The
first
booke
.
Wherein
the
iudgement
of
the
professors
of
the
Gospell
is
recited
,
confirmed
and
defended
from
Bellarmines
exceptions
.
CHAP.
I.
Of
the
diuers
significations
of
the
word
Iustifying
.
WHen
it
is
demaunded
,
how
a
man
may
be
iustifyed
before
God
:
the
word
Iustifie
is
taken
two
wayes
sometime
for
to
make
or
to
be
made
iust
:
and
sometime
for
to
pronounce
,
or
to
be
pronounced
iust
.
These
two
do
consent
and
agree
betweene
themselues
,
as
the
cause
efficient
,
and
the
effect
.
For
God
,
being
a
iust
iudge
,
pronounceth
no
man
iust
,
neither
acquiteth
any
,
but
him
whome
he
hath
first
made
iust
.
And
God
maketh
a
man
iust
(
whome
he
will
pronounce
iust
)
by
imputation
of
iustice
:
that
is
,
for
so
much
as
he
imputeth
iustice
to
him
,
or
(
that
which
is
all
one
)
imputeth
not
sinnes
vnto
him
,
but
pardoneth
&
forgiueth
them
,
Rom.
4.
ver.
5.6.7.8
.
In
the
first
signification
,
the
word
[
Iustifying
]
is
taken
Rom.
4.5
.
where
the
Apostle
sayth
,
To
him
that
worketh
not
,
but
beleeueth
in
him
that
iustifieth
the
vngodly
,
his
faith
is
imputed
for
iustice
.
Heere
God
is
sayd
to
iustifie
the
vngodly
.
But
God
pronounceth
not
the
vngodly
iust
,
but
maketh
him
iust
;
and
that
whiles
he
imputeth
iustice
vnto
him
:
as
the
Apostle
teacheth
in
this
place
.
And
then
at
last
pronounceth
him
iust
.
And
so
the
Apostle
himselfe
expoundeth
the
word
Iustified
,
by
to
be
made
iust
.
Rom.
5.19
.
In
the
latter
signification
it
is
taken
Rom.
8.33
.
where
the
Apostle
sayth
:
Who
shall
accuse
Gods
elect
?
God
is
he
that
iustifieth
.
Who
is
hee
that
condemneth
?
Heere
,
vnto
iustification
is
manifestly
opposed
condemnation
:
whereby
we
may
perceiue
that
by
that
word
here
is
signified
iudicial
acquitting
,
whereby
the
iudge
pronounceth
iust
and
innocent
the
guiltie
partie
,
(
that
is
,
him
that
is
accused
and
brought
to
the
iudgement
seate
.
)
But
,
Iustification
being
taken
this
latter
way
,
is
againe
to
be
distinguished
.
For
it
is
done
either
in
this
life
,
and
that
in
iustifying
euery
one
apart
by
himselfe
and
secretly
:
or
after
this
life
,
in
that
vniuersall
day
of
iudgement
,
in
altogether
and
openly
.
For
God
hath
set
vp
his
iudgement
seat
in
the
conscience
of
man
,
in
as
much
as
he
hath
so
indued
mans
mind
with
knowledge
of
iust
and
vniust
,
that
if
he
haue
done
any
vniust
thing
,
his
conscience
of
it
owne
accord
,
as
it
were
summoneth
him
to
Gods
iudgement
seat
,
and
accuseth
him
:
and
if
he
be
by
others
accused
vniustly
,
his
conscience
excuseth
him
.
Rom.
2.15
.
1.
Ioh.
3.20.21
.
In
this
life
therefore
God
iustifieth
or
pronounceth
man
iust
,
so
far
forth
as
he
giueth
testimony
to
his
soule
(
by
the
holy
Ghost
,
the
word
of
grace
being
the
means
)
of
imputed
iustice
,
or
of
forgiuenes
of
sins
,
and
by
consequence
,
of
adoption
,
for
the
satisfaction
sake
of
the
mediator
,
Rom.
8.16
.
And
in
that
day
of
iudgement
,
Christ
being
appointed
of
the
father
iudge
of
all
,
will
with
his
mouth
openly
before
all
Angels
and
men
,
pronounce
iust
,
and
crowne
with
life
eternall
the
reward
of
iustice
,
all
those
that
before
were
iustified
in
this
life
,
both
by
imputation
of
iustice
,
and
by
that
secret
testimonie
of
the
holy
Ghost
.
But
the
rest
he
will
condemne
as
transgressors
of
the
law
,
and
punish
them
with
eternall
paines
,
Rom.
11.12.13.14.15.16
.
Mat.
25.31
.
&c.
CHAP.
II.
The
state
of
the
controuersie
,
and
partition
of
this
disputation
.
FVrthermore
,
about
mans
Iustification
before
God
,
being
taken
the
first
way
,
this
question
chiefly
is
controuerted
betwixt
the
professors
of
the
Gospell
,
and
the
Papists
,
especially
the
Iesuites
:
whether
Iustificaion
be
infusing
of
iustice
,
or
whether
it
be
imputing
of
iustice
?
For
the
Papists
say
,
that
iustification
is
infusing
of
iustice
:
but
the
Gospellers
say
,
that
it
is
imputing
of
iustice
.
We
in
the
first
place
will
declare
and
confirme
the
Gospellers
opinion
as
true
,
and
therefore
first
by
nature
:
then
will
we
recite
and
refute
the
opinion
of
the
Papists
.
CHAP.
III.
The
Gospellers
opinion
expounded
by
seuen
parts
.
WHen
the
Gospellers
therefore
say
,
that
iustification
is
imputing
of
iustice
,
their
meaning
is
,
1.
that
man
by
himself
and
his
own
nature
vniust
,
is
accounted
for
iust
:
2.
and
thereupon
pronounced
iust
of
God
:
3.
in
as
much
as
he
forgiueth
him
his
sinnes
for
the
satisfaction
of
Christ
,
performed
for
him
:
4.
and
apprehended
of
him
by
faith
:
5.
and
therfore
that
man
is
iustified
by
faith
only
:
because
he
is
counted
iust
,
and
by
consequence
pronounced
iust
,
for
Christes
satisfaction
only
which
is
imputed
to
him
by
faith
only
:
for
that
he
doth
not
apprehend
and
apply
it
to
himselfe
,
but
by
faith
:
6.
and
so
that
man
is
iustified
,
partly
by
Gods
grace
or
free
loue
,
with
which
he
being
moued
,
did
ordayne
Christ
to
be
satisfier
or
mediator
for
the
elect
:
7.
partly
by
Gods
iustice
,
whereby
accepting
Christs
satisfaction
for
the
elect
,
he
imputeth
the
same
vnto
them
:
and
thereupon
receiueth
them
into
fauour
,
and
adopteth
them
for
sonnes
and
heyres
of
eternall
life
.
The
Gospellers
opinion
being
thus
declared
,
it
followeth
next
that
we
confirme
by
testimonies
of
scripture
all
the
parts
thereof
,
and
free
it
from
the
obiections
of
the
Papists
.
CHAP.
IIII.
The
first
part
of
the
opinion
expounded
is
confirmed
,
and
the
same
confirmation
freed
from
Bellarmines
exception
.
ANd
first
,
that
man
by
himselfe
and
of
his
owne
nature
being
vniust
,
is
counted
for
iust
,
Paul
beareth
witnesse
Rom.
4.5.6
.
in
these
words
,
To
him
that
worketh
not
,
but
beleeueth
in
him
that
iustifieth
the
vngodly
,
his
faith
is
imputed
for
iustice
:
as
also
Dauid
declareth
the
blessednesse
of
that
man
to
whome
God
imputeth
iustice
.
The
like
sentences
are
in
the
same
chapter
,
verse
.
9.10.22.23.24
.
Against
this
proofe
Bellarmine
excepteth
:
doth
not
signifie
a
bare
accounting
:
but
an
accounting
whereunto
the
truth
in
the
thing
it selfe
maketh
answere
,
as
is
plaine
by
these
words
,
To
him
that
worketh
,
wages
is
imputed
,
not
according
to
grace
,
but
according
to
debt
.
For
it
is
certaine
,
that
to
him
that
worketh
,
wages
is
due
,
not
only
in
opinion
and
accounting
,
but
in
truth
and
in
deede
.
I
answere
.
Here
Bellarmine
first
of
all
committeth
the
fault
of
falshood
,
in
as
much
as
he
inuerteth
the
order
of
the
Apostles
words
,
that
they
may
serue
his
purpose
.
For
it
is
not
in
that
place
,
To
him
that
worketh
,
wages
is
imputed
,
not
according
to
grace
,
&c.
But
it
is
,
To
him
that
worketh
,
wages
is
not
imputed
according
to
grace
,
&c.
Neyther
may
Bellarmine
except
,
that
it
skilleth
not
,
whither
way
the
aduerbe
of
denyall
be
there
placed
:
because
,
howsoeuer
it
be
there
placed
,
yet
in
the
opposition
,
the
word
Imputed
,
is
to
be
repeated
thus
:
But
(
the
wages
)
is
imputed
according
to
debt
.
For
by
the
very
phrase
wee
may
perceiue
,
that
after
the
words
[
ou
logizetai
]
is
not
imputed
,
these
words
must
bee
vnderstoode
[
tout'estin
ou
didotai
]
that
is
,
is
not
giuen
:
and
therefore
that
in
the
opposition
,
the
word
[
didotai
]
giuen
,
is
to
be
vnderstoode
,
that
the
whole
sentence
is
this
:
[
to
ergazomeno
ho
misthos
ou
logízetai
,
toutéstin
on
didotai
cata
chárin
,
alla
dídotai
cata
tó
opheílema
:
]
that
is
;
To
him
that
worketh
,
wages
is
not
imputed
,
that
is
to
say
,
is
not
giuen
according
to
grace
:
but
is
giuen
according
to
debt
.
And
if
Bellarmine
will
not
graunt
this
[
*
](A09695-e11190-b)
*
i.
want
of
a
word
.
ellipsis
,
he
must
confesse
that
here
is
a
manifest
[
†
](A09695-e11210-b)
†
i.
abounding
of
a
word
.
pleonasmus
in
the
former
part
,
and
also
a
manifest
Wages
is
not
imputed
:
is
not
this
as
if
he
should
say
,
Wages
is
not
giuen
according
to
grace
?
It
is
therefore
a
pleonasmus
if
one
say
,
It
is
not
imputed
according
to
grace
.
Also
if
any
say
,
Wages
is
not
imputed
,
but
is
giuen
according
to
debt
:
he
speaketh
properly
.
Therefore
if
one
say
,
Wages
is
imputed
according
to
debt
:
he
(
as
touching
the
word
imputed
)
speaketh
improperly
.
Wherefore
this
place
is
not
of
force
to
shift
off
the
other
:
in
which
it
is
plaine
by
the
Apostles
words
,
that
the
proper
signification
of
the
word
Imputed
,
is
kept
.
For
he
sayth
,
that
Faith
is
imputed
for
iustice
to
him
that
worketh
not
,
but
beleeueth
in
him
that
iustifieth
the
vngodly
.
Which
what
other
thing
is
it
,
then
that
man
is
iustified
,
not
by
debt
or
desert
of
his
works
,
but
by
grace
for
Christs
satisfaction
apprehended
by
faith
?
It
is
therefore
nothing
to
the
matter
that
Bellarmine
sayth
:
that
wages
is
so
imputed
,
that
in
the
meane
time
it
is
due
indeed
.
As
though
it
were
in
the
same
respect
said
,
that
faith
is
imputed
for
Iustice
.
But
euen
Bellarmine
himselfe
also
teacheth
,
that
faith
is
giuen
to
man
of
grace
,
and
likewise
,
that
Iustification
of
which
we
speake
in
this
place
:
which
he
is
wont
to
name
the
first
.
Whereupon
doubtlesse
it
followeth
,
that
neither
faith
nor
this
Iustification
is
owed
to
a
man
;
seeing
debt
and
grace
are
heere
manifestly
set
one
against
an
other
.
And
whereas
Bellarmine
saith
,
that
by
the
word
Imputing
,
is
signified
that
accounting
wherunto
the
truth
in
the
thing
it selfe
maketh
aunswere
:
it
is
truly
said
,
if
it
be
rightly
vnderstood
.
For
to
whom
God
imputeth
iustice
,
they
are
truly
iust
;
but
by
imputed
iustice
,
and
not
inherent
;
as
Bellarmine
vnderstandeth
.
Euen
as
he
whose
debts
his
suretie
hath
paid
to
the
creditor
,
oweth
the
creditor
indeede
nothing
,
though
himselfe
paide
not
his
debts
,
neither
had
wherewith
to
pay
them
.
CHAP.
V.
The
confirmation
and
freeing
of
the
second
part
.
SEcondly
,
that
man
of
himselfe
and
his
owne
nature
vniust
,
but
now
being
endued
with
imputed
iustice
,
is
pronounced
Iust
of
God
:
the
truth
of
this
sentence
is
plaine
by
these
testimonies
,
in
which
condemnation
is
opposed
to
iustification
:
as
Rom.
5.16
.
Iudgement
verily
of
one
vnto
condemnation
:
but
grace
of
many
offences
vnto
iustification
.
And
ver.
8.
As
by
the
fall
of
one
,
sinne
entred
vpon
all
men
vnto
condemnation
:
so
also
by
the
iust-worke
(
dicáioma
)
of
one
,
iustice
entred
vpon
all
men
vnto
iustification
of
life
.
And
Chap.
8.33.34
.
Who
shall
lay
any
thing
to
the
charge
of
Gods
elect
?
It
is
God
that
iustifieth
,
who
is
he
that
condemneth
?
Against
this
proofe
Bellarmine
excepteth
:
that
the
word
Iustification
doth
not
alwaies
pertain
to
the
iudgement
place
,
because
it
is
opposed
to
condemnation
.
For
condemnation
is
sometime
an
effect
of
the
fault
which
deserueth
punishment
.
And
as
Adam
condemned
vs
,
not
by
iudging
,
nor
after
the
maner
vsed
in
iudgement
places
,
but
by
imprinting
originall
blame
,
but
God
hath
condemned
by
iudging
:
so
Christ
as
the
second
Adam
,
iustifieth
vs
by
putting
out
our
sinnes
,
and
infusing
grace
:
and
secondly
shal
iustifie
vs
in
the
day
of
iudgment
,
by
declaring
them
iust
whom
he
before
hath
made
iust
.
I
answer
.
First
this
exception
maketh
nothing
against
the
proofe
brought
from
Rom.
8.
For
althogh
the
word
condemning
be
not
alwaies
belonging
to
the
iudgement
place
;
yet
that
it
is
so
there
,
is
manifest
by
that
which
the
Apostle
saith
,
Who
shall
accuse
Gods
elect
?
Moreouer
this
exception
corrupteth
the
place
of
the
5.
Chapter
,
both
touching
the
words
,
&
touching
the
sense
.
For
the
Apostle
saith
not
there
,
either
that
Adam
condemned
vs
,
or
Christ
iustifieth
vs
:
but
saith
,
by
one
offence
of
Adam
,
iudgement
,
that
is
,
guiltinesse
came
vpon
all
men
vnto
condemnation
:
likewise
by
the
iust-work
(
dicaloma
)
that
is
,
satisfaction
of
Christ
,
the
gift
,
that
is
,
iustice
came
vpon
all
men
,
vnto
iustification
of
life
.
Where
both
condemnation
&
iustification
are
referred
vnto
god
as
Iudge
:
who
may
with
right
condemne
all
Adams
natural
children
,
for
the
sin
that
he
committed
;
&
who
iustifieth
them
to
whom
he
hath
giuen
iustice
,
for
the
satisfaction
sake
of
Christ
.
Furthermore
,
Bellarmines
reasoning
from
a
contrary
sense
,
or
from
a
like
reason
of
contraries
,
stayeth
vpon
a
false
supposition
:
to
wit
,
a
false
opposition
of
contraries
.
For
these
are
not
opposite
one
to
an
other
,
to
imprint
originall
blame
,
and
to
put
out
sins
,
(
to
wit
,
from
nature
)
and
infuse
grace
,
that
is
,
inherent
iustice
.
But
these
are
opposite
,
to
imprint
originall
blame
,
and
,
to
put
out
originall
blame
;
likewise
,
to
obtaine
imputation
of
iustice
.
And
indeed
as
Adam
imprinted
by
his
fall
original
blame
in
all
his
children
,
so
Christ
,
for
those
that
pertaine
vnto
him
,
hath
put
out
that
blame
,
and
obtained
imputation
of
iustice
by
his
satisfaction
.
Moreouer
,
although
as
Adam
did
not
onely
imprint
blame
in
his
posteritie
,
but
also
by
generation
infused
into
them
the
very
force
of
sinne
:
so
Christ
also
,
hath
not
onely
put
out
the
blame
of
the
elect
,
and
obtained
imputation
of
iustice
for
them
,
but
also
regenerateth
them
by
his
holy
spirit
,
and
by
that
regeneration
,
putteth
out
the
force
of
sinne
,
and
infuseth
iustice
or
studie
of
good
workes
:
yet
in
that
place
of
the
Apostle
,
he
speaketh
not
of
this
benefite
of
Christ
,
but
onely
of
the
other
.
And
of
the
benefit
of
regeneration
or
sanctification
,
he
entreateth
afterwards
in
the
6.7
.
&
.
8.
Chapter
.
CHAP.
VI.
The
confirmation
and
clearing
of
the
third
part
.
THirdly
,
that
man
is
accounted
for
iust
,
and
pronounced
iust
of
God
,
in
as
much
as
God
forgiueth
him
his
sins
for
the
satisfaction
of
Christ
,
and
therefore
that
iustification
is
no
other
thing
then
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
:
these
sayings
teach
vs
.
Rom.
4.6.7.8
.
Dauid
saith
,
That
blessed
is
that
man
,
to
whom
God
imputeth
iustice
without
works
:
saying
,
Blessed
are
they
whose
iniquities
are
forgiuen
,
and
whose
sinnes
are
couered
:
blessed
is
the
man
to
whom
the
Lord
shall
not
impute
sinne
,
In
these
words
it
is
certaine
,
that
the
full
definition
of
Iustification
is
contained
:
for
of
this
the
Apostle
manifestly
there
entreateth
:
to
wit
,
minding
to
teach
how
man
is
iustified
before
God
,
as
appeareth
by
comparing
togither
those
things
which
go
before
,
from
the
17.
verse
of
the
1.
Chapter
,
vnto
this
place
.
And
he
defineth
Iustification
here
,
by
imputation
of
iustice
,
or
(
that
which
he
taketh
for
the
same
)
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
A
gainst
this
proofe
,
Bellarmine
excepteth
:
that
Paul
alleageth
not
this
testimonie
of
the
Psalme
,
be
gotten
by
our
owne
strength
.
He
also
saith
,
it
may
be
answered
,
that
in
these
words
a
perfect
definition
is
contained
,
but
intricately
.
For
,
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
saith
he
,
cannot
be
except
iustice
be
infused
:
euen
as
darknesse
is
not
driuen
away
,
except
light
come
in
place
therof
.
Also
:
by
not
imputing
of
sins
,
saith
he
,
the
Apostle
gathereth
imputing
of
iustice
:
and
by
this
teacheth
,
that
these
two
cannot
be
separated
,
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
and
giuing
of
iustice
,
to
wit
,
inherent
;
for
this
Bellarmine
vnderstandeth
.
I
aunswere
,
that
Paul
alleageth
the
testimonie
of
this
Psalme
perfectly
to
define
Iustification
,
is
plaine
by
his
drift
,
and
comparing
togither
things
that
went
before
:
as
euen
now
we
warned
.
Wherefore
Bellarmine
feigneth
here
a
false
drift
.
Whereupon
it
followeth
,
that
it
is
also
false
,
that
heere
is
contained
a
perfect
definition
intricately
;
to
wit
,
infusion
of
inherent
iustice
beeing
vnderstoode
herewithall
,
as
the
other
,
and
that
the
principall
part
of
iustification
.
And
although
it
be
true
,
that
with
iustifying
faith
,
inherent
iustice
is
togither
infused
,
not
perfect
,
but
begunne
:
yet
is
it
not
true
,
neither
followeth
it
,
that
this
iustice
is
a
part
of
that
iustice
whereby
wee
stand
before
the
iudgement
seate
of
GOD
,
about
which
the
Apostle
dealeth
in
this
place
.
Besides
,
Bellarmine
maketh
a
false
comparison
.
For
infusion
of
iustice
is
not
so
in
respect
of
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
as
infusion
of
light
into
the
ayre
,
to
driue
darkenesse
out
of
the
same
:
but
is
so
compared
vnto
the
reall
putting
out
of
inhabiting
sinne
,
which
the
scripture
calleth
mortification
of
the
flesh
and
of
the
olde
man
.
For
how
much
as
inherent
iustice
is
infused
,
that
is
,
how
much
as
the
spirit
or
new
man
is
quickned
:
so
much
is
inhabiting
sinne
put
out
,
or
the
flesh
and
olde
man
mortified
.
Moreouer
,
Bellarmine
falsly
interpreteth
the
Apostles
reasoning
;
as
thogh
he
gathered
imputation
of
iustice
,
by
not
imputing
of
sinnes
,
as
if
it
were
some
diuerse
thing
.
For
the
Apostle
doth
not
gather
here
a
diuerse
thing
from
a
diuerse
:
but
proueth
imputation
of
iustice
by
the
testimonie
of
Dauid
:
whereby
appeareth
,
that
hee
holdeth
imputation
of
Iustice
(
which
he
would
prooue
)
and
not
imputing
of
sinnes
(
which
is
mentioned
in
the
testimonie
alleadged
)
for
one
and
the
same
thing
.
For
otherwise
he
should
not
proue
his
purpose
.
For
it
were
ready
to
except
:
Thou
art
in
hand
to
proue
imputation
of
iustice
:
but
Dauid
mentioneth
not
imputation
of
iustice
,
but
not
imputing
of
sinnes
:
but
these
are
diuers
.
Wherefore
by
that
testimonie
,
thou
hast
yet
proued
nothing
.
Thus
I
say
,
might
one
except
against
the
Apostles
proofe
.
Lastly
,
Bellarmine
falsly
expoundeth
imputation
of
iustice
,
by
giuing
of
iustice
,
in
as
much
as
he
vnderstandeth
inherent
iustice
:
seeing
these
be
diuers
:
neither
is
there
any
speech
of
inherent
iustice
in
this
place
:
and
finally
,
seeing
it
implieth
a
contradiction
,
for
inherent
iustice
to
be
imputed
.
But
let
vs
bring
now
more
testimonies
to
confirme
the
sentence
proposed
:
God
hath
sette
foorth
to
bee
a
reconciliation
through
faith
in
his
bloud
,
&c.
that
he
way
be
iust
,
and
iustifying
him
that
is
of
the
faith
of
Iesus
.
