If it be said, that final perseverancey which is so express a condi-
106 ON JUSTIFICATION.
tion of salvation in tlie new covenant, is not indeed the condition of our first justification, but it is the condition of the continuation of our justification; then they yield up their grand position, that what- ever is a necessary condition of the new covenant is a necessary condition of justification: for it is that which they call the first justification alone which we treat about. And that the continuation of our justification depends solely on the same causes with our justi- fication itself, shall be aftenvard declared. But it is not yet proved, nor ever will be, that whatever is required in them that are to be justified, is a condition whereon their justification is immediately suspended. We allow that alone to be a condition of justification which hath an influence of causality thereunto, though it be but the causality of an instrument. This we ascribe unto faith alone. And because we do so, it is pleaded that we ascribe inore in our justifica- tion unto ourselves than they do by whom we are opposed. For> we ascribe the efficiency of an instrument herein unto our own faith, when they say only that it is a condition, or " causa sine qua non," of our justification. But I judge that grave and wise men ought not to give so much to the defence of the cause they have undertaken, seeing they cannot but know indeed the contrary. For after they have given the specious name of a condition, and a " causa sine qua non," unto faith, they immediately take all other graces and works of obedience into the same state with it, and the same use in justifica- tion ; and after this seeming gold hath been cast for a while into the fire of disputation, there comes out the calf of a personal, inherent righteousness, whereby men are justified before God, " virtute foederis evangelici;" for as for the righteousness of Christ to be imputed unto us, it is gone into heaven, and they know not what is become of it.
Having given this brief declaration of the nature of justifying faith, and the acts of it (as I suppose, sufficient unto my present design), I shall not trouble myself to give an accurate definition of it. What are my thoughts concerning it, will be better understood by what hath been spoken, than by any precise definition I can give. And the truth is, definitions of justifying faith have been so multiplied by learned men, and in so great variety, and [there is] such a manifest in- consistency among some of them, that they have been of no advantage unto the truth, but occasions of new controversies and divisions, whilst every one hath laboured to defend the accuracy of his o^vn definition, when yet it may be diflSicult for a true believer to find any thing com- pliant with his own experience in them; which kind of definitions in these things I have no esteem for. I know no man that hath laboured in this argument about the nature of faith more than Dr Jackson ; yet, when he hath done all, he gives us a definition of jus- tifying faith which I know few that mil subscribe unto : yet is it, in
THE USE OF FAITH IN JUSTIFICATION. 107
the main scope of it, both pious and sound. For he tells us, " Here, at length, we may define the faith by which the just do live, to be a firm and constant adherence unto the mercies and loving-kindness of the Lord; or, generally, unto the spiritual food exhibited in his sacred word, as much better than this life itself, and all the contentments it is capable of; grounded on a taste or relish of their sweetness, wrought in the soul or heart of a man by the Spirit of Christ." Whereunto he adds, " The terms for the most part are the prophet David's; not metaphorical, as some may fancy, much less equivocal, but proper and homogeneal to the subject defined," tom. i. book iv. chap. 9. For the lively scriptural expressions of faith, by receiving of Christ, leaning on him, rolling ourselves or our burden on him, tasting how gracious the Lord is, and the like, which of late have been reproached, yea, blasphemed, by many, I may have occasion to speak of them after- ward ; as also to manifest that they convey a better understanding of the nature, work, and object of justifying faith, unto the minds of men spiritually enlightened, than the most accuraie; definitions that many pretend unto ; some whereof are destnictive and exclusive of them all.
CHAPTER III
The use of faith in justification; its especial object farther cleared.
The description before given of justifying faith doth sufficiently manifest of what use it is in justification; nor shall I in general add much unto what may be thence observed unto that purpose. But whereas this use of it hath been expressed with some variety, and several ways of it asserted inconsistent with one another, they must be considered in our passage. And I shall do it with all bre- vity possible ; for these things lead not in any part of the controver'sy about the nature of justification, but are merely subservient unto other conceptions concerning it. When men have fixed their appre- hensions about the principal matters in controversy, they express what concemeth the use of faith in an accommodation thereunto. Supposing such to be the nature of justification as they assert, it must be granted that the tise of faith therein must be what they plead for. And if what is peculiar unto any in the substance of the doctrine be disproved, they cannot deny but that their notions about the use of faith do fall unto the ground. Thus is it with all who affirm faith to be either the instrument, or the condition, or the "causa sine qua non," or the preparation and disposition of the subject, or