar expressions used in this place, for the
reasons mentioned, concerning Christ; concerning all things that
are our own--The choice to be made on the case stated, whether we
will adhere unto our own righteousness, or that of Christ's, which
are inconsistent as to the end of justification--Argument from this
place--Exceptions unto this testimony, and argument from thence,
removed--Our personal righteousness inherent, the same with respect
unto the law and gospel --External righteousness only required by
the law, an impious imagination--Works wrought before faith only
rejected--The exception removed--Righteousness before conversion,
not intended by the apostle
XIX. Objections against the doctrine of justification by the imputation
of the righteousness of Christ--Personal holiness and obedience not
obstructed, but furthered by it
Objections against the doctrine of justification by the imputation of
the righteousness of Christ--Nature of these objections--Difficulty
in discerning aright the sense of some men in this argument--
Justification by works, the end of all declension from the
righteousness of Christ--Objections against this doctrine derived
from a supposition thereof alone--First principal objection:
Imputed righteousness overthrows the necessity of a holy life--This
objection, as managed by them of the church of Rome, an open
calumny--How insisted on by some among ourselves--Socinus'
fierceness in this charge--His foul dishonesty therein--False
charges on men's opinions making way for the rash condemnation of
their persons--Iniquity of such censures--The objection rightly
stated--Sufficiently answered in the previous discourses about the
nature of faith, and force of the moral law--The nature and
necessity of evangelical holiness elsewhere pleaded--Particular
answers unto this objection--All who profess this doctrine do not
exemplify it in their lives--The most holy truths have been abused-
-None by whom this doctrine is now denied exceeds them in holiness
by whom it is formerly professed, and the power of it attested--The
contrary doctrine not successful in the reformation of the lives of
men--The best way to determine this difference--The one objection
managed against the doctrine of the apostle in his own days--
Efficacious prejudices against this doctrine in the minds of men--
The whole doctrine of the apostle liable to be abused--Answer of
the apostle unto this objection--He never once attempts to answer
it by declaring the necessity of personal righteousness, or good
works, unto justification before God--He confines the cogency of
evangelical motives unto obedience only unto believers--Grounds of
evangelical holiness asserted by him, in compliance with his
doctrine of justification:--1 Divine ordination--Exceptions unto
this ground removed--2. Answer of the apostle vindicated--The
obligation of the law unto obedience--Nature of it, and consistency
with grace--This answer of the apostle vindicated--Heads of other
principles that might be pleaded to the same purpose
XX. The doctrine of the apostle James concerning faith and works--Its
agreement with that of St Paul
Seeming difference, no real contradiction, between the apostles Paul
and James, concerning justification--This granted by all--Reasons
of the seeming difference--The best rule of the interpretation of
places of Scripture wherein there is an appearing repugnancy--The
doctrine of justification according unto that rule principally to
be learned from the writings of Paul--The reasons of his fulness
and accuracy in the teaching of that doctrine--The importance of
the truth; the opposition made unto it, and abuse of it--The design
of the apostle James-- Exceptions of some against the writings of
St. Paul, scandalous and unreasonable--Not, in this matter, to be
interpreted by the passage in James insisted on, chap.2.--That
there is no repugnancy between the doctrine of the two apostles
demonstrated--Heads and grounds of the demonstration--Their scope,
design, and end, not the same--That of Paul; the only case stated
and determined by him--The design of the apostle James; the case
proposed by him quite of another nature--The occasion of the case
proposed and stated by him--No appearance of difference between the
apostles, because of the several cases they speak unto--Not the
same faith intended by them--Description of the faith spoken of by
the one, and the other--Bellarmine's arguments to prove true
justifying faith to be intended by James, answered--Justification
not treated of by the apostles in the same manner, nor used in the
same sense, nor to the same end--The one treats of justification,
as unto its nature and causes; the other, as unto its signs and
evidence--Proved by the instances insisted on--How the Scripture
was fulfilled, that Abraham believed in God, and it was counted
unto him for righteousness, when he offered his son on the altar--
Works the same, and of the same kind, in both the apostles--
Observations on the discourse of James--No conjunction made by him
between faith nor works in our justification, but an opposition--No
distinction of a first and second justification in him--
Justification ascribed by him wholly unto works--In what sense--
Does not determine how a sinner may be justified before God; but
how a professor may evidence himself so to be--The context opened
from verse 14, to the end of the chapter
Prefatory Note
There is a pregnant and striking passage in one of the charges of Bishop
Horsley, which may be said to embody the substance and intimate the scope
of the following work on justification,--a work which has been esteemed
one of the best productions of Dr Owen. "That man is justified," says
Horsley, "by faith, without the works of the law, was the uniform
doctrine of our first Reformers. It is a far more ancient doctrine,--it
was the doctrine of the whole college of apostles; it is more ancient
still,--it was the doctrine of the prophets; it is older than the
prophets,--it was the religion of the patriarchs; and no one who has the
least acquaintance with the writings of the first Reformers will impute
to them, more than to the patriarchs, the prophets, or apostles, the
absurd opinion, that any man leading an impenitent, wicked life, will
finally, upon the mere pretence of faith (and faith connected with an
impenitent life must always be a mere pretence), obtain admission into
heaven."
Dr Owen, in the "general considerations" with which he opens the
discussion of this momentous subject, shows that the doctrine of
justification by faith was clearly declared in the teaching of the
ancient church. Among other testimonies, he adduces the remarkable
extract from the epistle to Diognetus, which, though commonly printed
among the works of Justin Martyr, has been attributed by Tillemont to
some author in the first century. Augustine, in his contest with Pelagian
error, powerfully advocated the doctrines of grace. That he clearly
apprehended the nature of justification by grace appears from the
principle so tersely enunciated by him, "Opera bona non faciunt justum,
sed justificatus facit bona opera." The controversy, however in which he
was the great champion of orthodox opinions, turned mainly upon the
renovation of the heart by a divine and supernatural influence; not so
directly on the change of state effected by justifying grace. It was the
clear apprehension and firm grasp of this doctrine which ultimately
emancipated Luther from the thraldom of Romish error, and he clung to it
with a zeal proportioned to his conviction of the benefit which his own
soul had derived from it. He restored it to its true place and bearings
in the Christian system, and, in emphatic expression of its importance,
pronounced it "Articulus stantis aut cadentis ecclesiae." It had to
encounter, accordingly, strong opposition from all who were hostile to
the theology of the Reformation. Both Socinus and Bellarmine wrote
against it,--the former discussing the question in connection with his
general argument against orthodox views on the subject of the person and
work of Christ; the latter devoting a separate treatise expressly to the
refutation of the doctrine of the Reformed churches regarding
justification. Several Roman Catholic authors followed in his wake, to
whom Dr Owen alludes in different parts of his work. The ability with
which Bellarmine conducted his argument cannot be questioned; though
sometimes, in meeting difficulties and disposing of objections to his
views from Scripture, he evinces an unscrupulous audacity of statement.
His work still continues, perhaps the ablest and most systematic attempt
to overthrow the doctrine of justification by faith. In supplying an
antidote to the subtle disquisitions of the Romish divine, Dr Owen is in
reality vindicating that doctrine at all the points where the acumen of
his antagonist had conceived it liable to be assailed with any hope of
success.
To counteract the tendency of the religious mind when it proceeded in
the direction of Arminianism, Calvinistic divines, naturally engrossed
with the points in dispute, dwelt greatly on the workings of efficacious
grace in election, regeneration, and conversion, if not to the exclusion
of the free offer of the gospel, at least so as to cast somewhat into the
shade the free justification offered in it. The Antinomianism which arose
during the time of the Commonwealth has been accounted the reaction from
this defect. Under these circumstances, the attention of theologians was
again drawn to the doctrine of justification. Dissent could not, in those
times, afford to be weakened by divisions; and partly under the influence
of his own pacific dispositions, and partly to accomplish a public
service to the cause of religion, Baxter made an attempt to reconcile the
parties at variance, and to soothe into unity the British churches.
Rightly conceiving that the essence of the question lay in the nature of
justification, he published in 1649 his "Aphorisms on Justification," in
opposition to the Antinomian tendencies of the day, and yet designed to
accommodate the prevailing differences; on terms, however, that were held
to compromise the gratuitous character of justification. He had
unconsciously, by a recoil common in every attempt to reconcile
essentially antagonistic principles, made a transition from the ground of
justification by faith, to views clearly opposed to it. Though his mind
was the victim of a false theory, his heart was practically right; and he
subsequently modified and amended his views. But to his "Aphorisms"
Bishop Barlow traces the first departure from the received doctrine of
the Reformed churches on the subject of justification. In 1669, Bishop
Bull published his "Apostolical Harmony," with the view of reconciling
the apostles Paul and James. There is no ambiguity in regard to his views
as to the ground of a sinner's acceptance with God. According to Bull
"faith denotes the whole condition of the gospel covenant; that is,
comprehends in one word all the works of Christian piety." It is the just
remark of Bickersteth, that "under the cover of justification by faith,
this is in reality justification by works."
A host of opponents sprung up in reply to Baxter and Bull; but they were
not left without help in maintaining their position. In support of
Baxter, Sir Charles Wolsley, a baronet of some reputation, who had been a
member of Cromwell's Council of State, and who sat in several parliaments
after the Restoration, published, in 1667, his "Justification
Evangelical." In a letter to Mr Humfrey, author of the "Peaceable
Disquisition", published subsequently to Owen's work and partly in
refutation of it, Sir Charles, referring to Dr Owen, remarks, "I suppose
you know his book of Justification was written particularly against
mine." There is reason to believe that Owen had a wider object in view
than the refutation of any particular treatise. In the preface to his
great work, which appeared in 1677, he assures the reader that, whatever
contests prevailed on the subject of justification, it was his design to
mingle in no personal controversy with any author of the day. Not that
his seasonings had no bearing on the pending disputes, for, from the
brief review we have submitted of the history of this discussion, it is
clear that, with all its other excellencies, the work was eminently
seasonable and much needed; but he seems to have been under a conviction,
that in refuting specially Socinus and Bellarmine, he was in effect
disposing of the most formidable objections ever urged against the
doctrine of justification by grace, while he avoided the impleasantness
of personal collision with the Christian men of his own times whose views
might seem to him deeply erroneous on the point; and the very coincidence
of these views, both in principle and tendency, with Socinian and Popish
heresies, would suggest to his readers, if not a conclusive argument
against them, at least a good reason why they should be carefully
examined before they were embraced. His work, therefore, is not a meagre
and ephemeral contribution to the controversy as it prevailed in his day,
and under an aspect in which it may never again be revived. It is a
formal review of the whole amount of truth revealed to us in regard to
the justification of the sinner before God; and, if the scope of the
treatise is considered, the author cannot be blamed for prolixity in the
treatment of a theme so wide. On his own side of the question, it is
still the most complete discussion in one language of the important
doctrine to which it relates. Exception has been taken to the abstruse
definitions and distinctions which he introduces. He had obviously no
intention to offend in this way; for, at the close of chap.14, he makes a
quaint protest against the admission of "exotic learning," "philosophical
notions," and "arbitrary distinctions," into the exposition of spiritual
truth. In the refutation of complicated error, there is sometimes a
necessity to track it through various sinuosities; but, in the main, the
treatise is written in a spirit which proves how directly the author was
resting on divine truth as the basis of his own faith and hope, and how
warily he strove and watched that his mind might not "be corrupted from
the simplicity that is in Christ".
"A curious fact", says Mr Orme, "respecting this book, is mentioned in
the Life of Mr Joseph Williams, of Kidderminster:--'At last, the time of
his (Mr Grimshawe's, an active clergyman of the Church of England)
deliverance came. At the house of one of his friends he lays his hand on
a book, and opens it, with his face towards a pewter shelf. Instantly his
face is saluted with an uncommon flash of heat. He turns to the
title-page, and finds it to be Dr Owen on Justification. Immediately he
is surprised with such another flash. He borrows the book, studies it, is
led into God's method of justifying the ungodly, has a new heart given
unto him; and now, behold, he prays!' Whether these flashes were
electrical or galvanic, ss Southey in his Life of Wesley supposes, it
deserves to be noticed, that it was not the flash but the book which
converted Grimshawe. The occurrence which turned his attention to it, is
of importance merely as the second cause, which, under the mysterious
direction of Providence, led to s blessed result."
Analysis.--The causes, object, nature, and use of faith are successively
considered, chap.1-3. The nature of justification is next discussed;--
first, under an inquiry into the meaning of the different terms commonly
employed regarding it; and, secondly, by a statement of the juridical and
forensic aspect under which it is represented in Scripture, 4. The theory
of a twofold justification, as asserted by the Church of Rome, and
another error which ascribes the initial justification of the sinner to
faith, but the continuance of his state as justified to his own personal
righteousness, are examined, and proved untenable, 5. Several arguments
are urged in disproof of a third erroneous theory, broached and supported
by Socinians, that justification depends upon evangelical righteousness
as the condition on which the righteousness of Christ is imputed, 6. A
general statement follows of the nature of imputation, and of the grounds
on which imputation proceeds, 7. A full discussion ensues of the doctrine
that sin is imputed to Christ, grounded upon the mystical union between
Christ and the church, the suretiship of the former in behalf of the
church, and the provisions of the new covenant, 8. The chief
controversies in regard to justification are arranged and classified, and
the author fixes on the point relating to the formal cause of
justification as the main theme of the subsequent reasonings, 9.
At this stage, the second division of the treatise may be held to
begin,--the previous disquisitions being more of a preliminary character.
The scope of what follows is to prove that the sinner is justified,
through faith, by the imputed righteousness of Christ. This part of the
work embraces four divisions;--general arguments for the doctrine
affirmed; testimonies from Scripture in support of it; the refutation of
objections to it; and the reconciliation of the passages in the Epistles
of Paul and James which have appeared to some to be inconsistent.
Under the head of "general arguments", he rebuts briefly the general
objections to imputation, and contends for the imputation of Christ's
righteousness as the ground of justification;--first, from the
insufficiency of our own righteousness, or, in other words, from the
condition of guilt in which all men are by nature involved, 10; secondly,
from the nature of the obedience required unto justification, according
to the eternal obligation of the divine law, 11; and, as a subsidiary and
collateral consideration, from the necessity which existed that the
precept of the law should be fulfilled as well as that atonement should
be rendered for the violation of it,--in short, from the active as well
as the passive righteousness of Christ; and here the three objections of
Socinius, that such an imputation of Christ's obedience is impossible,
useless, and pernicious, receive s detailed confutation, 12; thirdly,
from the difference between the two covenants, 13; and fourthly, from the
express terms in which all works see excluded from justification in
Scripture, 14; while faith is exhibited in the gospel as the sole
instrument by which we are interested in the righteousness of Christ, 15.
The "testimony of Scripture" is then adduced at great length,--passages
being quoted and commented on from the prophets, 16; from the
evangelists, 17; and from the epistles of Paul, 18. The "objections" to
the doctrine of justification are reviewed, and the chief objection,--
namely, that the doctrine overthrows the necessity of holiness and
subverts moral obligation,--is repelled by a variety of arguments, 19.
Lastly, the concluding chapter is devoted to an explanation of the
passages in Paul and James which are alleged to be at variance but which
are proved to be in perfect harmony, 20.--Ed.
To the Reader
I shall not need to detain the reader with an account of the nature and
moment of that doctrine which is the entire subject of the ensuing
discourse; far although sunder persons, even among ourselves, have
various apprehensions concerning it, yet that the knowledge of the truth
therein is of the highest importance unto the souls of men is on all
hands agreed unto. Nor, indeed, is it possible that any man who knows
himself to be a sinner, and obnoxious thereon to the judgment of God, but
he must desire to have some knowledge of it, as that alone whereby the
way of delivery from the evil state and condition wherein he finds
himself is revealed. There are, I confess, multitudes in the world who,
although they cannot avoid some general convictions of sin, as also of
the consequent of it, yet do fortify their minds against a practical
admission of such conclusions as, in a just consideration of things, do
necessarily and unavoidably ensue thereon. Such persons, wilfully
deluding themselves with vain hopes and imaginations, do never once
seriously inquire by what way or means they may obtain peace with God and
acceptance before him, which, in comparison of the present enjoyment of
the pleasures of sin, they value not at all. And it is in vain to
recommend the doctrine of justification unto them who neither desire nor
endeavour to be justified. But where any persons are really made sensible
of their apostasy from God, of the evil of their natures and lives, with
the dreadful consequences that attend thereon, in the wrath of God and
eternal punishment due unto sin, they cannot well judge themselves more
concerned in any thing than in the knowledge of that divine way whereby
they may be delivered from this condition. And the minds of such persons
stand in no need of arguments to satisfy them in the importance of this
doctrine; their own concernment in it is sufficient to that purpose. And
I shall assure them that, in the handling of it, from first to last, I
have had no other design but only to inquire diligently into the divine
revelation of that way, and those means, with the causes of them, whereby
the conscience of a distressed sinner may attain assured peace with God
through our Lord Jesus Christ. I lay more weight on the steady direction
of one soul in this inquiry, than on disappointing the objections of
twenty wrangling or fiery disputers. The question, therefore, unto this
purpose being stated, as the reader will find in the beginning of our
discourse, although it were necessary to spend some time in the
explication of the doctrine itself, and terms wherein it is usually
taught, get the main weight of the whole lies in the interpretation of
scripture testimonies, with the application of them unto the experience
of them who do believe, and the state of them who seek after salvation by
Jesus Christ. There are, therefore, some few things that I would desire
the reader to take notice of, that he may receive benefit by the ensuing
discourse; at least, if it be not his own fault, be freed from prejudices
against it, or a vain opposition unto it.
1. Although there are at present various contests about the doctrine
of justification, and may books published in the way of controversy about
it, yet this discourse was written with no design to contend with or
contradict any, of what sort or opinion soever. Some few passages which
seem of that tendency are, indeed, occasionally inserted; but they are
such as every candid reader will judge to have been necessary. I have
ascribed no opinion unto any particular person,--much less wrested the
words of any, reflected on their persons, censured their abilities, taken
advantage of presumed prejudices against them, represented their opinions
in the deformed reflections of strained consequences, fancied intended
notions, which their words do not express, nor, candidly interpreted,
give any countenance unto,--or endeavoured the vain pleasure of seeming
success in opposition unto them; which, with the like effects of weakness
of mind and disorder of affections, are the animating principles of many
late controversial writings. To declare and vindicate the truth, unto the
instruction and edification of such as love it in sincerity, to extricate
their minds from those difficulties (in this particular instance) which
some endeavour to cast on all gospel mysteries, to direct the consciences
of them that inquire after abiding peace with God, and to establish the
minds of them that do believe, are the things I have aimed at; and an
endeavour unto this end, considering all circumstances, that station
which God has been pleased graciously to give me in the church, has made
necessary unto me.
2. I have written nothing but what I believe to be true, and useful
unto the promotion of gospel obedience. The reader may not here expect an
extraction of other men's notions, or a collection and improvement of
their arguments, either by artificial seasonings or ornament of style and
language; but a naked inquiry into the nature of the things treated on,
as revealed in the Scripture, and as evidencing themselves in their power
and efficacy on the minds of them that do believe. It is the practical
direction of the consciences of men, in their application unto God by
Jesus Christ for deliverance from the curse due unto the apostate state,
and peace with him, with the influence of the way thereof unto universal
gospel obedience, that is alone to be designed in the handling of this
doctrine. And, therefore, unto him that would treat of it in a due
manner, it is required that he weigh every thing he asserts in his own
mind and experience, and not dare to propose that unto others which he
does not abide by himself, in the most intimate recesses of his mind,
under his nearest approaches unto God, in his surprisals with dangers, in
deep afflictions, in his preparations for death, and most humble
contemplations of the infinite distance between God and him. Other
notions and disputations about the doctrine of justification, not
seasoned with these ingredients, however condited unto the palate of some
by skill and language, are insipid and useless, immediately degenerating
into an unprofitable strife of words.
3. I know that the doctrine here pleaded for is charged by many with
an unfriendly aspect towards the necessity of personal holiness, good
works, and all gospel obedience in general, yea, utterly to take it away.
So it was at the first clear revelation of it by the apostle Paul, as he
frequently declares. But it is sufficiently evinced by him to be the
chief principle of, and motive unto, all that obedience which is accepted
with God through Jesus Christ, as we shall manifest afterwards. However,
it is acknowledged that the objective grace of the gospel, in the
doctrine of it, is liable to abuse, where there is nothing of the
subjective grace of it in the hearts of men; and the ways of its
influence into the life of God are uncouth unto the seasonings of carnal
minds. So was it charged by the Papists, at the first Reformation, and
continues yet so to be. Yet, as it gave the first occasion unto the
Reformation itself, so was it that whereby the souls of men, being set at
liberty from their bondage unto innumerable superstitious fears and
observances, utterly inconsistent with true gospel obedience, and
directed into the ways of peace with God through Jesus Christ, were made
fruitful in real holiness, and to abound in all those blessed effects of
the life of God which were never found among their adversaries. The same
charge as afterwards renewed by the Socinians, and continues still to be
managed by them. But I suppose wise and impartial men will not lay much
weight on their accusations, until they have manifested the efficacy of
their contrary persuasion by better effects and fruits than yet they have
done. What sort of men they were who first coined that system of religion
which they adhere unto, one who knew them well enough, find sufficiently
inclined unto their Antitrinitarian opinions, declares in one of the
queries that he proposed unto Socinus himself and his followers. "If
this," says he, "be the truth which you contend for, whence comes it to
pass that is is declared only by persons 'nulla pietatis commendatione,
nulla laudato prioris vitae exemplo commendatos; imo ut prerumque
videmus, per vagabundos, et contentionum zeli carnalis plenos homines,
alios ex castris, aulis, graneis, prolatam esse. Scrupuli ab excellenti
viro propositi, inter oper. Socin.'" The fiercest charges of such men
against any doctrines they oppose as inconsistent with the necessary
motives unto godliness, are a recommendation of it unto the minds of
considerative men. And there cannot be a more effectual engine plied for
the ruin of religion, than for men to declaim against the doctrine of
justification by faith alone, and other truths concerning the grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ, as those which overthrow the necessity of moral
duties, good works, and gospel obedience; whilst, under the conduct of
the opinions which they embrace in opposition unto them, they give not
the least evidence of the power of the truth or grace of the gospel upon
their own hearts, or in their lives. Whereas, therefore, the whole gospel
is the truth which is after godliness, declaring and exhibiting that
grace of God which teaches us "to deny all ungodliness and worldly lusts,
and that we should live soberly, and righteously, and godly in this
world;" we being fallen into those times wherein, under great and fierce
contests about notions, opinions, and practices in religion, there is a
horrible decay in true gospel purity and holiness of life amongst the
generality of men, I shall readily grant that, keeping a due regard unto
the only standard of truth, a secondary trial of doctrines proposed and
contended for may and ought to be made, by the ways, lives, walkings, and
conversations of them by whom they are received and professed. And
although it is acknowledged that the doctrine pleaded in the ensuing
discourse be liable to be abused, yea, turned into licentiousness, by men
of corrupt minds, through the prevalence of vicious habits in them (as is
the whole doctrine of the grace of God by Jesus Christ); and although the
way and means of its efficacy and influence into universal obedience unto
God, in righteousness and true holiness, be not discernible without some
beam of spiritual light, nor will give an experience of their power unto
the minds of men utterly destitute of a principle of spiritual life; yet,
if it cannot preserve its station in the church by this rule, of its
useful tendency unto the promotion of godliness, and its necessity
thereunto, in all them by whom it is really believed and received in its
proper light and power, and that in the experience of former and present
times, I shall be content that it be exploded.
4. Finding that not a few have esteemed it compliant with their
interest to publish exceptions against some few leaves which, in the
handling of a subject of another nature, I occasionally wrote many years
ago on this subject, I am not without apprehensions, that either the same
persons or others of a like temper and principles, may attempt an
opposition unto what is here expressly tendered thereon. On supposition
of such an attempt, I shall, in one word, let the authors of it know
wherein alone I shall be concerned. For, if they shall make it their
business to cavil at expressions, to wrest my words, wire-draw inferences
and conclusions from them not expressly owned by me,--to revile my
person, to catch at advantages in any occasional passages, or other
unessential parts of the discourse,--labouring for an appearance of
success and reputation to themselves thereby, without a due attendance
unto Christian moderation, candour, and ingenuity,--I shall take no more
notice of what they say or write than I would do of the greatest
impertinencies that can be reported in this world. The same I say
concerning oppositions of the like nature unto another writings of mine,-
-a work which, as I hear, some are at present engaged in. I have somewhat
else to do than to cast away any part of the small remainder of my life
in that kind of controversial writings which good men bewail, and wise
men deride. Whereas, therefore, the principal design of this discourse is
to state the doctrine of justification from the Scripture, and to confirm
it by the testimonies thereof, I shall not esteem it spoken against,
unless our exposition of Scripture testimonies, and the application of
them unto the present argument, be disproved by just rules of
interpretation, and another sense of them be evinced. All other things
which I conceive necessary to be spoken unto, in order unto the right
understanding and due improvement of the truth pleaded for, are comprised
and declared in the ensuing general discourses to that purpose. These few
things I thought meet to mind the reader of.
J.O.
From my study, May the 30th, 1677.
The Doctrine of Justification by Faith
General Considerations, previous unto the Explanation of the Doctrine of
Justification
First, The general nature of justification--State of the person to be
justified antecedently thereunto, Rom.4:5; 3:19; 1:32; Gal.3:10; John
3:18,36; Gal.3:22--The sole inquiry on that state--Whether it be any
thing that is our own inherently, or what is only imputed unto us, that
we are to trust unto for our acceptance with God--The sum of this
inquiry--The proper ends of teaching and learning the doctrine of
justification--Things to be avoided therein
That we may treat of the doctrine of justification usefully unto its
proper ends, which are the glory of God in Christ, with the peace and
furtherance of the obedience of believers, some things are previously to
be considered, which we must have respect unto in the whole process of
our discourse. And, among others that might be insisted on to the same
purpose, these that ensue are not to be omitted:--
1. The first inquiry in this matter, in a way of duty, is after the
proper relief of the conscience of a sinner pressed and perplexed with a
sense of the guilt of sin. For justification is the way and means whereby
such a person does obtain acceptance before God, with a right and title
unto a heavenly inheritance. And nothing is pleadable in this cause but
what a man would speak unto his own conscience in that state, or unto the
conscience of another, when he is anxious under that inquiry. Wherefore,
the person under consideration (that is, who is to be justified) is one
who, in himself, is "asethes", Rom.4:5,--"ungodly;" and thereon
"hupodikos tooi Theooi", chap.3:19,--"guilty before God;" that is,
obnoxious, subject, liable, "tooi dikaioomati tou Theou", chap.1:32,--to
the righteous sentential judgment of God, that "he who committeth sin,"
who is any way guilty of it, is "worthy of death." Hereupon such a person
finds himself "hupo kataran", Gal.3:10,--under "the curse," and "the
wrath of God" therein abiding on him," John 3:18,36. In this condition he
is "anapologetos",--without plea, without excuse, by any thing in and
from himself, for his own relief; his "mouth is stopped," Rom.3:19. For
he is, in the judgment of God, declared in the Scripture,
"sungkekleismenos huph' hamartian", Gal.3:22,--every way "shut up under
sin" and all the consequents of it. Many evils in this condition are men
subject unto, which may be reduced unto those two of our first parents,
wherein they were represented. For, first, they thought foolishly to hide
themselves from God; and then, more foolishly, would have charged him as
the cause of their sin. And such, naturally, are the thoughts of men
under their convictions. But whoever is the subject of the justification
inquired after, is, by various means, brought into his apprehensions who
cried, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
2. With respect unto this state and condition of men, or men in this
state and condition, the inquiry is, "What that is upon the account
whereof God pardons all their sins, receives them into his favour,
declares or pronounces them righteous and acquitted from all guilt,
removes the curse, and turns away all his wrath from them, giving them
right and title unto a blessed, immortality or life eternal?" This is
that alone wherein the consciences of sinners in this estate are
concerned. Nor do they inquire after any thing, but what they may have to
oppose unto or answer the justice of God in the commands and curse of the
law, and what they may retake themselves unto for the obtaining of
acceptance with him unto life and salvation.
That the apostle does thus, and no otherwise, state this whole matter,
and, in an answer unto this inquiry, declare the nature of justification
and all the causes of it, in the third and fourth chapters of the Epistle
to the Romans, and elsewhere, shall be afterwards declared and proved.
And we shall also manifest, that the apostle James, in the second chapter
of his epistle, does not speak unto this inquiry, nor give an answer unto
it; but it is of justification in another sense, and to another purpose,
whereof he treats. And whereas we cannot either safely or usefully treat
of this doctrine, but with respect unto the same ends for which it is
declared, and whereunto it is applied in the Scripture, we should not, by
any pretences, be turned aside from attending unto this case and its
resolution, in all our discourses on this subject; for it is the
direction, satisfaction, and peace of the consciences of men, and not the
curiosity of notions or subtlety of disputations, which it is our duty to
design. And, therefore, I shall, as much as I possibly may, avoid all
these philosophical terms and distinctions wherewith this evangelical
doctrine has been perplexed rather than illustrated; for more weight is
to be put on the steady guidance of the mind and conscience of one
believer, really exercised about the foundation of his peace and
acceptance with God, than on the confutation of ten wrangling disputers.
3. Now the inquiry, on what account, or for what cause and reason, a
man may be so acquitted or discharged of sin, and accepted with God, as
before declared, does necessarily issue in this:--"Whether it be any
thing in ourselves, as our faith and repentance, thee renovation of our
natures, inherent habits of grace, and actual works of righteousness
which we have done, or may do? Or whether it be the obedience,
righteousness, satisfaction, and merit of the Son of God our mediator,
and surety of the covenant, imputed unto us?" One of these it must be,--
namely, something that is our own, which, whatever may be the influence
of the grace of God unto it, or causality of it, because wrought in and
by us, is inherently our own in a proper sense; or something which, being
not our own, nor inherent in us, nor wrought by us, is yet imputed unto
us, for the pardon of our sins and the acceptation of our persons as
righteous, or the making of us righteous in the sight of God. Neither are
these things capable of mixture or composition, Rom.11:6. Which of these
it is the duty, wisdom, and safety of a convinced sinner to rely upon and
trust unto, in his appearance before God, is the sum of our present
inquiry.
4. The way whereby sinners do or ought to betake themselves unto this
relief, on supposition that it is the righteousness of Christ, and how
they come to be partakers of, or interested in, that which is not
inherently their own, unto as good benefit and as much advantage as if it
were their own, is of a distinct consideration. And as this also is
clearly determined in the Scripture, so it is acknowledged in the
experience of all them that do truly believe. Neither are we in this
matter much to regard the senses or arguing of men who were never
thoroughly convinced of sin, nor have ever in their own persons "fled for
refuge unto the hope set before them."
5. These things, I say, are always to be attended unto, in our whole
disquisition into the nature of evangelical justification; for, without a
constant respect unto them, we shall quickly wander into curious and
perplexed questions, wherein the consciences of guilty sinners are not
concerned; and which, therefore, really belong not unto the substance or
truth of this doctrine, nor are to be immixed therewith. It is alone the
relief of those who are in themselves "hupodikoi tooi Theoo",--guilty
before, or obnoxious and liable to, the judgment of God,--that we inquire
after. That this is not any thing in or of themselves, nor can so be,--
that it is a provision without them, made in infinite wisdom and grace by
the mediation of Christ, his obedience and death therein,--is secured in
the Scripture against all contradiction; and it is the fundamental
principle of the gospel, Matt.11:28.
6. It is confessed that many things, for the declaration of the truth,
and the order of the dispensation of God's grace herein, are necessary to
be insisted on,--such are the nature of justifying faith, the place and
use of it in justification, and the causes of the new covenant, the true
notion of the mediation and suretiship of Christ, and the like; which
shall all of them be inquired into. But, beyond what tends directly unto
the guidance of the minds and satisfaction of the souls of men, who seek
after a stable and abiding foundation of acceptance with God, we are not
easily to be drawn unless we are free to lose the benefit and comfort of
this most important evangelical truth in needless and unprofitable
contentions. And amongst many other miscarriages which men are subject
unto, whilst they are conversant about these things, this, in an especial
manner, is to be avoided.
7. For the doctrine of justification is directive of Christian
practice, and in no other evangelical truth is the whole of our obedience
more concerned; for the foundation, reasons, and motives of all our duty
towards God are contained therein. Wherefore, in order unto the due
improvement of them ought it to be taught, and not otherwise. That which
alone we aim (or ought so to do) to learn in it and by it, is how we may
get and maintain peace with God, and so to live unto him as to be
accepted with him in what we do. To satisfy the minds and consciences of
men in these things, is this doctrine to be taught. Wherefore, to carry
it out of the understandings of ordinary Christians, by speculative
notions and distinctions, is disserviceable unto the faith of the church;
yea, the mixing of evangelical revelations with philosophical notions has
been, in sundry ages, the poison of religion. Pretence of accuracy, and
artificial skill in teaching, is that which gives countenance unto such a
way of handling sacred things. But the spiritual amplitude of divine
truths is restrained hereby, whilst low, mean, philosophical senses are
imposed on them. And not only so, but endless divisions and contentions
are occasioned and perpetuated. Hence, when any difference in religion
is, in the pursuit of controversies about it, brought into the old of
metaphysical respects and philosophical terms, whereof there is "polus
nomos entha kai entha"--sufficient provision for the supply of the
combatants on both sides,--the truth for the most part, as unto any
concernment of the souls of men therein, is utterly lost and buried in
the rubbish of senseless and unprofitable words. And thus, in particular,
those who seem to be well enough agreed in the whole doctrine of
justification, so far as the Scripture goes before them, and the
experience of believers keeps them company, when once they engage into
their philosophical definitions and distinctions, are at such an
irreconcilable variance among themselves, as if they were agreed on no
one thing that does concern it. For as men have various apprehensions in
coining such definitions as may be defensible against objections, which
most men aim at therein; so no proposition can be so pain, (at least in
"materia probabili,") but that a man ordinarily versed in pedagogical
terms and metaphysical notions, may multiply distinctions on every word
of it.
8. Hence, there has been a pretence and appearance of twenty several
opinions among Protestants about justification, as Bellarmine and
Vasguez, and others of the Papists, charge it against them out of
Osiander, when the faith of them all was one and the same, Bellar., lib 5
cap. l; Vasq. in 1, 2, quest. 113, disp. 202; whereof we shall speak
elsewhere. When men are once advanced into that field of disputation,
which is all overgrown with thorns of subtleties, perplexed notions, and
futilous terms of art, they consider principally how they may entangle
others in it, scarce at all how they may get out of it themselves. And in
this posture they oftentimes utterly forget the business which they are
about, especially in this matter of justification,--namely, how a guilty
sinner may come to obtain favour and acceptance with God. And not only
so, but I doubt they oftentimes dispute themselves beyond what they can
well abide by, when they return home unto a sedate meditation of the
state of things between God and their souls. And I cannot much value
their notions and sentiments of this matter, who object and answer
themselves out of a sense of their own appearance before God; much less
theirs who evidence an open inconformity unto the grace and truth of this
doctrine in their hearts and lives.
9. Wherefore, we do but trouble the faith of Christians, and the peace
of the true church of God, whilst we dispute about expressions, terms,
and notions, when the substance of the doctrine intended may be declared
and believed, without the knowledge, understanding, or use of any of
them. Such are all those in whose subtle management the captious art of
wrangling does principally consist. A diligent attendance unto the
revelation made hereof in the Scripture, and an examination of our own
experience thereby, is the sum of what is required of us for the right
understanding of the truth herein. And every true believer, who is taught
of God, knows how to put his whole trust in Christ alone, and the grace
of God by him, for mercy, righteousness, and glory, and not at all
concern himself with those loads of thorns and briers, which, under the
names of definitions, distinctions, accurate notions, in a number of
exotic pedagogical and philosophical terms, some pretend to accommodate
them withal.
10. The Holy Ghost, in expressing the most eminent acts in our
justification, especially as unto our believing, or the acting of that
faith whereby we are justified, is pleased to make use of many
metaphorical expressions. For any to use them now in the same way, and to
the same purpose, is esteemed rude, undisciplinary, and even ridiculous;
but on what grounds? He that shall deny that there is more spiritual
sense and experience conveyed by them into the hearts and minds of
believers (which is the life and soul of teaching things practical), than
in the most accurate philosophical expressions, is himself really
ignorant of the whole truth in this matter. The propriety of such
expressions belongs and is confined unto natural science; but spiritual
truths are to be taught, "not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth,
but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with
spiritual." God is wiser than man; and the Holy Ghost knows better what
are the most expedient ways for the illumination of our minds with that
knowledge of evangelical truths which it is our duty to have and attain,
than the wisest of us all. And other knowledge of or skill in these
things, than what is required of us in a way of duty, is not to be
valued.
It is, therefore, to no purpose to handle the mysteries of the gospel
as if Hilcot and Bricot, Thomas and Gabriel, with all the Sententiarists,
Summists, and Quodlibetarians of the old Roman peripatetical school, were
to be raked out of their graves to be our guides. Especially will they be
of no use unto us in this doctrine of justification. For whereas they
pertinaciously adhered unto the philosophy of Aristotle, who knew nothing
of any righteousness but what is a habit inherent in ourselves, and the
acts of it, they wrested the whole doctrine of justification unto a
compliance wherewithal. So Pighius himself complained of them, Controv.
2, "Dissimulate non possumus, hanc vel primam doctrinae Christianae
partem (de justificatione) obscuram magis quam illustratam a
scholasticis, spinosis plerisque quaestionibus, et definitionibus,
secundum quas nonnulli magno supercilio primam in omnibus autoritatem
arrogantes", etc.
Secondly, A due consideration of God, the Judge of all, necessary unto
the right stating and apprehension of the doctrine of justification,
Rom.8:33; Isa.43:25; 45:25; Ps.143:2; Rom.3:20--What thoughts will be
ingenerated hereby in the minds of men, Isa.33:14; Micah 6:6,7; Isa.6:5--
The plea of Job against his friends, and before God, not the same, Job
40:3-5, 43:406--Directions for visiting the sick given of old--
Testimonies of Jerome and Ambrose--Sense of men in their prayers,
Dan.9:7,18; Ps.143:2, 130:3,4--Paraphrase of Austin on that place--Prayer
of Pelagius--Public liturgies
Secondly, A due consideration of him with whom in this matter we have
to do, and that immediately, is necessary unto a right stating of our
thoughts about it. The Scripture expresses it emphatically, that it is
"God that justifieth," Rom.8:33; and he assumes it unto himself as his
prerogative to do what belongs thereunto. "I, even I, am he that blotteth
out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy
sins," Isa.43:25. And it is hard, in my apprehension, to suggest unto him
any other reason or consideration of the pardon of our sins, seeing he
has taken it on him to do it for his own sake; that is, "for the Lord's
sake," Dan.9:17, in whom "all the seed of Israel are justified,"
Isa.45:25. In his sight, before his tribunal, it is that men are
justified or condemned. Ps.143:2, "Enter not into judgment with thy
servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified." And the
whole work of justification, with all that belongs thereunto, is
represented after the manner of a juridical proceeding before God's
tribunal; as we shall see afterwards. "Therefore," says the apostle, "by
the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight," Rom.3:20.
However any man be justified in the sight of men or angels by his own
obedience, or deeds of the law, yet in his sight none can be so.
Necessary it is unto any man who is to come unto a trial, in the
sentence whereof he is greatly concerned, duly to consider the judge
before whom he is to appear, and by whom his cause is finally to be
determined. And if we manage our disputes about justification without
continual regard unto him by whom we must be cast or acquitted, we shall
not rightly apprehend what our plea ought to be. Wherefore the greatness,
the majesty, the holiness, and sovereign authority of God, are always to
be present with us in a due sense of them, when we inquire how we may be
justified before him. Yet is it hard to discern how the minds of some men
are influenced by the consideration of these things, in their fierce
contests for the interest of their own works in their justification:
"Precibus aut pretio ut in aliqua parte haereant." But the Scripture does
represent unto us what thoughts of him and of themselves, not only
sinners, but saints also, have had, and cannot but have, upon near
discoveries and effectual conceptions of God and his greatness. Thoughts
hereof ensuing on a sense of the guilt of sin, filled our first parents
with fear and shame, and put them on that foolish attempt of hiding
themselves from him. Nor is the wisdom of their posterity one jot better
under their convictions, without a discovery of the promise. That alone
makes sinners wise which tenders them relief. At present, the generality
of men are secure, and do not much question but that they shall come off
well enough, one way or other, in the trial they are to undergo. And as
such persons are altogether indifferent what doctrine concerning
justification is taught and received; so for the most part, for
themselves, they incline unto that declaration of it which best suits
their own reason, as influenced with self-conceit and corrupt affections.
The sum whereof is, that what they cannot do themselves, what is wanting
that they may be saved, be it more or less, shall one way or other be
made up by Christ; either the use or the abuse of which persuasion is the
greatest fountain of sin in the world, next unto the depravation of our
nature. And whatever be, or may be, pretended unto the contrary, persons
not convinced of sin, not humbled for it, are in all their ratiocinations
about spiritual things, under the conduct of principles so vitiated and
corrupted. See Matt.18:3,4. But when God is pleased by any means to
manifest his glory unto sinners, all their prefidences and contrivances
do issue in dreadful horror and distress. An account of their temper is
given us, Isa.33:14, "The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness has
surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring
fire? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?" Nor is it thus
only with some peculiar sort of sinners. The same will be the thoughts of
all guilty persons at some time or other. For those who, through
sensuality, security, or superstition, do hide themselves from the
vexation of them in this world, will not fail to meet with them when
their terror shall be increased, and become remediless. Our "God is a
consuming fire;" and men will one day find how vain it is to set their
briers and thorns against him in battle array. And we may see what
extravagant contrivances convinced sinners will put themselves upon,
under any real view of the majesty and holiness of God, Mic.6:6,7,
"Wherewith," says one of them, "shall I come before the LORD, and bow
myself before the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt-offerings,
with calves of a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousand of
rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first born
for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?"
Neither shall I ever think them meet to be contended withal about the
doctrine of justification who take no notice of these things, but rather
despise them.
This is the proper effect of the conviction of sin, strengthened and
sharpened with the consideration of the terror of the Lord, who is to
judge concerning it. And this is that which, in the Papacy, meeting with
an ignorance of the righteousness of God, has produced innumerable
superstitious inventions for the appeasing of the consciences of men who
by any means fall under the disquietments of such convictions. For they
quickly see that nothing of the obedience which God requires of them, as
it is performed by them, will justify them before this high and holy God.
Wherefore they seek for shelter in contrivances about things that he has
not commanded, to try if they can put a cheat upon their consciences, and
find relief in diversions.
Nor is it thus only with profligate sinners upon their convictions;
but the best of men, when they have had near and efficacious
representations of the greatness, holiness, and glory of God, have been
cast into the deepest self-abasement, and most serious renunciation of
all trust or confidence in themselves. So the prophet Isaiah, upon his
vision of the glory of the Holy One, cried out, "Woe is me! For I am
undone; because I am a man of unclean lips," chap. 6:5;--nor was he
relieved but by an evidence of the free pardon of sin, verse 7. So holy
Job, in all his contests with his friends, who charged him with
hypocrisy, and his being a sinner guilty in a peculiar manner above other
men, with assured confidence and perseverance therein, justified his
sincerity, his faith and trust in God, against their whole charge, and
every parcel of it. And this he does with such a full satisfaction of his
own integrity, as that not only he insists at large on his vindication,
but frequently appeals unto God himself as unto the truth of his plea;
for he directly pursues that counsel, with great assurance, which the
apostle James so long after gives unto all believers. Nor is the doctrine
of that apostle more eminently exemplified in any one instance throughout
the whole Scripture than in him; for he shows his faith by his works, and
pleads his justification thereby. As Job justified himself, and was
justified by his works, so we allow it the duty of every believer to be.
His plea for justification by works, in the sense wherein it is so, was
the most noble that ever was in the world, nor was ever any controversy
managed upon a greater occasion.
At length this Job is called into the immediate presence of Gods to
plead his own cause; not now, as stated between him and his friends,
whether he were a hypocrite or no, or whether his faith or trust in God
was sincere; but as it was stated between God and him, wherein he seemed
to have made some undue assumptions on his own behalf. The question was
now reduced unto this,--on what grounds he might or could be justified in
the sight of God? To prepare his mind unto a right judgment in this case,
God manifests his glory unto him, and instructs him in the greatness of
his majesty and power. And this he does by a multiplication of instances,
because under our temptations we are very slow in admitting right
conceptions of God. Here the holy man quickly acknowledged that the state
of the case was utterly altered. All his former pleas of faith, hope, and
trust in God, of sincerity in obedience, which with so much earnestness
he before insisted on, are now quite laid aside. He saw well enough that
they were not pleadable at the tribunal before which he now appeared, so
that God should enter into judgment with him thereon, with respect unto
his justification. Wherefore, in the deepest self-abasement and
abhorrence, he retakes himself unto sovereign grace and mercy. For "then
Job answered the LORDS and said, Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer
thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth. Once have I spoken; but I will
not answer: yea, twice; but I will proceed no farther," Job 40:3-5. And
again, "Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak; I will demand of thee,
and declare thou unto me. I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear:
but now mine eye seeth thee. Wherefore I abhor myself; and repent in dust
and ashes," chap.42:4-6. Let any men place themselves in the condition
wherein now Job was,--in the immediate presence of God; let them attend
unto what he really speaks unto them in his word,--namely, what they will
answer unto the charge that he has against them, and what will be their
best plea before his tribunal, that they may be justified. I do not
believe that any man living has more encouraging grounds to plead for an
interest in his own faith and obedience, in his justification before God,
than Job had; although I suppose he had not so much skill to manage a
plea to that purpose, with scholastic notions and distinctions, as the
Jesuits have; but however we may be harnessed with subtle arguments and
solutions, I fear it will not be safe for us to adventure farther upon
God than he durst to do.
There was of old a direction for the visitation of the sick, composed,
as they say, by Anselm, and published by Casparus Ulenbergius, which
expresses a better sense of these things than some seem to be convinced
of:--"Credisne te non posse salvari nisi per mortem Christi? Respondet
infirmus, 'Etiam". Tum dicit illi, Age ergo dum superest in te anima, in
hac sola morte fiduciam tuam constitue; in nulla alia re fiduciam habe
huic morti te totum committe, hac sola te totum contege totum immisce te
in hac morte, in hac morte totum te involve. Et si Dominus te voluerit
judicare, dic, 'Domine, mortem Domini nostri Jesus Christi objicio inter
me et tuum judicium, aliter tecum non contendo'. Et si tibi eixerit quia
peccator es, dic, 'Mortem Domini nostri Jesus Christi pono inter me et
peccte mea'. Si dixerit tibi quot meruisti damnationem; dic, 'Domine,
mortem Domini nostri Jesus Christi obtendo inter te et mala merita mea,
ipsiusque merita offero pro merito quod ego debuissem habere nec habeo'.
