SOCINIANISM in the Fundamental point of Justification discovered, and confuted.  
Or, an Answer to a written Pamphlet maintaining that faith is in a proper sense without a trope imputed to Believers in justification.  
Wherein The Socinian fallacies are discovered and confuted, and the true Christian Doctrine maintained, viz. That the righteousness by which true believers are justified before God is the perfect righteousness and obedience which the Lord jesus Christ God and man did perform to the Law of God, both in his life and death.  
By George Walker B▪ of Divinity, and Pastor of S. john the Evangelists Church in Watling-street London.  
A man that is an Heretic, after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself.  Tit. 3.10, 11. 
LONDON, Printed by R. O. for john Bartlet, at the Sign of the gilt Cup in Paul's Churchyard, near S. Augustins' Gate. 1641.   

To his Reverend Brethren, the Godly, Orthodox Pastors and Preachers of God's Word, in and about the City of London: the Author of this brief discovery and confutation, wisheth all increase of Grace, peace and happiness; with the abundance of blessings from God on their faithful labours.  
MY Reverend, and dear beloved Brethren, it is not unknown to divers of you, what great conflicts I have had with the adversaries of this Socinian Faction about this main fundamental point of Justification, what pains I have taken to vindicate the truth above six and twenty years ago, from the opposition and subtle Sophistry of a cunning adversary, who by the fame and opinion which men had of his great Learning, and no less Piety, had drawn many zealous Professors of Religion into some liking of his Errors. His written Pamphlets went currently through the City and were to be found in the hands of many men, in which he First utterly renounced the Law, in whole and part performed by ourselves, or any other in our stead, for the justifying of us in the sight of God. Secondly, rejected as a mere device of our late Divines, the imputation of Christ's righteousness and satisfaction, not only his habitual righteousness, but also his whole obedience, both active and passive; and affirmed it to be a thing whereof there was no testimony or proof in Scripture, nor any necessary end or use thereof. Thirdly, he professed and undertook to prove, thot Faith, even the act of believing and trusting in Christ for salvation after a general and confused manner, as a favourite of God, and not as a perfect satisfyer of his justice and just Law; is that which God accounts and accepts for righteousness to justification, in stead of righteousness and perfect obedience performed to the will and Law of God, either by Christ or ourselves. These and divers other errors which were here and there interlaced, I did at the first discover in some sermons, to be no Doctrines of sacred Truth by him digged out of the deep mines of holy Scripture▪ and newly brought to light (as his seduced Disciples proclaimed them to be) for the enlightening of the blind world in these last days of darkness and perilous times: but the old errors and Heresies of Servetus and Socinus, newly revived and raked out of hell by Arminius, Bertius, and others of their Faction. Divers of his Friends who had begun to embrace his opinion, were not a little terrified at the hearing of these things; and earnestly besought me to give him a meeting, who at that time was to me unknown by face; I condescended to their desire: but whereas I came with an heart full of tender compassion, and with Prayers in my mouth, and tears in mine eyes, laid open before him the danger of his errors, and the evil and mischief which by means of his obstinate persisting in them, might accrue to himself and those who were by him seduced and misled; he on the contrary hardened his heart to maintain per fas, et nefas, and dolo malo his foresaid erroneous opinions; showing out of Luther on the Galatians, some words which seemed to favour his error, and to exclude the righteousness of the Law from justification (which words he applied to the righteousness of the Law performed by Christ for us, and did most stiffly so urge them:) but the words which immediately followed, to wit, that God justifies us by the righteousness of his Son Jesus Christ, and by his fulfilling of the Law for us, he covered with his fingers, till I plucked the Book out of his hands, and read them to those that were present, whereby he was much confounded. Now the issue of my fair and Christian dealing with him and of my modest and mild opposing of him, without such sharpness as the cause and his carriage did require, was the same, which the gentle behaviour of Orthodox Divines towards perverse Heretics, hath commonly had in all former ages: For his Factious disciples did impute it to the weakness of my Cause, and to his arguments convincing my Conscience, that his opinions were not so dangerous as I had censured them to be: but rather unreprovable, yea and laudable. And upon my departure out of the City, immediately after to Cambridge, whither my occasions called me; in my absence they reported, that at our meeting he did so convince and confound me with strong arguments, that I humbled myself, to him confessed my ignorance, embraced his opinions, and promised to hold and maintain them till death. This wicked and Jesuitical policy which they used to retain divers of his disciples, who were ready to fall off from him; & to recall those who were fallen off already, did produce a quite contrary effect: For when I returned again to the City, and was saluted as a Socinian onvert, and informed of their false reports & lying forgeries; I was inflamed with a double desire to vindicate both the truth of God, and mine own reputation from their slanderous aspersions; and hereupon I betook myself to handle and expound that place of Scripture, Rom. 5.17, 18, 19 which doth most pithily and plainly set forth the Doctrine of Justification by the communion of Christ's righteousness and obedience. And because I discerned in mine Adversaries a perverse Heretical spirit, and that they had made lies their refuge, and did sin being condemned of themselves; I did with all zeal confute their errors, lay open the deadly poison and malignity of them, and clothe them with such reproachful titles as divers grave and learned Divines of the best reformed Churches had before shaped and fitted to them. I proved them to be profane and abominable Doctrine, 
Epistolica Collatio cum Bertio, pag 1. & 2.  even the damned Heresy of Servetus and Socinus, as Sibrandus Lubertus had before styled them. And that their denying of the reciprocal imputation of Christ's righteousness and satisfaction to the faithful, and of their sins to Christ, was impiety and blasphemy, as learned Beza calls it. Though by this means my adversaries were enraged, 
Lib. con. Anonymum.  and did suggest into the ears and minds of many godly people in the City, to whom as yet I was unknown, that I was a green headed novice carried away with anger and passion, rather than zeal: yet divers of you, my learned Brethren, did judge otherwise of me, and my labours; and God blessed them, and made them and your assistance of me therein, powerful and effectual to the quelling of those errors, and to the suppressing of them at that time, by putting the Author of them to silence. And now for 20. years, and more, they have been buried in oblivion, until this new Adversary hath raked them up, as coals out of ashes, and out of a surreptitious Book (which the First Adversary had composed, 
Wotton de Reconciliatione.  Printed beyond the Seas, and procured to be brought in by stealth, and sold underhand) did bring them into the pulpit, and from thence with a tumultuous noise proclaimed them most confidently. Now because I have sufficiently acted my part heretofore in opposing these errors; and also divers of you have entered into the lists, and with zeal and courage have begun to fight against the reviver of them, I should have refrained myself from further meddling: but because this common adversary hath singled me out, and provoked me by a proud challenge, to answer his writings. I have once more undertaken to answer his challenge, which Answer being sent to him privately, might there have rested, if his most reproachful and railing reply, full of lies, absurdities, contradictions, blasphemies, and intolerable scoffs and reproaches, had not forced me to send it abroad into the world to justify itself from the railing and slanderous clamours which he and his disciples, and factious followers have raised against it, I here commend it to your grave censure, in hope that the goodness of the cause which herein I maintain, will cover mine infirmities, and will stir you up to perfect and finish what I have begun. The Truth for which you shall fight is strong, and will prevail; all power, might, glory and victory is Gods, for whose cause you stand; and our Lord Jesus Christ, on whose perfect righteousness you strive to keep the Crown, hath all power given him in heaven and in earth. To this God eternal and omnipotent, and to his eternal Son our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and to the most holy and blessed Spirit, three persons in one God, I commend you and your holy and faithful labours in my daily Prayers, humbly supplicating to his Majesty for this Grace, that I may continue till death  
Your fellow Soldier and labourer in his Vineyard GEORGE WALKER.   

THE ANSWERERS' PREFACE To the first Chapter.  
THE question which is propounded and the state and drift thereof laid down in this first Chapter, is (in the Authors own words) this, whether the faith of him that truly believes, or the righteousness of CHRIST be imputed for righteousness in the act of justification. In this question the imputing of Faith is opposed to the imputing of Christ's righteousness, for righteousness to justification, which no Orthodox Christian durst attends to do at any time: for the godly learned in the Scriptures, and acquainted with the writings of Orthodox divines both ancient and Modern from the time of the Apostles to this day, do always join Faith with Christ's righteousness in the act of justification, and do never account them such opposites as do the one exclude the other, and cannot both stand together, and be reputed for righteousness to believers in justification. Though the Apostle doth oppose justification by faith, to justification by works of the Law performed by every man in his own person, as two opposites which cannot stand together in GOD'S justification of sinners; And this all true Christians receive, embrace, and hold for a solid truth, and a fundamental article of Christian Religion: Yet they abhor and detest the opposing of Faith, and Christ's righteousness in GOD'S imputing of righteousness to believers; and do with an unanimous consent teach, that in this justifying act of GOD, Christ's righteousness of which all true believers have communion, is that which GOD in a proper sense is said to accept, and repute for righteousness; and Faith as it receives and applies Christ's righteousness, is said to be imputed, but in an improper speech; the name of the act being used to signify the object, which we see frequently in Scripture, as for example, Gal. 3.2.25. where the name (Faith) is used to signify the thing believed, that is, the doctrine of the Gospel, and Coloss. 1.5. where the name [Hope] is used, to signify the thing hoped for; that is, the inheritance and reward laid up for us in Heaven, of which kind many more instances may be produced. But as for them who have called into controversy the imputation of Christ's righteousness; and having propounded this question, whether Faith or the righteousness of Christ is imputed in the act of justification, have set up Faith and thrust out Christ's righteousness, they have ever been branded by all true Churches of Christ for pestilent Heretics, and enemies of GOD'S saving truth. The first mover of this question was one Petrus Abilardus, a pestilent and blasphemous Heretic, who being full of the spirit of pride and error, did in disputing and writing, deny the communion of Christ's perfect satisfaction, obedience and righteousness; and the imputation of them for righteousness in the justification of true believers. This filthy wretch was gelded for corrupting and defiling of a Maid, and for his blasphemous heresies, Saint Bernard, and the Bishops of France caused him to be excommunicated and condemned for an Heretic, and his blasphemous books to be burned publicly.  
The next instrument of the Devil after him mentioned in former Histories was Servetus that blasphemous Heretic, who for heresies and blasphemies which he dispersed as a vagabond in several Countries, in divers books, was by Master Calvin discovered & apprehended at Geneva, condemned and burned, and died blaspheming Christ most horribly, as Beza testifieth, in vita Calvini.  
The third notorious Heretic who in writing and books published, did maintain this wicked error, and by his Disciples dispersed it in Transilvania, Polonia, and other adjoining Countries, was Faustus Socinus, whose blasphemous faction and sect still continueth, and infesteth those Countries at this day.  
The fourth Grand Master and propagatour of this heresy, who brought it into Holland nearer unto us was Arminius; He did first secretly teach and instill it into the ears and hearts of many disciples; and afterwards did openly profess it, as we read in his Epistle ad Hyppolytum de collibus, wherein he confesseth that he held, Faith to be imputed for righteousness to justification, not in a metonymical, but in a proper sense: And although this and other errors held by him are condemned in the late Synod of Dort: yet his disciples the Remonstrants do obstinately persist in this error, though some of that sect, would seem to decline and disclaim it.  
The fifth perverse publisher of this heresy, who first openly professed it in England, and in manuscript Pamphlets and Printed Books, dispersed it in London, and from thence into several places of the Country about 28. years ago, was Anthony Wotton, who being discovered and hotly opposed by the Author of this answer was by his zeal, and the industry of some other Preachers in London quickly quelled, and his opinion suppressed: but yet because he would uphold a secret faction, he wrote a book in Latin, wherein he seemed to retract, or rather to run from some desperate opinions and speeches, which are to be seen in his private manuscripts given by him from hand to hand, and formerly dispersed. For whereas in divers of them he professeth in plain words, his dissent from all our Orthodox Divines, which had been before written of Justification, saying, I am enforced to descent from them all; He in that book laboured to make a show of consent with them, and did wrest some of their doubtful speeches to countenance his Socinianism. This book entitled De Reconciliatione some of his fiery factious, and zealous disciples with much difficulty, after it was rejected at Leiden and Amsterdam, procured it to be printed at their own cost, brought over the Copies and sold them under hand in London. And out of it (we may justly suspect, that this Scribbler and babbler hath stolen the most part of his conclusions, arguments and distinctions, for I am informed that he is a great admirer of that book, and of the Author also. So that if this Socinian john will and must needs have, and usurp that high Title which our Saviour gave to john the Baptist, and will be called (as his disciples stick not to style him) the shining light of the Church in these last days: Surely he is but a borrowed light or rather a wand'ring light, like that ignis fatuus which in dark nights leadeth the followers into ditches, logs, praecipces, and break-neck downfalls, as the Philosophers write of it.  
For the recalling of the ignorant who are by him seduced, for the confounding of them who are by him perverted, and for the stopping of the foul lying, and slanderous mouths of those factious sectaries his followers, of a scared conscience, who as they have his person in high admiration, so also are bold to revise and defame all godly and learned Preachers, who oppose his errors and preach against them. I will spend a few spare hours to sift his written discourse, at least so much of it as is come to my hands; hoping by evidence of truth, plain Scriptures, solid reasons, and testimonies of the best writers, to make it manifest to GOD'S people, that he is a mere Socinian Sophister, and dangerous seducer, and that his discourse is an hotch potch of pestilent errors, and full of ●e●giversations, contradictions, and perverse wrestle of Scriptures, and of the words and writings both of Ancient and modern Divines. And that neither he himself▪ nor his clamorous disciples may have the least colour, or occasion to complain, that I have not dealt fairly with him. I will first set down his Socinianism, word for word out of his own writings, without concealing any word or sentence. And to every part thereof I will oppose the contrary doctrine of Christ under the name of Christianisme. And first I begin with his preface, with which he begins his first Chapter.  

The Preface to Socinianism.  
FOr the clear understanding of the state and drift of the question, something would be premised, which for the evidence sake might be privileddg and exempted, from passing under much dispute and contradiction: yet if any thing be not sufficiently prepared for assent in the brief proposal of it, the ensuing discourse will labour to reconcile the disproportion; And in the progress make satisfaction for what it shall receive upon courtesy in the beginning.   

The Answer to the Preface.  
THis short Preface doth by the affected stile, and phrase of it discover the Author to be one, who hath studied to preach himself more than Christ, and to set forth his own absurd conceits in the enticing words of carnal wisdom, not to declare the Testimony of GOD in Apostolical plainness, nor in demonstration of the Spirit, 
1 Cor. 2.12.  and of power as Saint Paul did. The lofty words, and short cut speech which he useth here, and in this ensuing discourse, are so far beyond the capacity of his rude unlearned followers, that his wooden pulpit shall assoon as they understand them, unless he first teach them his Grammatical skill, before he admit them into his Theological auditory. But belike he knows the ready way to catch the wavering, unstable, and giddy multitude, those wandering Stars of these last times, who are like clouds without water▪ carried about with winds of every new and strange Doctrine, and of all people are the fittest to be his disciples. For the mouth which speaketh great swelling words, is admired of them who have men's persons in admiration; and far fetched phrases are fine fooleries to tickle the itching ears, and win the hearts of such as desire to seem and be counted something, when indeed they are nothing but bubbles, and empty bladders, who as they admire every bewitching Simon Magus, as the great power of GOD, and extol to the Skies his most cursed errors: So they abhor and revile all sincere and godly Preachers, rebukers of their madness, blaspheme GOD'S word in their mouths, and speak evil of the good things, which they understand not, until in the gainsaying of Core they utterly perish.  
Moreover, to give him his due, he appears to me in his stile and phrase, a very skilful Artist in his own way, as cunning as the subtle Serpent, in clothing and trimming his strange Doctrines, with strange conceited words fited to them, by which they who affect strange novelties, may easily be alured and ensnared. But when the children of truth hunt him by the smell, and strong savours of his rankling errors (which stink as well as fret like an eating Cancer) and are ready to catch him; he doth by his inkhorn terms so obscure and darken his meaning, that only they who have a sharp, quick and strong sight, can lay fast and sure hold on him. We may well resemble him to the crafty fish Sepia of which we read, that when she is pursued and ready to be taken, she spueth forth a black ink wherewith she darkneth the waters round about, and so escapes away in thick darkness, through which she cannot be seen and discerned.  
But to omit his stile, and to come to the matter of his preface, it is a promise and pretence of somewhat by him premised, which shall serve for the clear understanding of the state of the question, and for evidence sake might be privileged, from passing under much dispute and contradiction; but hoc aliquid nihil est, this something is nothing, we find no performance of promise nor truth, in what he pretendeth; neither his brief proposal, nor his ensuing discourse gives us any satisfaction; neither can his beginning, progress, or ending receive from us any thing upon courtesy. For if any come to us and bring not the true Doctrine of Christ, but damnable Socinianism, error, and heresy, we must not show so much courtesy, as to bid him God speed. 2 john 10.   

The Analysis of his first Chapter in general.  
THe first Chapter of his Socinianism, which he calls his premising of somewhat for clear underderstanding of the state, and drift of the question, consists of six parts. In the first part he goeth about to rehearse the several significations of the words justification and justifying, and to determine in what sense the words are used in those Scriptures, which speak of the justification of a sinner before GOD.  
In the second he lays down 4. Propositions, which he takes for granted on all hands, and by none denied but Heretics.  
In the third he comes to speak of imputation of righteousness, for justification, or rather of somewhat which God in the act of every man's justification doth impute, for or instead of righteousness, to invest him in all privileges of a man perfectly righteous; and withal to show the reason of this imputation, and afterward to determine that Faith is that somewhat imputed.  
In the fourth part he shows first negatively, how Faith is not imputed, and excludes out of his question five severally quaeres. Secondly affirmatively, that Faith (as he holds it to be imputed) is opposed to the righteousness of Christ, as to a competitor which receives the repulse.  
In the fifth part (to cover the shame and scandal of his Heretical opinion) he doth admit Christ's righteousness into part of the honour for peace, and fashion sake, as Esau was admitted unto some vanishing participation▪ of some temporary blessings with jacob. For he forgeth a strange and false kind of imaginary imputation of Christ's righteousness, unto which he laboureth to wrest the words of Luther, Calvin, and the Homilies and Articles of our English Church.  
In the last part he undertaketh to show more light, that it may be seen to the bottom clearly, what he affirms and what he denies in the question propounded; The particulars whereof we shall see when I come to the answer of them. But first I will begin with the first part, and will proceed to answer the rest in order.   

