That which is of real difference among persons who agree in the substance of the doctrine, may be reduced unto a very few heads; as, — (1.) There is something of this kind about the nature of faith ■whereby we are justified, with its proper object in justifying, and its use in justification. And an instance we have herein, not only of the weakness of our intellects in the apprehension of spiritual things, but also of the remainders of confusion and disorder in our minds; at least, how true it is that we know only in part, and prophesy only in part, whilst we are in this life. For whereas this faith is an act of oior minds, put forth in the way of duty to God, yet many by whom it is sincerely exercised, and that continually, are not agreed either in the nature or proper object of it. Yet is there no doubt but that some of them who differ amongst themselves about these things, have de- livered their minds free from the prepossession of prejudices and no- tions derived from other artificial reasonings imposed on them, and do really express their own conceptions as to the best and utmost of tlieir experience. And notwithstanding this difference, they do yet all of them please God in the exercise of faith, as it is their duty, and have that respect unto its proper object as secures both their justifi-
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 63
cation and salvation. And if we cannot, on this consideration, bear with, and forbear, one another in our different conceptions and ex- pressions of those conceptions about these things, it is a sign we have a great mind to be contentious, and that our confidences are built on very weak foundations. For my part, I had much rather my lot should be found among them who do really believe with the heart unto righteousness, though they are not able to give a tolerable de- finition of faith unto others, than among them who can endlessly dis- pute about it with seeming accuracy and skill, but are negligent in the exercise of it as their o^vn duty. Wherefore, some things shall be briefly spoken of in this matter, to declare my own apprehensions concerning the things mentioned, without the least design to contra- dict or oppose the conceptions of others.
(2.) There hath been a controversy more directly stated among some learned divines of the Reformed churches (for the Lutherans are unanimous on the one side), about the righteousness of Christ that is said to be imputed, unto us. For some would have this to be only his suffering of death, and the satisfaction which he made for sin thereby, and others include therein the obedience of his life also. The occasion, original, and progi'ess of this controversy, the persons by whom it hath been managed, with the writings wherein it is so, and the various ways that have been endeavoured for its reconcilia- tion, are sufficiently known unto all who have inquired into these things. Neither shall I immix myself herein, in the way of contro- versy, or in opposition unto others, though I shall freely declare my own judgment in it, so far as the consideration of the righteousness of Christ, under this distinction, is inseparable from the substance of the truth itself which I plead for.
(8.) Some difference there hath been, also, whether the righteous- ness of Christ imputed unto us, or the imputation of the righteous- ness of Christ, may be said to be the formal cause of our justification before God; wherein there appears some variety of expression among learned men, who have handled this subject in the way of controversy with the Papists. The true occasion of the differences about this expression hath been this, and no other : Those of the Roman church do constantly assert, that the righteousness whereby we are righteous before God is the formal cause of our justification ; and this right- eousness, they say, is our own inherent, personal righteousness, and not the righteousness of Christ imputed unto us: wherefore they treat of this whole controversy — namely, what is the righteousness on the account whereof we are accepted with God, or justified — under the name of the formal cause of justification; which is the subject of the second book of Bellarmine concerning justification. In opposi- tion unto them, some Protestants, contendiua- that the righteousness
64 ON JUSTIFICATION.
wherewith we are esteemed righteous before God, and accepted with him, is the righteousness of Christ imputed unto us, and not our own inherent, imperfect, personal righteousness, have done it under this in- qiuiy, — namely. What is the formal cause of our justification? which some have said to be the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, — some, the righteousness of Christ imputed. But what they de- signed herein was, not to resolve this controversy into a philosophi- cal inquiry about the nature of a formal cause, but only to prove that that truly belonged unto the righteousness of Christ in our jus- tification which the Papists ascribed unto our own, under that name. That there is an habitual, infused habit of grace, which is the formal cause of our personal, inherent righteousness, they grant : but they all deny that Ood pardons our sins, and justifies our persons, with respect unto this righteousness, as the formal cause thereof ; nay, they deny that in the justification of a sinner there either is, or can be, any inherent formal cause of it. And what they mean by a for- mal cause in our justification, is only that which gives the denomina- tion unto the subject, as the imputation of the righteousness of Christ doth to a person that he is justified.