And
Chapter
4.24.25
.
It
shall
hee
imputed
vnto
vs
(
to
wit
,
faith
for
iustice
)
which
beleeue
in
him
that
raised
vp
Iesus
our
Lord
from
the
dead
,
who
was
deliuered
to
death
for
our
faults
,
and
raised
vp
for
our
iustification
.
And
Chapter
,
5.9
.
Iustified
by
his
bloud
.
And
Chap.
10.6.7
.
The
iustice
which
is
of
faith
,
saith
thus
:
Say
not
in
thy
heart
,
who
shall
goe
vp
to
heauen
?
this
is
to
bring
Christ
from
on
high
:
or
,
who
shall
goe
downe
into
the
deepe
?
this
is
to
bring
Christ
againe
from
the
dead
.
Gal.
2.20.21
.
I
liue
by
faith
of
the
son
of
God
,
who
loued
mee
,
and
gaue
himselfe
for
me
:
I
doo
not
abrogate
the
grace
of
God
:
for
if
iustice
be
by
the
law
,
then
Christ
died
in
vaine
.
Ephe.
1.6.7
.
God
by
his
grace
hath
made
vs
gracious
in
that
beloued
one
,
in
whom
we
haue
redemption
by
his
bloud
,
euen
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
Against
these
proofes
some
may
except
,
that
in
these
speeches
mention
is
made
indeed
of
Christs
satisfaction
,
as
of
the
first
mouing
and
deseruing
cause
,
for
which
man
is
iustified
,
and
his
sins
forgiuen
him
:
but
hence
it
followeth
not
that
Iustification
consisteth
only
in
forgiuenes
of
sins
:
because
that
Christ
by
his
satisfaction
,
hath
deserued
and
obtained
of
God
for
vs
,
not
onely
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
but
also
the
gift
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
doth
regenerate
vs
,
and
infuse
iustice
into
vs
.
I
answere
.
That
which
is
heere
saide
of
Christs
merits
,
is
indeed
true
:
but
yet
in
those
speeches
,
is
no
speech
of
regeneration
,
but
onely
of
forgiuenesse
of
sins
as
the
effect
of
Christs
satisfaction
,
and
as
the
thing
by
which
we
are
formally
iustified
:
as
chiefly
appeareth
by
that
place
,
Eph.
1.6.7
.
Wherfore
we
must
determin
,
that
it
is
one
and
the
same
thing
with
the
Apostle
,
for
A
man
to
be
iustified
by
the
bloud
of
Christ
;
and
A
man
to
haue
his
sinnes
forgiuen
for
the
bloud
of
Christ
.
Let
vs
adde
also
an
other
place
,
By
this
man
(
to
wit
Christ
)
is
preached
to
you
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
:
and
from
all
things
from
which
ye
could
not
be
uistisfied
by
Moses
law
:
by
this
man
,
euery
one
that
beleeueth
is
iustified
.
Heere
Iustification
is
manifestly
defined
,
by
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
Bellarmine
excepteth
:
to
wit
,
as
he
ought
:
that
is
,
by
fulfilling
all
things
which
faith
sheweth
should
be
fulfilled
.
For
he
that
beleeueth
a
Phisitian
,
though
a
most
skilfull
one
,
and
that
infallibly
cureth
,
is
not
healed
,
except
he
receiue
the
medicines
that
hee
appoynteth
.
I
answere
.
This
is
a
Iesutish
glosse
,
confounding
things
diuerse
,
that
I
say
not
aduerse
:
to
wit
,
to
beleeue
in
Christ
;
and
,
to
fulfill
the
law
;
or
doubtlesse
knitting
a
false
consequence
,
as
though
the
fulfilling
of
the
lawe
because
it
is
ioyned
with
true
faith
,
concurreth
as
a
cause
with
the
same
to
iustification
.
Moreouer
,
hee
deceiueth
by
the
diuerse
signification
of
the
word
beleeue
:
as
though
to
beleeue
in
Christ
,
were
no
other
thing
,
then
to
beleeue
Christ
,
that
he
is
a
most
skilfull
Phisitian
of
soules
,
and
curing
infallibly
,
and
in
the
meane
time
not
to
receiue
the
medicines
that
hee
appointeth
.
But
I
say
,
that
to
beleeue
in
Christ
,
is
by
faith
to
receiue
and
apply
to
ones
selfe
the
medicines
that
Christ
appointeth
,
namely
his
bloud
shead
for
vs
on
the
Crosse
,
with
feeling
of
the
wrath
of
God
.
Bellarmine
addeth
:
though
the
Apostle
in
this
place
nameth
onely
the
forgiuenesse
of
sins
,
yet
is
it
no
let
,
but
iustification
may
be
vnderstood
to
consist
in
forgiuenesse
of
sins
,
&
infusion
of
iustice
,
For
,
forgiuenesse
of
sins
is
not
only
forgiuing
of
the
punishment
,
but
is
the
washing
away
&
cleansing
of
the
fault
:
which
washing
and
cleansing
is
not
,
except
there
succeed
the
brightnesse
of
grace
&
comelinesse
of
iustice
.
I
answere
.
That
the
Apostle
in
this
place
defineth
Iustification
by
forgiuenesse
of
sins
onely
,
is
manifest
,
partly
by
the
consequence
of
sentences
,
wherof
one
is
added
to
an
other
,
as
explaining
the
same
:
partly
by
the
very
phrase
,
to
be
iustified
from
sins
:
which
is
no
other
thing
,
then
to
be
absolued
from
sins
committed
,
&
by
consequence
,
to
obtaine
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
Moreouer
,
it
is
vnfitly
distinguished
by
Bellarmine
,
as
things
diuerse
and
separable
one
from
an
other
,
Forgiuenesse
of
the
punishment
,
and
,
cleansing
of
the
fault
:
when
as
cleansing
or
rather
forgiuing
of
the
fault
,
is
no
other
thing
then
deliuerance
from
the
punishment
:
for
hee
is
said
to
forgiue
the
fault
,
that
will
not
inflict
deserued
punishment
for
the
fault
.
Besides
,
hee
confoundeth
cleansing
of
the
fault
,
with
cleansing
of
inhabiting
sinne
,
which
is
by
regeneration
:
seeing
vnto
the
cleansing
of
the
fault
,
he
opposeth
the
brightnesse
of
grace
and
comelinesse
or
seemelinesse
of
iustice
to
wit
,
inherent
.
Finally
,
he
hideth
a
false
consequence
,
in
that
he
saith
;
The
cleansing
of
the
fault
is
not
,
except
there
succeed
the
brightnesse
of
grace
and
comelinesse
of
iustice
.
By
which
words
hee
insinuateth
,
if
iustification
consist
in
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
:
and
this
is
the
cleansing
of
the
fault
:
and
this
cleansing
is
not
,
except
there
succeede
inherent
iustice
:
it
followeth
,
that
inherent
iustice
also
is
part
of
that
iustice
wherwith
man
is
formally
iustified
.
But
it
is
not
necessarie
,
that
inherent
iustice
should
be
part
of
that
iustice
wherewith
man
is
iustified
,
although
that
iustice
wherewith
man
is
iustified
,
befall
no
man
(
that
is
growen
to
yeares
of
discretion
)
without
the
gift
of
inherent
iustice
.
But
Bellarmine
further
excepteth
,
Although
,
saith
he
,
in
this
place
mention
onely
should
be
made
of
iustifying
from
sinne
:
yet
in
many
other
places
,
mention
is
made
of
sanctification
,
cleansing
,
washing
,
renewing
and
the
like
,
which
shew
the
other
part
of
Iustification
.
I
aunswere
.
It
seemeth
,
Bellarmine
by
the
very
phrase
of
this
place
,
to
be
iustified
from
things
,
vnderstood
,
that
speech
heere
properly
was
of
iustification
from
sinnes
:
that
is
,
of
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
:
but
least
he
should
hurt
his
cause
,
he
will
not
freely
confesse
this
.
Then
,
in
that
hee
saith
,
mention
is
made
in
other
places
of
sanctification
or
renewing
,
it
maketh
nothing
to
the
matter
.
For
there
is
indeed
mention
made
thereof
euery
where
:
but
not
as
part
of
iustification
,
as
heere
Bellarmine
by
begging
the
question
doth
affirme
.
Yet
Bellarmine
proceedeth
in
his
exception
.
That
from
which
ye
could
not
be
iustified
in
the
law
of
Moses
,
signifieth
,
saith
he
,
that
the
obseruation
of
the
law
,
presumed
on
by
our
owne
strength
,
or
by
the
help
of
the
law
only
doth
not
iustifie
:
not
that
the
true
obseruation
of
the
law
is
not
iustice
;
but
that
the
law
cannot
bee
kept
,
before
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
For
when
God
by
Christs
merits
reconcileth
any
,
he
togither
,
both
forgiueth
him
his
sinnes
,
and
infuseth
charitie
,
by
which
he
keepeth
the
commandements
of
the
law
.
I
answere
.
Whatsoeuer
that
signifieth
,
To
be
iustified
in
the
law
of
Moses
:
the
Apostle
saith
clearely
,
that
the
Iewes
to
whom
he
speaketh
,
could
not
be
iustified
in
Moses
law
:
which
thing
also
Peter
affirmeth
of
the
fathers
,
Act.
15.
where
he
saith
,
that
the
law
was
a
yoake
,
that
neither
they
nor
their
fathers
could
beare
.
And
who
skilfull
in
the
holy
storie
,
knoweth
not
,
that
there
were
among
the
fathers
some
godly
,
and
therefore
endued
with
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
and
the
gift
of
regeneration
?
And
yet
they
,
as
Peter
witnesseth
,
could
not
beare
the
yoake
of
the
law
,
that
is
,
by
keeping
of
the
law
,
be
iustified
from
their
sinnes
.
Also
who
dare
affirme
,
that
none
of
those
Iewes
whom
Paul
then
spake
vnto
,
was
endued
with
true
faith
in
Christ
to
come
,
although
as
yet
they
knew
not
who
he
was
:
and
therfore
were
also
endued
with
the
gift
of
generation
?
Surely
that
some
of
them
were
such
,
may
be
gathered
from
the
43.
verse
,
where
it
is
said
,
that
many
of
those
Iewes
and
religious
proselytes
followed
Paul
and
Barnabas
:
and
that
they
perswaded
them
to
continue
in
the
grace
of
God
.
And
yet
these
,
as
Paul
witnesseth
,
could
not
in
the
law
,
that
is
,
by
the
law
be
iustified
.
Wherefore
that
which
Bellarmine
saith
,
that
the
true
keeping
of
the
lawe
is
iustice
,
is
true
:
but
it
is
not
true
which
hee
vnderstandeth
and
insinuateth
in
the
wordes
following
,
namely
,
that
they
which
haue
receiued
of
GOD
,
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
and
the
gift
of
charitie
,
can
performe
the
true
,
(
that
is
,
perfect
)
obseruation
of
the
lawe
;
so
that
by
that
iustice
of
the
law
,
they
can
stand
in
the
iudgement
of
God
.
An other
place
for
a
sentence
there
is
,
O
God
bee
mercifull
vnto
mee
a
sinner
.
Contrariwise
,
the
Pharisee
preaching
the
gifts
of
God
bestowed
on
him
,
and
giuing
thankes
,
went
away
not
iustified
.
Therefore
Iustification
consisteth
not
in
gifts
and
good
workes
,
though
done
through
Gods
helpe
,
but
onely
in
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
when
the
Publican
said
,
O
God
bee
mercifull
to
mee
a
sinner
,
hee
asked
not
onely
forgiuenesse
of
the
debt
,
as
though
hee
would
bee
vnrighteous
,
yet
not
so
accounted
of
GOD
,
nor
punished
:
but
hee
asked
whole
reconciliation
;
and
the
same
hee
obtained
.
Whereupon
,
our
Lorde
concludeth
the
〈◊〉
:
This
man
went
away
iustified
from
him
,
for
euery
one
that
humbleth
himselfe
,
shall
be
exalted
:
and
hee
that
exalteth
himselfe
,
shall
be
humbled
.
The
exaltation
of
the
humble
and
penitent
publican
,
signifieth
doubtlesse
somewhat
more
then
onely
forgiuenes
of
his
offence
.
For
they
are
not
said
to
be
exalted
,
whose
debts
are
forgiuen
:
but
which
are
aduanced
vnto
degrees
and
honours
.
Therefore
the
publican
is
for
this
said
to
be
exalted
,
because
of
a
sinner
he
was
sodainly
made
iust
;
of
the
seruant
of
sinne
,
the
seruant
of
iustice
;
of
the
child
of
the
diuell
,
the
child
of
God
.
Moreouer
,
the
Pharisee
,
deserued
to
be
set
after
the
Publican
,
not
because
he
rehearsed
the
gifts
of
God
,
and
gaue
the
Lord
thanks
:
but
because
he
was
full
of
the
swelling
of
pride
,
and
trusted
in
his
owne
iustice
,
so
as
that
he
would
not
craue
any
thing
to
beadded
to
him
,
nothing
to
be
forgiuen
him
:
besides
also
hee
contemned
the
humble
Publican
.
I
answere
.
Bellarmine
doth
heere
crookedly
cauill
at
the
sentence
of
the
professors
of
the
Gospell
,
as
if
they
did
teach
that
such
shal
receiue
forgiuenesse
of
sins
,
as
will
yet
be
vnrighteous
:
or
as
if
such
a
purpose
can
stand
with
carnest
suite
for
remission
of
sinnes
.
And
where
he
saith
,
that
the
Publican
when
he
said
,
God
be
mercifull
vnto
me
a
sinner
,
asked
not
onely
forgiuenesse
of
his
debt
:
what
is
this
but
to
wrest
cleare
words
from
their
simple
sense
?
Also
,
what
meaneth
this
,
that
Bellarmine
opposeth
whole
reconciliation
vnto
forgiuenesse
of
debt
?
As
though
that
forgiuing
of
debt
,
or
remission
of
sinnes
,
were
not
a
whole
,
but
onely
a
halfe
reconciliation
,
against
the
manifest
testimonies
of
scripture
:
Rom.
5.9.10
.
Beeing
instified
by
his
bloud
,
wee
shall
be
saued
now
much
more
by
him
from
wrath
;
for
if
when
we
were
enemies
,
wee
were
reconciled
to
God
by
the
death
of
his
sonne
:
much
more
beeing
reconciled
,
wee
shall
be
saued
by
his
life
.
Heere
it
is
manifest
,
that
to
be
reconciled
vnto
God
,
is
the
same
that
to
be
iustified
of
God
,
as
may
be
perceiued
by
Chap.
4.
ver.
5.6.7
.
Yet
there
is
a
clearer
place
,
2.
Cor.
5.19
.
God
was
in
Christ
reconciling
the
world
to
himselfe
,
not
imputing
to
them
their
sinnes
.
Behold
whether
the
Apostle
dooth
not
expresly
define
reconciliation
wherewith
we
are
reconciled
vnto
God
,
by
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
?
And
whereas
Bellarmine
interpreteth
that
clause
,
Euery
one
that
humbleth
himselfe
,
&c.
so
as
if
the
Lord
would
define
what
it
is
to
be
instified
:
hee
misseth
the
marke
:
for
the
Lord
had
no
other
purpose
,
then
by
that
prouerbiall
sentence
,
to
confirme
that
speciall
two-folde
example
,
the
one
of
a
man
iustified
,
the
other
of
a
man
not
obtaining
Iustification
.
Likewise
,
where
he
interpreteth
to
be
exalted
,
of
infusion
of
iustice
,
he
vseth
a
fallacie
of
the
consequent
,
reasoning
from
the
gerall
to
the
speciall
,
affirmatiuely
,
thus
;
To
be
instified
is
to
be
exalted
:
therefore
it
is
,
to
bee
exalted
by
infusion
of
inherent
iustice
.
But
though
it
be
true
,
that
hee
which
is
iustified
,
is
exalted
not
onely
by
adoption
,
but
also
by
regeneration
:
yet
hence
it
followeth
not
,
that
Iustification
is
the
same
that
regeneration
.
Moreouer
,
Bellarmine
in
this
place
contradicteth
himselfe
,
whiles
now
he
granteth
,
that
forgiuenesse
of
sinne
is
signified
by
exaltation
,
and
straight
way
denieth
that
they
are
sayd
to
be
exalted
whose
debts
are
forgiuen
.
Lastly
,
as
touching
the
Pharisee
:
it
is
true
,
that
for
spirituall
pride
and
trust
in
his
owne
iustice
,
he
was
repulsed
from
God
:
but
in
the
meane
time
,
this
also
is
true
,
that
the
Lord
would
teach
by
this
example
,
that
this
pride
is
an
vnseparable
companion
of
that
desire
whereby
men
seeke
iustice
in
their
owne
workes
.
Neither
is
Zacheus
,
Luk.
19.
(
which
example
Bellarmine
obiecteth
)
sayd
to
be
iustified
by
good
workes
:
although
when
he
promised
good
works
,
the
Lord
sayd
vnto
him
,
To
day
is
saluation
come
to
this
house
:
but
only
the
sinceritie
of
his
faith
is
after
this
manner
commended
by
the
effects
.
And
the
cause
of
Zacheus
saluation
,
is
shewed
in
the
words
immediatly
following
;
for
he
sayth
,
To
day
is
saluation
come
to
this
house
,
for
that
he
also
is
the
sonne
of
Abraham
:
to
wit
,
infisting
in
the
steps
of
Abrahams
faith
,
as
Paul
interpreteth
this
sonne-ship
,
Rom.
4.12
.
For
as
touching
the
flesh
,
many
were
Abrahams
sonnes
,
to
whome
notwithstanding
saluation
came
not
.
And
king
Ezechias
,
(
which
example
Bellarmine
addeth
)
although
he
shewed
his
good
works
with
a
sincere
hart
:
yet
he
thought
not
,
that
he
was
by
them
iust
before
the
iudgement
seate
of
God
:
like
as
Paule
sayd
,
I
know
nothing
by
my selfe
;
but
I
am
not
hereby
iustified
.
CHAP.
VII
.
The
confirmation
of
the
fourth
part
.
FOurthly
,
that
man
is
iustified
by
faith
,
in
as
much
as
by
faith
he
layeth
hold
on
,
and
applieth
to
himselfe
Christes
satisfaction
,
may
be
perceiued
by
these
sayings
,
Rom.
3.24.25
.
They
are
iustified
by
the
redemption
made
in
Christ
,
whome
God
hath
set
forth
to
be
a
reconciliation
through
faith
in
his
bloud
.
And
chap.
4.24.25
.
It
shal
be
imputed
to
vs
(
to
wit
,
faith
for
iustice
)
which
beleeue
in
him
that
raised
vp
our
Lord
Iesus
from
the
dead
:
which
was
deliuered
to
death
for
our
faults
,
and
raised
vp
for
our
iustification
.
And
chap.
10.6.7
.
The
iustice
which
is
of
faith
,
saith
thus
.
Say
not
in
thy
hart
,
who
shall
go
vp
into
heauen
?
this
is
to
bring
Christ
from
aboue
.
Or
,
who
shall
go
downe
into
the
deepe
?
this
is
to
bring
Christ
againe
from
the
dead
.
Gal.
2.20
.
I
liue
by
faith
of
the
sonne
of
God
,
who
loued
me
,
and
gaue
himselfe
for
me
,
&c.
Rom.
4.5
.
To
him
that
worketh
not
,
but
beleeneth
in
him
that
iustifieth
the
vngodly
,
his
faith
is
imputed
for
iustice
.
Where
it
is
manifest
,
that
by
the
name
faith
,
by
a
metonymie
of
the
adioynt
,
is
to
be
vnderstood
any
thing
which
is
by
faith
imputed
to
a
man
for
iustice
.
For
to
speake
properly
,
that
which
is
in
a
man
,
is
not
said
to
be
imputed
to
him
,
but
that
which
is
without
a
man
.
And
faith
is
in
a
man
,
but
Christs
satisfaction
which
faith
apprehendeth
is
without
a
man
:
whereby
it
cometh
to
passe
,
that
it
is
imputed
vnto
man
by
faith
:
that
is
to
say
,
is
accounted
his
,
so
as
man
is
esteemed
in
this
place
,
as
if
he
had
performed
the
satisfaction
for
himselfe
.
CHAP.
VIII
.
The
confirmation
and
clearing
of
the
fift
part
.
FIftly
,
that
man
is
iustified
by
faith
only
,
that
is
,
for
the
onely
satisfaction
of
Christ
apprehended
by
faith
:
and
not
partly
by
faith
,
that
is
,
for
Christs
satisfaction
imputed
;
and
partly
by
works
,
that
is
,
for
inherent
iustice
:
may
be
gathered
by
the
sayings
following
,
which
teach
that
a
man
is
iustified
without
workes
.
Rom.
3.27
.
Where
is
then
the
reioycing
?
It
is
excluded
.
By
what
law
?
of
workes
?
no
;
but
by
the
law
of
faith
.
And
by
and
by
,
verse
,
28.
We
conclude
therfore
,
that
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
without
the
workes
of
the
law
.
And
Chap.
4.2
.
If
Abraham
our
father
were
iustified
by
workes
,
he
hath
wherein
to
reioyce
,
but
not
with
God
.
Gal.
2.16
.
Knowing
that
man
is
not
iustified
by
the
workes
of
the
law
,
but
by
the
faith
of
Iesus
Christ
:
we
also
haue
beleeued
in
Iesus
Christ
,
that
wee
might
bee
iustified
by
the
faith
of
Christ
,
and
not
by
the
works
of
the
law
.
Eph.
2.8.9
.
By
grace
ye
are
saued
through
faith
,
not
of
workes
.
Tit.
3.5
.
Not
of
iust
workes
which
we
had
done
,
but
of
his
owne
mercie
he
saued
vs
,
&c.
Phil.
3.9
.
That
I
may
be
found
in
him
,
not
hauing
my
own
iustice
which
is
of
the
lawe
,
but
that
which
is
by
faith
of
Christ
.
Vnto
those
sayings
wherein
works
are
opposed
to
faith
,
first
in
generall
or
in
commune
,
that
by
works
which
are
opposed
to
faith
,
&
excluded
from
Iustification
,
are
vnderstood
works
which
go
before
faith
,
&
which
are
done
by
the
only
strength
of
free-will
,
&
not
all
absolutely
.
And
this
he
saith
may
be
proued
from
Rom.
4.
where
we
read
,
saith
he
,
to
him
that
worketh
,
wages
is
imputed
as
by
debt
,
not
as
by
grace
.