Socinianism.  
THat the terms of Justifying, 
1 Part.  Justification, etc. are not to be taken in this question, (nor in any other that are usually moved about the Justification of a sinner) either 1. Physico sensu, in a Physical sense; as if Justification signified to make just with any habitual, actual, or any positive, or inhaerent righteousness. 2. Sensu forensi proprie dicto, in a juridical, or judiciary sense, properly so called, when the Judge hath only a subordinate or derived power of judging, and is bound by oath, or otherwise, to give sentence according to the rule of the Law; as to justify were to pronounce a man just▪ or to absolve him from punishment, according to the strict terms or rules of that Law whereof he was accused, as a transgressor, though this sense be received, and admitted by many. But 3. and lastly, Sensu forensi improprie dicto, in a judiciary sense less properly, and usually so called. viz. Where he that sits Judge, being supreme Magistrate, hath an Independency, and Sovereignty of power, to moderate, and dispense with the Law, as reason and equity shall require: So that justifying in this question, imports the discharging or absolving of a man from the guilt, blame, and punishment of those things, whereof he is or might justly be accused; not because he is clear of such things, or justifiable according to the letter and strictness of the Law, (for then he could not be justly accused) But because the Judge having a sufficient, and lawful Sovereignty of power, is willing upon sufficient, and weighty consideration, known unto himself, to remit the penalty of the Law, and to deliver and discharge him, as if he were an Innocent, and righteous man. As for that Physical sense of making just by inhaerent righteousness, though Bellarmine and his Angels, earnestly contend for it, yet till the Scriptures be brought low, and Etymology exalted above them; till use and custom of speaking, deliver up their Kingdom into the Cardinal's hand; that sense must no way be acknowledged, or received, in this dispute: yet, (to give reason and right, even unto those that demand that which is unreasonable) Its true, that GOD, in, and upon a man's Justification begins to justify him Physically, that is to infuse habitual, and inhaerent righteousness into him. But here the Scriptures, and the Cardinal, are as far out in terms, as in 1000 other things they are in substance and matter: That which he will needs call Justification, the Scripture will as peremptorily call Sanctification. Concerning that other sense of judiciary Justification, usually so called; wherein the judge, or justifier, proceeds upon legal grounds, to acquit, and absolve the party guilty, and accused, neither can this be taken in the question propounded, except the Scripture be forsaken, because the Scripture constantly speaks of this act of GOD, justifying a sinner, not as of such an act whereby he will either make him, or pronounce him legally Just, or declare him not to have offended the Law, and hereupon justify him, but as of such an act whereby he freely forgives him all that he hath done against the Law, and acquits him from all blame, and punishment due by the Law, for such offences: So that in that very act of GOD, by which he justifies a sinner, as there is a discharge from all punishment due unto sin, so there is a profession withal, or plain intimation of the guiltiness of the person, now to be justified, according to the Law, and that he is not acquitted, or discharged, upon any consideration that can be pleaded for him according to the Law: but that consideration upon which GOD proceeds to justify him is of another order: the consideration of somewhat done for him in this case, to relieve him out of the course or order and appointment of the Law. He whose Justification stands (whether in whole or in part, it's not material here) in the forgiveness of sin, can in no construction be said to be justified according to the Law, because the Law knows no forgiveness of sin, neither is there any rule for any such thing, nor the least intimation of so much as any possibility of any such thing there. The Law speaks of the curse, death, and condemnation of a sinner; but for the Justification of a sinner, it neither takes knowledge nor gives any hope thereof.   

Christianisme.  
IN this first part here are only three significations of the word Justification, and justifying, rehearsed. The first is Natural, or Physical; that is, making a man just with habitual inhaerent righteousness.  
The second is a judiciary sense, properly so called, when a subordinate judge doth according to the strict terms, and rules of the Law, acquit, and absolve a man from punishment (which is due by the Law to him being a transgressor) and doth pronounce him just.  
The third is a judiciary sense, less properly so called, when a supreme judge, by sovereignty of power, doth acquit and absolve a man, and remit the penalty of the Law, which he deserves, upon weighty consideration, known to himself, and doth deliver him, and discharge him, as if he were an innocent, and righteous man.  
The first Physical sense, he rejects, and plays upon Bellarmine, for retaining, and using the word justify, in that sense: And yet he himself immediately acknowledgeth, that GOD upon a man's justification, begins to justify him Physically, by infusing into him habitual, and inhaerent righteousness: But this (he saith) is in Scripture called Sanctification.  
The second sense he also disclaims, and in this dispute embraceth the third sense, to wit, that justification signifies GOD'S forgiving a man freely all that he hath done against the Law; and his acquitting, and discharging of a man from the guilt, and punishment, due by the Law, for such offences; not for any consideration which can be pleaded for him, according to the Law, but for somewhat done for him in this case, to relieve him out of the course, order, and appointment of the Law: His reason why he embraceth this sense, is because he conceives justification to stand in forgiveness of sin, which belongs to the Law in no respect at all.  
In all this part, and passage, I find not one particle of solid truth, but many gross errors, and falsehoods; for of all the three significations, of the word justify, by him here named, only the first may pass in some tolerable construction, but not in his sense: for though GOD in the creation made our first Parents after his own Image and similitude, in perfect righteousness, endued with a natural, and habitual uprightness, conformable to his revealed will, and Law; and in this respect may be said to have justified, that is, made them upright, as the wise Preacher saith, Eccles. 7.29. GOD made man upright: Yet whether this act of creation was a Physical act of GOD, or rather a voluntary act of his will & of his wisdom, and counsel, and so may be called Artificial, is something disputable. As for the framing and making of the man Christ, the blessed seed, by the power of the holy Ghost, pure, holy, upright, and just from his first conception; this was a spiritual and supernatural act, and the holiness and righteousness was a supernatural gift given from above, not introduced by natural generation, nor raised from natural principles. That making of men righteous in their sanctification, which Bellarmine speaks of, is not justification in a natural, but in a spiritual sense▪ For the spirit of GOD worketh those habits, and graces of holiness in men, whom GOD hath begotten of his own will in the word of truth. And therefore when Bellarmine or Goodwin, or any other call this a Physical justifying, they err grossly. For if it be any justification at all, it is spiritual and moral. But for my part, I find not that by the Spirit of GOD in Scripture, any habitual holiness of men begun in this life, is called righteousness simply in itself. But as the Saints regenerate, and faithful are called righteous in respect of their communion with Christ, and participation of his righteousness: So their sanctity or habitual holiness, is called righteousness, not simply in itself, but by conjunction with the righteousness of Christ, the head of the body: which as it justifies them by constituting and making them righteous: so also it justifies their rectified holy actions, which they perform by the mo●ions of the spirit, and by Faith in Christ, (as learned Beza well observed, and truth affirmeth. Lib. contra Anonymum,) and their sanctification cannot be called justification, but by reason of conjunction with justification in the same person. For if it were possible for a sinful man to be made perfectly holy, and conformable to GOD'S Law, in his own person: yet having formerly transgressed the Law, and failed in many things; ●his n●w conformity to the Law, by reason of those sins, and failings will prove a lame righteousness, not fit to satisfy the Law, and to be accepted for perfect righteousness to justification, because if a man keep the whole Law, and fail in one point, he is guilty of all. jam. 2, 10. No righteousness can justify, which is not a perfect obedience, and conformity of the whole man, to the whole, law in his whole life, from the beginning to the end. Secondly, that signification of the word justification, which he calls a judiciary sense, properly so called, is, (as he describes it) a foolish fiction of his own brain: for never did any but a madman dream of justifying sinners by a subordinate Judge, absolving them from punishment, according to the strict terms, and rules of the Law; for that were to give a false sentence, and to pronounce a man free from all transgression of the Law, and a perfect fulfiller of it in his own person. All our learned, and judicious Divines, do hold that the full satisfaction and obedience of CHRIST being communicated, and imputed to true believers, they are absolved, and have their sins pardoned, and are counted, and judged righteous by GOD: as men who have satisfied the justice, and just Law of GOD, by CHRIST their head, and surety, not in their own persons, which the Law in strict terms requires, & this is justification in the judiciary sense, which is approved by the learned.  
Thirdly, that judiciary sense, improperly so called, which he approves, & allows in this dispute, is an Heretical, and Socinian conceit; for so long as GOD the supreme judge of all the world, is immutable, and infinite in justice, he neither can, nor will dispense with his eternal just Law, in any jot, or tittle, but will have it perfectly fulfilled either by ourselves or some sufficient surety in our behalf, and will forgive no sinner, without a full suffering, and satisfaction, made to the Law in the same kind which the law requires, though not in every man's person; and this full satisfaction must be communicated to every one, and made his own by union, with CHRIST his head; before that GOD will judge or account him righteous, and pardon all his sins. To imagine a somewhat, in consideration whereof GOD forgives sinners, and accepts them as if they were righteous; besides, the full satisfaction of GOD'S Justice, and just law, is to conceive GOD to be mutable, and not the same in his infinite justice at all times; and to affirm it, is Samosatenian, and Socinian Blasphemy.  
Fourthly, in arguing against the second sense by him propounded, he wrestles with his own shadow, and fights against a fiction of his own brain, and discovers his blindness, and ignorance of the dictinction, and difference between Legal, and Evangelicall justification, and righteousness: Legal righteousness is the condition of the first covenant of works, and consists in perfect conformity, and obedience to the law, performed by every man in his own person, and no man can be legally justified but by his own personal righteousness. Evangelicall righteousness, is CHRIST'S perfect righteousness, and fulfilling of the Law in the behalf of all the elect and faithful: It was not the Law, nor our works of the Law, which moved GOD to give CHRIST to be our surety and redeemer; but he of his own free love and bounty gave Christ, and Christ the Son of GOD out of his love, humbled himself to become man, and to fulfil the law for us. Neither do we obtain Communion of Christ's satisfaction and righteousness, by the works of the Law; but by the Gospel preached & believed as the Apostle teacheth, Gal. 3.2. And therefore though Christ his righteousness be a perfect fulfilling of all obedience, which the law requires of man; & GOD did exact of him every farthing, of our debt, both in active, and passive obedience, and in respect of the matter and substance, his satisfaction may be called after a sort legal, and is so called by Luther: yet as it was for us, not for himself, and performed by him our head, not by every one of us in our own persons, and is received and applied by Faith, not by our works of the Law, and is brought unto us by the Gospel, not by the Law, and is given to us freely by GOD'S grace, not merited or procured by any thing in ourselves; so it is not legal but Evangelicall, and GOD'S justifying of us, and counting us righteous by it, is not a proceeding upon legal grounds, nor pronouncing us legally just, as this calumniator doth, either foolishly imagine, or falsely slander and misreport our Doctrine.  
Fiftly in arguing for his own false, and forged sense of the word Justification, he hath three reasons all which are for us, and prove our Doctrine not his opinion. For if this make a sense of the word Justification, good, because it doth intimate the former guiltiness of him that is justified, as well as it doth discharge him from all punishment, (which is his first reason) then is our Doctrine of justification by imputation of Christ's satisfaction for all our sins, very good and sound, for it intimates a guiltiness in him who is to be justified, as well as a discharge from punishment. Secondly we do not plead for our justification, any consideration according to the Law, that is, we do not plead our own innocency, nor satisfaction and righteousness performed in our own persons; but we plead more than somewhat done for us, even all Christ's obedience active and passive, by GOD'S free grace communicated to us, not obtained, or merited by our works of the law. Thirdly though the law justifies no sinner, but threatens the curse, death▪ and condemnation as the due reward of the transgressors of it: Yet it justifies all who are free from all sins committed against it, and are made righteous by the perfect fulfilling of it to the utmost. And therefore when the Gospel hath brought us to the Communion of Christ's full satisfaction, by which we are made free from all sin, and perfect fulfillers of the law in him our head; as GOD doth forgive us our sins, and counts us righteous: so the law is no more against us, 1 Tim. 1.9. but is witness for us, that in Christ we are worthy of remission and justification. By this are manifest the gross errors, and absurdities which he uttereth in this first part of his preparative Chapter.  
But that his ignorance in the Doctrine of justification, may more fully appear, I will lay down the several significations of the words, justification, and justifying, wherein the Spirit of God doth use them in the holy Scriptures.  
First the word justify, and justification signify, making men righteous, or constituting or setting them in the state of righteousness. This signification is justified by several testimonies of Scripture, as Rom. 5.19. Where many are said to be made, or constituted righteous by the obedience of Christ, even as by Adam's disobedience many were made sinners, and 1 Cor. 1.30. and 2 Cor. 5.21. Where Christ is said to be made unto us righteousness, and we are said to be made the righteousness of God in him. And Rom. 3.24. and 4, 5. Where we are said to be justified freely by his grace, through the redemption which is in Christ. And God is said to justify the ungodly, which cannot be meant of counting judging, and pronouncing, but of making them righteous by the Communion of Christ's righteousness. For to justify the wicked by judging and pronouncing them righteous, without making them such, is ao●mination to the LORD, Prov. 17.15. And in this sense Preachers of GOD'S Word are, as instruments under GOD, said to justify many by bringing them unto righteousness, and are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 justifiers, Dan. 12.3. This justifying we may very fitly call radical, or fundamental justification. This Luther and other learned Divines call actionem individuam, because it is GOD'S action of communicating Christ's righteousness in a moment, and not by degrees successively, and in it men are mere patients, and do not work with GOD, no more than Adam did in GOD'S first creating of him upright, in his Image: Even regenerate Infants may thus be justified, and are justified before they actually believe.  
Secondly the word justify, signifieth GOD'S justifying of men by Faith, that is, his counting and reputing them righteous, upon their actual believing, and his enableing them to feel themselves partakers of the righteousness of Christ, and to enjoy it by Faith, in this sense the word is used, Rom. 4. Where GOD is said to justify us by imputing righteousness, and counting Faith for righteousness, that is, counting a true believer a righteous person. And thus the word is to be taken, where we are said to be justified by Faith, without the works of the Law. The Apostle doth much urge, and press this justification, Rome▪ 4 and Gal. 3. because though in this taken actively, GOD only acteth: yet taken passively as it is received of us, and we by Faith feel and discern in what account we are with GOD, and by believing enjoy Christ's satisfaction for remission of sins, and for righteousness, we may be said to work with GOD, by way of receiving, as a begging hand doth in receiving gifts freely given, and put into it. This justifying doth necessarily presuppose the former, and doth assure us of it. For the just GOD, whose judgement is according to truth, cannot repute us righteous, till we have communion of Christ's righteousness, and be thereby truly righteous. And this Justification Divines call imputative. It springs from the former as from the root, and is builded on it as on the foundation.  
Thirdly, this word justify, signifies a manifesting and declaring of men to be righteous and justified, and that three ways. First in foro conscientiae, in the court, or judgement of our own conscience, when a man being troubled in his conscience with the sight of his sins, and his want of righteousness, after humble prayer, and penitent seeking, receives either the inward testimony of the Spirit, and is enlightened by GOD, to see that he is in the state of righteousness absolved and justified; or by inward sense of his sanctification, Faith, and other graces proper to the righteous justified; is declared and made manifest to his own conscience, that he is justified and righteous, and hath all his sins pardoned, and is accepted of GOD for a righteous man. This is that which we are taught by Christ to pray for in that petition, forgive us our debts or trespasses, that is, pacify and clear our consciences, by manifesting to us that we are justified, and have remission of all our sins by thy free grace, and by communion of Christ's full satisfaction; and thus we are to understand the word, wheresoever it is opposed to the accusations of Satan, and the horrors and troubles of conscience, as a remedy against them, as Rome▪ 8.33.  
Secondly it signifies declaring, and proving men righteous in foro humano, in the judgement and sight of men openly, and that by outward fruits of Faith, and external works of righteousness, and holiness. When GOD enableing us, and moving us to do such works, and bring forth such fruits as are by his word continually pronounced, and proclaimed to be righteous, and holy works and evidences of justification, doth thus declare, and prove us to be faithful and righteous, he is said to justify us before men. In this sense the word is used, job 13.18. where job saith that if he may plead before GOD the integrity of his life, he knoweth he shall be justified: as afterward he did cap. 31. and was thereby declared to be righteous, and so justified. And jam. 2.21. where it is 〈◊〉 that Abraham was justified by works, that is, declared to be a righteous man.  
Thirdly it signifies judging, and declaring men to be persons justified, and righteous in the universal judgement at the last day, when the LORD Christ shall by the evidence of their works of love and charity, done to him in his members, declare them to be his faithful servants, and children of his Father, justified by the communion of his righteousness, and in him worthy of eternal life; and also adjudge them unto the inheritance of the kingdom of Glory. In this sense the word is used, Rom. 5.16.18. where it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justification of life, and is opposed to the sentence of everlasting condemnation. These are all the significations of the word (justify) recorded in the Scriptures; And this great promiser here showeth himself ignorant of them all: and therefore how little satisfaction he hath given to any, but such fools as delight to fill themselves with husks, let the learned judge.   

Socinianism.  

2 Part.  THat jesus Christ the natural son of GOD, and supernatural son of the Virgin Marie, ran a race of obedience with the Law, (as well Ceremonial as Moral) and held out with every letter, jot and title of it, as far as it any ways concerned him, dureing the whole continuance of his life in the flesh; no man's thoughts ever rose up to deny; but those that denied him the best of his being, (I mean his Godhead) which of you can convince me of sin? was his challenge to the nation of the jews, whilst he was yet on earth, john 8.46. And remains through all ages, as a challenge to the whole World. He that can cast the least aspersion of sin upon Christ, shall shake the foundation of the peace and safety of the Church.  
That this Christ offered himself as a Lamb, without spot in sacrifice upon the Cross, to make an atonement for the World, and to purge the sins of it, I know no spirit at this day abroad in the world that denies, but that which wrought in Socinus formerly, and still works in those that are baptised into the same spirit of error with him.  
I conceive it to be a truth of greater authority amongst us, then to meet with contradiction from any, that jesus Christ is the sole entire meritorious cause of every man's justification, that is justified by GOD; or that that righteousness or absolution from sin, and condemnation which is given to every man in his justification, is somewhat, yea a principal part of that great purchase, which Christ hath made for the world: even as GOD for Christ's sake freely forgave you. Forgiveness of sins, or justification is from GOD for Christ's sake, he is worthy to be gratified or honoured by GOD, with the justification of those that believe in him.  
It's a truth which hath every man's judgement concurrent with it, that Faith is the condition appointed by GOD, and required on man's part, to bring him into communion and fellowship of that justification, and redemption which Christ hath purchased for the children of men, and that without believing no man can have part, or fellowship in that great and blessed business.   

