The words of Davenant on this passage of the apostle, being in my judgment not only sober, but weighty also, I shall transcribe them: "Hie docet apostolus queenam illajustitia sit qua nitendum coram Deo, nunirum qua? per fidem apprehenditur, at hsec imputata est: Causam etiam ostendit cur jure nostra fiat, nimirum quia nos Christi sumus et in Christo comperimur; quia igitur insiti sumus in corpus ejus et coalescimus cum illo in unam personam, ideo ejus jus- titia nostra reputatur," De Justif Habit, cap. xxxviii. For whereas some begin to interpret our being " in Christ," and being " found in him," so as to intend no more but our profession of the faith of the gospel, the faith of the catholic church in all ages concerning the mystical union of Christ and believers, is not to be blo\vn away with a few empty words and unproved assertions.
JUSTIFICATION AS DECLARED BY PAUL. 369
The answer, therefore, is full and clear unto the general exception, — namely, that the apostle rejects our legal, but not our evangelical righteousness ; for, — (1.) The apostle rejects, disclaims, disowns, nothing at all, not the one nor the other absolutely, but in compa- rison of Christ, and with respect unto the especial end of justification before God, or a righteousness in his sight. (2.) In that sense he rejects all our own righteousness; but our evangelical righteousness, in the sense pleaded for, is our own, inherent in us, performed by us. (3.) Our legal righteousness, and our evangehcal, so far as an inhe- rent righteousness is intended, are the same; and the different ends and use of the same righteousness are alone intended in that dis- tinction, so far as it hath sense in it. That which in respect of motives unto it, the ends of it, with the especial causes of its accept- ance with God, is evangelical ; in respect of its original prescription, rule, and measure, is legal. When any can instance in any act or duty, in any habit or effect of it, which is not required by that law which enjoins us to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, and mind, and our neighbour as ourselves, they shall be attended un- to. (4.) The apostle in this case rejects all the "works of righteous- ness which we have done," Tit. iii. 5 ; but our evangelical righteous- ness consisteth in the works of righteousness which we do. (5.) He disclaims all that is our own. And if the evangelical righteousness intended be our own, he sets up another in opposition unto it; and which, therefore, is not our o^vn, but as it is imputed unto us. And I shall yet add some other reasons which render this pretence useless, or show the falseness of it : —
(1.) Where the apostle doth not distinguish or limit what he speaks of, what gTound have we to distinguish or limit his assertions? " Not by works," saith he sometimes, absolutely; sometimes " ^Ae works of righteousness which we have done." " That is, not by some sort of works," say those who plead the contrary. But by what warrant? (2.) The works which they pretend to be excluded, as wherein our o^vn righteousness that is rejected doth consist, are works wrought without faith, without the aid of grace : but these are not good works, nor can any be denominated righteous from them, nor is it any righteousness that consists in them alone ; for " without faith it is impossible to please God." And to what purpose should the apostle exclude evil %vorks and hypocritical from our justification? Who ever imagined that any could be justified with respect unto them? There might have been some pretence for this gloss, had the apostle said his own works; but whereas he rejects his own righteousness, to restrain it unto such works as are not righteous, as will denominate none righteous, as are no righteousness at all, is most absurd. (3.) Works wrought in faith, if applied unto our justification, do give occasion
VOL. V. 24
S70 ON JUSTIFICATION,
unto, or include boasting, more than any others, as being better and more praiseworthy than they. (4.) The apostle elsewhere excludes from justification the works that Abraham had done, when he had been a believer many years; said the works of David, when he de- scribed the blessedness of a man by the forgiveness of sins. (5.) The state of the question which he handles in his Epistle unto the Gala- tians, was expressly about the works of them that did believe ; for he doth not dispute against the Jews, who would not be pressed in the least with his arguments, — namely, that if the inheritance were by the law, then the promise was of none effect ; and if righteousness were by the law, then did Christ die in vain ; for these things they would readily grant. But he speaks unto them that were believers, with respect unto those works which they would have joined with Christ and the gospel, in order unto justification. (6.) If this were the mind of the apostle, that he would exclude one sort of works, and assert the necessity of another unto the same end, why did he not once say so — especially considering how necessary it was that so he should do, to answer those objections against his doctrine which he himself takes notice of and returns answer unto on other grounds, without the least intimation of any such distinction?