In
which
place
the
Apostle
openeth
himselfe
,
saith
he
,
what
shuld
be
vnderstood
by
workes
which
are
opposed
to
faith
:
and
saith
,
that
he
calleth
them
works
,
to
which
that
which
is
giuen
is
wages
,
not
grace
.
And
such
be
not
any
,
but
those
that
are
done
by
the
onely
strength
of
freewill
.
For
that
which
is
giuen
to
the
works
that
be
done
of
grace
,
such
as
is
the
very
act
of
faith
,
and
those
that
follow
thereupon
,
is
not
simply
wages
,
but
also
grace
:
yea
more
grace
then
wages
.
Thus
saith
Bellarmine
.
I
answere
.
It
is
false
,
that
Pault
should
here
say
,
he
calleth
them
works
,
to
which
that
which
is
giuen
is
wages
,
not
grace
:
that
is
,
which
are
done
by
the
onely
strength
of
freewill
.
For
,
that
he
speaketh
of
works
in
generall
,
whether
they
be
done
by
the
strength
of
freewill
or
by
grace
,
appeareth
by
this
,
that
he
intreateth
there
of
Abrahams
workes
,
those
which
he
had
done
of
grace
and
faith
,
as
that
he
was
obedient
to
Gods
commandement
,
and
trusting
vpon
his
promise
,
left
his
countrie
of
Chaldea
,
and
went
into
a
land
which
God
was
to
shew
him
:
also
,
that
he
refused
not
to
offer
his
onely
sonne
Isaak
at
Gods
commandement
:
for
these
are
those
workes
wherein
he
might
reioyce
and
boast
with
men
.
And
from
these
works
doth
Pault
derogate
Iustification
before
God
,
by
this
argument
which
is
taken
from
the
generall
;
for
that
to
him
that
worketh
,
wages
is
giuen
as
by
debt
,
and
is
not
imputed
,
that
is
,
not
giuen
of
grace
:
but
to
Abraham
iustice
was
imputed
.
And
whereas
Bellarmine
faith
:
that
which
is
giuen
to
workes
which
be
done
of
grace
,
is
partly
wages
,
parly
grace
:
therein
hee
feigneth
,
that
things
immediately
aduerse
,
may
stand
togither
;
and
that
against
the
Apostles
manifest
sentence
,
both
in
this
place
,
where
he
opposeth
grace
to
debt
,
and
by
consequence
,
to
wages
,
as
that
cannot
stand
togither
;
and
also
Chap.
11.6
.
where
he
saith
,
If
by
grace
(
to
wit
,
there
be
a
reseruation
of
certaine
Iewes
that
are
iustified
)
it
is
not
now
of
workes
,
(
that
is
,
deserts
of
workes
)
otherwise
were
no
more
grace
.
But
if
of
workes
:
then
not
now
of
grace
:
otherwise
workes
were
no
more
workes
.
But
Bellarmine
hauing
first
set
downe
that
generall
answere
,
3
27.
maketh
answere
afterward
vnto
euery
of
those
sayings
.
And
first
vnto
that
place
,
Rom.
3.27
.
he
answereth
,
that
the
reioycing
of
the
Iewes
is
excluded
by
the
law
of
of
faith
,
not
by
the
law
of
deeds
:
because
man
is
iustified
of
grace
,
which
first
of
all
inspireth
faith
,
then
by
faith
,
leadeth
vnto
mercie
and
good
works
:
and
is
not
iustified
by
the
law
of
deeds
,
that
is
by
the
only
knowledge
of
the
law
,
&
strength
of
free
will
.
I
answer
.
Although
Gods
grace
wherby
a
man
is
iustified
,
leadeth
him
by
faith
vnto
good
works
:
yet
is
not
in
that
respect
man
said
to
be
justified
by
faith
(
as
Bellarmine
insinuateth
)
because
of
faith
he
doth
good
workes
,
but
he
is
said
to
be
iustified
by
faith
,
because
by
faith
he
leyeth
holde
on
Christs
satisfaction
,
for
which
only
he
is
iustified
.
Moreouer
,
it
is
false
,
that
the
Apostle
vnderstandeth
those
workes
only
which
are
done
according
to
Gods
law
,
by
the
strength
of
free
will
.
For
it
is
plain
by
Abrahams
example
,
which
he
presently
addeth
to
this
sentence
,
by
a
prolepsis
in
the
beginning
of
the
chapter
following
,
that
he
speaketh
of
those
workes
that
are
done
of
grace
and
faith
.
Against
this
answere
,
Bellarmine
excepteth
:
that
the
Apostle
saith
not
,
where
is
the
reioycing
?
but
,
where
is
the
reioycing
?
that
is
,
where
is
the
reioycing
,
wherewith
thou
reioycest
in
thy selfe
and
not
in
the
Lord
?
And
of
workes
done
of
faith
,
and
thereby
of
grace
;
seeing
faith
is
of
grace
;
none
can
reioyce
but
in
the
Lord
.
Which
reioycing
is
not
forbidden
,
seeing
the
same
Apostle
saith
,
Hee
that
reioyceth
,
let
him
reioyce
in
the
Lord
.
I
answere
.
That
Pronowne
,
thy
,
is
not
in
the
Greeke
.
Neuerthelesse
,
by
the
very
matter
it
appeareth
,
that
it
must
be
vnderstood
.
Then
,
that
there
is
no
need
the
Pronowne
should
be
so
expounded
,
as
Bellarmine
doth
;
for
reioycing
is
rightly
said
to
be
his
that
reioiceth
;
whether
he
reioyce
in
himself
,
or
in
an
other
.
Lastly
(
that
which
is
chiefly
to
be
marked
)
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
reioycing
wherewith
any
may
truly
reioyce
,
that
he
is
iust
by
inherent
iustice
,
bred
of
perfect
obseruation
of
the
commandements
of
the
law
,
whether
he
performe
this
obseruation
of
naturall
strength
,
or
of
Gods
singular
grace
.
And
such
reioycing
no
man
hath
:
because
all
haue
transgressed
the
law
,
and
they
which
begin
to
obserue
it
by
Gods
singular
grace
,
yet
can
they
not
(
in
this
life
)
obserue
it
perfectly
,
so
as
for
that
obseruation
they
can
be
counted
iust
of
God
.
In
the
meane
while
it
is
true
,
that
it
is
lawfull
for
the
godly
to
reioyce
in
the
Lord
:
but
so
farre
forth
as
they
reioyce
not
falsly
:
and
they
should
falsly
reioyce
,
if
they
should
say
,
that
they
can
by
Gods
grace
perfectly
fulfill
the
law
,
so
as
by
fulfilling
thereof
,
they
may
be
iust
before
God
.
The
second
place
from
Rom.
3.28
.
Wee
gather
that
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
without
the
workes
of
the
law
:
Bellarmine
passeth
ouer
in
silence
,
and
answereth
nothing
to
it
in
speciall
.
But
in
the
second
place
he
answereth
vnto
that
saying
,
Rom.
4.2
.
of
Abraham
:
and
withall
,
vnto
the
rest
of
the
places
before
recited
.
He
saith
therefore
,
vnto
the
places
following
,
Gal.
2.
Eph.
2.
Tit.
3.
for
in
all
those
places
,
are
excluded
onely
workes
done
before
faith
.
I
answere
.
The
Apostle
derogateth
Iustification
not
onely
from
those
works
which
are
done
before
faith
,
but
also
from
those
which
are
done
after
faith
.
For
he
speaketh
of
Abrahams
workes
,
which
are
mentioned
in
scripture
for
to
shew
his
vprightnesse
,
as
,
that
he
obeyed
God
,
going
out
of
his
owne
countrey
,
and
offering
his
sonne
.
But
the
workes
which
Abraham
did
before
faith
,
are
mentioned
in
the
scripture
,
not
as
such
whereof
hee
might
reioyce
,
but
as
such
whereof
hee
might
worthily
be
ashamed
:
namely
,
that
he
serued
strange
gods
,
Iosh.
24.2
.
Also
in
Gal.
2.
hee
speaketh
in
generall
of
the
workes
of
the
law
,
wherein
the
Iewes
exercised
themselues
,
among
whom
were
many
regenerate
,
and
endued
with
faith
of
Christ
,
as
cannot
be
denied
:
although
they
knew
not
,
that
that
Iesus
of
Nazareth
was
the
Christ
,
and
that
iustice
should
be
imputed
to
them
that
beleeue
in
him
.
Besides
in
this
saying
.
Gal.
2.
is
to
be
noted
the
want
of
that
expounding
particle
[
tout'ésti
,
1.
that
is
:
]
which
being
obserued
,
it
will
be
euident
,
that
heere
are
contained
exclusiue
particles
,
equiualent
to
that
exclusiue
particle
[
onely
.
]
For
it
is
,
as
if
he
should
say
;
Knowing
that
a
man
is
not
iustified
by
the
workes
of
the
law
:
that
is
,
but
by
the
faith
of
Iesus
Christ
,
&c.
And
these
are
equiualent
,
Not
to
be
iustified
but
by
faith
,
and
to
be
iustified
by
faith
onely
.
Besides
,
although
Eph.
2.
and
Tit.
3.
hee
taketh
away
iustification
from
workes
done
before
faith
,
yet
by
this
hee
dooth
not
ascribe
it
to
workes
done
after
faith
.
Against
this
answere
Bellarmine
excepteth
,
that
the
Apostle
when
hee
saith
,
Abraham
was
iustified
by
faith
,
not
by
workes
;
doth
not
reiect
the
workes
done
by
faith
,
but
affirmeth
them
not
to
bee
don
without
faith
:
for
if
they
had
bin
such
,
they
had
neuer
iustified
him
,
therefore
he
excludeth
(
saith
he
)
the
workes
which
Abraham
could
haue
done
,
not
of
faith
.
But
what
is
to
mingle
darknesse
with
the
cleare
light
,
if
this
be
not
?
The
Apostle
openly
denieth
that
Abraham
was
iustified
with
God
by
works
:
&
speaketh
of
works
don
by
faith
,
as
we
haue
now
twise
shewed
:
and
yet
Bellarmine
dareth
to
say
,
that
the
Apostle
reiecteth
not
(
to
wit
,
from
Abrahams
iustification
)
works
done
of
faith
.
Then
what
meaneth
Bellarmine
when
he
saith
,
the
Apostle
affirmeth
that
Abrahams
works
were
not
done
without
faith
:
for
if
they
had
bin
such
,
they
had
neuer
iustified
him
.
But
where
doth
the
Apostle
affirme
this
?
And
doth
not
now
Bellarmine
contradict
himselfe
:
which
affirmeth
here
,
that
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
Abrahams
works
done
of
faith
:
when
yet
before
hee
said
,
in
al
those
places
,
speech
was
of
works
done
before
faith
?
Also
,
dooth
hee
not
straightway
in
the
words
following
again
contradict
himselfe
,
when
he
saith
,
that
the
Apostle
excludeth
works
which
Abraham
could
haue
done
,
not
of
faith
?
Besides
,
Bellarmine
saith
,
that
the
Apostle
speaketh
with
condition
,
namely
thus
:
If
Abraham
〈◊〉
iustified
by
works
not
proceding
from
the
grace
of
faith
:
surely
he
had
reioycing
,
but
not
with
god
.
And
because
it
is
manifest
inough
(
saith
he
)
that
Abraham
had
reioycing
also
with
god
,
therupon
the
Apostle
gathereth
,
that
he
was
not
iustified
by
works
without
faith
,
but
by
faith
wherof
good
workes
truly
proceed
.
I
answere
.
Bellarmine
peruerteth
the
meaning
of
the
Apostles
words
,
in
feigning
vnto
him
such
a
syllogisme
:
ye
openly
contradicteth
the
Apostles
words
.
For
the
Apostle
denieth
that
Abraham
had
reioycing
with
God
:
but
Bellarmine
affirmeth
it
.
And
that
Bellarmines
syllogisme
is
feigned
,
appeareth
by
coherence
of
sencences
.
For
when
the
Apostle
had
recited
the
obiection
of
the
Iewes
drawne
from
Abrahams
example
,
as
if
hee
had
obtained
the
praise
of
iustice
by
woorkes
:
hee
answereth
by
distinction
:
graunting
that
Abraham
got
that
praise
with
men
but
not
with
God
.
Then
,
if
in
this
place
there
were
an
hypotheticall
or
connex
syllogisme
,
it
shoulde
bee
such
as
this
:
If
Abraham
were
iustified
by
workes
,
he
hath
wherof
to
reioyce
with
God
.
But
he
hath
not
whereof
to
reioyce
with
God
.
Therefore
hee
was
not
iustified
by
workes
.
The
assumption
of
which
syllogisme
,
plainely
contradicteth
the
assumption
of
Bellarmines
syllogisme
:
and
the
conclusion
is
diuerse
from
the
conclusion
of
Bellarmines
syllogisme
;
because
it
speaketh
of
workes
in
generall
,
when
Bellarmines
speaketh
onely
of
works
done
without
faith
.
Vnto
the
last
place
,
I
answere
.
By
that
which
the
Apostle
signifieth
,
that
hee
trusted
not
in
the
iustice
of
workes
which
hee
had
done
by
the
onely
strength
of
nature
,
it
cannot
firmely
be
gathered
,
that
he
trusted
in
the
justice
of
workes
which
hee
had
done
of
faith
.
Yea
he
openly
signifieth
,
that
hee
trusted
in
the
onely
iustice
of
faith
.
And
this
is
the
iustice
which
is
imputed
to
man
by
faith
,
as
he
teacheth
Rom.
4.5.6
.
and
not
the
iustice
of
workes
done
of
faith
,
inherent
in
a
man
.
And
in
an
other
place
speaking
of
this
inherent
iustice
,
he
saith
,
I
know
nothing
by
my selfe
:
but
I
am
not
hereby
iustified
.
CHAP.
IX
.
The
confirmation
and
clearing
of
the
sixt
part
.
HItherto
of
the
fifth
part
of
the
sentence
proposed
:
now
followeth
of
the
sixt
,
that
man
is
iustified
by
the
grace
or
free
loue
of
God
;
in
as
much
as
God
hath
of
fauour
to
man
,
ordained
Christ
for
a
Mediator
or
satisfactor
:
according
to
these
sayings
.
Act:
15.11
.
By
the
grace
of
our
Lord
Iesus
Christ
,
wee
beleeue
that
we
shall
be
saued
euen
as
they
.
Rom.
3.24
.
Are
iustified
freely
by
his
grace
,
by
the
redemption
made
in
Iesus
Christ
.
Rom.
4.16
.
Therefore
the
inheritance
is
of
faith
,
that
it
may
be
by
grace
:
Rom.
5.15
.
If
by
the
fal
of
that
one
,
many
are
dead
,
much
more
the
grace
of
God
,
and
the
gift
by
grace
,
which
is
by
one
man
Iesus
Christ
,
hath
abounded
vnto
many
.
And
verse
.
17.
they
which
receiue
the
abundance
of
grace
,
and
the
gift
of
iustice
shall
raigne
in
life
through
one
,
that
is
,
Iesus
Christ
.
And
vers.
21.
So
grace
might
reigne
by
iustice
vnto-eternall
life
,
through
Iesus
Christ
our
Lord
.
Rom.
11.5
.
Euen
so
at
this
present
time
there
is
a
remnant
according
to
the
election
of
grace
.
Gal.
2.21
.
I
do
not
abrogate
the
grace
of
God
.
For
if
iustice
be
by
the
law
,
then
Christ
died
in
vaine
.
Gal.
5.4
.
Yee
are
abolished
from
Grist
whosoeuer
are
iustified
by
the
Law
,
ye
are
fallen
from
grace
.
Eph.
1.5.6.7
.
Who
hath
predestinate
vs
to
be
adopted
throgh
Iesus
Christ
,
vnto
himselfe
,
according
to
the
good
pleasure
of
his
wilt
to
the
praise
of
the
glorie
of
his
grace
:
wherewith
he
hath
made
vs
accepted
in
his
beloued
:
by
whom
wee
haue
redemption
through
his
bloud
,
&c.
Eph.
2.8
.
By
grace
ye
are
saued
,
&c.
Tit.
3.7
.
That
wee
beeing
iustified
by
his
grace
,
should
bee
made
heires
according
to
the
hope
of
eternall
life
.
In
all
these
speeches
,
the
word
Grace
,
signifieth
the
fauour
of
God
,
wherewith
he
accepteth
his
elect
.
Against
this
,
Bellarmine
excepteth
:
that
iustifying
grace
is
not
onely
the
fauour
of
God
,
but
a
gift
inherent
in
the
minde
,
as
may
bee
vnderstood
(
saith
he
)
by
the
diuerse
attributes
and
names
thereof
.
For
it
is
called
the
gift
which
wee
receiue
,
Rom.
5.17
.
receiuing
the
abundance
of
the
grace
and
gift
.
Also
it
is
said
,
to
be
giuen
by
Christ
.
Grace
and
truth
is
made
by
Iesus
Christ
.
Ioh.
1.
Now
it
is
not
rightly
said
,
that
the
good
wil
of
God
the
Father
is
made
by
Christ
.
Also
it
is
said
to
be
giuen
of
Christ
by
measure
:
To
euery
one
of
vs
is
giuen
grace
,
according
to
the
measure
of
the
gift
of
Christ
.
Eph:
4.
But
the
good
will
of
God
is
not
,
giuen
by
measure
,
neither
of
Christ
.
Also
,
it
is
compared
to
the
being
which
is
giuen
by
creation
.
For
therof
we
are
said
to
be
Created
in
Christ
,
Eph.
2.
&
,
a
new
creature
.
Gal.
5.
But
that
whereby
we
are
said
to
be
creatures
,
is
inward
and
inherent
.
Finally
,
it
is
compared
to
the
light
,
2.
Cor.
6.
What
part
hath
iustice
with
iniquitie
?
What
fellowship
hath
light
with
darknesse
?
Eph.
5.
Ye
were
sometimes
darknesse
,
but
now
are
light
in
the
Lord
.
1.
Ioh.
2.
He
that
saith
he
is
in
the
light
and
hateth
his
brother
,
is
in
darknesse
.
But
certes
light
maketh
not
a
lucide
body
,
except
it
be
inherent
,
neither
suffereth
darkenesse
with
it
.
Besides
,
the
grace
by
which
the
Apostle
sayth
wee
are
iustified
,
is
called
also
,
loue
shead
in
our
hearts
by
the
holy
Ghost
.
Rom.
5.
Also
,
by
iustifying
grace
,
wee
are
saide
to
liue
.
Rom.
8.
the
spirit
liueth
for
iustification
.
But
wee
cannot
bee
rightly
saide
to
liue
by
the
outward
fauour
of
God
:
when
nothing
is
more
inward
then
life
is
.
I
answere
.
Rom.
5.17
.
the
grace
and
the
gift
,
of
iustice
are
openly
distinguished
:
therefore
the
gift
is
not
there
called
the
grace
,
as
Bellarmine
saith
.
Then
,
there
is
there
no
speech
of
inherent
iustice
,
as
Bellarmine
would
:
but
of
the
iustice
which
God
giueth
,
&
of
the
grace
or
fauour
hee
imputeth
:
for
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
the
same
iustice
that
before
.
Rom.
4.6
.
where
he
said
,
iustice
was
imputed
.
Ioh.
1.
The
name
of
Grace
signifieth
the
benefite
of
redemption
,
by
a
metonymie
of
the
cause
efficient
:
but
thereof
it
followeth
not
,
that
it
is
taken
after
the
same
maner
in
the
sayings
rehearsed
.
As
neither
from
the
saying
,
Eph.
4.
where
the
name
Grace
,
signifieth
some
spirituall
gift
,
profitable
for
the
edifying
of
the
Church
.
Neither
yet
by
the
other
speeches
,
Eph.
2.
Gal.
5.2
.
Cor.
6.
where
the
name
of
Grace
is
not
found
;
neither
is
the
speech
of
iustification
,
but
of
regeneration
.
And
in
that
saying
,
Rom.
5.
Loue
is
shead
,
&c
,
is
not
meant
the
loue
which
is
inherent
,
in
vs
,
and
wherewith
wee
loue
God
;
but
wherewith
God
loued
vs
:
as
is
plaine
by
comparing
it
with
the
8.
verse
,
where
it
is
said
,
God
commendeth
his
loue
towards
vs
,
&c.
Finally
,
Rom.
8.10
.
hee
speaketh
not
of
iustification
,
but
of
sanctification
,
neither
is
there
the
name
Iustification
as
Bellarmine
falsly
alleageth
;
but
the
name
of
Iustice
,
whereby
is
there
meant
,
a
iust
and
holy
life
:
as
may
appeare
by
the
whole
context
and
scope
of
that
place
:
and
not
that
iustice
whereby
a
man
standeth
before
the
iudgement
seate
of
GOD
;
the
disputation
of
which
matter
,
the
Apostle
finished
in
the
end
of
the
sift
Chapter
.
CHAP.
X.
The
confirmation
of
the
seuenth
part
.
THere
remaineth
the
seuenth
part
of
the
sentence
propounded
,
to
wit
,
that
man
is
iustified
by
the
iustice
of
God
,
whereby
he
accepteth
Christs
satisfaction
for
the
elect
.
Of
this
Paule
testifieth
,
Rom.
3.25.26
.
Where
he
saith
,
Whom
(
to
wit
Christ
)
God
hath
set
forth
to
be
are
conciliation
through
faith
in
his
bloud
to
declare
his
iustice
,
by
the
forgiuenesse
of
the
sinnes
,
that
are
past
through
the
patience
of
God
,
to
shew
at
this
time
his
iustice
,
that
he
might
be
iust
and
a
iustifier
of
him
which
is
of
the
faith
of
Iesus
.
By
which
words
the
Apostle
teacheth
,
that
God
declareth
his
iustice
,
in
as
much
as
he
forgiueth
sinnes
to
them
for
whom
Christ
hath
satisfied
,
namely
the
beleeuers
.
For
it
is
the
part
of
iustice
,
to
be
content
,
if
satisfaction
bee
made
for
the
debt
by
a
suretie
,
and
not
to
exact
satisfaction
of
the
debter
himselfe
.
THE
SECOND
Booke
of
Iustification
.
Wherein
the
opinion
of
the
Papists
,
and
proofes
of
the
same
,
are
recited
out
of
Bellarmines
Booke
,
and
refuted
.
CHAP.
I.
The
Papists
opinion
recited
:
which
consisteth
of
foure
parts
.
HItherto
hath
bene
the
first
part
of
our
entended
disputation
,
the
opinion
of
the
professors
of
the
Gospell
,
touching
Iustification
:
the
other
part
followeth
,
to
wit
,
the
opinion
of
the
Papists
.
The
Papists
opinion
and
sentence
therefore
,
Bellarmine
deliuereth
in
these
words
,
(
2.