Christianisme.  
IN this second part he doth promise four several propositions, which he conceives to be out of question, and undeniable. By the first proposition he makes a fair show in words, but his heart is far removed, and his meaning is wicked, and so will appear, if we observe how he in another place afterwards explains himself. First though he seems to acknowledge Christ to be GOD, yet he takes away the use of his being, GOD as well as man in the work of our redemption. For if GOD by his supreme sovereign power can dispense with the law of his justice, and instead of Christ's full satisfaction made for us to the law, and imputed to us, and made ours, can and doth accept our weak Faith for the perfect righteousness of the Law; what use is there of Christ's being GOD in our nature? For all Orthodox Divines do give this reason, why it was necessary that Christ should be GOD in our nature. viz. That his suffering and righteousness performed in our nature, might be of value to justify all the sons of men, who have communion of them, and to whom they are imputed. This communion and imputation while he denyeth, he takes away the use of Christ's being GOD in our nature.  
Secondly, in affirming that Christ obeyed the whole Law in every letter, jot, and title, he doth mock, and delude his hearers, and readers; for he doth not hold, that he fulfilled the Law only for us, but primarily for himself; his words imply so much, for he saith, he obeyed the Law, as far as concerned himself, while he continued in the flesh: and he dorh hereafter roundly affirm, that Christ was bound to fulfil the Law for himself, which is in effect, a denying of his eternal Godhead: for if he be GOD, infinite in glory, and excellency, his Godhead must needs exempt the Manhood personally united to it from all bondage of the Law, and make it worthy of glory at GOD'S right hand, from the first assumption of it. He continued in the flesh, and obeyed the Law, only for us without all doubt, as the Prophet foretold, Esa. 9.6. saying, To us a Child is borne, and to us a Son is given.  
Thirdly, as he denies the satisfaction of Christ to be imputed to us, so he denies the imputation of our sins to Christ; and that very closely, and cunningly, under colour of that challenge which Christ made to the jews, which of you can convince me of sin? For our Saviour speaks of sin committed by himself, and such aspersion none can say upon him; But all our iniquities GOD laid upon him, and he bore all our sins, Esa. 53. And was made sin for us, 2 Cor. 5, 21. and to cast this aspersion of all our sins on him, is a sure foundation of the peace, and safety of the Church.  
In the second proposition, he doth most notoriously aequivocate, and play the Hypocrite; First in that he seems to acknowledge the sacrifice of Christ to be an atonement, and satisfaction for the world, and a propitiatory sacrifice for the sin of it. Secondly, in that he denyeth his Lord, and Master Socinus, and calls the Spirit which wrought in him a Spirit of error; whereas indeed he himself is lead by the same Spirit, and doth deny Christ to be the propitiatory sacrifice for our sins, as far as Socinus ever did: For in a propitiatory sacrifice, offered to purge sin, and to make atonement, there were three necessary requisits: First, the thing offered, must be of his own proper goods, for whom it was offered, so the Law required, and therefore David durst not offer for his sin, that which was not his own, Purchased with his money, 2. Sam. 24, 24. Secondly, the owner, whose expiatory sacrifice it was, did lay his hand upon the head of the Beast which was to be offered, and thereby in a type imposed all his sin, and guilt upon it, so that it became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his sin, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his guilt, Levit 5, 6. and Exod. 30.10. and did bear upon it all his sins, Leu. 16.22. Thirdly, this sacrifice offered up by the Priest in that manner which GOD praescribed in the Law, GOD accepted as a propitiation for him, it was set on his score, and covered his sin, as the Hebrew words signify, Levit. 1.4. He who denies any one of these, overthrows the sacrifice of atonement. Now this dissembler doth with Socinus deny all these things in Christ's offering of himself a sacrifice of atonement to purge sin. First he denies the true real Spiritual union between Christ, and the persons pardoned, and justified; by which Christ, and they are made one body, and he is their head, and they his members; For if he, and the faithful be one, than all his goods are theirs, and their debts are his, and his satisfaction, and righteousness is theirs, and is set on their score, which he denyeth, and altogether opposeth, and so denies their interest, and propriety in Christ, and their union with him, as his Master Wotton did, in express word: In his Essays of Justification. Secondly, he also denieth that the sins of the faithful, were laid on Christ, and imputed to him; and in this he chargeth GOD, with notorious injustice, who laid the punishments of all our sins on Christ, without the sins: For he saith, that Christ bore the punishments, though he had no share in our sins by any imputation. Thirdly, he denyeth that the sacrifice of Christ's suffering, and obedience offered up by him, is imputed to us, set on our score, and accepted for us. And thus in the doctrine of Christ's sanitisfaction, and atonement, he declares himself a true disciple of Socinus, lead by the same spirit of error, and of the same opinion, though in words he denies it. And what he here seems to grant, is no more but what all Socinians yield unto.  
In the third proposition, viz. that Christ is the sole, and entire miraculous cause, of every man's justification, etc. He doth aequivocate, and delude the simple, and while he deceives them, he is deceived himself, as the Apostle saith of wicked seducers, 2 Tim. 3, 13. For if he doth understand his own words, that Christ is the sole meritorious cause of every man's justification, that is justified by GOD, he must needs grant that Christ's satisfaction, made to GOD'S justice, and his perfect righteousness, as it is meritorious, and of great value in itself; so it is appropriated, communicated, & imputed to him; that is, it is made actually meritorious for him, and makes him worthy to be counted righteous, and to be justified; for his words signify so much, though he is in his purpose and meaning, as contrary, as darkness is to light: for he means no more, but that Christ merited for himself, that GOD should gratify, and honour him with the justification of those that believe in him, so he explains himself in the last words. It is certain that a thing may be merritorious in itself, for the worth of it, but it cannot be meritorious to any particular person, till it be appropriated to him▪ and set on his score. Wotton his Master, (this point being proved to his face with undeniable arguments) was driven to disclaim the word (merit) denied Christ's meritting, for the faithful, and rejected it as a thing not named in Scripture, in his Essays of Justification. Besides this deceiving of himself, and misconceiving of his own words, I find here much absurdity: First, in that he is wavering, and not settled in his judgement, for in many places he holds faith to be the righteousness of a man justified; and here he calls absolution from sin, and condemnation, the righteousness which is given to every man in his justification: I grant that in a man justified, there is no righteousness inhaerent, but his cleanness from guilt of all sins, both of commission, and omission, and in this sense, Calvin, Luther, and others say that all the righteousness, in a man justified, is the remission of his sins, that is, his cleanness from the guilt of them, but this is not the righteousness which justifieth him, and which is communicated to him, to make him clean, and to work this cleanness from the guilt of his sin, that is, the righteousness inhaerent in Christ, which makes him clean, and puts him in a stare of righteousness before GOD: but this profound Doctor, with that stamp, and superscription of rational authority, which he conceiveth to be set on him, hath not yet searched into the deep things o● GOD.  
Secondly, he is most absurd in imagining that Christ hath purchased favour, and honour, wit● GOD, that he might justify the●… that believe in him by Procuring, that faith in a proper sense should be accepted for righteousness: For Christ as he was GOD, & man, was infinitely of himself in favour and honour with GOD, and humbled himself only for us▪ and in our behalf fulfilled the Law; not to purchase honour, and favour, to himself, nor to make himself worthy to be gratified, and honoured by GOD, as he affirmeth. Thus we see his absurdities, and his deceiving of himself.  
The fourth proposition is, that faith in the judgement of every man, is the condition required by GOD, on man's part, to bring him into that communion of justification, and redemption, which Christ hath purchased etc. In which I find delusion, and falsehood: First he doth not mean a gift, grace, or Spiritual qualification, appointed by GOD, by which as by the hand of the soul stretched out, we must lay hold on Christ's satisfaction, and righteousness▪ for justification, and redemption, (though his words pretend so much) but he means that faith is the condition of the new covenant, which man must on his part perform, in stead of all righteousness, which the Law requires; and so it is in the new covenant, the condition of life; as works of the Law, and of righteousness, were the condition of the old covenant: This is the very heresy, and damned error of Socinus. Secondly, he doth here make the covenant of grace, a covenant of life, not freely, but upon a condition▪ performed on man's part, and so a covenant of works, contrary to Scripture, Rom. 11.6. Thirdly, he errs grossly, in imagining faith not to be a free gift of grace, but a work performed on man's part, as works were required in the old covenant. Fourthly, he falsely chargeth all honest, and godly men, to be of his judgement. I know that all Orthodox Divines, abhor and detest this opinion. Fiftly, he affirms a manifest untruth, in saying, that without believing, none can have part in justification, and redemption; for no regenerate Infants, which die in their Infancy, do actually believe▪ and yet being by the Spirit of regeneration engrafted into Christ, they have communion of his ransom and righteousness, are justified before GOD, and saved.   

Socinianism.  

3. Part.  IT's evident from the Scriptures, that GOD in the act of every man's justification doth impute, or account righteousness to him, or rather somewhat for, or in stead of righteousness, by means of which imputed, the person justified passeth in account as a righteous man (though he be not properly, or perfectly such) and is invested accordingly with those great privileges of a man perfectly righteous, deliverance from death and condemnation, and acceptation into favour with GOD. The reason of which imputation, or why GOD is pleased to use an expression of righteousness imputed, in or about the justification of a sinner, seems to be this, the better to satisfy the natural scruple of the weak, and feeble conscience of men, who can hardly conceive, or think of a justification or of being justified, especially by GOD, without a perfect legal righteousness. Now the purpose and counsel of GOD in the Gospel, being to justify men without any such righteousness: the better to salve the fears of the conscience touching such a defect, and to prevent and stay all troublesome thoughts, or quaeres which might arise in the minds of men, who when they hear of being justified, are still ready to ask within themselves, but where is the righteousness▪ conceiving a legal righteousness to be as necessary to justification, as Isaac conceived of a Lamb for a burnt offering, Gen. 22. He (GOD I mean) is graciously pleased so far to condescend to men in Scripture treaty, with them about the weighty business of justification, as in effect to grant and say to them, that though he finds no proper or perfect righteousness in them, no such righteousness as passeth under the name of righteousness with them: yet if they truly believe in him as Abraham did; this believing shall be as good as a perfect complete righteousness unto them, or that he will impute rihteousnes to them upon their believing.   

Christianisme.  
THe first thing in this passage, to wit, GOD imputing righteousness to every man in his justification, is a thing evident by the Scriptures, and I willingly grant it. But I abhor and detest as heresy, that which he adds out of his own conceit, to wit, that GOD doth rather impute somewhat in stead of righteousness, which cannot make a man properly or perfectly righteous. This is a blasphemous imagination, that GOD can judge falsely, and account a thing for righteousness which is not, and esteem a man righteous who is not properly righteous. Secondly that which immediately follows is no less blasphemous, to wit, that a man may be invested by GOD, with the great privileges of a man perfectly righteous, namely deliverance from sin and condemnation, and acceptation, into favour with GOD, though he be no such man. For hereby GOD is charged either with injustice and iniquity, or with error in his judgement. Thirdly his taking upon him to give a reason of GOD'S purpose, and counsel, is Luciferian pride and presumption. For who knoweth the mind of GOD, or hath been of his counsel, Rom. 11.34. Saint Paul who was taken up into the third heaven, could never find out any such counsel of GOD, neither durst give a reason of GOD'S purpose and counsel, but only the good pleasure of his own will. Fourthly in the declaration of his reason I find many errors, and untruths, as first, that a man's conscience can hardly think of being justified by GOD, without a perfect legal righteousness. Every regenerate man and true believer can upon his own knowledge, and experience give him the lie, and tell him that the weakest conscience of any, who hath true Faith, being taught by the Gospel, can very easily think and believe, that GOD justifies him by an Evangelicall righteousness, even Christ's perfect fulfilling of the Law, which is far more perfect than that legal righteousness, which the Law requires of every man in his own person. This Abraham believed, and was fully persuaded of it, this David professes, and Saint Paul preached, and I know no true Christian, who doth not both think and believe it. If any man be found doubting of this, it is because the spirit of Antichrist and Socinus doth work strongly in him. Secondly the thing which he imagineth, being so notoriously false there can be no reason given of it, but a reason as false as the thing itself. And indeed so it is here. For first he assure, most falsely that GOD'S purpose in the Gospel, is to justify men without any such righteousness, as the Law requires in every man, that is the perfect fulfilling of the Law. For though GOD doth not purpose to justify men by their own fulfilling of the Law, every one in his own person: yet by Christ's righteousness and his fulfilling of the Law in their stead, and by communicating and imputing that righteousness to them, he purposeth in the Gospel, and professeth that men shall be and are by him justified, and this is in Christ such a righteousness as the Law requires, for proof of this see Rom. 8.4. and 10.4. Secondly the fathers upon GOD his own false and wicked conceits, to wit First, that GOD goeth about to cure an infirmity in his people, which is not to be found in any of them, after they are called to believe in Christ, and to be his people; for than they bid their own works of the Law adieu, and do no more dream of justification by them. Secondly, that GOD for the cure of their weak consciences tells them in the Gospel, that if they believe in Christ, this believing shall be as good as a perfect complete righteousness: by this he would make GOD a pure Socinian, one who takes the Crown from Christ, and the righteousness from GOD and man, and sets it on the head of man's Faith, which in the best believers, and even in Abraham himself was mingled with much doubting, and many infirmities. In a word, though all Orthodox Divines do according to the Scriptures, acknowledge that upon a man's believing truly in Christ, GOD doth impute to him the perfect, and complete righteousness of Christ, which is made his before he can truly apply it by Faith. Yet it can never enter into the heart of a true Christian, but his soul will abhor to think, that any man's believing should be to him as good, as perfect complete righteousness, or that GOD should accept it in stead of perfect righteousness, and rather than the righteousness of Christ GOD and man, who is made unto us of GOD righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.30. and in whom we are found to have the righteousness of GOD by faith, Philip. 3.9. To conclude this passage, let me add this as a foul absurdity. For if he speak by experience, that conscience leads men naturally to think that there can be no justification without righteousness, which is a perfect fulfilling of the Law. Which I confess my conscience and my reason tell me, and GOD'S word teacheth▪ me plainly: Then what is become of his conscience, who contrary to all truth and reason, and the common conscience of all men, will teach justification, without any true righteousness at all either of Christ, or our own, and will crown man's weak Faith with the Crown of righteousness, which only belongs to Christ and his perfect obedience.   


4. Part.  Socinianism.  
SO that now the state and drift of the question is, not either First whether Faith without an object or as separated from Christ, be imputed for righteousness; for such a Faith (doubtless) in the point of justification was never dreamt of by any man, that kept his 〈◊〉 company; men may as well fancy a living man without a soul●, or a wise man without his wits, as a Faith without an object; much less was such a Faith conceived by any man, to be imputed for righteousness.   

Christianisme.  
IN the fourth part, or passage, he first propounds five foolish quaeres, which he denieth to concern the state of the question. Secondly, he propounds a sixth quaere, and that in plain, and precise terms he affirms. I will first particularly answer the 5. quaeres: and after lay down the ●i●t at large, and address myself to the confutation of his discourse upon it.  
And first, whereas he pronounceth him a mad man, who dreams of faith without Christ the object, or thinks that faith which believes not in Christ, should be imputed for righteousness: Here I must be bold to put him in mind; that thus he dreams in the next Chapter, where he boldly affirms and by divers arguments laboureth, to prove that the Faith of Abraham which was imputed to him for righteousness, was not a believing in Christ, neither was Christ and his righteousness the object of it. And therefore by his own confession and his own words; he doth there play the mad man, and keeps not his wit's company, but his fancy runs wild, while he strives to prove that Abraham's Faith imputed to him for righteousness was not a believing in Christ.   

The second Quaere.  
NEither is it any part of the intent of the question, to inquire, whether Faith be the meritorious cause of a man's justification. For both they that affirm, and they that deny the imputation of Faith for righteousness; deny the meritoriousnes of Faith every way▪ how ever it is true, that they tha● would seem most to disclaim it, and cast it further from them, do yet in some of their most beloved tenets draw very near unto it (as will afterwards appear.)   

Answer.  
HEre behold either gross ignorance or wilful lying against knowledge, and conscience. For all the learned know that Faith and believing are held by the Church of Rome, to be a principal part of man's righteousness, and works which GOD imputes and accounts meritorious, of justification, and of eternal life ex condigno. Yea he himself in the passage next before hath plainly affirmed, that Faith to him that believeth as Abraham did, is as good as perfect and complete righteousness; which if it be true, than Faith must needs be, (as perfect and complete righteousness is) the meritorious cause of justification. And therefore that which he here saith is verified in himself, though he would seem most to disclaim the merit of Faith, and to cast it furthest from him, yet in some of his most beloved tenets, he draws very near to it, yea he embraceth it with his heart in his whole discourse, the main drift whereof is to exalt Faith into the place of Christ's most meritorious righteousness, and to put the Crown upon it. For what can be imagined more meritorious of justification, then that which GOD in a proper sense judgeth and counteth for righteousness, and for which he doth justify men, and counts them righteous.   

The third Quaere.  
NEither is it the question, whether faith be the formal cause of justification, that is, whether GOD doth justify a man with his faith, as a Painter makes a wall white with whiteness, or as a Master makes his Scholar learned with knowledge, or learning conveyed into him; for both parties make the form of justification to be somewhat really different from Faith (which is the genuine tenet of Arminius▪)   

Answer.  
THis quere is very ridiculous, for to imagine a quality or act in man, to be the formal cause of justification which is GOD'S act, is the fancy of a distempered brain, and the conceit of a mad man. His exposition of his quaere shows his want of Logical skill. For the whiteness wherewith the Painter makes a wall white, is a form introduced into the wall, it is not the formal cause of his action of painting; and so learning produced in a scholar, is forma docti, the form of a Scholar as he is made learned, not the formal cause, of his masters teaching, surely his expounding of his quaere, by such dissonant similitudes, showeth that he had need of a Master to teach him some better knowledge, and learning, and to set on him some better stamp, and superscription, of rational authority. His phrase (of learning conveyed) is somewhat improper, for learning is not conveyed, into a Scholar, but produced, and begotten, in him. Let him not therefore condemn tropes of speech, seeing he himself can, and doth often speak tropically, and improperly.  
But to come home to his quaere. If by justification he means imputative justification, in which GOD justifies a man, by imputing righteousness to him; and man is justified by believing that GOD counts him righteous in Christ; then we deny not that faith in some respect, is the formal cause of justification: For in this justification taken passively, as it is man's receiving by faith, that which GOD imputes to him; that is, as it is a man's believing, that God reckons him among the righteous, and counts him to be in the state of a justified person; so his actual faith, and believing, is the form of his justification: But take Justification, according to his own opinion, for GOD'S imputeing faith in a proper sense, for righteousness; Then is faith that somewhat, by which a man stands in the state of a person Justified before GOD, even his formal righteousness, or that at least, which is in stead of formal righteousness. Thus he is every way taken, and entangled in his own words. Lastly, what that is, which he saith is the genuine tenet of Arminius; he doth not express whether it be, that faith is really different, or not different, from the form of Justification; for his words are included in a parenthesis, which might very well be left out: only this I know, that Arminius professeth this to be his genuine tenet; That faith is imputed to the believer, for righteousness. sensu proprio, non m●tonymico, in a proper sense, without a trope, In Epist. ad Hippolitum de Collibus, If elsewhere he altars his tenet, and writes otherwise; It is but the common disease, the vertigo, and giddiness of the Socinian faction, to do as here their fellow disciple doth in this his hover, and wavering discourse; that is, to say, and gainsay, affirm, and deny, the same things, through the inconstancy of their windy brains, and minds unsettled.   

The 4 Quaere.  
NOr yet doth the question make any quaere at all, whether Christ be the sole meritorious cause of justification of a sinner, for both they that go on the right hand of the question, and they that go on the left hand, are knit together in the same mind, and judgement concerning this.   

Answer.  
WHosoever denyeth such a Spiritual union, & communion between Christ, and the penitent, and believing sinner justified, as doth make Christ's righteousness, and satisfaction to become his ransom, and righteousness, and to be imputed by GOD to him, and to make him accepted by GOD, as one clean from the guilt of sin, and righteous in his sight, This man denyeth Christ to be the meritorious cause, of the Justification of a sinner: For till Christ with his satisfaction, be communicated, and appropriated to the faithful, yea, till his righteousness be so made theirs, and set on their score, that they have a right, and interest in it: Christ is no more meritorious of Justification to them, than he is to Infidels, and reprobates: for it is as impossible for Christ to be actually meritorious of Justification to any man who hath not an interest in him, as for one man's money to ransom another, who is a captive, upon whose score it was never set, no● so much interest therein given to him, that it is paid for him and accounted for his ransom.   