Si dixerit quod tibi est iratus, dic, 'Domine, mortem Domini Jesu Christi
oppono inter me et iram tuam;'"--that is, "Dost thou believe that thou
canst not be saved but by the death of Christ? The sick man answers,
'Yes,' then let it be said unto him, Go to, then, and whilst thy soul
abideth in thee, put all thy confidence in this death alone, place thy
trust in no other thing; commit thyself wholly to this death, cover
thyself wholly with this alone, cast thyself wholly on this death, wrap
thyself wholly in this death. And if God would judge thee, say, 'Lord, I
place the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and thy judgment; and
otherwise I will not contend or enter into judgment with thee.' And if he
shall say unto thee that thou art a sinner, say, 'I place the death of
our Lord Jesus Christ between me and my sins.' If he shall say unto thee
that thou hast deserved damnation, say, 'Lord, I put the death of our
Lord Jesus Christ between thee and all my sins; and I offer his merits
for my own, which I should have, and have not.' If he say that he is
angry with thee, say, 'Lord, I place the death of our Lord Jesus Christ
between me and thy anger.'" Those who gave these directions seem to have
been sensible of what it is to appear before the tribunal of God, and how
unsafe it will be for us there to insist on any thing in ourselves. Hence
are the words of the same Anselm in his Meditations: "Conscientia mea
meruit damnation, et poenitentia mea non sufficit ad satisfactionem; set
certum est quod misericordia tua superat omnem offensionem;"--"My
conscience has deserved damnation, and my repentance is not sufficient
for satisfaction; but most certain it is that thy mercy aboundeth above
all offense." And this seems to me a better direction than those more
lately given by some of the Roman church;--such as the prayer suggested
unto a sick man by Johan. Polandus, lib. Methodus in adjuvandis
morientibus: "Domine Jesus, conjunge, obsecro, obsequium meum cum omnibus
quae tu egisti, et pssus s ex tam perfecta charitate et obedientia. Et
cum divitiis satisfactionum et meritorum dilectionis, patri aeterno,
illud offere digneris." Or that of a greater author, Antidot. Animae,
fol. 17, "Tu hinc o rosea martyrum turba offer pro me nunc et in hora
mortis mee, merita, fidelitatum, constantiae, et pretiosi sanguinis, cum
sanguine agni immaculati, pro omnium salute effusi." Jerome, long before
Anselm, spake to the same purpose: "Cum dies judicii aut dormitionis
advenerit, omnes manus dissolventur; quibus dicitur in alio loco,
confortamini manus dissolutae; dissolventur autem manus, quia nullum opus
dignum Dei justitia reperiatur, et non justificabitur in conspectu ejus
omnis vivens, unde propheta dicit in psalmo, 'Si iniquitates attends
Domine, quis sustinebit'", lib. 6 in Isa.13:6,7; --"When the day of
judgment or of death shall come, all hands will be dissolved" (that is,
faint or fall down); "unto which it is said in another place, 'Be
strengthened, ye hands that hang down.' But all hands shall be melted
down" (that is, all men's strength and confidence shall fail them),
"because no works shall be found which can answer the righteousness of
God; for no flesh shall be justified in his sight. Whence the prophet
says in the psalm, 'If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquity, who should
stand?" "And Ambrose, to the same purpose: "Nemo ergo sibi arroget, nemo
de meritis glorietur, nemo de ostate se jactet, omnes speremus per
Dominum Jesus misericordiam invenire, quoniam omnes ante tribunal ejus
stabimus. De illo veniam, de illo indulgentiam postulabo. Quaenam spes
alia peccatoribus?" in Ps.119. Resh,--"Let no man arrogate any thing unto
himself, let no man glory in his own merits or good deeds, let no man
boast of his power: let us all hope to find mercy by our Lord Jesus; for
we shall all stand before his judgment-seat. Of him will I beg pardon, of
him will I desire indulgence; what other hope is there for sinners?"
Wherefore, if men will be turned off from a continual regard unto the
greatness, holiness, and majesty of God, by their inventions in the heat
of disputation; if they do forget a reverential consideration of what
will become them, and what they may retake themselves unto when they
stand before his tribunal; they may engage into such apprehensions as
they dare not abide by in their own personal trial. For "how shall man be
just with God?" Hence it has been observed, that the schoolmen
themselves, in their meditations and devotional writings, wherein they
had immediate thoughts of God, with whom they had to do, did speak quite
another language as to justification before God than they do in their
wrangling, philosophical, fiery disputes about it. And I had rather learn
what some men really judge about their own justification from their
prayers than their writings. Nor do I remember that I did ever hear any
good man in his prayers use any expressions about justification, pardon
of sin, and righteousness before God, wherein any plea from any thing in
ourselves was introduced or made use of. The prayer of Daniel has, in
this matter, been the substance of their supplications: "O Lord,
righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces. We do
not present our supplications before thee for our righteousnesses, but
for thy great mercies. O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; for thine own sake,
O my God," Dan. 9:7,18,19. Or that of the psalmist, "Enter not into
judgment with thy servant, 0 Lord, for in thy sight shall no man living
be justified," Ps.143:2. Or, "If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O
LORD, who shall stand? But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou
mayest be feared," Ps.130:3,4. On which words the exposition of Austin is
remarkable, speaking of David, and applying it unto himself: "Ecce clamat
sub molibus iniquitatum suarum. Circumspexit se, circumspexit vitam suam,
vidit illam undique flagitiis coopertam; quacunque respexit, nihil in se
boni invenit: et cum tante et tam multa peccata undique videret, tanquam
expavescens, exclamavit, 'Si iniquitates observaris Domine, quis
sustinebit?' Vidit enim prope totam vitam humanam circumlatrari peccatis;
accusari omnes conscientias cogitationius suis; non inveniri cor castum
praesumens de justitia; quod quia inveniri non potest, praesumat ergo
omnium cor de misericordi Domini Dei sui, et dicat Deo, 'Si iniquitates
observaris Domine, Domine quis sustinebit?' Quae autem est spes? Quoniam
apud te propitiatio est". And whereas we may and ought to represent unto
God, in our supplications, our faith, or what it is that we believe
herein, I much question whether some men can find in their hearts to pray
over and plead before him all the arguments and distinctions they make
use of to prove the interest of our works and obedience in our
justification before him, or "enter into judgment" with him upon the
conclusions which they make from them. Nor will many be satisfied to make
use of that prayer which Pelagius taught the widow, as it was objected to
him in the Diospolitan Synod: "To nosti, Domine, quam sanctae, quam
innocentes, quam purae ab omni fraude et rapina quas ad te expando manus;
quam justa, quam immaculata labia et ab omni mendacio libera, quibus tibi
ut mihi miserearis preces fundo;"--"Thou knowest, O Lord, how holy, how
innocent, how pure from all deceit and rapine, are the hands which I
stretch forth unto thee; how just, how unspotted with evil, how free from
lying, are those lips wherewith I pour forth prayers unto thee, that thou
wouldst have mercy on me." And yet, although he taught her so to plead
her own purity, innocency, and righteousness before God, he does it not
as those whereon she might be absolutely justified, but only as the
condition of her obtaining mercy. Nor have I observed that any public
liturgies (the mass-book only excepted, wherein there is a frequent
recourse unto the merits and intercession of saints) do guide men in
their prayers before God to plead any thing for their acceptance with
him, or as the means or condition thereof, but grace, mercy,--the
righteousness and blood of Christ alone.
Wherefore I cannot but judge it best (others may think of it as they
please), for those who would teach or learn the doctrine of justification
in a due manner, to place their consciences in the presence of God, and
their persons before his tribunal, and then, upon a due consideration of
his greatness, power, majesty, righteousness, holiness,--of the terror of
his glory and sovereign authority, to inquire what the Scripture and a
sense of their own condition direct them unto as their relief and refuge,
and what plea it becomes them to make for themselves. Secret thoughts of
God and ourselves, retired meditations, the conduct of the spirit in
humble supplications, deathbed preparations for an immediate appearance
before God, faith and love in exercise on Christ, speak other things, for
the most part, than many contend for.
Thirdly, A due sense of our apostasy from God, the depravation of our
nature thereby, with the power and guilt of sin, the holiness of the law,
necessary unto a right understanding of the doctrine of justification--
Method of the apostle to this purpose, Rom.1,2,3--Grounds of the ancient
and present Pelagianism, in the denial of these things--Instances
thereof--Boasting of perfection from the same ground--Knowledge of sin
and grace mutually promote each other
Thirdly. A clear apprehension and due sense of the greatness of our
apostasy from, God, of the depravation of our natures thereby, of the
power and guilt of sin, of the holiness and severity of the law, are
necessary unto a right apprehension of the doctrine of justification.
Therefore, unto the declaration of it does the apostle premise a large
discourse, thoroughly to convince the minds of all that seek to be
justified with a sense of these things, Rom.1,2,3. The rules which he has
given us, the method which he prescribes, and the ends which he designs,
are those which we shall choose to follow. And he lays it down in
general, "That the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith;"
and that "the just shall live by faith," chap.1:17. But he declares not
in particular the causes, nature, and way of our justification, until he
has fully evinced that all men are shut up under the state of sin, and
manifested how deplorable their condition is thereby; and in the
ignorance of these things, in the denying or palliating of them, he lays
the foundation of all misbelief about the grace of God. Pelagianism, in
its first root, and all its present branches, is resolved whereinto. For,
not apprehending the dread of our original apostasy from God, nor the
consequence of it in the universal depravation of our nature, they disown
any necessity either of the satisfaction of Christ or the efficacy of
divine grace for our recovery or restoration. So upon the matter the
principal ends of the mission both of the Son of God and of the Holy
Spirit are renounced; which issues in the denial of the deity of the one
and the personality of the other. The fall which we had being not great,
and the disease contracted thereby being easily curable, and there being
little or no evil in those things which are now unavoidable unto our
nature, it is no great matter to he freed or justified from all by a mere
act of favour on our own endeavours; nor is the efficacious grace of God
any way needful unto our sanctification and obedience; as these men
suppose.
When these or the like conceits are admitted, and the minds of men by
them kept off from a due apprehension of the state and guilt of sin, and
their consciences from being affected with the terror of the Lord, and
curse of the law thereon, justification is a notion to be dealt withal
pleasantly or subtlety, as men see occasion. And hence arise the
differences about it at present,--I mean those which are really such, and
not merely the different ways whereby learned men express their thoughts
and apprehensions concerning it.
By some the imputation of the actual apostasy and transgression of
Adam, the head of our nature, whereby his sin became the sin of the
world, is utterly denied. Hereby both the grounds the apostle proceeds on
in evincing the necessity of our justification, or our being made
righteous by the obedience of another, and all the arguments brought in
the confirmation of the doctrine of it, in the fifth chapter of his
Epistle to the Romans, are evaded and overthrown. Socinus, de Servitor.
par.4 cap. 6, confesses that place to give great countenance unto the
doctrine of justification by the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ; and therefore he sets himself to oppose, with sundry artifices,
the imputation of the sin of Adam unto his natural posterity. For he
perceived well enough that, upon the admission thereof, the imputation of
the righteousness of Christ unto his spiritual seed would unavoidably
follow, according unto the tenor of the apostle's discourse.
Some deny the depravation and corruption of our nature, which ensued
on our apostasy from God, and the loss of his image; or, if they do not
absolutely deny it, yet they so extenuate it as to render it a matter of
no great concern unto us. Some disease and distemper of the soul they
will acknowledge, arising from the disorder of our affections, whereby we
are apt to receive in such vicious habits and customs as are in practice
in the world; and, as the guilt hereof is not much, so the danger of it
is not great. And as for any spiritual filth or stain of our nature that
is in it, it is clean washed away from all by baptism. That deformity of
soul which came upon us in the loss of the image of God, wherein the
beauty and harmony of all our faculties, in all their acting in order
unto their utmost end, did consist; that enmity unto God, even in the
mind, which ensued thereon; that darkness which our understandings were
clouded, yea, blinded withal,--the spiritual death which passed on the
whole soul, and total alienation frorn the life of God; that impotency
unto good, that inclination unto evil, that deceitfulness of sin, that
power and efficacy of corrupt lusts, which the Scriptures and experience
so fully charge on the state of lost nature, are rejected as empty
notions or fables. No wonder if such persons look upon imputed
righteousness as the shadow of a dream, who esteem those things which
evidence its necessity to be but fond imaginations. And small hope is
there to bring such men to value the righteousness of Christ, as imputed
to them, who are so unacquainted with their own unrighteousness inherent
in them. Until men know themselves better, they will care very little to
know Christ at all.
Against such as these the doctrine of justification may be defended,
as, we are obliged to contend for the faith once delivered unto the
saints, and as the mouths of gainsayers are to be stopped; but to
endeavor their satisfaction in it, whilst they are under the power of
such apprehensions, is a vain attempt. As our Saviour said unto them unto
whom he had declared the necessity of regeneration, "If I have told you
earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if I tell you
heavenly things" so may we say, If men will not believe those things,
whereof it would be marvelous, but that the reason of it is known, that
they have not an undeniable evidence and experience in themselves, how
can they believe those heavenly mysteries which respect a supposition of
that within themselves which they will not acknowledge?
Hence some are so far from any concernment in a perfect righteousness
to be imputed unto them, as that they boast of a perfection in
themselves. So did the Pelagians of old glory in a sinless perfection in
the sight of God, even when they were convinced of sinful miscarriages in
the sight of men; as they are charged by Jerome, lib. 2 Dialog.; and by
Austin, lib. 2 contra Julian., cap. 8. Such persons are not "subjects
capacia auditionis evangelicae." Whilst men have no sense in their own
hearts and consciences of the spiritual disorder of their souls, of the
secret continual acting of sin with deceit and violence, obstructing all
that is good, promoting all that is evil, defiling all that is done by
them through the lusting of the flesh against the Spirit, as contrary
unto it, though no outward perpetration of sin or actual omission of duty
do ensue thereon, who are not engaged in a constant watchful conflict
against the first motions of sin,--unto whom they are not the greatest
burden and sorrow in this life, causing them to cry out for deliverance
from them,--who can despise those who make acknowledgments in their
confession unto God of their sense of these things, with the guilt
wherewith they are accompanied,--[they] will, with an assured confidence,
resect and condemn what is offered about justification through the
obedience and righteousness of Christ imputed to us. For no man will be
so fond as to be solicitous of a righteousness that is not his own, who
has at home in a readiness that which is his own, which will serve his
turn. It is, therefore, the ignorance of these things alone that can
delude men into an apprehension of their justification before God by
their own personal righteousness. For if they were acquainted with them,
they would quickly discern such an imperfection in the best of their
duties, such a frequency of sinful irregularities in their minds and
disorders in their affections, such an unsuitableness in all that they
are and do, from the inward frames of their hearts unto all their outward
actions, unto the greatness and holiness of God, as would abate their
confidence in placing any trust in their own righteousness for their
justification.
By means of these and the like presumptuous conceptions of
unenlightened minds, the consciences of men are kept off from being
affected with a due sense of sin, and a serious consideration how they
may obtain acceptance before God. Neither the consideration of the
holiness or terror of the Lord, nor the severity of the law, as it
indispensably requires a righteousness in compliance with its commands;
nor the promise of the gospel, declaring and tendering a righteousness,
the righteousness of God, in answer whereunto; nor the uncertainty of
their own minds upon trials and surprisals, as having no stable ground of
peace to anchor on; nor the constant secret disquietment of their
consciences, if not seared or hardened through the deceitfulness of sin,
can prevail with them whose thought are prepossessed with such slight
conceptions of the state and art of sin to fly for refuge unto the only
hope that is set before them, or really and distinctly to comport with
the only way of deliverance and salvation.
Wherefore, if we would either teach or learn the doctrine of
justification in a due manner, a clear apprehension of the greatness of
our apostasy from God, a due sense of the guilt of sin, a deep experience
of its power, all with respect unto the holiness and law of God, are
necessary unto us. We have nothing to do in this matter with men, who,
through the fever of pride, have lost the understanding of their own
miserable condition. For, "Natura sic apparet vitiata, ut hoc majoris
vitii sit non videre", Austin. The whole need not the physician, but the
sick. Those who are pricked unto the heart for sin, and cry out, "What
shall we do to be saved?" will understand what we have to say. Against
others we must defend the truth, as God shall enable. And it may be made
good by all sorts of instances, that as men rise in their notions about
the extenuation of sin, so they fall in their regard unto the grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ. And it is no less true also, on the other hand, as
unbelief works in men a disesteem of the person and righteousness of
Christ, they are cast inevitably to seek for countenance unto their own
consciences in the extenuation of sin. So insensibly are the minds of men
diverted from Christ, and seduced to place their confidence in
themselves. Some confused respect they have unto him, as a relief they
know not how nor wherein; but they live in that pretended height of human
wisdom, to trust to themselves. So they are instructed to do by the best
of the philosophers: "Unum bonum est, quod beatae vitae causa et
firmamentum est, sibi fidere", Senec. Epist. 31. Hence, also, is the
internal sanctifying grace of God, among many, equally despised with the
imputation of the righteousness of Christ. The sum of their faith, and of
their arguments in the confirmation of it, is given by the learned Roman
orator and philosopher. "Virtutem", says he, "nemo unquam Deo acceptam
retulit; nimirum recte. Propter virtutem enim jure landamur, et in
virtute recte gloriamur, quod non contingeret, si donum a Deo, non a
nobis haberemus", Tull. de Nat. Deor.
Fourthly, Opposition between works and grace, as unto justification--
Method of the apostle, in the Epistle to the Romans, to manifest this
opposition--A scheme of others contrary thereunto--Testimonies witnessing
this opposition--Judgment to be made on them--Distinctions whereby they
are evaded--The uselessness of them--Resolution of the case in hand by
Bellarmine, Dan.9:18; Luke 17:10
Fourthly. The opposition that the Scripture makes between grace and
works in general, with the exclusion of the one and the assertion of the
other in our justification, deserves a previous consideration. The
opposition intended is not made between grace and works, or our own
obedience, as unto their essence, nature, and consistency, in the order
and method of our salvation; but only with respect unto our
justification. I do not design herein to plead any particular testimonies
of Scripture, as unto their especial sense, or declaration of the mind of
the Holy Ghost in them, which will afterward be with some diligence
inquired into; but only to take a view which way the eye of the Scripture
guides our apprehensions, and what compliance there is in our own
experience with that guidance.
The principal seat of this doctrine, as will be confessed by all, is
in the Epistles of Paul unto the Romans and Galatians, whereunto that
also to the Hebrews may be added: but in that unto the Romans it is most
eminently declared; for therein is it handled by the apostle ex professo
at large, and that both doctrinally and in the way of controversy with
them by whom the truth was opposed. And it is worth our consideration
what process he makes towards the decoration of it, and what principles
he proceeds upon therein.
He lays it down as the fundamental maxim which he would proceed upon,
or as a general thesis, including the substance of what he designed to
explain and prove, that in the gospel the "righteousness of God is
revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by
faith," Rom.1:17. All sorts of men who had any knowledge of God and
themselves, were then, as they must be always, inquiring, and in one
degree or other laboring, after righteousness. For this they looked on,
and that justly, as the only means of an advantageous relation between
God and themselves. Neither had the generality of men any other thoughts,
but that this righteousness must be their own,--inherent in them, and
performed by them; as Rom.10:3. For as this is the language of a natural
conscience and of the law, and suited unto all philosophical notions
concerning the nature of righteousness; so whatever testimony was given
of another kind in the law and the prophets (as such a testimony is given
unto a "righteousness of God without the law," chap.3:21), there was a
vail upon it, as to the understanding of all sorts of men. As, therefore,
righteousness is that which all men seek after, and cannot but seek
after, who design or desire acceptance with God; so it is in vain to
inquire of the law, of natural conscience, of philosophical reason, after
any righteousness but what consists in inherent habits and acts of our
own. Neither law, nor natural conscience, nor reason, do know any other.
But in opposition unto this righteousness of our own, and the necessity
thereof, testified unto by the law in its primitive constitution, by the
natural light of conscience, and the apprehension of the nature of things
by reason, the apostle declares, that in the gospel there is revealed
another righteousness, which is also the righteousness of another, the
righteousness of God, and that from faith to faith. For not only is the
righteousness itself reveals alien from those other principles, but also
the manner of our participation of it, or its communication unto us,
"from faith to faith" (the faith of God in the revelation, and our faith
in the acceptation of it, being only here concerned), is an eminent
revelation. Righteousness, of all things, should rather seem to be from
works unto works,--from the work of grace in us to the works of obedience
done by us, as the Papists affirm. "No," says the apostle, "it is 'from
faith to faith;'" whereof afterward.
This is the general thesis the apostle proposes unto confirmation; and
he seems therein to exclude from justification every thing but the
righteousness of God and the faith of believers. And to this purpose he
considers all persons that did or might pretend unto righteousness, or
seek after it, and all ways and means whereby they hoped to attain unto
it, or whereby it might most probably be obtained, declaring the failing
of all persons, and the insufficiency of all means as unto them, for the
obtaining a righteousness of our own before God. And as unto persons,--
1. He considers the Gentiles, with all their notions of God, their
practice in religious worship, with their conversation thereon: and from
the whole of what might be observed amongst them, he concludes, that they
neither were nor could be justified before God; but that they were all,
and most deservedly, obnoxious unto the sentence of death. And whatever
men may discourse concerning the justification and salvation of any
without the revelation of the righteousness of God by the gospel, "from
faith to faith," it is expressly contradictory to his whole discourse,
chap. 1, from verse 19 to the end.
2. He considers the Jews, who enjoyed the written law, and the
privileges wherewith it was accompanied, especially that of circumcision,
which was the outward seal of God's covenant: and on many considerations,
with many arguments, he excludes them also from any possibility of
attaining justification before God, by any of the privileges they
enjoyed, or their own compliance wherewithal, chap. 2. And both sorts he
excludes distinctly from this privilege of righteousness before God, with
this one argument, that both of them sinned openly against that which
they took for the rule of their righteousness,--namely, the Gentiles
against the light of nature, and the Jews against the law; whence it
inevitably follows, that none of them could attain unto the righteousness
of their own rule. But he proceeds farther, unto that which is common to
them all; and,--
3. He proves the same against all sorts of persons, whether Jews or
gentiles, from the consideration of the universal depravation of nature
in them all, and the horrible effects that necessarily ensue thereon in
the hearts and lives of men, chap. 3; so evidencing that as they all
were, so it could not fall out but that all must be shut up under sin,
and come short of righteousness. So, from persons he proceeds to things,
or means of righteousness. And,--
4. Because the law was given of God immediately, as the whole and only
rule of our obedience unto him, and the works of the law are therefore
all that is required of us, these may be pleaded with some pretence, as
those whereby we may be justified. Wherefore, in particular, he considers
the nature, use, and end of the law, manifesting its utter insufficiency
to be a means of our justification before God, chap.3:19,20.
5. It may be yet objected, that the law and its works may be thus
insufficient, as it is obeyed by unbelievers in the state of nature,
without the aids of grace administered in the promise; but with respect
unto them who are regenerate and do believe, whose faith and works are
accepted with God, it may be otherwise. To obviate this objection, he
gives an instance in two of the most eminent believers under the Old
Testament,--namely, Abraham and David, declaring that all works whatever
were excluded in and from their justification, chap. 4.
On these principles, and by this gradation, he peremptorily concludes
that all and every one of the sons of men, as unto any thing that is in
themselves, or can be done by them, or be wrought in them, are guilty
before God, obnoxious unto death, shut up under sin, and have their
mouths so stopped as to be deprived of all pleas in their own excuse;
that they had no righteousness wherewith to appear before God; and that
all the ways and means whence they expected it were insufficient unto
that purpose.
Hereon he proceeds with his inquiry, how men may be delivered from
this condition, and come to be justified in the sight of God. And in the
resolution hereof he makes no mention of any thing in themselves, but
only faith, whereby we receive the atonement. That whereby we are
justified, he says, is "the righteousness of God which is by the faith of
Christ Jesus;" or, that we are justified "freely by grace through the
redemption that is in him," chap.3:22-24. And not content here with this
answer unto the inquiry how lost convinced sinners may come to be
justified before God,--namely, that it is by the "righteousness of God,
revealed from faith to faith, by grace, by the blood of Christ," as he is
set forth for a propitiation,--he immediately proceeds unto a positive
exclusion of every thing in and of ourselves that might pretend unto an
interest herein, as that which is inconsistent with the righteousness of
God as revealed in the gospel, and witnessed unto by the law and the
prophets. How contrary their scheme of divinity is unto this design of
the apostle, and his management of it, who affirm, that before the law,
men were justified by obedience unto the light of nature, and some
particular revelations made unto them in things of their own especial
private concernment; and that after the giving of the law, they were so
by obedience unto God according to the directions thereof! as also, that
the heathen might obtain the same benefit in compliance with the dictates
of reason,--cannot be contradicted by any who have not a mind to be
contentious.
Answerable unto this declaration of the mind of the Holy Ghost herein
by the apostle, is the constant tenor of the Scripture speaking to the
same purpose. The grace of God, the promise of mercy, the free pardon of
sin, the blood of Christ, his obedience, and the righteousness of God in
him, rested in and received by faith, are everywhere asserted as the
causes and means of our justification, in opposition unto any thing in
ourselves, so expressed as it uses to express the best of our obedience,
and the utmost of our personal righteousness. Wherever mention is made of
the duties, obedience, and personal righteousness of the best of men,
with respect unto their justification, they are all renounced by them,
and they betake themselves unto sovereign grace and mercy alone. Some
places to this purpose may be recounted.
The foundation of the whole is laid in the first promise; wherein the
destruction of the work of the devil by the suffering of the seed of the
woman is proposed as the only relief for sinners, and only means of the
recovery of the favour of God. "It shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt
bruise his heel," Gen.3:15. "Abraham believed in the LORD; and he counted
it to him for righteousness," Gen.15:6. "And Aaron shall lay both his
hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the
iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all
their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat; and the goat shall
bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited,"
Lev.16:21,22. "I will go in the strength of the Lord GOD: I will make
mention of thy righteousness, even of thine only," Ps.71:16. "If thou,
LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O LORD, who shall stand? But there is
forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared," Ps.130:3,4. "Enter
not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no man living
be justified," Ps.143:2. "Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and
his angels he charged with folly: how much less in them that dwell in
houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust?" Job 4:18,19. "Fury is
not in me: who would set the briers and thorns against me in battle? I
would go through them, I would burn them together. Or let him take hold
of my strength, that he may make peace with me; and he shall make peace
with me," Isa.27:4,5. "Surely, shall one say, In the LORD have I
righteousness and strength: in the LORD shall all the seed of Israel be
justified, and shall glory," chap.45:24,25. "All we like sheep have gone
astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on
him the iniquity of us all. By his knowledge shall my righteous servant
justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities," chap.53:6,11. "This is
his name whereby he shall be called, The LORD our Righteousness,"
Jer.23:6. "But ye are all as an unclean thing, and all our
righteousnesses are as filthy rags," Isa.64:6. "He shall finish the
transgression, and make an end of sins, and make reconciliation for
iniquity, and bring in everlasting righteousness," Dan.9:24. "As many as
received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to
them that believe on his name," John 1:12. "As Moses lifted up the
serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life,"
chap.3:14,15. "Be it known unto you, therefore, men and brethren, that
through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by him
all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not
be justified by the law of Moses," Acts 13:38,39. "That they may receive
forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by
faith that is in me," chap.26:18. "Being justified freely by his grace
through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus; whom God has set forth to
be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his
righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the
forbearance of God; to declare at this time his righteousness: that he
might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Where
is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? Nay; but by the
law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith
without the deeds of the law," Rom.3:24-28. "For if Abraham were
justified by works, he has whereof to glory; but not before God. For what
saith the Scriptures Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him
for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of
grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him
that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even
as David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God
imputeth righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose
iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man
to whom the Lord will not impute sin," chap.4:2-8. "But not as the
offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many
be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by
one man, Jesus Christ, has abounded unto many. And not as it was by one
that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation,
but the free gift is of many offenses unto justification. For if by one
man's offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive
abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life
by one, Jesus Christ. Therefore, as by the offense of one judgment came
upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the
free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one
man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one
shall many be made righteous," chap.5:15-19. "There is therefore now no
condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the
flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ
Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law
could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the
flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us,"
chap.8:l-4. "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every
one that believeth," chap.10:4. "And if by grace, then is it no more of
works; otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is
it no more grace; otherwise work is no more work," chap.11:6. "But of him
are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption," 1 Cor.1:30. "For he
has made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the
righteousness of God in him," 2 Cor.5:21. "Knowing that a man is not
justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even
we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith
of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law
shall no flesh he justified," Gal.2:16. "But that no man is justified by
the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by
faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall
live in them. Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being
made a curse for us," chap.3:11-13. "For by grace are ye saved through
faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works,
lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ
Jesus unto good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk
in them," Eph.2:8-10. "Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for
the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have
suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may
win Christ, and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which
is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the
righteousness which is of God by faith," Phil.3:8,9. "Who has saved us,
and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but
according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ
Jesus before the world began," 2 Tim.1:9. "That being justified by his
grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life,"
Tit.3:7. "Once in the end of the world has he appeared, to put away sin,"
Heb.9:26,28. "Having by himself purged our sins," chap.1:3. "For by one
offering he has perfected forever them that are sanctified," chap.10:14.
"The blood of Jesus Christ God's Son cleanseth us from all sin," 1 John
1:7. Wherefore, "Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in
his own blood, and has made us kings and priests unto God and his Father;
to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen," Rev.1:5,6.
These are some of the places which at present occur to remembrance,
wherein the Scripture represents unto us the grounds, causes, and
reasons, of our acceptation with God. The especial import of many of
them, and the evidence of truth that is in them, will be afterwards
considered. Here we take only a general view of them. And every thing in
and of ourselves, under any consideration whatever, seems to be excluded
from our justification before God, faith alone excepted, whereby we
receive his grace and the atonement. And, on the other side, the whole of
our acceptation with him seems to be assigned unto grace, mercy, the
obedience and blood of Christ; in opposition unto our own worth and
righteousness, or our own works and obedience. And I cannot but suppose
that the soul of a convinced sinner, if not prepossessed with prejudice,
will, in general, not judge amiss whether of these things, that are set
in opposition one to the other, he should retake himself unto, that he
may be justified.
But it is replied,--These things are not to be understood absolutely,
and without limitations. Sundry distinctions are necessary, that we may
come to understand the mind of the Holy Ghost and sense of the Scripture
in these ascriptions unto grace, and exclusions of the law, our own works
and righteousness from our justification. For,--1. The law is either the
moral or the ceremonial law. The latter, indeed, is excluded from any
place in our justification, but not the former. 2. Works required by the
law are either wrought before faith, without the aid of grace; or after
believing, by the help of the Holy Ghost. The former are excluded from
our justification, but not the latter. 3. Works of obedience wrought
after grace received may be considered either as sincere only, or
absolutely perfect, according to what was originally required in the
covenant of works. Those of the latter sort are excluded from any place
in our justification, but not those of the former. 4. There is a twofold
justification before God in this life,--a first and a second; and we must
diligently consider with respect unto whether of these justifications any
thing is spoken in the Scripture. 5. Justification may be considered
either as to its beginning or as unto its continuation;--and so it has
divers causes under these diverse respects. 6. Works may be considered
either as meritorious "ex condigno", so as their merit should arise from
their own intrinsic worth; or "ex congruo" only, with respect unto the
covenant and promise of God. Those of the first sort are excluded, at
least from the first justification: the latter may have place both in the
first and second. 7. Moral causes may be of many sorts: preparatory,
dispository, meritorious, conditionally efficient, or only "sine quibus
non". And we must diligently inquire in what sense, under the notion of
what cause or causes, our works are excluded from our justification, and
under what notions they are necessary thereunto. And there is no one of
these distinctions but it needs many more to explain it; which,
accordingly, are made use of by learned men. And so specious a colour may
be put on these things, when warily managed by the art of disputation,
that very few are able to discern the ground of them, or what there is of
substance in that which is pleaded for; and fewer yet, on whether side
the truth does lie. But he who is really convinced of sin, and, being
also sensible of what it is to enter into judgment with the holy God,
inquires for himself, and not for others, how he may come to be accepted
with him, will be apt, upon the consideration of all these distinctions
and sub-distinctions wherewith they are attended, to say to their
authors, "Fecistis probe, incertior sum multo, quam dudum." My inquiry
is, How shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the high God?
How shall I escape the wrath to come? What shall I plead in judgment
before God, that I may be absolved, acquitted, justified? Where shall I
have a righteousness that will endure a trial in his presence? If I
should be harnessed with a thousand of these distinctions, I am afraid
they would prove thorns and briers, which he would pass through and
consume.
The inquiry, therefore is, upon the consideration of the state of the
person to be justified, before mentioned and described, and the proposal
of the reliefs in our justification as now expressed, whether it be the
wisest and safest course for such a person seeking to be justified before
God, to retake himself absolutely, his whole trust and confidence, unto
sovereign grace, and the mediation of Christ, or to have some reserve
for, or to place some confidence in, his own graces, duties, works, and
obedience? In putting this great difference unto umpirage, that we may
not be thought to fix on a partial arbitrator we shall refer it to one of
our greatest and most learned adversaries in this cause. And he
positively gives us in his determination and resolution in those known
words, in this case: "Propter incertitudinem propriae justitiae, et
periculum inanis gloriae, tutissimum est fiduciam totam in sola
misericordia Dei et benignitate reponere", Bellar. de Justificat., lib. 5
cap. 7, prop. 3;--"By reason of the uncertainty of our own righteousness,
and the danger of vain glory, it is the safest course to repose our whole
trust in the mercy and kindness or grace of God alone."
And this determination of this important inquiry he confirms with two
testimonies of Scripture, as he might have done it with many more. But
those which he thought meet to mention are not impertinent. The first is
Dan.9:18, "We do not present our supplications before thee for our
righteousnesses, but for thy great mercies;" and the other is that of our
Saviour, Luke 17:10, "When ye shall have done all those things which are
commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants." And after he has
confirmed his resolution with sundry testimonies of the fathers, he
closes his discourse with this dilemma: "Either a man has true merits, or
he has not. If he has not, he is perniciously deceived when he trusts in
any thing but the mercy of God alone, and seduces himself, trusting in
false merits; if he has them, he loses nothing whilst he looks not to
them, but trusts in God alone. So that whether a man have any good works
or no, as to his justification before God, it is best and safest for him
not to have any regard unto them, or put any trust in them." And if this
be so, he might have spared all his pains he took in writing his
sophistical books about justification, whose principal design is to
seduce the minds of men into a contrary opinion. And so, for aught I
know, they may spare their labour also, without any disadvantage unto the
church of God or their own souls, who so earnestly contend for some kind
of interest or other for our own duties and obedience in our
justification before God; seeing it will be found that they place their
own whole trust and confidence in the grace of God by Jesus Christ alone.
For to what purpose do we labour and strive with endless disputations,
arguments, and distinctions, to prefer our duties and obedience unto some
office in our justification before God, if; when we have done all, we
find it the safest course in our own persons to abhor ourselves with Job
in the presence of God, to retake ourselves unto sovereign grace and
mercy with the publican, and to place all our confidence in them through
the obedience and blood of Christ?
So died that great emperor, Charles V, as Thuanus gives the account of
his Novissima. So he reasoned with himself: "Se quidem indignum esse, qui
propriis meritis regnum coelorum obtineret; set Dominum Deum suum qui
illud duplici jure obtineat, et Patris haereditate, et passionis merito,
altero contentum esse, alterum sibi donare; ex cujus dono illud sibi
merito vendicet, hacque fiducia fretus minime confundatur; neque enim
oleum misericordiae nisi in vase fiduciae poni; hanc hominis fiduciam
esse a se deficientis et innitentis domino suo; alioquin propriis meritis
fidere, non fidei esse sed perfidiae; peccata deleri per Dei
indulgentiam, ideoque credere nos debere peccata deleri non posse nisi ab
eo cui soli peccavimus, et in quem peccatum non cadit, per quem solum
nobis peccata condonentur;"--"That in himself he was altogether unworthy
to obtain the kingdom of heaven by his own works or merits; but that his
Lord God, who enjoyed it on a double right or title, by inheritance of
the Father, and the merit of his own passion, was contented with the one
himself, and freely granted unto him the other; on whose free grant he
laid claim thereunto, and in confidence thereof he should not be
confounded; for the oil of mercy is poured only into the vessel of faith
or trust: that this is the trust of a man despairing in himself, and
resting in his Lord; otherwise, to trust unto his own works or merits, is
not faith, but treachery: that sins are blotted out by the mercy of God;
and therefore we ought to believe that our sins can be pardoned by him
alone, against whom alone we have sinned, with whom there is no sin, and
by whom alone sins are forgiven."
This is the faith of men when they come to die, and those who are
exercised with temptations whilst they live. Some are hardened in sin,
and endeavour to leave this world without thoughts of another; some are
stupidly ignorant, who neither know nor consider what it is to appear in
the presence of God, and to be judged by him; some are seduced to place
their confidence in merits, pardons, indulgences, and future suffrages
for the dead: but such as are acquainted with God and themselves in any
spiritual manner, who take a view of the time that is past, and
approaching eternity, into which they must enter by the judgment-seat of
God, however they may have thought, talked, and disputed about their own
works and obedience, looking on Christ and his righteousness only to make
up some small defects in themselves, will come at last unto a universal
renunciation of what they have been, and are, and retake themselves unto
Christ alone for righteousness or salvation. And in the whole ensuing
discourse I shall as little as is possible immix myself in any curious
scholastical disputes. This is the substance of what is pleaded for,--
that men should renounce all confidence in themselves, and every thing
that may give countenance whereunto; retaking themselves unto the grace
of God by Christ alone for righteousness and salvation. This God designs
in the gospel, 1 Cor.1:29-31; and herein, whatever difficulties we may
meet withal in the explication of some propositions and terms that belong
unto the doctrine of justification, about which men have various
conceptions, I doubt not of the internal concurrent suffrage of them who
know any thing as they ought of God and themselves.
Fifthly, A commutation as unto sin and righteousness, by imputation,
between Christ and believers, represented in the Scripture--The ordinance
of the scapegoat, Lev.16:21,22--The nature of expiatory sacrifices,
Lev.4:29, etc.--Expiation of an uncertain murder, Deut.21:1-9--The
commutation intended proved and vindicated, Isa.53:5,6; 2 Cor.5:21;
Rom.8:3,4; Gal.3:13,14; 1 Pet.2:24; Deut.21:23--Testimonies of Justin
Martyr, Gregory Nyseen, Augustine, Chrysostom, Bernard, Taulerus,
Pighius, to that purpose--The proper actings of faith with respect
thereunto, Rom.5:11; Matt.11:28; Ps.38:4; Gen.4:13; Isa.53:11; Gal.3:1;
Isa.45:22; John 3:14,15--A bold calumny answered
Fifthly. There is in the Scripture represented unto us a commutation
between Christ and believers, as unto sin and righteousness; that is, in
the imputation of their sins unto him, and of his righteousness unto
them. In the improvement and application hereof unto our own souls, no
small part of the life and exercise of faith does consist.
This was taught the church of God in the offering of the scapegoat:
"And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and
confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all
their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the
goat. And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities,"
Lev.16:21,22. Whether this goat sent away with this burden upon him did
live, and so was a type of the life of Christ in his resurrection after
his death; or whether he perished in the wilderness, being cast down the
precipice of a rock by him that conveyed him away, as the Jews suppose;
it is generally acknowledged, that what was done to him and with him was
only a representation of what was done really in the person of Jesus
Christ. And Aaron did not only confess the sins of the people over the
goat, but he also put them all on his head, "wenatan 'otam al-rosh
hassa'ir",--"And he shall give them all to be on the head of the goat."
In answer whereunto it is said, that he bare them all upon him. This he
did by virtue of the divine institution, wherein was a ratification of
what was done. He did not transfuse sin from one subject into another,
but transferred the guilt of it from one to another; and to evidence this
translation of sin from the people unto the sacrifice, in his confession,
"he put and fixed both his hands on his head." Thence the Jews say, "that
all Israel was made as innocent on the day of expiation as they were on
the day of creation;" from verse 30. Wherein they came short of
perfection or consummation thereby the apostle declares, Heb.10. But this
is the language of every expiatory sacrifice, "Quod in ejus caput sit;"--
"Let the guilt be on him." Hence the sacrifice itself was called "chatat"
and "'ashan",--"sin" and "guilt," Lev.4:29; 7:2; 10:17. And therefore,
where there was an uncertain murder, and none could be found that was
liable to punishment thereon, that guilt might not come upon the land,
nor the sin be imputed unto the whole people, a heifer was to be slain by
the elders of the city that was next unto the place where the murder was
committed, to take away the guilt of it, Deut.21:1-9. But whereas this
was only a moral representation of the punishment due to guilt, and no
sacrifice, the guilty person being not known, those who slew the heifer
did not put their hands on him, so as to transfer their own guilt to him,
but washed their hands over him, to declare their personal innocence. By
these means, as in all other expiatory sacrifices, did Cod instruct the
church in the transferring of the guilt of sin unto Him who was to bear
all their iniquities, with their discharge and justification thereby.
So "God laid on Christ the iniquities of us all," that "by his stripes
we might be healed," Isa.53:5,6. Our iniquity was laid on him, and he
bare it, verse 11; and through his bearing of it we are freed from it.
His stripes are our healing. Our sin was his, imputed unto him; his merit
is ours, imputed unto us. "He was made sin for us, who knew no sin; that
we might become the righteousness of God in him," 2 Cor.5:21. This is
that commutation I mentioned: he was made sin for us; we are made the
righteousness of God in him. God not imputing sin unto us, verse 19, but
imputing righteousness unto us, does it on this ground alone that "he was
made sin for us." And if by his being made sin, only his being made a
sacrifice for sin is intended, it is to the same purpose; for the formal
reason of any thing being made an expiatory sacrifice, was the imputation
of sin unto it by divine institution. The same is expressed by the same
apostle, Rom.8:3,4, "God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful
flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of
the law might be fulfilled in us." The sin was made his, he answered for
it; and the righteousness which God requireth by the law is made ours:
the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us, not by our doing it, but
by his. This is that blessed change and commutation wherein alone the
soul of a convinced sinner can find rest and peace. So he "has redeemed
us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us, that the
blessing of Abraham might come on us," Gal.3:13,14. The curse of the law
contained all that was due to sin. This belonged unto us; but it was
transferred on him. He was made a curse; whereof his hanging on a tree
was the sign and token. Hence he is said to "bear our sins in his own
body on the tree," 1 Pet.2:24; because his hanging on the tree was the
token of his bearing the curse: "For he that is hanged is the curse of
God," Dent.21:23. And in the blessing of faithful Abraham all
righteousness and acceptation with God is included; for Abraham believed
God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness.
But because some, who, for reasons best known unto themselves, do take
all occasions to except against my writings, have in particular raised an
impertinent glamour about somewhat that I formerly delivered to this
purpose, I shall declare the whole of my judgment herein in the words of
some of those whom they can pretend no quarrel against, that I know of.
The excel1ent words of Justin Martyr deserve the first place: "Autos
ton idion huion apedoto lutron huper hemoon, ton hagion huper anomoon,
ton akakon huper toon kakoon, ton dikaion huper toon adikoon, ton
aftarton huper toon ftartoon, ton atanaton huper toon tnetoon, ti gar
allo tas hamartias hemoon edunete kalupsai, e ekeinou dikaiosune; en tini
dikaiootenai dunaton tous anomous hemas kai aseteis, e en monooi tooi
huioo tou Theou; oo tes glukeias antallages, oo tes anexichniastou
demiourgias, oo toon aprosdoketoon euergesioon, hina anomia men polloon
en dikaiooi heni krute, dikaiosune de henos pollous anomous dikaioosei,"
Epist. ad Diognet.;--"He gave his Son a ransom for us;--the holy for
transgressors; the innocent for the nocent; the just for the unjust; the
incorruptible for the corrupt; the immortal for mortals. For what else
could hide or cover our sins but his righteousness? In whom else could we
wicked and ungodly ones be justified, or esteemed righteous, but in the
Son of God alone? O sweet permutation, or change! O unsearchable work, or
curious operation! O blessed beneficence, exceeding all expectations that
the iniquity of many should be hid in one just one, and the righteousness
of one should justify many transgressors." And Gregory Nyssen speaks to
the same purpose: "Metatheis gar pros heauton ton toon hemoon hamartioon
thupon, metedooke moi tes heautou kathapotetos, koinoonon me tou heautou
kallous apergasamenos", Orat. 2 in Cant.;--"He has transferred unto
himself the filth of my sins, and communicated unto me his purity, and
made me partaker of his beauty." So Augustine, also: "Ipse peccatum ut
nos justitia, nec nostra sed Dei, nec in nobis sed in ipso; sicut ipse
peccatum, non suum sed nostrum, nec in se sed in nobis constitutum",
Enchirid. ad Laurent., cap.41;--"He was sin, that we might be
righteousness; not our own, but the righteousness of God; not in
ourselves, but in him; as he was sin, not his own, but ours,--not in
himself, but in us." The old Latin translation renders those words,
Ps.22:1, "divrei sha'agati"--"Verba delictorum meorum". He thus comments
on the place: "Quomodo ergo dicit, 'Delictorum meorum?' nisi quia pro
delictis nostris ipse precatur; et delicta nostra delicta sua fecit, ut
justitiam suam nostram justitiam faceret;"--"How says he, 'Of my sins?'
Because he prayeth for our sins; he made our sins to be his, that he
might make his righteousness to be ours. "Oo tes glukeias antallages." "O
sweet commutation and change!" And Chrysostom, to the same purpose, on
those words of the apostle,-- "That we might be made the righteousness of
God in him:" Poios tauta logos, poios tauta parastesai dunesetai vous;
ton gar dikaion, fesin, epoiesen hamartoolon, hina tous hamartoolous
poiesei dikaious, mallon de oude houtoos eipen, alla ho pollooi mekzon
en, ou gar hexin ethekein, all' auten ten poioteta, ou gar eipen,
epoiesen hamartoolon, all' hamartian, ouchi ton me hamartanonta monon,
alla ton mede gnonta hamartian, hina kai hemeis genoometha, ouk eipe,
dikaioi, alle dikaiosune, kai Theou dikaiosune, Theou gar estin haute,
hotan me ex ergoon (hotan kai kelida ananke tina me heurethenai) all' apo
xaritos dikaioothoomen, entha pasa hamartia efanistai", 2 Epist. ad
Corinth. cap.5 Hom.11;--"What word, what speech is this? What mind can
comprehend or express it? For he says, 'He made him who was righteous to
be made a sinner, that he might make sinners righteous. Nor yet does he
say so neither, but that which is far more sublime and excellent; for he
speaks not of an inclination or affection, but expresses the quality
itself. For he says not, he made him a sinner, but sin; that we might be
made, not merely righteous, but righteousness, and that the righteousness
of God, when we are justified not by works (for if we should, there must
be no spot found in them), but by grace, whereby all sin is blotted out."