Booke
of
Iustification
,
Chapter
2.
)
that
Iustification
is
the
infusion
of
inherent
iustice
.
Also
(
in
the
same
booke
,
Chap.
3.
)
that
it
is
a
regeneration
and
renewing
through
the
goodnesse
of
God
,
made
in
vs
by
the
lauer
of
Baptisme
and
sheading
out
of
the
holy
Ghost
.
Inherent
iustice
he
maketh
to
consist
in
faith
,
hope
and
charitie
:
(
in
the
same
booke
,
Chap.
2.
)
yet
in
an
other
place
(
1.
booke
of
Iustice
,
Chap.
2.
)
in
charitie
onely
.
Therefore
(
in
the
same
booke
Chap.
13.
and
2.
booke
.
Chap.
4.
)
that
faith
iustifieth
,
not
onely
,
but
as
the
beginning
and
first
roote
of
Iustification
.
Also
(
2.
booke
of
Iustification
.
Chap.
6.
)
that
iustification
consisteth
not
in
onely
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
Finally
,
(
in
the
same
booke
,
Chap.
7.
)
that
Iustification
consisteth
not
in
imputation
of
Christes
iustice
.
All
which
things
how
he
endeuoureth
to
proue
,
let
vs
see
after
.
CHAP.
II.
The
profe
of
the
first
part
recited
and
refuted
.
TO
proue
the
first
part
,
That
Iustification
is
the
infusion
of
inherent
iustice
,
he
bringeth
these
arguments
.
As
by
the
disobedience
of
one
man
,
many
were
made
sinners
:
so
by
the
obedience
of
one
,
many
shall
be
made
iust
.
Hence
Bellarmine
inferreth
,
that
we
are
made
iust
by
obteining
inherent
iustice
,
both
for
that
the
Apostle
saith
,
shall
be
made
iust
:
and
also
,
for
that
he
saith
,
we
are
so
made
iust
by
Christes
obedience
,
as
we
were
made
vniust
by
Adams
disobedience
.
But
by
Adams
disobedience
we
are
made
vniust
,
by
iniustice
cleauing
within
vs
indeede
.
I
answere
.
It
foloweth
not
:
we
are
made
iust
;
therefore
by
obteining
inherent
iustice
:
because
we
may
be
made
iust
by
imputation
of
iustice
.
And
indeede
the
Apostle
teacheth
that
we
are
made
iust
so
,
Rom.
4.6
.
where
he
saith
,
that
Dauid
affirmed
the
blessednesse
of
the
man
to
whome
God
imputeth
iustice
.
But
that
comparison
of
the
Apostle
,
is
wrested
to
a
wrong
sense
:
for
the
Apostle
would
say
;
As
vnto
all
naturally
borne
of
Adam
iniustice
is
imputed
for
his
disobedience
:
so
to
all
that
beleeue
in
Christ
,
and
belong
vnto
Christ
,
iustice
is
imputed
for
his
obedience
,
to
wit
,
wherewith
hee
obeyed
his
father
,
in
suffering
the
punishment
for
them
.
And
although
it
is
true
,
that
Christ
by
that
his
obedience
,
hath
obteined
also
that
iustice
is
infused
into
the
elect
by
the
regeneration
of
the
holy
Ghost
;
as
Adam
by
his
disobedience
caused
that
iniustice
is
infused
into
his
posteritie
by
carnal
generation
:
neuerthelesse
the
Apostle
speaketh
not
heere
of
that
thing
,
because
heere
he
handleth
not
regeneration
(
which
he
handleth
in
the
6.7
.
and
8.
chapters
)
but
iustification
.
The
second
argument
for
inherent
iustice
,
Bellarmine
taketh
from
Rom.
3.
Iustified
freely
by
his
grace
.
That
is
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
by
iustice
giuen
&
infused
of
him
.
I
answere
with
them
of
sound
iudgement
:
that
by
the
name
grace
,
here
is
not
meant
any
infused
or
inherent
gift
,
but
Gods
fauour
and
good
wil
which
he
beareth
towards
vs
.
As
in
many
other
places
in
this
disputation
:
as
is
to
be
seene
in
the
sayings
recited
before
,
for
to
confirme
the
sixt
part
of
the
sentence
of
the
professon
of
the
Gospell
.
Against
this
answere
Bellarmine
excepteth
:
that
gods
fauour
is
explained
inough
by
that
word
,
freely
;
in
that
addition
therfore
,
by
grace
,
is
signified
the
effect
of
his
fauour
.
Then
(
saith
he
)
the
preposition
per
,
by
,
is
not
rightly
applied
to
fauour
,
that
it
be
said
,
God
by
his
fauour
iustifieth
vs
.
Moreouer
,
the
good
will
of
God
effecteth
that
good
which
it
willeth
to
any
;
and
Gods
will
is
,
that
we
be
truly
iust
and
holy
before
him
.
I
answere
.
Although
Gods
fauour
he
signified
ynough
by
the
word
[
dorean
,
a.
freely
]
yet
because
by
that
aduerb
there
is
not
expressed
the
author
of
this
gift
whereof
we
speake
;
it
pleased
the
Apostle
for
more
full
declaration
sake
to
adde
,
té
autoú
chariti
,
by
,
(
or
through
)
his
,
(
that
is
,
Gods
)
grace
;
by
a
certaine
apposition
.
Then
,
Bellarmine
assumeth
falsly
,
that
the
Apostle
heere
vseth
the
preposition
per
,
.i.
by
.
Moreouer
he
frameth
a
false
position
,
when
he
saith
the
preposition
per
.i.
by
,
is
not
rightly
applied
to
fauour
.
For
the
contrary
is
gathered
by
th'
Apostles
words
Eph.
1.6
.
where
he
saith
,
to
the
praise
of
the
glory
of
his
grace
,
in
which
(
en
hé
)
he
hath
made
vs
accepted
,
&c.
Heere
it
is
certaine
,
by
the
name
grace
,
is
vnderstood
the
favour
or
good
will
of
God
:
for
this
is
the
subiect
of
the
praise
whereof
the
Apostle
treateth
.
Then
,
this
also
is
manifest
that
[
en
hé
]
in
which
,
is
put
by
an
hebrue
proprietie
,
for
[
di
hes
]
by
which
.
Lastly
,
the
good
will
of
God
effecteth
in
deed
,
that
we
be
truly
holy
:
but
it
effecteth
not
that
we
be
perfectly
holy
in
this
life
,
so
as
that
we
can
stand
in
the
iudgement
of
God
by
the
holinesse
inherent
in
vs
:
but
effecteth
that
we
are
counted
for
perfectly
holy
,
for
the
redemption
made
by
Christ
:
of
which
benefit
the
Apostle
here
properly
speaketh
,
as
appeareth
by
his
words
.
The
third
argument
he
taketh
from
1.
Cor.
6.
I
answere
.
This
consequence
cannot
be
firmely
drawen
from
the
Apostles
words
.
Then
this
is
not
the
Aposties
mind
,
that
sanctification
is
part
of
iustification
:
which
may
be
gathered
by
this
,
that
in
the
Epistle
to
the
Romanes
,
hauing
ended
the
disputation
about
Iustification
,
he
treateth
of
Sanctification
apart
by
it selfe
,
to
wit
,
in
the
6.7
.
and
8.
chapters
.
And
those
three
things
by
the
sentence
of
the
Apostle
,
are
thus
compared
among
themselues
.
First
by
the
word
washing
,
he
signifieth
in
generall
,
metaphorically
both
the
benefits
of
Christ
,
to
wit
,
sanctification
&
iustification
:
which
afterwards
he
addeth
for
speciall
explication
sake
.
Moreouer
,
the
things
that
Bellarmine
in
this
place
doth
further
inferre
from
those
words
,
against
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
and
imputation
of
iustice
,
shall
more
fitly
be
answered
otherwhere
.
The
4.
argument
he
taketh
from
Tit.
3.
When
the
bounty
&
humanity
of
God
our
sauiour
appeared
:
not
by
works
which
we
did
,
but
according
to
his
mercy
he
saued
vs
,
by
the
lauer
of
regeneration
and
renouation
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
he
hath
shed
into
vs
abundantly
through
Iesus
Christ
our
Sauiour
:
that
being
iustified
by
his
grace
,
we
may
be
heires
according
to
the
hope
of
eternal
life
.
From
those
last
words
,
that
being
iustified
by
his
grace
,
we
vnderstand
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
that
iustification
of
described
in
the
former
words
:
so
that
,
after
the
Apostles
mind
,
iustification
is
regeneration
and
renouation
through
the
goodnesse
of
God
wrought
in
vs
by
the
lauer
of
Baptisme
,
and
powring
out
of
the
holy
Ghost
.
Also
,
in
those
words
,
that
being
iustified
by
his
grace
,
&c.
he
sheweth
the
cause
(
saith
he
)
why
God
hath
regenerate
&
renued
vs
by
the
lauer
and
holy
Ghost
:
and
saith
,
the
cause
was
,
that
being
iustified
,
that
is
,
being
iustified
by
that
regeneration
and
renouation
,
we
may
deserue
to
be
made
heyres
of
the
kingdame
and
life
euerlasting
.
I
answere
.
Bellarmine
as
his
manner
is
,
confoundeth
and
taketh
for
one
and
the
same
,
the
things
which
in
the
Apostle
are
manifestly
diuerse
:
to
wit
,
regeneration
and
iustification
;
and
to
obteine
this
,
he
giueth
a
glosse
vpon
those
words
,
that
being
iustified
:
saying
,
that
is
to
say
,
that
being
iustified
by
that
regeneration
:
which
glosse
notwithstanding
might
be
admitted
,
if
it
were
rightly
vnderstood
,
namely
of
the
procreant
cause
of
faith
,
and
not
of
the
formall
cause
of
iustification
.
For
by
regeneration
,
the
holy
Ghost
worketh
faith
in
the
elect
,
whereby
they
apprehend
the
grace
of
Christ
,
that
is
,
Christs
satisfaction
through
Gods
grace
performed
for
them
.
And
this
is
it
which
the
Apostle
saith
in
this
place
,
that
being
iustified
by
his
grace
,
&c.
That
is
to
say
,
hauing
by
regeneration
the
gift
of
faith
,
we
apprehend
the
grace
of
Christ
,
and
so
are
iustified
,
and
obteine
the
inheritance
of
eternall
life
.
The
5.
argument
he
taketh
from
Heb.
II.
where
the
Apostle
testifieth
(
saith
he
)
that
some
men
were
truly
and
absolutely
iust
:
He
obteyned
testimonie
that
he
was
iust
.
Of
Noah
,
Hee
was
made
heyre
of
the
iustice
which
is
by
faith
.
And
this
their
iustice
(
saith
Bellarmine
further
)
was
not
the
iustice
of
Chrise
imputed
:
but
iustice
inherent
and
proper
to
them
.
For
the
Apostle
willing
to
shew
,
from
whence
Abel
obteined
testimonie
of
iustice
,
saith
,
God
giuing
testimonie
to
his
gifis
.
Where
we
see
,
that
Abels
iustice
is
proued
by
the
effect
of
his
iustice
;
to
wit
,
because
hee
did
good
works
,
when
he
sacrificed
vnto
God
aright
.
Now
the
cause
of
a
good
worke
is
inherent
iustice
,
not
imputation
of
iustice
:
which
seeing
it
is
outward
,
cannot
be
the
beginning
of
the
worke
.
So
also
that
Noe
was
iust
,
the
Apostle
prooueth
in
the
same
place
:
Because
hee
beleeued
God
,
feared
Gods
iudgement
,
obeyed
Gods
commaundement
.
And
in
Genes.
6.
he
is
sayd
to
be
iust
,
because
he
walked
with
God
.
Euen
as
also
Saint
Luke
prooueth
(
Chapter
.
1.
)
that
Zacharie
and
Elizabeth
were
iust
before
God
,
because
they
walked
in
all
the
commaundements
and
iustifications
of
the
Lord
.
I
answere
.
The
fraud
of
Bellarmine
is
to
be
marked
,
who
that
he
might
wrest
that
place
of
Abel
to
his
purpose
,
reciteth
it
vnperfitly
:
leauing
out
these
two
words
By
which
,
which
do
agree
in
the
same
sentence
with
those
words
which
he
citeth
,
and
pertaine
greatly
vnto
the
question
in
hand
.
For
so
saith
the
Apostle
:
Abel
by
faith
offered
a
more
pretious
sacrifice
then
Cain
;
By
which
,
he
obteined
testimonie
that
he
was
iust
,
God
bearing
witnesse
of
his
gifts
.
Where
it
is
manifest
,
that
faith
is
made
the
procreant
cause
both
of
the
pretiousnes
of
Abels
sacrifice
,
and
also
of
Abels
iustice
,
and
lastly
also
of
the
testimonie
,
whereby
God
bare
witnesse
that
Abel
was
iust
by
faith
,
and
therefore
that
his
sacrifice
was
pretious
and
pleased
him
.
Wherefore
it
is
plaine
,
that
here
he
speaketh
of
the
iustice
of
faith
.
Which
thing
appeareth
yet
more
manifestly
by
the
other
testimonie
;
namely
,
that
Noe
was
made
heyre
of
the
iustice
which
is
by
faith
.
Which
testimonie
it
is
strange
that
Bellarmine
would
cite
heere
,
seeing
it
plainly
repugneth
his
purpose
.
For
the
iustice
of
faith
,
is
the
iustice
which
God
imputeth
to
man
,
as
is
euident
by
the
words
of
the
same
Apostle
,
Rom.
4.6
.
Blessed
is
the
man
to
whom
the
Lord
imputeth
iustice
.
Moreouer
,
Bellarmine
feigneth
a
false
drift
of
the
Apostles
words
;
as
though
he
would
proue
,
that
Abel
was
iust
:
and
as
though
he
proued
it
by
this
,
that
he
did
a
good
worke
,
by
sacrificing
a
right
.
But
the
Apostle
hath
another
purpose
,
namely
,
by
Abels
'
example
to
proue
,
that
both
man
himselfe
and
his
workes
please
God
by
faith
.
Besides
he
falsly
denieth
,
that
imputed
iustice
is
the
cause
of
a
iust
worke
.
For
except
iustice
be
imputed
to
a
man
by
saith
,
no
worke
of
his
can
please
God
and
be
approued
as
Iust.
.
For
without
faith
(
as
the
Apostle
there
saith
)
it
is
impossible
to
please
God
.
Neither
doth
it
hinder
,
that
imputation
of
iustice
(
as
Bellarmine
speaketh
)
is
outward
.
For
faith
,
by
which
iustice
is
imputed
to
man
,
is
(
that
I
may
so
say
)
inward
,
that
is
,
seated
within
:
and
this
is
it
which
worketh
by
loue
.
But
as
concerning
those
places
,
Gen.
6.
of
Noe
,
and
Luke
.
1.
of
Zacharie
and
Elizabeth
;
their
begun
inherent
iustice
,
is
there
commended
,
by
the
adioyned
sinceritie
:
to
wit
,
for
that
they
minded
,
that
God
was
the
beholder
of
all
their
actions
:
and
thereupon
studied
to
approue
them
vnto
him
:
and
it
is
not
meant
,
that
they
trusted
vpon
that
iustice
of
their
life
before
God
,
as
being
perfect
,
and
in
all
things
answerable
to
his
law
,
for
which
eternall
life
ought
to
be
adiudged
them
of
God
.
The
6.
Argument
hee
taketh
from
Rom.
8.29
.
and
1.
Cor.
15.49
.
where
the
Apostle
saith
,
that
the
iust
are
conformed
to
the
Image
of
Christ
,
&
beare
Christs
Image
,
Those
whom
he
fore-knew
(
saith
he
)
them
he
praedestinated
to
be
made
conformable
to
the
Image
of
his
sonne
.
And
as
we
haue
borne
the
Image
of
the
earthy
,
we
shall
beare
also
the
Image
of
the
heauenly
.
Bellarmine
assumeth
:
now
Christ
is
not
iust
by
imputation
,
but
by
iustice
inherent
to
himselfe
.
He
concludeth
:
therefore
it
is
necessarie
,
that
wee
also
haue
inherent
iustice
.
Here
first
Bellarmine
vseth
a
fallacie
from
that
which
is
spoken
in
respect
,
vnto
that
which
is
spoken
simplie
:
whiles
he
taketh
those
speeches
of
the
Apostle
which
are
spoken
properly
of
the
conformitie
of
the
beleeuers
with
Christ
in
glorie
,
as
if
they
were
spoken
of
conformitie
in
all
things
.
For
otherwise
he
could
not
thence
inferre
,
that
wee
ought
to
be
conformed
vnto
Christ
euen
in
this
also
,
that
we
be
not
iust
by
imputation
.
Then
he
deceitfully
leaueth
out
in
the
conclusion
,
the
one
part
of
the
assumption
:
when
as
the
whole
conclusion
is
this
:
therefore
we
also
are
not
iust
by
imputation
,
but
by
inherent
iustice
.
The
first
part
of
which
conclusion
manifestly
contradicteth
the
Apostle
,
who
saith
,
Rom.
4.
The
man
is
blessed
to
whom
God
imputeth
iustice
.
Finally
that
conclusion
of
Bellarmines
,
maketh
nothing
for
the
question
in
hand
.
For
the
question
is
not
,
whither
it
be
necessarie
that
we
haue
inherent
iustice
:
but
whether
by
inherent
iustice
wee
can
stand
in
Gods
iudgement
and
be
iustified
of
God
.
But
Bellarmine
proceedeth
to
reason
from
that
place
to
the
Corinthes
thus
.
Wee
haue
borne
the
true
Image
of
the
earthly
man
,
that
is
,
of
the
sinner
Adam
:
because
sinne
cleaued
in
vs
not
putatiuely
,
but
in
truth
and
in
deed
:
Therefore
we
beare
also
Christs
true
Image
,
if
iustice
cleaue
in
vs
,
not
putatiuely
,
but
in
truth
and
in
deed
.
Here
Bellarmine
deceitfully
in
stead
of
the
word
Imputation
,
putteth
as
equall
thereto
,
the
word
Putation
:
saying
putatiuely
,
for
imputatiuely
:
that
he
might
note
a
certaine
vaine
opinion
,
whereunto
no
matter
subsisteth
.
Yet
in
the
meane
while
Bellarmine
is
not
ignorant
,
that
not
onely
the
sinne
which
dwelleth
in
man
since
the
fall
,
is
deriued
from
Adam
vnto
his
posteritie
by
generation
:
but
also
that
first
sinne
committed
properly
by
Adam
,
is
imputed
to
his
posteritie
.
And
by
like
reason
,
not
onely
inherent
iustice
,
that
is
,
study
of
godlinesse
in
those
that
belong
vnto
Christ
,
is
wrought
by
Christ
through
regeneration
of
the
holy
Ghost
:
but
also
that
obedience
of
Christ
,
whereby
he
satisfied
for
the
sinnes
of
the
elect
,
is
imputed
vnto
them
for
the
iustice
whereby
they
stand
before
God
.
Moreouer
,
he
concludeth
not
heere
the
question
,
which
is
not
,
whether
wee
shall
beare
Christes
Image
as
touching
inherent
iustice
:
for
no
professor
of
the
Gospell
denieth
this
:
but
the
question
is
,
whether
by
this
iustice
we
can
stand
in
the
iudgement
of
God
.
The
7.
argument
hee
draweth
from
Rom.
6.
where
the
Apostle
teacheth
(
saith
he
)
that
we
through
Iustification
,
He
that
is
dead
,
is
iustified
from
sinne
.
Which
also
the
Apostle
Peter
signified
in
his
first
Epistle
,
Chap.
4.
when
he
saith
,
Christ
therefore
hauing
suffered
in
the
flesh
,
be
ye
also
armed
with
the
same
minde
.
For
he
that
hath
suffered
in
the
flesh
,
hath
ceased
from
sinnes
.
But
Christ
was
not
putatiuely
,
but
truly
dead
,
&
truly
rose
again
:
therefore
we
also
do
not
putatiuely
but
truly
die
to
sinne
,
and
rise
againe
to
iustice
,
when
wee
are
iustified
by
Baptisme
.
I
answere
.
First
it
is
false
,
that
the
Apostle
in
Rom.
6.
teacheth
,
that
wee
by
Iustification
do
represent
Christs
death
and
resurrection
.
For
hee
treateth
not
there
of
Iustification
,
hauing
made
an
end
of
that
dispute
in
in
the
5.
Chapter
:
but
he
treateth
of
sanctification
or
regeneration
.
Neither
can
it
bee
proued
otherwise
,
from
those
words
:
He
that
is
dead
,
is
iustified
from
sinne
.
For
the
Apostle
speaketh
not
there
of
mans
Iustification
before
God
,
but
vseth
the
word
Iustified
for
Freed
,
by
a
synechdoche
of
the
species
.
For
euery
one
that
is
iustified
,
that
is
to
say
,
is
quitted
by
the
Iudge
,
is
freed
:
to
wit
,
from
punishment
:
but
euery
one
that
is
freed
,
is
not
iustified
:
for
one
may
be
freed
from
some
other
thing
then
from
punishment
;
as
,
from
sinne
.
And
of
this
freeing
saith
the
Apostle
:
He
that
is
dead
is
iustified
from
sinne
:
for
because
hee
that
is
dead
cannot
worke
eyther
good
or
euill
.
Therefore
beleeuen
in
as
much
as
they
are
dead
to
sinne
,
(
as
the
Apostle
there
saith
,
verse
,
11.
)
so
far
forth
they
are
freed
from
sinne
.
Euen
as
a
seruant
by
death
is
freed
from
his
maister
,
that
he
serue
him
not
any
more
hereafter
,
as
the
Apostle
saith
in
the
words
immediately
going
before
,
That
our
old
man
is
crucified
with
Christ
,
that
the
body
of
sinne
may
be
weakened
,
that
hereafter
we
serue
so
no
more
.
Then
it
is
true
,
that
wee
do
truly
die
to
sinne
and
rise
againe
to
iustice
:
but
the
question
is
not
of
this
thing
:
but
it
is
,
whether
by
this
spirituall
death
and
resurrection
(
that
is
to
say
,
inherent
iustice
)
we
be
iustified
before
God
.
Finally
Bellarmine
comprehendeth
more
in
the
conclusion
,
then
followeth
of
the
premisses
where
he
saith
,
When
we
are
iustified
by
faith
:
in
which
very
thing
hee
beggeth
the
question
.
For
the
Apostle
sayth
not
in
the
place
cited
:
that
we
are
iustified
by
Baptisme
:
seeing
hee
handleth
nothing
there
of
Iustification
:
but
teacheth
,
that
Baptisme
is
a
testimonie
of
our
regeneration
,
which
is
wrought
by
the
holy
Ghost
,
in
as
much
as
it
teacheth
vs
of
Christs
death
and
resurrection
.