5 Quaere.  
NEither doth the question as it is here propounded, intent any dispute at all, whether the active obedience of Christ, falling in with the passive, and considered in conjunction with it, be that whereby Christ merited the Justification of sinners, or that which GOD hath a principal respect, and recourse unto, in the Justification of sinners, for this also is acknowledged on both sides (at least by the greater party of both)   

Answer.  
But while he denies GOD'S communicating, and imputeing Christ's whole obedience▪ he denies the merit of them in our Justification; and when he affirms, that faith, and not Christ's righteousness, is the thing imputed for righteousness, to justification, he denies Christ's obedience active, and passive, to be that which GOD hath a principal respect, and recourse unto in the justification of sinners, and therefore here he contradicts himself, and saith untruly▪ that all sides hold the merit of Christ's whole obedience, when in his Doctrine he utterly overthrows it.   

The 6 Quaere, which he alloweth, and affirmeth.  
BUt lastly the question in plain terms is this, whether the faith of him that truly believes in Christ, or whether the righteousness of Christ himself, that is that obedience that Christ performed to the moral Law (consisting of all those several and particular acts of righteousness, wherein he obeyed in the letter and propriety of it) be that which GOD imputes to a believer, for righteousness in his justification, so that he that believes is not righteous only by account, or by GOD'S gracious reputing and accepting of him for such: but is rigidly, literally, and peremptorily righteous, constituted and made as perfectly and completely, and legally righteous as Christ himself, no difference at all between them, quoad veritatem, but only quoad modum, the justified every whit as righteous as the justifier, both righteous with the selfsame individual righteousness, only this difference between one and the other; the justified wears i● as put upon him by another by imputation; the justifier wears it as put upon him by himself, or by inherency. That the Scriptures no where countenance any such imputation of the righteousness of Christ, I trust (the spirit of truth directing and assisting) to make manifest in the sequel of this discourse, and to give good measure of truth to the Reader, heaped up by testimonies from the Scripture, pressed down by the weight of many arguments, & demonstrations running over, with the clear approbation of many Authors learned and sound, and every way greater than exception.  
Multa fidem promissa levant.   

Answer.  
TO this question laid down in plain, and precise terms, I answer. First that to move this question, except with purpose to discover and oppose Socinus, and his followers who affirm it, and stand for imputation of faith in a proper sense; for righteousness is not to be tolerated among true Christians: but to dispute for that damned error, which takes the Crown from the all-sufficient righteousness of Christ, and sets on the head of man's weak faith, is most heretical impudence (as in my whole answer I shall prove abundantly. Secondly his absurd expounding of Justification by Christ's righteousness imputed; and how in this question the righteousness of Christ, and the justifying of men by it, are to be understood; is a notable point either of calumny in slandering our doctrine, and reporting it corruptly, or of subtlety, that when his opinion is proved to be blasphemous, he may have some starting holes, through which he may shift away, and make an escape, pleading that he mistook our Doctrine of being righteous by Christ's righteousness imputed, and ignorantly did oppose it.  
First no man standing for the imputation of Christ's righteousness, doth affirm that every particular act of Christ which he performed, was necessary to make up a perfect and sufficient righteousness: but that his righteousness contains in it all his acts of obedience, none denyeth. For suppose our Saviour by reason of imprisonment, or some other restraint and impediment, had been hindered from doing divers of those works of mercy, charity and piety, which he did perform being at liberty, this had not diminished his righteousness, so long as he had a ready will to do good upon all occasions, and did good works when liberty and opportunity served. Secondly none of our Divines do think or write, that Christ's righteousness imputed, and communicated to believers, doth make them rigidly, literally, and peremptorily righteous, constituted and made us perfectly completely and legally righteous, as Christ himself, for though they are iustifi●d by the Communion of Christ's satisfaction, and have so much interest in it, as to make them truly righteous, yet they have it not as Christ hath it performed legally by himself in his own person; neither have they power to give the Spirit, whereby they may communicate it to others to justify them, & to make them righteous. The Wife is endowed with her Husband's honours and riches, and made honourable and rich, but she is not endowed with her Husband's Lordship and dominion over them, so far that she may give them away at her pleasure: but only posseseth them in him and with him, for her own use. And so it is between Christ and the faithful, he is righteous rigidly and legally, according to the letter of the Law; They are righteous Evangelically by the Communion of his righteousness, that is, originally righteous, as the head in a natural body is sensitive, and hath sense and motion in it as the root and fountain: They are righteous by Communion from him, and possess his righteousness as all the rest of the members, in a living body possess life by derivation from the heart, not in the same degree as the heart doth, to communicate it to others; but every one so far as to be a living member. Therefore all that he here saith is but subtlety, calumny, and falsehood, neither Scriptures nor any sound and learned Authors will minister arguments, or demonstrations to him to prove any thing contrary to our Doctrine, concerning the imputation of Christ's righteousness for justification. The more he strives to wrest and abuse testimonies of Scripture, and learned Authors, the more evident demonstrations will he give of his wickedness, and wilful contending against GOD'S sacred truth.   

Socinianism.  
GIve me leave here to mention that by the way, which prevents many mistakes (yea and offences too) in reading the writings of many later Divines (especially of other Churches) touching this point of Justification. If we take the phrase of imputing Christ's righteousness unproperly, and out of the usual and formal signification of it (as Luther and Calvin, and other Divines of the reformed Churches sometimes do in their writings) viz For the giving out and bestowing (as it were) the righteousness of Christ in the return of it, that is, in the privileges, blessings and benefits, that are procured and purchased by it for men: So a believer may be said to be justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed. But then the meaning can be no more but this. A believer is justified by the imputation of Christ's righteousness. That is, GOD justifies a believer for Christ's righteousness sake, and not for any righteousness of his own. Such an imputation of the righteousness of Christ as this is, is no ways denied or once questioned. And thus such passages as those in Calvin, GOD freely justifies us by imputing the obedience of Christ unto us, Instit. 1. c. 3.11, and again a man is not righteous in himself, but because the righteousness of Christ is communicated, or imparted to him by imputation, these and such like expressions in this Author, are to be interpreted by such passages as these (which are frequent in the same Author) Christ by his obedience, procured and merited for us, grace and favour with GOD the Father, and again Instit. 1.2.17. and again, 1.3. c. 11.12. Christ by his obedience procured, or purchased righteousness for us. And again, in Gal. 3.6. All such expressions as these import the same thing, that we are justified by the grace of GOD, that Christ is our righteousness; and that righteousness was procured for us by the death, and resurrection of Christ. By all which passages and many more of like importment, that might be produced out of the same Author, it's fully evident, that where he mentions any imputation of the righteousness of Christ's in justification, the meaning is only this, that the righteousness of Christ is only the meritorious cause of our justification, and he hath procured and purchased this for us at GOD'S hand; that upon our believing we should be accounted righteous by him; or (which is but the same) that our faith should be imputed for righteousness to us. To which purpose he speaks more significantly, and expressly in the place last mentioned, Gal. 3.6. men not having righteousness lodged in them, they obtain it by imputation, which imputation he thus explicates and interprets. Because GOD doth impute or account their faith unto them, for righteousness. Divers like passages might be drawn together out of other Authors, which must be seasoned with the same salt of interpretation, to be made savoury and meet for spiritual nourishment. In the Homilies of our Church, there are several passages that mention the imputation of Christ's righteousness in justification, for the genuine sense whereof if we consult with the 11. article of Religion (which is concerning justification) and is framed with all possible exactness this way (that so few words are capable of) that will lead us directly to the same interpretation of them. We are accounted righteous before GOD, (saith our Article) only for the merit of our LORD, and Saviour jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Where it's to be observed, that we are not said to be constituted, or made righteous before GOD in justification, but only that we are accounted or reputed such. 2. It's not said that we are accounted righteous with the righteousness, nor yet with the merit of Christ, but only we are accounted righteous before GOD, only for the merit of our LORD Christ by faith. The merit of Christ or of his righteousness, hath so far prevailed with GOD on our behalf, that by our faith we shall be accounted righteous before him; which is in effect the same truth we maintain. viz. that GOD for Christ's sake, or for Christ's merits sake doth impute our faith for righteousness unto us. And thus Musculus expresseth himself roundly. Faith is accounted for righteousness for Christ's sake; And again Loc. come. de justifica. This faith ought to be esteemed of us, as that which GOD purposeth for Christ's sake, to impute for righteousness to those that believe in him. So Luther also ad Gal. 3.6. GOD for Christ's sake accounts this imperfect faith for perfect righteousness. And Chamier calls remission of sins, the righteousness which is imputed to us. Therefore wheresoever, whether in the Homilies of our Church▪ or in other Authors we meet with any such expressions of the righteousness of Christ imputed in justification; we must not understand this righteousness of Christ in the letter, propriety, and formality of it, but in the Spirit, or merit of it to be imputed. And this manner of speech to put the name of a thing in the propriety of it, instead of the value, worth, benefit, and return of it, is both usual, and familiar in ordinary passage, of discourse amongst us, and very frequent in the Scriptures; when we say, a Merchant grew rich by such, or such a commodity, our meaning is, that he grew rich by the gain, or return of it, he may be made rich by the commodity, and yet have never a whit of it with him; so when we say, such a man grew rich by his place or office, our meaning is, that he grew rich by such gain, or profit, as his office afforded him; we do not mean that the place itself, or office, were his riches; so it may be said, that we are justified by the righteousness of Christ, and yet not have the righteousness itself upon us by imputation, or otherwise, but only a righteousness procured, and purchased by it, really, and essentially, differing from it, viz. remission of sins, as will appear in due time: Thus in the Scriptures themselves there is no figure, or form of speech more frequent, then to name the thing itself in the propriety of it in the stead of the fruit of it, good or bad, benefit, or loss, vantage or disadvantage, merit, or demerit of it. Thus job 33.26. GOD is said to render unto man his righteousness, the fruit and benefit of his righteousness in the favour of GOD, and manifestation of it in his deliverance, and restauration; the righteousness itself in the propriety of it, cannot be rendered unto him: So Ephes. 6.8. Whatsoever good thing, any man doth, the same he shall receive of the LORD: he shall receive benefit, and consideration from GOD for it▪ so Reve. 14.12. and 13.10. here is the patience and faith of the Saints, that is, the benefit, and unspeakable reward of the faith, and patience of the Saints to be seen; when the Beast, and all that worship him shall be tormented in fire, and brimstone for evermore, and those that have constantly suffered for not worshipping him, shall be delivered from drinking of that bitter cup: so Psal. 128.2. Thou shalt eat the labour of thy hands, that is, the fruit of thy labour. So on the other hand Heb. 9.28. To those that look for him, he shall appear the second time without sin; without the guilt or punishment of sin charged upon him. Gen. 19.15. Lest thou be destroyed in the iniquity of the city: that is, in that judgement which fell upon them by means of their iniquity: In such a construction of speech, as the holy Ghost himself useth in these, and such passages in Scripture, the righteousness of Christ may be said to be the righteousness by which we are justified, or which is imputed unto us in justification.   

Christianisme.  
THis fifth part, or passage, is nothing else, but first the propounding of a new, and strange imputation of Christ's righteousness contrary to sense and reason, & to the common signification of the phrase of imputing righteousness, or counting a thing for righteousness. Secondly, a wresting, and abusing, of some speeches of Scripture, and learned writers, that he may father on them, an opinion, which they abhorred, and in express words, disclaimed, and confuted.  
First, he saith, that the phrase of imputing Christ's righteousness, is by Luther, Calvin, and other Divines, taken unproperly, and out of the usual, and formal signification, for the giving, and bestowing of the return, that is, the privileges, blessings, and benefits, which are purchased by Christ's righteousness, for men; and the meaning can be no more but this; that GOD justifies a believer, for Christ's righteousness sake, and not for any righteousness of his own. To this I answer, First, that this signification of the phrase, is so unproper, unusual, & deformed, that it is never found in all the Scriptures, nor any approved Author (as hereafter I shall make manifest) only Socinus, & they of his faction are coiners, and forgers, of such strange barbarismes. Secondly, it is so contrary to common sense, and reason, that if any man should say, the Sun, the air, or other Elements are imputed to us by GOD, because GOD hath given us the benefit of them; every man would laugh at such a barbarism, even the most simple would discern it to be ridiculous. If Master Goodwin, or any of his disciples, coming into some country house for shelter from some cruel tempest, which overtook him as he traveled on his journey, should for the benefit which he received under the man's roof, presently challenge, that the house is imputed to him, and is to be counted his, and set on his score, it is a thousand to one, that the owner of the house, would take him for a mad man, and put a fool's feather in his cap, or cast him out of the doors, by the head and shoulders, for a saucy companion: he had not best therefore use such speeches, nor write such phrases with his pen, for if they once proceed out of his mouth, and come to other men's ears, he will thereby purchase to himself much scorn and derision. But let us proceed to examine the instances, by which he goeth about to prove this strange signification, of the word imputing righteousness, wherein righteousness is put for the fruit of it by a metonymy of the cause for the effect; imputing is put for bestowing by a new Socinian trope, and GOD'S bestowing, for man's receiving, by a monstrous metonymy, of one opposite for another: I wonder here by the way, how this man (who disclaims in the next Chapter, the Apostles using of tropes and figures in the weighty Doctrine of justification, and calls it a monster of speech to use two tropes in one phrase) dares here make in this one phrase, so many tropes, and monstrous figures.  
The first instance, which he brings to prove that Calvin did use the phrase in this signification is this; GOD freely justifies us, by imputing Christ's obedience to us: and again, a man is not righteous in himself; but because the righteousness of Christ is communicated, and imparted to him by imputation. I might here blame his false quotations, to wit, Instit. 1. c 3.1.11. and 1.2.17. and 1.3.14.17. In which places no such words are to be found; but I willingly embrace these words as calvin's, for they are most clear, and manifest to prove that GOD not only give us the return or benefits of Christ's righteousness, but also doth by imputation communicate, and impart to us the righteousness itself: so that if this man had studied all his days, to contradict his own opinion, and to confute his forged signification, he could not have found more full, plain, and perspicuous words then these of Calvin; for if a man be not righteous in himself, then is he not righteous by faith in a proper sense, for his faith in a proper sense, is in himself. But let us not be too hasty to insult over his folly; it may be his impudence will catch at some other words of Calvin, which do not so expressly contradict him, but are more obscure, and them he will wrest, and abuse to expound Calvins plain words in a contradictory sense. It is even so indeed, for he citys in the next place, some more general and obscure speeches of Calvin, to expound his plain words, and to make them contradictory to themselves. I have heard absurd fellows derided for going about to show obscurum perobscurius, that is, to make men see dark things through greater darkness, and for running (as the proverb is) out of GOD'S blessing, into the warm sun: But that any should go about, to make others see the sun, when it shineth in full strength, by the dim light of a candle, and to persuade them that the sun is the moon; this is madness, & deserves that the Lunatic, & Melancholic person so doing should be sent to the Island of Hellebore, there to inhabit till he recover his wits. And doth not he so who seeks to make Calvins plain words, to contradict themselves by citing words, wherein he speaks neither so plainly, nor so fully as in them. But let us see those other speeches of Calvin, which he brings for this purpose: one is, that Christ by his obedience hath merited, and procured for us favour with GOD his Father. These words do not prove that the imputing of Christ's obedience, and righteousness signifies the bestowing of the benefit of it on us, that is GOD'S favour: but show clearly the contrary to that which he intends, namely that Christ's obedience is made ours, and imputed to us, because it procures to us the favour of GOD, which we cannot enjoy, nor appear gracious in his sight, unless we be clothed, with Christ's rich robe of righteousness, and washed clean from the guilt of sin, by his satisfaction imputed to us. Another is, Christ by his obedience hath purchased righteousness for us; the true and plain sense of which words, is no more but this, that Christ by his obedience hath fulfilled the Law of GOD for us, and we by that obedience are constituted & made righteous, as the Apostle expressly affirms, Rom. 5.19. Another is that, when we are said to be justified by the grace of GOD, and that righteousness was procured by the death, and resurrection of Christ: these expressions import the same thing with those, that Christ is our righteousness, that is by union with him and communion of his righteousness, which he purchased by his death and resurrection, and which GOD graciously gives to us, we are justified. Another is, men having not any righteousness in themselves, they obtain it by imputation, that is, neither a man's own works, nor faith taken in a proper sense, for a gift grace or work in him, can be his righteousness, but only that which is obtained by imputation, to wit, Christ's righteousness apprehended by faith, which when true believers have laid hold on, than GOD doth account them righteous, and in this improper sense GOD is said to impute faith for righteousness. Thus every speech of Calvin which he brings against Calvin himself, is like a stone cast against a brazen wall, and rebounds against the caster, and dasheth out the brains of his heretical opinion. And therefore it was his safest course, only to tell us of more such passages, but not to recite any more out of Calvin, or other Authors. For being seasoned with the salt of their own interpretation, they will prove gravel in his mouth, choke him, (and if it be possible) put him to shame and silence.  
From Calvin he comes home to the Homilies allowed in our Church, and they by his own confession teach, that we are justified by the imputation of Christ's righteousness. But to prove that by the righteousness of Christ, they mean faith taken in a proper sense, that is, as it is the gift of faith in us, and the operation of it in us, even our believing: he brings the words of the 11. Article of Religion allowed in our Church by Law. viz. we are ac, counted righteous before GOD only for the merit of our LORD and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, not for our own works or deserts; where note, that whereas the Articles send us to the Homilies, as being very profitable, & plain expositions of them; he on the contrary sets the cart before the horses to draw them after it. He brings the text to expound the commentary or plain exposition of it. But he gets no advantage by doing so, for the words of the Article are very exact indeed, and make much for us against his opinion, they show that the merit of Christ apprehended by faith, is that for which we are accounted righteous before GOD, and that faith is not our righteousness, for than we should be accounted righteous for a grace in ourselves, and for a work of our own, performed by us, even our own believing. Oh but the Article doth not say that we are constituted, and made, but only accounted righteous: True indeed, the Article doth not speak of fundamental justification mentioned, Rom. 5.19. but of imputative justification, of which the Apostle speaks, Rom. 4, 3. which necessarily presupposeth the other: For GOD whose judgement is according to truth, cannot judge, and count us righteous, till he hath communicated Christ's righteousness to us, and by it, constituted, and made us righteous; which when we by faith, receive, and apply by the assistance of his Spirit, which dwells in us, and makes us one Spiritual, and mystical body, with Christ; then GOD accounts us righteous, and by our faith, and believing, we obtene, as Abraham did, this testimony from GOD, that we are righteous, as justine Martyr saith in the words cited in the next Chapter.  
From the Article, and Homilies, he proceeds to Musculus, Luther, and Chamier, who, though in their Doctrine they are opposite to his opinion, as heaven is to earth, yet he snatcheth here, and there, some improper speeches out of their writings, which he wresteth to his purpose; though they do most plainly expound their own meaneing to be contrary to his mind. The words of Musculus are these, Faith is accounted, for righteousness for Christ's sake: That is, faith is accounted for righteousness, and the true believer is counted a righteous man: not sensu proprio, nec per se, sed propter Christum. That is, by reason of Christ, and his righteousness, whom the believer apprehendeth, and by faith possesseth his righteousness; and again, this faith ought to be esteemed of us, as that which GOD purposeth for Christ's sake to impute for righteousness, to those that believe in him, in which words Musculus following the phrase of the Apostle, intends no more but this, that we are not to seek righteousness by our own works, but by faith in Christ for if we can obtain grace to believe in him, and to lay hold on his righteousness; we are for Christ and his righteousness sake, upon our believing counted righteous before GOD, because by our communion which we have with Christ by the Spirit dwelling in us, and enabling us to believe, The righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us imputatively, by the righteousness of another, even of Christ, which is also ours, for we are flesh of his flesh, that is▪ one with him; these are Musculus his own words, in which, he roundly expresseth himself in Rom. 8.4. and 10.3.4▪ Luther's words, at which he catcheth in vain, are to the same purpose, in Gal. 3.6. GOD for Christ's sake, accounts this imperfect faith, for perfect righteousness. Here Luther doth not charge GOD with error, or iniquity in judgement, by judging, and accounting, that for perfect righteousness, which is imperfect; for his speech is tropical imitating the phrase of the Apostle; by imperfect faith he means a true believer, by a weak faith, laying, hold on Christ's righteousness, and by perfect righteousness a man set in a state of perfect righteousness by communion with Christ; and this is the sense of the words, that if a true believer doth lay hold on Christ by faith, which in the best of us, is but weak, and imperfect; yet GOD accounts him perfectly righteous, with the righteousness of Christ, which is most perfect, and complete. Thus Luther expounds himself, 1 Tom. pag 32. Editionis jenensis: Christ (saith he) is in us by faith, yea, one with us, but Christ is righteousness, and a fulfiller of all GOD'S commandments, therefore we also do by him fulfil all GOD'S commandments, when he is by faith made ours: And 2 Tom. pag. 515. Faith puts us upon Christ's works of righteousness, without our own works, and translates us out of the exile of our sins into the Kingdom of his righteousness▪ And Tom. 1. pag 106. By faith, our sins are made no more our own, but Christ's, upon whom GOD hath laid the iniquities of us all? and again, all Christ's righteousness is made ours, for he layeth his hand on us: If a man had the tongue of men and Angels, he could not speak more fully for the communion, and imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers, for justification, and of their sins to Christ for remission: then Luther doth in these, and divers other places, as I shall more fully show in the second Chapter. As for Chamiers words, who calls remission of sins, the righteousness which is imputed to us; they show that faith is not that imputed righteousness, for faith, or believing, is our act; remission is GOD'S act▪ who can forgive sins but▪ GOD▪ But indeed▪ the meaning of Chamier is the same with Calvin, to wit▪ that our cleanness from the guilt of sin, which is Passive, remission, or justification, is that which GOD looks upon in us, when he counts us righteous in Christ, as I have before showed: wherefore I conclude with the contradictory of his conclusion (which he infers upon the speeches of our Homilies, and of other learned Authors) to weet thus; That wheresoever we find in the Scriptures, or any Authors of sound learning; this phrase of faith, or believing, imputed for righteousness, we must not understand faith in a proper sense, but the righteousness of Christ, even his fulfilling of the Law for us, which together with the power, and merit of it, so far as every believer hath need, is communicated to him, and imputed to him for justification: For as a Merchant cannot be, said to be enriched by the gain of a commodity, which never was his own, and in which he never had any interest, or propriety, nor any man by an office which was never his own, nor by him executed: So none can have the merit, and benefit of Christ's righteousness, nor be said to be thereby justified, neither can any such thing be imputed to them, except they have a propriety in it, and communion of it. Thus his instances, and similitudes, are turned against himself, to the confusion of his haereticall opinion. But that his sin may appear out of measure sinful, he doth not content himself, with his abusing, wresting, and perverting of the godly sayings of other Authors, and using similitudes which are most contrary to his purpose; but he also layeth profane hands, on the holy Scriptures. That excellent saying, job 33, 26. which Master Perkins learnedly expounds to be meant of Christ's righteousness, which when men humbly seek to GOD, by repentance, and faithful prayers, GOD renders unto them by renewing their sense and assurance of their communion with Christ in his whole satisfaction. This Doctor novice most Popishly applies to a man's own righteousness, and saith, that GOD'S rendering to a man his righteousness is giving him the benefit of it, not the righteousness itself: And yet if we should grant what he perversely seeks, it will avail him nothing; for as the fruit, and benefit, which GOD renders to a man, is not the fruit of a righteousness, in which he hath no propriety, or interest, but is his righteousness, so the fruit, and benefit, which we receive of Christ's righteousness, GOD renders to us when that righteousness is become ours in the propriety of it: That place Ephes. 6.8. whatsoever good a man doth the same he shall receive of the LORD: it is for us, and against himself, for as the good which a man receives from GOD for well doing, is the good fruit of his own well doing, so is the fruit, and benefit which we receive in our justification▪ the fruit of Christ's righteousness made ours, and imputed to us: Those speeches Revel. 13.10. and 15.10. here is the faith and patience of the Saints, etc. are not to be understood of the fruit, and reward of their patience (as the circumstances show, which are killing, and slaying, and leading into captivity) but of the patience, and faith themselves, that in such times they are seen, tried, and proved, and GOD at such times gives them patience, and faith, by threatening, and foretelling the final destruction of their enemies; as learned Brightman truly expounds the words. Besides if patience and faith were here used to signify the fruit, and benefit of patience and faith: yet he cannot say it is the fruit of any patience, or faith, but of the Saints themselves who receive the benefit. Likewise if we grant, that in the other places Psal. 128.2. Labour signifies the fruit of labour, and Heb. 9.28. Sin signifies the punishment of sin, and Gen. 19.15. iniquity signifies the judgement of GOD on Sodom for iniquity, by a trope or Metonymy of the cause for the effect. This proves that faith which is the hand, or instrument of the soul, receiving Christ with his righteousness, may by the same trope be used to signify that state of righteousness, which we receive by it as by an hand or instrument. Thus while he runs against the invincible rock of the holy Scriptures, and seeks to turn them like a rolling stone against a bark, they roll and rebound back, and tumbling upon him grind him to powder· For if he had ten thousand instances of Scripture, wherein the fruit and benefit which men receive, are signified by the names of the things which are the causes, and means of them▪ yet still it will appear that the fruit is not received except men have first an interest, and propriety in the causes and means of it. And thus you see his fifth part, or passage proved to be a rotten heap of stinking lies, absurdities and gross errors.   