So Bernard also, Epist.190, ad Innocent:--"Homo siquidem qui debuit; homo
qui solvit. Nam 'si unus,' inquit, 'pro omnibus mortuus est, ergo omnes
mortui sunt;' ut videlicet satisfactio unius omnibus imputetur, sicut
omnium peccata unus ille portavit: nec alter jam inveniatur, qui
forisfecit, alter qui satisfecit; quia caput et corpus unus est
Christus." And many more speak unto the same purpose. Hence Luther,
before he engaged in the work of reformation, in an epistle to one George
Spenlein, a monk, was not afraid to write after this manner: "Mi dulcis
frater, disce Christum et hunc crucifixum, disce ei cantare, et de teipso
desperant dicere ei; tu Domine Jesu es justitia mea, ego autem sum
peccatum tuum; tu assumpsisti meum, et dedisti mihi tuum; assumpsisti
quod non eras, et dedisti mihi quod non eram. Ipse suscepit te et peccata
tua fecit sua, et suam justitiam fecit tuam; maledictus qui haec non
credit!" Epist. an. 1516, tom.1
If those who show themselves now so quarrelsome almost about every
word that is spoken concerning Christ nd his righteousness, had ever been
harassed in their consciences about the guilt of sin, as this man was,
they would think it no strafe matter to speak and write as he did. Yea,
some there are who have lived and died in the communion of the church of
Rome itself, that have given their testimony unto this truth. So speaks
Taulerus, Meditat. Vitae Christ. cap.7: "Christus omnia mundi peccata in
se recepit, tantumque pro illis ultro sibi assumpsis dolerem cordis, ac
si ipse ea perpetrasset;"--"Christ took upon him all the sins of the
world, and willingly underwent that grief of heart for them, as if he
himself had committed them". And again, speaking in the person of Christ:
"Quandoquidem peccatum Adae multum abire non potest, obsecro te Pater
coelestis, ut ipsum in me vindices. Ego enim omnia illius peccata in me
recipio. Si haec irae tempestas, propter me orta est, mitte me in mare
amarissimae passionis;"--"Whereas the great sin of Adam cannot go away, I
beseech thee, heavenly Father, punish it in me. For I take all his sins
upon myself If, then, this tempest of anger be risen for me, cast me into
the sea of my most bitter passion." See, in the justification of these
expressions, Heb.10:5-10. The discourse of Albertus Pighius to this
purpose, though often cited and urged, shall be once again repeated, both
for its worth and truth, as also to let some men see how fondly they have
pleased themselves in reflecting on some expressions of mine, as though I
had been singular in them. His words are, after others to the same
purpose: "Quoniam quidem inquit (apostolus) Deus erat in Christo, mundum
reconcilians sibi, non imputans hominibus sua delicta, et deposuit apud
nos verbum reconciliationis; in illo ergo justificamur coram Deo, non in
nobis; non nostra sed illius justitia, quae nobis cum illo jam
communicantibus imputatur. Propriae justitiae inopes, extra nos, in illo
docemur justitiam quaerere. Cum inquit, ui peccatum non noverat, pro
nobis peccatum fecit; hoc est, hostiam peccati expiatricem, ut nos
efficeremur justitia Dei in ipso, non nostra, sed Dei justitia justi
efficimur in Christo; quo jure? Amicitiae, quae communionem omnium inter
amicor facit, juxta vetus et celebratissimum proverbium; Christo
insertis, conglutinatis, et unitis, et sua nostra facit, suas divitias
nobis communicat, suam justitiam inter Patris judicium et nostram
injustitiam interponit, et sub ea veluti sub umbone ac clypeo a divina,
quam commeruimus, ira nos abscondit, tuetur ac protegit; imo eandem nobis
impertit et nostram facit, qua tecti ornatique audacter et secure jam
divino nos sistamus tribunali et judicio: justique non solum appareamus,
sed etiam simus. Quemadmodum enim unius delicto peccatoris nos etiam
factor affirmat apostolus: ita unius Christi justitiam in justificandis
nobis omnibus efficacem esse; et sicut per inobedientiam unius hominis
peccatores constituti sunt multi sic per obedientiam unius justi (inquit)
constituentur multi. Haec est christi justitia,ejus obedientia, qua
voluntatem Patris sui perfecit in omnibus; sicut contra nostra injustitia
est nostra inobedientia, et mandatorum Dei praevaricatio. In Christi
autem obedientia quod nostra collocatur justitia inde est, quod nobis
illi incorporatis, ac si nostra esset, accepta ea fertur: ut ea ipsa
etiam nos justi habeamur. Et velut ille quondam Jacob, quum nativitate
primogenitus non esset, sub habitu fratris occultatus, atque ejus veste
indutus, quae odorem optimum spirabat, seipsum insinuavit patri, ut sub
aliena persona benedictionem primogeniturae acciperet: ita et nos sub
Christi primogeniti fratris nostri preciosa puritate delitescere, bono
ejus odore fragrare, ejus perfectione vitia nostra sepeliri et obtegi,
atque ita nos pissimo Patri ingerere, ut justitiae benedictionem ab eodem
assequamur, necesse est". And afterwards: "Justificat erno nos Deus Pater
bonitate sua gratuita, qua nos in Christo complectitur, dum eidem
insertos innocentia et justitia Christi nos induit; quae una et vera et
perfecta est, quae Dei sustinere conspectum potest, ita unam pro nobis
sisti oportet tribunali divini judicii et veluti causae nostrae
intercessorem eidem repraesentari: qua subnixi etiam hic obtineremus
remissionem peccatorum nostrorum assiduam: cujus puritate velatae non
imputentur nobis sordes nostrae, imperfectionum immunditiae, sed veluti
sepultae conteguntur, ne in judicium Dei veniant: donec confecto in
nobis, et plane extincto veteri homine, divina bonitas nos in beatam
pacem cum novo Adam recipiat;"--"'God was in Christ,' says the apostle,
'reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing unto men their sins,'
['and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.'] In him,
therefore, we are justified before God; not in ourselves, not by our own,
but by his righteousness, which is imputed unto us, now communicating
with him. Wanting righteousness of our own, we are taught to seek for
righteousness without ourselves, in him. So he says, 'Him who knew no
sin, he made to be sin for us' (that is, an expiatory sacrifice for sin),
'that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.' We are made
righteous in Christ, not with our own, but with the righteousness of God.
By what right? The right of friendship, which makes all common among
friends, according unto the ancient celebrated proverb. Being in grafted
into Christ, fastened, united unto him, he makes his things ours,
communicates his riches unto us, interposes his righteousness between the
judgment of God and our unrighteousness: and under that, as under a
shield and buckler, he hides us from that divine wrath which we have
deserved, he defends and protects us therewith; yea, he communicates it
unto us and makes it ours, so as that, being covered and adorned
therewith, we may boldly and securely place ourselves before the divine
tribunal and judgment, so as not only to appear righteous, but so to be.
For even as the apostle affirms, that by one man's fault we were all made
sinners, so is the righteousness of Christ alone efficacious in the
justification of us all: 'And as by the disobedience of one man many were
made sinners, so by the obedience of one man,' says he, 'many are made
righteous.' This is the righteousness of Christ, even his obedience,
whereby in all things he fulfilled the will of his Father; as, on the
other hand, our unrighteousness is our disobedience and our transgression
of the commands of God. But that our righteousness is placed in the
obedience of Christ, it is from hence, that we being incorporated into
him, it is accounted unto us as if it were ours; so as that therewith we
are esteemed righteous. And as Jacob of old, whereas he was not the
firstborn, being hid under the habit of his brother, and clothed with his
garment, which breathed a sweet savour, presented himself unto his
father, that in the person of another he might receive the blessing of
the primogeniture; so it is necessary that we should lie hid under the
precious purity of the First-born, our eldest brother, be fragrant with
his sweet savour, and have our sin buried and covered with his
perfections, that we may present ourselves before our most holy Father,
to obtain from him the blessing of righteousness." And again: "God,
therefore, does justify us by his free grace or goodness, wherewith he
embraces us in Christ Jesus, when he clotheth us with his innocence and
righteousness, as we are ingrafted into him; for as that alone is true
and perfect which only can endure in the sight of God, so that alone
ought to be presented and pleaded for us before the divine tribunal, as
the advocate of or plea in our cause. Resting hereon, we here obtain the
daily pardon of sin; with whose purity being covered, our filth, and the
uncleanness of our imperfections are not imputed unto us, but are covered
as if they were buried, that they may not come into the judgment of God;
until, the old man being destroyed and slain in us, divine goodness
receives us into peace with the second Adam". So far he, expressing the
power which the influence of divine truth had on his mind, contrary to
the interest of the cause wherein he was engaged, and the loss of his
reputation with them; for whom in all other things he was one of the
fiercest champions. And some among the Roman church, who cannot bear this
assertion of the commutation of sin and righteousness by imputation
between Christ and believers, no more than some among ourselves, do yet
affirm the same concerning the righteousness of other men: "Mercaturam
quandam docere nos Paulus videtur. Abundatis, inquit, vos pecunia, et
estis inopes justitiae; contra, illi abundant justitia et sunt inopes
pecuniae; fiat quaedam commutatio; date vos piis egentibus pecuniam quae
vobis affluit, et illis deficit; sic futurum est, ut illi vicissim
justitiam suam qua abundant, et qua vos estis destituti, vobis
communicent." Hosius, De Expresso Dei Verbo, tom. 2 p.21. But I have
mentioned these testimonies, principally to be a relief unto some men's
ignorance, who are ready to speak evil of what they understand not.
This blessed permutation as unto sin and righteousness is represented
unto us in the Scripture as a principal object of our faith,-- as that
whereon our peace with God is founded. And although both these (the
imputation of sin unto Christ, and the imputation of righteousness unto
us) be the acts of God, and not ours, yet are we by faith to exemplify
them in our own souls, and really to perform what on our part is required
unto their application unto us; whereby we receive "the atonement,"
Rom.5:11. Christ calls unto him all those that "labour and are heavy
laden," Matt.11:28. The weight that is upon the consciences of men,
wherewith they are laden, is the burden of sin. So the psalmist complains
that his "sins were a burden too heavy for him," Ps.38:4. Such was Cain's
apprehension of his guilt, Gen.4:13. This burden Christ bare, when it was
laid on him by divine estimation. For so it is said, "wa'awonotam hu
jisbol", Isa.53:11,-- "He shall bear their iniquities" on him as a
burden. And this he did when God made to meet upon him "the iniquity of
us all," verse 6. In the application of this unto our own souls, as it is
required that we be sensible of the weight and burden of our sins and how
it is heavier than we can bear; so the Lord Christ calls us unto him with
it, that we may be eased. This he does in the preachings of the gospel,
wherein he is "evidently crucified before our eyes," Gal.3:1. In the view
which faith has of Christ crucified (for faith is a "looking unto him,"
Isa.45:22; 65:1, answering their looking unto the brazen serpent who were
stung with fiery serpents, John 3:14,15), and under a sense of his
invitation (for faith is our coming unto him, upon his call and
invitation) to come unto him with our burdens, a believer considers that
God has laid all our iniquities upon him; yea, that he has done so, is an
especial object whereon faith is to act itself, which is faith in his
blood. Hereon does the soul approve of and embrace the righteousness and
grace of God, with the infinite condescension and love of Christ himself.
It gives its consent that what is thus done is what becomes the infinite
wisdom and grace of God; and therein it rests. Such a person seeks no
more to establish his own righteousness, but submits to the righteousness
of God. Herein, by faith, does he leave that burden on Christ which he
called him to bring with him, and complies with the wisdom and
righteousness of God in laying it upon him. And herewithal does he
receive the everlasting righteousness which the Lord Christ brought in
when he made an end of sin, and reconciliation for transgressors.
The reader may be pleased to observe, that I am not debating these
things argumentatively, in such propriety of expressions as are required
in a scholastic disputation; which shall be done afterwards, so far as I
judge it necessary. But I am doing that which indeed is better, and of
more importance,--namely, declaring the experience of faith in the
expressions of the Scripture, or such as are analogous unto them. And I
had rather be instrumental in the communication of light and knowledge
unto the meanest believer, than to have the clearest success against
prejudiced disputers. Wherefore, by faith thus acting are we justified,
and have peace with God. Other foundation in this matter can no man lay,
that will endure the trial.
Nor are we to be moved, that men who are unacquainted with these
things in their reality and power do reject the whole work of faith
herein, as an easy effort of fancy or imagination. For the preaching of
the cross is foolishness unto the best of the natural wisdom of men;
neither can any understand them but by the Spirit of God. Those who know
the terror of the Lord, who have been really convinced and made sensible
of the guilt of their apostasy from God, and of their actual sins in that
state, and what a fearful thing it is to fall into the hands of the
living God,--seeking thereon after a real solid foundation whereon they
may be accepted with him,--have other thoughts of these things, and do
find believing a thing to be quite of another nature than such men
suppose. It is not a work of fancy or imagination unto men, to deny and
abhor themselves, to subscribe unto the righteousness of God in
denouncing death as due to their sins, to renounce all hopes and
expectations of relief from any righteousness of their own, to mix the
word and promise of God concerning Christ and righteousness by him with
faith, so as to receive the atonement, and wherewithal to give up
themselves unto a universal obedience unto God. And as for them unto
whom, through pride and self-conceit on the one hand, or ignorance on the
other, it is so, we have in this matter no concernment with them. For
unto whom these things are only the work of fancy, the gospel is a fable.
Something unto this purpose I had written long since, in a practical
discourse concerning "Communion with God." And whereas some men of an
inferior condition have found it useful, for the strengthening themselves
in their dependencies on some of their superiors, or in compliance with
their own inclinations, to cavil at my writings and revile their author,
that book has been principally singled out to exercise their faculty and
good intentions upon. This course is steered of late by one Mr Hotchkis,
in a book about justification, wherein, in particular, be falls very
severely on that doctrine, which, for the substance of it, is here again
proposed, p.81. And were it not that I hope it may be somewhat useful
unto him to be a little warned of his immoralities in that discourse, I
should not in the least have taken notice of his other impertinencies.
The good man, I perceive, can be angry with persons whom he never saw,
and about things which he can not or will not understand, so far as to
revile them with most opprobrious language. For my part, although I have
never written any thing designedly on this subject, or the doctrine of
justification, before now, yet he could not but discern, by what was
occasionally delivered in that discourse, that I maintain no other
doctrine herein but what was the common faith of the most learned men in
all Protestant churches. And the reasons why I am singled out for the
object of his petulancy and spleen are too manifest to need repetition.
But I shall yet inform him of what, perhaps, he is ignorant,--namely,
that I esteem it no small honour that the reproaches wherewith the
doctrine opposed by him is reproached do fall upon me. And the same I say
concerning all the reviling and contemptuous expressions that his ensuing
pages are filled withal. But as to the present occasion, I beg his excuse
if I believe him not, that the reading of the passages which he mentions
out of my book filled him with "horror and indignation," as he pretends.
For whereas he acknowledges that my words may have a sense which he
approves of (and which, therefore, must of necessity be good and sound),
what honest and sober person would not rather take them in that sense,
then wrest them unto another, so as to cast himself under the
disquietment of a fit of horrible indignation? In this fit I suppose it
was, if such a fit, indeed, did befall him (as one evil begets another),
that he thought he might insinuate something of my denial of the
necessity of our own personal repentance and obedience. For no man who
had read that book only of all my writings, could, with the least regard
to conscience or honesty, give countenance unto such a surmise, unless
his mind was much discomposed by the unexpected invasion of a fit of
horror. But such is his dealing with me from first to last; nor do I know
where to fix on any one instance of his exceptions against me, wherein I
can suppose he had escaped his pretended fit and was returned unto
himself,--that is, unto honest and ingenuous thoughts; wherewith I hope
he is mostly conversant. But though I cannot miss in the justification of
this charge by considering any instance of his reflections, yet I shall
at present take that which he insists longest upon, and fills his
discourse about it with most scurrility of expressions. And this is in
the 164th page of his book, and those that follow; for there he disputes
fiercely against me for making this to be an "undue end of our serving
God,--namely, that we may flee from the wrath to come". And who would not
take this for an inexpiable crime in any, especially in him who has
written so much of the nature and use of threatening under the gospel,
and the fear that ought to be in generated by them in the hearts of men,
as I have done Wherefore so great a crime being the object of them all,
his revilings seem not only to be excused but allowed. Eat what if all
this should prove a wilful prevarication, not becoming a good man, much
less a minister of the gospel? My words, as reported and transcribed by
himself; are these: "Some there are that do the service of the house of
God as the drudgery of their lives; the principle they yield obedience
upon is a spirit of bondage unto fear; the rule they do it by is the law
in its dread and rigour, exacting it of them to the utmost without mercy
or mitigation; the end they do it for is to fly from the wrath to come,
to pacify conscience, and to seek for righteousness as it were by the
works of the law." What follow unto the same purpose he omits, and what
he adds as my words are not so, but his own; "ubi pudor, ubi fides?" That
which I affirmed to be a part of an evil end, when and as it makes up one
entire end, by being mixed with sundry other things expressly mentioned,
is singled out, as if I had denied that in any sense it might be a part
of a good end in our obedience: which I never thought, I never said; I
have spoken and written much to the contrary. And yet, to countenance
himself in this disingenuous procedure, besides many other untrue
reflections, he adds that I insinuate, that those whom I describe are
"Christians that seek righteousness by faith in Christ", p.167. I must
needs tell this author that my faith in this matter is, that such works
as these will have no influence in his justification; and that the
principal reason why I suppose I shall not, in my progress in this
discourse, take any particular notice of his exceptions, either against
the truth or me,--next unto this consideration, that they are all trite
and obsolete, and, as to what seems to be of any force in them, will
occur unto me in other authors from whom they are derived,--is, that I
may not have a continual occasion to declare how forgetful he has been of
all the rules of ingenuity, yea, and of common honesty, in his dealing
with me. For that which gave the occasion unto this present unpleasing
digression,--it being no more, as to the substance of it, but that our
sins were imputed unto Christ, and that his righteousness is imputed unto
us,--it is that in the faith whereof I am assured I shall live and die,
though he should write twenty as learned books against it as those which
he has already published; and in what sense I do believe these things
shall be afterwards declared. And although I judge no men upon the
expressions that fall from them in polemical writings, wherein, on many
occasions, they do affront their own experience, and contradict their own
prayers; yet, as to those who understand not that blessed commutation of
sins and righteousness, as to the substance of it, which I have pleaded
for, and the acting of our faith with respect thereunto, I shall be bold
to say, "that if the gospel be hid, it is hid to them that perish."
Sixthly, Introduction of grace by Jesus Christ into the whole of our
relation unto God, and its respect unto all the parts of our obedience--
No mystery of grace in the covenant of works--All religion originally
commensurate unto reason--No notions of natural light concerning the
introduction of the mediation of Christ and mystery of grace, into our
relation to God, Eph.1:17-19--Reason, as corrupted, can have no notions
of religion but what are derived from its primitive state--Hence the
mysteries of the gospel esteemed folly--Reason, as corrupted, repugnant
unto the mystery of grace--Accommodation of spiritual mysteries unto
corrupt reason, wherefore acceptable unto many--Reasons of it--Two parts
of corrupted nature's repugnancy unto the mystery of the gospel:--1. That
which would reduce it unto the private reason of men--Thence the Trinity
denied, and the incarnation of the Son of God; without which the doctrine
of justification cannot stand--Rule of the Socinians in the
interpretation of the Scripture--2. Want of a due comprehension of the
harmony that is between all the parts of the mystery of grace--This
harmony proved--Compared with the harmony in the works of nature--To be
studied--But it is learned only of them who are taught of God; and in
experience--Evil effects of the want of a due comprehension hereof--
Instances of them--All applied unto the doctrine of justification
Sixthly. We can never state our thoughts aright in this matter, unless
we have a clear apprehension of, and satisfaction in, the introduction of
grace by Jesus Christ into the whole of our relation unto God, with its
respect unto all parts of our obedience. There was no such thing, nothing
of that nature or kind, in the first constitution of that relation and
obedience by the law of our creation. We were made in a state of
immediate relation unto God in our own persons, as our creator,
preserver, and rewarder. There was no mystery of grace in the covenant of
works. No more was required unto the consummation of that state but what
was given us in our creation, enabling us unto rewardable obedience. "Do
this, and live," was the sole rule of our relation unto God. There was
nothing in religion originally of that which the gospel celebrates under
the name of the grace, kindness, and love of God, whence all our
favourable relation unto God does now proceed, and whereinto it is
resolved; nothing of the interposition of a mediator with respect unto
our righteousness before God, and acceptance with him;--which is at
present the life and soul of religion, the substance of the gospel, and
the centre of all the truths revealed in it. The introduction of these
things is that which makes our religion a mystery, yea, a "great
mystery," if the apostle may be believed, 1 Tim.3:16. All religion at
first was suited and commensurable unto reason; but being now become a
mystery, men for the most part are very unwilling to receive it. But so
it must be; and unless we are restored unto our primitive rectitude, a
religion suited unto the principles of our reason (of which it has none
but what answer that first state) will not serve our turns.
Wherefore, of this introduction of Christ and grace in him into our
relation unto God, there are no notions in the natural conceptions of our
minds; nor are they discoverable by reason in the best and utmost of its
exercise, 1 Cor.2:14. For before our understanding were darkened, and our
reason debased by the fall, there were no such things revealed or
proposed unto us; yea, the supposition of them is inconsistent with, and
contradictory unto, that whole state and condition wherein we were to
live to God,--seeing they all suppose the entrance of sin. And it is not
likely that our reason, as now corrupted, should be willing to embrace
that which it knew nothing of in its best condition, and which was
inconsistent with that way of attaining happiness which was absolutely
suited unto it: for it has no faculty or power but what it has derived
from that state; and to suppose it is now of itself suited and ready to
embrace such heavenly mysteries of truth and grace as it had no notions
of, nor could have, in the state of innocence, is to suppose that by the
fall our eyes were opened to know good and evil, in the sense that the
serpent deceived our first parents with an expectation of. Whereas,
therefore, our reason was given us for our only guide in the first
constitution of our natures, it is naturally unready to receive what is
above it; and, as corrupted, has an enmity thereunto.
Hence, in the first open proposal of this mystery,--namely, of the
love and grace of God in Christ, of the introduction of a mediator and
his righteousness into our relation unto God, in that way which God in
infinite wisdom had designed,--the whole of it was looked on as mere
folly by the generality of the wise and rational men of the world, as the
apostle declares at large, 1 Cor.1; neither was the faith of them ever
really received in the world without an act of the Holy Ghost upon the
mind in its renovation. And those who judge that there is nothing more
needful to enable the mind of man to receive the mysteries of the gospel
in a due manner but the outward proposal of the doctrine thereof, do not
only deny the depravation of our nature by the fall, but, by just
consequence, wholly renounce that grace whereby we are to be recovered.
Wherefore, reason (as has been elsewhere proved), acting on and by its
own innate principles and abilities, conveyed unto it from its original
state, and as now corrupted, is repugnant unto the whole introduction of
grace by Christ into our relation unto God, Rom.8:7. An endeavour,
therefore, to reduce the doctrine of the gospel, or what is declared
therein concerning the hidden mystery of the grace of God in Christ, unto
the principles and inclinations of the minds of men, or reason as it
remains in us after the entrance of sin,--under the power, at least, of
those notions and conceptions of things religious which it retains from
its first state and condition,--is to debase and corrupt them (as we
shall see in sundry instances), and so make way for their rejection.
Hence, very difficult it is to keep up doctrinally and practically the
minds of men unto the reality and spiritual height of this mystery; for
men naturally do neither understand it nor like it: and therefore, every
attempt to accommodate it unto the principles and inbred notions of
corrupt reason is very acceptable unto many, yea, unto the most; for the
things which such men speak and declare, are, without more ado,--without
any exercise of faith or prayer, without any supernatural illumination,--
easily intelligible, and exposed to the common sense of mankind. But
whereas a declaration of the mysteries of the gospel can obtain no
admission into the minds of men but by the effectual working of the
Spirit of God, Eph.1:17-19, it is generally looked on as difficult,
perplexed, unintelligible; and even the minds of many, who find they
cannot contradict it, are yet not at all delighted with it. And here lies
the advantage of all them who, in these days, do attempt to corrupt the
doctrine of the gospel, in the whole or any part of it; for the
accommodation of it unto the common notions of corrupted reason is the
whole of what they design. And in the confidence of the suffrage hereof,
they not only oppose the things themselves, but despise the declaration
of them as enthusiastical canting. And by nothing do they more prevail
themselves than by a pretence of reducing all things to reason, and
contempt of what they oppose, as unintelligible fanaticism. But I am not
more satisfied in any thing of the most uncontrollable evidence, than
that the understandings of these men are no just measure or standard of
spiritual truth. Wherefore, notwithstanding all this fierceness of scorn,
with the pretended advantages which some think they have made by
traducing expressions in the writings of some men, it may be improper, it
maybe only not suited unto their own genius and capacity in these things,
we are not to be "ashamed of the gospel of Christ, which is the power of
God unto salvation to every one that believeth".
Of this repugnancy unto the mystery of the wisdom and grace of God in
Christ, and the foundation of its whole economy, in the distinct
operations of the persons of the holy Trinity therein, there are two
parts or branches:--
1. That which would reduce the whole of it unto the private reason of
men, and their own weak, imperfect management thereof. This is the entire
design of the Socinians. Hence,--
(1.) The doctrine of the Trinity itself is denied, impugned, yea,
derided by them; and that solely on this account. They plead that it is
incomprehensible by reason; for there is in that doctrine a declaration
of things absolutely infinite and eternal, which cannot be exemplified
in, nor accommodated unto, things finite and temporal. This is the
substance of all their pleas against the doctrine of the holy Trinity,
that which gives a seeming life and sprightly vigour to their objections
against it; wherein yet, under the pretence of the use and exercise of
reason, they fall, and resolve all their seasonings into the most absurd
and irrational principles that ever the minds of men were besotted
withal. For unless you will grant them that what is above their reason,
is, therefore, contradictory unto true reason; that what is infinite and
eternal is perfectly comprehensible, and in all its concerns and respects
to be accounted for; that what cannot be in things finite and of a
separate existence, cannot be in things infinite, whose being and
existence can be but one; with other such irrational, yea, brutish
imaginations; all the arguments of these pretended men of reason against
the Trinity become like chaff that every breath of wind will blow away.
Hereon they must, as they do, deny the distinct operations of any persons
in the Godhead in the dispensation of the mystery of grace; for if there
are no such distinct persons, there can be no such distinct operations.
Now, as upon a denial of these things no one article of faith can be
rightly understood, nor any one duty of obedience be performed unto God
in an acceptable manner; so, in particular, we grant that the doctrine of
justification by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ cannot
stand.
(2.) On the same ground the incarnation of the Son of God is rejected
as "atopoon atopootaton",--the most absurd conception that ever befell
the minds of men. Now it is to no purpose to dispute with men so
persuaded, about justification; yea, we will freely acknowledge that all
things we believe about it are "graoodeis muthoi",--no better than old
wives' tales,--if the incarnation of the Son of God be so also. For I can
as well understand how he who is a mere man, however exalted, dignified,
and glorified, can exercise a spiritual rule in and over the hearts,
consciences, and thoughts of all the men in the world, being intimately
knowing of and present unto them all equally at all times (which is
another of their fopperies), as how the righteousness and obedience of
one should be esteemed the righteousness of all that believe, if that one
be no more than a man, if he be not acknowledged to be the Son of God
incarnate.
Whilst the minds of men are prepossessed with such prejudices, nay,
unless they firmly assent unto the truth in these foundations of it, it
is impossible to convince them of the truth and necessity of that
justification of a sinner which is revealed in the gospel. Allow the Lord
Christ to be no other person but what they believe him to be, and I will
grant there can be no other way of justification than what they declare;
though I cannot believe that ever any sinner will be justified thereby.
These are the issues of an obstinate refusal to give way unto the
introduction of the mystery of God and his grace into the way of
salvation and our relation unto him.
And he who would desire an instance of the fertility of men's
inventions in forging and coining objections against heavenly mysteries,
in the justification of the sovereignty of their own reason, as unto what
belongs to our relation unto God, need go no farther than the writings of
these men against the Trinity and incarnation of the eternal Word. For
this is their fundamental rule, in things divine and doctrines of
religion,--That not what the Scripture says is therefore to be accounted
true, although it seems repugnant unto any reasonings of ours, or is
above what we can comprehend; but what seems repugnant unto our reason,
let the words of the Scripture be what they will, that we must conclude
that the Scripture does not say so, though it seem never so expressly so
to do. "Itaque non quia utrumque Scripture dicat, propterea haec inter se
non pugnare concludendum est; sed potius quia haec inter se pugnant, ideo
alterutrum a Scriptura non dici statuendum est", says Schlichting ad
Meisn. Def. Socin. p.102;--"Wherefore, because the Scripture affirms both
these" (that is the efficacy of God's grace and the freedom of our
wills), "we cannot conclude from thence that they are not repugnant; but
because these things are repugnant unto one another, we must determine
that one of them is not spoken in the Scripture:"--no, it seems, let it
say what it will. This is the handsomest way they can take in advancing
their own reason above the Scripture; which yet savours of intolerable
presumption. So Socinus himself, speaking of the satisfaction of Christ,
says, in plain terms: "Ego quidem etiamsi non semel sed saepius id in
sacris monumentis scriptum extaret, non idcirco tamen ita prorsus rem se
habere crederem, ut vos opinamini; cum enim id omnino fieri non possit
non secus atque in multis llis Scripturae Testimoniis, una cum caeteris
omnibus facio; aliqua, quae minus incommoda videretur, interpretatione
adhibita, eum sensum ex ejusmodi verbis elicerem qui sibi constaret;"--
"For my part, if this (doctrine) were extant and written in the holy
Scripture, not once, but often, yet would I not therefore believe it to
be so as you do; for where it can by no means be so (whatever the
Scripture says), I would, as I do with others in other places, make use
of some less incommodious interpretation, whereby I would draw a sense
out of the words that should be consistent with itself." And how he would
do this he declares a little before: "Sacra verba in alium sensum, quam
verba sonant, per inusitatos etiam tropos quandoque explicantur". He
would explain the words into another sense than what they sound or
propose, by unusual tropes. And, indeed, such uncouth tropes does he
apply, as so many engines and machines, to pervert all the divine
testimonies concerning our redemption, reconciliation, and justification
by the blood of Christ.
Having therefore fixed this as their rule, constantly to prefer their
own reason above the express words of the Scripture, which must,
therefore, by one means or other, be so perverted or wrested as to be
made compliant therewith, it is endless to trace them in their multiplied
objections against the holy mysteries, all resolved into this one
principle, that their reason cannot comprehend them, nor does approve of
them. And if any man would have an especial instance of the serpentine
wits of men winding themselves from under the power of conviction by the
spiritual light of truth, or at least endeavouring so to do, let him read
the comments of the Jewish rabbins on Isaiah, chap.53, and of the
Socinians on the beginning of the Gospel of John.
2. The second branch of this repugnancy springs from the want of a due
comprehension of that harmony which is in the mystery of grace, and
between all the parts of it. This comprehension is the principal effect
of that wisdom which believers are taught by the Holy Ghost. For our
understanding of the wisdom of God in a mystery is neither an art nor a
science, whether purely speculative or more practical, but a spiritual
wisdom. And this spiritual wisdom is such as understands and apprehends
things, not so much, or not only in the notion of them, as in their
power, reality, and efficacy, towards their proper ends. And, therefore,
although it may be very few, unless they be learned, judicious, and
diligent in the use of means of all sorts, do attain unto it clearly and
distinctly in the doctrinal notions of it; yet are all true believers,
yea, the meanest of them, directed and enabled by the Holy Spirit, as
unto their own practice and duty, to act suitably unto a comprehension of
this harmony, according to the promise that "they shall be all taught of
God." Hence, those things which appear unto others contradictory and
inconsistent one with another, so as that they are forced to offer
violence unto the Scripture and their own experience in the rejection of
the one or the other of them, are reconciled in their minds and made
mutually useful or helpful unto one another, in the whole course of their
obedience. But these things must be farther spoken unto.
Such an harmony as that intended there is in the whole mystery of God.
For it is the most curious effect and product of divine wisdom; and it is
no impeachment of the truth of it, that it is not discernible by human
reason. A full comprehension of it no creature can in this world arise
unto. Only, in the contemplation of faith, we may arrive unto such an
understanding admiration of it as shall enable us to give glory unto God,
and to make use of all the parts of it in practice as we have occasion.
Concerning it the holy man mentioned before cried out, "O anexichniastou
demiourgias"--"O unsearchable contrivance and operations". And so is it
expressed by the apostle, as that which has an unfathomable depth of
wisdom in it, "O bathos ploutou", etc.--"O the depth of the riches both
of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments,
and his ways past finding Rom.11:33-36. See to the same purpose,
Eph.3:8-10.
There is a harmony, a suitableness of one thing unto another, in all
the works of creation. Yet we see that it is not perfectly nor absolutely
discoverable unto the wisest and most diligent of men. How far are they
from an agreement about the order and motions of the heavenly bodies, of
the sympathies and qualities of sundry things here below, in the relation
of causality and efficiency between one thing and another! The new
discoveries made concerning any of them, do only evidence how far men are
from a just and perfect comprehension of them. Yet such a universal
harmony there is in all the parts of nature and its operations, that
nothing in its proper station and operation is destructively
contradictory either to the whole or any part of it, but every thing
contributes unto the preservation and use of the universe. But although
this harmony be not absolutely comprehensible by any, yet do all living
creatures, who follow the conduct or instinct of nature, make use of it,
and live upon it; and without it neither their being could be preserved,
nor their operations continued.
But in the mystery of God and his grace, the harmony and suitableness
of one thing unto another, with their tendency unto the same end, is
incomparably more excellent and glorious than that which is seen in
nature or the works of it. For whereas God made all things at first in
wisdom, yet is the new creation of all things by Jesus Christ ascribed
peculiarly unto the riches, stores, and treasures of that infinite
wisdom. Neither can any discern it unless they are taught of God; for it
is only spiritually discerned. But yet is it by the most despised. Some
seem to think that there is no great wisdom in it; and some, that no
great wisdom is required unto the comprehension of it: few think it worth
the while to spend half that time in prayer, in meditation, in the
exercise of self-denial, mortification, and holy obedience, doing the
will of Christ, that they may know of his word, to the attaining of a due
comprehension of the mystery of godliness, as some do in diligence,
study, and trial of experiments, who design to excel in natural or
mathematical sciences. Wherefore there are three things evident herein:--
1. That such an harmony there is in all the parts of the mystery of
God, wherein all the blessed properties of the divine nature are
glorified, our duty in all instances is directed and engaged, our
salvation in the way of obedience secured, and Christ, as the end of all,
exalted. Wherefore, we are not only to consider and know the several
parts of the doctrine of spiritual truths but their relation, also, one
unto another, their consistency one with another in practice, and their
mutual furtherance of one another unto their common end. And a disorder
in our apprehensions about any part of that whose beauty and use arises
from its harmony, gives some confusion of mind with respect unto the
whole.
2. That unto a comprehension of this harmony in a due measure, it is
necessary that we be taught of God; without which we can never be wise in
the knowledge of the mystery of his grace. And herein ought we to place
the principal part of our diligence, in our inquiries into the truths of
the gospel.
3. All those who are taught of God to know his will, unless it be when
their minds are disordered by prejudices, false opinions, or temptations,
have an experience in themselves and their own practical obedience, of
the consistency of all parts of the mystery of God's grace and truth in
Christ among themselves,--of their spiritual harmony and cogent tendency
unto the sane end. The introduction of the grace of Christ into our
relation unto God, makes no confusion or disorder in their minds, by the
conflict of the principles of natural reason, with respect unto our first
relation unto God, and those of grace, with respect unto that whereunto
we are renewed.
From the want of a due comprehension of this divine harmony it is,
that the minds of men are filled with imaginations of an inconsistency
between the most important parts of the mystery of the gospel, from
whence the confusions that are at this day in Christian religion do
proceed.
Thus the Socinians can see no consistency between the grace or love of
God and the satisfaction of Christ, but imagine if the one of them be
admitted, the other must be excluded out of our religion. Wherefore they
principally oppose the latter, under a pretence of asserting and
vindicating the former. And where these things are expressly conjoined in
the same proposition of faith,--as where it is said that "we are
justified freely by the grace of God, through the redemption that is in
Christ Jesus; whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith
in his blood," Rom.3:24,25,--they will offer violence unto common sense
and reason, rather than not disturb that harmony which they cannot
understand. For although it be plainly affirmed to be a redemption by his
blood, as he is a propitiation, as his blood was a ransom or price of
redemption, yet they will contend that it is only metaphorical,--a mere
deliverance by power, like that of the Israelites by Moses. But these
things are clearly stated in the gospel; and therefore not only
consistent, but such as that the one cannot subsist without the other.
Nor is there any mention of any especial love or grace of God unto
sinners, but with respect unto the satisfaction of Christ as the means of
the communication of all its effects unto them. See John 3:16;
Rom.3:23-25; 8:30-33; 2 Cor.5:19-21; Eph.1:7; etc.
In like manner, they can see no consistency between the satisfaction
of Christ and the necessity of holiness or obedience in them that do
believe. Hence they continually glamour, that, by our doctrine of the
mediation of Christ, we overthrow all obligations unto a holy life. And
by their sophistical reasonings unto this purpose, they prevail with many
to embrace their delusion, who have not a spiritual experience to
confront their sophistry withal. But as the testimony of the Scripture
lies expressly against them, so those who truly believe, and have real
experience of the influence of that truth into the life of God, and how
impossible it is to yield any acceptable obedience herein without respect
thereunto, are secured from their snares.
These and the like imaginations arise from the unwillingness of men to
admit of the introduction of the mystery of grace into our relation unto
God. For suppose us to stand before God on the old constitution of the
covenant of creation, which alone natural reason likes and is
comprehensive of, and we do acknowledge these things to be inconsistent.
But the mystery of the wisdom and grace of God in Christ cannot stand
without them both.
So, likewise, God's efficacious grace in the conversion of sinners,
and the exercise of the faculties of their minds in a way of duty, are
asserted as contradictory and inconsistent. And although they seem both
to be positively and frequently declared in the Scripture, yet, say these
men, their consistency being repugnant to their reason, let the Scripture
say what it will, yet is it to be said by us that the Scripture does not
assert one of them. And this is from the same cause; men cannot, in their
wisdom, see it possible that the mystery of God's grace should be
introduced into our relation and obedience unto God. Hence have many ages
of the church, especially the last of them, been filled with endless
disputes, in opposition to the grace of God, or to accommodate the
conceptions of it unto the interests of corrupted reason.
But there is no instance more pregnant unto this purpose than that
under our present consideration. Free justification, through the
imputation of the righteousness of Christ, is cried out against, as
inconsistent with a necessity of personal holiness and obedience: and
because the Socinians insist principally on this pretence, it shall be
fully and diligently considered apart; and that holiness which, without
it, they and others deriving from them do pretend unto, shall be tried by
the unerring rule.
Wherefore I desire it may be observed, that in pleading for this
doctrine, we do it as a principal part of the introduction of grace into
our whole relation unto God. Hence we grant,--
1. That it is unsuited, yea foolish, and, as some speak, childish,
unto the principles of unenlightened and unsanctified reason or
understandings of men. And this we conceive to be the principal cause of
all the oppositions that are made unto it, and all the deprivations of it
that the church is pestered withal. Hence are the wits of men so fertile
in sophistical cavils against it, so ready to load it with seeming
absurdities, and I know not what unsuitableness unto their wondrous
rational conceptions. And no objection can be made against it, be it
never so trivial, but it is highly applauded by those who look on that
introduction of the mystery of grace, which is above their natural
conceptions, as unintelligible folly.
2. That the necessary relation of these things, one unto the other,--
namely, of justification by the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ, and the necessity of our personal obedience,--will not be clearly
understood, nor duly improved, but by and in the exercise of the wisdom
of faith. This we grant also; and let who will make what advantage they
can of this concession. True faith has that spiritual light in it, or
accompanying of it, as that it is able to receive it, and to conduct the
soul unto obedience by it. Wherefore, reserving the particular
consideration hereof unto its proper place, I say, in general,--
(1.) That this relation is evident unto that spiritual wisdom whereby
we are enabled, doctrinally and practically, to comprehend the harmony of
the mystery of God, and the consistency of all the parts of it, one with
another.
(2.) That it is made evident by the Scripture, wherein both these
things--justification through the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ, and the necessity of our personal obedience--are plainly asserted
and declared. And we defy that rule of the Socinians, that seeing these
things are inconsistent in their apprehension or unto their reason,
therefore we must say that one of them is not taught in the Scripture:
for whatever it may appear unto their reason, it does not so to ours; and
we have at least as good reason to trust unto our own reason as unto
theirs. Yet we absolutely acquiesce in neither, but in the authority of
God in the Scripture; rejoicing only in this, that we can set our seal
unto his revelations by our own experience. For,--
(3.) It is fully evident in the gracious conduct which the minds of
them that believe are under, even that of the Spirit of truth and grace,
and the inclinations of that new principle of the divine life whereby
they are acted; for although, from the remainders of sin and darkness
that are in them, temptations may arise unto a continuation in sin
because grace has abounded, yet are their minds so formed and framed by
the doctrine of this grace, and the grace of this doctrine, that the
abounding of grace herein is the principal motive unto their abounding in
holiness, as we shall see afterward.
And this we aver to be the spring of all those objections which the
adversaries of this doctrine do continually endeavour to entangle it
withal. As,--1. If the passive righteousness (as it is commonly called),
that is, his death and suffering, be imputed unto us, there is no need,
nor can it be, that his active righteousness, or the obedience of his
life, should be imputed unto us; and so on the contrary: for both
together are inconsistent. 2. That if all sin be pardoned, there is no
need of the righteousness; and so on the contrary, if the righteousness
of Christ be imputed unto us, there is no room for, or need of, the
pardon of sin. 3. If we believe the pardon of our sins, then are our sins
pardoned before we believe, or we are bound to believe that which is not
so. 4. If the righteousness of Christ be imputed unto us, then are we
esteemed to have done and suffered what, indeed, we never did nor
suffered; and it is true, that if we are esteemed our selves to have done
it, imputation is overthrown. 5. If Christ's righteousness be imputed
unto us, then are we as righteous as was Christ himself. 6. If our sins
were imputed unto Christ, then was he thought to have sinned, and was a
sinner subjectively. 7. If good works be excluded from any interest in
our justification before God, then are they of no use unto our salvation.
8. That it is ridiculous to think that where there is no sin , there is
not all the righteousness that can be required. 9. That righteousness
imputed is only a putative or imaginary righteousness, etc.
Now, although all these and the like objections, however subtilely
managed (as Socinus boasts that he had used more than ordinary subtlety
in this cause,--"In quo, si subtilius aliquanto quam opus esse videretur,
quaedam a nobis disputate sunt", De Servat., par.4, cap.4.), are capable
of plain and clear solutions, and we shall avoid the examination of none
of them; yet at present I shall only say, that all the shades which they
cast on the minds of men do vanish and disappear before the light of
express Scripture testimonies, and the experience of them that do
believe, where there is a due comprehension of the mystery of grace in
any tolerable measure.
Seventhly, General prejudices against the imputation of the righteousness
of Christ: --1. That it is not in terms found in the Scripture, answered-
-2. That nothing is said of it in the writings of the evangelists,
answered, John 20:30,31--Nature of Christ's personal ministry--
Revelations by the Holy Spirit immediately from Christ--Design of the
writings of the evangelists--3. Differences among Protestants themselves
about this doctrine, answered--Sense of the ancients herein--What is of
real difference among Protestants, considered
Seventhly. There are some common prejudices, that are usually pleaded
against the doctrine of the imputation of the righteousness of Christ;
which, because they will not orderly fall under a particular
consideration in our progress, may be briefly examined in these general
previous considerations:--
1. It is usually urged against it, that this imputation of the
righteousness of Christ is nowhere mentioned expressly in the Scripture.
This is the first objection of Bellarmine against it. "Hactenus", says
he, "nullum omnino locum invenire putuerunt, ubi legeretur Christi
justitiam nobis imputari ad justitiam; vel nos justos esse per Christi
justitiam nobis imputatam", De Justificat., lib.2 cap.7;--an objection,
doubtless, unreasonably and immodestly urged by men of this persuasion;
for not only do they make profession of their whole faith, or their
belief of all things in matters of religion, in terms and expressions
nowhere used in the Scripture, but believe many things also, as they say,
with faith divine, not at all revealed or contained in the Scripture, but
drained by them out of the traditions of the church. I do not, therefore,
understand how such persons can modestly manage this as an objection
against any doctrine, that the terms wherein some do express it are not
"rhetoos",--found in the Scripture just in that order of one word after
another as by them they are used; for this rule may be much enlarged, and
yet be kept strait enough to exclude the principal concerns of their
church out of the confines of Christianity. Nor can I apprehend much more
equity in others, who reflect with severity on this expression of the
imputation of the righteousness of Christ as unscriptural, as if those
who make use thereof were criminal in no small degree, when themselves,
immediately in the declaration of their own judgment, make use of such
terms, distinctions, and expressions, as are so far from being in the
Scripture, as that it is odds they had never been in the world, had they
escaped Aristotle's mint, or that of the schools deriving from him.
And thus, although a sufficient answer has frequently enough (if any
thing can be so) been returned unto this objection in Bellarmine, yet has
one of late amongst ourselves made the translation of it into English to
be the substance of the first chapter of a book about justification;
though he needed not to have given such an early intimation unto whom he
is beholding for the greatest part of his ensuing discourse, unless it be
what is taken up in despiteful revilings of other men. For take from him
what is not his own, on the one hand, and impertinent cavils at the words
and expressions of other men, with forged imputations on some of them, on
the other, and his whole book will disappear. But yet, although he
affirms that none of the Protestant writers, who speak of the imputation
of the righteousness of Christ unto us (which were all of them, without
exception, until of late), have precisely kept to the form of wholesome
words, but have rather swerved and varied from the language of the
Scripture; yet he will excuse them from open error, if they intend no
more thereby but that we are made partakers of the benefits of the
righteousness of Christ. But if they intend that the righteousness of
Christ itself imputed unto us (that is, so as to be our righteousness
before God, whereon we are pardoned and accepted with him, or do receive
the forgiveness of sins, and a right to the heavenly inheritance), then
are they guilty of that error which makes us to be esteemed to do
ourselves what Christ did; and so on the other side, Christ to have done
what we do and did, chap.2,3. But these things are not so. For, if we are
esteemed to have done any thing in our own persons, it cannot be imputed
unto us as done for us by another; as it will appear when we shall treat
of these things afterwards. But the great and holy persons intended, are
as little concerned in the accusations or apologies of some writers, as
those writers seem to be acquainted with that learning, wisdom, and
judgment, wherein they did excel, and the characters whereof are so
eminently conspicuous in all their writings.
But the judgment of most Protestants is not only candidly expressed, but
approved of also by Bellarmine himself in another place. "Non esset",
says he, "absurdum, si quis diceret nobis imputari Christi justitiam et
merita; cum nobis donentur et applicentur; ac si nos ipsi Deo
satisfecissemus". De Justif., lib.2, cap.10;--"It were not absurd, if any
one should say that the righteousness and merits of Christ are imputed
unto us, when they are given and applied unto us, as if we ourselves had
satisfied God." And this he confirms with that saying of Bernard, Epist.
ad Innocent. 190, "Nam 'si unus pro omnibus mortuus est, ergo omnes
mortui sunt,' ut videlicet satisfactio unius omnibus imputetur, sicut
omnium peccata unus ille portavit". And those who will acknowledge no
more in this matter, but only a participation "quovis modo", one way or
other, of the benefits of the obedience and righteousness of Christ,
wherein we have the concurrence of the Socinians also, might do well, as
I suppose, plainly to deny all imputation of his righteousness unto us in
any sense, as they do, seeing the benefits of his righteousness cannot be
said to be imputed unto us, what way soever we are made partakers of
them. For to say that the righteousness of Christ is imputed unto us,
with respect unto the benefits of it, when neither the righteousness
itself is imputed unto us, nor can the benefits of it be imputed unto us,
as we shall see afterward, does minister great occasion of much needless
variance and contests. Neither do I know any reason why men should seek
countenance unto this doctrine under such an expression as themselves
reflect upon as unscriptural, if they be contented that their minds and
sense should be clearly understood and apprehended;--for truth needs no
subterfuge.
The Socinians do now principally make use of this objection. For,
finding the whole church of God in the use of sundry expressions, in the
declaration of the most important truths of the gospel, that are not
literally contained in the Scripture, they hoped for an advantage from
thence in their opposition unto the things themselves. Such are the terms
of the Trinity, the incarnation, satisfaction, and merit of Christ, as
this also, of the imputation of his righteousness. How little they have
prevailed in the other instances, has been sufficiently manifested by
them with whom they have had to do. But as unto that part of this
objection which concerns the imputation of the righteousness of Christ
unto, believers, those by whom it is asserted do say,--
(1.) That it is the thing alone intended which they plead for. If that
be not contained in the Scripture, if it be not plainly taught and
confirmed therein, they will speedily relinquish it. But if they can
prove that the doctrine which they intend in this expression, and which
is thereby plainly declared unto the understandings of men, is a divine
truth sufficiently witnessed unto in the Scripture; then is this
expression of it reductively scriptural, and the truth itself so
expressed a divine verity. To deny this, is to take away all use of the
interpretation of the Scripture, and to overthrow the ministry of the
church. This, therefore, is to be alone inquired into.