For
it
being
taught
by
the
holy
Ghost
,
we
beleeue
that
Christ
died
for
our
sinnes
,
and
rose
againe
vnto
heauenly
life
,
as
our
first
fruites
and
head
:
certainly
wee
will
study
to
auoyde
sinnes
,
and
will
meditate
an
heauenlie
and
an
holie
life
.
The
8.
Argument
hee
taketh
from
Rom.
8.
where
the
Apostle
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
writeth
,
That
wee
now
by
Christ
haue
receiued
the
spirit
of
adoption
of
sonnes
of
God
,
as
touching
the
soule
,
which
liueth
(
as
there
is
said
)
because
of
Iustification
:
though
the
body
be
dead
,
(
that
is
,
be
yet
mortall
)
because
of
sinne
.
But
by
and
by
after
hee
addeth
(
to
wit
,
the
Apostle
)
that
we
now
hauing
the
first
fruites
of
the
spirit
,
doo
sigh
in
our selues
,
expecting
the
adoption
of
the
sonnes
of
God
,
the
redemption
of
our
body
.
For
as
the
same
Apostle
saith
,
Phil.
3.
Wee
expect
a
Sauiour
which
will
reforme
the
body
of
our
humilitie
,
configured
to
the
body
of
his
glory
.
But
the
adoption
of
sonnes
which
we
expect
in
the
redemption
of
our
body
,
shall
be
most
true
and
inherent
in
the
body
:
that
is
,
immortalitie
,
and
impassibilitie
,
not
imputatiue
,
but
true
.
Therefore
the
adoption
which
now
we
haue
in
the
spirit
by
Iustification
,
ought
also
to
be
true
,
not
putatiue
.
Otherwise
as
we
expect
the
redemption
of
the
body
,
so
also
we
expect
the
redemption
of
the
soule
.
I
answere
.
First
Bellarmine
faulteth
in
a
false
exposition
:
in
as
much
as
he
taketh
the
name
body
simplie
for
the
body
of
man
:
and
contrariwise
,
the
name
spirit
for
the
soule
.
For
the
Apostle
there
by
the
name
body
,
vnderstandeth
that
which
in
that
and
other
places
hee
calleth
flesh
:
that
is
,
the
body
together
with
the
soule
,
but
such
as
it
is
by
carnall
generation
:
and
likewise
by
the
name
spirit
,
he
vnderstandeth
the
soule
with
the
body
;
but
so
far
forth
as
the
soule
is
regenerate
by
the
holy
Ghost
.
Next
,
he
faulteth
in
false
citation
:
for
the
Apostle
writeth
not
,
The
soule
liueth
because
of
Iustification
;
but
The
spirit
is
life
,
because
of
Iustice
.
Then
againe
he
faulteth
in
false
exposition
;
in
as
much
as
he
expoundeth
those
words
,
The
body
is
dead
,
to
meane
,
Is
yet
mortall
:
when
the
Apotles
meaning
is
,
that
by
the
holy
Ghost
dwelling
in
the
beleeuers
,
it
commeth
to
passe
that
their
flesh
is
mortified
as
touching
sinne
;
to
wit
so
,
as
that
it
sinne
not
:
and
the
spirite
is
quickned
as
concerning
iustice
,
to
wit
so
,
as
that
it
endeuoureth
for
iustice
and
worketh
it
.
That
this
is
the
meaning
of
those
words
,
may
plainly
appeare
to
any
that
marketh
,
by
the
words
there
next
ensuing
.
Moreouer
Bellarmines
sophisme
,
from
a
like
reason
of
the
adoption
of
the
body
,
and
the
adoption
of
the
soule
,
is
vtterly
darke
,
and
farre
from
the
Apostles
words
and
meaning
.
For
neither
doth
the
Apostle
say
,
the
adoption
to
come
in
the
body
;
nor
yet
,
that
wee
now
haue
adoption
in
the
spirit
;
that
is
,
in
the
soule
:
neither
doth
hee
compare
these
two
adoptions
as
like
one
to
an
other
.
But
hee
sayth
,
Wee
expect
the
adoption
of
the
sonnes
of
God
:
that
is
to
say
,
that
heauenly
inheritance
,
which
wee
are
adopted
to
possesse
and
enioy
in
due
time
.
And
this
very
thing
hee
calleth
redemption
of
the
body
:
that
is
to
say
redemption
,
whereby
both
the
body
shall
be
deliuered
from
the
crosse
whereto
it
is
subiect
in
this
life
▪
and
the
soule
,
from
inhabiting
sinne
,
wherein
it
is
holden
,
so
long
as
it
liueth
in
this
mortall
body
.
Wherefore
it
is
vnapt
,
and
not
beseeming
a
Diuine
,
that
Bellarmine
counteth
this
an
absurd
thing
,
that
we
should
looke
for
redemption
of
the
soule
.
For
that
lamentation
of
Paule
,
Rom.
7.24
.
O
wretched
man
that
I
am
,
who
shall
deliuer
me
from
this
body
of
death
?
doth
it
not
pertaine
to
the
ful
deliuerance
of
the
soule
from
inhabiting
sinne
.
Finally
,
it
is
a
true
,
and
not
a
putatiue
adoption
(
as
Bellarmine
cauelling
speaketh
)
wherewith
God
hath
adopted
vs
:
and
yet
the
adoption
,
is
the
imputation
of
sonneship
,
whereby
wee
are
counted
for
the
sonnes
of
God
through
grace
:
when
by
nature
wee
were
the
children
of
wrath
.
But
in
the
meane
time
,
adoption
is
one
thing
,
the
spirit
of
adoption
an
other
thing
.
By
adoption
we
are
receiued
into
grace
,
and
iustified
:
by
the
spirit
of
adoption
,
we
are
regenerate
,
beeing
already
adopted
.
CHAP.
III.
The
proofe
of
the
second
part
recited
and
refuted
.
HItherto
we
haue
disputed
of
the
first
part
of
the
Papists
opinion
,
wherin
they
determine
,
that
Iustification
is
infusion
of
iustice
.
It
followeth
that
now
wee
treate
of
the
second
parte
,
wherein
they
say
,
That
faith
alone
iustifieth
not
,
but
[
*
](A09695-e17410-b)
*
The
I.
principall
Argument
the
proofes
wherof
do
follow
.
I.
Argument
.
I
Booke
of
Iustification
Chap.
13.
as
the
beginning
and
roote
of
Iustification
.
To
proue
this
,
Bellarmine
first
bringeth
the
place
,
Heb.
11.
Hee
that
commeth
vnto
God
,
must
beleeue
that
God
is
.
Where
the
first
motion
vnto
God
,
is
giuen
to
faith
;
by
which
he
that
was
far
off
,
beginneth
now
to
draw
nigh
.
I
answere
.
The
Apostle
here
maketh
no
comparison
betweene
faith
and
other
spirituall
vertues
:
but
speaking
simplie
of
faith
alone
,
affirmeth
it
to
bee
necessarie
for
him
that
commeth
vnto
God
,
to
wit
,
to
craue
his
helpe
,
and
aske
any
thing
of
him
.
Wherfore
it
is
a
strange
glosse
,
that
the
first
motion
vnto
God
is
here
giuen
to
faith
.
As
though
the
motions
that
follow
,
were
not
of
faith
,
but
of
other
spiritual
vertues
:
And
as
though
Iustification
were
done
by
I
know
not
how
many
motions
vnto
God
.
Nay
,
Iustification
is
made
by
this
onely
motion
,
wherby
the
mind
through
faith
is
so
moued
vnto
God
,
that
it
taketh
hold
of
his
good
will
,
reconciled
by
Christs
satisfaction
to
all
that
beleeue
in
him
.
Then
hee
bringeth
the
saying
Rom.
Whosoeuer
shall
call
vpon
the
name
of
the
Lord
,
shall
be
saued
.
But
how
shall
they
call
vpon
him
,
in
whom
they
haue
not
beleeued
?
how
shall
they
beleeue
without
a
Preacher
?
how
shall
they
preach
except
they
bee
sent
?
Where
the
Apostle
deseribeth
this
order
of
lustification
,
that
first
there
be
a
sending
of
Preachers
:
secondly
,
the
preaching
of
the
Gospell
:
thirdly
,
faith
:
fourthly
,
inuocation
:
fiftly
,
saluation
:
that
is
,
Iustifications
,
which
is
health
of
soule
,
from
the
disease
of
sinne
.
Of
which
sending
and
preaching
,
are
without
vs
:
and
and
to
the
first
beginning
of
Iustification
in
vs
,
is
faith
:
after
which
followeth
inuocation
and
the
rest
in
their
order
.
I
answere
.
Bellarmine
faulteth
fast
in
confusion
of
things
diuerse
,
in
that
be
expoundeth
the
word
Saluation
,
by
the
word
Iustification
▪
when
as
Saluation
properly
spoken
,
is
more
large
,
to
wit
,
comprehending
iustification
,
regeneration
,
and
glorification
.
Then
hee
faulteth
in
a
false
definition
:
when
as
hee
defineth
Iustification
to
bee
health
of
soule
from
the
disease
of
sinne
:
that
is
to
say
,
regeneration
.
Finally
,
he
goeth
from
the
question
,
in
that
hee
numbreth
certaine
things
which
be
needfull
vnto
saluation
besides
faith
.
For
when
the
professors
of
the
Gospell
teach
,
that
man
is
iustified
by
faith
onely
:
they
exclude
not
those
things
that
are
here
reckoned
,
from
the
obtaining
of
saluation
:
but
only
they
exclude
mans
workes
from
obtaining
that
rustice
which
God
may
approoue
as
perfect
.
Thirdly
,
he
bringeth
the
place
Iohn
.
I.
So
many
as
receiued
him
,
he
gaue
them
power
to
be
made
the
sons
of
God
,
to
those
that
beleeue
in
his
name
.
Here
Iohn
openly
teacheth
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
that
they
which
receiue
Christ
by
faith
,
are
not
yet
the
sons
of
God
,
but
may
so
be
made
,
if
they
go
on
further
,
that
they
also
begin
to
hope
and
loue
.
For
loue
properly
maketh
the
sonnes
of
God
,
as
as
appeareth
,
I.
Iohn
.
2.
I
answere
.
The
meaning
of
Iohn
words
,
is
not
that
which
Bellarmine
bringeth
:
but
he
meaneth
,
that
God
hath
giuen
to
the
beleeuers
power
or
right
[
exousian
]
for
to
be
made
the
sonnes
of
God
,
that
is
,
to
be
the
sonnes
of
God
,
in
this
very
respect
,
that
they
are
borne
of
God
(
as
be
declareth
in
the
verse
following
)
that
is
,
that
they
are
regenerate
,
and
by
consequence
endued
with
faith
.
Whence
I
draw
this
Argument
:
As
farre
forth
as
the
beleeuers
are
borne
of
God
,
so
farre
forth
is
giuen
vnto
them
the
right
of
the
children
of
God
.
But
the
beleeuers
as
far
foorth
as
they
beleeue
,
are
borne
of
God
.
Therefore
to
the
beleeuers
as
far
forth
a
they
beleeue
,
is
giuen
the
right
of
the
children
of
God
:
and
by
consequence
,
they
are
iustified
as
far
foxth
as
they
beleeue
,
or
,
by
faith
.
And
whereas
Bellarmine
saith
,
it
is
plaine
by
1.
Ioh.
2.
that
loue
properly
maketh
the
sonnes
of
God
:
verily
I
find
not
this
sentence
in
that
Chapter
,
neither
expresly
,
nor
yet
by
collection
:
But
if
perhaps
through
the
Printers
fault
,
the
number
second
crept
in
for
the
number
third
,
there
is
indeed
in
the
third
Chapter
a
certaine
sentence
of
loue
,
but
not
this
.
That
loue
maketh
the
sonnes
of
God
;
but
,
that
by
loue
the
sonnes
of
God
are
knowne
:
namely
in
the
10.
verse
.
By
this
are
manifested
the
sonnes
of
God
,
and
the
sonnes
of
the
diuell
:
Who
so
doth
not
iustice
,
is
not
of
God
,
and
he
that
loueth
not
his
brother
.
Neither
can
Bellarmines
sentence
be
concluded
(
as
hee
peraduenture
thinketh
)
from
the
1.
verse
,
where
it
is
said
thus
,
Behold
what
loue
the
father
hath
giuen
to
vs
,
that
we
should
be
called
the
sonnes
of
God
.
For
by
the
name
Loue
there
,
by
a
metonymie
of
the
efficient
cause
,
he
vnderstandeth
a
benefit
proceeding
from
the
loue
wherewith
God
loueth
vs
:
and
what
that
benefit
is
,
he
declareth
by
opposition
in
those
words
,
that
we
should
be
called
the
sonnes
of
God
:
namely
,
the
benefit
of
adoption
.
Wherefore
Bellarmine
hath
not
yet
shewed
,
that
we
are
adopted
and
iustified
of
GOD
by
loue
,
and
therefore
not
by
faith
onely
.
To
these
Arguments
Bellarmine
addeth
a
naturall
reason
,
I
answere
.
In
this
reason
,
the
question
is
not
concluded
.
Which
is
not
,
whether
faith
be
the
foundation
or
originall
of
hope
and
loue
:
but
whether
we
be
iustified
by
faith
only
,
or
by
faith
hope
and
loue
together
.
Vnto
this
reason
he
ioyneth
an
other
:
in
bodily
diseases
the
beginning
of
health
is
,
I
answere
.
First
Bellarmine
vnaptly
maketh
the
sick
mans
faith
a
part
of
health
when
as
it
is
the
procreant
cause
of
health
:
in
as
much
as
the
sick
man
should
not
obtaine
health
,
except
he
had
that
faith
.
In
like
manner
faith
whereby
we
are
iustified
,
is
not
a
part
of
Iustification
:
but
the
procreant
instrumental
cause
,
because
by
faith
we
apprehend
Christs
satisfaction
,
for
which
we
are
iustified
.
Next
as
his
maner
is
,
he
confoundeth
iustification
with
regeneration
:
in
as
much
as
hee
calleth
faith
health
,
towit
,
of
soule
,
vnderstanding
newnesse
of
nature
.
Moreouer
,
he
falsly
defineth
faith
whereby
we
are
iustified
:
to
wit
,
as
though
by
it
we
beleeued
only
,
that
we
are
spiritually
sick
,
that
is
to
say
,
sinners
:
and
that
the
spirituall
phisitian
Christ
,
is
willing
to
cure
vs
.
But
these
suffice
not
vnto
iustifying
faith
:
but
it
is
required
further
,
that
we
beleeue
that
Christ
hath
already
perfectly
cured
vs
by
his
satisfaction
,
as
touching
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
:
and
hath
begun
to
cure
vs
,
as
touching
renuing
of
nature
:
and
finally
,
as
touching
the
same
,
is
willing
perfectly
to
cure
vs
,
and
also
will
cure
vs
after
this
life
.
Wherefore
there
is
not
the
like
reason
of
the
faith
which
Bellarmine
in
this
place
attributeth
to
a
sick
man
,
and
of
iustifying
faith
.
First
(
saith
he
)
we
haue
learned
by
the
Apostle
,
that
faith
iustifieth
,
Without
faith
it
is
impossible
to
please
"
God
,
Hebr.
11.
But
the
same
is
also
said
of
Feare
;
Ecclesiasticus
,
1.
He
that
is
without
feare
,
cannot
be
iustified
.
I
answere
,
First
,
the
testimonie
of
Ecclesiasticus
is
not
of
force
to
proue
any
poynt
of
faith
:
because
that
booke
is
not
Canonicall
,
but
Apocryphall
.
Then
,
though
that
booke
were
of
authoritie
;
yet
the
saying
alleadged
would
proue
nothing
:
because
here
is
brought
a
false
interpretation
,
which
containeth
a
plain
diuerse
sentence
from
that
which
is
contained
in
the
Greek
words
of
Iesus
the
son
of
Sirach
;
which
are
to
be
interpreted
,
an
angry
man
cannot
be
iustified
:
for
the
moment
of
his
anger
is
ruine
vnto
him
.
Thirdly
,
althogh
it
were
so
in
the
Greek
as
Bellarmine
citeth
out
of
the
common
translation
;
yet
this
speech
would
make
nothing
to
the
purpore
for
the
son
of
Sirach
speaketh
not
of
mans
iustification
before
God
;
but
before
the
ciuill
Iudge
:
warning
,
that
they
which
are
giuen
to
anger
,
or
that
without
the
feare
of
God
follow
their
owne
lusts
,
will
at
length
commit
those
haynous
sinnes
and
wickednesses
,
for
which
beeing
brought
vnto
iudgement
,
they
cannot
be
iustified
,
that
is
quitted
:
but
are
by
the
Iudge
condemned
vnto
deserued
punishment
.
Fourthly
,
although
this
saying
of
Syrach
were
to
be
vnderstood
of
Iustification
before
God
:
yet
could
not
the
question
bee
concluded
from
it
.
For
it
is
brought
as
beeing
like
to
that
saying
of
the
Apostle
:
and
from
that
likenesse
,
is
the
Argument
drawne
:
when
as
notwithstanding
it
is
not
like
.
For
it
is
not
said
,
Without
feare
it
is
impossible
to
be
iustified
;
as
it
is
said
,
Without
faith
it
is
impossible
to
please
God
:
but
it
is
said
,
Hee
that
is
without
feare
,
cannot
bee
iustified
.
Besides
,
though
it
were
said
,
Without
feare
it
is
impossible
to
be
iustified
,
as
it
is
said
,
without
faith
it
is
impossible
to
please
God
:
yet
would
it
not
follow
from
hence
,
that
feare
would
pertaine
vnto
Iustification
,
after
one
and
the
same
manner
that
faith
dooth
:
for
faith
pertaineth
to
Iustification
,
as
the
instrumentall
cause
whereby
wee
take
holde
on
Christes
satisfaction
,
for
which
wee
are
iustified
:
but
the
feare
of
GOD
pertaineth
as
an
effect
of
faith
,
necessarily
agreeing
therewith
.
For
where
the
feare
of
GOD
is
not
,
neither
is
there
iustyfying
faith
.
Then
,
I
answere
.
First
it
is
false
,
that
by
wisedome
is
vnderstood
iustification
,
for
iustification
is
Gods
action
,
whereby
he
counteth
and
pronounceth
man
iust
:
but
wisedome
is
a
qualitie
in
mans
minde
,
wrought
of
God
.
Wherefore
that
saying
maketh
nothing
to
the
matter
.
Next
,
if
by
the
name
of
wisedome
in
Salomons
speech
,
were
vnderstoode
iustification
,
Bellarmine
assumeth
things
that
manifestly
cannot
stand
together
,
and
feigneth
them
vnto
the
holy
Ghost
that
speaketh
in
the
scripture
:
in
as
much
as
he
affirmeth
both
faith
and
feare
to
be
the
beginning
of
iustification
.
For
if
faith
be
the
beginning
of
iustification
,
feare
cannot
be
:
and
so
contrariwise
,
seeing
of
one
thing
,
there
is
but
one
beginning
.
Moreouer
,
When
he
slew
them
,
they
sought
him
and
returned
,
&c
I
answere
.
Bellarmine
assumeth
a
false
thing
:
for
faith
iustifieth
not
,
because
by
it
we
seeke
God
:
but
because
by
it
we
take
hold
on
Christes
satisfaction
,
for
which
God
iustifieth
vs
.
Which
thing
cannot
be
attributed
vnto
feare
.
Furthermore
,
But
of
feare
,
Isaiah
writeth
,
chapt.
26.
according
to
the
70.
Greeke
interpreters
,
By
the
feare
we
haue
conceiued
,
and
brought
forth
the
spirit
of
saluation
.
I
answere
.
First
it
is
false
,
that
it
is
said
in
Gal.
4.
Faith
iustifieth
because
by
it
Christ
is
formed
in
vs
.
Yet
it
is
true
,
that
this
sentence
may
be
concluded
from
the
Apostles
words
,
which
are
:
My
little
children
,
of
whom
I
trauel
in
birth
againe
,
vntill
Christ
be
formed
in
you
.
By
which
words
the
Apostle
signifieth
,
that
he
went
about
by
the
doctrine
of
the
Gospell
to
reduce
the
Galathians
to
the
true
knowledge
and
faith
of
Christ
.
And
the
scope
was
,
that
by
that
faith
they
might
be
iustified
;
in
as
much
as
by
it
they
should
take
hold
on
Christes
satisfaction
.
Which
taking
hold
,
the
Apostle
metaphorically
calleth
a
forming
of
Christ
in
the
Galathians
:
because
he
had
said
,
that
hee
trauelled
in
birth
againe
of
them
:
that
so
he
might
continue
the
metaphor
hee
had
begun
.
But
such
forming
of
Christ
in
man
,
cannot
be
ascribed
vnto
feare
.
Neither
can
that
any
way
be
prooued
from
that
saying
of
Isaiah
:
in
the
citing
wherof
hitherto
,
Bellarmine
bewrayeth
his
maruellous
impudencie
:
seeing
that
place
containeth
nothing
at
all
of
Christ
or
iustification
:
no
not
though
the
interpretation
of
the
70.
be
admitted
.
But
why
doth
not
Bellarmine
cite
the
common
Latin
translation
;
when
as
notwithstanding
hee
approoueth
and
defendeth
the
decree
of
the
Councell
of
Trent
;
wherin
is
determined
,
that
the
common
Latin
edition
is
to
be
held
for
authenticall
?
2.
Booke
De
Verbo
Des
,
Chap.
10.
For
if
that
be
authenticall
,
that
which
differeth
from
it
cannot
be
counted
for
authenticall
.
And
the
interpretation
of
the
70.
differeth
in
this
place
.
But
if
one
looke
into
that
place
,
and
consider
the
whole
context
,
hee
shall
see
,
that
there
is
nothing
at
all
of
Christes
or
mans
iustification
before
God
,
contained
in
those
words
:
but
a
narration
of
the
Iewes
,
wherein
they
tell
theyr
owne
weaknesse
in
deliuering
themselues
from
calamities
,
and
purchasing
themselues
saluation
.
Their
calamities
they
compare
to
a
woman
in
trauell
,
saying
:
As
a
woman
with
child
,
that
draweth
neare
to
the
trauell
,
is
in
sorrow
,
and
crieth
in
her
paines
,
so
haue
we
bene
in
thy
sight
ô
Lord
:
We
haue
conceiued
,
we
haue
borne
in
paine
,
as
though
wee
should
haue
brought
forth
wind
;
We
could
not
giue
any
helpe
to
the
Land
.