Socinianism.  
WHerefore to draw towards the close of this first Chapter, and withal to give a little more light, that it may be seen to the bottom clearly, both what we affirm, and what we deny in the question propounded: First when we affirm the faith of him that believeth to be imputed for righteousness; The meaning is not either, 1ᵒ. That it should be imputed in respect of any thing it hath from a man himself, or as it is a man's own act, nor yet in respect of any thing it hath from GOD himself, or from the spirit of GOD producing, & raising of it in the soul (though it be true, it requires the lighting down of the mighty arm of GOD, upon the soul to raise it. Neither 3 o is it imputed for righteousness in respect of the object, or as, or because it layeth hold upon Christ, or his righteousness (though it be also true that that faith that is imputed for righteousness must of necessity lay hold upon Christ; and no other faith is cable of this imputation besides) because if faith should justify or be imputed as it lays hold upon Christ, it should justify out of the inhaerent dignity & worth of it and by virtue of that which is natural and intrinsecall to it, there being nothing that can be conceived more natural, and essential to faith, then to lay hold upon Christ: this is the very life, and soul of it, and that which gives it its specifical being, and subsistence. Therefore to make the object of faith, (as such) the precise, and formal ground of its imputation, is to make haste into the midst of Samaria, whilst men are confident, they are travailing towards Dotha●. It's the giving of the right hand of fellowship, to the Romish justification, which makes faith the meritorious cause of it (in part.)  
But lastly, when with the Scriptures we affirm that faith is imputed for righteousness: our meaning is simply, and plainly this, that as GOD in the first covenant of works required an absolute, and through obedience to the whole Law, with continuance in all things, for every man's justification, which perfect obedience had it been performed had been a perfect righteousness to the performer, and so would have justified him:  
So now in the new covenant of grace, GOD requires nothing of any man for his justification, but only faith in his Son, which faith, shall be as available, & effectual to him for his justification, as a perfect righteousness should have been under the first covenant: this is that which is meant when faith is said to be imputed for righteousness, which is nothing but that which is taught generally by Divines, both ancient and modern. Sic decretum dicit a Deo, ut cessante lege solam fidem gratia Dei posceret ad salutem. Ambrose. In Rom. 4. that is, that the Apostle saying, that to him that believeth his faith is imputed for righteousness, affirmeth that GOD hath decreed that the Law ceasing, the grace of GOD will require of men only faith for salvation: and again upon Chap. 9 of the same Epistle, Sola fides posita est ad salutem, only Faith is appointed to salvation. Calvin writing upon Rom. 10.8. hath words of the same importance, and somewhat more clear, and full, ex hac distinctionis nota colligimus, sicut lex opera exigit, Evangelium nihil aliud postulas, nisi ut fidem afferrent homines ad recipiendam Dei gratiam: that is, from this distinction we gather, that as the Law exacted works; so the Gospel requires nothing else, but that men bring faith to receive the grace of GOD. If GOD requires faith in the Gospel, for that same end for which he requireth works, or perfect righteousness in the law; it necessarily follows that he shall impute this faith for that righteousness, that is accept from men upon the same terms, and be countable unto them the same favours, rewards, and privileges upon it, that should have been given unto men, in regard of that righteousness, had it been performed or fulfilled: otherwise he should require it for such an end, or upon such terms as he would refuse to make good unto it, when the creature hath exhibited and tendered it unto him. To require it for righteousness, or in stead of righteousness, and not to accept it for righteousness, when it is brought to him, should be as apparent a breach of Covenant with GOD, as it would be in a rich creditor, that should compound and agree with his poor debtors for 1. in the pound, or the like, but when they brought the money to him, should refuse to take it upon any such terms, or to discharge them of their debt, and give them out their bonds.   

Christianisme.  
IN this last part or passage which is a mere confusion, and distraction of words, he gives more than a little light, that his Socinian heresy in this point of justification maintained with much non sense, may be seen to the bottom clearly. First, he takes upon him to show that faith is imputed, and how it is imputed. Secondly he strives to show that Christ's righteousness is not imputed. The first is in the words before recited. The second follows hereafter. First I will sift his words already rehearsed, And after proceed to the second. The sum of his speech last recited, may be reduced into a Syllogism of non sense, without form mood or figure. The proposition and assumption whereof are contradictory. And the conclusion damned Socinian heresy, so that here I may say with the Poet. Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici?  
His proposition runs thus. Faith is neither imputed for righteousness, in respect of any thing which it receives from man, the proper subject of it, nor as it is man's act who useth it, and performs the acts of believing, nor in respect of any thing which it hath from GOD, or his spirit in the production of it, nor in respect of the object Christ and his righteousness, nor in respect of the life and soul of it, which gives to it the specifical being, and subsistence, to wit, the application of Christ, and laying hold on him.   

The Assumption.  
But faith is imputed to men, and is counted, and accepted as sufficiently for justification, and upon the same terms under the Gospel, as perfect righteousness of works and of obedience to the whole Law, was in the first covenant and under the Law: So all Divines hold both ancient and modern.   

The Conclusion.  
THerefore upon men's believing, GOD shall be as countable to them, to give them the same favour, rewards and privileges, that should have been given unto them in regard of the perfect righteousness of works, and of the Law, if they had fulfilled it.  
First for his negatives heaped up in the proposition, wherein we have a narration of what he holds not: if we lay them altogether, they will conclude, that faith is no way at all imputed for righteousness, for neither in respect of the subject in which the habit of it resteth, nor in respect of the acts which man performs by it, nor in respect of any thing, which GOD by his spirit gives it in the production of it, that is, for no quantity quality, or virtue in it, nor in respect of the object Christ, nor in respect of the life, soul, or form which gives it the specifical being, and subsistence, so he plainly professeth, and besides these there is no other respect in which it may be imputed, as all reasonable men do know. Therefore the conclusion is, that it is not imputed at all.  
But yet in affirming nothing, but denying all respects, which reason can conceive in faith, and in roaming from himself and us, he kicks at us, and by the way snarls and bites at the truth. For it is most certain, that faith is said to be imputed in respect of GOD'S production of it by his spirit, and in respect of the object Christ, and his righteousness which it doth lay hold on and apply. For the spirit of regenerarion being shed on us through Christ, dwelling in us, and making us one body with Christ, & partakers of his whole satisfaction, doth work justifying faith in us, and this union and conjunction, which in order of nature, goeth before faith and concurres to the production of it, is the ground, and reason, of the imputation of it. If Christ were not made ours, and his satisfaction communicated to us, faith could not truly believe in Christ, nor truly apply his righteousness, therefore the two last of his negatives are false, and haereticall. Besides, it is not to be passed over in silence, that here again he contradicts himself, and grants that Christ, with his righteousness, is the object of faith, and laying hold on him, is the life, and soul of faith; which he utterly denyeth, and disputes to the contrary in the next Chapter, as I have touched before.  
As for his assumption, the sum whereof is, that faith is imputed, and accepted of GOD, for righteousness, upon the same terms, that perfect righteousness of works should have been in the first Covenant; This is Socinian heresy, in the highest degree; so gross, and palpable, and so openly, and expressly affirmed by him, that no salt of interpretation can keep it from stinking in the nostrils of any true Christian. Here also we may note his ignorance, absurdity, and nonsense; for instead of showing in what respect faith is imputed, he affirms, that he holds it to be imputed instead of perfect righteousness of our own works, and that it is in the new Covenant a condition answerable and every way as sufficient and available to procure all favours, rewards, and privileges, to us from GOD, as the righteousness of works, was in the Covenant of works: and both here, and in the conclusion, he makes faith as meritorious, and as strong a bond to tie GOD, and make him countable for all favours, rewards, and privileges, under pain of being counted a covenant breaker; as the perfect fulfilling of the Law, by every man in his own person, was in the covenant of works, and here doth more than give the right hand of fellowship, to Popish justification, for he transcends them, and makes GOD more obliged to men for them, and more countable than any Papists ever did. As for the testimonies which he brings, out of Ambrose, and Calvin, they are nothing to his purpose; they only affirm, that as the Law was man's only guide to salvation, and the rule of righteousness in the old covenant; So faith in the Gospel, is the only way to salvation in the new covenant, and the means by which we receive the grace of GOD▪ and the righteousness of Christ offered to us for justification, and salvation.   

Socinianism.  
SEcondly, when we deny the imputation of Christ's righteousness in justification, we neither deny the righteousness of Christ in itself, we rather suppose and establish it, neither 2ᵒ do we deny the absolute necessity of it, both to the justification, and salvation of a sinner: neither 3ᵒ do we deny a meritorious efficiency, and causality in that righteousness in respect of the justification of a sinner, but verily believe and conceive, that GOD justifieth all that are justified, not simply or barely, for Christ's sake, or for his righteousness sake (for a man may do a thing for his sake whom he much loves, and respects, though he hath not otherwise deserved it at his hands) but for the righteousness of Christ, his death being taken into the consideration with it, why GOD should justify those that believe in him. But 4ᵒ and last, that which we deny in denying the imputation of Christ's righteousness, is this, that GOD should look upon a believing sinner, and account of him, as one that hath done in his own person, all that Christ did in obedience to the moral Law, and hereupon pronounce him righteous: or: (which is the same) that GOD should impute unto him those particular acts of obedience which Christ performed in that nature, and property of them, so that he should stand as righteous before GOD, as Christ himself, or (which is the same) righteous with the self same righteousness wherewith Christ was righteous, and so GOD make himself countable to him for such obedience imputed in as great matters of rewards as he would have been for the like obedience personally performed by himself; in a word, this is that which we deny, and this is that which we affirm, concerning the righteousness of Christ, in the justification of a sinner, that GOD clothes none with the letter of it, but every man that believes with the spirit of it. 1. that this righteousness of Christ, is not that, that is imputed unto any man for his righteousness; but is that for which righteousness is imputed to every man that believeth: a justified person may in such a sense be said to be clothed with Christ's righteousness, as Paul's necessities were relieved, and supplied by his hands. Act. 20.24. these hands (saith he) have ministered to my necessities. Paul neither eat his fingers, nor spun out the flesh of his hands, into clothing, and yet was both fed, and clothed with them: So may a believer be said to be clothed with the righteousness of Christ, and yet the righteousness of Christ itself, not to be his clothing, but only that which procureth his clothing unto him, and so Calvin calls that clothing of righteousness wherewith the believer is clothed in his justification, Justitiam morte & resurrectione Christi acquisitam, a righteousness procured by the death, and resurrection of Christ. This righteousness of Christ may be said to be the righteousness of a believer, in such construction of speech, as the knowledge of GOD and of Christ, is said to be eternal life. john 17.3. viz. in way of causality, not in that formality of it, and again the righteousness of a believer in his justification, may be termed the righteousness of Christ in such sense, as the favour of GOD in deliverance of a man out of trouble, is called a man's righteousness. job. 33. verse 26. or as the nation and people of the Jews are often in the Scriptures called jacob, they were not jacob in the propriety of his person, but in his descent and propagation; so may the righteousness of a believer be called the righteousness of Christ, because it is a righteousness descended from it, and issuing as it were out of the loins of it. What hath been affirmed, and what hath been denied in the question, we come now to prove and demonstrate the truth of both. 1 o From the authority of Scriptures. 2 o From the grounds of reason; as for the third way of proof and confirmation by consent of Authors, we shall not assign a peculiar place for that by itself, but interlace our other proofs occasionally with such testimonies as we have received from learned, and judicious men for confirmation of our point to be discussed.   