(2.) They say, the same thing is taught and expressed in the Scripture
in phrases equipollent. For it affirms that "by the obedience of one"
(that is Christ), "many are made righteous", Rom.5:19; and that we are
made righteous by the imputation of righteousness unto us, "Blessed is
the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works," chap.4:6.
And if we are made righteous by the imputation of righteousness unto us,
that obedience or righteousness whereby we are made righteous is imputed
unto us. And they will be content with this expression of this doctrine,-
-that the obedience of Christ whereby we are made righteous, is the
righteousness that God imputes unto us. Wherefore, this objection is of
no force to disadvantage the truth pleaded for.
2. Socinus objects, in particular, against this doctrine of
justification by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, and of
his satisfaction, that there is nothing said of it in the "Evangelists",
nor in the "report of the sermons of Christ unto the people, nor yet in
those of his private discourses with his disciples"; and he urges it
vehemently and at large against the whole of the expiation of sin by his
death, De Servator., par.4, cap.9. And as it is easy "malis inventis
pejora addere", this notion of his is not only made use of and pressed at
large by one among ourselves, but improved also by a dangerous comparison
between the writings of the evangelists and the other writings of the New
Testament. For to enforce this argument, that the histories of the
gospel, wherein the sermons of Christ are recorded, do make no mention of
the imputation of the righteousness of Christ (as in his judgment they do
not), nor of his satisfaction, or merit, or expiation of sin, or of
redemption by his death (as they do not in the judgment of Socinus), it
is added by him, that for his part he is "apt to admire our Saviour's
sermons, who was the author of our religion, before the writings of the
apostles, though inspired men". Whereunto many dangerous insinuations and
reflections on the writings of St Paul, contrary to the faith and sense
of the church in all ages, are subjoined. See pp.240,241.
But this boldness is not only unwarrantable, but to be abhorred. What
place of Scripture, what ecclesiastical tradition, what single precedent
of any one sober Christian writer, what theological reason, will
countenance a man in making the comparison mentioned, and so determining
thereon? Such juvenile boldness, such want of a due apprehension and
understanding of the nature of divine inspiration, with the order and
design of the writings of the New Testament, which are the springs of
this precipitate censure, ought to be reflected on. At present, to remove
this pretence out of our way, it may be observed,--
(1.) That what the Lord Christ taught his disciples, in his personal
ministry on the earth, was suited unto that economy of the church which
was antecedent unto his death and resurrection. Nothing did he withhold
from them that was needful to their faith, obedience, and consolation in
that state. Many things he instructed them in out of the Scripture, many
new revelations he made unto them, and many times did he occasionally
instruct and rectify their judgments; howbeit he made no clear, distinct
revelation of those sacred mysteries unto them which are peculiar unto
the faith of the New Testament, nor were to be distinctly apprehended
before his death and resurrection.
(2.) What the Lord Christ revealed afterward by his Spirit unto the
apostles, was no less immediately from himself than was the truth which
he spoke unto them with his own mouth in the days of his flesh. An
apprehension to the contrary is destructive of Christian religion. The
epistles of the apostles are no less Christ's sermons than that which he
delivered on the mount. Wherefore--
(3.) Neither in the things themselves, nor in the way of their
delivery or revelation, is there any advantage of the one sort of
writings above the other. The things written in the epistles proceed from
the same wisdom, the same grace, the same love, with the things which he
spoke with his own mouth in the days of his flesh, and are of the same
divine veracity, authority, and efficacy. The revelation which he made by
his Spirit is no less divine and immediate from himself, than what he
spoke unto his disciples on the earth. To distinguish between these
things, on any of these accounts, is intolerable folly.
(4.) The writings of the evangelists do not contain the whole of all
the instructions which the Lord Christ gave unto his disciples personally
on the earth. For he was seen of them after his resurrection forty days,
and spoke with them of "the things pertaining to the kingdom of God,"
Acts 1:3; and yet nothing hereof is recorded in their writings, but only
some few occasional speeches. Nor had he given before unto them a clear
and distinct understanding of those things which were delivered
concerning his death and resurrection in the Old Testament; as is plainly
declared, Luke 24:25-27. For it was not necessary for them, in that state
wherein they were. Wherefore,--
(5.) As to the extent of divine revelations objectively those which he
granted, by his Spirit, unto his apostles after his ascension, were
beyond those which he personally taught them, so far as they are recorded
in the writings of the evangelists. For he told them plainly, not long
before hit death, that he had many things to say unto them which "then
they could not bear," John 16:12. And for the knowledge of those things,
he refers them to the coming of the Spirit to make revelation of them
from himself, in the next words, "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth,
is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of
himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will
show you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of
mine, and shall show it unto you," verses 13,14. And on this account he
had told them before, that it was expedient for them that he should go
away, that the Holy Spirit might come unto them, whom he would send from
the Father, verse 7. Hereunto he referred the full and clear
manifestation of the mysteries of the gospel. So false, as well as
dangerous and scandalous, are those insinuations of Socinus and his
followers.
(6.) The writings of the evangelists are full unto their proper ends
and purposes. These were, to record the genealogy, conception, birth,
acts, miracles, and teachings of our Saviour, so far as to evince him to
be the true, only-promised Messiah. So he testifies who wrote the last of
them: "Many other signs truly did Jesus, which are not written in this
book: but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the
Christ, the Son of God," John 22:30,31. Unto this end every thing is
recorded by them that is needful unto the ingenerating and establishing
of faith. Upon this confirmation, all things declared in the Old
Testament concerning him--all that was taught in types and sacrifices--
became the object of faith, in that sense wherein they were interpreted
in the accomplishment; and that in them this doctrine was before
revealed, shall be proved afterward. It is, therefore, no wonder if some
things, and those of the highest importance, should be declared more
fully in other writings of the New Testament than they are in those of
the evangelists
(7.) The pretence itself is wholly false; for there are as many
pregnant testimonies given unto this truth in one alone of the
evangelists as in any other book of the New Testament,--namely, in the
book of John. I shall refer to some of them, which will be pleaded in
their proper place, chap.1:12,17; 3:14-18,36; 5:24.
But we may pass this by, as one of those inventions concerning which
Socinus boasts, in his epistle to Michael Vajoditus, that his writings
were esteemed by many for the singularity of things asserted in them.
3. The difference that has been among Protestant writers about this
doctrine is pleaded in the prejudice of it. Osiander, in the entrance of
the reformation, fell into a vain imagination, that we were justified or
made righteous with the essential righteousness of God, communicated unto
us by Jesus Christ. And whereas he was opposed herein with some severity
by the most learned persons of those days, to countenance himself in his
singularity, he pretended that there were "twenty different opinions
amongst the Protestants themselves about the formal cause of our
justification before God". This was quickly laid hold on by them of the
Roman church, and is urged as a prejudice against the whole doctrine, by
Bellarmine, Vasquez, and others. But the vanity of this pretence of his
has been sufficiently discovered; and Bellarmine himself could fancy but
four opinions among them that seemed to be different from one another,
reckoning that of Osiander for one, De Justificat., lib.2, cap.1. But
whereas he knew that the imagination of Osiander was exploded by them
all, the other three that he mentions are indeed but distinct parts of
the same entire doctrine. Wherefore, until of late it might be truly
said, that the faith and doctrine of all Protestants was in this article
entirely the same. For however they differed in the way, manner, and
methods of its declaration, and too many private men were addicted unto
definitions and descriptions of their own, under pretence of logical
accuracy in teaching, which gave an appearance of some contradiction
among them; yet in this they generally agreed, that it is the
righteousness of Christ, and not our own, on the account whereof we
receive the pardon of sin, acceptance with God, are declared righteous by
the gospel, and have a right and title unto the heavenly inheritance.
Hereon, I say, they were generally agreed, first against the Papists, and
afterwards against the Socinians; and where this is granted, I will not
contend with any man about his way of declaring the doctrine of it.
And that I may add it by the way, we have herein the concurrence of
the fathers of the primitive church. For although by justification,
following the etymology of the Latin word, they understood the making us
righteous with internal personal righteousness,--at least some of them
did so, as Austin in particular,--yet that we are pardoned and accepted
with God on any other account but that of the righteousness of Christ,
they believed not. And whereas, especially in their controversy with the
Pelagians, after the rising of that heresy, they plead vehemently that we
are made righteous by the grace of God changing our hearts and natures,
and creating in us a principle of spiritual life and holiness, and not by
the endeavours of our own free will, or works performed in the strength
thereof, their words and expressions have been abused, contrary to their
intention and design.
For we wholly concur with them, and subscribe unto all that they
dispute about the making of us personally righteous and holy by the
effectual grace of God, against all merit of works and operations of our
own free will (our sanctification being every way as much of grace as our
justification, properly so called); and that in opposition unto the
common doctrine of the Roman church about the same matter: only they call
this our being made inherently and personally righteous by grace,
sometimes by the name of justification, which we do not. And this is laid
hold on as an advantage by those of the Roman church who do not concur
with them in the way and manner whereby we are so made righteous. But
whereas by our justification before God, we intend only that
righteousness whereon our sins are pardoned, wherewith we are made
righteous in his sight, or for which we are accepted as righteous before
him, it will be hard to find any of them assigning of it unto any other
causes than the Protestants do. So it is fallen out, that what they
design to prove, we entirely comply with them in; but the way and manner
whereby they prove it is made use of by the Papists unto another end,
which they intended not.
But as to the way and manner of the declaration of this doctrine among
Protestants themselves, there ever was some variety and difference in
expressions; nor will it otherwise be whilst the abilities and capacities
of men, whether in the conceiving of things of this nature, or in the
expression of their conceptions, are so various as they are. And it is
acknowledged that these differences of late have had by some as much
weight laid upon them as the substance of the doctrine generally agreed
in. Hence some have composed entire books, consisting almost of nothing
but impertinent cavils at other men's words and expressions. But these
things proceed from the weakness of some men, and other vicious habits of
their minds, and do not belong unto the cause itself. And such persons,
as for me, shall write as they do, and fight on until they are weary.
Neither has the multiplication of questions, and the curious discussion
of them in the handling of this doctrine, wherein nothing ought to be
diligently insisted on but what is directive of our practice, been of
much use unto the truth itself, though it has not been directly opposed
in them.
That which is of real difference among persons who agree in the
substance of the doctrine, may be reduced unto a very few heads; as,--
(1.) There is something of this kind about the nature of faith whereby we
are justified, with its proper object in justifying, and its use in
justification. And an instance we have herein, not only of the weakness
of our intellects in the apprehension of spiritual things, but also of
the remainders of confusion and disorder in our minds; at least, how true
it is that we know only in part, and prophesy only in part, whilst we are
in this life. For whereas this faith is an act of our minds, put forth in
the way of duty to God, yet many by whom it is sincerely exercised, and
that continually, are not agreed either in the nature or proper object of
it. Yet is there no doubt but that some of them who differ amongst
themselves about these things, have delivered their minds free from the
prepossession of prejudices and notions derived from other artificial
seasonings imposed on them, and do really express their own conceptions
as to the best and utmost of their experience. And notwithstanding this
difference, they do yet all of them please God in the exercise of faith,
as it is their duty, and have that respect unto its proper object as
secures both their justification and salvation. And if we cannot, on this
consideration, bear with, and forbear, one another in our different
conceptions and expressions of those conceptions about these things, it
is a sign we have a great mind to be contentious, and that our
confidences are built on very weak foundations. For my part, I had much
rather my lot should be found among them who do really believe with the
heart unto righteousness, though they are not able to give a tolerable
definition of faith unto others, than among them who can endlessly
dispute about it with seeming accuracy and skill, but are negligent in
the exercise of it as their own duty. Wherefore, some things shall be
briefly spoken of in this matter, to declare my own apprehensions
concerning the things mentioned, without the least design to contradict
or oppose the conceptions of others.
(2.) There has been a controversy more directly stated among some
learned divines of the Reformed churches (for the Lutherans are unanimous
on the one side), about the righteousness of Christ that is said to be
imputed unto us. For some would have this to be only his suffering of
death, and the satisfaction which he made for sin thereby, and others
include therein the obedience of his life also. The occasion, original,
and progress of this controversy, the persons by whom it has been
managed, with the writings wherein it is so, and the various ways that
have been endeavoured for its reconciliation, are sufficiently known unto
all who have inquired into these things. Neither shall I immix myself
herein, in the way of controversy, or in opposition unto others, though I
shall freely declare my own judgment in it, so far as the consideration
of the righteousness of Christ, under this distinction, is inseparable
from the substance of the truth itself which I plead for.
(3.) Some difference there has been, also, whether the righteousness
of Christ imputed unto us, or the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ, may be said to be the formal cause of our justification before
God; wherein there appears some variety of expression among learned men,
who have handled this subject in the way of controversy with the Papists.
The true occasion of the differences about this expression has been this,
and no other: Those of the Roman church do constantly assert, that the
righteousness whereby we are righteous before God is the formal cause of
our justification; and this righteousness, they say, is our own inherent,
personal righteousness, and not the righteousness of Christ imputed unto
us: wherefore they treat of this whole controversy--namely, what is the
righteousness on the account whereof we are accepted with God, or
justified--under the name of the formal cause of justification; which is
the subject of the second book of Bellarmine concerning justification. In
opposition unto them, some Protestants, contending that the righteousness
wherewith we are esteemed righteous before God, and accepted with him, is
the righteousness of Christ imputed unto us, and not our own inherent,
imperfect, personal righteousness, have done it under this inquiry,--
namely, What is the formal cause of our justification? Which some have
said to be the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, some, the
righteousness of Christ imputed. But what they designed herein was, not
to resolve this controversy into a philosophical inquiry about the nature
of a formal cause, but only to prove that that truly belonged unto the
righteousness of Christ in our justification which the Papists ascribed
unto our own, under that name. That there is a habitual, infused habit of
grace, which is the formal cause of our personal, inherent righteousness,
they grant: but they all deny that God pardons our sins, and justifies
our persons, with respect unto this righteousness, as the formal cause
thereof; nay, they deny that in the justification of a sinner there
either is, or can be, any inherent formal cause of it. And what they mean
by a formal cause in our justification, is only that which gives the
denomination unto the subject, as the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ does to a person that he is justified.
Wherefore, notwithstanding the differences that have been among some
in the various expression of their conceptions, the substance of the
doctrine of the reformed churches is by them agreed upon and retained
entire. For they all agree that God justifies no sinner,-- absolves him
not from guilt, nor declares him righteous, so as to have a title unto
the heavenly inheritance,--but with respect unto a true and perfect
righteousness; as also, that this righteousness is truly the
righteousness of him that is so justified; that this righteousness
becomes ours by God's free grace and donation,--the way on our part
whereby we come to be really and effectually interested therein being
faith alone; and that this is the perfect obedience or righteousness of
Christ imputed unto us: in these things, as they shall be afterwards
distinctly explained, is contained the whole of that truth whose
explanation and confirmation is the design of the ensuing discourse. And
because those by whom this doctrine in the substance of it is of late
impugned, derive more from the Socinians than the Papists, and make a
nearer approach unto their principles, I shall chiefly insist on the
examination of those original authors by whom their notions were first
coined, and whose weapons they make use of in their defense.
Eighthly, Influence of the doctrine of justification into the first
Reformation--Advantages unto the world by that Reformation--State of the
consciences of men under the Papacy, with respect unto justification
before God--Alterations made therein by the light of this doctrine,
though not received--Alterations in the Pagan unbelieving world by the
introduction of Christianity--Design and success of the first reformers
herein--Attempts for reconciliation with the Papists in this doctrine,
and their success--Remainders of the ignorance of the truth in the Roman
church--Unavoidable consequences of the corruption of this doctrine
Eighthly. To close these previous discourses, it is worthy our
consideration what weight was laid on this doctrine of justification at
the first Reformation and what influence it had into the whole work
thereof. However the minds of men may be changed as unto sundry doctrines
of faith among us, yet none can justly own the name of Protestant, but he
must highly value the first Reformation: and they cannot well do
otherwise whose present even temporal advantages are resolved thereinto.
However, I intend none but such as own an especial presence and guidance
of God with them who were eminently and successfully employed therein.
Such persons cannot but grant that their faith in this matter, and the
concurrence of their thoughts about its importance, are worthy
consideration.
Now it is known that the doctrine of justification gave the first
occasion to the whole work of reformation, and was the main thing whereon
it turned. This those mentioned declared to be "Articulus stantis aut
cadentis eccleseae", and that the vindication thereof alone deserved all
the pains that were taken in the whole endeavor of reformation. But
things are now, and that by virtue of their doctrine herein, much changed
in the world, though it be not so understood or acknowledged. In general,
no small benefit redounded unto the world by the Reformation, even among
them by whom it was not, nor is received, though many bluster with
contrary pretensions: for all the evils which have accidentally ensued
thereon, arising most of them from the corrupt passions and interests of
them by whom it has been opposed, are usually ascribed unto it; and all
the light, liberty, and benefit of the minds of men which it has
introduced, are ascribed unto other causes. But this may be signally
observed with respect unto the doctrine of justification, with the causes
and effects of its discovery and vindication. For the first reformers
found their own, and the consciences of other men, so immersed in
darkness, so pressed and harassed with fears, terrors, and disquietments
under the power of it, and so destitute of any steady guidance into the
ways of peace with God, as that with all diligence (like persons sensible
that herein their spiritual and eternal interest was concerned) they made
their inquiries after the truth in this matter; which they knew must be
the only means of their deliverance. All men in those days were either
kept in bondage under endless fears and anxieties of mind upon the
convictions of sin, or sent for relief unto indulgences, priestly
pardons, penances, pilgrimages, works satisfactory of their own, and
supererogatory of others, or kept under chains of darkness for purgatory
unto the last day. Now, he is no way able to compare things past and
present, who sees not how great an alteration is made in these things
even in the papal church. For before the Reformation, whereby the light
of the gospel, especially in this doctrine of justification, was diffused
among men, and shone even into their minds who never comprehended nor
received it, the whole almost of religion among them was taken up with,
and confined unto, these things. And to instigate men unto an abounding
sedulity in the observation of them, their minds were stuffed with
traditions and stories of visions, apparitions, frightful spirits, and
other imaginations that poor mortals are apt to be amazed withal, and
which their restless disquitments gave countenance unto.
"Somnia, terrores magici, miracula, sagae
Nocturni lemures, portentaque Thessala,"--[Hor., Ep.2,2,209.]
were the principal objects of their creed, and matter of their religious
conversation. That very church itself comparatively at ease from these
things unto what it was before the Reformation; though so much of them is
still retained as to blind the eyes of men from discerning the necessity
as well as the truth of the evangelical doctrine of justification.
It is fallen out herein not much otherwise than it did at the first
entrance of Christianity into the world. For there was an emanation of
light and truth from the gospel which affected the minds of men, by whom
yet the whole of it, in its general design, was opposed and persecuted.
For from thence the very vulgar sort of men became to have better
apprehensions and notions of God and his properties, or the original and
rule of the universe, than they had arrived unto in the midnight of their
paganism. And a sort of learned speculative men there were, who, by
virtue of that light of truth which sprung from the gospel, and was now
diffused into the minds of men, reformed and improved the old philosophy,
discarding many of those falsehoods and impertinencies wherewith it had
been encumbered. But when this was done, they still maintained their
cause on the old principles of the philosophers. And, indeed, their
opposition unto the gospel was far more plausible and pleadable than it
was before. For after they had discarded the gross conceptions of the
common sort about the divine nature and rule, and had blended the light
of truth which brake forth in Christian religion with their own
philosophical notions, they made a vigorous attempt for the reinforcement
of heathenism against the main design of the gospel. And things have not,
as I said, fallen out much otherwise in the Reformation. For as by the
light of truth which therein brake forth, the consciences of even the
vulgar sort are in some measure freed from those childish affrightments
which they were before in bondage unto; so those who are learned have
been enabled to reduce the opinions and practices of their church into a
more defensible posture, and make their opposition unto the truths of the
gospel more plausible than they formerly were. Yea, that doctrine which,
in the way of its teaching and practice among them, as also in its
effects on the consciences of men, was so horrid as to drive innumerable
persons from their communion in that and other things also, is now, in
the new representation of it, with the artificial covering provided for
its former effects in practice, thought an argument meet to be pleaded
for a return unto its entire communion.
But to root the superstitions mentioned out of the minds of men, to
communicate unto them the knowledge of the righteousness of God, which is
revealed from faith to faith, and thereby to deliver them from their
bondage, fears, and distress, directing convinced sinners unto the only
way of solid peace with God, did the first reformers labour so diligently
in the declaration and vindication of the evangelical doctrine of
justification; and God was with them. And it is worth our consideration,
whether we should, on every cavil and sophism of men not so taught, not
so employed, not so tried, not so owned of God as they were, and in whose
writings there are not appearing such characters of wisdom, sound
judgment, and deep experience, as in theirs, easily part with that
doctrine of truth wherein alone they found peace unto their own souls,
and whereby they were instrumental to give liberty and peace with God
unto the souls and consciences of others innumerable, accompanied with
the visible effects of holiness of life, and fruitfulness in the works of
righteousness, unto the praise of God by Jesus Christ.
In my judgment, Luther spake the truth when he said, "Amisso articulo
justificationis, simul amissa est tota doctrina Christiana". And I wish
he had not been a true prophet, when he foretold that in the following
ages the doctrine thereof would be again obscured; the causes whereof I
have elsewhere inquired into.
Some late writers, indeed, among the Protestants have endeavoured to
reduce the controversy about justification with the Papist unto an
appearance of a far less real difference than is usually judged to be in
it. And a good work it is, no doubt, to pare off all unnecessary
occasions of debate and differences in religion, provided we go not so
near the quick as to let out any of its vital spirits. The way taken
herein is, to proceed upon some concessions of the most sober among the
Papists, in their ascriptions unto grace and the merit of Christ, on the
one side; and the express judgment of the Protestants, variously
delivered, of the necessity of good works to them that are justified, on
the other. Besides, it appears that in different expressions which either
party adhere unto, as it were by tradition, the same things are indeed
intended. Among them who have laboured in this kind, Ludovicus le Blanc,
for his perspicuity and plainness, his moderation and freedom from a
contentious frame of spirit, is "pene solus legi dignus". He is like the
ghost of Tiresias in this matter. But I must needs say, that I have not
seen the effect that might be desired of any such undertaking. For, when
each party comes unto the interpretation of their own concessions, which
is, "ex communi jure", to be allowed unto them, and which they will be
sure to do in compliance with their judgment on the substance of the
doctrine wherein the main stress of the difference lies, the distance and
breach continue as wide as ever they were. Nor is there the least ground
towards peace obtained by any of our condescensions or compliance herein.
For unless we can come up entirely unto the decrees and canons of the
Council of Trent, wherein the doctrine of the Old and New Testament is
anathematized, they will make no other use of any man's compliance, but
only to increase the glamour of differences among ourselves. I mention
nothing of this nature to hinder any man from granting whatever he can or
please unto them, without the prejudice of the substance of truths
professed in the protestant churches; but only to intimate the
uselessness of such concessions, in order unto peace and agreement with
them, whilst they have a Procrustes' bed to lay us upon, and from whose
size they will not recede.
Here and there one (not above three or four in all may be named,
within this hundred and thirty years) in the Roman communion has owned
our doctrine of justification, for the substance of it. So did Albertus
Pighius, and the Antitagma Coloniense, as Bellarmine acknowledges. And
what he says of Pighius is true, as we shall see afterwards; the other I
have not seen. Cardinal Contarinus, in a treatise of justification,
written before, and published about the beginning of the Trent Council,
delivers himself in the favour of it. But upon the observation of what he
had done, some say he was shortly after poisoned; though I must confess I
know not where they had the report.
But do what we can for the sake of peace, as too much cannot be done
for it, with the safety of truth, it cannot be denied but that the
doctrine of justification, as it works effectually in the church of Rome,
is the foundation of many enormities among them, both in judgment and
practice. They do not continue, I acknowledge, in that visible
predominancy and rage as formerly, nor are the generality of the people
in so much slavish bondage unto them as they were; but the streams of
them do still issue from this corrupt fountain, unto the dangerous
infection of the souls of men. For missatical expiatory sacrifices for
the tiring and the dead, the necessity of auricular confession, with
authoritative absolution, penances, pilgrimages, sacramentals,
indulgences, commutations, works satisfactory and supererogatory, the
merit and intercession of saints departed, with especial devotions and
applications to this or that particular saint or angel, purgatory, yea,
on the matter, the whole of monastic devotion, do depend thereon. They
are all nothing but ways invented to pacify the consciences of men, or
divert them from attending to the charge which is given in against them
by the law of God; sorry supplies they are of a righteousness of their
own, for them who know not how to submit themselves to the righteousness
of God. And if the doctrine of free justification by the blood of Christ
were once again exploded, or corrupted and made unintelligible, unto
these things, as absurd and foolish as now unto some they seem to be, or
what is not one jut better, men must and will again betake themselves.
For if once they are diverted from putting their trust in the
righteousness of Christ, and grace of God alone, and do practically
thereon follow after, take up with, or rest in, that which is their own,
the first impressions of a sense of sin which shall befall their
consciences will drive them from their present hold, to seek for shelter
in any thing that tenders unto them the least appearance of relief. Men
may talk and dispute what they please, whilst they are at peace in their
own minds, without a real sense either of sin or righteousness, yea, and
scoff at them who are not under the power of the same security; but when
they shall be awakened with other apprehensions of things than yet they
are aware of, they will be put on new resolutions. And it is in vain to
dispute with any about justification, who have not duly been convinced of
a state of sin, and of its guilt; for such men neither understand what
they say, nor that whereof they dogmatize.
We have, therefore, the same reasons that the first reformers had, to
be careful about the preservation of this doctrine of the gospel pure and
entire; though we may not expect the like success with them in our
endeavours unto that end. For the minds of the generality of men are in
another posture than they were when they dealt with them. Under the power
of ignorance and superstition they were; but yet multitudes of them were
affected with a sense of the guilt of sin. With us, for the most part,
things are quite otherwise. Notional light, accompanied with a
senselessness of sin, leads men unto a contempt of this doctrine, indeed
of the whole mystery of the gospel. We have had experience of the fruits
of the faith which we now plead for in this nation, for many years, yea,
now for some ages; and it cannot well be denied, but that those who have
been most severely tenacious of the doctrine of justification by the
imputation of the righteousness of Christ, have been the most exemplary
in a holy life: I speak of former days. And if this doctrine be yet
farther corrupted, debased, or unlearned among us, we shall quickly fall
into one of the extremes wherewith we are at present urged on either
side. For although the reliefs provided in the church of Rome, for the
satisfaction of the consciences of men, are at present by the most
disliked, yea, despised, yet, if they are once brought to a loss how to
place their whole trust and confidence in the righteousness of Christ,
and grace of God in him, they will not always live at such an uncertainty
of mind as the best of their own personal obedience will hang them on the
briers of; but retake themselves unto somewhat that tenders them certain
peace and security, though at present it may seem foolish unto them. And
I doubt not but that some, out of a mere ignorance of the righteousness
of God, which either they have not been taught, or have had no mind to
learn, have, with some integrity in the exercise of their consciences,
betaken themselves unto that pretended rest which the church of Rome
offers unto them. For being troubled about their sins, they think it
better to retake themselves unto that great variety of means for the ease
and discharge of their consciences which the Roman church affords, than
to abide where they are, without the least pretence of relief; as men
will find in due time, there is no such thing to be found or obtained in
themselves. They may go on for a time with good satisfaction unto their
own minds; but if once they are brought unto a loss through the
conviction of sin, they must look beyond themselves for peace and
satisfaction, or sit down without them to eternity. Nor are the
principles and ways which others take up withal in another extreme, upon
the rejection of this doctrine, although more plausible, yet at all more
really useful unto the souls of men than those of the Roman church which
they reject as obsolete, and unsuited unto the genius of the present age.
For they all of them arise from, or lead unto, the want of a due sense of
the nature and guilt of sin, as also of the holiness and righteousness of
God with respect thereunto. And when such principles as these do once
grow prevalent in the minds of men, they quickly grow careless,
negligent, secure in sinning, and end for the most part in atheism, or a
great indifference, as unto all religion, and all the duties thereof.
I. Justifying faith; the causes and object of it declared
Justification by faith generally acknowledged--The meaning of it
perverted--The nature and use of faith in justification proposed to
consideration--Distinctions about it waived--A twofold faith of the
gospel expressed in the Scripture--Faith that is not justifying, Acts
8:13; John 2:23,24; Luke 8:13; Matt.7:22,23--Historical faith; whence it
is so called, and the nature of it--Degrees of assent in it--
Justification not ascribed unto any degree of it--A calumny obviated--The
causes of true saving faith--Conviction of sin previous unto it--The
nature of legal conviction, and its effects--Arguments to prove it
antecedent unto faith--Without the consideration of it, the true nature
of faith not to be understood--The order and relation of the law and
gospel, Rom.1:17--Instance of Adam--Effects of conviction--Internal:
Displicency and sorrow; fear of punishment; desire of deliverance--
External: Abstinence from sin; performance of duties; reformation of
life--Not conditions of justification; not formal disposition unto it;
not moral preparations for it--The order of God in justification--The
proper object of justifying faith--Not all divine verity equally; proved
by sundry arguments--The pardon of our own sins, whether the first object
of faith--The Lord Christ in the work of mediation, as the ordinance of
God for the recovery of lost sinners, the proper object of justifying
faith--The position explained and proved, Acts 10:43; 16:31; 4:12; Luke
24:25-27; John 1:12; 3:16,36; 6:29,47; 7:38; Acts 26:18; Col.2:6;
Rom.3:24,25; 1 Cor.1:30; 2 Cor.5:21; Eph.1:7,8; 2 Cor.5:19
The means of justification on our part is faith. That we are justified by
faith, is so frequently and so expressly affirmed in the Scripture, as
that it cannot directly and in terms by any be denied. For whereas some
begin, by an excess of partiality, which controversial engagements and
provocations do incline them unto, to affirm that our justification is
more frequently ascribed unto other things, graces or duties, than unto
faith, it is to be passed by in silence, and not contended about. But
yet, also, the explanation which some others make of this general
concession, that "we are justified by faith", does as fully overthrow
what is affirmed therein as if it were in terms rejected; and it would
more advantage the understandings of men if it were plainly refused upon
its first proposal, than to be led about in a maze of words and
distinctions unto its real exclusion, as is done both by the Romanists
and Socinians. At present we may take the proposition as granted, and
only inquire into the true, genuine sense and meaning of it: That which
first occurs unto our consideration is faith; and that which does concern
it may be reduced unto two heads:--1. Its nature. 2. Its use in our
justification.
Of the nature of faith in general, of the especial nature of
justifying faith, of its characteristical distinctions from that which is
called faith but is not justifying, so many discourses (divers of them
the effects of sound judgment and good experience) are already extant, as
it is altogether needless to engage at large into a farther discussion of
them. However, something must be spoken to declare in what sense we
understand these things;--what is that faith which we ascribe our
justification unto, and what is its use therein.
The distinctions that are usually made concerning faith (as it is a
word of various significations), I shall wholly pretermit; not only as
obvious and known, but as not belonging unto our present argument. That
which we are concerned in is, that in the Scripture there is mention made
plainly of a twofold faith, whereby men believe the gospel. For there is
a faith whereby we are justified, which he who has shall be assuredly
saved; which purifies the heart and works by love. And there is a faith
or believing, which does nothing of all this; which who has, and has no
more, is not justified, nor can be saved. Wherefore, every faith, whereby
men are said to believe, is not justifying. Thus it is said of Simon the
magician, that he "believed," Acts 8:13, when he was in the "gall of
bitterness and bond of iniquity;" and therefore did not believe with that
faith which "purifieth the heart," Acts 15:9. And that many "believed on
the name of Jesus, when they saw the miracles that he did; but Jesus did
not commit himself unto them, because he knew what was in man," John
2:23,24. They did not believe on his name as those do, or with that kind
of faith, who thereon "receive power to become the sons of God," John
1:12. And some, when they "hear the word receive it with joy, believing
for a while," but "have no root," Luke 8:13. And faith, without a root in
the heart, will not justify any; for "with the heart men believe unto
righteousness," Rom.10:10. So is it with them who shall cry, "Lord, Lord"
(at the last days, "we have prophesied in thy name," whilst yet they were
always "workers of iniquity", Matt.7:22,23.
This faith is usually called historical faith. But this denomination
is not taken from the object of it, as though it were only the history of
the Scripture, or the historical things contained in it. For it respects
the whole truth of the word, yea, of the promises of the gospel as well
as other things. But it is so called from the nature of the assent
wherein it does consist; for it is such as we give unto historical things
that are credibly testified unto us.
And this faith has divers differences or degrees, both in respect unto
the grounds or reasons of it, and also its effects. For as unto the
first, all faith is an assent upon testimony; and divine faith is an
assent upon a divine testimony. According as this testimony is received,
so are the differences or degrees of this faith. Some apprehend it on
human motives only, and its credibility unto the judgment of reason; and
their assent is a mere natural act of their understanding, which is the
lowest degree of this historical faith. Some have their minds enabled
unto it by spiritual illumination, making a discovery of the evidences of
divine truth whereon it is to be believed; the assent they give hereon is
more firm and operative than that of the former sort.
Again; it has its differences or degrees with respect unto its
effects. With some it does no way, or very little, influence the will or
the affections, or work any change in the lives of men. So is it with
them that profess they believe the gospel, and yet live in all manner of
sins. In this degree, it is called by the apostle James "a dead faith,"
and compared unto a dead carcass, without life or motion; and is an
assent of the very serene nature and kind with that which devils are
compelled to give; and this faith abounds in the world. With others it
has an effectual work upon the affections, and that in many degrees,
also, represented in the several sorts of ground whereinto the seed of
the word is cast, and produces many effects in their lives. In the utmost
improvement of it, both as to the evidence it proceeds from and the
effects it produces, it is usually called temporary faith; for it is
neither permanent against all oppositions, nor will bring any unto
eternal rest. The name is taken from that expression of our Saviour
concerning him who believeth with this faith,--"Proskairos esti",
Matt.13:21.
This faith I grant to be true in its kind, and not merely to be
equivocally so called: it is not "pistis pseudoonumos". It is so as unto
the general nature of faith; but of the same special nature with
justifying faith it is not. Justifying faith is not a higher, or the
highest degree of this faith, but is of another kind or nature.
Wherefore, sundry things may be observed concerning this faith, in the
utmost improvement of it unto our present purpose. As--
1. This faith, with all the effects of it, men may have and not be
justified; and, if they have not a faith of another kind, they cannot be
justified. For justification is nowhere ascribed unto it, yea, it is
affirmed by the apostle James that none can be justified by it.
2. It may produce great effects in the minds, affections and lives of
men, although not one of them that are peculiar unto justifying faith.
Yet such they may be, as that those in whom they are wrought may be, and
ought, in the judgment of charity, to be looked on as true believers.
3. This is that faith which may be alone. We are justified by faith
alone; but we are not justified by that faith which can be alone. Alone,
respects its influence into our justification, not its nature and
existence. And we absolutely deny that we can be justified by that faith
which can be alone; that is, without a principle of spiritual life and
universal obedience, operative in of it, as duty does require.
These things I have observed, only to obviate that calumny and
reproach which some endeavour to fix on the doctrine of justification by
faith only, through the mediation of Christ. For those who assert it,
must be Solifidians, Antinomians, and I know not what;--such as oppose or
deny the necessity of universal obedience, or good works. Most of them
who manage it, cannot but know in their own consciences that this charge
is false. But this is the way of handling controversies with many. They
can aver any thing that seems to advantage the cause they plead, to the
great scandal of religion. If by Solifidians, they mean those who believe
that faith alone is on our part the means, instrument, or condition (of
which afterward) of our justification, all the prophets and apostles were
so, and were so taught to be by Jesus Christ; as shall be proved. If they
mean those who affirm that the faith whereby we are justified is alone,
separate, or separable, from a principle and the fruit of holy obedient,
they must find them out themselves, we know nothing of them. For we allow
no faith to be of the same kind or nature with that whereby we are
justified, but what virtually and radically contains in it universal
obedience, as the effect is in the cause, the fruit in the root, and
which acts itself in all particular duties, according as by rule and
circumstances they are made so to be. Yea, we allow no faith to be
justifying, or to be of the same kind with it, which is not itself, and
in its own nature, a spiritually vital principle of obedience and good
works. And if this be not sufficient to prevail with some not to seek for
advantages by such shameful calumnies, yet is it so with others, to free
their minds from any concernment in them.
[As] for the especial nature of justifying faith, which we inquire
into, the things whereby it is evidenced may be reduced unto these four
heads:--1. The causes of it on the part of God. 2. What is in us
previously required unto it. 3. The proper object of it. 4. Its proper
peculiar acts and effects. Which shall be spoken unto so far as is
necessary unto our present design:--
1. The doctrine of the causes of faith, as unto its first original in
the divine will, and the way of its communication unto us, is so large,
and so immixed with that of the way and manner of the operation of
efficacious grace in conversion (which I have handled elsewhere), as that
I shall not here insist upon it. For as it cannot in a few words be
spoken unto, according unto its weight and worth, so to engage into a
full handling of it would too much divert us from our present argument.
This I shall only say, that from thence it may be uncontrollable
evidenced, that the faith whereby we are justified is of an especial kind
or nature, wherein no other faith, which justification is not inseparable
from, does partake with it.
2. Wherefore, our first inquiry is concerning what was proposed in the
second place,--namely, What is on our part, in a way of duty, previously
required thereunto; or, what is necessary to be found in us
antecedaneously unto our believing unto the justification of life? And I
say there is supposed in them in whom this faith is wrought, on whom it
is bestowed, and whose duty it is to believe therewith, the work of the
law in the conviction of sin; or, conviction of sin is a necessary
antecedent unto justifying faith. Many have disputed what belongs
hereunto, and what effects it produces in the mind, that dispose the soul
unto the receiving of the promise of the gospel. But whereas there are
different apprehensions about these effects or concomitants of conviction
(in compunction, humiliation, self-judging, with sorrow for sin
committed, and the like), as also about the degrees of them, as
ordinarily prerequired unto faith and conversion unto God, I shall speak
very briefly unto them, so far as they are inseparable from the
conviction asserted. And I shall first consider this conviction itself,
with what is essential thereunto, and then the effects of it in
conjunction with that temporary faith before spoken of. I shall do so,
not as unto their nature, the knowledge whereof I take for granted, but
only as they have respect unto our justification.
(1.) As to the first, I say, the work of conviction in general,
whereby the soul of man has a practical understanding of the nature of
sin, its guilt, and the punishment due unto it; and is made sensible of
his own interest therein, both with respect unto sin original and actual,
with his own utter disability to deliver himself out of the state and
condition wherein on the account of these things he finds himself to be,-
-is that which we affirm to be antecedaneously necessary unto justifying
faith; that is, in the adult, and of whose justification the word is the
external means and instrument.
A convinced sinner is only "subjectum capax justificationis",--not
that every one that is convinced is or must necessarily be justified.
There is not any such disposition or preparation of the subject by this
conviction, its effects, and consequent, as that the form of
justification, as the Papists speak, or justifying grace, must
necessarily ensue or be introduced thereon. Nor is there any such
preparation in it, as that, by virtue of any divine compact or promise, a
person so convinced shall be pardoned and justified. But as a man may
believe with any kind of faith that is not justifying, such as that
before mentioned, without this conviction; so it is ordinarily previous
and necessary so to be, unto that faith which is unto the justification
of life. The motive unto it is not that thereon a man shall be assuredly
justified; but that without it he cannot be so.
This, I say, is required in the person to be justified, in order of
nature antecedaneously unto that faith whereby we are justified; which we
shall prove with the ensuing arguments:--For, [1.] Without the due
consideration and supposition of it, the true nature of faith can never
be understood. For, as we have showed before, justification is God's way
of the deliverance of the convinced sinner, or one whose mouth is
stopped, and who is guilty before God,--obnoxious to the law, and shut up
under sin. A sense, therefore, of this estate, and all that belongs unto
it, is required unto believing. Hence Le Blanc, who has searched with
some diligence into these things, commends the definition of faith given
by Mestrezat,--that it is "the fight of a penitent sinner unto the mercy
of God in Christ." And there is, indeed, more sense and truth in it than
in twenty others that seem more accurate. But without a supposition of
the conviction mentioned, there is no understanding of this definition of
faith. For it is that alone which puts the soul upon a flight unto the
mercy of God in Christ, to be saved from the wrath to come. Heb.6:18,
"Fled for refuge."
[2.] The order, relation, and use of the law and the gospel do
uncontrollably evince the necessity of this conviction previous unto
believing. For that which any man has first to deal withal, with respect
unto his eternal condition, both naturally and by God's institution, is
the law. This is first presented unto the soul with its terms of
righteousness and life, and with its curse in case of failure. Without
this the gospel cannot be understood, nor the grace of it duly valued.
For it is the revelation of God's way for the relieving the souls of men
from the sentence and curse of the law, Rom.1:17. That was the nature,
that was the use and end of the first promise, and of the whole work of
God's grace revealed in all the ensuing promises, or in the whole gospel.
Wherefore, the faith which we treat of being evangelical,--that which, in
its especial nature and use, not the law but the gospel requires, that
which has the gospel for its principle, rule, and object,--it is not
required of us, cannot be acted by us, but on a supposition of the work
and effect of the law in the conviction of sin, by giving the knowledge
of it, a sense of its guilt, and the state of the sinner on the account
thereof. And that faith which has not respect hereunto, we absolutely
deny to be that faith whereby we are justified, Gal.3:22-24; Rom.10:4.
[3.] This our Saviour himself directly teaches in the gospel. For he
calls unto him only those who are weary and heavily laden; affirms that
the "whole have no need of the physician, but the sick;" and that he
"came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." In all which
he intends not those who were really sinners, as all men are,--for he
makes a difference between them, offering the gospel unto some and not
unto others,--but such as were convinced of sin, burdened with it, and
sought after deliverance.
So those unto whom the apostle Peter proposed the promise of the
gospel, with the pardon of sin thereby as the object of gospel faith,
were "pricked to the heart" upon the conviction of their sin, and cried,
"What shall we do?" Acts 2:37-39. Such, also, was the state of the jailer
unto whom the apostle Paul proposed salvation by Christ, as what he was
to believe for his deliverance, Acts 16:30,31.
[4.] The state of Adam, and God's dealing with him therein, is the
best representation of the order and method of these things. As he was
after the fall, so are we by nature, in the very same state and
condition. Really he was utterly lost by sin, and convinced he was both
of the nature of his sin and of the effects of it, in that act of God by
the law on his mind, which is called the "opening of his eyes." For it
was nothing but the communication unto his mind by his conscience of a
sense of the nature, guilt, effects, and consequent of sin; which the law
could then teach him, and could not do so before. This fills him with
shame and fear; against the former whereof he provided by fig-leaves, and
against the latter by hiding himself among the trees of the garden. Nor,
however they may please themselves with them, are any of the contrivances
of men, for freedom and safety from sin, either wiser or more likely to
have success. In this condition God, by an immediate inquisition into the
matter of fact, sharpens this conviction by the addition of his own
testimony unto its truth, and casts him actually under the curse of the
law, in a juridical denunciation of it. In this lost, forlorn, hopeless
condition, God proposes the promise of redemption by Christ unto him. And
this was the object of that faith whereby he was to be justified.
Although these things are not thus eminently and distinctly translated
in the minds and consciences of all who are called unto believing by the
gospel, yet for the substance of them, and as to the previousness of the
conviction of sin unto faith, they are found in all that sincerely
believe.
These things are known, and, for the substance of them, generally
agreed unto. But yet are they such as, being duly considered, will
discover the vanity and mistakes of many definitions of faith that are
obtruded on us. For any definition or description of it which has not
express, or at least virtual, respect hereunto, is but a deceit, and no
way answers the experience of them that truly believe. And such are all
those who place it merely in an assent unto divine revelation, of what
nature soever that assent be, and whatever effects are ascribed unto it.
For such an assent there may be, without any respect unto this work of
the law. Neither do I, to speak plainly, at all value the most accurate
disputations of any about the nature and act of justifying faith, who
never had in themselves an experience of the work of the law in
conviction and condemnation for sin, with the effects of it upon their
consciences; or [who] do omit the due consideration of their own
experience, wherein what they truly believe is better stated than in all
their disputations. That faith whereby we are justified is, in general,
the acting of the soul towards God, as revealing himself in the gospel,
for deliverance out of this state and condition, or from under the curse
of the law applied unto the conscience, according to his mind, and by the
ways that he has appointed. I give not this as any definition of faith,
but only express what has a necessary influence unto it, whence the
nature of it may be discerned.
(2.) The effects of this conviction, with their respect unto our
justification, real or pretended, may also be briefly considered. And
whereas this conviction is a mere work of the law, it is not, with
respect unto these effects, to be considered alone, but in conjunction
with, and under the conduct of, that temporary faith of the gospel before
described. And these two, temporary faith and legal conviction, are the
principles of all works or duties in unto justification; and which,
therefore, we must deny to have in them any causality thereof. But it is
granted that many acts and duties, both internal and external, will ensue
on real convictions. Those that are internal may be reduced unto three
heads:--[1.] Displicency and sorrow that we have sinned. It is impossible
that any one should be really convinced of sin in the way before
declared, but that a dislike of sin, and of himself that he has sinned,
shame of it, and sorrow for it, will ensue thereon. And it is a
sufficient evidence that he is not really convinced of sin, whatever he
profess, or whatever confession he make, whose mind is not so affected,
Jer.36:24. [2.] Fear of punishment due to sin. For conviction respects
not only the instructive and receptive part of the law, whereby the being
and nature of sin are discovered, but the sentence and curse of it also,
whereby it is judged and condemned, Gen.4:13,14. Wherefore, where fear of
the punishment threatened does not ensue, no person is really convinced
of sin; nor has the law had its proper work towards him, as it is
previous unto the administration of the gospel. And whereas by faith we
"fly from the wrath to come," where there is not a sense and apprehension
of that wrath as due unto us, there is no ground or reason for our
believing. [3.] A desire of deliverance from that state wherein a
convinced sinner finds himself upon his conviction is unavoidable unto
him. And it is naturally the first thing that conviction works in the
minds of men, and that in various degrees of care, fear, solicitude, and
restlessness; which, from experience and the conduct of Scripture light,
have been explained by many, unto the great benefit of the church, and
sufficiently derided by others. Secondly, These internal acts of the mind
will also produce sundry external duties, which may be referred unto two
heads:--[1.] Abstinence from known sin unto the utmost of men's power.
For they who begin to find that it is an evil thing and a bitter that
they have sinned against God, cannot but endeavour a future abstinence
from it. And as this has respect unto all the former internal acts, as
causes of it, so it is a peculiar exurgency of the last of them, or a
desire of deliverance from the state wherein such persons are. For this
they suppose to be the best expedient for it, or at least that without
which it will not be. And herein usually do their spirits act by promises
and vows, with renewed sorrow on surprisals into sin, which will befall
them in that condition. [2.] The duties of religious worship, in prayer
and hearing of the word, with diligence in the use of the ordinances of
the church, will ensue hereon. For without these they know that no
deliverance is to be obtained. Reformation of life and conversation in
various degrees does partly consist in these things, and partly follow
upon them. And these things are always so, where the convictions of men
are real and abiding.
But yet it must be said, that they are neither severally nor jointly,
though in the highest degree, either necessary dispositions,
preparations, previous congruities in a way of merit, nor conditions of
our justification. For,--
[1.] They are not conditions of justification. For where one thing is
the condition of another, that other thing must follow the fulfilling of
that condition, otherwise the condition of it it is not; but they may be
all found where justification does not ensue: wherefore, there is no
covenant, promise, or constitution of God, making them to be such
conditions of justification, though, in their own nature, they may be
subservient unto what is required of us with respect thereunto; but a
certain infallible connection with it, by virtue of any promise or
covenant of God (as it is with faith), they have not. And other
condition, but what is constituted and made to be so by divine compact or
promise, is not to be allowed; for otherwise, conditions might be
endlessly multiplied, and all things, natural as well as moral, made to
be so. So the meat we eat may be a condition of justification. Faith and
justification are inseparable; but so are not justification and the
things we now insist upon, as experience does evince.