It
is
therfore
an
impudent
sophisme
of
Bellarmine
:
who
shameth
not
to
alleadge
these
things
here
,
as
being
spoken
of
mans
Iustification
.
Againe
,
faith
Iustifieth
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
because
the
iust
liueth
by
faith
.
Hab.
2.
And
of
feare
it
is
written
,
The
feare
of
the
Lord
is
the
fountaine
of
life
.
Prou.
14.
I
answere
.
It
is
false
,
that
faith
iustifieth
,
because
,
or
in
as
much
as
the
Iust
liueth
by
faith
.
Neither
doth
Habacuck
say
this
,
but
onely
saith
,
The
iust
shall
liue
by
faith
.
You
contrariwise
,
the
iust
shall
liue
by
faith
,
because
hee
is
iustified
by
faith
.
For
iustice
goeth
before
life
,
as
the
cause
before
the
effect
.
And
faith
Iustifieth
,
because
,
or
in
as
much
as
it
apprehendeth
Christs
satisfaction
,
for
which
God
iustifieth
.
To
conclude
,
The
feare
of
the
Lord
expelleth
sinne
.
I
answere
.
Faith
,
to
speake
properly
,
purgeth
not
sinnes
,
but
Christes
bloud
,
1.
Iohn
.
1.
And
if
faith
be
said
to
purge
sinnes
,
it
is
to
be
vnderstood
thus
,
that
it
apprehendeth
Christes
satisfaction
vnto
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
But
after
this
manner
the
feare
of
the
Lord
doth
not
expell
sinne
:
but
so
farre
as
it
holdeth
a
man
like
a
bridle
,
from
giuing
himselfe
vp
to
sinne
,
and
sinning
securely
.
Neither
is
it
said
in
any
of
the
places
alleaged
,
that
faith
purgeth
sinnes
.
But
Act.
15.9
.
Peter
saith
,
that
God
had
purged
the
harts
of
the
beleeuing
Gentiles
by
faith
:
that
is
,
had
forgiuen
them
their
sinnes
by
faith
,
whereby
they
apprehended
Christs
satisfaction
.
In
Rom.
3.25
.
it
is
said
,
That
God
hath
set
forth
Christ
to
be
a
propitiation
by
faith
in
his
bloud
,
to
declare
his
iustice
by
forgiuenesse
of
foredone
sins
.
In
Gal.
3.
there
is
no
such
thing
.
Last
of
all
he
addeth
this
reason
:
I
answere
.
But
hence
it
foloweth
not
that
feare
iustifieth
;
and
that
after
the
same
manner
that
faith
doth
.
He
that
hopeth
in
the
Lord
,
shal
be
healed
,
Psal.
36.
He
wil
saue
them
because
they
hoped
in
him
.
Psal.
90.
Because
he
hoped
in
me
,
I
will
deliuer
him
.
Mat.
9.
Haue
confidence
some
,
thy
sinnes
are
forgiuen
thee
:
where
he
noteth
,
that
the
Lord
first
said
,
Haue
confidence
sonne
:
and
when
he
sawe
him
lifted
vp
vnto
the
hope
of
saluation
,
he
added
,
Thy
sinnes
are
forgiuen
thee
.
I
answere
.
First
,
Bellarmine
strayeth
from
the
question
.
For
the
question
proposed
is
,
whether
onely
faith
iustifieth
;
and
not
,
whether
it
onely
dispose
vnto
iustification
:
wherefore
he
should
proue
,
that
hope
also
iustifieth
,
and
not
,
that
hope
disposeth
vnto
iustification
.
Moreouer
,
the
sayings
all
eaged
out
of
the
Prouerbs
and
Psalmes
,
make
nothing
to
the
matter
:
for
none
of
them
speake
of
the
obtaining
of
the
forgiuenes
of
sinnes
,
but
they
speake
of
outward
felicitie
,
and
deliuerance
from
outward
dangers
.
Neither
is
there
in
that
place
of
the
Prouerbs
,
in
the
Hebrue
,
the
word
healed
:
but
〈◊〉
,
shal
be
made
fat
.
Neither
in
the
said
90.
Psalme
,
or
after
the
Hebrues
dist●ction
,
the
91.
Psalme
,
is
the
Hebrue
;
because
he
hoped
in
me
:
but
because
he
hath
loued
me
,
or
,
bene
louingly
affected
vnto
me
.
Finally
,
in
none
of
these
places
is
there
speech
of
hope
of
obtaining
pardon
,
of
which
the
question
was
propounded
:
but
there
is
speech
of
hope
of
the
fatherly
prouidence
and
care
of
God
towards
his
children
.
Now
as
touching
that
saying
,
Math.
9.
Bellarmine
wresteth
it
vnto
his
purpose
,
by
a
false
interpretation
of
the
word
,
Haue
confidence
:
as
if
it
were
the
same
that
Conceiue
hope
of
pardon
is
.
Then
he
maket'd
a
weake
consequence
.
If
the
Lord
said
first
,
Haue
confidence
:
and
after
,
Thy
sinnes
are
forgiuen
thee
.
Therfore
that
confidence
of
which
he
spake
,
went
before
forgiuenes
of
sinnes
.
Lastly
he
foloweth
the
false
interpretation
of
the
word
[
aphéontas
]
forgiuen
,
which
signifieth
not
are
forgiuen
,
but
,
haue
bene
forgiuen
,
for
it
is
not
of
the
time
present
,
but
past
.
And
the
naturall
sense
of
the
words
is
this
:
Haue
confidence
sonne
,
that
thou
shalt
obtaine
of
me
healing
of
thy
palsie
:
because
thou
hast
already
obtained
a
farre
greater
benefit
,
to
wit
,
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
But
if
that
were
the
sense
which
Bellarmine
giueth
the
word
▪
should
sound
thus
,
Haue
confidence
sonne
,
and
thy
sinnes
shal
be
forgiuen
thee
:
that
is
(
as
Bellarmine
would
haue
it
)
Conceiue
hope
of
pardon
,
or
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
;
for
if
thou
so
do
,
it
shall
be
done
vnto
thee
.
Yee
that
feare
the
Lord
,
trust
in
him
,
hee
addeth
,
Yee
that
feare
the
Lord
,
loue
him
,
and
your
harts
shall
be
inlightned
.
Then
also
our
Sauiour
himselfe
teacheth
it
,
when
hee
saith
,
Luk.
7.
Many
sinnes
are
forgiuen
her
,
because
shee
loued
much
.
Also
the
Apostle
Paule
teacheth
it
,
when
he
writeth
,
Galath
.
5.
Neither
Circumcision
auaileth
any
thing
,
nor
Vncircumcision
:
but
faith
which
worketh
by
loue
.
The
Apostle
Iohn
teacheth
the
same
,
1.
Iohn
.
3.
saying
,
We
are
translated
from
death
to
life
,
because
we
loue
the
brethren
.
I
answere
.
As
touching
that
place
in
Ecclesiasticus
:
it
is
not
of
force
to
proue
any
point
of
faith
,
because
the
booke
is
Apocryphal
.
Then
,
that
sentence
is
not
found
in
the
Greeke
copie
.
Thirdly
,
he
treateth
not
there
of
remission
of
sinnes
,
wherefore
this
sentence
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
.
As
concerning
the
other
places
,
Luc.
7.
the
coniunction
because
,
in
Greeke
[
hóti
,
]
noteth
not
the
cause
of
the
thing
,
but
the
cause
of
the
conclusion
:
that
is
the
argument
,
whereby
the
sentence
proposed
is
proued
.
And
that
argument
was
drawen
not
from
the
cause
,
but
from
the
effect
.
For
,
that
many
sinnes
are
forgiuen
this
woman
,
Christ
proueth
by
her
deede
,
as
an
effect
of
the
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
which
she
perceiued
she
had
obteyned
by
the
grace
of
Christ
.
As
is
plaine
by
the
Simile
,
which
the
Lord
addeth
to
declare
that
deede
,
to
wit
,
the
creditor
,
which
forgaue
two
debtors
,
to
the
one
,
more
;
to
the
other
,
lesse
:
whereupon
it
came
,
that
the
one
loued
him
more
,
the
other
lesse
.
As
therefore
that
loue
of
the
debtors
,
was
not
the
cause
of
forgiuing
the
det
:
but
contrarywise
,
the
forgiuing
of
the
det
,
was
cause
of
their
loue
:
so
also
the
loue
of
that
woman
,
was
not
the
cause
why
Christ
forgaue
her
her
sinnes
:
but
contrariwise
,
the
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
was
cause
why
the
woman
loued
him
.
Neither
is
this
declaration
answered
,
by
the
exposition
which
Bellarmine
bringeth
in
an
other
place
,
that
the
coniunction
[
hóti
]
because
,
is
a
causal
.
For
it
is
not
named
a
causal
,
for
that
it
signifieth
the
cause
of
the
thing
,
but
for
that
it
signifieth
the
cause
of
the
conclusion
:
that
is
,
the
argument
or
medium
of
the
proofe
.
From
the
words
Gal.
5.
it
cannot
be
gathered
,
that
loue
disposeth
vnto
iustification
:
but
onely
we
are
taught
,
what
maner
of
faith
that
is
whereby
we
are
iustified
,
namely
faith
working
by
loue
.
In
the
place
out
of
the
Epistle
of
Iohn
,
Bellarmine
hath
committed
the
crime
of
falshood
,
for
that
he
hath
cited
the
text
vnperfectly
,
that
he
might
wrest
it
vnto
his
purpose
.
For
it
is
not
there
,
We
are
translated
,
&c.
but
,
We
know
that
we
are
translated
.
It
is
euident
therefore
,
that
loue
is
not
there
made
the
cause
of
our
translation
from
death
to
life
:
but
the
signe
and
argument
,
whereby
we
know
that
we
are
translated
.
And
loue
is
the
signe
of
this
thing
:
because
it
is
the
effect
of
true
faith
,
by
which
that
translation
is
made
,
as
our
Lord
witnesseth
,
Ioh.
5.24
.
He
that
beleeueth
,
hath
passed
from
death
into
life
.
hope
and
loue
and
other
vertues
,
without
doubt
it
cannot
iustifie
:
Therefore
onely
faith
cannot
iustifie
.
The
consequence
of
this
argument
is
proued
saith
he
,
thus
:
If
the
whole
force
of
iustifying
were
in
faith
only
,
so
that
other
vertues
though
they
were
present
,
conferred
nothing
at
all
vnto
iustification
;
surely
that
faith
would
iustifie
[
*
](A09695-e19780-b)
*
It
should
be
,
as
well
when
they
are
absent
as
present
.
as
well
when
they
are
present
,
as
absent
.
Therefore
,
if
it
cannot
iustifie
when
they
are
absent
,
it
argueth
that
the
force
of
iustifying
is
not
in
it
onely
,
but
partly
in
it
,
partly
in
the
other
.
Also
:
If
it
cannot
be
,
that
faith
seuered
from
loue
should
iustifie
;
then
it
alone
iustifieth
not
.
But
the
first
is
true
:
for
without
loue
there
can
be
no
iustice
:
because
he
that
loueth
not
,
abideth
in
death
,
1.
Iohn
.
2.
Therefore
the
latter
also
is
true
.
Besides
,
if
faith
separated
from
vertues
can
iustifie
,
it
can
also
doo
the
same
with
vices
:
for
as
the
presence
of
other
vertues
profiteth
faith
nothing
,
as
concerning
the
dutie
of
iustifying
,
because
it
onely
iustifieth
:
so
the
presence
of
vices
shall
nothing
hinder
it
as
touching
the
office
of
iustifying
:
because
by
accident
,
there
are
ioyned
with
it
either
vices
or
vertues
.
But
the
consequent
is
absurd
:
therefore
also
the
antecedent
.
I
answere
.
All
these
connexe
or
(
as
Bellarmine
calleth
them
)
conditionate
propositions
of
these
three
reasons
,
are
false
.
For
although
faith
be
not
alone
,
but
hath
other
vertues
ioyned
with
it
,
and
not
vices
(
which
is
impossible
:
)
yet
faith
onely
iustifieth
.
Euen
as
the
hand
of
a
writer
,
although
it
be
not
alone
,
but
ioyned
with
the
other
members
:
yet
it
onely
writeth
.
And
as
the
foote
as
not
alone
,
but
ioyned
to
the
other
members
,
yet
it
onely
standeth
.
Likewise
as
the
eye
is
not
alone
,
and
yet
alone
seeth
:
the
eare
is
not
alone
,
but
yet
heareth
alone
.
Finally
,
the
members
of
mans
body
,
although
they
be
ioyned
one
to
another
,
and
cannot
do
their
seuerall
actions
,
except
they
be
ioyned
one
to
another
,
yet
haue
euery
one
their
proper
action
.
the
remouing
away
of
the
causes
which
may
be
giuen
why
faith
onely
iustifieth
.
For
all
such
causes
may
be
reduced
(
saith
he
)
vnto
three
heads
.
And
thus
he
concludeth
.
If
faith
alone
iustifieth
:
either
it
therefore
iustifieth
alone
because
the
scripture
expressely
saith
it
;
or
because
it
pleased
God
to
giue
iustification
with
the
onely
condition
of
faith
:
or
because
it
alone
hath
the
force
to
apprehend
iustification
,
and
apply
it
vnto
vs
,
and
make
it
ours
.
But
none
of
these
causes
can
truly
be
said
of
faith
.
Therefore
neither
can
it
be
truly
said
of
it
,
that
it
onely
iustifieth
.
The
first
part
of
the
assumption
he
endenoureth
to
proue
by
this
,
that
in
the
scripture
there
is
found
an
expresse
denyall
of
that
word
(
to
wit
,
Onely
)
or
a
word
of
the
same
signification
:
namely
,
Iam.
2.
Yee
see
that
of
workes
a
man
is
iustified
,
and
not
of
faith
onely
.
The
second
part
he
proueth
by
this
,
that
scriptures
doo
much
more
openly
require
the
condition
of
repentance
and
of
the
Sacraments
vnto
Iustification
,
then
of
faith
:
as
Ezek.
18.
If
the
wicked
repent
,
he
shall
liue
.
Luk.
13.
Except
ye
repent
,
ye
shall
all
likewise
perish
.
Ioh.
3.
Except
a
man
be
borne
againe
of
water
and
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
he
cannot
enter
into
the
Kingdome
of
God
.
The
third
part
,
he
endeuoureth
to
proue
thus
:
for
that
faith
is
not
said
properly
to
apprehend
:
or
certainly
,
Iustification
is
not
so
apprehended
by
faith
,
that
it
is
had
indeed
and
inherent
:
but
onely
that
it
is
in
the
mind
after
the
manner
of
an
obiect
,
apprehended
by
the
action
of
the
vnderstanding
or
will
:
But
after
this
manner
loue
also
and
ioy
do
apprehend
.
I
answere
.
The
assumption
of
the
syllogisme
proposed
is
false
,
as
touching
the
third
part
or
branch
.
For
onely
faith
apprehendeth
Christs
satisfaction
vnto
Iustification
:
because
by
faith
onely
we
can
make
full
account
,
that
Christ
hath
satisfied
for
vs
,
and
by
his
satisfaction
obtained
of
God
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
for
vs
.
And
in
this
very
sence
faith
onely
is
said
to
iustifie
,
because
it
onely
apprehendeth
Christs
satisfaction
:
for
which
onely
,
and
not
for
our
works
also
,
god
counteth
vs
for
iust
.
And
this
answere
is
inough
for
soluting
the
Argument
propounded
.
Yet
in
the
meane
time
,
the
Reader
is
to
be
put
in
minde
,
as
touching
the
first
part
of
the
assumption
,
that
it
is
not
denied
by
Iames
of
true
faith
,
that
it
onely
iustifieth
,
but
this
only
he
meaneth
,
that
man
is
not
iustified
by
a
dead
faith
,
but
by
a
liuing
faith
,
which
of
it self
bringeth
forth
good
workes
.
And
although
it
bee
not
found
expresly
written
,
Faith
onely
iustifieth
:
yet
is
there
found
a
sentence
of
equall
force
,
namely
,
A
man
is
not
iustified
but
by
faith
,
Gal.
2.16
.
Besides
,
as
touching
the
second
part
of
the
assumption
:
it
is
false
,
that
the
scripture
requireth
the
condition
of
the
sacraments
vnto
Iustification
:
as
though
none
could
be
iustified
without
the
sacraments
.
Neither
can
it
be
proued
from
that
place
,
Ioh.
3.
Except
a
man
be
borne
againe
:
for
Christ
speaketh
not
there
of
Baptisme
,
but
of
the
holy
Ghost
that
regenerateth
:
which
hee
compareth
to
water
.
I
answere
.
I
denie
the
consequence
:
For
although
faith
iustifieth
after
the
maner
of
a
cause
;
yet
it
iustifieth
alone
:
for
it
iustifieth
as
an
instrumentall
cause
,
apprehending
Christes
satisfaction
,
for
which
onely
wee
are
iustified
.
And
there
is
no
other
instrumentall
cause
whereby
Christs
satisfaction
is
apprehended
.
The
other
Argument
.
Faith
is
the
beginning
formall
cause
of
Iustification
:
Therefore
it
iustifieth
not
onely
.
To
proue
the
antecedent
,
these
sayings
are
brought
.
Rom.
4.
To
him
that
beleeueth
in
him
that
iustifieth
the
vngodly
,
his
faith
is
imputed
for
iustice
.
1.
Cor.
3.
Other
foundation
can
no
man
lay
,
&c.
Where
by
foundation
,
Bellarmine
would
haue
vnderstood
,
faith
in
Christ
.
And
the
foundation
is
the
beginning
of
the
house
:
Therefore
also
faith
is
the
beginning
of
Iustification
.
Act.
15.
By
faith
purifying
theyr
hearts
.
And
what
is
purenesse
of
heart
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
but
iustice
either
begun
or
perfected
.
I
answere
.
I
denie
the
antecedent
:
and
I
denie
,
that
it
can
be
proued
by
the
sayings
alleadged
.
For
Rom.
4.
Faith
is
said
to
be
reputed
for
iustice
,
in
this
sence
,
for
that
iustice
is
imputed
vnto
a
man
by
faith
.
For
so
the
Apostle
there
saith
,
in
the
words
next
ioyned
to
them
,
that
Dauid
said
,
The
man
is
blessed
to
whom
God
imputeth
iustice
,
namely
by
faith
:
as
we
may
perceiue
by
conferring
of
the
words
that
go
before
:
as
also
by
conference
of
that
phrase
so
much
vsed
of
Paul
,
wherein
he
saith
,
That
God
iustifieth
man
through
faith
,
of
faith
,
by
faith
.
Now
to
iustifie
and
to
impute
iustice
,
are
of
equal
force
with
the
same
Apostle
.
Next
,
1.
Cor.
3.
by
the
name
of
foundation
,
is
vnderstood
Christ
,
as
the
Apostle
himself
plainly
affirmeth
:
that
is
to
say
,
the
doctrine
of
Christ
,
namely
,
of
his
person
and
office
.
For
hee
there
handleth
Christian
doctrine
,
and
not
iustification
.
Bellarmine
therefore
Sophistically
wresteth
the
name
foundation
,
vnto
Iustification
:
as
though
he
treated
there
of
the
foundation
,
that
is
the
beginning
of
Iustification
.
Now
,
Act.
15.
Peter
faith
,
their
hearts
were
purified
by
faith
,
because
by
faith
the
hearts
are
certified
,
that
the
bloud
of
Christ
purgeth
vs
from
all
sinne
:
to
wit
so
,
as
that
no
sinne
is
imputed
to
vs
.
There
fore
purenesse
of
heart
is
euill
restrained
of
Bellarmine
,
vnto
purenes
or
iustice
inherent
:
when
as
there
is
also
purenesse
or
iustice
imputed
.
The
third
Argument
straieth
from
the
question
propounded
:
for
it
concludeth
a
diuerse
thing
;
namely
thus
.
Faith
obtaineth
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
&
after
a
sort
also
deserueth
it
:
therefore
it
iustifieth
not
,
because
it
apprehendeth
the
promise
.
The
antecedent
hee
proueth
from
Luk.
7.
where
our
Lord
saith
to
the
woman
,
Thy
faith
hath
made
thee
safe
.
But
if
faith
did
onely
receiue
mercie
,
it
could
not
rightly
be
said
to
saue
.
For
who
wold
say
to
a
poore
man
,
that
onely
reacheth
out
his
hand
for
almes
,
thy
hand
hath
got
the
almes
?
or
who
wold
say
to
a
sick
man
,
that
with
his
hand
taketh
the
medicine
,
Thy
hand
hath
cured
thee
of
thy
disease
?
I
answere
.
It
followeth
not
:
Faith
maketh
safe
,
therefore
it
saueth
by
obtaining
and
deseruing
.
For
the
word
,
make
in
generall
noteth
an
efficient
cause
.
And
from
the
generall
to
the
special
,
the
consequence
followeth
not
affirmatiuely
.
And
how
faith
maketh
safe
,
wee
must
learne
out
of
the
scripture
:
which
declareth
the
nature
and
force
of
faith
in
iustifying
,
no
otherwise
then
by
relation
vnto
Christs
satisfaction
,
as
the
obiect
which
it
apprehendeth
and
applieth
to
a
man
,
as
Rom.
3.
By
faith
in
his
bloud
.
Gal.
2.
Who
hath
loued
me
and
giuen
himself
for
me
,
&c.
And
although
no
wise
man
would
say
,
Thy
hand
hath
got
thy
almes
:
yet
might
one
rightly
say
to
him
that
is
enriched
by
receiuing
almes
:
Thy
hand
hath
made
thee
rich
.
For
if
he
had
not
taken
the
almes
,
he
had
not
bene
enriched
.
So
our
faith
hath
not
made
for
vs
Christes
satisfaction
:
but
yet
by
receiuing
it
,
it
enricheth
and
iustifieth
vs
.
Finally
when
it
is
said
,
Faith
iustifieth
,
it
is
a
*
figuratiue
speech
;
to
bee
vnderstood
thus
,
God
Iustifieth
a
beleeuer
,
because
of
Christs
satisfaction
which
he
apprehendeth
by
faith
.
Bellarmine
bringeth
also
other
places
of
scripture
to
confirme
his
antecedent
,
namely
,
Rom
4.
Abraham
was
comforted
by
faith
,
giuing
glory
to
God
,
&c.
Therefore
also
was
it
counted
vnto
him
for
iustice
.
In
this
place
,
the
Apostle
sheweth
the
cause
why
Abrahams
faith
was
counted
iustice
:
because
in
beleeuing
hee
gaue
glory
to
God
.
Therefore
that
faith
pleased
God
,
by
which
he
was
glorified
:
and
therefore
for
desert
of
that
faith
(
which
notwithstanding
was
his
gift
and
grace
)
he
iustified
Abraham
.