Christianisme.  
THe second thing in this last part or passage is a profession of his meaning in denying Christ's righteousness to be imputed in justification.  
First because he would have an adversary for him to triumph over, and lest his admired sophistry should be idle, for want of an opposite against which it might magnify itself in the eyes of senseless sectaries; he suffers Christ's righteousness to have a being, and doth not deny it in itself, but doth approve and establish it, and so by good hap he escapes one base absurdity in his disputing, to wit, denying of the subject of the question.  
Secondly, because he would have his competitor, or corrival to be of some great note, the more to glorify his victory over him, he doth not deny an absolute necessity of Christ's righteousness, both to the justification and salvation of sinners; we thank him, that for saving of himself from the hatred and scorn of the world, he would grant so much of truth openly testified in Scripture. Thirdly he doth not deny a meritorious efficiency, or causality of Christ's righteousness in respect of the justification of a sinner. In this he comes somewhat near to us, but I doubt it is not in sincerity and truth, but rather in show, to make the ignorant to conceive better, or at least, not to judge so hardly of his opinion, for mark his slubbering, and daubing, with untempered mortar, I verily believe (saith he) that GOD justifieth them that are justified, not simply, or barely, for Christ's sake, or for his righteousness sake, but for the righteousness of Christ, his death being taken into consideration with it: here you see a plain contradiction, for Christ's righteousness, his death, being taken into consideration with it, is no more but his perfect righteousness, because his active obedience, without his passive obedience to death, is no perfect fulfilling of the Law; so that here is a contradiction, even an affirmation, and negation of one, and the same thing, in one continued sentence. The parenthesis also, which he inserts to trouble the reader, is false, and frivolous, to wit, (for a man may do a thing for his sake, whom he much loves, and respects, though he hath not otherwise deserved it at his hands.) First let me ask him what is his drift in these words? It seems to me, either to be wholly superfluous, or to intimate that Christ's righteousness did not deserve our justification at GOD'S hands, but that GOD out of love and respect to Christ's person, without the merit of his righteousness, doth accept us, and count us righteous. Secondly, let me tell him, that when a man doth any thing for another out of love, without desert, he doth it for his own love's sake, and for the magnifying of his kindness, and free bounty▪ and thus GOD did in giving his Son for us, undeserving sinners: But when justice doth stand up in strength and pleads for right, as in the justification of sinners, than a full satisfaction must come between, & love can no otherwise be rightly, and lawfully showed, but by making a satisfaction, or by apposing one who is sufficient to make satisfaction, that no evil but good may be done to the party loved, and respected: and thus the case stands in justification of sinners. Thirdly, though a man out of his corrupt, and carnal love, may do a thing for his favourite, without desert, or just consideration, yea contrary to justice, yet it is not so with GOD, who is no respecter of persons, in matter of justice, and justification: He doth never out of his free love decree to do any thing, but withal, he decrees, and ordeines a just consideration, why he should do it; so that this is a frivolous parenthesis, both false and from the matter.  
In the fourth place he showeth what he denies in denying the imputation of Christ's righteousness, viz. That GOD looks upon a believing sinner, and accounts him as one that hath done in his own person, all that Christ did in obedience to the moral Law, and hereupon pronounceth him righteous, so that he doth stand as righteous before GOD, as Christ himself, because righteous with the same righteousness; and so GOD makes himself countable to him for such obedience imputed in as great matters of reward, as he would have been for the like obedience, particularly performed by himself. In this expression of himself, here is much calumny, error, and untruth. First he doth calumniate, and slander the true Doctrine of Christ professed by us concerning the imputation of Christ's righteousness; for no man in his right wits did ever hold that imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers, is GOD'S accounting them to have performed in their own persons, every act of obedience, which Christ performed to the Law▪ This is a manifest contradiction, fitter for a giddy fancy to imagine, then for any true Christian to profess. The truth which we profess is this, that true believers being by that one spirit which works faith in them, united to Christ, and made partakers of his righteousness, and believing, and applying by faith to themselves, his satisfaction particularly are accounted truly righteous before GOD by communion, and imputation, not by legal performance in their own persons: And though the righteousness by which they are justified, is the very same which is in Christ, and which he performed, yet it doth not follow, that they thereby are as fully righteous as Christ himself, for he is originally righteous, by his own personal righteousness, as the justifier; they are righteous by communion, and imputation, as justified: And as the hands and feet, and other inferior members, live by the same life, and are sensitive by the same sense which is originally in the heart, and head of the same body; yet they are not so lively, and sensitive, as the heart and head, but in a competent measure, and proportion, fit for every one of them. So it is in the mystical body of Christ, between him the head, and them his believing, and justified members, as I have before touched. So that here we have an intolerable calumny, and slander, laid upon GOD'S sacred truth, and the true professors of the same. Secondly, he utters a notorious untruth when he saith, that to be righteous by the same righteousness which Christ performed, is nothing else, but to be performers of every act of his obedience in our persons. Thirdly, it is a wicked error to think (as he doth) that obedience and righteousness, either performed by ourselves or communicated to us, should make GOD countable to us▪ that is, bound to give us the greatest rewards. For the righteousness of justification and the holiness, and obedience of sanctification, are only free gifts which GOD gives to make us capable of eternal life, and fit to stand in his presence, and to see and enjoy his glory; not bands to tie himself, and to make him countable to us; for if we be righteous what give we to him, or what receiveth he at our hands? job 35.7. eternal life, though by Christ purchased for us; yet is the free gift of GOD in Christ. Rom. 6.23. Here therefore this sublimate Doctor doth bewray his own ignorance in the main mysteries of salvation, and is as David saith, Psal. 14. become filthy, stinking, and abominable in his thoughts, and imaginations, concerning GOD himself, while he doteth after Socinian subtleties, and sets himself to be singular, by preaching his fond errors, and heresies. Lastly, after all this, in conclusion, he takes upon him to elude, and evacuate those most plain testimonies of holy Scripture, wherein Christ is said to cloth, and cover us with the garments of salvation, and the robe of his righteousness Isa 61.10. that our sins and stains, being thereby covered, Psal. 32.1. sin might no more be imputed to us; but we in the robes of his righteousness may stand clothed as with long white linen robes, Revel. 19.8. And like jacob in the garments of the first borne, yielding a sweet smelling savour, may be accepted of GOD our heavenly father. First he saith, that GOD in the justification of sinners, clothes none with the letter of Christ's righteousness, but every man that believes with the Spirit of it: that is, not with the righteousness itself, but with the fruit and benefit of it: that is, with faith counted for righteousness, where note, that (in his conceit,) the righteousness of a justified man, is a thing inhaerent in himself, and a work performed in his own person, not communicated to him from another, ab extra, as garments are, and so no clothing: here is one gross absurdity, like as if one should say, a man's clothes are not on him, but in him. That speech of Paul, these hands have ministered to my necessity, Act 20.34. are nothing to the purpose, for he doth not say his hands were his necessary meat, and clothes, but by working did get him necessaries; and so Christ by his obedience procured righteousness for us, which he doth communicate to us, and clothes us with, and by GOD it is imputed to us: and this Calvin calls righteousness gotten by Christ's death and resurrection: and all this is for us, and against himself.  
The other instances which he brings from Scripture to prove that Christ's righteousness is by a metonymy of the cause for the effect, used to signify the fruit and effect of it in us, prove no such thing at all. The first of them john 17.3. (this is eternal life, to know thee the only true GOD, etc. It is mistaken, for to know GOD, and Christ (that is, to have experimental knowledge of GOD, and Christ, and to enjoy GOD in Christ, as the word (know) by an Hebraisme signifies) is not there mentioned, as the efficient cause of eternal life, but as the thing wherein it doth formally consist: So also that speech, job 33, 26. (as Master Perkins truly expounds it) doth not speak of the fruit of a man's righteousness, which GOD renders to him; but of the righteousness of Christ, which GOD renders to a man a fresh, and after temptation, doubting, and distress, makes him feel and enjoy it in himself, when by repentance, and humble and faithful prayer he seeks it.  
And although the nation of the Israelites are often (as he allegeth) called by the name of Jacob in Scripture, because he was their Father, and they his natural progeny: yet this proves only, that the Scripture useth tropes of speech many times, which we acknowledge willingly, and in the next Chapter will prove fully. Where he forgetting, and contradicting himself, utterly disclaims tropes and figures, and exclaimes against all the learned, who hold that Saint Paul useth a trope in saying that faith is imputed for righteousness: Well, for the present we will grant him, that our cleanness from the guilt of sin, and the state of righteous, and justified persons, wherein we stand before GOD, being the issue and fruit of Christ's satisfaction communicated to us, may very well be called by a trope the righteousness of Christ; but this doth not overthrow, but rather strongly prove the communion, and imputation of Christ's righteousness to us. Thus we see how he labours in the fire, and in vain beats his brains, and out of the confusion, and distemper of them, doth say, and gainsay, affirm and deny the same things oftentimes; being like a cloud without water, carried about with winds, sometimes one way, and again the contrary way, and never settling upon solid truth, nor building upon a sure foundation. Now what he promiseth in the conclusion of this Chapter▪ you shall see how he performeth by my answer, to his second Chapter, wherein as he begins here, so he goeth on entangling and beating himself, forging and falsifying, and in every passage discovering his ignorance and folly, mingled with much impudence & heretical perverseness and pravity, which that it may better appear, and that we may see his Socinian heresy to the bottom clearly, I will lay down the chief heads of the Doctrine of Justification, as it is taught in the Scriptures, and maintained by all Orthodox Divines, both ancient and modern.  
Justification taken in a full sense is that act of GOD, by which he justifies his elect, and faithful in his son jesus Christ by the communion of his spirit; that is, doth make them righteous by Christ's perfect righteousness, and full satisfaction spiritually made theirs, and doth count them righteous by imputing the same unto them, and doth declare them to be righteous inwardly to their own consciences by the inward testimony of his spirit, and the inward sense and experience of inward grace; and outwardly in this life before men, and publicly in the last judgements by their good works, which are evidences of their faith, and of their union and communion with jesus Christ, and of their regeneration by his spirit, and adoption unto GOD in him.  
First GOD the father is the primary efficient cause of our justification. Rom. 3.26.30. and 4.5. and 8.33. Secondly the inward moving cause is GOD'S own free grace favour and love Rom. 3.24. Tit. 3.7. The outward moving or impulsive cause is Christ's mediation Isa 53.11. john 1●. 21. 1 John 2.2.  
The instrumental cause is Christ the mediator communicating his whole obedience to us, when by the spirit which GOD sheds on us through him, we are made one body with him, 1 Cor. 12.13. Tit. 3.6. The means by which we come to be justified are, either principal; viz. the lively operation of the spirit, spiritual union with Christ, the pure and holy humanity of Christ, or less principal▪ the word and ministry thereof, the Sacraments, faith and the like, as appears, Rom. 3.25.28. and 10.14. Gal. 3.8. Heb. 9.14. 1 john 1. ●. Dan. 12.3.  
The material cause, that is, the righteousness itself by which they are justified, that is, made, counted, and declared to be righteous, is Christ's perfect righteousness obedience and satisfaction, which he, GOD and man performed in our nature, in the state of humiliation, Rom. 3.24.25. Rom. 5.19. and 8.4. The formal cause of justification is that communion between Christ and us, and that reciprocal imputation of our sins to Christ, and of his righteousness, and full satisfaction to us, which communion ariseth, and floweth from the spirit which GOD sheds on us through Christ, which spirit dwelling in us (in some measure, so as he dwelleth in the man Christ, from whom he is derived to us) doth make us one spiritual body with Christ, and works in us faith and all holy graces, & affections by which we adhere and cleave to Christ, and apply and enjoy his righteousness, so that it is our formal righteousness not inherently, but imputatively, and by spiritual communion, for it is that which doth constitute, and make us righteous, Rom. 5.17, 18, 19 and 8.4. and ●0. 4. and 2 Cor. 5.21.  
The immediate fruit and benefit of our justification, is the state of righteousness and of cleanness from the guilt of sin, and acceptation with GOD, Rom. 3.25. and 4.2. also peace with GOD, Rom. 5.1.  
The end and use of our justification is the satisfaction and declaration of GOD'S justice, in that he justifieth us by the full satisfaction of Christ, and not otherwise, neither by it till he communicates it to us and makes it ours; Also the manifestation of his mercy, free grace and bounty, in that he would give his son to become man, and to make satisfaction to the full, when no other could be found able to satisfy for us, neither could his justice by any other means be satisfied, also in that he would give us his spirit to unite us to his son, and to bring us to a true communion of his righteousness, and to work faith in us by which we receive and enjoy Christ with all his benefits, Rom. 3.24.26. Tit. 3.4. Ephes. 1.6.12.   

The contrary Doctrine of Socinus▪ and his faction.  
THough they grant that GOD is the chief efficient cause, and his free grace, mercy, and love, the inward moving cause; yet they err in the impulsive and instrumental cause, and make Christ and his righteousness no otherwise meritorious, but by procuring that GOD should count faith in a proper sense, for righteousness to them that believe, neither any other way an instrument of justification, but by bringing faith to this honour, to be accepted for, or in stead of righteousness.  
Secondly they deny all causality of Christ's righteousness in justification, except only by way of efficiency: whereas indeed and in truth it is the matter about which justification is exercised, for what is justification but the communicating of that righteousness to men, and the imputing of it, and declaring of them to be thereby righteous? the very name of justification signifies so much: and what is the form of a justified man as he is righteous, but righteousness? to imagine a righteous, and justified man without righteousness, is as if one should dream of a living man without life or soul.  
Thirdly they deny the principal ground of justification, to wit, spiritual union and communion with Christ, which cannot stand without imputation of Christ's righteousness; for communion and union do necessarily bring with them imputation. If we have communion of Christ's satisfaction and righteousness, GOD must needs judge and count them to be ours, for his judgement is according to truth. And faith which is an inferior and subordinate means, they set up in the place of Christ's righteousness.  
Fourthly as they deny the material cause of justification, by rejecting Christ's righteousness from being the proper matter about which it is exercised; so also the form or formal cause, even the mutual communion, and reciprocal imputation of our sins to Christ, and Christ's satisfaction and righteousness to us, whereby it is made our formal righteousness not inherently, but spiritually and imputatively, for they acknowledge no formality, but inherency.  
Fiftly they deny the immediate fruit and benefit of justification, to wit that state of righteousness, cleanness from the guilt of sin, and acceptation with GOD, wherein the justified are firmly established before GOD, and stand in his sight, which is the chief honour and prerogative of GOD'S Saints, and their greatest comfort in all their afflictions, and temptations.  
Lastly, they take away the true end, and use of justification, to wit, the revelation of GOD'S infinite justice, mercy, bounty, and free grace; for they overthrow his infinite justice, while they teach that GOD by his sovereign power puts his justice to silence; and without Christ's full satisfaction, made to it, for us, and made ours by communion, and imputation, doth accept our weak faith in stead of it, and makes himself as countable for it in all rewards, as he would do for the perfect fulfilling of the Law by ourselves, or by Christ in our stead. They extenuate and vilify GOD'S mercy, bounty, and free grace; by setting up faith in stead of Christ's perfect righteousness, and making it the condition of the new covenant. For whatsoever is given or promised to us, upon a condition to be on our part performed, is not a gift of free grace and bounty. And when justice may be turned out of doors, without a complete satisfaction; there is nothing left for mercy wherein to show the power of it. The infinite mercy of GOD doth appear in this, that, when his infinite justice required that we should all be damned without a full satisfaction (which none could make but the son of GOD in our nature) and that performed for us, and made ours; He would give his only son for us to satisfy in our stead, and his holy spirit to unite us to his Son, and to bring us to communion of his satisfaction.  
Thus we see that they shut up the door of Heaven, and stop that only way to eternal life, by overthrowing justification, which is the making and accounting of men righteous, by that only righteousness of Christ, besides which there is not any other to be found sufficient, and able to bear us out before GOD'S tribunal of justice. Now let all true Christians well weigh and consider the difference, between truth and error, life and death, true Christianity and Antichristian infidelity; for such is the damned Socinianism before discovered. And if any man in the midst of the light of the Gospel shining so clearly, and discovering so plainly cursed heresy, will be blind; let him be more blind still; and if any will be filthy, let them be more filthy still. And if any love not the LORD Jesus, but hate and blaspheme his truth, let him be Anathema Maranatha. Amen.    

THE SECOND CHAPTER, OF Socinianism.  
Wherein the imputation of faith for righteousness (in a proper sense) is undertaken to be proved from the Scriptures, and the interpretation of those Scriptures confirmed both by reason, and authority, as well of ancient, as modern Divines.  

THE PREFACE.  
WHat it is that should be imputed for righteousness in justification; all the wisdom, and learning under heaven, is not so fit or able to determine, as the holy Ghost speaking in the Scriptures, being the great Secretary of heaven, and privy to all the ways, and counsels of GOD: and therefore there is none to him, to take up any difference, or to compromise between the controverters, about any subject in Religion.  
All the difficulty, and question is, because though he speaks upon the house top, yet he interprets in the ear: all the Christian world either knows (or readily may know) what he speaks in the Scripture: But what his meaning and intent is in any thing, he leaves unto men to debate, and make out amongst them. To some indeed he reveals the secret of his counsel, the Spirit of his letter, in some particulars; but because these are not marked in the forehead, therefore their apprehensions and thoughts (though the true begotten of the truth) are yet in common esteem, but like other men's, till some stamp or superscription of rational authority be set upon them to make the difference, yea many times, the nearer the truth, the further off from the approbation of many, and sometimes, even of those, that are greatest pretenders to the truth.   

The Answer.  
THe first part or speech, is a solid truth, to wit, that no wisdom, and learning under heaven, is so fit or able to determine what is imputed, for righteousness in justification, as the holy Ghost speaking in the Scriptures. But this truth he contradicts in the next words which follow immediately, where he saith, that the holy Ghost leaves his meaning, and intent to men to debate, which if it be true, than men are to determine, and to take up every difference about any subject in Religion. This beginning with contradiction is very ominous, and prodigious: and from hence we may gather, what we are likely to find in his ensuing discourse.  
The rule by which men are to judge of, the Spirits meaning is the stamp, and superscription of rational authority, set upon them: so he here expressly affirms, and in this he openly professeth himself, to be of the faction of the Socinian, and Arminian remonstrants, who do teach that the best judge of the meaning, of the Scriptures is, recta ratio, that is, their own carnal reason, rectified by the art of Sophistry. Again, he affirms, that all the Christian world knows, or readily may know, what the holy Ghost speaks in the Scripture. If this be true, than they are all taught of GOD, and the Spirit leaves not his meaning to men to debate, and to promise between controverters. Here is another contradiction.  
He proceeds yet further in his absurdities, and tells us that the holy Ghost reveals not to all the Christian world, but to some, the secret of his counsel, the Spirit of his letter: this is a contradiction to that which went next before. And whereas before he saith, that all the Christian world knows what the holy Ghost speaks in Scripture, that is all saving truth: here he saith, that he reveals the secret of his counsel, but in some particulars: thus in every thing he contradicts himself, and like a lunatic broken out of Bedlam, he raves, first saying, and affirming, and immediately denying, and gainsaying, in the same things. But yet a lunatic persons have high conceits of themselves, that they are of noble, and royal blood, right heirs to Crowns, Kingdoms, and Empires: or if not the holy Ghost himself, yet persons wonderfully illuminated, and inspired by him. And many times they will not utter their conceits in express words, but tell you of such great persons, and complain of your blockish dulness, and stupidity, if you do not presently discern that they speak of themselves, and they are the men. So here doth this illuminated Doctor deal with us: He tells us of some special ones, to whom the Spirit interprets in the ear, and reveals the secret of his council, the Spirit of his letter, who are the true begotten of the truth: and that he takes himself to be a chief among these, it appears, first by his undertaking to give a reason of the counsel and purpose of GOD in his former Chapter, (as I have there noted.) Secondly, by his taking upon him, here to determine this question, which none but such illuminated ones can be able to do. And he breaks off his prologue with a kind of complaint, and exprobration full of disdain, namely this, that because they, (meaning himself, and his fellows) are not marked in the forehead, by the Spirit of illumination; therefore their thoughts, and apprehensions, are yet in common esteem like other men (you see, non sapit humanum, nec est mortale quod optat) till some stamp, and superscription, of rational authority, be set upon them to make the difference. Here he seems in this last clause, to take courage, and to conceive some hope, that by the rational authority, of his new coined Logic, (of which he lately gave us a taste, when he told us, that causes are opposite, ex diametro & therefore the efficient, impulsive instrumental material, formal, and final causes, of man's justification, and salvation, cannot all, or the most of them concur in one person Christ, though GOD and man) he will make the difference known between his excellency, and other men's ignobility, and obscurity.  
The last clause of his complaint, wherewith he concludes his Preface, is an overthwart blow to some, where speaking of those first begotten of the truth, he saith, yea many times the nearer the truth, the further off from the approbation of many; and sometimes even of those, that are the greatest pretenders to the truth. A shrewd nip (if you mark it) to you learned Doctors, & Preachers of the City of London, who are great pretenders to the truth: and yet the nearer that he is come to the truth, and makes his unlearned followers able to see it to the bottom (as he hath often told us) the further off he is from your approbation. If he be thus bold, and ready to nip you who do not approve his opinion, it is no marvel that his rude followers, do lay all slanders, reproach, and aspersions on us, who oppose him, and charge him with Socinian heresy, and blasphemy, whom they admire, and proclaim to be the great light of GOD'S Church in these last days.   