[2.] Justification may be, where the outward acts and duties
mentioned, proceeding from convictions under the conduct of temporary
faith, are not. For Adam was justified without them; so also were the
converts in the Acts, chap. 2,--for what is reported concerning them is
all of it essentially included in conviction, verse 37; and so likewise
was it with the jailer, Acts 16:30,31; and as unto many of them, it is so
with most that do believe. Therefore, they are not conditions; for a
condition suspends the event of a condition.
[3.] They are not formal dispositions unto justification; because it
consists not in the introduction of any new form or inherent quality in
the soul, as has been in part already declared, and shall yet afterwards
be more fully evinced. Nor,-[4.] Are they moral preparations for it; for
being antecedent unto faith evangelical, no man can have any design in
them, but only to "seek for righteousness by the works of the law," which
is no preparation unto justification. All discoveries of the
righteousness of God, with the soul's adherence unto it, belong to faith
alone. There is, indeed, a repentance which accompanies faith, and is
included in the nature of it, at least radically. This is required unto
our justification But that legal repentance which precedes gospel faith,
and is without it, is neither a disposition, preparation, nor condition
of our justification.
In brief, the order of these things may be observed in the dealing of
God with Adam, as was before intimated. And there are three degrees in
it:--[1.] The opening of the eyes of the sinner, to see the filth and
guilt of sin in the sentence and curse of the law applied unto his
conscience, Rom.8:9,10. This effects in the mind of the sinner the things
before mentioned, and puts him upon all the duties that spring from them.
For persons on their first convictions, ordinarily judge no more but that
their state being evil and dangerous, it is their duty to better it; and
that they can or shall do so accordingly, if they apply themselves
thereunto. But all these things, as to a protection or deliverance from
the sentence of the law, are no better than fig-leaves and hiding. [2.]
Ordinarily, God by his providence, or in the dispensation of the word,
gives life and power unto this work of the law in a peculiar manner; in
answer unto the charge which he gave unto Adam after his attempt to hide
himself. Hereby the "mouth of the sinner is stopped," and he becomes, as
thoroughly sensible of his guilt before God, so satisfied that there is
no relief or deliverance to be expected from any of those ways of sorrow
or duty that he has put himself upon. [3.] In this condition it is a mere
act of sovereign grace, without any respect unto these things foregoing,
to call the sinner unto believing, or faith in the promise unto the
justification of life. This is God's order; yet so as that what precedes
his call unto faith has no causality thereof.
3. The next thing to be inquired into is the proper object of
justifying faith, or of true faith, in its office, work, and duty, with
respect unto our justification. And herein we must first consider what we
cannot so well close withal. For besides other differences that seem to
be about it (which, indeed, are but different explanations of the same
thing for the substance), there are two opinions which are looked on as
extremes, the one in an excess, and the other in defect. The first is
that of the Roman church, and those who comply with them therein. And
this is, that the object of justifying faith, as such, is all divine
verity, all divine revelation, whether written in the Scripture or
delivered by tradition, represented unto us by the authority of the
church. In the latter part of this description we are not at present
concerned. That the whole Scripture, and all the parts of it, and all the
truths, of what sort soever they be, that are contained in it, are
equally the objects of faith in the discharge of its office in our
justification, is that which they maintain. Hence, as to the nature of
it, they cannot allow it to consist in any thing but an assent of the
mind. For, supposing the whole Scripture, and all contained in it,--laws,
precepts, promises, threatening, stories, prophecies, and the like,--to
be the object of it, and these not as containing in them things good or
evil unto us, but under this formal consideration as divinely revealed,
they cannot assign or allow any other act of the mind to be required
hereunto, but assent only. And so confident are they herein,--namely,
that faith is no more than an assent unto divine revelation,--as that
Bellarmine, in opposition unto Calvin, who placed knowledge in the
description of justifying faith, affirms that it is better defined by
ignorance than by knowledge.
This description of justifying faith and its object has been so
discussed, and on such evident grounds of Scripture and reason rejected
by Protestant writers of all sorts, as that it is needless to insist much
upon it again. Some things I shall observe in relation unto it, whereby
we may discover what is of truth in what they assert, and wherein it
falls short thereof. Neither shall I respect only them of the Roman
church who require no more to faith or believing, but only a bare assent
of the mind unto divine revelations, but them also who place it wholly in
such a firm assent as produces obedience unto all divine commands. For as
it does both these, as both these are included in it, so unto the
especial nature of it more is required. It is, as justifying, neither a
mere assent, nor any such firm degree of it as should produce such
effects.
(1.) All faith whatever is an act of that power of our souls, in
general, whereby we are able firmly to assent unto the truth upon
testimony, in things not evident unto us by sense or reason. It is "the
evidence of things not seen." And all divine faith is in general an
assent unto the truth that is proposed unto us upon divine testimony. And
hereby, as it is commonly agreed, it is distinguished from opinion and
moral certainty on the one hand, and science or demonstration on the
other.
(2.) Wherefore, in justifying faith there is an assent unto all divine
revelation upon the testimony of God, the revealer. By no other act of
our mind, wherein this is not included or supposed, can we be justified;
not because it is not justifying, but because it is not faith. This
assent, I say, is included in justifying faith. And therefore we find it
often spoken of in the Scripture (the instances whereof are gathered up
by Bellarmine and others) with respect unto other things, and not
restrained unto the especial promise of grace in Christ; which is that
which they oppose. But besides that in most places of that kind the
proper object of faith as justifying is included and referred ultimately
unto, though diversely expressed by some of its causes or concomitant
adjuncts, it is granted that we believe all divine truth with that very
faith whereby we are justified, so as that other things may well be
ascribed unto it.
(3.) On these concessions we yet say two things:--[1.] That the whole
nature of justifying faith does not consist merely in an assent of the
mind, be it never so firm and steadfast, nor whatever effects of
obedience it may produce. [2.] That in its duty and office in
justification, whence it has that especial denomination which alone we
are in the explanation of, it does not equally respect all divine
revelation as such, but has a peculiar object proposed unto it in the
Scripture. And whereas both these will be immediately evinced in our
description of the proper object and nature of faith, I shall, at
present, oppose some few things unto this description of them, sufficient
to manifest how alien it is from the truth.
1st. This assent is an act of the understanding only,--an act of the
mind with respect unto truth evidenced unto it, be it of what nature it
will. So we believe the worst of things and the most grievous unto us, as
well as the best and the most useful. But believing is an act of the
heart; which, in the Scriptures comprises all the faculties of the soul
as one entire principle of moral and spiritual duties: "With the heart
man believeth unto righteousness," Rom.10:10. And it is frequently
described by an act of the will, though it be not so alone. But without
an act of the will, no man can believe as he ought. See John 5:40; 1:12;
6:35. We come to Christ in an act of the will; and "let whosoever will,
come." And to be willing is taken for to believe, Ps.110:3; and unbelief
is disobedience, Heb.3:18,19.
2dly. All divine truth is equally the object of this assent. It
respects not the especial nature or use of any one truth, be it of what
kind it will, more than another; nor can it do so, since it regards only
divine revelation. Hence that Judas was the traitor, must have as great
an influence into our justification as that Christ died for our sins. But
how contrary this is unto the Scripture, the analogy of faith, and the
experience of all that believe, needs neither declaration nor
confirmation.
3dly. This assent unto all divine revelation may be true and sincere,
where there has been no previous work of the law, nor any conviction of
sin. No such thing is required thereunto, nor are they found in many who
yet do so assent unto the truth. But, as we have showed, this is
necessary unto evangelical, justifying faith; and to suppose the
contrary, is to overthrow the order and use of the law and gospel, with
their mutual relation unto one another, in subserviency unto the design
of God in the salvation of sinners.
4thly. It is not a way of seeking relief unto a convinced sinner,
whose mouth is stopped, in that he is become guilty before God. Such
alone are capable subjects of justification, and do or can seek after it
in a due manner. A mere assent unto divine revelation is not peculiarly
suited to give such persons relief: for it is that which brings them into
that condition from whence they are to be relieved; for the knowledge of
sin is by the law. But faith is a peculiar acting of the soul for
deliverance.
5thly. It is no more than what the devils themselves may have, and
have, as the apostle James affirms. For that instance of their believing
one God, proves that they believe also whatever this one God, who is the
first essential truth, does reveal to be true. And it may consist with
all manner of wickedness, and without any obedience; and so make God a
liar, 1 John 5:10. And it is no wonder if men deny us to be justified by
faith, who know no other faith but this.
6thly. It no way answers the descriptions that are given of justifying
faith in the Scripture. Particularly, it is by faith as it is justifying
that we are said to "receive" Christ, John 1:12; Col.2:6;-- to "receive"
the promise, the word, the grace of God, the atonement, James 1:21; John
3:33; Acts 2:41; 11:1; Rom.5:11; Heb.11:17; to "cleave unto God,"
Deut.4:4; Acts 11:23. And so, in the Old Testament it is generally
expressed by trust and hope. Now, none of these things are contained in a
mere assent unto the truth; but they require other acting of the soul
than what are peculiar unto the understanding only.
7thly. It answers not the experience of them that truly believe. This
all our inquiries and arguments in this matter must have respect unto.
For the sum of what we aim at is, only to discover what they do who
really believe unto the justification of life. It is not what notions men
may have hereof, nor how they express their conceptions, how defensible
they are against objections by accuracy of expressions and subtle
distinctions; but only what we ourselves do, if we truly believe, that we
inquire after. And although our differences about it do argue the great
imperfection of that state wherein we are, so as that those who truly
believe cannot agree what they do in their so doing,--which should give
us a mutual tenderness and forbearance towards each other;--yet if men
would attend unto their own experience in the application of their souls
unto God for the pardon of sin and righteousness to life, more than unto
the notions which, on various occasions, their minds are influenced by,
or prepossessed withal, many differences and unnecessary disputations
about the nature of justifying faith would be prevented or prescinded. I
deny, therefore, that this general assent unto the truth, how firm soever
it be, or what effects in the way of duty or obedience soever it may
produce, does answer the experience of any one true believer, as
containing the entire acting of his soul towards God for pardon of sin
and justification.
8thly. That faith alone is justifying which has justification actually
accompanying of it. For thence alone it has that denomination. To suppose
a man to have justifying faith, and not to be justified, is to suppose a
contradiction. Nor do we inquire after to nature of any other faith but
that whereby a believer is actually justified. But it is not so with all
them in whom this assent is found; nor will those that plead for it allow
that upon it alone any are immediately justified. Wherefore it is
sufficiently evident that there is somewhat more required unto justifying
faith than a real assent unto all divine revelations, although we do give
that assent by the faith whereby we are justified.
But, on the other side, it is supposed that, by some, the object of
justifying faith is so much restrained, and the nature of it thereby
determined unto such a peculiar acting of the mind, as comprises not the
whole of what is in the Scripture ascribed unto it. So some have said
that it is the pardon of our sins, in particular, that is the object of
justifying faith;--faith, therefore, they make to be a full persuasion of
the forgiveness of our sins through the mediation of Christ; or, that
what Christ did and suffered as our mediator, he did it for us in
particular: and a particular application of especial mercy unto our own
souls and consciences is hereby made the essence of faith; or, to believe
that our own sins are forgiven seems hereby to be the first and most
proper act of justifying faith. Hence it would follow, that whosoever
does not believe, or has not a firm persuasion of the forgiveness of his
own sins in particular, has no saving faith,--is no true believer; which
is by no means to be admitted. And if any have been or are of this
opinion, I fear that they were, in the asserting of it, neglective of
their own experience; or, it may be, rather, that they knew not how, in
their experience, all the other acting of faith, wherein its essence does
consist, were included in this persuasion, which in an especial manner
they aimed at: whereof we shall speak afterwards. And there is no doubt
unto me, but that this which they propose, faith is suited unto, aims at,
and does ordinarily effect in true believers, who improve it, and grow in
its exercise in a due manner.
Many great divines, at the first Reformation, did (as the Lutherans
generally yet do) thus make the mercy of God in Christ, and thereby the
forgiveness of our own sins, to be the proper object of justifying faith,
as such;--whose essence, therefore, they placed in a fiducial trust in
the grace of God by Christ declared in the promises, with a certain
unwavering application of them unto ourselves. And I say, with some
confidence, that those who endeavour not to attain hereunto, either
understand not the nature of believing, or are very neglective, both of
the grace of God and of their own peace.
That which inclined those great and holy persons so to express
themselves in this matter, and to place the essence of faith in the
highest acting of it (wherein yet they always included and supposed its
other acts), was the state of the consciences of men with whom they had
to do. Their contest in this article with the Roman church, was about the
way and means whereby the consciences of convinced, troubled sinners
might come to rest and peace with God. For at that time they were no
otherwise instructed, but that these things were to be obtained, not only
by works of righteousness which men did themselves, in obedience unto the
commands of God, but also by the strict observance of many inventions of
what they called the Church; with an ascription of a strange efficacy to
the same ends unto missatical sacrifices, sacramentals, absolutions,
penances, pilgrimages, and other the like superstitions. Hereby they
observed that the consciences of men were kept in perpetual
disquietments, perplexities, fears and bondage, exclusive of that rest,
assurance, and peace with God through the blood of Christ, which the
gospel proclaims and tenders; and when the leaders of the people in that
church had observed this, that indeed the ways and means which they
proposed and presented would never bring the souls of men to rest, nor
give them the least assurance of the pardon of sins, they made it a part
of their doctrine, that the belief of the pardon of our own sins, and
assurance of the love of God in Christ, were false and pernicious. For
what should they else do, when they knew well enough that in their way,
and by their propositions, they were not to be attained? Hence the
principal controversy in this matter, which the reformed divines had with
those of the church of Rome, was this,--Whether there be, according unto
and by the gospel, a state of rest and assured peace with God to be
attained in his life? And having all advantages imaginable for the proof
hereof, from the very nature, use, and end of the gospel,--from the
grace, love, and design of God in Christ,--from the efficacy of his
mediation in his oblation and intercession,--they assigned these things
to be the especial object of justifying faith, and that faith itself to
be a fiduciary trust in the especial grace and mercy of God, through the
blood of Christ, s proposed in the promises of the gospel;--that is, they
directed the souls of men to seek for peace with God, the pardon of sin,
and a right unto the heavenly inheritance, by placing their sole trust
and confidence in the mercy of God by Christ alone. but yet, withal, I
never read any of them (I know not what others have done) who affirmed
that every true and sincere believer always had a full assurance of the
especial love of God in Christ, or of the pardon of his own sins,--though
they plead that this the Scripture requires of them in a way of duty, and
that this they ought to aim at the attainment of.
And these things I shall leave as I find them, unto the use of the
church. For I shall not contend with any about the way and manner of
expressing the truth, where the substance of it is retained. That which
in these things is aimed at, is the advancement and glory of the grace of
God in Christ, with the conduct of the souls of men unto rest and peace
with him. Where this is attained or aimed at, and that in the way of
truth for the substance of it, variety of apprehensions and expressions
concerning the same things may tend unto the useful exercise of faith and
the edification of the church. Wherefore, neither opposing nor rejecting
what has been delivered by others as their judgments herein, I shall
propose my own thoughts concerning it; not without some hopes that they
may tend to communicate light in the knowledge of the thing itself
inquired into, and the reconciliation of some differences about it
amongst learned and holy men. I say, therefore, that the Lord Jesus
Christ himself, as ordinance of God, in his work of mediation for the
recovery and salvation of lost sinners, and as unto that end proposed in
the promise of the gospel, is the adequate, proper object of justifying
faith, or of saving faith in its work and duty with respect unto our
justification.
The reason why I thus state the object of justifying faith is, because
it completely answers all that is ascribed unto it in the Scripture, and
all that the nature of it does require. What belongs unto it as faith in
general, is here supposed; and what is peculiar unto it as justifying, is
fully expressed. And a few things will serve for the explication of the
thesis, which shall afterwards be confirmed.
(1.) The Lord Jesus Christ himself is asserted to be the proper object
of justifying faith. For so it is required in all those testimonies of
Scripture where that faith is declared to be our believing in him, on his
name, our receiving of him, or looking unto him; whereunto the promise of
justification and eternal life is annexed: whereof afterwards. See John
1:12; 3:16,36; 6:29,47; 7:38; 14:12; Acts 10:43; 13:38,39; 16:31; 26:18;
etc.
(2.) He is not proposed as the object of our faith unto the
justification of life absolutely, but as the ordinance of God, even the
Father, unto that end: who therefore also is the immediate object of
faith as justifying; in what respects we shall declare immediately. So
justification is frequently ascribed unto faith as peculiarly acted on
him, John 5:24, "He that believeth on him that sent me, has everlasting
life, and shall not come into judgment; but is passed from death unto
life." And herein is comprised that grace, love, and favour of God, which
is the principal moving cause of our justification, Rom.3:23,24. Add
hereunto John 6:29, and the object of faith is complete: "This is the
work of God, that ye believe on him whom he has sent." God the Father as
sending, and the Son as sent,-- that is, Jesus Christ in the work of his
mediation, as the ordinance of God for the recovery and salvation of lost
sinners, is the object of our faith. See 1 Pet.1:21.
(3.) That he may be the object of our faith, whose general nature
consists in assent, and which is the foundation of all its other acts, he
is proposed in the promises of the gospel; which I therefore place as
concurring unto its complete object. Yet do I not herein consider the
promises merely as peculiar divine revelations, in which sense they
belong unto the formal object of faith; but as they contain, propose, and
exhibit Christ as the ordinance of God, and the benefits of his
mediation, unto them that do believe. There is an especial assent unto
the promises of the gospel, wherein some place the nature and essence of
justifying faith, or of faith in its work and duty with respect unto our
justification. And so they make the promises of the gospel to be the
proper object of it. And it cannot be but that, in the acting of
justifying faith, there is a peculiar assent unto them. Howbeit, this
being only an act of the mind, neither the whole nature nor the whole
work of faith can consist therein. Wherefore, so far as the promises
concur to the complete object of faith, they are considered materially
also,--namely, as they contain, propose, and exhibit Christ unto
believers. And in that sense are they frequently affirmed in the
Scripture to be the object of our faith unto the justification of life,
Acts 2:39; 26:6; Rom.4:16,20; 15:8; Gal.3:16,18; Heb.4:1; 6:13; 8:6;
10:36.
(4.) The end for which the Lord Christ, in the work of his mediation,
is the ordinance of God, and as such proposed in the promises of the
gospel,--namely, the recovery and salvation of lost sinners,--belongs
unto the object of faith as justifying. Hence, the forgiveness of sin and
eternal life are proposed in the Scripture as things that are to be
believed unto justification, or as the object of our faith, Matt.9:2;
Acts 2:38,39; 5:31; 26:18; Rom. 3:25; 4:7,8; Col.2:13; Tit.1:2; etc. And
whereas the just is to live by his faith, and every one is to believe for
himself, or make an application of the things believed unto his own
behoof, some from hence have affirmed the pardon of our own sins and our
own salvation to be the proper object of faith; and indeed it does belong
thereunto, when, in the way and order of God and the gospel, we can
attain unto it, 1 Cor.15:3,4; Gal.2:20; Eph.1:6,7.
Wherefore, asserting the Lord Jesus Christ, in the work of his
mediation, to be the object of faith unto justification, I include
therein the grace of God, which is the cause; the pardon of sin, which is
the effect; and the promises of the gospel, which are the means, of
communicating Christ and the benefits of his mediation unto us.
And all these things are so united, so intermixed in their mutual
relations and respects, so concatenated in the purpose of God, and the
declaration made of his will in the gospel, as that the believing of any
one of them does virtually include the belief of the rest. And by whom
any one of them is disbelieved, they frustrate and make void all the
rest, and so faith itself.
The due consideration of these things solves all the difficulties that
arise about the nature of faith, either from the Scripture or from the
experience of them that believe, with respect unto its object. Many
things in the Scripture are we said to believe with it and by it, and
that unto justification; but two things are hence evident:--First, That
no one of them can be asserted to be the complete, adequate object of our
faith. Secondly, That none of them are so absolutely, but as they relate
unto the Lord Christ, as the ordinance of God for our justification and
salvation.
And this answers the experience of all that do truly believe. For
these things being united and made inseparable in the constitution of
God, all of them are virtually included in every one of them. (1.) Some
fix their faith and trust principally on the grace, love, and mercy of
God; especially they did so under the Old Testament, before the clear
revelation of Christ and his mediation. So did the psalmist, Ps.130:3,4;
33:18,19; and the publican, Luke 18:13. And these are, in places of the
Scripture innumerable, proposed as the causes of our justification. See
Rom.3:24; Eph.2:4-8; Tit.3:5-7. But this they do not absolutely, but with
respect unto the "redemption that is in the blood of Christ," Dan.9:17.
Nor does the Scripture anywhere propose them unto us but under that
consideration. See Rom.3:24,25; Eph.1:6-8. For this is the cause, way,
and means of the communication of that grace, love, and mercy unto us.
(2.) Some place and fix them principally on the Lord Christ, his
mediation, and the benefits thereof. This the apostle Paul proposes
frequently unto us in his own example. See Gal.2:20; Phil.3:8-10. But
this they do not absolutely, but with respect unto the grace and love of
God, whence it is that they are given and communicated unto us, Rom.8:32;
John 3:16; Eph.1:6-8. Nor are they otherwise anywhere proposed unto us in
the Scripture as the object of our faith unto justification. (3.) Some in
a peculiar manner fix their souls, in believing, on the promises. And
this is exemplified in the instance of Abraham, Gen.15:6; Rom.4:20. And
so are they proposed in the Scripture as the object of our faith, Acts
2:39; Rom.4:16; Heb.4:1,2; 6:12,13. But this they do not merely as they
are divine revelations, but as they contain and propose unto us the Lord
Christ and the benefits of his mediation, from the grace, love, and mercy
of God. Hence the apostle disputes at large, in his Epistle unto the
Galatians, that if justification be any way but by the promise, both the
grace of God and the death of Christ are evacuated and made of none
effect. And the reason is, because the promise is nothing but the way and
means of the communication of them unto us. (4.) Some fix their faith on
the things themselves which they aim at,--namely, the pardon of sin and
eternal life. And these also in the Scripture are proposed unto us as the
object of our faith, or that which we are to believe unto justification,
Ps.130:4; Acts 26:18; Tit.1:2. But this is to be done in its proper
order, especially as unto the application of them unto our own souls. For
we are nowhere required to believe them, or our own interest in them, but
as they are effects of the grace and love of God, through Christ and his
mediation, proposed in the promises of the gospel. Wherefore the belief
of them is included in the belief of these, and is in order of nature
antecedent thereunto. And the belief of the forgiveness of sins, and
eternal life, without the due exercise of faith in those causes of them,
is but presumption.
I have, therefore, given the entire object of faith as justifying, or
in its work and duty with respect unto our justification, in compliance
with the testimonies of the Scripture, and the experience of them that
believe.
Allowing, therefore, their proper place unto the promises, and unto
the effect of all in the pardon of sins and eternal life, that which I
shall farther confirm is, that the Lord Christ, in the work of his
mediation, as the ordinance of God for the recovery and salvation of lost
sinners, is the proper adequate object of justifying faith. And the true
nature of evangelical faith consists in the respect of the heart (which
we shall immediately describe) unto the love, grace, and wisdom of God;
with the mediation of Christ, in his obedience; with the sacrifice,
satisfaction, and atonement for sin which he made by his blood. These
things are impiously opposed by some as inconsistent; for the second head
of the Socinian impiety is, that the grace of God and satisfaction of
Christ are opposite and inconsistent, so as that if we allow of the one
we must deny the other. But as these things are so proposed in the
Scripture, as that without granting them both neither can be believed; so
faith, which respects them as subordinate,--namely, the mediation of
Christ unto the grace of God, that fixes itself on the Lord Christ and
that redemption which is in his blood,--as the ordinance of God, the
effect of his wisdom, grace, and love, finds rest in both, and in nothing
else.
For the proof of the assertion, I need not labour in it, it being not
only abundantly declared in the Scripture, but that which contains in it
a principal part of the design and substance of the gospel. I shall,
therefore, only refer unto some of the places wherein it is taught, or
the testimonies that are given unto it.
The whole is expressed in that place of the apostle wherein the
doctrine of justification is most eminently proposed unto us,
Rom.3:24,25, "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption
that is in Christ Jesus; whom God has set forth to be a propitiation
through faith in his blood; to declare his righteousness for the
remission of sins." Whereunto we may add, Eph.1:6,7, "He has made us
accepted in the Beloved; in whom we have redemption through his blood,
according to the riches of his grace." That whereby we are justified, is
the especial object of our faith unto justification. But this is the Lord
Christ in the work of his mediation: for we are justified by the
redemption that is in Jesus Christ; for in him we have redemption through
his blood, even the forgiveness of sin. Christ as a propitiation is the
cause of our justification, and the object of our faith or we attain it
by faith in his blood. But this is so under this formal consideration, as
he is the ordinance of God for that end,--appointed, given, proposed, set
forth from and by the grace, wisdom, and love of God. God set him forth
to be a propitiation. He makes us accepted in the Beloved. We have
redemption in his blood, according to the riches of his grace, whereby he
makes us accepted in the Beloved. And herein he "abounds towards us in
all wisdom," Eph.1:8. This, therefore, is that which the gospel proposes
unto us, as the especial object of our faith unto the justification of
life.
But we may also in the same manner confirm the several parts of the
assertion distinctly:--
(1.) The Lord Jesus Christ, as proposed in the promise of the gospel,
is the peculiar object of faith unto justification. There are three sorts
of testimonies whereby this is confirmed:--
[1.] Those wherein it is positively asserted, as Acts 10:43, "To him
give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth
in him shall receive remission of sins." Christ believed in as the means
and cause of the remission of sins, is that which all the prophets give
witness unto. Acts 16:31, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou
shalt be saved." It is the answer of the apostle unto the jailer's
inquiry,--"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" His duty in believing, and
the object of it, the Lord Jesus Christ, is what they return thereunto.
Acts 4:12, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none
other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." That
which is proposed unto us, as the only way and means of our justification
and salvation, and that in opposition unto all other ways, is the object
of faith unto our justification; but this is Christ alone, exclusively
unto all other things. This is testified unto by Moses and the prophets;
the design of the whole Scripture being to direct the faith of the church
unto the Lord Christ alone, for life and salvation, Luke 24:25-27.
[2.] All those wherein justifying faith is affirmed to be our
believing in him, or believing on his name; which are multiplied. John
1:12, "He gave power to them to become the sons of God, who believed on
his name," chap.3:16, "That whosoever believeth in him should not perish,
but have everlasting life;" verse 36, "He that believeth on the Son has
everlasting life;" chap.6:29, "This is the work of God, that ye believe
on him whom he has sent;" verse 47, "He that be1ieveth on me has
everlasting life;" chap.7:38, "He that believeth on me, out of his belly
shall flow rivers of living water." So chap.9:35-37; 11:25; Acts 26:18,
"That they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them
which are sanctified by faith that is in me." 1 Pet.2:6,7. In all which
places, and many others, we are not only directed to place and affix our
faith on him, but the effect of justification is ascribed thereunto. So
expressly, Acts 13:38,39; which is what we design to prove.
[3.] Those which give us such a description of the acts of faith as
make him the direct and proper object of it. Such are they wherein it is
called a "receiving" of him. John 1:12, "To as many as received him."
Col.2:6, "As you have received Christ Jesus the Lord." That which we
receive by faith is the proper object of it; and it is represented by
their looking unto the brazen serpent, when it was lifted up, who were
stung by fiery serpents, John 3:14,15; 12:32. Faith is that act of the
soul whereby convinced sinners, ready otherwise to perish, do look unto
Christ as he was made a propitiation for their sins; and who so do "shall
not perish, but have everlasting life." He is, therefore, the object of
our faith.
(2.) He is so, as he is the ordinance of God unto this end; which
consideration is not to be separated from our faith in him: and this also
is confirmed by several sorts of testimonies:--
[1.] All those wherein the love and grace of God are proposed as the
only cause of giving Jesus Christ to be the way and means of our recovery
and salvation; whence they become, or God in them, the supreme efficient
cause of our justification. John 3:16, "God so loved the world, that he
gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not
perish, but have everlasting life". So Rom.5:8; 1 John 4:9,10. "Being
justified through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus," Rom.3:24;
Eph.1:6-8. This the Lord Christ directs our faith unto continually,
referring all unto him that sent him, and whose will he came to do,
Heb.10:5.
[2.] All those wherein God is said to set forth and to make him be for
us and unto us, what he is so, unto the justification of life. Rom.3:25,
"Whom God has proposed to be a propitiation." 1 Cor.1:30, "Who of God is
made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and rectification, and
redemption". 2 Cor.5:21, "He has made him to be sin for us, who knew no
sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." Acts
13:38,39; etc. Wherefore, in the acting of faith in Christ unto
justification, we can no otherwise consider him but as the ordinance of
God that end; he brings nothing unto us, does nothing for us, but what
God appointed, designed, and made him to do. And this must diligently be
considered, that by our regard by faith unto the blood, the sacrifice,
the satisfaction of Christ, we take off nothing from the free grace,
favour, and love of God.
[3.] All those wherein the wisdom of God in the contrivance of this
way of justification and salvation is proposed unto us. Eph.1:7,8, "In
whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins,
according to the riches of his grace; wherein he has abounded towards us
in all wisdom and understanding." See chap.3:10,11; 1 Cor.1:24.
The whole is comprised in that of the apostle: "God was in Christ,
reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto
them," 2 Cor.5:19. All that is done in our reconciliation unto God, as
unto the pardon of our sins, and acceptance with him unto life, was by
the presence of God, in his grace, wisdom, and power, in Christ designing
and effecting of it.
Wherefore, the Lord Christ, proposed in the promise of the gospel as
the object of our faith unto the justification of life, is considered as
the ordinance of God unto that end. Hence the love, the grace, and the
wisdom of God, in the sending and giving of him, are comprised in that
object; and not only the acting of God in Christ towards us, but all his
acting towards the person of Christ himself unto the same end, belong
thereunto. So, as unto his death, "God set him forth to be a
propitiation," Rom.3:25. "He spared him not, but delivered him up for us
all," Rom.8:32; and therein "laid all our sins upon him," Isa.53:6. So he
was "raised for our justification," Rom.4:25. And our faith is in God,
who "raised him from the dead," Rom.10:9. And in his exaltation, Acts
5:31. Which things complete "the record that God has given of his Son," 1
John 5:10-12.
The whole is confirmed by the exercise of faith in prayer; which is
the soul's application of itself unto God for the participation of the
benefits of the mediation of Christ. And it is called our "access through
him unto the Father," Eph.2:18; our coming through him "unto the throne
of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of
need," Heb.4:15,16; and through him as both "a high priest and
sacrifice," Heb.10:19-22. So do we "bow our knees unto the Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ," Eph.3:14. This answers the experience of all who know
what it is to pray. We come therein in the name of Christ, by him,
through his mediation, unto God, even the Father; to be, through his
grace, love, and mercy, made partakers of what he has designed and
promised to communicate unto poor sinners by him. And this represents the
complete object of our faith.
The due consideration of these things will reconcile and reduce unto a
perfect harmony whatever is spoken in the Scripture concerning the object
of justifying faith, or what we are said to believe therewith. For
whereas this is affirmed of sundry things distinctly, they can none of
them be supposed to be the entire adequate object of faith. But consider
them all in their relation unto Christ, and they have all of them their
proper place therein,--namely, the grace of God, which is the cause; the
pardon of sin, which is the effect; and the promises of the gospel, which
are the means, of communicating the Lord Christ, and the benefits of his
mediation unto us.
The reader may be pleased to take notice, that I do in this place not
only neglect, but despise, the late attempt of some to wrest all things
of this nature, spoken of the person and mediation of Christ, unto the
doctrine of the gospel, exclusively unto them; and that not only as what
is noisome and impious in itself, but as that also which has not yet been
endeavoured to be proved, with any appearance of learning, argument, or
sobriety.
II. The nature of justifying faith
The nature of justifying faith in particular, or of faith in the exercise
of it, whereby we are justified--The heart's approbation of the way of
the justification and salvation of sinners by Christ, with its
acquiescency therein--The description given, explained and confirmed:--1.
From the nature of the gospel--Exemplified in its contrary, or the nature
of unbelief, Prov.1:30; Heb.2:3; 1 Pet.2:7; 1 Cor.1:23,24; 2 Cor.4:3--
What it is, and wherein it does consist.--2. The design of God in and by
the gospel--His own glory his utmost end in all things--The glory of his
righteousness, grace, love, wisdom, etc.--The end of God in the way of
the salvation of sinners by Christ, Rom.3:25; John 3:16; 1 John 3:16;
Eph.1:5,6; 1 Cor.1:24; Eph.3:10; Rom.1:16; 4:16; Eph.3:9; 2 Cor.4:6--3.
The nature of faith thence declared--Faith alone ascribes and gives this
glory to God.--4. Order of the acts of faith, or the method in believing-
-Convictions previous thereunto--Sincere assent unto all divine
revelations, Acts 26:27--The proposal of the gospel unto that end,
Rom.10:11-17; 2 Cor.3:18,etc.--State of persons called to believe--
Justifying faith does not consist in any one single habit or act of the
mind or will--The nature of that about which is the first act of faith--
Approbation of the way of salvation by Christ, comprehensive of the
special nature of justifying faith--What is included there in:--1. A
renunciation of all other ways, Hos.14:2,3; Jer.3:23; Ps.71:16;
Rom.10:3.--2. Consent of the will unto this way, John 14:6--3.
Acquiescency of the heart in God, 1 Pet.1:21.--4. Trust in God.--5. Faith
described by trust--The reason of it--Nature and object of this trust
inquired into--A double consideration of special mercy--Whether obedience
be included in the nature of faith, or be of the essence of it--A sincere
purpose of universal obedience inseparable from faith--How faith alone
justifies--Repentance, how required in and unto justification--How a
condition of the new covenant--Perseverance in obedience is so also--
Definitions of faith
That which we shall now inquire into, is the nature of justifying faith;
or of faith in that act and exercise of it whereby we are justified, or
whereon justification, according unto God's ordination and promise, does
ensue. And the reader is desired to take along with him a supposition of
those things which we have already ascribed unto it, as it is sincere
faith in general; as also, of what is required previously thereunto, as
unto its especial nature, work, and duty in our justification. For we do
deny that ordinarily, and according unto the method of God's proceeding
with us declared in the Scripture, wherein the rule of our duty is
prescribed, any one does, or can, truly believe with faith unto
justification, in whom the work of conviction, before described, has not
been wrought. All descriptions or definitions of faith that have not a
respect thereunto are but vain speculations. And hence some do give us
such definitions of faith as it is hard to conceive that they ever asked
of themselves what they do in their believing on Jesus Christ for life
and salvation.
The nature of justifying faith, with respect unto that exercise of
whereby we are justified, consists in the heart's approbation of the way
of justification and salvation of sinners by Jesus Christ proposed in the
gospel, as proceeding from the grace, wisdom, and love of God, with its
acqiescency therein as unto its own concernment and condition.
There needs no more for the explanation of this declaration of the
nature of faith than what we have before proved concerning its object;
and what may seem wanting thereunto will be fully supplied in the ensuing
confirmation of it. The Lord Christ, and his mediation, as the ordinance
of God for the recovery, life, and salvation of sinners, is supposed as
the object of this faith. And they are all considered as an effect of the
wisdom, grace, authority, and love of God, with all their acting in and
towards the Lord Christ himself, in his susception and discharge of his
office. Hereunto he constantly refers all that he did and suffered, with
all the benefits redounding unto the church thereby. Hence, as we
observed before, sometimes the grace, or love, or especial mercy of God,
sometimes his acting in or towards the Lord Christ himself, in sending
him, giving him up unto death, and raising him from the dead, are
proposed as the object of our faith unto justification. But they are so,
always with respect unto his obedience and the atonement that he made for
sin. Neither are they so altogether absolutely considered, but as
proposed in the promises of the gospel. Hence, a sincere assent unto the
divine veracity in those promises is included in this approbation.
What belongs unto the confirmation of this description of faith shall
be reduced unto these four heads:--1. The declaration of its contrary, or
the nature of privative unbelief upon the proposal of the gospel. For
these things do mutually illustrate one another. 2. The declaration of
the design and end of God in and by the gospel. 3. The nature of faith's
compliance with that design, or its actings with respect thereunto. 4.
The order, method, and way of believing, as declared in the Scripture:--
1. The gospel is the revelation or declaration of that way of
justification and salvation for sinners by Jesus Christ, which God, in
infinite wisdom, love, and grace, has prepared. And upon a supposition of
the reception thereof, it is accompanied with precepts of obedience and
promises of rewards. "Therein is the righteousness of God," that which he
requires, accepts, and approves unto salvation,--"revealed from faith
unto faith," Rom.1:17. This is the record of God therein, "That he has
given unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son," 1 John 5:11. So
John 3:14-17. "The words of this life," Acts 5:20; "All the counsel of
God," Acts 20:27. Wherefore, in the dispensation or preaching of the
gospel, this way of salvation is proposed unto sinners, as the great
effect of divine wisdom and grace. Unbelief is the rejection, neglect,
non-admission, or disapprobation of it, on the terms whereon, and for the
ends for which, it is so proposed. The unbelief of the Pharisees, upon
the preparatory preaching of John the Baptist, is called the "rejecting
of the counsel of God against themselves;" that is, unto their own ruin,
Luke 7:30. "They would none of my counsel," is an expression to the same
purpose, Prov.1:30; so is the "neglecting this great salvation",
Heb.2:3,--not giving it that admission which the excellency of it does
require. A disallowing of Christ, the stone "hos apedokimasan hoi
oikodomountes", 1 Pet.2:7,--the "builders disapproved of," as not meet
for that place and work whereunto it was designed, Acts 4:11,--this is
unbelief; to disapprove of Christ, and the way of salvation by him, as
not answering divine wisdom, nor suited unto the end designed. So is it
described by the refusing or not receiving of him; all ~o lo one purpose.
What is intended will be more evident if we consider the proposal of
the gospel where it issued in unbelief, in the first preaching of it, and
where it continues still so to do.
Most of those who rejected the gospel by their unbelief, did it under
this notion, that the way of salvation and blessed proposed therein was
not a way answering divine goodness and power, such as they might safely
confide in and trust unto. This the apostle declares at large, 1 Cor.1;
so he expresses it, verses 23,24, "We preach Christ crucified, unto the
Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them
which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the
wisdom of God." That which they declared unto them in the preaching of
the gospel was, that "Christ died for our sins, according to the
Scriptures," chap.15:3. Herein they proposed him as the ordinance of God,
as the great effect of his wisdom and power for the salvation of sinners.
But as unto those who continued in their unbelief, they rejected it as
any such way, esteeming it both weakness and folly. And therefore, he
describes the faith of them that are called, by their approbation of the
wisdom and power of God herein. The want of a comprehension of the glory
of God in this way of salvation, rejecting it thereon, is that unbelief
which ruins the souls of men, 2 Cor.4:3,4.
So is it with all that continue unbelievers under the proposal of the
object of faith in the preaching of the gospel They may give an assent
unto the truth of it, so far as it is a mere act of the mind,--at least
they find not themselves concerned to reject it; yea, they may assent
unto it with that temporary faith which we described before, and perform
many duties of religion thereon: yet do they manifest that they are not
sincere believers, that they do not believe with the heart unto
righteousness, by many things that are irreconcilable unto and
inconsistent with justifying faith. The inquiry, therefore, is, Wherein
the unbelief of each persons, on the account whereof they perish, does
insist, and what is the formal nature of it? It is not, as was said, in
the want of an assent unto the truths of the doctrine of the gospel: for
from such an assent are they said, in many places of the Scripture, to
believe, as has been proved; and this assent may be so firm, and by
various means so radicated in their minds, as that, in testimony unto it,
they may give their bodies to be burned; as men also may do in the
confirmation of a false persuasion. Nor is it the want of an especial
fiduciary application, of the promises of the gospel unto themselves, and
the belief of the pardon of their own sins in particular: for this is not
proposed unto them in the first preaching of the gospel, as that which
they are first to believe, and there may be a believing unto
righteousness where this is not attained, Isa.1:10. This will evidence
faith not to be true; but it is not formal unbelief. Nor is it the want
of obedience unto the precepts of the gospel in duties of holiness and
righteousness; for these commands, as formally given in and by the
gospel, belong only unto them that truly believe, and are justified
thereon. That, therefore, which is required unto evangelical faith,
wherein the nature of it does consist, as it is the foundation of all
future obedience, is the heart's approbation of the way of life and
salvation by Jesus Christ, proposed unto it as the effect of the infinite
wisdom, love, grace, and goodness of God; and as that which is suited
unto all the wants and whole design of guilty convinced sinners. This
such persons have not; and in the want thereof consists the formal nature
of unbelief. For without this no man is, or can be, influenced by the
gospel unto a relinquishment of sin, or encouraged unto obedience,
whatever they may do on other grounds and motives that are foreign unto
the grace of it. And wherever this cordial, sincere approbation of the
way of salvation by Jesus Christ, proposed in the gospel, does prevail,
it will infallibly produce both repentance and obedience.
If the mind and heart of a convinced sinner (for of such alone we
treat) be able spiritually to discern the wisdom, love, and grace of God,
in this way of salvation, and be under the power of that persuasion, he
has the ground of repentance and obedience which is given by the gospel.
The receiving of Christ mentioned in the Scripture, and whereby the
nature of faith in its exercise is expressed, I refer unto the latter
part of the description given concerning the soul's acquiescence in God,
by the way proposed.
Again: some there were at firsts and such still continue to be, who
rejected not this way absolutely, and in the notion of it, but
comparatively, as reduced to practice; and so perished in their unbelief.
They judged the way of their own righteousness to be better, as that
which might be more safely trusted unto,--as more according unto the mind
of God and unto his glory. So did the Jews generally, the frame of whose
minds the apostle represents, Rom.10:3,4. And many of them assented unto
the doctrine of the gospel in general as true, howbeit they liked it not
in their hearts as the best way of justification and salvation, but
sought for them by the works of the law.
Wherefore, unbelief, in its formal nature, consists in the want of a
spiritual discerning and approbation of the say of salvation by Jesus
Christ, as an effect of the infinite wisdom, goodness, and love of God;
for where these are, the soul of a convinced sinner cannot but embrace
it, and adhere unto it. Hence, also, all acquiescency in this way, and
trust and confidence in committing the soul unto it, or unto God in it,
and by it (without which whatever is pretended of believing is but a
shadow of faith), is impossible unto such persons; for they want the
foundation whereon alone they can be built. And the consideration hereof
does sufficiently manifest wherein the nature of true evangelical faith
does consist.
2. The design of God in and by the gospel, with the work and office of
faith with respect thereunto, farther confirms the description given of
it. That which God designs herein, in the first place, is not the
justification and salvation of sinners. His utmost complete end, in all
his counsels, is his own glory. He does all things for himself; nor can
he who is infinite do otherwise. But in an especial manner he expresses
this concerning this way of salvation by Jesus Christ.
Particularly, he designed herein the glory of his righteousness; "To
declare his righteousness," Rom.3:20;--of his love; "God so loved the
world," John 3:16; "Herein we perceive the love of God, that he laid down
his life for us," 1 John 3:16; of his grace; "Accepted, to the praise of
the glory of his grace," Eph.1:5,6;--of his wisdom; "Christ crucified,
the wisdom of God," 1 Cor.1:24; "Might be known by the church the
manifold wisdom of God," Eph.3:10;--of his power; "it is the power of God
unto salvation," Rom.1:16;--of his faithfulness, Rom.4:16. For God
designed herein, not only the reparation of all that glory whose
declaration was impeached and obscured by the entrance of sin, but also a
farther exaltation and more eminent manifestation of it, unto the degrees
of its exaltation, and some especial instances before concealed, Eph.3:9.
And all this is called "The glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ;"
whereof faith is the beholding, 2 Cor.4:6.
3. This being the principal design of God in the way of justification
and salvation by Christ proposed in the gospel, that which on our part is
required unto a participation of the benefits of it, is the ascription of
that glory unto God which he designs so to exalt. The acknowledgment of
all these glorious properties of the divine nature, as manifested in the
provision and proposition of this way of life, righteousness, and
salvation, with an approbation of the way itself as an effect of them,
and that which is safely to be trusted unto, is that which is required of
us; and this is faith or believing: "Being strong in faith, he gave glory
to God," Rom.4:20. And this is in the nature of the weakest degree of
sincere faith. And no other grace, work, or duty, is suited hereunto, or
firstly and directly of that tendency, but only consequentially and in
the way of gratitude. And although I cannot wholly assent unto him who
affirms that faith in the epistles of Paul is nothing but "existimation
magnifice sentiens de Dei potentia, justitia, bonitate, et si quid
promiserit in eo praestando constantia", because it is too general, and
not limited unto the way of salvation by Christ, his "elect in whom he
will be glorified;" yet has it much of the nature of faith in it.
Wherefore I say, that hence we may both learn the nature of faith, and
whence it is that faith alone is required unto our justification. The
reason of it is, because this is that grace or duty alone whereby we do
or can give unto God that glory which he designs to manifest and exalt in
and by Jesus Christ. This only faith is suited unto, and this it is to
believe. Faith, in the sense we inquire after, is the heart's approbation
of, and consent unto, the way of life and salvation of sinners by Jesus
Christ, as that wherein the glory of the righteousness, wisdom, grace,
love, and mercy of God is exalted; the praise whereof it ascribes unto
him, and rests in it as unto the ends of it,--namely, justification,
life, and salvation. It is to give "glory to God," Rom.4:20; to "behold
his glory as in a glass," or the gospel wherein it is represented unto
us, 2 Cor.3:18; to have in our hearts "the light of the knowledge of the
glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ," 2 Cor.4:6. The contrary
whereunto makes God a liar, and thereby despoils him of the glory of all
those holy properties which he this way designed to manifest, l John
5:10.
And, if I mistake not, this is that which the experience of them that
truly believe, when they are out of the heats of disputation, will give
testimony unto.
4. To understand the nature of justifying faith aright, or the act and
exercise of saving faith in order unto our justification, which are
properly inquired after, we must consider the order of it; first the
things which are necessarily previous thereunto, and then what it is to
believe with respect unto them. As,--
(1.) The state of a convinced sinner, who is the only "subjectum capax
justificationis." This has been spoken unto already, and the necessity of
its precedency unto the orderly proposal and receiving of evangelical
righteousness unto justification demonstrated. If we lose a respect
hereunto, we lose our best guide towards the discovery of the nature of
faith. Let no man think to understand the gospel, who knows nothing of
the law. God's constitution, and the nature of the things themselves,
have given the law the precedency with respect unto sinners; "for by the
law is the knowledge of sin." And gospel faith is the soul's acting
according to the mind of God, for deliverance from that state and
condition which it is cast under by the law. And all those descriptions
of faith which abound in the writings of learned men, which do not at
least include in them a virtual respect unto this state and condition, or
the work of the law on the consciences of sinners, are all of them vain
speculations. There is nothing in this whole doctrine that I will more
firmly adhere unto than the necessity of the convictions mentioned
previous unto true believing; without which not one line of it can be
understood aright, and men do but beat the air in their contentions about
it. See Rom.3:21-24.
(2.) We suppose herein a sincere assent unto all divine revelations,
whereof the promises of grace and mercy by Christ are an especial part.
This Paul supposed in Agrippa when he would have won him over unto faith
in Christ Jesus: "King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that
thou believest", Acts 26:27. And this assent which respects the promises
of the gospel, not as they contain, propose, and exhibit the Lord Christ
and the benefits of his mediation unto us, but as divine revelations of
infallible truth, is true and sincere in its kind, as we described it
before under the notion of temporary faith; but as it proceeds no
farther, as it include no act of the will or heart, it is not that faith
whereby we are justified. However, it is required thereunto, and is
included therein.