Also
Rom.
10.
Whosoeuer
shall
call
vpon
the
name
of
the
Lord
shall
be
saued
.
How
shal
they
cal
vpon
him
is
whom
they
haue
not
beleeued
?
how
shall
they
beleeue
without
a
Preacher
?
Where
S.
Paul
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
as
hee
maketh
the
preaching
of
the
word
,
the
cause
of
faith
:
so
hee
maketh
faith
the
cause
of
inuocation
:
and
inuocation
the
cause
of
sauing
:
that
is
,
of
Iustification
.
Whereby
wee
vnderstand
(
saith
he
further
)
that
faith
by
inuocation
,
obtaineth
iustification
.
Faith
therefore
iustifieth
not
relatiuely
,
to
wit
,
by
accepting
Iustification
offered
.
Lastly
,
in
the
11.
to
the
Heb.
the
Apostle
teacheth
by
many
examples
,
that
men
please
God
by
faith
;
&
by
this
,
that
faith
is
of
great
price
and
merit
with
God
.
I
answere
.
Although
that
place
Rom.
4.
may
seeme
much
to
fauor
Bellarmines
opinion
:
yet
if
one
look
throghly
into
it
,
&
consider
the
applying
of
Abrahams
example
vnto
vs
.
Which
immediatly
followeth
,
he
shall
see
,
the
causall
coniunction
dio
,
therefore
,
not
to
be
so
much
referred
vnto
that
effect
of
Abrahams
faith
,
to
wit
,
glorifying
of
God
,
as
vnto
the
truth
of
his
faith
:
which
truth
is
signified
by
that
effect
.
For
in
applying
Abrahams
example
,
hee
doth
not
now
mention
strong
faith
:
such
as
that
of
Abrahams
was
:
but
simply
true
faith
to
wit
,
wherby
we
beleeue
that
God
gaue
Iesus
for
our
sinnes
,
and
raised
him
vp
for
our
Iustification
.
The
place
Rom.
10
speaketh
not
of
Iustification
,
but
of
saluation
:
that
is
glorification
.
Which
although
it
be
obtained
by
inuocation
proceeding
of
faith
:
yet
is
it
not
obtained
by
the
merit
of
faith
,
but
by
Gods
grace
and
the
way
that
he
hath
prescribed
.
Lastly
,
although
out
of
Hebr.
11.
it
is
manifest
that
faith
is
of
great
price
with
God
:
yet
hence
it
followeth
not
,
that
wee
by
faith
do
merit
Gods
benefits
.
For
as
other
the
benefites
of
God
,
so
faith
it selfe
also
is
Gods
free
gift
,
as
the
Apostle
witnesseth
,
Eph.
2.8
.
Before
wee
see
how
Bellarmine
dooth
reason
from
these
principles
;
it
is
meet
first
to
put
in
minde
,
that
that
first
principle
is
false
,
euen
by
Bellarmines
owne
testimonie
:
From
the
first
principle
he
reasoneth
thus
:
Vnto
the
infusion
of
iustice
are
more
actions
required
then
the
action
of
faith
:
But
Iustification
is
the
infusion
of
iustice
:
Therfore
vnto
Iustification
are
required
moe
actions
then
the
action
of
faith
:
And
by
consequence
,
onely
faith
Iustifieth
not
,
after
the
manner
of
disposition
.
I
answere
.
First
Bellarmine
here
departeth
from
the
question
:
not
oppugning
the
opinion
of
the
professors
of
the
Gospell
,
but
a
Popish
fiction
.
For
the
professors
of
the
Gospel
,
when
they
say
,
that
faith
onely
iustifieth
,
do
not
meane
,
that
it
iustifieth
onely
by
way
of
disposition
,
but
by
way
of
apprehension
:
as
hath
already
b●●
often
declared
.
Then
the
assumption
is
false
:
as
we
haue
shewed
before
.
Besides
,
Bellarmine
agreeth
not
with
himself
:
who
now
affirmeth
,
that
the
action
of
faith
is
fore-required
vnto
Iustification
;
also
that
it
disposeth
vnto
Iustification
;
when
before
he
said
,
Faith
iustifieth
as
the
beginning
and
first
roote
of
Iustification
:
and
afterward
he
maketh
faith
,
part
of
the
formall
cause
of
Iustification
,
where
he
saith
,
That
faith
is
not
the
whole
formal
cause
of
Iustification
.
And
in
an
other
place
,
that
the
formall
cause
of
Iustification
consisteth
in
faith
,
hope
and
charnie
.
Is
part
of
the
forme
therefore
,
fore
required
for
the
obtaining
of
the
forme
?
Now
from
the
other
principle
,
he
draweth
this
argument
.
If
faith
only
did
iustifie
,
it
shuld
only
saue
also
.
But
it
doth
not
only
saue
:
because
good
works
are
also
necessarie
to
saluation
.
Therefore
it
onely
doth
not
Iustifie
.
I
answere
.
Although
this
argument
at
the
first
sight
haue
a
great
shew
:
yet
if
it
be
throghly
looked
into
,
it
will
be
sound
to
be
a
[
*
](A09695-e21080-b)
*
i.
A
false
argument
.
Paralogisme
,
hauing
foure
terms
by
the
homony●●●●
or
double
signification
of
the
argument
or
middle
cerme
.
For
that
Onely
saue
,
in
the
proposition
,
is
to
be
vnderstood
specially
of
saluation
,
which
is
by
way
of
apprehension
:
but
in
the
assumption
,
it
is
vnderstood
generally
of
saluation
which
is
any
maner
of
way
.
For
faith
onely
saueth
as
the
instrumentall
apprehending
cause
,
to
wit
,
by
apprehending
Christes
satisfaction
,
for
which
God
saueth
the
beleeuer
:
but
it
doth
not
onely
saue
euery
maner
of
way
:
for
Gods
grace
and
Christs
satisfaction
also
saueth
,
but
as
the
principall
efficient
causes
:
also
good
workes
saue
,
but
as
the
way
by
which
God
bringeth
the
beleeuers
vnto
saluation
.
This
double
signification
being
obserued
,
I
answere
to
the
assumption
,
where
it
is
said
,
Faith
saueth
not
onely
.
If
this
be
vnderstood
generally
,
it
is
true
:
but
then
an
other
thing
is
assumed
then
was
in
the
proposition
.
For
when
it
is
said
in
the
proposition
,
Faith
onely
saueth
:
that
is
not
vnderstood
generally
,
but
specially
:
to
wit
,
by
way
of
apprehension
.
But
if
the
assumption
bee
vnderstood
specially
,
as
in
the
proposition
,
namely
,
that
faith
onely
saueth
not
by
laying
hold
on
Christs
satisfaction
;
it
is
manifestly
false
.
CHAP.
IIII.
The
proofe
of
the
third
part
,
recited
,
and
refuted
.
HItherto
of
the
second
part
of
the
Papists
sentence
,
wherein
they
contend
,
that
faith
onely
iustifieth
not
.
Now
followeth
the
third
part
,
wherein
they
dispute
,
that
Iustification
standeth
not
onely
in
forgiuenesse
of
sins
.
Which
Bellarmine
purposeth
to
proue
thus
.
The
first
place
is
Rom.
4.
Who
was
deliuered
for
our
sinnes
,
and
rose
againe
for
our
iustification
.
That
is
,
as
Bellarmine
interpreteth
:
that
we
may
walke
in
newnesse
of
life
.
I
answer
.
This
exposition
of
Bellarmines
is
false
,
confounding
those
things
which
the
Apostle
distinguisheth
.
For
Paul
beginneth
in
that
Epistle
to
dispute
of
renning
of
nature
,
or
of
sanctification
,
at
the
sixt
chapter
,
hauing
finished
the
disputation
of
iustification
in
the
fift
chapter
.
And
the
sense
of
the
place
alleaged
is
:
That
Christ
was
deliuered
vnto
death
for
our
sinnes
,
that
is
,
to
purge
our
sinnes
by
satisfaction
,
and
was
raised
vp
for
our
iustification
:
that
is
to
say
,
that
he
might
make
knowen
our
iustification
:
to
wit
,
that
he
hath
obtained
it
by
his
death
for
vs
.
For
if
he
had
not
risen
from
the
dead
,
we
should
yet
be
in
our
sinnes
:
1.
Cor.
15.
Wherefore
seeing
he
is
risen
againe
,
we
know
that
we
are
no
more
in
our
sinnes
,
but
that
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
or
our
iustification
is
gotten
for
vs
by
Christs
death
.
The
second
place
is
,
As
sinne
reigned
vnto
death
,
so
also
grace
reigneth
by
iustice
vnto
eternall
life
.
From
hence
Bellarmine
reasoneth
thus
.
He
opposeth
iustice
to
sin
:
and
by
iustice
vnderstandeth
renuing
,
from
which
works
proceed
of
life
,
for
that
the
opposition
requireth
.
For
sinne
is
said
to
haue
reigned
vnto
death
,
because
it
wrought
deadly
workes
:
contrariwise
,
therfore
the
grace
of
God
is
said
to
reign
by
iustice
vnto
life
,
because
by
iustice
infused
,
it
worketh
the
works
of
life
.
And
if
inward
renuing
,
which
is
the
beginning
of
good
works
,
be
rightly
called
rustice
,
out
of
doubt
Iustification
must
be
constituted
in
that
renuing
,
and
not
in
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
onely
.
I
answere
.
A
gaine
Bellarmine
bringeth
a
false
exposition
.
For
the
Apostle
entreateth
nothing
in
that
Chapter
,
of
renuing
of
nature
:
but
afterward
in
the
Chapter
following
.
And
the
meaning
of
the
place
alleaged
,
by
comparing
it
vnto
the
former
,
with
which
it
agreeth
,
may
be
perceiued
to
be
this
.
As
Adams
sinne
reigned
in
his
posterite
vnto
death
,
because
being
imputed
vnto
them
,
it
brought
death
:
that
so
the
grace
of
God
whereby
he
imputeth
iustice
to
them
that
beleeue
,
for
Christs
satisfaction
,
reigneth
in
them
vnto
life
eternall
:
because
iustice
being
imputed
to
them
,
bringeth
life
eternall
.
The
third
place
is
,
Rom.
6.
Neither
exhibit
your
members
as
weapons
of
iniquitie
to
sinne
:
but
exhibit
your selues
to
God
,
as
liuing
from
the
dead
,
and
your
members
weapons
of
iustice
to
God
.
I
answere
.
This
place
speaketh
not
of
Iustification
;
the
dispute
whereof
the
Apostle
ended
in
the
5.
Chapter
:
but
treateth
of
sanctification
.
Wherefore
it
maketh
nothing
to
the
matter
.
The
4.
place
is
,
Rom.
8.
The
spirit
liueth
for
Iustification
:
or
(
as
it
is
in
the
Greek
)
the
spirit
of
life
for
iustice
:
Bellarmine
addeth
:
Iustification
or
iustice
,
which
maketh
to
liue
,
and
by
this
to
worke
,
cannot
be
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
onely
:
but
some
inward
and
inherent
thing
.
I
answere
.
Againe
he
bringeth
a
false
exposition
:
for
neither
speaketh
he
here
of
Iustification
,
but
of
sanctification
:
as
is
manifest
by
the
things
before
and
after
.
And
the
meaning
of
the
place
is
:
that
the
spirit
of
God
,
dwelling
in
them
that
beleeue
and
are
iustified
by
faith
,
quickneth
them
,
as
concerning
study
of
iustice
or
good
workes
:
so
that
now
they
cease
to
giue
themselues
to
sinne
,
and
contrariwise
doo
studie
for
iustice
and
good
workes
.
The
5.
place
is
Gal.
3.
If
there
had
bene
a
law
giuen
,
that
could
haue
giuen
life
:
surely
iustice
had
bene
by
the
law
.
Here
the
Apostle
sheweth
openly
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
that
Iustice
whereupon
Iustification
is
called
,
is
something
that
giueth
life
to
the
soule
:
and
constituteth
it
in
motion
and
action
.
But
I
see
not
by
what
syllogisme
Bellarmine
gathereth
this
consequence
from
the
Apostles
words
.
The
meaning
of
the
Apostle
is
:
If
the
law
could
giue
life
to
man
,
vnto
whom
it
was
giuen
:
that
is
,
could
giue
him
strength
perfectly
to
fulfill
or
keep
it
:
then
should
mans
iustice
arise
of
the
law
:
that
is
,
man
should
be
iust
,
and
counted
of
God
for
iust
for
the
law
by
him
obserued
.
But
by
what
force
wil
you
conclude
from
hence
,
that
iustification
consisteth
in
that
iustice
which
constituteth
the
soule
in
action
,
that
is
,
in
inherent
iustice
?
Yea
the
contrary
may
rather
be
from
hence
concluded
:
namely
,
that
iustification
consisteth
not
in
that
iustice
:
for
that
iustice
,
which
is
required
vnto
iustification
,
namely
,
perfect
obseruation
of
the
law
,
falleth
not
vnto
man
in
this
life
.
The
sixt
place
is
,
Be
renued
in
the
spirit
of
your
minde
,
and
put
on
the
new
man
,
which
according
to
God
is
created
in
iustice
and
holinesse
of
truth
.
Where
the
Apostle
calleth
renuing
,
iustice
and
holinesse
.
I
answere
.
This
place
also
maketh
nothing
to
the
matter
:
seeing
it
speaketh
not
of
iustification
,
but
of
sanctification
:
neither
of
the
iustice
of
faith
,
but
of
the
iustice
of
workes
:
which
although
it
be
not
perfect
,
and
euery
way
absolute
in
the
regenerate
,
so
as
to
answer
in
euery
part
to
the
law
of
God
:
yet
is
it
true
and
sincere
,
and
not
feigned
.
The
first
reason
is
.
Iustification
without
doubt
is
a
certaine
motion
from
sinne
vnto
iustice
:
and
hath
it
name
from
the
thing
whereunto
it
leadeth
,
as
all
other
the
like
motions
;
inlightning
,
warning
,
&c.
True
iustification
therefore
cannot
be
vnderstood
,
except
some
iustice
be
gotten
besides
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
:
euen
as
it
can
〈◊〉
either
be
true
inlightning
,
nor
true
warming
:
if
when
darknesse
is
driuen
away
,
or
cold
expelled
,
there
follow
no
light
,
and
no
heate
in
the
subiect
the
body
.
I
answere
.
Iustification
,
it
is
in
deed
a
kind
of
motion
from
sinne
to
iustice
,
but
not
such
as
Bellarmine
feigneth
:
to
wit
,
such
as
inlightning
and
warning
be
.
For
it
is
not
the
motion
of
expelling
sinne
and
infusing
iustice
:
for
this
motion
in
scripture
is
not
called
Iustification
,
but
Regeneration
,
Renouation
,
Sanctification
.
But
it
is
the
motion
of
forgiuing
or
remitting
sinne
,
and
imputing
iustice
.
Now
forgiuenesse
of
sinne
,
and
imputing
of
iustice
,
differ
onely
in
name
,
indeed
they
are
the
same
:
as
appeareth
by
the
Apostles
words
Rom.
4.6.7
.
as
we
haue
declared
elswhere
.
And
what
other
thing
it
is
to
driue
out
darknesse
,
but
to
bring
in
light
?
also
what
els
,
to
expell
cold
,
but
to
put
in
warmth
?
Vnaptly
therfore
doth
Bellarmine
feigne
,
that
darkenesse
may
be
driuen
away
,
and
cold
expelled
,
although
there
follow
no
light
nor
heate
in
the
subiect
body
.
The
second
reason
.
I
deny
the
assumption
.
For
remission
of
sinnes
doth
not
onely
deliuer
from
paine
,
to
wit
,
eternall
death
;
but
also
bringeth
glorie
or
eternall
life
.
The
reason
of
which
thing
is
this
,
that
remission
of
sinnes
,
wherein
mans
iustification
consisteth
,
is
remission
of
all
sinnes
:
and
therefore
not
onely
of
sinnes
of
committing
,
but
also
of
sinnes
of
omitting
:
whereby
it
commeth
,
that
he
to
whome
God
forgiueth
sinnes
,
is
so
accounted
of
,
as
if
he
had
not
only
committed
nothing
which
God
hath
forbidden
in
his
law
:
but
also
,
omitted
nothing
of
that
which
he
hath
commanded
:
and
therefore
,
as
if
he
had
perfectly
fulfilled
the
law
of
God
.
Now
where
the
perfect
fulfilling
of
the
law
is
,
there
also
is
life
;
according
to
that
,
The
man
that
doeth
these
thinges
shall
liue
in
them
.
Moreouer
,
the
example
of
ciuil
iudgement
which
Bellarmine
bringeth
,
proueth
not
his
assumption
:
because
that
absolution
is
vnlike
to
the
absolution
of
God
.
For
this
is
vniuersall
,
to
wit
from
all
sinnes
against
the
law
of
God
:
but
that
is
particular
or
special
;
to
wit
,
from
some
certaine
crime
or
crimes
,
against
the
politick
lawes
.
Notwithstanding
,
the
ciuil
Iudge
giueth
vnto
him
whome
he
hath
quitted
from
certaine
crimes
,
those
rewards
which
hee
hath
promised
to
the
innocent
,
namely
,
preseruation
in
life
and
defence
;
although
hee
giue
him
no
new
and
singular
rewards
which
hee
hath
promised
onely
to
certaine
vertuous
exploits
.
And
so
God
giueth
eternall
life
as
a
reward
to
those
,
vnto
whome
he
hath
promised
it
,
to
wit
,
vnto
those
that
keepe
his
law
:
such
as
he
accounteth
all
those
,
whose
sinnes
he
hath
forgiuen
.
The
third
reason
.
Iustification
of
enemies
maketh
friends
,
children
,
〈◊〉
,
citizens
with
Saints
,
of
the
houshold
of
God
,
heyres
of
his
kingdome
.
Onely
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
maketh
not
men
such
:
Therefore
onely
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
is
not
iustification
.
The
assumption
he
would
proue
thus
:
For
one
is
not
worthy
of
loue
for
this
only
that
his
dets
are
forgiuen
him
when
hee
cannot
pay
them
.
Neither
is
hee
straight-way
made
a
sonne
,
a
citizen
,
or
of
the
houshold
,
or
an
heyre
:
who
by
the
iudges
clemencie
vndergoeth
not
the
punishment
,
whereto
he
was
iustly
adiudged
.
I
deny
the
assumption
.
And
I
proue
the
contrary
by
the
Apostles
words
,
Eph.
1.5.6.7
.
He
bath
predestinate
vs
to
be
adopted
through
Iesus
Christ
,
vnto
himselfe
,
according
to
the
good
pleasure
of
his
will
:
To
the
praise
of
the
glory
of
his
grace
,
wherewith
he
hath
made
vs
accepted
in
that
Beloued
;
by
whome
wee
haue
redemption
through
his
bloud
,
the
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
If
thou
askest
how
God
hath
adopted
vs
for
sonnes
,
and
so
for
heyres
of
his
kingdome
?
also
,
how
he
hath
made
vs
accepted
,
that
is
,
friends
and
beloued
?
the
Apostle
answereth
:
By
Iesus
Christ
:
also
,
In
that
(
his
)
beloued
:
and
declaring
this
same
thing
,
he
faith
,
that
in
him
or
by
him
we
haue
redemption
through
his
bloud
,
the
for
giuenes
of
sinnes
.
Therefore
the
Apostle
sheweth
no
other
thing
by
which
we
are
made
the
friends
of
God
,
then
the
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
:
neither
any
other
thing
for
which
,
then
the
redemption
made
by
the
bloud
of
Christ
.
The
proofe
which
Bellarmine
bringeth
of
the
assumption
,
hath
no
force
,
for
the
manner
of
dealing
with
God
and
with
men
is
vnlike
.
Men
are
not
so
affected
,
that
they
will
straightway
vouchsafe
to
heape
benefits
on
him
,
to
whom
they
haue
forgiuen
offences
:
but
God
,
to
whomsoeuer
he
forgiueth
offences
for
Christ
,
them
he
prosecuteth
which
eternal
fauour
for
his
sake
:
and
thereupon
heapeth
his
benefits
on
them
,
though
vnworthy
.
CHAP.
V.
The
proofe
of
the
fourth
part
,
recited
and
refuted
.
NOw
remayneth
the
fourth
and
last
part
of
the
Papists
sentence
,
That
iustification
confisteth
not
in
imputation
of
Christes
iustice
.
This
first
he
would
proue
by
this
,
it
is
neuer
read
in
the
scripture
,
that
Christes
iustice
is
imputed
to
vs
:
or
,
that
we
are
iust
,
by
Christes
iustice
imputed
to
vs
.
Before
I
answere
this
argument
,
I
will
first
shew
in
what
sense
these
things
be
spoken
of
the
professors
of
the
Gospell
,
whome
Bellarmine
oppugneth
.
Therefore
when
they
say
,
That
Christes
iustice
is
imputed
to
vs
,
they
vnderstand
,
the
iustice
gotten
by
Christes
death
.
Therefore
this
they
meane
:
That
iustice
is
imputed
to
vs
of
God
,
or
,
we
are
counted
of
God
iust
,
for
the
death
of
Christ
,
whereby
hee
hath
satisfied
his
iudgement
for
our
sinnes
.
Which
is
all
one
as
if
they
should
say
,
that
Christes
satisfaction
is
of
God
imputed
vnto
vs
for
iustice
.
This
appeareth
by
Caluins
words
in
his
third
booke
of
Instir
.
To
iustifie
,
is
nothing
else
,
but
to
acquite
from
guiltinesse
,
as
being
of
approued
innocency
,
him
that
is
guiltie
or
so
accused
.
When
as
therefore
God
iustifieth
vs
by
Christes
intercession
,
he
doth
not
acquite
vs
,
by
approuing
of
our
owne
innocencie
,
but
by
imputation
of
iustice
:
that
we
are
counted
iust
in
Christ
,
which
are
not
so
in
our selues
.
Behold
he
saith
,
God
iustifieth
vs
by
Christes
intercession
,
that
is
,
for
Christes
intercession
:
vnder
which
name
is
comprehended
satisfaction
.
Also
,
He
acquitteth
vs
by
imputation
of
iustice
,
or
,
in
as
much
as
hee
imputeth
iustice
vnto
vs
:
namely
for
that
intercession
and
satisfaction
of
Christ
.
Whereby
wee
perceiue
,
that
Caluine
maketh
the
formall
cause
of
iustification
,
to
be
imputation
of
iustice
,
which
otherwhere
he
calleth
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
Now
the
meaning
of
the
words
being
declared
,
I
answere
to
Bellarmines
argument
:
and
say
,
that
it
is
not
necessarie
that
those
very
wordes
,
Christes
iustice
is
imputed
to
vs
,
be
read
in
the
scripture
:
but
that
it
is
ynough
,
if
those
things
be
read
,
from
which
this
sentence
may
by
good
consequence
be
drawen
.
