66

66

"ralem hominem esse bonum sine operibus, et ante "opera, per solam rationem rectam. Stat veritas, "Christianum esse justum sine caritatis operibus, et "antea caritatem, per solam fidem. Quid sit ergo, quod urgent opera et dicta de operibus, cum cogantur "fateri, nullum opus esse posse, nisi prior sit efficiens "seu operans sine opere, et opus necessario prærequirere personam, quæ ipsum faciat? Cur ergo ita pugnant "contra nos, quod fidem sine operibus dicimus esse, et "facere personam justam; postea sequi opera, quæ non "faciant personam justam, sed fiant a persona justa: 66 cum fateri cogantur id ita fieri tam in natura, quam in 66 philosophia morali, seu lege?. . . . . . Vitiosissimum " igitur argumentum est; Deus reddet secundum opera, "ergo opera justificant vel damnant. Et est vere fal"lacia compositionis et divisionis. Pessime enim divi"dunt, quæ composita sunt. Siquidem illud verbum "opera est compositum, includens fidem, seu rationem "fidelem, per quam fiunt opera, &c. At ipsi dividunt "istud compositum, et sola opera, seu partem compositi, "opponunt fidei, et per opera volunt salvari. Et ipse "textus Evangelii hanc divisionem vitiosam non patitur,

quia conjungit opera cum persona, et facit tale com"positum ex operante et operibus, quod non sit dividen"dum. Non enim dicit, Reddet cuilibet operi,' sed sic "dicit, Reddet unicuique secundum opera sua.' Uni"cuique inquit, id est, qualis fuerit persona operans, "talem accipiet mercedem. Quare non opera, sed ope "rans recipiet mercedem. Operans vero est, qui ante "opus vel bonus vel malus est. Ergo argumentari ab "opere ad operantem, est a parte ad totum argumentari. "Sicut si argumenteris: Hoc animal habet duos pedes; "ergo est homo, quia duo pedes sunt pars hominis, non "totus homo.

"Si ista subtiliora sunt, quam ut intelligi possint a "vulgo, tunc manendum est in ista simplicitate, quod

Scripturæ de operibus et præmiis loquentes sunt regu"læ, secundum quas tota vita agenda sit." Opera, vol. v. p. 69.

Page 137, note (16).

Homily of the salvation of mankind.

Page 137, note (17).

The same. This Homily, to which the Article refers for a fuller explanation of the subject, is expressed in language remarkably clear and unsophistical. The object of it is to point out, in opposition to the delusive doctrine of the Church of Rome, the true meritorious cause of justification, on which the returning penitent should fix his eye, who, by transgression, has lost that state of acceptance, which he before possessed, and consequently his sure title to eternal happiness. It commences therefore with stating, that justification consists in the forgiveness of sins, which nothing can deserve, except the sacrifice of Christ; a justification, received by infants in baptism, and recovered by adults through penitence. "Insomuch that infants being baptized, "and dying in their infancy, are by this sacrifice washed "from their sins, brought to God's favour, and made "his children, and inheritors of the kingdom of Heaven. "And they, which in act or deed do sin after baptism, "when they turn again to God unfeignedly, are like"wise washed by this sacrifice from their sins, in such "sort, that there remaineth not any spot of sin, that "shall be imputed to their damnation." Thus baptism is the mean of admission into God's favour in infancy, and penitence that of a reinstatement in it, if forfeited by crime, in maturer years, "when we turn again to "God unfeignedly." But with respect to the latter case, although penitence be the mean, it is not the merit, of reconciliation; for it is said, that we are "justified by "faith only," or, in other words, by Christ only, in whose atonement, as the basis of our justification, alone

66

we trust. "And yet that faith," it is added, “doth not "shut out repentance, hope, love, dread, and the fear of "God, to be joined" (that is, requisite to be joined) “in every man, that is justified, but it shutteth them out "from the office" (ar the meritorious agency) " of jus"tifying. So that although they be all present together "in him, that is justified, yet they justify not all toge"ther;" (accomplish that to which nothing but Christ's sacrifice is competent;) "neither doth faith shut out the "justice of our good works necessarily to be done after"wards of duty towards God, (for we are most bounden "to serve God in doing deeds commanded by him in "his holy Scripture, all the days of our life,) but it ex“cludeth them, so that we may not do them to this in"tent, to be made just by doing of them. For all the "good works that we can do be imperfect, and therefore "not able to deserve our justification; but our justifica"tion doth come freely by the mere mercy of God." We here plainly perceive, that with faith the coexistence of repentance, hope, love, the dread and fear of God, is deemed necessary before we can be justified, and the performance of every good work afterwards, as qualifications, which we are required to possess, although in point of merit they contribute nothing toward our justification.