(3.) The proposal of the gospel, according unto the mind of God, is
hereunto supposed; that is, that it be preached according unto God's
appointment: for not only the gospel itself, but the dispensation or
preaching of it in the ministry of the church, is ordinarily required
unto believing. This the apostle asserts, and proves the necessity of it
at large, Rom.10:11-17. Herein the Lord Christ and his mediation with
God, the only way and means for the justification and salvation of lost
convinced sinners, as the product and effect of divine wisdom, love,
grace, and righteousness, is revealed, declared, proposed, and offered
unto such sinners: "For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from
faith to faith," Rom.1:17. The glory of God is represented "as in a
glass," 2 Cor.3:18; and "life and immortality are brought to light
through the gospel," 2 Tim.1:10; Heb.2:3. Wherefore,--
(4.) The persons who are required to believe, and whose immediate duty
it is so to do, are such who really in their own consciences are brought
unto, and do make the inquiries mentioned in the Scripture,--"What shall
we do? What shall we do to be saved? How shall we fly from the wrath to
come? Wherewithal shall we appear before God? How shall we answer what is
laid unto our charge?"--or such as, being sensible of the guilt of sin,
do seek for a righteousness in the sight of God, Acts 2:37,38; 16:30,31;
Micah 6:6,7; Isa.35:4; Heb.6:18.
On these suppositions, the command and direction given unto men being,
"Believe, and thou shalt be saved;" the inquiry is, What is that act or
work of faith whereby we may obtain a real interest or propriety in the
promises of the gospel, and the things declared in them, unto their
justification before God?
And,--1. It is evident, from what has been discoursed, that it does
not consist in, that it is not to be fully expressed by, any one single
habit or act of the mind or will distinctly whatever; for there are such
descriptions given of it in the Scripture, such things are proposed as
the object of it, and such is the experience of all that sincerely
believe, as no one single act, either of the mind or will, can answer
unto. Nor can an exact method of those acts of the soul which are
concurrent therein be prescribed; only what is essential unto it is
manifest.
2. That which, in order of nature, seems to have the precedency, is
the assent of the mind unto that which the psalmist retakes himself unto
in the first place for relief, under a sense of sin and trouble,
Ps.130:3,4, "If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall
stand?" The sentence of the law and judgment of conscience lie against
him as unto any acceptation with God. Therefore, he despairs in himself
of standing in judgment, or being acquitted before him. In this state,
that which the soul first fixes on, as unto its relief, is, that "there
is forgiveness with God." This, as declared in the gospel, is, that God
in his love and grace will pardon and justify guilty sinners through the
blood and mediation of Christ. So it is proposed, Rom.3:23,24. The assent
of the mind hereunto, as proposed in the promise of the gospel, is the
root of faith, the foundation of all that the soul does in believing; nor
is there any evangelical faith without it. But yet, consider it
abstractedly, as a mere act of the mind, the essence and nature of
justifying faith does not consist solely therein, though it cannot be
without it. But,--
3. This is accompanied, in sincere believing, with an approbation of
the way of deliverance and salvation proposed, as an effect of divine
grace, wisdom, and love; whereon the heart does rest in it, and apply
itself unto it, according to the mind of God. This is that faith whereby
we are justified; which I shall farther evince, by showing what is
included in it, and inseparable from it:--
(1.) It includes in it a sincere renunciation of all other ways and
means for the attaining of righteousness, life, and salvation. This is
essential unto faith, Acts 4:12; Hos.14:2,3; Jer.3:23; Ps.71:16, "I will
make mention of thy righteousness, of thine only." When a person is in
the condition before described (and such alone are called immediately to
believe, Matt.9:13; 11:28; 1 Tim.1:15), many things will present
themselves unto him for his relief, particularly his own righteousness,
Rom.10:3. A renunciation of them all, as unto any hope or expectation of
relief from them, belongs unto sincere believing, Isa.50:10,11.
(2.) There is in it the will's consent, whereby the soul betakes
itself cordially and sincerely, as unto all its expectation of pardon of
sin and righteousness before God, unto the way of salvation proposed in
the gospel. This is that which is called "coming unto Christ", and
"receiving of him," whereby true justifying faith is so often expressed
in the Scripture; or, as it is peculiarly called, "believing in him," or
"believing on his name." The whole is expressed, John 14:6, "Jesus saith
unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the
Father, but by me."
(3.) An acquiescency of the heart in God, as the author and principal
cause of the way of salvation prepared, as acting in a way of sovereign
grace and mercy towards sinners: "Who by him do believe in God, that
raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope
might be in God," 1 Pet.1:21. The heart of a sinner does herein give unto
God the glory of all those holy properties of his nature which he
designed to manifest in and by Jesus Christ. See Isa.42:1; 49:3. And this
acquiescency in God is that which is the immediate root of that waiting,
patience, longsuffering, and hope, which are the proper acts and effects
of justifying faith, Heb.6:12,15,18,19.
(4.) Trust in God, or the grace and mercy of God in and through the
Lord Christ, as set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his
blood, does belong hereunto, or necessarily ensue hereon; for the person
called unto believing is,--first, Convinced of sin, and exposed unto
wrath; secondly, Has nothing else to trust unto for help and relief;
thirdly, Does actually renounce all other things that tender themselves
unto that end: and therefore, without some act of trust, the soul must
lie under actual despair; which is utterly inconsistent with faith, or
the choice and approbation of the way of salvation before described.
(5.) The most frequent declaration of the nature of faith in the
Scripture, especially in the Old Testament, is by this trust; and that
because it is that act of it which composes the soul, and brings it unto
all the rest it can attain. For all our rest in this world is from trust
in God; and the especial object of this trust, so far as it belongs unto
the nature of that faith whereby we are justified, is "God in Christ
reconciling the world unto himself" For this is respected where his
goodness, his mercy, his grace, his name, his faithfulness, his power,
are expressed, or any of them, as that which it does immediately rely
upon; for they are no way the object of our trust, nor can be, but on the
account of the covenant which is confirmed and ratified in and by the
blood of Christ alone.
Whether this trust or confidence shall be esteemed of the essence of
faith, or as that which, on the first fruit and working of it, we are
found in the exercise of, we need not positively determine. I place it,
therefore, as that which belongs unto justifying faith, and is
inseparable from it. For if all we have spoken before concerning faith
may be comprised under the notion of a firm assent and persuasion, yet it
cannot be so if any such assent be conceivable exclusive of this trust.
This trust is that whereof many divines do make special mercy to be
the peculiar object; and that especial mercy to be such as to include in
it the pardon of our own sins. This by their adversaries is fiercely
opposed, and that on such grounds as manifest that they do not believe
that there is any such state attainable in this life; and that if there
were, it would not be of any use unto us, but rather be a means of
security and negligence in our duty: wherein they betray how great is the
ignorance of these things in their own minds. But mercy may be said to be
especial two ways:--First, In itself, and in opposition unto common
mercy. Secondly, With respect unto him that believes. In the first sense,
especial mercy is the object of faith as justifying; for no more is
intended by it but the grace of God setting forth Christ to be a
propitiation through faith in his blood, Rom.3:23,24. And faith in this
especial mercy is that which the apostle calls our "receiving of the
atonement," Rom.5:11;--that is, our approbation of it, and adherence unto
it, as the great effect of divine wisdom, goodness, faithfulness, love,
and grace; which will, therefore, never fail to them who put their trust
in it. In the latter sense, it is looked on as the pardon of our own sins
in particular, the especial mercy of God unto our souls. That this is the
object of justifying faith, that a man is bound to believe this in order
of nature antecedent unto his justification, I do deny; neither yet do I
know of any testimony or safe experience whereby it may be confirmed. But
yet, for any to deny that an undeceiving belief hereof is to be attained
in this life, or that it is our duty to believe the pardon of our own
sins and the especial love of God in Christ, in the order and method of
our duty and privileges, limited and determined in the gospel, so as to
come to the full assurance of them (though I will not deny but that peace
with God, which is inseparable from justification, may be without them);
[is to] seem not to be much acquainted with the design of God in the
gospel, the efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ, the nature and work of
faith, or their own duty, nor the professed experience of believers
recorded in the Scripture. See Rom.5:1-5; Heb.10:2,10,19-22; Ps.46:1,2;
138:7,8; etc. Yet it is granted that all these things are rather fruits
or effects of faith, as under exercise and improvement, than of the
essence of it, as it is the instrument in our justification.
And the trust before mentioned, which is either essential to
justifying faith, or inseparable from its is excellently expressed by
Bernard, Dom. 6 post Pentec., Ser. 3, "Tria considero in quibus tota spes
mea consistit, charitatem adoptionis, veritatem promissionis, potestatem
redditionis. Murmuret jam quantum voluerit insipiens cogitatio mea,
dicens: Quis enim es tu, et quanta est illa gloria, quibusve meritis hanc
obtinere speras? Et ego fiducialiter respondebo: Scio cui credidi,
missione, quia potens in exhibitione: licet enim ei facere quod voluerit.
Hic est funiculus triplex qui difficile rumpitur, quem nobis a patria
nostra in hunc carcerem usque dimissum firmiter, obsecro, teneamus: ut
ipse nos sublevet, ipse nos trahat et pertrahat usque ad conspectum
gloriae magni Dei: qui est benedictus in saecula. Amen".
Concerning this faith and trust, it is earnestly pleaded by many that
obedience is included in it; but as to the way and manner thereof, they
variously express themselves. Socinus, and those who follow him
absolutely, do make obedience to be the essential form of faith; which is
denied by Episcopius. The Papists distinguish between faith in-formed and
faith formed by charity: which comes to the same purpose, for both are
built on this supposition,--that there may be true evangelical faith
(that which is required as our duty, and consequently is accepted of God,
that may contain all in it which is comprised in the name and duty of
faith) that may be without charity or obedience, and so be useless; for
the Socinians do not make obedience to be the essence of faith
absolutely, but as it justifies. And so they plead unto this purpose,
that "faith without works is dead". But to suppose that a dead faith, or
that faith which is dead, it that faith which is required of us in the
gospel in the way of duty, is a monstrous imagination. Others plead for
obedience, charity, the love of God, to be included in the nature of
faith; but plead not directly that this obedience is the form of faith,
but that which belongs unto the perfection of it, as it is justifying.
Neither yet do they say that by this obedience, a continued course of
works and obedience, as though that were necessary unto our first
justification, is required; but only a sincere active purpose of
obedience: and thereon, as the manner of our days is, load them with
reproaches who are otherwise minded, if they knew who they were. For how
impossible it is, according unto their principles who believe
justification by faith alone, that justifying faith should be without a
sincere purpose of heart to obey God in all things, I shall briefly
declare. For, First, They believe that faith is "not of ourselves, it is
the gift of God"; yea, that it is a grace wrought in the hearts of men by
the exceeding greatness of his power. And to suppose such a grace dead,
inactive, unfruitful, not operative unto the great end of the glory of
God, and the transforming of the souls of them that receive it into his
image, is a reflection on the wisdom, goodness, and love of God himself.
Secondly, That this grace is in them a principle of spiritual life, which
in the habit of it, as resident in the heart, is not really distinguished
from that of all other grace whereby we live to God. So, that there
should be faith habitually in the heart,--I mean that evangelical faith
we inquire after,--or actually exercised, where there is not a habit of
all other graces, is utterly impossible. Neither is it possible that
there should be any exercise of this faith unto justification, but where
the mind is prepared, disposed, and determined unto universal obedience.
And therefore, Thirdly, It is denied that any faith, trust, or
confidence, which may be imagined, so as to be absolutely separable from,
and have its whole nature consistent with, the absence of all other
graces, is that faith which is the especial gift of God, and which in the
gospel is required of us in a way of duty. And whereas some have said,
that "men may believe, and place their firm trust in Christ for life and
salvation, and yet not be justified;"--it is a position so destructive
unto the gospel, and so full of scandal unto all pious souls, and
contains such an express denial of the record that God has given
concerning his Son Jesus Christ, as I wonder that any person of sobriety
and learning should be surprised into it. And whereas they plead the
experience of multitudes who profess this firm faith and confidence in
Christ, and yet are not justified,--it is true, indeed, but nothing unto
their purpose; for whatever they profess, not only not one of them does
so in the sight and judgment of God, where this matter is to be tried,
but it is no difficult matter to evict them of the folly and falseness of
this profession, by the light and rule of the gospel, even in their own
consciences, if they would attend unto instruction.
Wherefore we say, the faith whereby we are justified, is such as is
not found in any but those who are made-partakers of the Holy Ghost, and
by him united unto Christ, whose nature is renewed, and in whom there is
a principle of all grace, and purpose of obedience. Only we say, it is
not any other grace, as charity and the like, nor any obedience, that
gives life and form unto this faith; but it is this faith that gives life
and efficacy unto all other graces, and form unto all evangelical
obedience. Neither does any thing hence accrue unto our adversaries, who
would have all those graces which are, in their root and principle, at
least, present in all that are to be justified, to have the same
influence unto our justification as faith has: or that we are said to be
justified by faith alone; and in explication of it, in answer unto the
reproaches of the Romanists, do say we are justified by faith alone, but
not by that faith which is alone; that we intend by faith all other
graces and obedience also. For besides that, the nature of no other grace
is capable of that office which is assigned unto faith in our
justification, nor can be assumed into a society in operation with it,--
namely, to receive Christ, and the promises of life by him, and to give
glory unto God on their account; so when they can give us any testimony
of Scripture assigning our justification unto any other grace, or all
graces together, or all the fruits of them, so as it is assigned unto
faith, they shall be attended unto.
And this, in particular, is to be affirmed of repentance; concerning
which it is most vehemently urged, that it is of the same necessity unto
our justification as faith is. For this they say is easily proved, from
testimonies of Scripture innumerable, which call all men to repentance
that will be saved; especially those two eminent places are insisted on,
Acts 2:38,39; 3:19. But that which they have to prove, is not that it is
of the same necessity with faith unto them that are to be justified, but
that it is of the same use with faith in their justification. Baptism in
that place of the apostle, Acts 2:38,39, is joined with faith no less
than repentance; and in other places it is expressly put into the same
condition. Hence, most of the ancients concluded that it was no less
necessary unto salvation than faith or repentance itself. Yet never did
any of them assign it the same use in justification with faith But it is
pleaded, whatever is a necessary condition of the new covenant, is also a
necessary condition of justification; for otherwise a man might be
justified, and continuing in his justified estate, not be saved, for want
of that necessary condition: for by a necessary condition of the new
covenant, they understand that without which a man cannot be saved. But
of this nature is repentance as well as faith, and so is equally a
condition of our justification. The ambiguity of the signification of the
word "condition" does cast much disorder on the present inquiry, in the
discourses of some men. But to pass it by at present, I say, final
perseverance is a necessary condition of the new covenant; wherefore, by
this rule, it is also of justification. They say, some things are
conditions absolutely; such as are faith and repentance, and a purpose of
obedience: some are so on some supposition only,--namely, that a man's
life be continued in this world; such is a course in obedience and good
works, and perseverance unto the end. Wherefore I so position that a man
lives in this world, perseverance unto the end is a necessary condition
of his justification. And if so, no justified whilst he is in this world;
for a condition does suspend that whereof it is a condition from
existence until it be accomplished. It is, then, to no purpose to dispute
any longer about justification, if indeed no man is, nor can be,
justified in this life. But how contrary this is to Scripture and
experience is known.
If it be said, that final perseverance, which is so express a
condition of salvation in the new covenant, is not indeed the condition
of our first justification, but it is the condition of the continuation
of our justification; then they yield up their grand position, that
whatever is a necessary condition of the new covenant is a necessary
condition of justification: for it is that which they call the first
justification alone which we treat about. And that the continuation of
our justification depends solely on the same causes with our
justification itself, shall be afterwards declared. But it is not yet
proved, nor ever will be, that whatever is required in them that are to
be justified, is a condition whereon their justification is immediately
suspended. We allow that alone to be a condition of justification which
has an influence of causality thereunto, though it be but the causality
of an instrument. This we ascribe unto faith alone. And because we do so,
it is pleaded that we ascribe more in our justification unto ourselves
than they do by whom we are opposed. For we ascribe the efficiency of an
instrument herein unto our own faith, when they say one that it is a
condition, or "causa sine qua non," of our justification. But I judge
that grave and wise men ought not to give so much to the defense of the
cause they have undertaken, seeing they cannot but know indeed the
contrary. For after they have given the specious name of a condition, and
a "causa sine qua non," unto faith, they immediately take all other
graces and works of obedience into the same state with it, and the same
use in justification; and after this seeming gold has been cast for a
while into the fire of disputation, there comes out the calf of a
personal, inherent righteousness, whereby men are justified before God,
"virtute foederis evangelici;" for as for the righteousness of Christ to
be imputed unto us, it is gone into heaven, and they know not what is
become of it.
Having given this brief declaration of the nature of justifying faith,
and the acts of it (as I suppose, sufficient unto my present design), I
shall not trouble myself to give an accurate definition of it. What are
my thoughts concerning it, will be better understood by what has been
spoken, than by any precise definition I can give. And the truth is,
definitions of justifying faith have been so multiplied by learned men,
and in so great variety, and [there is] such a manifest inconsistency
among some of them, that they have been of no advantage unto the truth,
but occasions of new controversies and divisions, whilst every one has
laboured to defend the accuracy of his own definition, when yet it may be
difficult for a true believer to find any thing compliant with his own
experience in them; which kind of definitions in these things I have no
esteem for. I know no man that has laboured in this argument about the
nature of faith more than Dr Jackson; yet, when he has done all, he gives
us a definition of justifying faith which I know few that will subscribe
unto: yet is it, in the main scope of it, both pious and sound. For he
tells us, "Here at length, we may define the faith by which the just
live, to be a firm and constant adherence unto the mercies and the
loving-kindness of Lord; or, generally, unto the spiritual food exhibited
in his sacred word, as much better than this life itself, and all the
contentments it is capable of; grounded on a taste or relish of their
sweetness, wrought in the soul or heart of a man by the Spirit of
Christ". Whereunto he adds, "The terms for the most part are the prophet
David's; not metaphorical, as some may fancy, much less equivocal, but
proper and homogeneal to the subject defined," tom. 1 book 4 chap.9. For
the lively scriptural expressions of faith, by receiving on Christ,
leaning on him, rolling ourselves or our burden on him, tasting how
gracious the Lord is, and the like, which of late have been reproached,
yea, blasphemed, by many, I may have occasion to speak of them
afterwards; as also to manifest that they convey a better understanding
of the nature, work, and object of justifying faith, unto the minds of
men spiritually enlightened, than the most accurate definitions that many
pretend unto; some whereof are destructive and exclusive of them all.
III. The use of faith in justification; its especial object farther
cleared
Use of faith in justification; various conceptions about it--By whom
asserted as the instrument of it; by whom denied--In what sense it is
affirmed so to be--The expressions of the Scripture concerning the use of
faith in justification; what they are, and how they are best explained by
an instrumental cause--Faith, how the instrument of God in justification-
-How the instrument of them that do believe--The use of faith expressed
in the Scripture by apprehending, receiving; declared by an instrument--
Faith, in what sense the condition of our justification--Signification of
that term, whence to be learned
The description before given of justifying faith does sufficiently
manifest of what use it is in justification; nor shall I in general add
much unto what may be thence observed unto that purpose. But whereas this
use of it has been expressed with some variety, and several ways of it
asserted inconsistent with one another, they must be considered in our
passage. And I shall do it with all brevity possible; for these things
lead not in any part of the controversy about the nature of
justification, but are merely subservient unto other conceptions
concerning it. When men have fixed their apprehensions about the
principal matters in controversy, they express what concerns the use of
faith in an accommodation thereunto. Supposing such to be the nature of
justification as they assert, it must be granted that the use of faith
therein must be what they plead for. And if what is peculiar unto any in
the substance of the doctrine be disproved, they cannot deny but that
their notions about the use of faith do fall unto the ground. Thus is it
with all who affirm faith to be either the instrument, or the condition,
or the "causa sine qua non," or the preparation and disposition of the
subject, or a meritorious cause, by way of condecency or congruity, in
and of our justification. For all these notions of the use of faith are
suited and accommodated unto the opinions of men concerning the nature
and principal causes of justification. Neither can any trial or
determination be made as unto their truth and propriety, but upon a
previous judgment concerning those causes, and the whole nature of
justification itself. Whereas, therefore, it were vain and endless to
plead the principal matter in controversy upon every thing that
occasionally belongs unto it,--and so by the title unto the whole
inheritance of every cottage that is built on the premises,--I shall
briefly speak unto these various conceptions about the use of faith in
our justification, rather to find out and give an understanding of what
is intended by them, than to argue about their truth and propriety, which
depend on that wherein the substance of the controversy does consist.
Protestant divines, until of late, have unanimously affirmed faith to
be the instrumental cause of our justification. So it is expressed to be
in many of the public confessions of their churches. This notion of
theirs concerning the nature and use of faith was from the first opposed
by those of the Roman church. Afterward it was denied also by the
Socinians, as either false or improper. Socin. Miscellan. Smalcius adv.
Frantz. disput. 4; Schlichting. adver. Meisner. de Justificat. And of
late this expression is disliked by some among ourselves; wherein they
follow Episcopius, Curcellaeus, and others of that way. Those who are
sober and moderate do rather decline this notion and expression as
improper, than reject them as untrue. And our safest course, in these
cases, is to consider what is the thing or matter intended. If that be
agreed upon, he deserves best of truth who parts with strife about
propriety of expressions, before it be meddled with. Tenacious pleading
about them will surely render our contentions endless; and none will ever
want an appearance of probability to give them countenance in what they
pretend. If our design in teaching be the same with that of the
Scripture,--namely, to inform the minds of believers, and convey the
light of the knowledge of God in Christ unto them, we must be contented
sometimes to make use of such expressions as will scarce pass the ordeal
of arbitrary rules and distinctions, through the whole compass of
notional and artificial sciences. And those who, without more ado, reject
the instrumentality of faith in our justification, as an unscriptural
notion, as though it were easy for them with one breath to blow away the
reasons and arguments of so many learned men as have pleaded for it, may
not, I think, do amiss to review the grounds of their confidence. For the
question being only concerning what is intended by it, it is not enough
that the term or word itself, of an instrument, is not found unto this
purpose in the Scripture; for on the same ground we may reject a trinity
of persons in the divine essence, without an acknowledgment whereof, not
one line of the Scripture can be rightly understood.
Those who assert faith to be as the instrumental cause in our
justification, do it with respect unto two ends. For, first, they design
thereby to declare the meaning of those expressions in the Scripture
wherein we are said to be justified "pistei", absolutely; which must
denote, either "instrumentum, aut formam, aut modum actionis".
"Logidzometha oun pistei kikaiousthai anthroopon", Rom.3:28;--"Therefore
we conclude that a man is justified by faith." So, "Dia pisteoos", verse
22; "Ek pisteoos", Rom.1:17; Gal.3:8; "Dia tes pisteoos", Eph.2:8; "Ek
pisteoos, kai dia tes pisteoos", Rom.3:30;--that is "Fide, ex fide, per
fidem"; which we can express only, by faith, or through faith. "Propter
fidem", or "dia pistin", for our faith, we are nowhere said to be
justified. The inquiry is, What is the most proper, lightsome, and
convenient way of declaring the meaning of these expressions? This the
generality of Protestants do judge to be by an instrumental cause: for
some kind of causality they do plainly intimate, whereof the lowest and
meanest is that which is instrumental; for they are used of faith in our
justification before God, and of no other grace of duty whatever.
Wherefore, the proper work or office of faith in our justification is
intended by them. And "dia" is nowhere used in the whole New Testament
with a genitive case (nor in any other good author), but it denotes an
instrumental efficiency at least. In the divine works of the holy
Trinity, the operation of the second person, who is in them a principal
efficient, yet is sometimes expressed thereby; it may be to denote the
order of operation in the holy Trinity answering the order of
subsistence, though it be applied unto God absolutely or the Father:
Rom.11:36, "Di autou"--"By him are all things". Again, "ex ergoon vomou"
and "ex akoes pisteoos" are directly opposed, Gal.3:2. But when it is
said that a man is not justified "ex ergoon nomou",--"by the works of the
law,"--it is acknowledged by all that the meaning of the expression is to
exclude all efficiency, in every kind of such works, from our
justification. Is follows, therefore, that where, in opposition hereunto,
we are said to be justified "ek pisteoos",--"by faith,"--an instrumental
efficiency is intended. Yet will I not, therefore, make it my controversy
with any, that faith is properly an instrument, or the instrumental cause
in or of our justification; and so divert into an impertinent contest
about the nature and kinds of instruments and instrumental causes, as
they are metaphysically hunted with a confused cry of futilous terms and
distinctions. But this I judge, that among all those notions of things
which may be taken from common use and understanding, to represent unto
our minds the meaning and intention of the scriptural expressions so
often used, "pistei, ek pisteoos, dia pisteoos", there is none so proper
as this of an instrument or instrumental cause, seeing a causality is
included in them, and that of any other kind certainly excluded; nor has
it any of its own.
But it may be said, that if faith be the instrumental cause of
justification, it is either the instrument of God, or the instrument of
believers themselves. That it is not the instrument of God is plain, in
that it is a duty which he prescribes unto us: it is an act of our own;
and it is we that believe, not God; nor can any act of ours be the
instrument of his work. And if it be our instrument, seeing an efficiency
is ascribed unto it, then are we the efficient causes of our own
justification in some sense, and may be said to justify ourselves; which
is derogatory to the grace of God and the blood of Christ.
I confess that I lay not much weight on exceptions of this nature.
For, First, Notwithstanding what is said herein, the Scripture is
express, that "God justifieth us by faith." "It is one God which shall
justify the circumcision no "ek pisteoos", (by faith,) "and the
uncircumcision "dia tes pisteoos", (through or by faith), Rom.3:30. "The
Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith,"
Gal.3:8. As he "purifieth the hearts of men by faith," Acts 15:9,
wherefore faith, in some sense, may be said to be the instrument of God
in our justification, both as it is the means and way ordained and
appointed by him on our part whereby we shall be justified; as also,
because he bestows it on us, and works it in us unto this end, that we
may be justified: for "by grace we are saved through faith, and that not
of ourselves; it is the gift of God," Eph.2:8. If any one shall now say,
that on these accounts, or with respect unto divine ordination and
operation concurring unto our justification, faith is the instrument of
God, in its place and way, (as the gospel also is, Rom.1:16; and the
ministers of it, 2 Cor.5:18; 1 Tim.4:6; and the sacraments also,
Rom.4:11; Tit.3:5, in their several places and kinds), unto our
justification, it may be he will contribute unto a right conception of
the work of God herein, as much as those shall by whom it is denied.
But that which is principally intended is, that it is the instrument
of them that do believe. Neither yet are they said hereon to justify
themselves. For whereas it does neither really produce the effect of
justification by a physical operation, nor can do so, it being a pure
sovereign act of God; nor is morally any way meritorious thereof; nor
does dispose the subject wherein it is unto the introduction of an
inherent formal cause of justification, there being no such thing in
"rerum natura"; nor has any other physical or moral respect unto the
effect of justifications but what arises merely from the constitution and
appointment of God; there is no colour of reason, from the
instrumentality of faith asserted, to ascribe the effect of justification
unto any but unto the principal efficient cause, which is God alone, and
from whom it proceeds in a way of free and sovereign grace, disposing the
order of things and the relation of them one unto another as seems good
unto him. "Dikaioumenoi doorean tei autou chariti", Rom.3:24; "Dia tes
pisteoos en tooi autou haimati", verse 25. It is, therefore, the
ordinance of God prescribing our duty, that we may be justified freely by
his grace, having its use and operation towards that end, after the
manner of an instrument; as we shall see farther immediately. Wherefore,
so far as I can discern, they contribute nothing unto the real
understanding of this truth, who deny faith to be the instrumental cause
of our justification; and, on other grounds, assert it to be the
condition thereof, unless they can prove this is a more natural
exposition of these expressions, "pistei, ek pisteoos, dia tes pisteoos",
which is the first thing to be inquired after. For all that we do in this
matter is but to endeavour a right understanding of Scripture
propositions and expressions, unless we intend to wander "extra pleas,"
and lose ourselves in a maze of uncertain conjectures.
Secondly. They designed to declare the use of faith in justification,
expressed in the Scripture by apprehending and receiving of Christ or his
righteousness, and remission of sins thereby. The words whereby this use
of faith in our justification is expressed, are, "lamthanoo,
paralamthanoo", and "katalamthanoo". And the constant use of them in the
Scripture is, to take or receive what is offered, tendered, given or
granted unto us; or to apprehend and lay hold of any thing thereby to
make it our own: as "epilamthanomai" is also used in the same sense,
Heb.2:16. So we are said by faith to "receive Christ", John 1:12;
Col.2:6;--the "abundance of grace, and the gift of righteousness",
Rom.5:17;--the "word of promise," Acts 2:41;--the "word of God," Acts
8:14; 1 Thess.1:6; 2:13;--the "atonement made by the blood of Christ,"
Rom.5:11;--the "forgiveness of sins", Acts 10:43; 26:18;--the "promise of
the Spirit," Gal.3:14;--the "promises", Heb.9:15. There is, therefore,
nothing that concurs unto our justification, but we receive it by faith.
And unbelief is expressed by "not receiving," John 1:11; 3:11; 12:48;
14:17. Wherefore, the object of faith in our justification, that whereby
we are justified, is tendered, granted, and given unto us of God; the use
of faith being to lay hold upon it, to receive it, so as that it may be
our own. What we receive of outward things that are so given unto us, we
do it by our hand; which, therefore, is the instrument of that reception,
that whereby we apprehend or lay hold of any thing to appropriate it unto
ourselves, and that, because this is the peculiar office which, by
nature, it is assigned unto among all the members of the body. Other uses
it has, and other members, on other accounts, may be as useful unto the
body as it; but it alone is the instrument of receiving and apprehending
that which, being given, is to be made our own, and to abide with us.
Whereas, therefore, the righteousness wherewith we are justified is the
gift of God, which is tendered unto us in the promise of the gospel; the
use and office of faith being to receive, apprehend, or lay hold of and
appropriate, this righteousness, I know not how it can be better
expressed than by an instrument, nor by what notion of it more light of
understanding may be conveyed unto our minds. Some may suppose other
notions are meet to express it by on other accounts; and it may be so
with respect unto other uses of it: but the sole present inquiry is, how
it shall be declared, as that which receives Christ, the atonement, the
gift of righteousness; which shall prove its only use in our
justification. He that can better express this than by an instrument
ordained of God unto this end, all whose use depends on that ordination
of God, will deserve well of the truth. It is true, that all those who
place the formal cause or reason of our justification in ourselves, or
our inherent righteousness, and so, either directly or by just
consequence, deny all imputation of the righteousness of Christ unto our
justification, are not capable of admitting faith to be an instrument in
this work, nor are pressed with this consideration; for they acknowledge
not that we receive a righteousness which is not our own, by way of gift,
whereby we are justified, and so cannot allow of any instrument whereby
it should be received. The righteousness itself being, as they phrase it,
putative, imaginary, a chimera, a fiction, it can have no real
accidents,--nothing that can be really predicated concerning it.
Wherefore, as was said at the entrance of this discourse, the truth and
propriety of this declaration of the use of faith in our justification by
an instrumental cause, depends on the substance of the doctrine itself
concerning the nature and principal causes of it, with which they must
stand or fall. If we are justified through the imputation of the
righteousness of Christ, which faith alone apprehends and receives, it
will not be denied but that it is rightly enough placed as the
instrumental cause of our justification. And if we are justified by an
inherent, evangelical righteousness of our own, faith may be the
condition of its imputation, or a disposition for its introduction, or a
congruous merit of it, but an instrument it cannot be. But yet, for the
present, it has this double advantage:--First, That it best and most
appositely answers what is affirmed of the use of faith in our
justification in the Scripture, as the instances given do manifest.
Secondly, That no other notion of it can be so stated, but that it must
be apprehended in order of time to be previous unto justification; which
justifying faith cannot be, unless a man may be a true believer with
justifying faith, and yet not be justified.
Some do plead that faith is the condition of our justification, and
that otherwise it is not to be conceived of. As I said before, so I say
again, I shall not contend with any man about words, terms, or
expressions, so long as what is intended by them is agreed upon. And
there is an obvious sense wherein faith may he called the condition of
our justification; for no more may be intended thereby, but that it is
the duty on our part which God requires, that we may be justified. And
this the whole Scripture bears witness unto. Yet this hinders not but
that, as unto its use, it may be the instrument whereby we apprehend or
receive Christ and his righteousness. But to assert it the condition of
our justification, or that we are justified by it as the condition of the
new covenant, so as, from a preconceived signification of that word, to
give it another use in justification, exclusive of that pleaded for, as
the instrumental cause thereof, is not easily to be admitted; because it
supposes an alteration in the substance of the doctrine itself.
The word is nowhere used in the Scripture in this matter; which I
argue no farther, but that we have no certain rule or standard to try and
measure its signification by. Wherefore, it cannot first be introduced in
what sense men please, and then that sense turned into argument for other
ends. For thus, on a supposed concession that it is the condition of our
justification, some heighten it into a subordinate righteousness, imputed
unto us antecedently, as I suppose, unto the imputation of the
righteousness of Christ in any sense, whereof it is the condition. And
some, who pretend to lessen its efficiency or dignity in the use of it in
our justification, say it is only "causa sine qua non;" which leaves us
at as great an uncertainty as to the nature and efficacy of this
condition as we were before. Nor is the true sense of things at all
illustrated, but rather darkened, by such notions.
If we may introduce words into religion nowhere used in the Scripture
(as we may and must, if we design to bring light, and communicate proper
apprehensions of the things contained [in it] unto the minds of men), yet
are we not to take along with them arbitrary, preconceived senses, forged
either among lawyers or in the peripatetic school. The use of them in the
most approved authors of the language whereunto they do belong, and their
common vulgar acceptation among ourselves, must determine their sense and
meaning. It is known what confusion in the minds of men, the introduction
of words into ecclesiastical doctrines, of whose signification there has
not been a certain determinate rule agreed on, has produced. So the word
"merit" was introduced by some of the ancients (as is plain from the
design of their discourses where they use it) for impetration or
acquisition "quovis modo;"--by any means whatever. But there being no
cogent reason to confine the word unto that precise signification, it has
given occasion to as great a corruption as has befallen Christian
religion. We must, therefore, make use of the best means we have to
understand the meaning of this word, and what is intended by it, before
we admit of its use in this case.
"Conditio," in the best Latin writers, is variously used, answering
"katastasis, tuche, axia, aitia, tuntheche", in the Greek; that is,
"status, fortuna, dignitas, causa, pactum initum." In which of these
significations it is here to be understood is not easy to be determined.
In common use among us, it sometimes denotes the state and quality of
men,--that is, "katastatis" and "axia"; and sometimes a valuable
consideration for what is to be done,--that is, "aitia" or "suntheke".
But herein it is applied unto things in great variety; sometimes the
principal procuring, purchasing cause is so expressed. As the condition
whereon a man lends another a hundred pounds is, that he be paid it again
with interest;--the condition whereon a man conveys his land unto another
is, that he receive so much money for it: so a condition is a valuable
consideration. And sometimes it signifies such things as are added to the
principal cause, whereon its operation is suspended;--as a man bequeaths
a hundred pounds unto another, on condition that he come or go to such a
place to demand it. This is no valuable consideration, yet is the effect
of the principal cause, or the will of the testator, suspended thereon.
And as unto degrees of respect unto that whereof any thing is a
condition, as to purchase, procurement, valuable consideration, necessary
presence, the variety is endless. We therefore cannot obtain a
determinate sense of this word condition, but from a particular
declaration of what is intended by it, wherever it is used. And although
this be not sufficient to exclude the use of it from the declaration of
the way and manner how we are justified by faith, yet is it so to exclude
the imposition of any precise signification of it, any other than is
given it by the matter treated of. Without this, every thing is left
ambiguous and uncertain whereunto it is applied.
For instance, it is commonly said that faith and new obedience are the
condition of the new covenant; but yet, because of the ambiguous
signification and various use of that term (condition) we cannot
certainly understand what is intended in the assertion. If no more be
intended but that God, in and by the new covenant, does indispensably
require these things of us,--that is, the restipulation of a good
conscience towards God, by the resurrection of Christ from the dead, in
order unto his own glory, and our full enjoyment of all the benefits of
it, it is unquestionably true; but if it be intended that they are such a
condition of the covenant as to be by us performed antecedently unto the
participation of any grace, mercy, or privilege of it, so as that they
should be the consideration and procuring causes of them,--that they
should be all of them, as some speak, the reward of our faith and
obedience,--it is most false, and not only contrary to express
testimonies of Scripture, but destructive of the nature of the covenant
itself. If it be intended that these things, though promised in the
covenant, and wrought in us by the grace of God, are yet duties required
of us, in order unto the participation and enjoyment of the full end of
the covenant in glory, it is the truth which is asserted; but if it be
said that faith and new obedience--that is, the works of righteousness
which we do--are so the condition of the covenant, as that whatever the
one is ordained of God as a means of, and in order to such or such an
end, as justification, that the other is likewise ordained unto the same
end, with the same kind of efficacy, or with the same respect unto the
effect, it is expressly contrary to the whole scope and express design of
the apostle on that subject. But it will be said that a condition in the
sense intended, when faith is said to be a condition of our
justification, is no more but that it is "causa sine qua non"; which is
easy enough to be apprehended. But yet neither are we so delivered out of
uncertainties into a plain understanding of what is intended; for these
"causa sine quibus non" may be taken largely or more strictly and
precisely. So are they commonly distinguished by the masters in these
arts. Those so called, in a larger sense, are all such causes, in any
kind of efficiency or merit, as are inferior unto principal causes, and
would operate nothing without them; but in conjunction with them, have a
real effective influence, physical or moral, into the production of the
effect. And if we take a condition to be a "causa sine qua non" in this
sense, we are still at a loss what may be its use, efficiency, or merit,
with respect unto our justification. If it be taken more strictly for
that which is necessarily present, but has no causality in any kind, not
that of a receptive instrument, I cannot understand how it should be an
ordinance of God. For every thing that he has appointed unto any end,
moral or spiritual, has, by virtue of that appointment, either a
symbolical instructive efficacy, or an active efficiency, or a rewardable
condecency, with respect unto that end. Other things may be generally and
remotely necessary unto such an end, so far as it partakes of the order
of natural beings, which are not ordinances of God with respect
thereunto, and so have no kind of causality with respect unto it, as it
is moral or spiritual. So the air we breathe is needful unto the
preaching of the word, and consequently a "causa sine qua non" thereof;
but an ordinance of God with especial respect thereunto it is not. But
every thing that he appoints unto an especial spiritual end, has an
efficacy or operation in one or other of the ways mentioned; for they
either concur with the principal cause in its internal efficiency, or
they operate externally in the removal of obstacles and hindrances that
oppose the principal cause in its efficiency. And this excludes all
causes "sine quibus non," strictly so taken, from any place among divine
ordinances. God appoints nothing for an end that shall do nothing. His
sacraments are not "arga semeia" but, by virtue of his institution, do
exhibit that grace which they do not in themselves contain. The preaching
of the word has a real efficiency unto all the ends of it. So have all
the graces and duties that he works in us, and requires of us: by them
all are "we made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light;" and
our whole obedience, through his gracious appointment, has a rewardable
condecency with respect unto eternal life. Wherefore, as faith may be
allowed to be the condition of our justification, if no more be intended
thereby but that it is what God requires of us that we may be justified;
so, to confine the declaration of its use in our justification unto its
being the condition of it, when so much as a determinate signification of
it cannot be agreed upon, is subservient only unto the interest of
unprofitable strife and contention.
To close these discourses concerning faith and its use in our
justification, some things must yet be added concerning its *especial
object*. For although what has been spoken already thereon, in the
description of its nature and object in general, be sufficient, in
general, to state its especial object also; yet there having been an
inquiry concerning it, and debate about it, in a peculiar notion, and
under some especial terms, that also must be considered. And this is,
Whether justifying faith, in our justification, or its use therein, do
respect Christ as a king and prophet, as well as a priest, with the
satisfaction that as such he made for us, and that in the same manner,
and unto the same ends and purposes? And I shall be brief in this
inquiry, because it is but a late controversy, and, it may be, has more
of curiosity in its disquisition than of edification in its
determination. However, being not, that I know of, under these terms
stated in any public confessions of the reformed churches, it is free for
any to express their apprehensions concerning it. And to this purpose I
say,--
1. Faith, whereby we are justified, in the receiving of Christ,
principally respects his person, for all those ends for which he is the
ordinance of God. It does not, in the first place, as it is faith in
general, respect his person absolutely, seeing its formal object, as
such, is the truth of God in the proposition, and not the thing itself
proposed. Wherefore, it so respects and receives Christ as proposed in
the promise,--the promise itself being the formal object of its assent.
2. We cannot so receive Christ in the promise, as in that act of
receiving him to exclude the consideration of any of his offices; for as
he is not at any time to be considered by us but as vested with all his
offices, so a distinct conception of the mind to receive Christ as a
priest, but not as a king or prophet, is not faith, but unbelief,--not
the receiving, but the rejecting of him.
3. In the receiving of Christ for justification formally, our distinct
express design is to be justified thereby, and no more. Now, to be
justified is to be freed from the guilt of sin, or to have all our sins
pardoned, and to have a righteousness wherewith to appear before God, so
as to be accepted with him, and a right to the heavenly inheritance.
Every believer has other designs also, wherein he is equally concerned
with this,--as, namely, the renovation of his nature, the sanctification
of his person, and ability to live unto God in all holy obedience; but
the things before mentioned are all that he aims at or designs in his
applications unto Christ, or his receiving of him unto justification.
Wherefore,--
4. Justifying faith, in that act or work of it whereby we are
justified, respects Christ in his priestly office alone, as he was the
surety of the covenant, with what he did in the discharge thereof. The
consideration of his other office is not excluded, but it is not formally
comprised in the object of faith as justifying.
5. When we say that the sacerdotal office of Christ, or the blood of
Christ, or the satisfaction of Christ, is that alone which faith respects
in justification, we do not exclude, yea, we do really include and
comprise, in that assertion, all that depends thereon, or concurs to make
them effectual unto our justification. As,--First, The "free grace" and
favour of God in giving of Christ for us and unto us, whereby we are
frequently said to be justified, Rom.3:24; Eph.2:8; Tit.3:7. His wisdom,
love, righteousness, and power, are of the same consideration, as has
been declared. Secondly. Whatever in Christ himself was necessary
antecedently unto his discharge of that office, or was consequential
thereof, or did necessarily accompany it. Such was his incarnation, the
whole course of his obedience, his resurrection, ascension, exaltation,
and intercession; for the consideration of all these things is
inseparable from the discharge of his priestly office. And therefore is
justification either expressly or virtually assigned unto them also,
Gen.3:15; 1 John 3:8; Heb. 2:14-16; Rom.4:25; Acts 5:31; Heb.7:27;
Rom.8:34. But yet, wherever our justification is so assigned unto them,
they are not absolutely considered, but with respect unto their relation
to his sacrifice and satisfaction. Thirdly. All the means of the
application of the sacrifice and righteousness of the Lord Christ unto us
are also included therein. Such is the principal efficient cause thereof,
which is the Holy ghost; whence we are said to be "justified in the name
of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God," 1 Cor.6:11; and the
instrumental cause thereof on the part of God, which is the "promise of
the gospel," Rom.1:17; Gal.3:22,23. It would, therefore, be unduly
pretended, that by this assertion we do narrow or straiten the object of
justifying faith as it justifies; for, indeed, we assign a respect unto
the whole mediatory office of Christ, not excluding the kingly and
prophetical parts thereof, but only such a notion of them as would not
bring in more of Christ, but much of ourselves, into our justification.
And the assertion, as laid down, may be proved,--
(1.) From the experience of all that are justified, or do seek for
justification according unto the gospel: for under this notion of seeking
for justification, or a righteousness unto justification, they were all
of them to be considered, and do consider themselves as "hupodikoi tooi
Theooi",--"guilty before God,"--subject, obnoxious, liable unto his wrath
in the curse of the law; as we declared in the entrance of this
discourse, Rom.3:19. They were all in the same state that Adam was in
after the fall, unto whom God proposed the relief of the incarnation and
suffering of Christ, Gen.3:15. And to seek after justification, is to
seek after a discharge from this woeful state and condition. Such persons
have, and ought to have, other designs and desires also. For whereas the
state wherein they are antecedent unto their justification is not only a
state of guilt and wrath, but such also as wherein, through the
depravation of their nature, the power of sin is prevalent in them, and
their whole souls are defiled, they design and desire not only to be
justified, but to be sanctified also; but as unto the guilt of sin, and
the want of a righteousness before God, from which justification is their
relief, herein, I say, they have respect unto Christ as "set forth to be
a propitiation through faith in his blood." In their design for
sanctification they have respect unto the kingly and prophetical offices
of Christ, in their especial exercise; but as to their freedom from the
guilt of sin, and their acceptance with God, or their justification in
his sight,--that they may be freed from condemnation, that they may not
come into judgment,--it is Christ crucified, it is Christ lifted up as
the "brazen serpent" in the wilderness, it is the blood of Christ, it is
the propitiation that he was and the atonement that he made, it is his
bearing their sins, his being made sin and the curse for them, it is his
obedience, the end which he put unto sin, and the everlasting
righteousness which he brought in, that alone their faith does fix upon
and acquiesce in. If it be otherwise in the experience of any, I
acknowledge I am not acquainted with it. I do not say that conviction of
sin is the only antecedent condition of actual justification; but this it
is that makes a sinner "subjectum capax justificationis". No man,
therefore, is to be considered as a person to be justified, but he who is
actually under the power of the conviction of sin, with all the necessary
consequent thereof. Suppose, therefore, any sinner in this condition, as
it is described by the apostle, Rom.3, "guilty before God," with his
"mouth stopped" as unto any pleas, defenses, or excuses; suppose him to
seek after a relief and deliverance out of this estate,--that is, to be
justified according to the gospel,--he neither does nor can wisely take
any other course than what he is there directed unto by the same apostle,
verses 20-20, "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be
justified in his sight; for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now
the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed
by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God, which is by
faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe; for there
is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of
God; being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is
in Christ Jesus; whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through
faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of
sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." Whence I argue,--
That which a guilty, condemned sinner, finding no hope nor relief from
the law of God, the sole rule of all his obedience, does retake himself
unto by faith, that he may be delivered or justified,--that is the
especial object of faith as justifying. But this is the grace of God
alone, through the redemption that is in Christ; or Christ proposed as a
propitiation through faith in his blood. Either this is so, or the
apostle does not aright guide the souls and consciences of men in that
condition wherein he himself does place them. It is the blood of Christ
alone that he directs the faith unto of all them that would be justified
before God. Grace, redemption, propitiation, all through the blood of
Christ, faith does peculiarly respect and fix upon. This is that, if I
mistake not, which they will confirm by their experience who have made
any distinct observation of the acting of their faith in their
justification before God.
(2.) The Scripture plainly declares that faith as justifying respects
the sacerdotal office and acting of Christ alone. In the great
representation of the justification of the church of old, in the
expiatory sacrifice, when all their sins and iniquities were pardoned,
and their persons accepted with God, the acting of their faith was
limited unto the imposition of all their sins on the head of the
sacrifice by the high priest, Lev.16. "By his knowledge" (that is, by
faith in him) "shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear
their iniquities", Isa.53:11. That alone which faith respects in Christ,
as unto the justification of sinners, is his "bearing their iniquities".
Guilty, convinced sinners look unto him by faith, as those who were stung
with "fiery serpents" did to the "brazen serpent,"--that is, as he was
lifted up on the cross, John 3:14,15. So did he himself express the
nature and acting of faith in our justification. Rom.3:24,25, "Being
justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ
Jesus: whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his
blood." As he is a propitiation, as he shed his blood for us, as we have
redemption thereby, he is the peculiar object of our faith, with respect
unto our justification. See to the same purpose, Rom.5:9,10; Eph.1:7;
Col.1:14; Eph.2:13-16; Rom.8:3,4. "He we made sin for us, who knew no
sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him," 2 Cor.5:21.