Socinianism.  
Four things there are especially, which much commend an Interpretation, when they are found in conjunction, and establish, it like that King upon his Throne Prov. 36.31. against whom there is no rising up. First if the Letter, or Grammar of the Scripture will fairly and strongly bear it. 2ᵒ If the scope of the place will close directly and entirely with it. 3ᵒ When the interpretation which is set up against it, cannot stand before the circumstances of the text. 4ᵒ And last, when the judgement of able, learned, and unpartial men are found in concurrence with it. If these four be sufficient to furnish out an interpretation with authority, and power, then shall we need no more Scriptures, to prove the innocency of our affirmative. viz. the imputation of faith for righteousness (the truth of the negative inseparably accompanying it) but that one Chapter only, Rom. 4.   

Christianisme.  
IN these words he makes his entrance, into the disputing of the point before propounded, to wit, faith in a proper sense is imputed for righteousness in justification; which speech excludes the righteousness of Christ from being the only righteousness by, which being communicated, and imputed to true believers, they are justified and stand righteous before GOD.  
First he propounds four things, which when they are found in conjunction, with an interpretation of any Scripture, they commend and establish it (as he saith) like that King upon his Throne against whom there is no rising up, Prov. 30.31. These four things. First the literal sense strongly bearing it. Secondly the scope of the place concurring. Thirdly the inconsistence of the circumstances of the place, with the interpretation which is contrary. Fourthly the Judgement of able learned men agreeing with it, these I say may pass for current. But whether that one place of Scripture, in the interpretation whereof these concur, be alone without more Scriptures, sufficient to prove the innocency of an assertion which is agreeable to that interpretation, is a question, many interpretations seem to have all these, and yet are contradicted by other Scriptures, as that place Hosea 11.1. When Israel was a child, out of Egypt have I called my Son, being interpreted of the Nation of the Israelites, was borne up by the letter, concurred with the scope, and circumstances more than many contrary expositors, and all the learned and able Jews so understood it: and yet the Gospel expounds it another way, Mat. 2.15. The place of Scripture upon the interpretation whereof established by these four things, he intends to build his whole dispute in this Chapter, is the fourth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans; so that his proofs by which he goeth about to set the royal Crown, which is due to Christ and his righteousness, on the head of man's imperfect faith, are according to these four things, divided into four ranks. First he undertakes to prove, that the Letter of that Scripture, Rom. 4. doth bear up his interpretation, to wit, that faith in itself, and in a proper sense is said to be imputed for righteousness in justification. Secondly by the scope of the place. Thirdly by showing that the circumstances of that Scripture, cannot bear the Doctrine of Christ's righteousness imputed. Fourthly by the judgement, and testimonies of able learned and unpartial men. But how poorly he performs his undertake, and how pitifully he faileth in them, we shall in the progress show. That his disputation is like to be very Illogicall, we may gather from the foul flaw which appears in his Logic, in this his first entrance, where he saith we need no more Scriptures, to prove the innocency of our affirmative, viz. the imputation of faith for righteousness (the truth of the negative inseparably accompanying it) but that Chapter only, Rom. 4.  
First it is against all true reason and Logic, that the affirmative should be innocent from untruth, and that the negative which is opposed to it, should have truth accompanying it. If his affirmative (faith is imputed for righteousness, in a proper sense) be true, than the negative must needs be false, to wit, faith in a proper sense is not imputed: But perhaps by the negative, he doth not mean the negative of his affirmative, but some other negative proposition, the subject whereof, is different from the subject of his affirmative. His hatred and envy, against Christ's righteousness, lest it should get the Crown from faith, is so great, that we may well conceive, that by the negative he in heart means, this (Christ's righteousness is not imputed in justification) which if he doth, we cannot but blame him for speaking ambiguously, which Logic in a disputation abhorreth. But I leave his trifling, and come to the ground and foundation of his discourse, even that fourth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, on which he labours to build his heretical opinion. The words of that Chapter which seem most to favour him are these. Verse 3. Abraham believed GOD, and it was counted to him for righteousness, and verse 5. To him that believeth, his faith is counted for righteousness, and verse 9 For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.  
That the truth may more plainly appear, and the contrary falsehood, and error be made more fully manifest, I will first lay down the true orthodox exposition of the words, which is according to the common judgement of the most godly, learned, and judicious Divines, of the best reformed Churches.  
Secondly I will truly rehearse the corrupt exposition of the Apostles words, made by the heretic Socinus, and his followers the Arminians, and other fanatical Sectaries, unto which this adversary adheres, and grounds his whole disputation upon it. The orthodox exposition I will illustrate and confirm by the scope, and circumstances of the rext, and by arguments drawn from other Scriptures. The corrupt exposition also I will prove to be false, and heretical. And afterwards I will proceed to answer this adversaries discourse in every particular.   

The true Exposition explained.  
FIrst these words, that Abraham believed GOD, and it was counted to him for righteousness, are generally held to be improper, and tropical, and that the meaning of them is not, that Abraham's faith, or act of believing by it self in a proper sense, was counted to him for righteousness: but that the object of his faith even that which he believed, to wit, Christ promised for righteousness and salvation, was that which by GOD was (upon Abraham's believing) counted to him for righteousness. It was not his faith simply considered in itself, but his faith embracing Christ promised, and possessing him with his righteousness, and satisfaction which was reckoned to him for righteousness, and as to him, so to every one that believeth his faith is counted to him for righteousness. For all true believers who by faith lay hold on Christ, the promised seed of Abraham, and believe GOD to be their shield, and exceeding great reward in him, they are by one spirit baptised into one spiritual body with Christ, united to him their spiritual head, and made his lively members, and sensible partakers of his perfect obedience, righteousness and full satisfaction, for redemption, remission of sins, justification, and perfect salvation; and need not any more to seek the reward of blessedness, by the righteousness of their own works▪ performed according to the tenor of the Law, by every man in his own person; but in the LORD jesus Christ (who is jehovah Zidkenu the LORD our righteousness, jer. 23.6. and the end and fulfilling of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth, Rom. 10.4.) they have perfect righteousness. And in him GOD is become their reward, and the lot and portion of their inheritance, Psal. 16.5. And that gracious and free favour which GOD showed to Abraham, when he believed in Christ promised, and firmly without staggering applied to himself, the blessing promised, being fully persuaded that GOD who of his free grace promised, was by his power able to perform, though by the course of nature, and by reason of the deadness of Sara's womb he himself seemed to be, and indeed was uncapable of that blessing; The same he will show to all true believers, who are Abraham's faithful seed, and children of promise, that is, as he reckoned Abraham's faith for righteousness; so he will count their faith to them for righteousness; that is, he will accept and account them for righteous persons (as indeed they are) not for any works of their own, nor by any righteousness performed according to the letter of the law in their own persons, but by the righteousness, which is through the faith of Christ, and is called the righteousness of faith, because it is the righteousness of Christ GOD and man, given to them of GOD, and of them apprehended, and applied by faith. For being thus justified by faith, and having communion with Christ of his full satisfaction and righteousness, GOD whose judgement is according to truth doth certainly judge and count them (as truly they are) righteous in his sight, & becomes in Christ their shield, and exceeding great reward. This is the Orthodox exposition of the Apostles words in this Chapter, generally received by all, both ancient and modern Divines, famous for learning and godliness.   

The corrupt and heretical exposition of the Apostles words, made by Socinus, and maintained by his followers the Arminians, and other fanatical Sectaries.  
THey of the Socinian faction, do generally hold and obstinately affirm, that Abraham's believing and his faith, taken in a proper literal sense without any trope, is here said by the Apostle to be counted to Abraham for righteousness, in stead of all righteousness which either Abraham himself, was by the Law bound to perform in his own person, or any surety could perform for him. And in like manner to every one that believeth, his faith is in a proper sense said to be counted for righteousness, even his faith by itself, and not the righteousness of Christ with it. This is their exposition. And upon these words of the Apostle thus falsely, and corruptly interpreted, they build all their heretical opinions, and doctrines concerning justification of the faithful before GOD, namely these following. First that faith, as it is in every believer, even as it is inherent in him, and is his own faith and believing; is the only thing which GOD of his grace and mercy, and out of his absolute sovereign power and dominion, is pleased to ordain, appoint, and account for all the righteousness, which a man shall have for his justification; though in truth, and according to Law and the rule of justice, it is not righteousness, being weak oftentimes and full of imperfections.  
Secondly that the Spirit of GOD in these words of the Apostle, did not intend or mean any communion of the righteousness, and perfect obedience performed by Christ to the Law, as our surety, and in our stead, nor imputation of that righteousness to every true believer for justification, nor GOD'S accepting of the faithful for righteous by that righteousness communicated to them, and of them applied possessed and enjoyed by faith.  
By faith, and believing, they do not understand that applying faith, which is a gift and work of GOD'S Spirit, in the elect, regenerate, and sanctified, by which they do believe and are persuaded, that they are in Christ, and Christ is their head, and they as lively members of his mystical body▪ have communion of all his benefits, even of his full satisfaction and perfect righteousness, for justification, and full remission of all their sins. But by faith, and believing, they understand only a confidence in GOD, that he will perform his promises made in Christ, and an assent unto his word that it is true. The tenor of which word, and promises, they conceive to be this; That Christ in his pure unspotted humane nature, hath by his righteousness, suffering and obedience, unto death, merited, such high favour with GOD; that GOD in honour to him is pleased to accept and account the faith of them that believe in him, and rest on him for their Saviour, for perfect righteousness, and requires no other righteousness to constitute, and make them in any sort formally righteous in their justification.  
When they acknowledge that the perfect righteousness, and satisfaction of Christ, is the meritorious cause of our justification: they do not mean that they are communicated to us, and so apprehended, and possessed of us by faith, that we are thereby indeed, and in GOD'S account righteous before GOD, and justified; or that they deserve and are worthy, that GOD should so account us for them. But their mind, and meaning is, that Christ by his righteousness hath merited, that GOD for his sake, and in favour to him should account faith to us for righteousness, without either our own works, of the Law, or Christ's righteousness imputed to us and made ours by communion. And when they say that faith is imputed for righteousness as an instrument, they do not mean as the instrument or spiritual hand, applying Christ his righteousness to be after a sort, the formal righteousness of the believer, but that faith, as it is the instrument by which the believer doth believe that Christ hath purchased this favour, that his believing should be the only thing, accounted to him for righteousness; so only and no other way, GOD reckons to him for righteousness.  
The orthodox exposition I will in the first place prove, and confirm, from the words of the Apostle himself, & by other strong reasons▪ & afterward confute & overthrow the Socinian, heretical exposition.   