And
such
we
read
:
namely
where
it
is
said
,
that
faith
is
imputed
to
man
for
iustice
,
and
,
that
iustice
is
imputed
to
man
,
Rom.
4.5.6
.
Now
seeing
these
phrases
be
diuerse
,
and
therfore
cannot
be
both
of
them
proper
:
we
must
consider
which
is
proper
,
and
which
figuratiue
.
To
speake
properly
,
a
thing
is
said
to
be
imputed
to
one
,
which
himselfe
hath
not
done
,
or
which
is
not
in
himselfe
:
and
contrariwise
,
that
is
said
not
to
be
imputed
,
which
one
hath
done
,
or
which
is
in
him
.
Therefore
when
iustice
is
said
to
be
imputed
to
sinfull
man
,
it
is
a
proper
speech
:
us
also
when
it
is
said
,
that
sinne
is
not
imputed
to
a
sinner
.
It
is
therfore
improperly
said
,
that
To
him
that
beleeueth
,
faith
is
imputed
for
iustice
;
and
therefore
this
is
to
be
vnfolden
by
a
proper
speech
:
to
wit
,
that
To
him
that
beleeueth
,
iustice
is
imputed
:
or
,
he
that
beleeueth
is
counted
for
iust
,
by
faith
:
as
elsewhere
the
Apostle
saith
,
The
beleeuer
is
iustified
by
faith
.
Which
that
it
may
more
fully
be
vnderstood
,
it
is
needfull
that
the
nature
of
faith
be
declared
by
his
obiect
whereon
it
leaneth
,
or
which
it
apprehendeth
for
iustice
.
For
that
is
the
thing
for
which
the
beleeuer
is
iustified
,
or
iustice
is
imputed
to
him
:
or
finally
which
is
imputed
to
him
for
iustice
by
faith
.
And
that
obiect
of
faith
is
Christes
satisfaction
:
as
appeareth
by
the
Apostles
words
,
Rom.
3.25
.
Whom
God
hath
set
forth
a
reconciliation
by
faith
in
his
bloud
.
Therefore
to
speake
properly
,
iustice
is
imputed
to
vs
for
Christes
satisfaction
by
faith
:
because
we
apprehend
that
by
faith
:
or
Christes
satisfaction
is
imputed
to
vs
for
iustice
by
faith
:
that
is
,
in
as
much
as
it
is
apprehended
by
faith
.
Secondly
,
that
no
necessitie
can
be
alleadged
of
that
sort
of
imputation
.
But
,
say
I
,
there
is
manifest
necessitie
:
namely
our
sinnes
which
cannot
be
vndone
:
but
least
we
be
damned
for
them
,
it
is
necessary
that
they
be
not
imputed
to
vs
,
but
couered
:
which
is
no
other
thing
,
then
to
haue
iustice
imputed
to
vs
:
as
appeareth
by
the
Apostles
wordes
,
Rom.
4.6.7
.
Dauid
saith
,
that
Blessed
is
that
man
to
whom
God
imputeth
iustice
.
Blessed
are
they
whose
iniquities
are
forgiuen
,
and
whose
sinnes
are
couered
:
blessed
is
the
man
to
whom
the
Lord
shall
not
impute
sinne
.
But
Bellarmine
laboureth
to
confirme
his
argument
,
thus
.
If
this
imputation
were
necessarie
:
it
should
therefore
cheefly
be
necessary
,
for
that
man
after
forgiuenesse
of
sinne
is
yet
verily
a
sinner
,
to
wit
,
his
sinne
being
couered
,
not
taken
away
.
But
this
cause
of
necessitie
hath
no
place
.
Because
by
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
,
sinne
is
vtterly
taken
away
,
that
it
is
not
:
(
for
proofe
whereof
,
he
heapeth
together
many
testimonies
of
scripture
.
)
Therefore
this
imputation
is
not
necessary
.
I
answere
.
First
,
the
proposition
is
false
:
for
although
imputation
of
iustice
be
necessary
for
man
,
yet
is
it
not
therefore
necessary
,
for
that
man
after
forgiuenesse
of
sinne
is
yet
verily
a
sinner
:
as
though
imputation
of
iustice
were
done
after
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
.
For
remission
of
sinnes
,
and
imputation
of
iustice
,
are
one
and
the
same
thing
:
as
appeareth
by
the
Apostles
words
,
Rom.
4.5.6
.
where
these
two
are
taken
as
equiualent
,
for
Iustice
to
be
imputed
to
man
;
and
iniquities
to
be
forgiuen
a
man
.
Yet
is
it
true
,
that
imputation
of
iustice
is
necessary
for
a
man
,
because
he
is
a
sinner
.
Then
,
Bellarmine
confirmeth
his
assumption
by
a
false
sentence
:
to
wit
,
that
by
forgiuenesse
of
sins
,
sinne
is
vtterly
taken
away
,
that
it
is
not
.
For
sinne
is
taken
away
by
forgiuenesse
;
not
so
as
that
it
is
not
,
but
that
it
is
not
imputed
,
but
couered
:
as
Dauid
expresly
teacheth
in
that
place
which
the
Apostle
citeth
,
Rom.
4.7.8
.
in
these
words
,
Blessed
are
they
whose
iniquities
are
forgiuen
,
and
whose
sinnes
are
couered
:
blessed
is
the
man
to
whom
the
Lord
shal
not
impute
sin
.
Behold
,
if
thou
askest
what
it
is
to
haue
iniquities
or
sins
forgiuen
?
Dauid
answereth
:
It
is
to
haue
sins
couered
,
that
they
come
not
into
the
sight
of
God
,
as
iudge
.
Also
,
it
is
to
haue
sinne
not
imputed
of
the
Lord
:
to
wit
,
that
man
be
punished
for
his
sinne
,
as
he
hath
deserued
.
Wherefore
we
may
not
thinke
,
that
in
those
places
of
scripture
(
those
I
meane
that
speake
of
iustification
)
which
Bellarmine
hath
heaped
together
,
a
diuerse
thing
is
taught
:
seeing
it
is
certaine
,
that
the
holy
Ghost
contradicteth
not
himselfe
.
Further
,
vnto
that
argument
,
from
the
opposition
of
Adam
vnto
Christ
,
Rom.
5.
which
Bellarmine
thinketh
,
will
admit
no
answere
at
all
:
we
haue
answered
[
*
](A09695-e22630-b)
*
Before
in
the
second
chapter
of
this
booke
,
in
the
solution
of
the
first
Argument
.
before
.
Bellarmines
third
argument
is
this
.
If
faith
,
hope
and
loue
,
can
be
perfect
in
this
life
:
the
imputation
of
Christes
iustice
is
not
necessary
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
:
Therefore
also
the
consequent
.
I
answere
.
The
proposition
is
false
.
For
first
,
that
imputation
of
iustice
be
not
necessary
for
man
;
it
is
not
ynough
,
that
faith
,
hope
and
loue
,
can
be
perfect
in
this
life
,
but
it
behoueth
that
they
be
perfect
.
Then
,
though
it
be
graunted
that
perfect
faith
,
hope
and
loue
,
befall
some
(
as
the
Martyrs
)
in
this
life
:
yet
neuerthelesse
is
imputation
of
iustice
necessary
for
them
,
for
sinnes
committed
before
the
perfection
of
those
vertues
.
For
we
cannot
satisfie
God
for
them
,
by
the
duties
of
vertues
that
folow
;
seeing
they
are
owing
vnto
God
.
Therefore
for
old
debts
another
satisfaction
is
needfull
.
And
God
cannot
be
satisfied
for
sinnes
,
but
by
suffering
the
punishment
of
them
.
And
this
hath
Christ
suffered
for
them
that
beleeue
,
&
so
hath
satisfied
for
their
sinnes
:
which
satisfaction
is
imputed
to
them
for
iustice
:
and
this
imputation
is
needfull
for
them
:
seeing
they
cannot
but
by
it
be
counted
for
iust
,
and
worthy
of
eternall
life
:
yea
,
iustifying
faith
,
whether
perfect
or
vnperfect
,
doth
in
any
wise
require
imputation
of
iustice
:
seeing
it
iustifieth
no
otherwise
,
then
in
as
much
as
it
apprehendeth
Christs
satisfaction
,
which
by
the
grace
of
God
is
imputed
for
iustice
to
him
that
beleeueth
.
In
exposition
of
the
fourth
argument
,
Bellarmine
alloweth
of
the
Gospellers
sentence
,
at
least
in
part
:
in
that
he
saith
,
it
is
right
if
it
be
so
vnderstood
:
that
Christs
iustice
is
imputed
to
vs
,
that
is
,
Christes
merits
,
because
they
are
giuen
vnto
vs
:
and
we
can
offer
them
to
God
the
Father
for
our
sinnes
:
because
Christ
hath
taken
vpon
him
the
burden
of
satisfying
for
vs
,
and
reconciling
vs
to
God
the
Father
.
Yet
he
denyeth
,
that
Christes
iustice
it
so
imputed
vnto
vs
,
that
we
are
called
,
and
be
formally
iust
by
it
,
and
that
he
would
proue
thus
.
When
there
be
two
contrary
formes
in
any
,
the
one
inherent
,
the
other
outward
:
without
doubt
the
absolute
denomination
is
taken
from
the
inherent
forme
,
rather
then
from
the
outward
.
For
if
one
should
put
a
white
garment
vpon
a
black-moore
,
he
could
not
rightly
say
,
This
black-moore
is
white
:
but
contrary
wise
it
might
rightly
be
said
,
this
Moore
is
black
;
because
the
proper
and
inherent
blacknesse
perteyneth
more
vnto
him
,
then
that
outward
whitenesse
fetched
from
an
other
thing
.
But
in
man
by
the
doctrine
of
imputation
of
iustice
there
are
made
two
contrary
formes
,
the
one
inherent
,
namely
Iniustice
:
the
other
outward
,
namely
,
inputed
iustice
.
Wherewith
man
by
apprehension
is
cloathed
as
with
a
garment
.
Therfore
man
to
whom
iustice
is
imputed
,
is
rather
to
be
named
vniust
of
the
inherent
forme
,
then
iust
of
the
outward
.
I
answer
vnto
the
proposition
.
Althogh
that
denomination
be
vsuall
with
men
:
yet
God
in
this
affaire
foloweth
a
diuerse
:
reason
in
his
word
:
saying
both
;
to
wit
,
that
faith
is
imputed
vnto
vs
for
iustice
,
or
that
iustice
is
imputed
to
vs
,
to
wit
by
faith
,
Rom.
4.5.6
.
and
that
we
are
iustified
by
faith
,
Rom.
5.1
.
And
surely
,
when
as
we
are
so
far
forth
iust
before
God
,
as
iustice
is
imputed
to
vs
,
as
Paul
in
the
place
alleaged
,
Rom.
4.
doth
teach
:
it
is
rightly
said
,
that
we
by
imputed
iustice
,
be
and
are
named
formally
iust
.
Now
to
the
assumption
.
In
man
to
whom
iustice
is
imputed
,
it
is
graunted
there
is
vniustice
inherent
:
but
it
is
vnderstood
,
vniustice
cleauing
vnto
him
by
sinnes
already
committed
,
and
not
a
purpose
of
doing
vniustly
.
For
to
whom
faith
is
giuen
,
that
by
it
iustice
is
imputed
to
him
and
committed
sinnes
are
forgiuen
:
to
him
withall
,
is
giuen
a
purpose
to
liue
iustly
,
and
to
auoyd
sinnes
.
The
5.
Argument
.
I
answere
.
I
denie
the
consequence
.
For
by
Christs
iustice
which
is
imputed
to
vs
,
is
vnderstood
the
obedience
of
death
,
wherby
he
satisfied
for
our
sinnes
,
and
so
brought
vs
euerlasting
iustice
(
as
Daniel
speaketh
.
)
This
obedience
I
say
,
is
imputed
to
vs
for
iustice
:
so
that
we
are
esteemed
of
God
,
as
if
our selues
had
performed
it
.
Neither
dooth
it
follow
from
hence
,
that
wee
should
be
called
and
counted
redeemers
and
sauiours
of
the
world
:
both
for
that
Christs
suffering
is
so
imputed
to
euery
beleeuer
,
as
if
hee
had
suffered
for
himselfe
,
and
not
for
others
:
as
also
because
that
any
may
be
called
the
redeemer
and
sauiour
of
the
world
,
it
is
not
inogh
that
he
be
ready
to
suffer
for
the
world
,
but
it
is
necessary
that
he
be
meete
to
satisfie
God
by
his
suffering
for
the
world
:
and
vnto
this
is
required
,
that
he
be
not
onely
man
,
but
a
holy
man
,
and
besides
that
,
God
.
The
sixt
Argument
.
That
which
we
lost
in
Adam
,
is
restored
vs
by
Christ
:
In
Adam
we
lost
not
imputed
iustice
,
Therefore
,
imputed
iustice
is
not
restored
vs
by
Christ
.
The
second
syllogisme
is
this
.
That
which
we
lost
in
Adam
,
is
restored
vs
by
Christ
.
〈◊〉
out
iustice
we
lost
in
Adam
.
Therefore
,
inherent
iustice
is
restored
vs
by
Christ
.
I
answere
to
the
last
first
.
I
grant
all
the
latter
syllogisme
:
but
the
conclusion
of
it
,
is
far
from
the
question
proponed
.
For
although
Christ
hath
restored
vs
inherent
iustice
,
in
regenerating
and
renuing
vs
to
the
Image
of
God
by
the
holy
Ghost
;
in
this
life
as
beginning
;
in
the
next
▪
perfectly
:
yet
that
letteth
not
,
why
he
should
not
impute
iustice
to
vs
,
wherby
we
may
stand
in
the
iudgement
of
God
.
As
touching
the
first
syllogisme
,
it
first
of
all
is
faultie
in
the
storme
,
because
it
hath
a
negatiue
minor
in
the
first
figure
.
Then
,
the
conclusion
is
from
the
question
proponed
.
For
it
is
not
asked
,
whether
that
iustice
be
restored
vs
which
was
imouted
to
vs
in
Adam
before
he
fel
▪
but
it
is
demanded
,
whether
iustice
be
imputed
to
vs
,
that
is
,
whether
wee
be
esteemed
of
God
for
iust
,
because
of
Christs
satisfaction
.
Thirdly
,
the
minor
●omimu
in
the
assumption
is
doubtfull
.
For
imputed
iustice
there
may
bee
vnderstoode
either
of
the
iustice
which
may
bee
saide
to
bee
imputed
to
vs
in
Adam
before
his
fall
:
or
of
the
iustice
which
wee
say
now
is
imputed
to
vs
for
Christs
satisfaction
.
In
the
first
sence
,
the
assumption
is
true
:
but
then
there
be
foure
termini
,
for
that
minor
terminus
in
the
conclusion
is
manifestly
vnderstood
of
the
iustice
which
is
said
to
be
imputed
to
vs
in
Adam
before
his
fall
:
as
is
plaine
by
the
word
Restore
.
And
in
the
latter
sense
the
assumption
is
false
:
for
wee
lost
surely
in
Adam
that
iustice
which
now
is
imputed
vnto
vs
for
Christs
satisfaction
.
For
by
the
disobedience
of
Adam
we
were
made
vniust
;
and
again
,
by
Christs
obedience
we
are
made
iust
,
Rom.
5.19
.
&
that
by
imputation
of
iustice
,
Rom.
4.6
.
The
7.
Argument
.
I
answere
.
There
be
foure
termini
,
for
the
doubtfulnes
of
the
word
truly
:
which
in
the
proposition
is
vnderstood
of
the
truth
of
imputation
,
but
in
the
assumption
of
the
truth
of
inherence
.
For
after
the
manner
of
inherence
,
Christ
was
not
truly
a
sinner
,
but
truly
holy
,
innocent
,
&c.
Yet
after
the
manner
of
imputation
he
was
truly
a
sinner
:
for
our
sins
were
truly
imputed
vnto
him
of
God
,
when
as
for
them
he
was
truly
made
a
curse
or
execration
,
Gal.
3.13
.
that
is
,
accursed
:
as
is
there
declared
,
when
it
is
added
:
For
it
is
written
,
Cursed
is
euery
one
that
hangeth
on
tree
.
Now
none
is
accursed
vnto
God
,
but
for
sin
;
that
is
,
in
as
much
as
either
he
is
a
sinner
,
or
so
reputed
.
And
so
also
may
be
expounded
,
and
it
seemeth
should
bee
expounded
that
place
,
2.
Cor.
5
Him
which
knew
no
sin
,
he
made
sin
for
vs
:
that
we
might
be
made
the
iustice
of
God
in
him
.
For
although
it
be
a
sound
exposition
,
that
God
made
Christ
a
sacrifice
for
sin
:
yet
the
opposition
seemeth
to
require
that
it
be
expounded
,
he
made
him
a
sinner
:
namely
by
imputing
our
sins
vnto
him
:
for
so
are
we
made
iustice
in
him
,
whiles
we
are
made
iust
by
imputation
of
his
suffering
.
But
Bellarmine
vrgeth
this
argument
:
&
from
that
comparison
of
the
imputation
of
Christs
iustice
,
and
the
imputation
of
our
vniustice
,
he
proceedeth
to
reason
thus
.
If
we
were
truly
vncleane
and
wicked
,
euen
after
iustification
:
although
Christes
iustice
were
imputed
vnto
vs
,
yet
were
we
not
to
be
called
iust
,
but
vnrighteous
.
But
the
scripture
calleth
vs
iust
and
holy
.
Gods
sonnes
and
heires
after
the
lauer
of
regineration
and
renouation
.
We
are
not
therefore
iustified
by
imputation
of
iustice
,
but
by
iustice
inherent
and
abiding
〈◊〉
vs
.
The
proposition
he
confirmeth
by
the
comparison
before
spoken
of
.
I
answere
.
First
,
there
be
4.
termini
:
for
it
is
one
thing
to
be
called
iust
after
Iustification
,
as
it
is
set
downe
in
the
proposition
:
and
an
other
thing
,
to
be
called
iust
after
the
lauer
of
regeneration
and
renouation
,
as
is
set
downe
in
the
assumption
.
Then
the
conclusion
followeth
not
of
the
premisses
,
no
not
though
the
same
argument
be
repeated
in
the
assumption
,
which
is
contained
in
the
proposition
,
as
namely
,
if
it
be
said
,
But
the
scripture
calleth
vs
iust
after
Iustification
.
But
this
conclusion
followeth
of
those
premisses
:
Therfore
after
Iustification
we
are
not
truly
vncleane
and
wicked
:
Which
no
professor
of
the
Gospell
denieth
.
For
after
the
iustification
of
faith
,
we
are
truly
cleane
and
godly
by
imputation
;
yea
and
moreouer
also
,
by
inherence
of
godlinesse
,
but
begun
onely
:
for
iustifying
faith
,
doth
necessarily
bring
with
it
study
of
godlinesse
.
The
8.
Argument
.
I
answere
.
Christes
Bride
,
the
Church
,
in
the
Song
of
Songs
,
confesseth
that
shee
is
black
,
&
withall
affirmeth
that
she
is
comely
,
Chap.
1.5
.
By
that
confession
shee
acknowledgeth
her
filthinesse
or
natiue
deformitie
,
that
is
,
sin
:
but
by
that
affirmation
,
she
setteth
forth
the
bewtie
receiued
from
the
Bridegroome
.
And
that
bewtie
is
double
:
the
one
of
iustice
imputed
,
the
other
of
iustice
infused
:
but
this
is
imperfect
in
this
life
.
Wherefore
Bellarmine
doth
falsly
lay
it
to
the
Gospellers
charge
,
as
if
they
thought
,
that
Christs
Bride
euen
iustified
,
should
yet
be
filthy
:
or
faire
onely
by
imputation
of
iustice
.
Moreouer
,
although
Christes
Bride
be
faire
,
euen
by
iustice
inherent
to
her
:
yee
hence
it
followeth
not
,
that
she
is
not
iustified
by
iustice
imputed
.
The
9.
Argument
.
I
answere
.
Bellarmine
doth
sophistically
oppose
,
true
&
imputed
cleannes
:
as
though
the
cleannesse
which
is
imputed
vnto
vs
by
faith
,
were
not
true
cleannesse
.
Also
by
the
rest
of
his
disputation
it
appeareth
,
that
hee
by
true
cleannesse
,
vnderstandeth
inherent
cleannesse
.
But
the
consequence
of
his
proposition
is
false
.
For
although
it
be
needfull
to
haue
an
eye
truly
and
habitually
cleane
for
to
see
withall
:
and
by
Iustification
the
heart
is
after
a
sort
prepared
to
see
God
:
yet
is
not
inherent
cleannesse
conferred
by
it
,
but
by
regeneration
.
Euen
as
by
taking
away
the
putrified
matter
,
a
wound
is
prepared
vnto
the
scarre
:
yet
is
there
no
forte
conferred
by
it
for
the
wound
to
close
togither
,
but
by
the
plaister
which
is
laid
vpon
the
wound
being
purged
of
the
putrified
matter
.
For
God
first
by
Iustification
remoueth
from
man
the
filth
and
vncleannesse
of
sin
:
then
by
regeneration
endueth
him
with
faith
&
studie
of
godlinesse
:
that
by
faith
hee
may
be
made
more
sure
of
his
Iustification
,
and
may
begin
to
see
God
:
&
by
studie
of
godlinesse
cleaue
vnto
him
,
vntil
he
come
to
see
him
fully
in
the
other
life
.
The
10.
Argument
.
Christ
suffered
,
The
Syllogisme
is
to
be
formed
thus
.
If
Christ
haue
not
sanctified
his
people
truly
,
but
onely
imputatiuely
he
suffered
in
vaine
.
But
he
suffered
not
in
vaine
.
Therefore
,
He
hath
sanctified
his
people
truly
and
not
onely
imputatiuely
.
I
answere
.
Againe
,
truly
and
imputatiuely
are
sophistically
opposed
.
Then
,
the
conclusion
is
from
the
question
.
For
the
Gospellers
confesse
,
that
Christ
hath
sanctified
his
people
,
not
onely
imputatiuely
,
but
also
habitually
:
or
,
not
onely
by
imputation
of
holinesse
,
but
also
by
reall
beginning
of
holinesse
:
for
by
his
suffering
,
he
obtained
both
benefites
of
God
.
But
yet
it
followeth
not
from
hence
,
that
the
iustification
wherwith
man
is
iustified
before
God
consisteth
not
in
imputation
of
Iustice
.
FINIS
.