That which we seek after in justification, is a participation of the
righteousness of God;--to be made the righteousness of God, and that not
in ourselves, but in another; that is, in Christ Jesus. And that alone
which is proposed unto our faith as the means and cause of it, is his
being made sin for us, or a sacrifice for sin; wherein all the guilt of
our sins was laid on him, and he bare all our iniquities. This therefore,
is its peculiar object herein. And wherever, in the Scripture, we are
directed to seek for the forgiveness of sins by the blood of Christ, to
receive the atonement, to be justified through the faith of him as
crucified, the object of faith in justification is limited and
determined.
But it may be pleaded, in exception unto the testimonies, that no one
of them does affirm that we are justified by faith in the blood of Christ
alone, so as to exclude the consideration of the other offices of Christ
and their acting from being the object of faith in the same manner and
unto the same ends with his sacerdotal office, and what belongs
thereunto, or is derived from it.
Answer. This exception derives from that common objection against the
doctrine of justification by faith alone,--namely, that that exclusive
term alone is not found in the Scripture, or in any of the testimonies
that are produced for justification by faith. But it is replied, with
sufficient evidence of truth, that although the word be not found
syllabically used unto this purpose, yet there are exceptive expressions
equivalent unto it; as we shall see afterwards. It is so in this
particular instance also; for,--First, Where our justification is
expressly ascribed unto our faith in the blood of Christ as the
propitiation for our sins, unto our believing in him as crucified for us,
and it is nowhere ascribed unto our receiving of him as King, Lord, or
Prophet, it is plain that the former expressions are virtually exclusive
of the latter consideration. Secondly, I do not say that the
consideration of the kingly and prophetical offices of Christ is
excluded. from our justification, as works are excluded in opposition
unto faith and grace: for they are so excluded, as there we are to
exercise an act of our minds in their positive rejection, as saying, "Get
you hence, you have no lot nor portion in this matter;" but as to these
offices of Christ, as to the object of faith as justifying, we say only
that they are not included therein. For, so to believe to be justified by
his blood, as to exercise a positive act of the mind, excluding a
compliance with his other offices, is an impious imagination.
(3.) Neither the consideration of these offices themselves, nor any of
the peculiar acts of them, is suited to give the souls and consciences of
convinced sinners that relief which they seek after in justification. We
are not, in this whole cause, to lose out of our eye the state of the
person who is to be justified, and what it is he does seek after, and
ought to seek after, therein. Now, this is pardon of sin, and
righteousness before God alone. That, therefore, which is no way suited
to give or tender this relief unto him, is not, nor can be, the object of
his faith whereby he is justified, in that exercise of it whereon his
justification does depend. This relief, it will be said, is to be had in
Christ alone. It is true; but under what consideration? For the whole
design of the sinner is, how he may be accepted with God, be at peace
with him, have all his wrath turned away, by a propitiation or atonement.
Now, this can no otherwise be done but by the acting of some one towards
God and with God on his behalf; for it is about the turning away of God's
anger, and acceptance with him, that the inquiry is made. It is by the
blood of Christ that we are "made nigh," who were "far off," Eph.2:13. By
the blood of Christ are we reconciled, who were enemies, verse 16. By the
blood of Christ we have redemption, Rom.3:24,25; Eph.1:7; etc. This,
therefore, is the object of faith.
All the actings of the kingly and prophetical offices of Christ are
all of them from God; that is, in the name and authority of God towards
us. Not any one of them is towards God on our behalf so as that by virtue
of them we should expect acceptance with God. They are all good, blessed,
holy in themselves, and of an eminent tendency unto the glory of God in
our salvation: yea, they are no less necessary unto our salvation, to the
praise of God's grace, than are the atonement for sin and satisfaction
which he made; for from them is the way of life revealed unto us, grace
communicated, our persons sanctified, and the reward bestowed. Yea, in
the exercise of his kingly power does the Lord Christ both pardon and
justify sinners. Not that he did as a king constitute the law of
justification; for it was given and established in the first promise, and
he came to put it in execution, John 3:16; but in the virtue of his
atonement and righteousness, imputed unto them, he does both pardon and
justify sinners. But they are the acts of his sacerdotal office alone,
that respect God on our behalf. Whatever he did on earth with God for the
church, in obedience, suffering, and offering up of himself; whatever he
does in heaven, in intercession and appearance in the presence of God,
for us; it all entirely belongs unto his priestly office. And in these
things alone does the soul of a convinced sinner find relief when he
seeks after deliverance from the state of sin, and acceptance with God.
In these, therefore, alone the peculiar object of his faith, that which
will give him rest and peace, must be comprised. And this last
consideration is, of itself, sufficient to determine this difference.
Sundry things are objected against this assertion, which I shall not
here at large discuss, because what is material in any of them will occur
on other occasions, where its consideration will be more proper. In
general it may be pleaded, that justifying faith is the same with saving
faith: nor is it said that we are justified by this or that part of
faith, but by faith in general; that is, as taken essentially, for the
entire grace of faith. And as unto faith in this sense, not only a
respect unto Christ in all his offices, but obedience itself also is
included in it; as is evident in many places of the Scripture. Wherefore,
there is no reason why we should limit the object of it unto the person
of Christ as acting in the discharge of his sacerdotal office, with the
effects and fruits thereof.
Answer 1. Saving faith and justifying faith, in any believer, are one
and the same; and the adjuncts of saving and justifying are but external
denominations, from its distinct operations and effects. But yet saving
faith does act in a peculiar manner, and is of peculiar use in
justification, such as it is not of under any other consideration
whatever. Wherefore,--2. Although saving faith, as it is described in
general, do ever include obedience, not as its form or essence, but as
the necessary effect is included in the cause, and the fruit in the
fruit-bearing juice; and is often mentioned as to its being and exercise
where there is no express mention of Christ, his blood, and his
righteousness, but is applied unto all the acts, duties, and ends of the
gospel; yet this proves not at all but that, as unto its duty, place, and
acting in our justification, it has a peculiar object. If it could be
proved, that where justification is ascribed unto faith, that there it
has any other object assigned unto it, as that which it rested in for the
pardon of sin and acceptance with God, this objection were of some force;
but this cannot be done. 3. This is not to say that we are justified by a
part of faith, and not by it as considered essentially; for we are
justified by the entire grace of faith, acting in such a peculiar way and
manner, as others have observed. But the truth is, we need not insist on
the discussion of this inquiry; for the true meaning of it is, not
whether any thing of Christ is to be excluded from being the object of
justifying faith, or of faith in our justification; but, what in and of
ourselves, under the name of receiving Christ as our Lord and King, is to
be admitted unto an efficiency or conditionality in that work. As it is
granted that justifying faith is the receiving of Christ, so whatever
belongs unto the person of Christ, or any office of his, or any acts in
the discharge of any office, that may be reduced unto any cause of our
justification, the meritorious, procuring, material, formal, or
manifesting cause of it, is, so far as it does so, freely admitted to
belong unto the object of justifying faith. Neither will I contend with
any upon this disadvantageous stating of the question,--What of Christ is
to be esteemed the object of justifying faith, and what is not so? For
the thing intended is only this,--Whether our own obedience, distinct
from faith, or included in it, and in like manner as faith, be the
condition of our justification before God? This being that which is
intended, which the other question is but invented to lead unto a
compliance with, by a more specious pretence than in itself it is capable
of, under those terms it shall be examined, and no otherwise.
IV. Of justification; the notion and signification of the Word in
Scripture
The proper sense of these words, justification, and to justify,
considered--Necessity thereof--Latin derivation of justification--Some of
the ancients deceived by it --From "jus", and "justum"; "justus filius",
who--The Hebrew "hitsdik"--Use and signification of it--Places where it
is used examined, 2 Sam.15:4; Deut.25:1; Prov.17:15; Isa.5:23; 50:8,9; 1
Kings 8:31,32; 2 Chron.6:22,23; Ps.82:3; Exod.23:7; Job 27:5; Isa.53:11;
Gen.44:16; Dan.12:3--The constant sense of the word evinced--"Diakaio-
oo", use of it in other authors, to punish--What it is in the New
Testament, Matt.11:19; 12:37; Luke 7:29; 10:29; 16:15; 18:14; Acts
13:38,39; Rom.2:13; 3:4--Constantly used in a forensic sense--Places
seeming dubious, vindicated, Rom.8:30; 1 Cor.6:11; Tit.3:5-7; Rev.22:11--
How often these words, "diakaio-oo" and "dikaioumai", are used in the New
Testament--Constant sense of this--The same evinced from what is opposed
unto it, Isa.1:8,9; Prov.17:15; Rom.5:116,18; 8:33,34--And the
declaration of it in terms equivalent, Rom.4:6,11; 5:9,10; 2 Cor.5:20,21;
Matt.1:21; Acts 13:39; Gal.2:16, etc.--Justification in the Scripture,
proposed under a juridical scheme, and of a forensic title--The parts and
progress of it--Inferences from the whole
Unto the right understanding of the nature of justification, the proper
sense and signification of these words themselves, justification and to
justify, is to be inquired into; for until that is agreed upon, it is
impossible that our discourses concerning the thing itself should be
freed from equivocation. Take words in various senses, and all may be
true that is contradictorily affirmed or denied concerning what they are
supposed to signify; and so it has actually fallen out in this case, as
we shall see more fully afterwards. Some taking these words in one sense,
some in another, have appeared to deliver contrary doctrines concerning
the thing itself, or our justification before God, who yet have fully
agreed, in what the proper determinate sense or signification of the
words does import; and therefore the true meaning of them has been
declared and vindicated already by many. But whereas the right stating
hereof is of more moment unto the determination of what is principally
controverted about the doctrine itself, or the thing signified, than most
do apprehend, and something at least remains to be added for the
declaration and vindication of the import and only signification of these
words in the Scripture, I shall give an account of my observations
concerning it with what diligence I can.
The Latin derivation and composition of the word "justificatio," would
seem to denote an internal change from inherent unrighteousness unto
righteousness likewise inherent, by a physical motion and transmutation,
as the schoolmen speak; for such is the signification of words of the
same composition. So sanctification, mortification, vivification, and the
like, do all denote a real internal work on the subject spoken of.
Hereon, in the whole Roman school, justification is taken for
justifaction, or the making of a man to be inherently righteous, by the
infusion of a principle or habit of grace, who was before inherently and
habitually unjust and unrighteous. Whilst this is taken to be the proper
signification of the word, we neither do nor can speak, ad idem, in our
disputations with them about the cause and nature of that justification
which the Scripture teaches.
And this appearing sense of the word possibly deceived some of the
ancients, as Austin in particular, to declare the doctrine of free,
gratuitous sanctification, without respect unto any works of our own,
under the name of justification; for neither he nor any of them ever
thought of a justification before God, consisting in the pardon of our
sins and the acceptation of our persons as righteous, by virtue of any
inherent habit of grace infused into us, or acted by us. Wherefore the
subject-matter must be determined by the scriptural use and signification
of these words, before we can speak properly or intelligibly concerning
it: for if to justify men in the Scripture, signify to make them
subjectively and inherently righteous, we must acknowledge a mistake in
what we teach concerning the nature and causes of justification; and if
it signify no such thing, all their disputations about justification by
the infusion of grace, and inherent righteousness thereon, fall to the
ground. Wherefore, all Protestants (and the Socinians all of them comply
therein) do affirm, that the use and signification of these words is
forensic, denoting an act of jurisdiction. Only the Socinians, and some
others, would have it to consist in the pardon of sin only; which,
indeed, the word does not at all signify. But the sense of the word is,
to assoil, to acquit, to declare and pronounce righteous upon a trial;
which, in this case, the pardon of sin does necessarily accompany.
"Justificatio" and "justifico" belong not, indeed, unto the Latin
tongue, nor can any good author be produced who ever used them, for the
making of him inherently righteous, by any means, who was not so before.
But whereas these words were coined and framed to signify such things as
are intended, we have no way to determine the signification of them, but
by the consideration of the nature of the things which they were invented
to declare and signify. And whereas, in this language, these words are
derived from "jus" and "justum," they must respect an act of jurisdiction
rather than a physical operation or infusion. "Justificari" is "justus
censeri, pro justo haberi;"--to be esteemed, accounted, or adjudged
righteous. So a man was made "justus filius," in adoption, unto him by
whom he was adopted, which, what it is, is well declared by Budaeus,
Cajus lib.2, F. de Adopt. De Arrogatione loquens: "Is qui adoptat
rogatur, id est, interrogatur, an velit eum quem adopturus sit, justum
sibi filium esse. Justum", says he, "intelligo, non verum, ut aliqui
censent, sed omnibus partibus, ut ita dicam, filiationis, veri filii
vicem obtinentem, naturalis et legitimi filii loco sedentem". Wherefore,
as by adoption there is no internal inherent change made in the person
adopted, but by virtue thereof he is esteemed and adjudged as a true God,
and has all the rights of a legitimate son; so by justification, as to
the importance of the word, a man is only esteemed, declared, and
pronounced righteous, as if he were completely so. And in the present
case justification and gratuitous adoption are the same grace, for the
substance of them, John 1:12; only, respect is had, in their different
denomination of the same grace, unto different effects or privileges that
ensue thereon.
But the true and genuine signification of these words is to be
determined from those in the original languages of the Scripture which
are expounded by them. In the Hebrew it is "tsadak". This the LXX render
by "Dikaion apofainoo", Job 27:5; "Dikaios anafainomai", chap.13:18;
"Dikaion krinoo", Prov.17:15;to show or declare one righteous; to appear
righteous; to judge any one righteous. And the sense may be taken from
any one of them, as Job 13:18, "Hinneh-na 'arakti mishpat yada'ti ki-'ani
'etsdak"--Behold, now I have ordered my cause; I know that I shall be
justified." The ordering of his cause (his judgment), his cause to be
judged on, is his preparation for a sentence, either of absolution or
condemnation: and hereon his confidence was, that he should be justified;
that is, absolved, acquitted, pronounced righteous. And the sense is no
less pregnant in the other places. Commonly, they render it by "dikaio-
oo", whereof I shall speak afterwards.
Properly, it denotes an action towards another (as justification and
to justify do) in Hiphil only; and a reciprocal action of a man on
himself in Hithpael, "hitstadak". Hereby alone is the true sense of these
words determined. And I say, that in no place, or on any occasion, is it
used in that conjugation wherein it denotes an action towards another, in
any other sense but to absolve, acquit, esteem, declare, pronounce
righteous, or to impute righteousness; which is the forensic sense of the
word we plead for,--that is its constant use and signification, nor does
it ever once signify to make inherently righteous, much less to pardon or
forgive: so vain is the pretence of some, that justification consist only
in the pardon of sin, which is not signified by the word in any one place
of Scripture. Almost in all places this sense is absolutely
unquestionable; nor is there any more than one which will admit of any
debate, and that on so faint a pretence as cannot prejudice its constant
use and signification in all other places. Whatever, therefore, an
infusion of inherent grace may be, or however it may be called,
justification it is not, it cannot be; the word nowhere signifying any
such thing. Wherefore those of the church of Rome do not so much oppose
justification by faith through the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ, as, indeed, deny that there is any such thing as justification:
for that which they call the first justification, consisting in the
infusion of a principle of inherent grace, is no such thing as
justification: and their second justification, which they place in the
merit of works, wherein absolution or pardon of sin has neither place nor
consideration, is inconsistent with evangelical justification; as we
shall show afterwards.
This word, therefore, whether the act of God towards men, or of men
towards God, or of men among themselves, or of one towards another, be
expressed thereby, is always used in a forensic sense, and does not
denote a physical operation, transfusion, or transmutation. 2 Sam.15:4,
"If any man has a suit or cause, let him come to me," "wehitsdaktiw",
"and I will do him justice;"--"I will justify him, judge in his cause,
and pronounce for him." Dent.25:1, "If there be a controversy among men,
and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them," "wehitsdiku
et-hatsdik", "they shall justify the righteous;" pronounce sentence on
his side: whereunto is opposed, "wehirshi'u et-harasha" "and they shall
condemn the wicked;" make him wicked, as the word signifies;--that is,
judge, declare, and pronounce him wicked; whereby he becomes so
judicially, and in the eye of the law, as the other is made righteous by
declaration and acquitment. He does not say, "This shall pardon the
righteous;" which to suppose would overthrow both the antithesis and
design of the place. And "hirshia" is as much to infuse wickedness into a
man, as "hitsdik" is to infuse a principle of grace or righteousness into
him. The same antithesis occurs, Prov.17:15, "matsdik rasha umarshia
tsadik"--"He that justifieth the wicked, and condemneth the righteous."
Not he that makes the wicked inherently righteous, not he that changes
him inherently from unrighteous unto righteousness; but he that, without
any ground, reason, or foundation, acquits him in judgment, or declares
him to be righteous, "is an abomination unto the LORD." And although this
be spoken of the judgment of men, yet the judgment of God also is
according unto this truth: for although he justified the ungodly,--those
who are so in themselves,--yet he does it on the ground and consideration
of a perfect righteousness made theirs by imputation; and by another act
of his grace, that they may be meet subjects of this righteous favour,
really and inherently changes them from unrighteousness unto holiness, by
the renovation of their natures. And these things are singular in the
actings of God, which nothing amongst men has any resemblance unto or can
represent; for the imputation of the righteousness of Christ unto a
person in himself ungodly, unto his justification, or that he may be
acquitted, absolved, and declared righteous, is built on such
foundations, and proceeds on such principles of righteousness, wisdom,
and sovereignty, as have no place among the actions of men, nor can have
so; as shall afterwards be declared. And, moreover, when God does justify
the ungodly, on the account of the righteousness imputed unto him, he
does at the same instant, by the power of his grace, make him inherently
and subjectively righteous or holy; which men cannot do one towards
another. And therefore, whereas man's justifying of the wicked is to
justify them in their wicked ways, whereby they are constantly made
worse, and more obdurate in evil; when God justifies the ungodly, their
change from personal unrighteousness and unholiness unto righteousness
and holiness does necessarily and infallibly accompany it.
To the same purpose is the word used, Isa.5:23, "Which justify the
wicked for reward;" and chap. 50:8,9, "karov matsdiki"--"He is near that
justifieth me; who will contend with me? Let us stand together: who is
mine adversary? Let him come near to me. Behold, the Lord GOD will help
me; who shall condemn me?" Where we have a full declaration of the proper
sense of the word; which is, to acquit and pronounce righteous on a
trial. And the same sense is fully expressed in the former antithesis. 1
Kings 8:31,32, "If any man trespass against his neighbour, and an oath be
laid upon him to cause him to swear, and the oath come before thine altar
in this house; then hear thou in heaven, and do, and judge thy servants,"
"leharchi'a rasha" "to condemn the wicked," to charge his wickedness on
him, to bring his way on his head, "ulhatsdik tsadik", "and to justify
the righteous." The same words are repeated, 2 Chron.6:22,23. Ps.82:3,
"ani warash hatsdiku"--"Do justice to the afflicted and poor;" that is,
justify them in their cause against wrong and oppression. Exod.23:7, "lo-
'atsdik rasha"--"I will not justify the wicked;" absolve, acquit, or
pronounce him righteous. Job 27:5, "chalilah li im-atsdik etchem"--"Be it
far from me that I should justify you," or pronounce sentence on your
side as if you were righteous. Isa.53:11, "By his knowledge my righteous
servant," "yatsdik", "shall justify many:" the reason whereof is added,
"For he shall bear their iniquities;" whereon they are absolved and
justified
Once it is used in Hithpael, wherein a reciprocal action is denoted,
that whereby a man justifies himself. Gen.44:16, "And Judah said, What
shall we say unto my lord? What shall we speaks?" "Umah-nitstadak", "and
how shall we justify ourselves? God has found out our iniquity." They
could plead nothing why they should be absolved from guilt.
Once the participle is used to denote the outward instrumental cause
of the justification of others; in which place alone there is any doubt
of its sense. Dan.12:3, "Umatsdikei harabim"--"And they that justify
many," namely, in the same sense that the preachers of the gospel are
said "to save themselves and others," 1 Tim.4:16; for men may be no less
the instrumental causes of the justification of others than of their
sanctification.
Wherefore, although "tsadak" in Kal signifies "justum esse", and
sometimes "juste agere," which may relate unto inherent righteousness,
yet where any action towards another is denoted, this word signifies
nothing but to esteem, declare, pronounce, and adjudge any one absolved,
acquitted, cleared, justified: there is, therefore, no other kind of
justification once mentioned in the Old Testament.
"Dikaio-oo" is the word used to the same purpose in the New Testament,
and that alone. Neither is this word used in any good author whatever to
signify the making of a man righteous by any applications to produce
internal righteousness in him; but either to absolve and acquit, to
judge, esteem, and pronounce righteous; or, on the contrary, to condemn.
So Suidas, "Dikaioun duo deloi, to te koladzein, kai to dikaion
nomidzein"--"It has two significations; to punish, and to account
righteous." And he confirms this sense of the word by instances out of
Herodotus, Appianus, and Josephus. And again, "Dikaioosai, aitiatikei,
katadikasai, kolasai, dikaion nomisai" with an accusative case; that is,
when it respects and affects a subject, a person, it is either to condemn
and punish, or to esteem and declare righteous: and of this latter sense
he gives pregnant instances in the next words. Hesychius mentions only
the first signification. "Dikaioumenon, koladzomenon, dikaioosai,
kolasai". They never thought of any sense of this word but what is
forensic. And, in our language, to be justified was commonly used
formerly for to be judged and sentenced; as it is still among the Scots.
One of the articles of peace between the two nations at the surrender of
Leith, in the days of Edward VI, was, "That if any one committed a crime,
he should be justified by the law, upon his trial." And, in general,
"dikaousthai" is "jus in judicio auferre;" and "dikaioosai" is "justum
censere, declarare pronuntiare;" and how in the Scripture it is
constantly opposed unto "condemnare," we shall see immediately.
But we may more distinctly consider the use of this word in the New
Testament, as we have done that of "hitsdik" in the Old. And that which
we inquire concerning is,--whether this word be used in the New Testament
in a forensic sense, to denote an act of jurisdiction; or in a physical
sense, to express an internal change or mutation,--the infusion of a
habit of righteousness, and the denomination of the person to be
justified thereon; or whether it signifies not pardon of sin. But this we
may lay aside: for surely no man was ever yet so fond as to pretend that
"dikaio-oo" did signify to pardon sin, yet is it the only word applied to
express our justification in the New Testament; for if it be taken only
in the former sense, then that which is pleaded for by those of the Roman
church under the name of justification, whatever it be, however good,
useful, and necessary, yet justification it is not, nor can be so called,
seeing it is a thing quite of another or nature than what alone is
signified by that word. Matt.11:19, "Edikaioothe he Sofia",--"Wisdom is
justified of her children;" not made just, but approved and declared.
Chap.12:37, "E, toon logoon sou dikaioothesei"--"By thy words thou shalt
be justified;" not made just by them, but judged according to them, as is
manifested in the antithesis, "kai ek toon logoon sou katadikasthesei"--
"and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." Luke 7:29, "Edikaioosan ton
Theon"--"They justified God;" not, surely, by making him righteous in
himself, but by owning, avowing, and declaring his righteousness.
Chap.10:29, "Ho de theloon dikaioun heauton"--"He, willing to justify
himself;" to declare and maintain his own righteous ness. To the same
purpose, chap.16:15, "Hemeis este hoi dikaiountes heautous enoopion toon
enthroopoon"--"Ye are they which justify yourselves before men;" they did
not make themselves internally righteous, but approved of their own
condition, as our Saviour declares in the place, chap.18:14, the publican
went down "dedikaioomenos" (justified) unto his house; that is,
acquitted, absolved, pardoned, upon the confession of his sin, and
supplication for remission. Acts 13:38,39, with Rom.2:13, "Hoi poietai
tou nomou dikaioothesontai"--"The doers of the law shall be justified."
The place declares directly the nature of our justification before God,
and puts the signification of the word out of question; for justification
ensues as the whole effect of inherent righteousness according unto the
law: and, therefore, it is not the making of us righteous, which is
irrefragable. It is spoken of God, Rom.3:4, "Hopoos an dikaiootheis en
tois logois sou"--"That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings;" where
to ascribe any other sense to the word is blasphemy. In like manner the
same word is used, and in the same signification, 1 Cor.4:4; 1 Tim.3:16;
Rom.3:20,26,28,30; 4:2,5; 5:1,9; 6:7; 8:30; Gal.2:16,17; 3:11,24; 5:4;
Tit.3:7; James 2:21,24,25; and in no one of these instances can it admit
of any other signification, or denote the making of any man righteous by
the infusion of a habit or principle of righteousness, or any internal
mutation whatever.
It is not, therefore, in many places of Scripture, as Bellarmine
grants, that the words we have insisted on do signify the declaration or
juridical pronunciation of any one to be righteous; but, in all places
where they are used, they are capable of no other but a forensic sense;
especially is this evident where mention is made of justification before
God. And because, in my judgment, this one consideration does
sufficiently defeat all the pretences of those of the Roman church about
the nature of justification, I shall consider what is excepted against
the observation insisted on, and remove it out of our way.
Lud. de Blanc, in his reconciliatory endeavors on this article of
justification, ("Thes. de Usu et Acceptatione Vocis, Justificandi,")
grants unto the Papists that the word "dikaio-oo" does, in sundry places
of the New Testament, signify to renew, to sanctify, to infuse a habit of
holiness or righteousness, according as they plead. And there is no
reason to think but he has grounded that concession on those instances
which are most pertinent unto that purpose; neither is it to be expected
that a better countenance will be given by any unto this concession than
is given it by him. I shall therefore examine all the instances which he
insists upon unto this purpose, and leave the determination of the
difference unto the judgment of the reader. Only, I shall premise that
which I judge not an unreasonable demand,--namely, that if the
signification of the word, in any or all the places which he mentions,
should seem doubtful unto any (as it does not unto me), that the
uncertainty of a very few places should not make us question the proper
signification of a word whose sense is determined in so many wherein it
is clear and unquestionable. The first place he mentions is that of the
apostle Paul himself, Rom.8:30, "moreover, whom he did predestinate, them
he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he
justified, them he also glorified". The reason whereby he pleads that by
"justified" in this place, an internal work of inherent holiness in them
that are predestinated is designed, is this, and no other: "It is not,"
says he, "likely that the holy apostle, in this enumeration of gracious
privileges, would omit the mention of our sanctification, by which we are
freed from the service of sin, and adorned with true internal holiness
and righteousness. But this is utterly omitted, if it be not comprised
under the name and title of being justified; for it is absurd with some
to refer it unto the head of glorification."
Ans. 1. The grace of sanctification, whereby our natures are
spiritually washed, purified, and endowed with a principle of life,
holiness, and obedience unto God, is a privilege unquestionably great and
excellent, and without which none can be saved; of the same nature, also,
is our redemption by the blood of Christ; and both these does this
apostles in other places without number, declare, commend, and insist
upon: but that he ought to have introduced the mention of them or either
of them in this place, seeing he has not done so, I dare not judge.
2. If our sanctification be included or intended in any of the
privileges here expressed, there is none of them, predestination only
excepted, but it is more probably to be reduced unto, than unto that of
being justified. Indeed, in vocation it seems to be included expressly.
For whereas it is effectual vocation that is intended, wherein a holy
principle of spiritual life, or faith itself, is communicated unto us,
our sanctification radically, and as the effect in it adequate immediate
cause, is contained in it. Hence, we are said to "be called to be
saints," Rom.1:7; which is the same with being "sanctified in Christ
Jesus," 1 Cor.1:2. And in many other places is sanctification included in
vocation.
3. Whereas our sanctification, in the infusion of a principle of
spiritual life, and the acting of it unto an increase in duties of
holiness, righteousness, and obedience, is that whereby we are made meet
for glory, and is of the same nature essentially with glory itself,
whence its advances in us are said to be from "glory to glory," 2
Cor.3:18; and glory itself is called the "grace of life," l Pet.3:7: it
is much more properly expressed by our being gloried than by being
justified, which is a privilege quite of another nature. However, it is
evident that there is no reason why we should depart from the general use
and signification of the word, no circumstance in the text compelling us
so to do.
The next place that he gives up unto this signification is l Cor.6:11,
"Such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye
are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our
God." That by justification here, the infusion of an inherent principle
of grace, making us inherently righteous, is intended, he endeavours to
prove by three reasons:--1. "Because justification is here ascribed unto
the Holy Ghost: 'Ye are justified by the Spirit of our God' But to renew
us is the proper work of the Holy Spirit." 2. "It is manifest," he says,
"that by justification the apostle does signify some change in the
Corinthians, whereby they ceased to be what they were before. For they
were fornicators and drunkards, such at could not inherit the kingdom of
God; but now were changed: which proves a real inherent work of grace to
be intended." 3. "If justification here signify nothing but to be
absolved from the punishment of sin, then the reasoning of the apostle
will be infirm and frigid: for after he has said that which is greater,
as heightening of it, he adds the less; for it is more to be washed than
merely to be freed from the punishment of sin."
Ans. 1. All these reasons prove not that it is the same to be
sanctified and to be justified; which must be, if that be the sense of
the latter which is here pleaded for. But the apostle makes an express
distinction between them, and, as this author observes, proceeds from one
to another, by an ascent from the lesser to the greater. And the infusion
of a habit or principle of grace, or righteousness evangelical, whereby
we are inherently righteous, by which he explains our being justified in
this place, is our sanctification, and nothing else. Yea, and
sanctification is here distinguished from washing,--"But ye are washed,
but ye are sanctified;" so as that it peculiarly in this place denotes
positive habits of grace and holiness: neither can he declare the nature
of it any way different from what he would have expressed by being
justified.
2. Justification is ascribed unto the Spirit of God, as the principal
efficient cause of the application of the grace of God and blood of
Christ, whereby we are justified, unto our souls and consciences; and he
is so also of the operation of that faith whereby we are justified:
whence, although we are said to be justified by him, yet it does not
follow that our justification consists in the renovation of our natures.
3. The change and mutation that was made in these Corinthians, so far
as it was physical, in effects inherent (as such there was), the apostle
expressly ascribes unto their washing and sanctification; so that there
is no need to suppose this change to be expressed by their being
justified. And in the real change asserted--that is, in the renovation of
our natures--consists the true entire work and nature of our
sanctification. But whereas, by reason of the vicious habits and
practices mentioned, they were in a state of condemnation, and such as
had no right unto the kingdom of heaven, they were by their justification
changed and transferred out of that state into another, wherein they had
peace with God, and right unto life eternal.
4. The third reason proceeds upon a mistake,--namely, that to be
justified is only to be "freed from the punishment due unto sin;" for it
comprises both the non-imputation of sin and the imputation of
righteousness, with the privilege of adoption, and right unto the
heavenly inheritance, which are inseparable from it. And although it does
not appear that the apostle, in the enumeration of these privileges, did
intend a process from the lesser unto the greater; nor is it safe for us
to compare the unutterable effects of the grace of God by Christ Jesus,
such as sanctification and justification are, and to determine which is
greatest and which is least; yet, following the conduct of the Scripture,
and the due consideration of the things themselves, we may say that in
this life we can be made partakers of no greater mercy or privilege than
what consists in our justification. And the reader may see from hence how
impossible it is to produce any one place wherein the words
"justification", and "to justify", dos signify a real internal work and
physical operation, in that this learned man, a person of more than
ordinary perspicacity, candour, and judgment, designing to prove it,
insisted on such instances as give so little countenance unto what he
pretended. He adds, Tit.3:5-7, "Not by works of righteousness which we
have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of
regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which he shed on us
abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; that, being justified by his
grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life."
The argument which he alone insists upon to prove that by justification
here, an infusion of internal grace is intended, is this:--that the
apostle affirming first, that "God saved us, according unto his mercy, by
the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost," and
afterwards affirming that we are "justified by his grace," he supposes it
necessary that we should be regenerate and renewed, that we may be
justified; and if so, then our justification contains and comprises our
sanctification also.
Ans. The plain truth is, the apostle speaks not one word of the
necessity of our sanctification, or regeneration, or renovation by the
Holy Ghost, antecedently unto our justification; a supposition whereof
contains the whole force of this argument. Indeed he assigns our
regeneration, renovation, and justification, all the means of our
salvation, all equally unto grace and mercy, in opposition unto any works
of our own; which we shall afterwards make use of. Nor is there intimated
by him any order of precedency or connection between the things that he
mentions, but only between justification and adoption, justification
having the priority in order of nature: "That, being justified by his
grace, we should be heirs according to the hope of eternal life." All the
things he mentions are inseparable. No man is regenerate or renewed by
the Holy Ghost, but withal he is justified;--no man is justified, but
withal he is renewed by the Holy Ghost. And they are all of them equally
of sovereign grace in God, in opposition unto any works of righteousness
that we have wrought. And we plead for the freedom of God's grace in
sanctification no less than in justification. But that it is necessary
that we should be sanctified, that we may be justified before God, who
justifies the ungodly, the apostle says not in this place, nor any thing
to that purpose; neither yet, if he did so, would it at all prove that
the signification of that expression "to be justified," is "to be
sanctified," or to have inherent holiness and righteousness wrought in
us: and these testimonies would not have been produced to prove it,
wherein these things are so expressly distinguished, but that there are
none to be found of more force or evidence.
The last place wherein he grants this signification of the word
"dikaio-oo", is Rev.22:11, "Ho dikaios dikaioothetoo eti"--"Qui justus
est, justificetur adhuc"; which place is pleaded by all the Romanists.
And our author says they are but few among the Protestants who do not
acknowledge that the word cannot be here used in a forensic sense, but
that to be justified, is to go on and increase in piety and
righteousness.
Ans. But,--(1.) There is a great objection lies in the way of any
argument from these words,--namely, from the various reading of the
place; for many ancient copies read, not "Ho dikaios dikaioothetoo eti",
which the Vulgar renders "Justificetur adhuc;" but, "Dikaiosunen
poiesatoo eti"--"Let him that is righteous work righteousness still," as
does the printed copy which now lies before me. So it was in the copy of
the Complutensian edition, which Stephens commends above all others, and
in one more ancient copy that he used. So it is in the Syrian and Arabic
published by Hutterus, and in our own Polyglot. So Cyprian reads the
words, "De bono patientiae; justus autem adhuc justior faciat, similiter
et qui sanctus sanctiora". And I doubt not but that it is the true
reading of the place, "dikaioothetoo" being supplied by some to comply
with "hagiasthetoo" that ensues. And this phrase of "dikaiosunen poiein"
is peculiar unto this apostle, being nowhere used in the New Testament
(nor, it may be, in any other author) but by him. And he uses it
expressly, 1 Epist.2, 29, and chap.3, 7, where these words, "Ho poioon
dikaiosunen, dikaios esti", do plainly contain what is here expressed.
(2.) To be justified, as the word is rendered by the Vulgar, "Let him be
justified more" (as it must be rendered, if the word "dikaioothetoo" be
retained), respects an act of God, which neither in its beginning nor
continuation is prescribed unto us as a duty, nor is capable of increase
in degrees; as we shall show afterwards. (3.) Men are said to be
"dikaioi" generally from inherent righteousness; and if the apostle had
intended justification in this place, he would not have said "ho
dikaios", but "ho dikaiootheis". All which things prefer the
Complutensian, Syrian, and Arabic, before the Vulgar reading of this
place. If the Vulgar reading be retained, no more can be intended but
that he who is righteous should so proceed in working righteousness as to
secure his justified estate unto himself, and to manifest it before God
and the world.
Now, whereas the words "dikaio-oo" and "dikaioumai" are used
thirty-six times in the New Testament, these are all the places whereunto
any exception is put in against their forensic signification; and how
ineffectual these exceptions are, is evident unto any impartial judge.
Some other considerations may yet be made use of, and pleaded to the
same purpose. Such is the opposition that is made between justification
and condemnation. So is it, Isa.50:8,9; Prov.17:15; Rom.5:16,18; 8:33,34;
and in sundry other places, as may be observed in the preceding
enumeration of them. Wherefore, as condemnation is not the infusing of a
habit of wickedness into him that is condemned, nor the making of him to
be inherently wicked who was before righteous, but the passing a sentence
upon a man with respect unto his wickedness; no more is justification the
change of a person from inherent unrighteousness unto righteousness, by
the infusion of a principle of grace, but a sentential declarations of
him to be righteous.
Moreover, the thing intended is frequently declared in the Scripture
by other equivalent terms, which are absolutely exclusive of any such
sense as the infusion of a habit of righteousness; so the apostle
expresses it by the "imputation of righteousness without works,"
Rom.4:6,11; and calls it the "blessedness" which we have by the "pardon
of sin" and the "covering of iniquity," in the same place. So it is
called "reconciliation with God," Rom.5:9,10. To be "justified by the
blood of Christ" is the same with being "reconciled by his death". "Being
now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath by him. For if,
when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son;
much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." See 2
Cor.5:20,21. Reconciliation is not the infusion of a habit of grace, but
the effecting of peace and love, by the removal of all enmity and causes
of offense. To "save," and "salvation," are used to the same purpose. "He
shall save his people from their sins," Matt.1:21, is the same with "By
him all that believe are justified from all things, from which they could
not be justified by the law of Moses," Acts 13:39. That of Gal.2:16, "We
have believed, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not
by the works of the law," is the same with Acts 15:11, "But we believe
that, through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even
as they." Eph.2:8,9, "By grace are ye saved through faith;....and not of
works," is so to be justified. So it is expressed by pardon, or the
"remission of sins," which is the effect of it, Rom.4:5,6; by "receiving
the atonement," chap.5:1l; not "coming into judgment" or "condemnation,"
John 5:24; "blotting out sins and iniquities," Isa.43:26; Ps.51:9;
Isa.44:22; Jer.18:23; Acts 3:19; "casting them into the bottom of the
sea," Micah 7:19; and sundry other expressions of an alike importance.
The apostle declaring it by its effects, says, "Dikaioi katastathesontai
hoi polloi"--"Many shall be made righteous," Rom.5:19. "Dikaios
kathistatai", [he is made righteous] who on a juridical trial in open
court, is absolved and declared righteous.
And so it may be observed that all things concerning justification are
proposed in the Scripture under a juridical scheme, or forensic trial and
sentence. As,--(1.) A judgment is supposed in it, concerning which the
psalmist prays that it may not proceed on the terms of the law, Ps.143:2.
(2.) The judge is God himself, Isa.50:7,8; Rom.8:33. (3.) The tribunal
whereon God sits in judgment, is the "throne of grace," Heb.4:16.
"Therefore will the LORD wait, that he may be gracious unto you; and
therefore will he be exalted, that he may have mercy upon you; for the
LORD is a God of judgment," Isa.30:18. (4.) A guilty person. This is the
sinner, who is "hupodikos tooi Theooi",--so guilty of sin as to be
obnoxious to the judgment of God; "tooi dikaioomati tou Theou", Rom.3:19;
1:32,--whose mouth is stopped by conviction. (5.) Accusers are ready to
propose and promote the charge against the guilty person;--these are the
law, John 5:45; and conscience, Rom.2:15; and Satan also, Zech.3:1;
Rev.12:10. (6.) The charge is admitted and drawn up in a handwriting in
form of Law, and is laid before the tribunal of the Judge, in bar, to the
deliverance of the offender, Col.2:14. (7.) A plea is prepared in the
gospel for the guilty person; and this is grace, through the blood of
Christ, the ransom paid, the atonement made the eternal righteousness
brought in by the surety of the covenant, Rom.3:23-25; Dan.9:24; Eph.1:7.
(8.) Hereunto alone the sinner retakes himself, renouncing all other
apologies or defensatives whatever, Ps.130:2,3; 143:2; Job 9:2,3; 42:5-7;
Luke 18:13; Rom.3:24,25; 5:11,16-19; 8:1-3,32,33; Isa.53:5,6; Heb.
9:13-15; 10:1-13; 1 Pet.2:24; 1 John 1:7. Other plea for a sinner before
God there is none. He who knows God and himself will not provide or
retake himself unto any other. Nor will he, as I suppose, trust unto any
other defense, were he sure of all the angels in heaven to plead for him.
(9.) To make this plea effectual, we have an advocate with the Father,
and he pleads his own propitiation for us, 1 John 2:1,2. (10.) The
sentence hereon is absolution, on the account of the ransom, blood, or
sacrifice and righteousness of Christ; with acceptation into favour, as
persons approved of God, Job 33:24; Ps.32:1,2; Rom.3:23-25; 8:1,33,34; 2
Cor.5:21; Gal.3:13,14.
Of what use the declaration of this process in the justification of a
sinner may be, has been in some measure before declared. And if many did
seriously consider that all these things do concur, and are required,
unto the justification of every one that shall be saved, it may be they
would not have such slight thoughts of sin, and the way of deliverance
from the guilt of it, as they seem to have. From this consideration did
the apostle learn that "terror of the Lord," which made him so earnest
with men to seek after reconciliation, 2 Cor.5:10,11.
I had not so long insisted on the signification of the words in the
Scripture, but that a right understanding of it does not only exclude the
pretences of the Romanists about the infusion of a habit of charity from
being the formal cause of our justification before God, but may also give
occasion unto some to take advice, into what place or consideration they
can dispose their own personal, inherent righteousness in their
justification before him.
V. The distinction of a first and second justification examined--The
continuation of justification:--whereon it does depend
Distinction of a first and second justification--The whole doctrine of
the Roman church concerning justification grounded on this distinction--
The first justification, the nature and causes of it, according unto the
Romanists--The second justification, what it is in their sense--Solution
of the seeming difference between Paul and James, falsely pretended by
this distinction--The same distinction received by the Socinians and
others--The latter termed by some the continuation of our justification--
The distinction disproved--Justification considered, either as unto its
essence or its manifestation--The manifestation of it twofold, initial
and final--Initial is either unto ourselves or others--No second
justification hence ensues--Justification before God, legal and
evangelical--Their distinct natures--The distinction mentioned derogatory
to the merit of Christ--More in it ascribed unto ourselves than unto the
blood of Christ, in our justification--The vanity of disputations to this
purpose--All true justification overthrown by this distinction--No
countenance given unto this justification in the Scripture--The second
justification not intended by the apostle James--Evil of arbitrary
distinctions--Our first justification so described in the Scripture as to
leave no room for a second--Of the continuation of our justification;
whether it depend on faith alone, or our personal righteousness,
inquired--Justification at once completed, in all the causes and effects
of it, proved at large--Believers, upon their justification, obliged unto
perfect obedience--The commanding power of the law constitutes the nature
of sin in them who are not obnoxious unto its curse--Future sins, in what
sense remitted at our first justification--The continuation of actual
pardon, and thereby of a justified estate; on what it does depend--
Continuation of justifications the act of God; whereon it depends in that
sense--On our part, it depends on faith alone--Nothing required hereunto
but the application of righteousness imputed--The continuation of our
justification is before God--That whereon the continuation of our
justification depends, pleadable before God--This not our personal
obedience, proved:--1. By the experience of all believers--2. Testimonies
of Scripture--3. Examples--The distinction mentioned rejected
Before we inquire immediately into the nature and causes of
justification, there are some things yet previously to be considered,
that we may prevent all ambiguity and misunderstanding about the subject
to be treated of. I say, therefore, that the evangelical justification,
which alone we plead about, is but one, and is at once completed. About
any other justification before God but one, we will not contend with any.
Those who can find out another may, as they please, ascribe what they
will unto it, or ascribe it unto what they will. Let us, therefore,
consider what is offered of this nature.
Those of the Roman church do ground their whole doctrine of
justification upon a distinction of a double justification; which they
call the first and the second. The first justification, they say, is the
infusion or the communication unto us of an inherent principle or habit
of grace or charity. Hereby, they say, original sin is extinguished, and
all habits of sin are expelled. This justification they say is by faith;
the obedience and satisfaction of Christ being the only meritorious cause
thereof. Only, they dispute many things about preparations for it, and
dispositions unto it. Under those terms the Council of Trent included the
doctrine of the schoolmen about "meritum de congruo," as both Hosius and
Andradius confess, in the defense of that council. And as they are
explained, they come much to one; however, the council warily avoided the
name of merit with respect unto this their first justification. And the
use of faith herein (which with them is no more but a general assent unto
divine revelation) is to bear the principal part in these preparations.
So that to be "justified by faith," according unto them, is to have the
mind prepared by this kind of believing to receive "gratiam gratum
facientem",--a habit of grace, expecting sin and making us acceptable
unto God. For upon this believing, with those other duties of contrition
and repentance which must accompany it, it is meet and congruous unto
divine wisdom, goodness, and faithfulness, to give us that grace whereby
we are justified. And this, according unto them, is that justification
whereof the apostle Paul treats in his epistles, from the procurement
whereof he excludes all the works of the law. The second justification is
an effect or consequent hereof, and the proper formal cause thereof is
good works, proceeding from this principle of grace and love. Hence are
they the righteousness wherewith believers are righteous before God,
whereby they merit eternal life. The righteousness of works they call it;
and suppose it taught by the apostle James. This they constantly affirm
to make us "justos ex injustis;" wherein they are followed by others. For
this is the way that most of them take to salve the seeming repugnancy
between the apostles Paul and James. Paul, they say, treats of the first
justification only, whence he excludes all works; for it is by faith, in
the manner before described: but James treats of the second
justification; which is by good works. So Bellar., lib. 2 cap. 16, and
lib 4 cap. 18. And it is the express determination of those at Trent,
sess. 6 cap. 10. This distinction was coined unto no other end but to
bring in confusion into the whole doctrine of the gospel. Justification
through the free grace of God, by faith in the blood of Christ, is
evacuated by it. Sanctification is turned into a justification, and
corrupted by making the fruits of it meritorious. The whole nature of
evangelical justification, consisting in the gratuitous pardon of sin and
the imputation of righteousness, as the apostle expressly affirms, and
the declaration of a believing sinner to be righteous thereon, as the
word alone signifies, is utterly defeated by it.
Howbeit others have embraced this distinction also, though not
absolutely in their sense. So do the Socinians. Yea, it must be allowed,
in some sense, by all that hold our inherent righteousness to be the
cause of, or to have any influence into, our justification before God.
For they do allow of a justification which in order of nature is
antecedent unto works truly gracious and evangelical: but consequential
unto such works there is a justification differing at least in degree, if
not in nature and kind, upon the difference of its formal cause; which is
our new obedience from the former. But they mostly say it is only the
continuation of our justification, and the increase of it as to degrees,
that they intend by it. And if they may be allowed to turn sanctification
into justification, and to make a progress therein, or an increase
thereof, either in the root or fruit, to be a new justification, they may
make twenty justifications as well as two, for aught I know: for therein
the " inward man is renewed day by day," 2 Cor.4:16; and believers go
"from strength to strength," are "changed from glory to glory," 2
Cor.3:18, by the addition of one grace unto another in their exercise, 2
Pet.1:5-8, and "increasing with the increase of God," Col.2:19, do in all
things "grow up into him who is the head," Eph.4:15. And if their
justification consist herein, they are justified anew every day. I shall
therefore do these two things:--1. Show that this distinction is both
unscriptural and irrational. 2. Declare what is the continuation of our
justification, and whereon it does depend.
1. Justification by faith in the blood of Christ may be considered
either as to the nature and essence of it, or as unto its manifestation
and declaration. The manifestation of it is twofold:--First, Initial, in
this life. Second, Solemn and complete, at the day of judgment; whereof
we shall treat afterwards. The manifestation of it in this life respects
either the souls and consciences of them that are justified, or others;
that is, the church or the world. And each of these have the name of
justification assigned unto them, though our real justification before
God be always one and the same. But a man may be really justified before
God, and yet not have the evidence or assurance of it in his own mind;
wherefore that evidence or assurance is not of the nature or essence of
that faith whereby we are justified, nor does necessarily accompany our
justification. But this manifestation of a man's own justification unto
himself, although it depend on many especial causes, which are not
necessary unto his justification absolutely before God, is not a second
justification when it is attained; but only the application of the former
unto his conscience by the Holy Ghost. There is also a manifestation of
it with respect unto others, which in like manner depends on other causes
then does our justification before God absolutely; yet is it not a second
justification: for it depends wholly on the visible effects of that faith
whereby we are justified, as the apostle James instructs us; yet is it
only one single justification before God, evidenced and declared, unto
his glory, the benefit of others, and increase of our own reward.