But that no mistake might arise upon this important subject, it is again explained more fully. "Nevertheless "this sentence, that we be justified by faith only, is not

so meant of them," (viz, the Fathers,)" that the said justifying faith is alone in man without repentance, "hope, charity, dread and the fear of God at any time and 66 season. Nor when they say that we be justified freely, "they mean not that we should or might afterwards be “idle, and that nothing should be required on our parts "afterward: neither mean they, that we are so to be “justified without good works, that we should do no "good works at all, like as shall be more expressed at

"large hereafter. But this saying, that we be justified "by faith only, freely and without works, is spoken for "to take away clearly all merit of our works, as being "unable to deserve our justification at God's hands, and "thereby most plainly to express the weakness of man "and the goodness of God, the great infirmity of our"selves, and the might and power of God, the imperfect“ness of our own works, and the most abundant grace "of our Saviour Christ, and therefore wholly to ascribe "the merit and deserving of our justification unto Christ "only, and his most precious blood-shedding." Can words more evidently demonstrate, that the great object of the Homily is to prove man incapable of deserving his justification, because he cannot by his own works "take away and purge his own sins, and so justify him"self," as it is subsequently expressed?

Let us not, however, suppose, that our Reformers imagined faith, when contemplated in the light of a mere mental quality, to be more capable of justifying, than any other quality of the mind. For they remarked; "The true understanding of this doctrine, we be jus"tified freely by faith without works, or that we be jus"tified by faith in Christ only, is not, that this our own "act to believe in Christ, or this our faith in Christ, "which is within us, doth justify us, and deserve our "justification unto us; (for that were to count our"selves to be justified by some act or virtue, that is within “ourselves;) but the true understanding and meaning "thereof is, that, although we hear God's word and believe "it, although we have faith, hope, charity, repentance, "dread and fear of God, within us, and do never so 66 many works thereunto; yet we must renounce the "merit of all our said virtues, of faith, hope, charity, " and all other virtues, and good deeds, which we either "have done, shall do, or can do, as things that be far "too weak and insufficient and imperfect to deserve the

66

"remission of our sins." If therefore it be asked, in what is our confidence to be placed? the answer has been already given, and is again added in expressions, which, at the same time, manifestly point out the conditional nature of reconciliation. "We must trust," it is stated, "only in God's mercy, and that sacrifice, "which our High Priest and Saviour Jesus Christ, the "Son of God, once offered upon the Cross, to obtain "thereby God's grace, and remission as well of original "sin in baptism, as of all actual sin committed by us "after our Baptism, if we truly repent, and turn unfeignedly to him again." Is it possible to doubt, that the terms of acceptance are here understood in a conditional point of view, when Christ is expressly asserted to have obtained the remission of actual sin after baptism only "if," or upon the condition that, "we truly repent, "and turn unfeignedly to him again?" Indeed, that our Reformers solely intended to exclude repentance and the conversion of the heart from the contemplation of Omniscience, as meritorious causes, and not as necessary qualifications, the whole tenor of the Homily evinces. All that they meant by the phrase, "we are justified by "faith in Christ only," (as they themselves explained it,) "is this; we put our faith in Christ, that we be justified "by him only, that we be justified by God's free mercy " and the merits of our Saviour Christ only, and by no "virtue or good works of our own, that is in us, or that "we can be able to have, or to do, for to deserve the "same; Christ himself only being the cause meritorious "thereof... ... Nevertheless because faith doth di"rectly send us to Christ for remission of our sins, and "that by faith given us of God we embrace the promise "of God's mercy and of the remission of our sins, "(which thing none other of our virtues or works pro"perly doth,) therefore the Scripture useth to say, that "faith without works doth justify."