There is also a twofold justification before God mentioned in the
Scripture. First, "By the works of the law," Rom.2:13; 10:5; Matt.19:16-
19. Hereunto is required an absolute conformity unto the whole law of
God, in our natures, all the faculties of our souls, all the principles
of our moral operations, with perfect actual obedience unto all its
commands, in all instances of duty, both for matter and manner: for he is
cursed who continues not in all things that are written in the law, to do
them; and he that break any one commandment is guilty of the breach of
the whole law. Hence the apostle concludes that none can be justified by
the law, because all have sinned. Second, There is a justification by
grace, through faith in the blood of Christ; whereof we treat. And these
ways of justification are contrary, proceeding on terms directly
contradictory, and cannot be made consistent with or subservient one to
the other. But, as we shall manifest afterwards, the confounding of them
both, by mixing them together, is that which is aimed at in this
distinction of a first and second justification. But whatever respects it
may have, that justification which we have before God, in his sight
through Jesus Christ, is but one, and at once full and complete; and this
distinction is a vain and fond invention. For,--
(1.) As it is explained by the Papists, it is exceedingly derogatory
to the merit of Christ; for it leaves it no effect towards us, but only
the infusion of a habit of charity. When that is done, all that remains,
with respect unto our salvation, is to be wrought by ourselves. Christ
has only merited the first grace for us, that we therewith and thereby
may merit life eternal. The merit of Christ being confined in its effect
unto the first justification, it has no immediate influence into any
grace, privilege, mercy, or glory that follows thereon; but they are all
effects of that second justification which is purely by works. But this
is openly contrary unto the whole tenor of the Scripture: for although
there be an order of God's appointment, wherein we are to be made
partakers of evangelical privileges in grace and glory, one before
another, yet are they all of them the immediate effects of the death and
obedience of Christ; who has "obtained for us eternal redemption,"
Heb.9:12; and is "the author of eternal salvation unto all that do obey
him," chap.5:9; "having by one offering forever perfected them that are
sanctified." And those who allow of a secondary, if not of a second,
justification, by our own inherent, personal righteousnesses, are also
guilty hereof, though not in the same degree with them; for whereas they
ascribe unto it our acquitment from all charge of sin after the first
justification, and a righteousness accepted in judgment, in the judgment
of God, as if it were complete and perfect, whereon depends our final
absolution and reward, it is evident that the immediate efficacy of the
satisfaction and merit of Christ has its bounds assigned unto it in the
first justification; which, whether it be taught in the Scripture or no,
we shall afterward inquire.
(2.) More, by this distinction, is ascribed unto ourselves, working by
virtue of inherent grace, as unto the merit and procurement of spiritual
and eternal good, than unto the blood of Christ; for that only procures
the first grace and justification for us. Thereof alone it is the
meritorious cause; or, as others express it, we are made partakers of the
effects of it in the pardon of sins past: but, by virtue of this grace,
we do ourselves obtain, procure, or merit, another, a second, a complete
justification, the continuance of the favour of God, and all the fruits
of it, with life eternal and glory. So do our works, at least, perfect
and complete the merit of Christ, without which it is imperfect. And
those who assign the continuation of our justification, wherein all the
effects of divine favour and grace are contained, unto our own personal
righteousness, as also final justification before God as the pleadable
cause of it, do follow their steps, unto the best of my understanding.
But such things as these may be disputed; in debates of which kind it is
incredible almost what influence on the minds of men, traditions,
prejudices, subtlety of invention and arguing, do obtain, to divert them
from real thoughts of the things about which they contend, with respect
unto themselves and their own condition. If by any means such persons can
be called home unto themselves, and find leisure to think how and by what
means they shall come to appear before the high God, to be freed from the
sentence of the law, and the curse due to sin,--to have a pleadable
righteousness at the judgment-seat of God before which they stand,--
especially if a real sense of these things be implanted on their minds by
the convincing power of the Holy Ghost,--all their subtle arguments and
pleas for the mighty efficacy of their own personal righteousness will
sink in their minds like water at the return of the tide, and leave
nothing but mud and defilement behind them.
(3.) This distinction of two justifications, as used and improved by
those of the Roman church, leaves us, indeed, no justification at all.
Something there is, in the branches of it, of sanctification; but of
justification nothing at all. Their first justification, in the infusion
of a habit or principle of grace, unto the expulsion of all habits of
sin, is sanctification, and nothing else. And we never did contend that
our justification in such a sense, if any will take it in such a sense,
does consist in the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. And this
justification, if any will needs call it so, is capable of degrees, both
of increase in itself and of exercise in its fruits; as was newly
declared. But, not only to call this our justification, with a general
respect unto the notion of the word, as a making of us personally and
inherently righteous, but to plead that this is the justification through
faith in the blood of Christ declared in the Scripture, is to exclude the
only true, evangelical justification from any place in religion. The
second branch of the distinction has much in it like unto justification
by the law, but nothing of that which is declared in the gospel. So that
this distinction, instead of coining us two justifications, according to
the gospel, has left us none at all. For,--
(4.) There is no countenance given unto this distinction in the
Scripture. There is, indeed, mention therein, as we observed before, of a
double justification,--the one by the law, the other according unto the
gospel; but that either of these should, on any account, be sub-
distinguished into a first and second of the same kind,--that is, either
according unto the law or the gospel,--there is nothing in the Scripture
to intimate. For this second justification is no way applicable unto what
the apostle James discourses on that subject. He treats of justification;
but speaks not one word of an increase of it, or addition unto it, of a
first or second. Besides, he speaks expressly of him that boasts of
faith; which being without works, is a dead faith. But he who has the
first justification, by the confession of our adversaries, has a true,
living faith, formed and enlivened by charity. And he uses the same
testimony concerning the justification of Abraham that Paul does; and
therefore does not intend another, but the same, though in a diverse
respect. Nor does any believer learn the least of it in his own
experience; nor, without a design to serve a farther turn, would it ever
have entered the minds of sober men on the reading of the Scripture. And
it is the bane of spiritual truth, for men, in the pretended declaration
of it, to coin arbitrary distinctions, without Scripture ground for them,
and obtrude them as belonging unto the doctrine they treat of. They serve
unto no other end or purpose but only to lead the minds of men item the
substance of what they ought to attend unto, and to engage all sorts of
persons in endless strifes and contentions. If the authors of this
distinction would but go over the places in the Scripture where mention
is made of our justification before God, and make a distribution of them
into the respective parts of their distinction, they would quickly find
themselves at an unbelievable loss.
(5.) There is that in the Scripture ascribed unto our first
justification, if they will needs call it so, as leaves no room for their
second feigned justification; for the sole foundation and pretence of
this distinction is a denial of those things to belong unto our
justification by the blood of Christ which the Scripture expressly
assigns unto it. Let us take out some instances of what belongs unto the
first, and we shall quickly see how little it is, yea, that there is
nothing left for the pretended second justification. For,--[1.] Therein
do we receive the complete "pardon and forgiveness of our sins,"
Rom.4:6,7; Eph.1:7; 4:32; Acts 26:18. [2.] Thereby are we "made
righteous," Rom.5:19; 10:4; and, [3.] Are freed from condemnation,
judgment, and death, John 3:16,19; 5:25; Rom.8:1; [4.] Are reconciled
unto God, Rom.5:9,10; 2 Cor.5:21; and, [5.] Have peace unto him, and
access into the favour wherein we stand by grace, with the advantages and
consolations that depend thereon in a sense of his love, Rom.5:1-5. And,
[6.] We have adoption therewithal, and all its privileges, John 1:12;
and, in particular, [7.] A right and title unto the whole inheritance of
glory, Acts 26:18; Rom.8:17. And, [8.] Hereon eternal life does follow,
Rom.8:30; 6:23. Which things will be again immediately spoken unto upon
another occasion. And if there be anything now left for their second
justification to do, as such, let them take it as their own; these things
are all of them ours, or do belong unto that one justification which we
do assert. Wherefore it is evident, that either the first justification
overthrows the second, rendering it needless; or the second destroys the
first, by taking away what essentially belongs unto it: we must therefore
part with the one or the other, for consistent they are not. But that
which gives countenance unto the fiction and artifice of this
distinction, and a great many more, is a dislike of the doctrine of the
grace of God, and justification from thence, by faith in the blood of
Christ; which some endeavour hereby to send out of the way upon a
pretended sleeveless errand, whilst they dress up their own righteousness
in its robes, and exalt it into the room and dignity thereof.
2. But there seems to be more of reality and difficulty in what is
pleaded concerning the continuation of our justification; for those that
are freely justified are continued in that state until they are
glorified. By justification they are really changed into a new spiritual
state and condition, and have a new relation given them unto God and
Christ, unto the law and the gospel. And it is inquired what it is
whereon their continuation in this state does on their part depend; or
what is required of them that they may be justified unto the end. And
this, as some say, is not faith alone, but also the works of sincere
obedience. And none can deny but that they are required of all them that
are justified, whilst they continue in a state of justification on this
side glory, which next and immediately ensues thereunto; but whether,
upon our justification at first before God, faith be immediately
dismissed from its place and office, and its work be given over unto
works, so as that the continuation of our justification should depend on
our own personal obedience, and not on the renewed application of faith
unto Christ and his righteousness, is worth our inquiry. Only, I desire
the reader to observe, that whereas the necessity of owning a personal
obedience in justified persons is on all hands absolutely agreed, the
seeming difference that is herein concerns not the substance of the
doctrine of justification, but the manner of expressing our conceptions
concerning the order of the disposition of God's grace, and our own duty
unto edification; wherein I shall use my own liberty, as it is meet
others should do theirs. And I shall offer my thoughts hereunto in the
ensuing observations:--
(1.) Justification is such a work as is at once completed in all the
causes and the whole effect of it, though not as unto the full possession
of all that it gives right and title unto. For,--[1.] All our sins, past,
present, and to come, were at once imputed unto and laid upon Jesus
Christ; in what sense we shall afterwards inquire. "He was wounded for
our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement
of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes are we healed. All we
like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way: and
the LORD has made to meet on him the iniquities of us all," Isa.53:5,6.
"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree," 1 Pet.2:24.
The assertions being indefinite, without exception or limitation, are
equivalent unto universals. All our sins were on him, he bare them all at
once; and therefore, once died for all. [2.] He did, therefore, at once
"finish transgression, make an end of sin, make reconciliation for
iniquity, and bring in everlasting righteousness," Dan.9:24. At once he
expiated all our sins; for "by himself he purged our sins," and then "sat
down at the right hand of the Majesty on high," Heb.1:3. And "we are
sanctified," or dedicated unto God, "through the offering of the body of
Jesus Christ once for all; for by one offering he has perfected"
(consummated, completed, as unto their spiritual state) "them that are
sanctified," Heb.10:10,14. He never will do more than he has actually
done already, for the expiation at all our sins from first to last; "for
there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin". I do not say that hereupon
our justification is complete, but only, that the meritorious procuring
cause of it was at once completed, and is never to be renewed or repeated
any more; all the inquiry is concerning the renewed application of it
unto our souls and consciences, whether that be by faith alone, or by the
works of righteousness which we do. [3.] By our actual believing with
justifying faith, believing on Christ, or his name, we do receive him;
and thereby, on our first justifications become the "sons of God," John
1:12; that is, "heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ," Rom.8:17.
Hereby we have a right unto, and an interest in, all the benefits of his
mediation; which is to be at once completely justified. For "in him we
are complete," Col.2:10; for by the faith that is in him we do "receive
the forgiveness of sins," and a lot or "inheritance among all them that
are sanctified," Acts 26:18; being immediately "justified from all
things, from which we could not be justified by the law," Acts 13:39;
yea, God thereon "blesseth us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly
things in Christ," Eph.1:3. All these things are absolutely inseparable
from our first believing in him; and therefore our justification is at
once complete. In particular,--[4.] On our believing, all our sins are
forgiven. "He has quickened you together with him, having forgiven you
all trespasses," Col.2:13-15. For "in him we have redemption through his
blood, even the forgiveness of sins, according unto the riches of his
grace," Eph.1:7; which one place obviates all the petulant exceptions of
some against the consistency of the free grace of God in the pardon of
sins, and the satisfaction of Christ in the procurement thereof [5.]
There is hereon nothing to be laid unto the charge of them that are so
justified; for "he that believeth has everlasting life, and shall not
come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life," John 5:24.
And "who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that
justifieth; it is Christ that died," Rom.8:33,34. And "there is no
condemnation unto them that are in Christ Jesus," verse 1; for, "being
justified by faith, we have peace with God," chap.5:1. And, [6.] We have
that blessedness hereon whereof in this life we are capable, chap.4:5,6.
From all which it appears that our justification is at once complete.
And, [7.] It must be so, or no man can be justified in this world. For no
time can be assigned, nor measure of obedience be limited, whereon it may
be supposed that any one comes to be justified before God, who is not so
on his first believing; for the Scripture does nowhere assign any such
time or measure. And to say that no man is completely justified in the
sight of God in this life, is at once to overthrow all that is taught in
the Scriptures concerning justification, and wherewithal all peace with
God and comfort of believers. But a man acquitted upon his legal trial is
at once discharged of all that the law has against him.
(2.) Upon this complete justifications, believers are obliged unto
universal obedience unto God. The law is not abolished, but established,
by faith. It is neither abrogated nor dispensed withal by such an
interpretation as should take off its obligation in any thing that it
requires, nor as to the degree and manner wherein it requires it. Nor is
it possible it should be so; for it is nothing but the rule of that
obedience which the nature of God and man makes necessary from the one to
the other. And that is an Antinomianism of the worst sort, and most
derogatory unto the law of God, which affirms it to be divested of its
power to oblige unto perfect obedience, so as that what is not so shall
(as it were in despite of the law) be accepted as if it were so, unto the
end for which the law requires it. There is no medium, but that either
the law is utterly abolished, and so there is no sin, for where there is
no law there is no transgression, or it must be allowed to require the
same obedience that it did at its first institution, and unto the same
degree. Neither is it in the power of any man living to keep his
conscience from judging and condemning that, whatever it be, wherein he
is convinced that he comes short of the perfection of the law.
Wherefore,--
(3.) The commanding power of the law in positive precepts and
prohibitions, which justified persons are subject unto, does make and
constitute all their unconformities unto it to be no less truly and
properly sins in their own nature, than they would be if their persons
were obnoxious unto the curse of it. This they are not, nor can be; for
to be obnoxious unto the curse of the law, and to be justified, are
contradictory; but to be subject to the commands of the law, and to be
justified, are not so. But it is a subjection to the commanding power of
the law, and not an obnoxiousness unto the curse of the law, that
constitutes the nature of sin in its transgression. Wherefore, that
complete justification which is at once, though it dissolve the
obligations on the sinner unto punishment by the curse of the law, yet
does it not annihilate the commanding authority of the law unto them that
are justified, that, what is sin in others should not be so in them. See
Rom.8:1,33,34.
Hence, in the first justification of believing sinners, all future
sins are remitted as unto any actual obligation unto the curse of the
law, unless they should fall into such sins as should, ipso facto,
forfeit their justified estate, and transfer them from the covenant of
grace into the covenant of works; which we believe that God, in his
faithfulness, will preserve them from. And although sin cannot be
actually pardoned before it be actually committed, yet may the obligation
unto the curse of the law be virtually taken away from such sins in
justified persons as are consistent with a justified estate, or the terms
of the covenant of grace, antecedently unto their actual commission. God
at once in this sense "forgiveth all their iniquities, and health all
their diseases, redeemeth their life from destruction, and crowneth them
with loving-kindness and tender mercies," Ps.103:3,4. Future sins are not
so pardoned as that, when they are committed, they should be no sins;
which cannot be, unless the commanding power of the law be abrogated: but
their respect unto the curse of the law, or their power to oblige the
justified person thereunto, is taken away.
Still there abides the true nature of sin in every unconformity unto
or transgression of the law in justified persons, which stands in need of
daily actual pardon. For there is "no man that liveth and sinneth not;"
and "if we say that we have no sin, we do but deceive ourselves." None
are more sensible of the guilt of sin, none are more troubled for it,
none are more earnest in supplications for the pardon of it, than
justified persons. For this is the effect of the sacrifice of Christ
applied unto the souls of believers, as the apostle declares
Heb.10:1-4,10,14, that it does take away conscience condemning the sinner
for sin, with respect unto the curse of the law; but it does not take
away conscience condemning sin in the sinner, which, on all
considerations of God and themselves, of the law and the gospel, requires
repentance on the part of the sinner, and actual pardon on the part of
God.
Where, therefore, one essential part of justification consists in the
pardon of our sins, and sins cannot be actually pardoned before they are
actually committed, our present inquiry is, whereon the continuation of
our justification does depend, notwithstanding the interveniency of sin
after we are justified, whereby such sins are actually pardoned, and our
persons are continued in a state of acceptation with God, and have their
right unto life and glory uninterrupted? Justification is at once
complete in the imputation of a perfect righteousness, the grant of a
right and title unto the heavenly inheritance, the actual pardon of all
past sins, and the virtual pardon of future sin; but how or by what
means, on what terms and conditions, this state is continued unto those
who are once justified, whereby their righteousness is everlasting, their
title to life and glory indefeasible, and all their sins are actually
pardoned, is to be inquired.
For answer unto this inquiry I say,--(1.) "It is God that justifieth;"
and, therefore, the continuation of our justification is his act also.
And this, on his part, depends on the immutability of his counsel; the
unchangeableness of the everlasting covenant, which is "ordered in all
things, and sure;" the faithfulness of his promises; the efficacy of his
grace; his complacency in the propitiation of Christ; with the power of
his intercession, and the irrevocable grant of the Holy Ghost unto them
that do believe: which things are not of our present inquiry.
(2.) Some say that, on our part, the continuation of this state of our
justification depends on the condition of good works; that is, that they
are of the same consideration and use with faith itself herein. In our
justification itself there is, they will grant, somewhat peculiar unto
faith; but as unto the continuation of our justification, faith and works
have the same influence into it; yea, some seem to ascribe it distinctly
unto works in an especial manner, with this only proviso, that they be
done in faith. For my part I cannot understand that the continuation of
our justification has any other dependencies than has our justification
itself. As faith alone is required unto the one, so faith alone is
required unto the other, although its operations and effects in the
discharge of its duty and office in justification, and the continuation
of it, are diverse; nor can it otherwise be. To clear this assertion two
things are to be observed:--
[1.] That the continuation of our justification is the continuation of
the imputation of righteousness and the pardon of sins. I do still
suppose the imputation of righteousness to concur unto our justification,
although we have not yet examined what righteousness it is that is
imputed. But that God in our justification imputes righteousness unto us,
is so expressly affirmed by the apostle as that it must not be called in
question. Now the first act of God in the imputation of righteousness
cannot be repeated; and the actual pardon of sin after justification is
an effect and consequent of that imputation of righteousness. If any man
sin, there is a propitiation: "Deliver him, I have found a ransom."
Wherefore, unto this actual pardon there is nothing required but the
application of that righteousness which is the cause of it; and this is
done by faith only.
[2.] The continuation of our justification is before God, or in the
sight of God, no less than our absolute justification is. We speak not of
the sense and evidence of it unto our own souls unto peace with God, nor
of the evidencing and manifestation of it unto others by its effects, but
of the continuance of it in the sight of God. Whatever, therefore, is the
means, condition, or cause hereof, is pleadable before God, and ought to
be pleaded unto that purpose. So, then, the inquiry is,--
What it is that, when a justified person is guilty of sin (as guilty
he is more or less every day), and his conscience is pressed with a sense
thereof, as that only thing which can endanger or intercept his justified
estate, his favour with God, and title unto glory, he retakes himself
unto, or ought so to do, for the continuance of his state and pardon of
his sins, what he pleads unto that purpose, and what is available
thereunto? That this is not his own obedience, his personal
righteousness, or fulfilling the condition of the new covenant, is
evident, from,--1st. The experience of believers themselves; 2dly. The
testimony of Scripture; and, 3dly. The example of them whose cases are
recorded therein:--
1st. Let the experience of them that do believe be inquired into; for
their consciences are continually exercised herein. What is it that they
retake themselves unto, what is it that they plead with God for the
continuance of the pardon of their sins, and the acceptance of their
persons before him? Is it any thing but sovereign grace and mercy,
through the blood of Christ? Are not all the arguments which they plead
unto this end taken from the topics of the name of God, his mercy, grace,
faithfulness, tender compassion, covenant, and promises,--all manifested
and exercised in and through the Lord Christ and his mediation alone? Do
they not herein place their only trust and confidence, for this end, that
their sins may be pardoned, and their persons, though every way unworthy
in themselves, be accepted with God? Does any other thought enter into
their hearts? Do they plead their own righteousness, obedience, and
duties to this purpose? Do they leave the prayer of the publican, and
retake themselves unto that of the Pharisee? And is it not of faith alone
which is that grace whereby they apply themselves unto the mercy or grace
of God through the mediation of Christ. It is true that faith herein
works and acts itself in and by godly sorrow, repentance, humiliation,
self judging and abhorrence, fervency in prayer and supplications, with a
humble waiting for an answer of peace from God, with engagements unto
renewed obedience: but it is faith alone that makes applications unto
grace in the blood of Christ for the continuation or our justified
estate, expressing itself in those other ways and effects mentioned; from
none of which a believing soul does expect the mercy aimed at.
3dly. The Scripture expressly does declare this to be the only way of
the continuation of our justification, 1 John 3:1,2, "These things write
I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with
the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitiation for
our sins." It is required of those that are justified that they sin not,-
-it is their duty not to sin; but yet it is not so required of them, as
that if in any thing they fail of their duty, they should immediately
lose the privilege of their justification. Wherefore, on a supposition of
sin, if any man sin (as there is no man that lives and sins not), what
way is prescribed for such persons to take, what are they to apply
themselves unto that their sin may be pardoned, and their acceptance with
God continued; that is, for the continuation of their justification? The
course in this case directed unto by the apostle is none other but the
application of our souls by faith unto the Lord Christ, as our advocate
with the Father, on the account of the propitiation that he has made for
our sins. Under the consideration of this double act of his sacerdotal
office, his oblation and intercession, he is the object of our faith in
our absolute justification; and so he is as unto the continuation of it.
So our whole progress in our justified estate, in all the degrees of it,
is ascribed unto faith alone.
It is no part of our inquiry, what God requires of them that are
justified. There is no grace, no duty, for the substance of them, nor for
the manner of their performance, that are required, either by the law or
the gospel, but they are obliged unto them. Where they are omitted, we
acknowledge that the guilt of sin is contracted, and that attended with
such aggravations as some will not own or allow to be confessed unto God
himself. Hence, in particular, the faith and grace of believers, [who] do
constantly and deeply exercise themselves in godly sorrow, repentance,
humiliation for sin, and confession of it before God, upon their
apprehensions of its guilt. And these duties are so far necessary unto
the continuation at our justification, as that a justified estate cannot
consist with the sins and vices that are opposite unto then; so the
apostle affirms that "if we live after the flesh, we shall die,"
Rom.8:13. He that does not carefully avoid falling into the fire or
water, or other things immediately destructive of life natural, cannot
live. But these are not the things whereon life does depend. Nor have the
best of our duties any other respect unto the continuation of our
justification, but only as in them we are preserved from those things
which are contrary unto it, and destructive of it. But the sole question
is, upon what the continuation of our justification does depend, not
concerning what duties are required of us in the way of our obedience. If
this be that which is intended in this position, that the continuation of
our justification depends on our own obedience and good works, or that
our own obedience and good works are the condition of the continuation of
our justification,--namely, that God does indispensably require good
works and obedience in all that are justified, so that a justified estate
is inconsistent with the neglect of them,--it is readily granted, and I
shall never contend with any about the way whereby they choose to express
the conceptions of their minds. But if it be inquired what it is whereby
we immediately concur in a way of duty unto the continuation of our
justified estate,--that is, the pardon of our sins and acceptance with
God,--we say it is faith alone; for "The just shall live by faith,"
Rom.1:17. And as the apostle applies this divine testimony to prove our
first or absolute justification to be by faith alone; so does be also
apply it unto the continuation of our justification, as that which is by
the same means only, Heb.10:38,39, "Now the just shall live by faith: but
if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are
not of them that draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to
the saving of the soul". The drawing back to perdition includes the loss
of a justified estate, really so or in profession. In opposition
whereunto the apostle places "believing unto the saving of the soul;"
that is, unto the continuation of justification unto the end. And herein
it is that the "just live by faith; " and the loss of this life can only
be by unbelief: so the "life which we now live in the flesh we live by
the faith of the Son of God, who loved us, and gave himself for us,"
Gal.2:20. The life which we now lead in the flesh is the continuation of
our justification, a life of righteousness and acceptation with God; in
opposition unto a life by the works of the law, as the next words
declare, verse 21, "I do not frustrate the grace of God; for if
righteousness come by the law, then is Christ dead in vain." And this
life is by faith in Christ, as "he loved us, and gave himself for us;"
that is, as he was a propitiation for our sins. This, then, is the only
way, means, and cause, on our part, of the preservation of this life, of
the continuance of our justification; and herein are we "kept by the
power of God through faith unto salvation." Again; if the continuation of
our justification depends on our own works of obedience, then is the
righteousness of Christ imputed unto us only with respect unto our
justification at first, or our first justification, as some speak. And
this, indeed, is the doctrine of the Roman school. They teach that the
righteousness of Christ is so far imputed unto us, that on the account
thereof God gives unto us justifying grace, and thereby the remission of
sin, in their sense; whence they allow it [to be] the meritorious cause
of our justification. But so a supposition thereof, or the reception of
that grace, we are continued to be justified before God by the works we
perform by virtue of that grace received. And though some of them rise so
high as to affirm that this grace and the works of it need no farther
respect unto the righteousness of Christ, to deserve our second
justification and life eternal, as does Vasquez expressly, in 1, 2, q.
114, disp. 222, cap. 3; yet many of them affirm that it is still from the
consideration of the merit of Christ that they are so meritorious. And
the same, for the substance of it, is the judgment of some of them who
affirm the continuation of our justification to depend on our own works,
setting aside that ambiguous term of merit; for it is on the account of
the righteousness of Christ, they say, that our own works, or imperfect
obedience, is so accepted with God, that the continuation of our
justification depends thereon. But the apostle gives us another account
hereof, Rom.5:1-3; for he distinguishes three things:--1. Our access into
the grace of God. 2. Our standing in that grace. 3. Our glorying in that
station against all opposition. By the first he expresses our absolute
justification; by the second, our continuation in the state whereinto we
are admitted thereby; and by the third, the assurance of that
continuation, notwithstanding all the oppositions we meet withal. And all
these he ascribes equally unto faith, without the intermixture of any
other cause or condition; and other places express to the same purpose
might be pleaded.
3dly. The examples of them that did believe, and were justified, which
are recorded in the Scripture, do all bear witness unto the same truth.
The continuation of the justification of Abraham before God is declared
to have been by faith only, Rom.4:3; for the instance of his
justification, given by the apostle from Gen.15:6, was long after he was
justified absolutely. And if our first justification, and the
continuation of it, did not depend absolutely on the same cause, the
instance of the one could not be produced for a proof of the way and
means of the other, as here they are. And David, when a justified
believer, not only places the blessedness of man in the free remission of
sins, in opposition unto his own works in general, Rom.4:6,7, but, in his
own particular case, ascribes the continuation of his justification and
acceptation before God unto grace, mercy, and forgiveness alone; which
are no otherwise received but by faith, Ps.130:3-5; 143:2. All other
works and duties of obedience do accompany faith in the continuation of
our justified estate, as necessary effects and fruits of it, but not as
causes, means, or conditions, whereon that effect is suspended. It is
patient waiting by faith that brings in the full accomplishment of the
promises, Heb.6:12,15. Wherefore, there is but one justification, and
that of one kind only, wherein we are concerned in this disputation,--the
Scripture makes mention of no more; and that is the justification of an
ungodly person by faith. Nor shall we admit of the consideration of any
other. For if there be a second justification, it must be of the same
kind with the first, or of another;--if it be of the same kind, then the
same person is often justified with the same kind of justification, or at
least more than once; and so on just reason ought to be often baptized;--
if it be not of the same kind, then the same person is justified before
God with two sorts of justification; of both which the Scripture is
utterly silent. And [so] the continuation of our justification depends
solely on the same causes with our justification itself.
VI. Evangelical personal righteousness, the nature and use of it--Final
judgment, and its respect unto justification
Evangelical personal righteousness; the nature and use of it--Whether
there be an angelical justification on our evangelical righteousness,
inquired into--How this is by some affirmed and applauded--Evangelical
personal righteousness asserted as the condition of our righteousness, or
the pardon of sin--Opinion of the Socinians--Personal righteousness
required in the gospel--Believers hence denominated righteous--Not with
respect unto righteousness habitual, but actual only--Inherent
righteousness the same with sanctification, or holiness--In what sense we
may be said to be justified by inherent righteousness--No evangelical
justification on our personal righteousness--The imputation of the
righteousness of Christ does not depend thereon--None have this
righteousness, but they are antecedently justified--A charge before God,
in all justification before God--The instrument of this charge, the law
or the gospel--From neither of them can we be justified by this personal
righteousness--The justification pretended needless and useless--It has
not the nature of any justification mentioned in the Scripture, but is
contrary to all that is so called--Other arguments to the same purpose--
Sentential justification at the last day--Nature of the last judgement--
Who shall be then justified --A declaration of righteousness, and an
actual admission into glory, the whole of justification at the last day--
The argument that we are justified in this life in the same manner, and
on the same grounds, as we shall be judged at the last day, that
judgement being according unto works, answered; and the impertinency of
it declared
The things which we have discoursed concerning the first and second
justification, and concerning the continuation of justification, have no
other design but only to clear the principal subject whereof we treat
from what does not necessarily belong unto it. For until all things that
are either really heterogeneous or otherwise superfluous are separated
from it, we cannot understand aright the true state of the question about
the nature and causes of our justification before God. For we intend one
justification only,--namely, that whereby God at once freely by his grace
justifies a convinced sinner through faith in the blood of Christ.
Whatever else any will be pleased to call justification, we are not
concerned in it, nor are the consciences of them that believe. To the
same purpose we must, therefore, briefly also consider what is usually
disputed about our own personal righteousness, with a justification
thereon; as also what is called sentential justification at the day of
judgment. And I shall treat no farther of them in this place, but only as
it is necessary to free the principal subject under consideration from
being intermixed with them, as really it is not concerned in them. For
what influence our own personal righteousness has into our justification
before God will be afterwards particularly examined. Here we shall only
consider such a notion of it as seems to interfere with it, and disturb
the right understanding of it. But yet I say concerning this also, that
it rather belongs unto the difference that will be among us in the
expression of our conceptions about spiritual things whilst we know but
in part, than unto the substance of the doctrine itself. And on such
differences no breach of charity can ensue, whilst there is a mutual
grant of that liberty of mind without which it will not be preserved one
moment.
It is, therefore, by some apprehended that there is an evangelical
justification upon our evangelical personal righteousness. This they
distinguish from that justification which is by faith through the
imputation of the righteousness of Christ, in the sense wherein they do
allow it; for the righteousness of Christ is our legal righteousness,
whereby we have pardon of sin, and acquitment from the sentence of the
law, on the account of his satisfaction and merit. But, moreover, they
say that as there is a personal, inherent righteousness required of us,
so there is a justification by the gospel thereon. For by our faith, and
the plea of it, we are justified from the charge of unbelief; by our
sincerity, and the plea of it, we are justified from the charge of
hypocrisy; and so by all other graces and duties from the charge of the
contrary sins in commission or omission, so far as such sins are
inconsistent with the terms of the covenant of grace. How this differs
from the second justification before God, which some say we have by
works, on the supposition of the pardon of sin for the satisfaction of
Christ, and the infusion of a habit of grace enabling us to perform those
works, is declared by those who so express themselves.
Some add, that this inherent, personal, evangelical righteousness, is
the condition on our part of our legal righteousness, or of the
imputation of the righteousness of Christ unto our justification, or the
pardon of sin. And those by whom the satisfaction and merit of Christ are
denied, make it the only and whole condition of our absolute
justification before God. So speak all the Socinians constantly; for
they deny our obedience unto Christ to be either the meritorious or
efficient cause of our justification; only they say it is the condition
of it, without which God has decreed that we shall not be made partakers
of the benefit thereof. So does Socinus himself, De Justificat. p. 17,
"Sunt opera nostra, id est, ut dictum fuit, obedientia quam Christo
praestamus, licet nec efficiens nec meritoria, tamen causa est (ut
vocant) sine qua non, justificationis coram Deo, tque aeternae nostrae".
Again, p. 14, inter Opuscul, "Ut cavendum est ne vitae sanctitatem atque
innocentiam effectum justificationis nostrae coram Deo esse credamus,
neque illam nostrae coram Deo justificationis causam efficientem aut
impulsivam esse affirmemus; set tantummodo causam sine qua eam
justificationem nobis non contingere decrevit Deus". And in all their
discourses to this purpose they assert our personal righteousness and
holiness, or our obedience unto the commands of Christ, which they make
to be the form and essence of faith, to be the condition whereon we
obtain justification, or the remission of sins. And indeed, considering
what their opinion is concerning the person of Christ, with their denial
of his satisfaction and merit, it is impossible they should frame any
other idea of justification in their minds. But what some among ourselves
intend by a compliance with them herein, who are not necessitated
thereunto by a prepossession with their opinions about the person and
mediation of Christ, I know not. For as for them, all their notions about
grace, conversion to God, justification, and the like articles of our
religion, they are nothing but what they are necessarily cast upon by
their hypothesis about the person of Christ.
At present I shall only inquire into that peculiar evangelical
justification which is asserted to be the effect of our own personal
righteousness, or to be granted us thereon. And hereunto we may observe,-
-
1. That God does require in and by the gospel a sincere obedience of
all that do believe, to be performed in and by their own persons, though
through the aids of grace supplied unto them by Jesus Christ. He
requires, indeed, obedience, duties, and works of righteousness, in and
of all persons whatever; but the consideration of them which are
performed before believing is excluded by all from any causality or
interest in our justification before God: at least, whatever any may
discourse of the necessity of such works in a way of preparation unto
believing (whereunto we have spoken before), none bring them into the
verge of works evangelical, or obedience of faith; which would imply a
contradiction. But that the works inquired after are necessary unto all
believers, is granted by all; on what grounds, and unto what ends, we
shall inquire afterwards. They are declared, Eph.2:10.
2. It is likewise granted that believers, from the performance of this
obedience, or these works of righteousness, are denominated righteous in
the Scripture, and are personally and internally righteous, Luke 1:6;
John 3:7. But yet this denomination is nowhere given unto them with
respect unto grace habitually inherent, but unto the effect of it in
duties of obedience; as in the places mentioned: "They were both
righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of
the Lord blameless;"the latter words give the reason of the former, or
their being esteemed righteous before God. And, "He that does
righteousness is righteous;"--the denomination is from doing. And
Bellarmine, endeavouring to prove that it is habitual, not actual
righteousness, which is, as he speaks, the formal cause of our
justification before God, could not produce one testimony of Scripture
wherein any one is denominated righteous from habitual righteousness, (De
Justificat., lib. 2 cap. 15); but is forced to attempt the proof of it
with this absurd argument,--namely, that "we are justified by the
sacraments, which do not work in us actual, but habitual righteousness".
And this is sufficient to discover the insufficiency of all pretence for
any interest of our own righteousness from this denomination of being
righteous thereby, seeing it has not respect unto that which is the
principal part thereof.
3. This inherent righteousness, taking it for that which is habitual
and actual, is the same with our sanctification; neither is there any
difference between them, only they are diverse names of the same thing.
For our sanctification is the inherent renovation of our natures exerting
and acting itself in newness of life, or obedience unto God in Christ and
works of righteousness. But sanctification and justification are in the
Scripture perpetually distinguished, whatever respect of causality the
one of them may have unto the other. And those who do confound them, as
the Papists do, do not so much dispute about the nature of justification,
as endeavour to prove that indeed there is no such thing as justification
at all; for that which would serve most to enforce it,--namely, the
pardon of sin,--they place in the exclusion and extinction of it, by the
infusions of inherent grace, which does not belong unto justification.
4. By this inherent, personal righteousness we may be said several
ways to be justified. As,--(1.) In our own consciences, inasmuch at it is
an evidence in us and unto us of our participation of the grace of God in
Christ Jesus, and of our acceptance with him; which has no small
influence into our peace. So speaks the apostle, "Our rejoicing is this,
the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity,
not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our
conversation in the world," 2 Cor.1:12: who yet disclaims any confidence
therein as unto his justification before God; for says he, "Although I
know nothing by myself, yet am I not hereby justified," 1 Cor.4:4. (2.)
Hereby may we be said to be justified before men; that is, acquitted of
evils laid unto our charge, and approved as righteous and unblamable; for
the state of things is so in the world, as that the professors of the
gospel ever were, and ever will be, evil spoken of, as evil doers. The
rule given them to acquit themselves, so as that at length they may be
acquitted and justified by all that are not absolutely blinded and
hardened in wickedness, is that of a holy and fruitful walking, in
abounding in good works, 1 Pet.2:12; 3:16. And so is it with respect unto
the church, that we be not judged dead, barren professors, but such as
have been made partakers of the like precious faith with others: "Show me
thy faith by thy works", James 2. Wherefore, (3.) This righteousness is
pleadable unto our justification against all the charges of Satan, who is
the great accuser of the brethren,--of all that believe. Whether he
manage his charge privately in our consciences (which is as it were
before God), as he charged Job; or by his instruments, in all manner of
reproaches and calumnies (whereof some in this age have had experience in
an eminent manner), this righteousness is pleadable unto our
justification.
On a supposition of these things, wherein our personal righteousness
is allowed its proper place and use (as shall afterward be more fully
declared), I do not understand that there is an evangelical justification
whereby believers are, by and on the account of this personal, inherent
righteousness, justified in the sight of God; nor does the imputation of
the righteousness of Christ unto our absolute justification before him
depend thereon. For,--
1. None have this personal righteousness but they are antecedently
justified in the sight of God. It is wholly the obedience of faith,
proceeding from true and saving faith in God by Jesus Christ: for, as it
was said before, works before faith, are, as by general consent, excluded
from any interest in our justification, and we have proved that they are
neither conditions of it, dispositions unto it, nor preparations for it,
properly so called; but every true believer is immediately justified on
his believing. Nor is there any moment of time wherein a man is a true
believer, according as faith is required in the gospel, and yet not
justified; for as he is thereby united unto Christ, which is the
foundation of our justification by him, so the whole Scripture testifies
that he that believes is justified, or that there is an infallible
connection in the ordination of God between true faith and justification.
Wherefore this personal righteousness cannot be the condition of our
justification before God, seeing it is consequential thereunto. What may
be pleaded in exception hereunto from the supposition of a second
justification, or differing causes of the beginning and continuation of
justification, has been already disproved
2. Justification before God is a freedom and absolution from a charge
before God, at least it is contained therein; and the instrument of this
charge must either be the law or the gospel. But neither the law nor the
gospel do before God, or in the sight of God, charge true believers with
unbelief, hypocrisy, or the like; for "who shall lay any thing to the
charge of God's elect," who are once justified before him? Such a charge
may be laid against them by Satan, by the church sometimes on mistake, by
the world, as it was in the case of Job; against which this righteousness
is pleadable. But what is charged immediately before God is charged by
God himself either by the law of the gospel; and the judgement of God is
according unto truth. If this charge be by the law, by the law we must be
justified. But the plea of sincere obedience will not justify us by the
law. That admits of none in satisfaction unto its demands but that which
is complete and perfect. And where the gospel lays any thing unto the
charge of any persons before God, there can be no justification before
God, unless we shall allow the gospel to be the instrument of a false
charge; for what should justify him whom the gospel condemns? And if it
be a justification by the gospel from the charge of the law, it renders
the death of Christ of no effect; and a justification without a charge is
not to be supposed.
3. Such a justification as that pretended is altogether needless and
senseless. This may easily be evinced from what the Scripture asserts
unto our justification in the sight of God by faith in the blood of
Christ; but this has been spoken to before on another occasion. Let that
be considered, and it will quickly appear that there is no place nor use
for this new justification upon our personal righteousness, whether it be
supposed antecedent and subordinate thereunto, or consequential and
perfective thereof.
4. This pretended evangelical justification has not the nature of any
justification that is mentioned in the Scripture,--that is, neither that
by the law, nor that provided in the gospel. Justification by the law is
this,--The man that does the works of it shall live in them. This it does
not pretend unto. And as unto evangelical justification, it is every way
contrary unto it. For therein the charge against the person to be
justified is true,--namely, that he has sinned, and is come short of the
glory of God; [but] in this it is false,--namely, that a believer is an
unbeliever; a sincere person, a hypocrite; one fruitful in good works,
altogether barren: and this false charge is supposed to be exhibited in
the name of God, and before him. Our acquitment, in true, evangelical
justification, is by absolution or pardon of sin; here, by a vindication
of our own righteousness. There, the plea of the person to be justified
is, Guilty; all the world is become guilty before God: but here, the plea
of the person on his trial is, Not guilty, whereon the proofs and
evidences of innocence and righteousness do ensue; but this is a plea
which the law will not admit, and which the gospel disclaims.
5. If we are justified before God on our own personal righteousness,
and pronounced righteous by him on the account thereof, then God enters
into judgement with us on something in ourselves, and acquits us thereon;
for justification is a juridical act, in and of that Judgment of God
which is according unto truth. But that God should enter into judgment
with us, and justify us with respect unto what he judges on, or our
personal righteousness, the psalmist does not believe, Ps.130:2,3; 143:2;
nor did the publican, Luke 18.
6. This personal righteousness of ours cannot be said to be a
subordinate righteousness, and subservient unto our justification by
faith in the blood of Christ: for therein God justifies the ungodly, and
imputes righteousness unto him that works not; and, besides, it is
expressly excluded from any consideration in our justification,
Eph.2:7,8.
7. This personal, inherent righteousness, wherewith we are said to be
justified with this evangelical justification, is our own righteousness.
Personal righteousness, and our own righteousness, are expressions
equivalent; but our own righteousness is not the material cause of any
justification before God. For,--(1.) It is unmeet so to be, Isa.64:6.
(2.) It is directly opposed unto that righteousness whereby we are
justified, as inconsistent with it unto that end, Phil.3:9; Rom.10:3,4.
It will be said that our own righteousness is the righteousness of the
law, but this personal righteousness is evangelical. But,--(1.) It will
be hard to prove that our personal righteousness is any other but our own
righteousness; and our own righteousness is expressly rejected from any
interest in our justification in the places quoted. (2.) That
righteousness which is evangelical in respect of its efficient cause, its
motives and some especial ends, is legal in respect of the formal reason
of it and our obligation unto it; for there is no instance of duty
belonging unto it, but, in general, we are obliged unto its performance
by virtue of the first commandment, to "take the LORD for our God."
Acknowledging therein his essential verity and sovereign authority, we
are obliged to believe all that he shall reveal, and to obey in all that
he shall command. (3.) The good works rejected from any interest in our
justification, are those whereunto we are "created in Christ Jesus",
Eph.2:8~10; the "works of righteousness which we have done," Tit.3:5,
wherein the Gentiles are concerned, who never sought for righteousness by
the works of the law, Rom.9:30. But it will yet be said, that these
things are evident in themselves. God does require an evangelical
righteousness in all that do believe; this Christ is not, nor is it the
righteousness of Christ. He may be said to be our legal righteousness,
but our evangelical righteousness he is not; and, so far as we are
righteous with any righteousness, so far we are justified by it. For
according unto this evangelical righteousness we must be tried; if we
have it we shall be acquitted, and if we have it not we shall be
condemned. There is, therefore, a justification according unto it.
I answer,--1. According to some authors or maintainers of this
opinion, I see not but that the Lord Christ is as much our evangelical
righteousness as he is our legal. For our legal righteousness he is not,
in their judgement, by a proper imputation of his righteousness unto us,
but by the communication of the fruits of what he did and suffered for
us. And so he is our evangelical righteousness also; for our
sanctification is an effect or fruit of what he did and suffered for us,
Eph.5:26,27; Tit.2:14.
2. None have this evangelical righteousness but those who are, in
order of nature at least, justified before they actually have it; for it
is that which is required of all that do believe, and are justified
thereon. And we need not much inquire how a man is justified after he is
justified.
3. God has not appointed this personal righteousness in order unto our
justification before him in this life, though he have appointed it to
evidence our justification before others, and even in his sight; as shall
be declared. He accepts of it, approves of it, upon the account of the
free justification of the person in and by whom it is wrought: so he had
"respect unto Abel and his offering". But we are not acquitted by it from
any real charge in the sight of God, nor do receive remission of sins on
the account of it. And those who place the whole of justification in the
remission of sins, making this personal righteousness the condition of
it, as the Socinians do, leave not any place for the righteousness of
Christ in our justification.
4. If we are in any sense justified hereby in the sight of God, we
have whereof to boast before him. We may not have so absolutely, and with
respect unto merit; yet we have so comparatively, and in respect of
others who cannot make the same plea for their justification. But all
boasting is excluded; and it will not relieve, to say that this personal
righteousness is of the free grace and gift of God unto some, and not
unto others; for we must plead it as our duty, and not as God's grace.
5. Suppose a person freely justified by the grace of God, through
faith in the blood of Christ, without respect unto any works, obedience,
or righteousness of his own, we do freely grant,--(1.) That God does
indispensably require personal obedience of him; which may be called his
evangelical righteousness. (2.) That God does approve of and accept, in
Christ, this righteousness so performed. (3.) That hereby that faith
whereby we are justified is evidenced, proved, manifested, in the sight
of God and men. (4.) That this righteousness is pleadable unto an
acquitment against any charge from Satan, the world, or our own
consciences. (5.) That upon it we shall be declared righteous at the last
day, and without it none shall so be. And if any shall think meet from
hence to conclude unto an evangelical justification, or call God's
acceptance of our righteousness by that name, I shall by no means contend
with then. And wherever this inquiry is made,--not how a sinner, guilty
of death, and obnoxious unto the curse, shall be pardoned, acquitted, and
justified, which is by the righteousness of Christ alone imputed unto
him--but how a man that professes evangelical faith, or faith in Christ,
shall be tried, judged, and whereon, as such, he shall be justified, we
grant that it is and must be, by his own personal, sincere obedience.
And these things are spoken, not with a design to contend with any, or
to oppose the opinions of any; but only to remove from the principal
question in hand those things which do not belong unto it.
A very few words will also free our inquiry from any concernment in
that which is called sentential justification, at the day of judgement;
for of what nature soever it be, the person concerning whom that sentence
is pronounced was,--(1.) Actually and completely justified before God in
this world; (2.) Made partaker of all the benefits of that justification,
even unto a blessed resurrection in glory: "It is raised in glory", 1
Cor.15:43. (3.) The souls of the most will long before have enjoyed a
blessed rest with God, absolutely discharged and acquitted from all their
labours and all their sins; there remains nothing but an actual admission
of the whole person into eternal glory. Wherefore this judgement can be
no more but declaratory, unto the glory of God, and the everlasting
refreshment of them that have believed. And without reducing of it unto a
new justification, as it is nowhere
called in the Scripture, the ends of that solemn judgement,--in the
manifestation of the wisdom and righteousness of God, in appointing the
way of salvation by Christ, as well as in giving of the law; the public
conviction of them by whom the law has been transgressed and the gospel
despised; the vindication of the righteousness, power, and wisdom of God
in the rule of the world by h