The true Exposition proved and confirmed.  
FOr the right understanding of the Apostles words, three things come first to be considered, and explained. 1. What is here meant by faith, and believing. 2. What righteousness is here meant. 3. What is meant by imputation.  
First, by faith in this text, we must not understand, that natural habit and power, which is common to all reasonable men; who upon their apprehension, and knowledge of things spoken, and promised, do give willing assent unto them that they are true, either for the authority of the speaker whom they do respect and judge to be faithful, or because they see good reason in the things spoken and promised: And if the things spoken and promised be such as tend to their own good; they rest upon them confidently, and persuade themselves, that they are sure and certain of them already, or shall receive and enjoy them in due time without fail. But here by faith we are to understand that supernatural gift, and grace of believing wrought in the elect, regenerate by the spirit shed on them abundantly through jesus Christ, Tit. 3.6. which is therefore called most holy faith, jud. 20. verse. This faith agreeth with the other in four points. First as that is an habit and power of believing, so is this. Secondly as that contains in it, notitiam in intellectu, and assensum in voluntate, that is, both a notice and knowledge of the things spoken and believed, and an assent of the will, so doth this also. Thirdly as that faith when it goeth no further than knowledge and assent is called hlstoricall; so this also. Fourthly as that faith when it reacheth to good things promised to ourselves particularly, to apply them, and to rest on them, hath also fiduciam in cord et affectionibus, a trust and confidence of the heart and affections in it; so hath this also, and is called a firm persuasion, trust and confidence. But they differ in divers things. First that is a natural power or habit, this is a spiritual wrought in men by the spirit of GOD dweling in them, and uniting them to Christ in one mystical body. Secondly, that hath in it no knowledge, but natural, arising from light of natural reason, nor any assent of the will, or confidence in the heart and affections, but such as are drawn, stirred up and wrought by means of natural light, and common causes. This hath in it a spiritual knowledge arising from the spirit of GOD, enlightening the understanding; the spirit also inclines and moves the will to give assent, and confirms the heart with confidence, and firm persuasion. Thirdly that is common to all reasonable men; This is proper to the elect regenerate and sanctified by the holy Ghost, shed on them through Christ, and is the first and as it were the radical grace and virtue of renovation. Fourthly that hath for the object or things believed, either natural and worldly things only; or things heavenly and supernatural, seen, and discerned through the dim mist of natural reason, and assented to and rested on with a carnal and unsanctified will and heart. This hath for the object things supernatural, heavenly and spiritual, discerned by supernatural light, assented to with an holy and sanctified will, confirmed to the heart by a spiritual sense, and sweet taste of the things promised, wrought by the holy spirit in the true believer apprehending and applying them.  
But to come nearer to the text, the believing which the Apostle speaks of in 3.9. and 22. verses, is the faith and believing of Abraham, who divers years before this act of believing, which it here said to be counted to him for righteousness, was called out of his own country, and by faith obeyed GOD calling, and went and sojourned in the land, promised to him, and his seed, as appears, Heb. 11.8, 9 He had overcome and slaughtered four mighty Kings, and their victorious armies, by faith and confidence in GOD'S promises. And Melchizedek, King of Salem, the Priest of the most high GOD, had blessed him, as we read, Gen. 14. And after these things, the LORD appeared to him, and said, fear not Abraham▪ I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward; and withal he renewed the promise of the blessed seed, by means of which seed, all the families of the earth should be blessed in Abraham, and should become his faithful Children; besides, his natural seed, and posterity, which should come of the Son, and heir of his own bowels, as appears, Gen. 15. verse 1.4. These were the promises which GOD made to Abraham, and which Abraham believed to be true, and resting upon the LORD by firm faith, and belief, for the performance of them, the LORD counted it to him for righteousness. Gen. 15.6. or as the Apostle expresseth the same sentence, in the same sense, though in words somewhat different, it was counted to him for righteousness. verse 3. even faith was reckoned to him for righteousness, verse 9 Now this faith was first an holy and spiritual belief, and the faith of a man, long before called of GOD, sanctified by his Spirit, and made obedient to GOD and his word. Secondly, it was a belief not only of the promise of Christ the blessed seed in general, but more specially, that Christ the blessed seed, should according to the flesh come out of his own bowels, and that by Christ the Son of GOD, made man of his seed, the redemption both of him, and of his faithful seed, all true believers should be wrought, and performed, GOD'S wrath appeased, the Law fulfilled, and justice satisfied, and perfect righteousness brought in for their justification; and by his, and their union with Christ by one spirit, and communion of all his benefits, they should have GOD for their portion, and reward, and for their shield and defence, and should not need to seek the blessing and reward from their own works, or their righteousness, and fulfilling of the Law in their own persons, but merely from the free grace of GOD, and of his free gift in Christ as a reward of Christ's righteousness, freely given to them, and of them apprehended by faith, and believing. Thirdly, this faith of Abraham was not a weak, but strong faith and belief, without staggering, even a full persuasion that GOD who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not, as if they were, was able to make good, and to perform what he had promised, yea, it was a believing in hope, against hope, that GOD could out of a dead body, and womb raise up a lively seed, and make them spiriritually righteous, which are by nature, and according to the Law wicked sinners. All these things are manifest by the place before cited. Gen 15. and by the express words of the Apostle in this Chapter, from the tenth verse, to the end of the Chapter. And thus it is plain what is meant by faith, which is here said to be imputed for righteousness.  
Secondly, the righteousness here meant, is not the righteousness which is according to the strict terms, and tenor of the Law, that is, righteousness of a man's own works, performed by every man in his own person to the whole Law of GOD, for the Apostle doth dispute altogether against that righteousness, and proves that neither Abraham was justified, or counted of GOD righteous for it, as appears in the 2.5.6. and 13. verses; nor any other at any time, as he shows in the Chapter next before, and in the Chap. 8.3. and 9.32. and 10.3. But here is meant an Evangelical righteousness which doth not consist in any work, or works performed by man himself in his own person, nor in any grace or virtue, inhaerent in himself, but is a righteousness which GOD of his own free grace, doth impute to the true believer, who by one spirit is united to Christ, and hath communion with him, and which is called the righteousness of faith, (because by faith men lay hold on it) and doth exclude legal justification by righteousness of a man's own works▪ as appears by the Apostles whole discourse in this and the former Chapter, and in divers other places of this Epistle, especially verse 13, of this Chapter, and in Chap. 3.27.28.  
Thirdly the phrase of imputing or counting a thing to one, signifies both in the old and new Testament, an act of judgement and estimation, by which a thing is judged, esteemed, reckoned, and accounted to be as it is indeed, and then it is just according to truth; or else judged thought, and esteemed to be as it is not, and then it is unjust and not according to truth. GOD'S thoughts are always right and just, and his judgement is according to truth. Rom. 2.2. And therefore a just counting and imputing is here meant, for GOD doth account, and judge of persons, and things so as they are.  
Of unjust counting, and imputing falsely, we have some instances in Scripture, as 1 King 1.21. where Bethsheba saith to David, I and my son Solomon shall be counted offenders, that is usurping Adoniah, and his wicked company will esteem and judge us, and use us accordingly,  
Of reputing and counting truly as the thing is, we have examples also, as Nehem. 13.13. where it is said of the chosen Levites that they were counted faithful, viz. upon former experience of their faithfulness, and therefore the office of distributing to their brethren was committed to them. And Levit. 17.4. where it is said, blood shall be imputed to that man, he hath shed blood, and shall be cut off from among his people, and Psal. 22.30. a seed shall serve him, it shall be counted to the LORD for a generation.  
Moreover this word impute, or count, signifies sometimes in the most proper sense, a bare act of judgement and thought. Prov. 17.28. where a fool is said to be counted wise, when he holdeth his peace, that is, men for the present so think, and judge him to be at least in that point of silence. Sometimes it signifies in a more full sense not only thinking, counting and judging persons to be good, or bad, just or unjust, innocent or guilty; but also dealing with them, and using them accordingly, as in the place before named, I King 2.21. Neh. 13.13. Psal. 22.30. and 1 Sam. 22.15. where Ahimilech purging himself before Saul, from the offence of conspiracy with David against him, as Doeg had falsely accused him, saith, let not the King impute any thing to his servant, that is, let him not count his servant guilty, nor use him as a conspirator. Sometimes it signifies by a Metonymy of the cause, for the effect condemning, and punishing an offence in a guilty person as he hath deserved, and to deal with him as he is justly thought and judged to have deserved, as Shimei said, 2 Sam. 19.19. Let not my LORD impute iniquity to me, he doth not desire that David would not think, nor count his iniquity to be no iniquity, that had been against all reason: but that for the satisfaction which he had made in coming, first before all the house of Joseph to meet David, and to bring him again to his Kingdom, David would graciously pardon his offence, and not proceed against him and punish him according to his favit, though guilty and worthy of punishment. Sometimes it signifies by a Metaphor to count one thing, as if it were another, or no better than another, or of the same value, as Prov. 27.4. where a flattering salutation, or blessing given with a loud voice is said to be counted a curse, that is, esteemed no better than a curse. Sometimes to use one as if he counted him of another condition, as Gen. 31.15. where it is said that Laban counted his daughter's strangers, that is, used them as he had counted them strangers, and job 31.10. where job saith that GOD counted him for his enemy, that is, afflicted and plagued him as if he had counted him his enemy. Sometimes the word signifies to score up, or put upon a man's account, either the offence or debt which he runs into himself, as Rom. 5.13. where it is said, that sin is not imputed where there is no Law, that is, it is not so skored up, that they are punished for it, it is not judged and punished in them; Or the debt which he takes upon him for another, as Philemon verse 18. If he hath wronged thee or is indebted to thee, put that on mine account, that is, impute and count it to me, set it on my score. Now the several significations of the several words being thus laid open, I proceed more particularly to every word to show the true sense, and meaning of it in these speeches of the Apostle, and to show how far the speeches may be extended. And first by faith and believing which is counted to every true believer, and was counted to Abraham for righteousness; I here understand (according to the judgement of the most Orthodox Divines) the true holy, spiritual faith and belief, which is before showed to have been in Abraham, and which is proper to the elect regenerate, and is said to be imputed for righteousness. By righteousness is here meant Evangelicall righteousness (which is opposed to the legal righteousness of works, which is inherent in every man, and is every man's fulfilling of the Law in his own person) even the righteousness and perfect satisfaction of Christ, GOD and man, our mediator and surety, which he the son of GOD in man's nature performed to the Law, and which is apprehended by every true believer, and applied to himself by a lively faith, whereof also he hath true communion, and is truly made partaker by his spirtual union, with Christ, of whose mystical body, he is a member, being thereinto engrafted and baptised by one spirit. By the imputing, and counting of that faith for righteousness to Abraham, and to every one of his faithful seed, is here meant GOD'S setting of Christ's righteousness on every true believers score, and putting it on his account, and judging, counting, and esteeming him no more guilty of sin, but perfectly righteous by that Evangelicall righteousness, which is called the righteousness of GOD, 2 Cor. 5.21. because GOD performed it in man's nature; and the righteousness of faith, Rom. 4.13. and not of works, because it is applied and enjoyed by faith, Philip 3.9.  
For the confirmation of this exposition and justifying of this truth, we need seek no other arguments, but such as may be gathered from the Apostles own words as in other of his Epistles, so especially in this to the Romans.  
argument 1 The first argument is drawn from the 2. Chapter of this Epistle; v. 26. where this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it signifies to be imputed or counted, is first used by the Apostle in the very same phrase, as here in this Chapter 4.3.5▪ 9 If (saith he) the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? By uncircumcision, in the first clause, we must necessarily understand a Gentile uncircumcised (as learned Beza in his notes observes) and that by a trope of speech which is called Metonymia adjuncti, for with some reason it may be supposed that an uncircumcised man, may observe the precepts of righteousness contained in the law; but it is against common sense, to suppose that the foreskin of any man's flesh not cut off, should perform the righteousness of the Law, no man in his right wits will father such a senseless meaning upon the learned Apostle. The same word in the second clause (as Beza also well observes) cannot with any reason be thought to signify the foreskin of man's flesh not cut off, that is uncircumcision in a proper sense, for that cannot but most falsely be reputed, and counted for circumcision, because they are contradictories one to another. But here by a trope or Metonymy (called Metonymia signipro re signatâ) the word uncircumcision signifies the state of Gentilism. Neither doth it signify that state barely considered by itself, but as comprehending in it the righteousness of the Law, which the uncircumcised man hath kept and performed in that state, as the words necessarily imply, for the Apostle doth not say that uncircumcision simply, but uncircumcision which hath kept the righteousness of the Law, shall be counted for circumcision. So that here is a Metalepsis or double trope, to wit, first uncircumcision put for Gentilism, of which it is a sign or adjunct, and secondly put not only for that state of a Gentile, but also for the righteousness of the Law, kept by the man in that outward state of a Gentile, uncircumcised which is a Metonymy of the subject containing for the thing contained. Yea if we look thoroughly into the phrase, we shall see that the state of the man uncircumcised, or the man in that estate, put for that which he hath done, and performed even the righteousness of the Law.  
By circumcision we cannot with reason understand, the outward cutting away of the foreskin of man's flesh, neither taken literally and carnally as the corrupt & blind jews did take it, for a work of righteousness and obedience to the Law for justification. The Apostle affirms, Galatians 5.3. that so taken it was an obligation, by which the circumcised was bound, under pain of cutting off for ever, to perform the whole Law. And for a righteous Gentile to be brought under this bondage was no benefit, but a miserable condition an ill reward of his keeping the Law.  
Neither can circumcision be here taken sacramentally as it was an outward sign and seal of the righteousness of faith, and of mortification, and all virtues of holiness by which men are sanctified to GOD, and become his peculiar people. For Ishmael, Esau, and all the Sons of Belial in Israel, even Elies wicked Sons, and the rest were partakers of the outward sign and sacrament of circumcsion, and yet being destitute of the inward grace, signified, their circumcision was no reward to them, but was a witness to condemn them. But the circumcision here mentioned by the Apostle is an honour, benefit, and a good condition, and therefore undoubtedly signifies, the inward circumcision of the heart in the Spirit, and not in the letter, so the Apostle doth expound himself, verse 29. that is true mortification, and sanctification.  
The word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) shall be counted, signifies here in a full sense, judging, counting, approving, accepting, and using accordingly. Now all laid together, the meaning of the Apostle must necessarily be this, without any contradiction. That if a man uncercumcised, do keep and observe with all holy endeavour the commandments of GOD'S Law, and the righteousness thereof, his state of Gentilism, and of outward uncircumcision comprehending in it a conscionable observing of GOD'S holy commandment, shall be accounted, and judged by GOD and by all who judge aright, (as it is indeed) the state of mortification, and sanctification, which by the Prophets is called circumcising of ourselves to the LORD, and putting away the foreskin of our hearts jer. 4.4. And this man though uncircumcised in the flesh and a Gentile in outward estate, shall be counted of GOD for a true Israelite, without guile, circumcised with circumcision of the heart in the Spirit, whose praise is not of men, but of GOD.  
This sense and meaning of the words of this phrase is so clear, and manifest, and so perfectly agreeable to all true reason, that no man can deny it, unless he will set himself to rebel against the light And this phrase being the same with that which is made the ground of this dispute, Rom. 4. where the same Apostle saith, that faith, and believing, were counted to Abraham, and so are to every true believer, for righteousness: yea, being the only place in all this Epistle wherein the Apostle useth the phrase of imputing, or counting, except only in this 4. Chap. and once in the 5. Chapter, where he saith, sin is not imputed, it must needs give light to these speeches, and words, in controversy, and as it hath the first place in this Epistle, so it deserves to go before as a guide to lead us to the understanding of the rest. Wherefore if we will follow the Apostle himself, and tread in the same steps after him, being the surest guide, and best expounder of his own meaning: we must by Abraham's believing, by a Metalepsis, or double trope (with our learned Divines) understand Abraham settled in the state of a true believer, united by one Spirit unto GOD in Christ, and having communion of his satisfaction, and righteousness, which were of force and efficacy from the beginning, to save & justify all the faithful, and to make GOD their reward. And by faith imputed we must not understand faith by itself in a proper sense, but the state and condition of a faithful man, and also that which faith comprehends, and includes in it, even the perfect righteousness, and full satisfaction of Christ, GOD and man (for there is a metalepsis or double trope, as in the place before expounded) By righteousness we must understand the state of a man justified, and made righteous by the communion of Evangelicall righteousness, and by counting, and imputing, we must understand, the accepting, approving, esteeming, and judging of Abraham and every true believer, to be in the state of a man justified, and GOD'S setting on his score, and imputing to him being faithful, the righteousness of Christ apprehended by faith, which no man can truly by faith lay hold on until by one spirit he be united to Christ, and have communion with him. Hear then the true sense and meaning of the speeches in question, parallelled with the sentence and speech before expounded Chap. 2.26. which I thus lay down paraphrastically.  
Abraham upon a true inward spiritual sense of his union, and communion with Christ did believe and was surely persuaded that GOD was his reward, and this belief, and faith apprehending Christ, and after a sort containning in it, as by a fast holding and possessing hand of the soul, Christ's righteousness, GOD counted it to him for righteousness, that is, set it on his score, and reckoned to him for justification, and judged, esteemed, and accepted him for a man truly righteous, as indeed he was by Evangelicall righteousness. And so, whosoever doth not rest on his own works for justification, nor seeketh thereby to be justified, but by faith feeling himself by nature ungodly, fleeth to Christ's righteousness, and by faith feels himself to have communion of it, and holds it fast, and applies, and enjoys it. His faith is to him an evidence of his righteousness, and GOD▪ who judgeth according to truth knowing him to have share in Christ's righteousness, doth accept it for him, and counts him righteous, and useth him as a man truly justified. Thus you see how the Apostles former using of this phrase in the second Chapter, doth show the true meaning of it here where it seems to be more doubtful. The sum of the argument reduced into a short syllogism is this.  
That exposition of a doubtful phrase, which is most agreeable to the manifest sense and meaning of the same phrase used by the same Author, in the same discourse, is the best: Our exposition of the phrase in question, to wit, faith and believing is imputed for righteousness, is most agreeable to the manifest sense of the same phrase of speech used by this same Apostle Cap. 2.26 in this same Epistle. Therefore undoubtedly, our exposition is best.  
argument 2 Secondly, wheresoever the Apostle useth the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, of imputing one thing for another, there the thing imputed differeth from that, for which it is imputed, and cannot in any proper sense be called the same, as in the place before cited, Rom. 2.26 Rom. 9.8. and so it is, Psal 106.31. where Phineas his executing of judgement, is said to be counted to him for righteousness. And wheresoever a thing is said in a proper sense to be counted, or imputed, or set on ones score, it is said simply to be counted, imputed, set upon a man's account, as Rome 4.4. where the reward is said to be counted of debt to him that worketh, and verse 6. and 8. where GOD is said to impute righteousness, and not to impute sin▪ and verse 11. that righteousness might be imputed unto them. and Rom. 5.13. sin is not imputed when there is no Law. & 2 Cor. 5.19. not imputing their trespasses to them, & 2. Tim. 4.16. I pray GOD it may not be laid to their charge, or counted to them (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Philem. 18. put that on my account. Now here in the speeches controverted faith and believing are not said simply to be imputed to believers, but to be imputed for righteousness, and therefore faith is not said to be imputed in a proper sense, neither can it truly be counted or called righteousness by itself, and in a proper sense; but the speech is tropical, and improper.  
A third argument is drawn argument 3 from the Apostles words in the 4. verse where he saith to him that worketh the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt; these words imply, that the righteousness here said to be imputed brings the reward of blessedness to the believer, which reward is of grace, and not of debt. Now there is nothing which can bring the reward of blessedness in eternal life to him unto whom it is counted and set on his score, but the perfect righteousness, and satisfaction of jesus Christ. That all do grant to be meritorious of eternal life to all that are partakers of it, and because the communion, and imputation of it is of GOD'S free grace, and the faith by which we receive and apply it is GOD'S free gift, therefore the reward of it, to wit, eternal life is of free grace, and not of debt, as the Apostle here saith, whereupon the conclusion follows, that the righteousness which GOD accepts, and imputes, is properly the righteousness of Christ apprehended by faith.  
Fourthly, the Apostle teacheth, argument 4 expressly, verse 6. and 7. that the thing imputed simply, and properly, by GOD, is righteousness, and such a righteousness, as being imputed, brings forgiveness of iniquity, & covers sins, and so makes the believer blessed. Now there is no righteousness to be found among all mankind but Christ's perfect righteousness, and satisfaction, and that is a perfect propitiation for all sins, and an expiation of all iniquity to them, who by faith have put on Christ, therefore it is the righteousness which is imputed to every believer for justification.  
Fiftly, that which is said to be imputed to Abraham, and to every true believer, is righteousness, argument 5 to justification: for the discourse of the Apostle both here, and in the Chapters next going before, & that which next followeth is altogether of justifying, as appears, Chap. 3.24 25.26, 28, 30. and Chap. 5.1, 16, 17, 18, 19 in all which places, he names expressly justification, & justifying: and here in this 4. Cap. he brings Abraham's example, and David's testimony, to show how we are justified. Now there is nothing which doth serve to us for justification, but that which is found in Christ our mediator, even his righteousness and perfect fulfilling of the Law, so he plainly affirms and teacheth Chap. 5, 19 and 8, 3, 4. and 10.3, 4. and therefore his righteousness upon the true believing of Abraham, and the faithful, is counted, and imputed to them, and set on their score, and they by it are justified.  
argument 6 Lastly, as the imputing of any thing for righteousness, is to be taken in other places of Scripture, wheresoever it is mentioned, so undoubtedly, it is here to be taken. For the Scripture is the best expounder of itself; and the spirit of God therein speaking doth best understand & show his own meaning. Now the only place in all the Scripture where any thing besides faith, and believing is said to be counted to man for righteousness, is that place of the Psalmist, Psal. 106. and 31. where the godly zealous act of Phinees, in executing just judgement on Zamri, and Cosbi is said to be counted to him for righteousness. Now the meaning of the words there cannot be, that this act of Phinees was accepted of GOD, and counted to him for righteousness to justification. For than it will follow that a man may be justified before GOD by one act, or work of his own. Which the Apostle here utterly condemneth as a gross error, and bends his whole discourse against it. The true sense and meaning of the phrase is no more but this, that Phinees performing such an act of godly zeal, as is proper only to a faithful righteous man, who by the spirit of regeneration, dwelling in him is so united unto Christ, that by faith he was a true partaker of his righteousness. GOD upon this act gave him the testimony of righteousness, and declared and judged him to be a righteous man truly justified. Therefore the Apostles phrase of counting faith to the believer for righteousness, which he often useth in this Chapter, signifieth after the same manner, GOD'S counting a true believer for a righteous man, and giving him the testimony of righteousness, because he is righteous indeed by communion of Christ's righteousness which he hath apprehended, applied, and enjoyeth by faith.   

The confutation of the false heretical exposition of the Apostles words maintained by the Socinian faction.  
FIrst whereas they hold that faith considered by itself in a proper literal sense, without consideration of the object, or laying hold on Christ, and his righteousness, is counted to the believer for righteousness to justification, and GOD requires in and of us, no other thing for righteousness, neither our own works performed in our own persons according to the Law, nor Christ's perfect righteousness and fulfilling of the Law made ours by spiritual union and communion with Christ, and accepted of GOD for us. This I prove to be false heretical and blasphemous, by these arguments following.  
First faith taken in a proper sense is a part of our conformity, and argument 1 obedience to the Law of GOD, which above all things requires that we give honour to GOD by believing him and his word, and by trusting in him as our only rock, & the GOD of our strength, and salvation. They therefore teaching that faith in a proper sense is counted for righteousness, do teach that we are justified by a work of obedience, to the Law performed in our own persons, and GOD requires on our behalf, no other righteousness for justification, which Doctrine the Apostle utterly condemns. Therefore their opinion and exposition is heretical, and more impious than the Pelagian and Popish heresies concerning justification.  
Secondly that which was properly argument 2 imputed to Abraham, and is so imputed to true believers is righteousness, so the Apostle in plain words expresseth, verse 6. and 11. but faith in a proper sense is not righteousness. For righteousness is perfect conformity to the Law, as sin is transgression of the Law, yea humane righteousness is a man's keeping of the whole Law, and his observing to do all GOD'S commandments with his whole heart all the days of his life, as we read Deuteronomie 8.  
Thirdly that which chargeth argument 3 GOD with error and falsehood, in his judgement is blasphemous. This opinion that GOD counts faith for righteousness, that is, thinketh, judgeth, and esteemeth it to be righteousness, in a proper sense, chargeth GOD with error and falsehood in his judgement. For faith is not any true righteousness properly. Therefore this opinion is blasphemy, If they plead that GOD by his absolute sovereignty of power, may accept and repute that for righteousness which is not true righteousness: This doth but more entangle them and involve them in error. For GOD and his sovereign power are all one: as GOD cannot lie, nor make contradictories true, so his sovereignty of power, cannot either make that to be righteousness which is not, or truly judge it so to be. Neither can his infinite justice be satisfied without perfect fulfilling of his Law, nor allow any man to be justified without righteousness, nor will his truth suffer him to count any just who is not just. Therefore by this base shift, and wicked pretence devised to hide, and cover their blasphemy, they do run further into blasphemy, and make his sovereign power, a tyrant and oppressor of his justice and truth.  
argument 4 Fourthly that opinion which taketh away, and denyeth the means by which GOD is revealed to be infinitely just, merciful and wise, and makes the satisfaction of Christ, and his perfect fulfilling the Law, a vain and needless thing, is most heretical, impious, and blasphemous. This opinion, that GOD by his sovereign power can, and doth accept and count imperfect faith for perfect righteousness, takes away the means by which GOD'S justice, mercy, and wisdom are revealed to be infinite, yea it extenuates and vilifies GOD'S justice, mercy, bounty, and wisdom, and makes Christ's full satisfaction, a vain, superfluous and needless thing. Therefore it is an impious and blasphemous opinion.  
First that which reveals GOD to be infinitely just is, that he cannot be reconciled to men that have sinned without execution of justice to the full, and a full satisfaction made according to his just Law, if not by men in their own persons, which is impossible, yet by their mediator and surety, in their behalf, and by him communicated to them, and made theirs, as truly as if they had fulfilled the Law in their own persons. And though this satisfaction be of infinite value, yet it cannot profit them, nor actually merit for them till they be partakers of it truly, and really by spiritual communion. This is that means by which GOD is known to be infinitely just.  
Secondly, when GOD'S infinite justice was so strict, that nothing could satisfy it, nor redeem mankind, but a satisfaction of infinite value made for them. And when all the world was not able to find such a satisfaction; that his wisdom should find one out, and have it ready before hand in her eternal treasures, even a full satisfaction performed in man's nature, by GOD the eternal son, and also the means to make it truly and really the satisfaction of every man truly believing, that is, by the Holy Ghost shed on them through the Son Christ, and making them one spiritual body with him. This reveals GOD to be infinite in wisdom.  
Thirdly in that GOD the Father would in this case give his only begotten son, to be humbled in our nature, and to obey, suffer, and make such a satisfaction for poor miserable men, in that the son would willingly take all this upon him▪ to do and suffer whatsoever justice could require, and in that the holy Ghost, when this satisfaction could not otherwise profit men nor be made theirs, doth not disdain to take up for his constant dwelling, the earthly tabernacles of men's bodies, and to work in them all graces needful, to conform them to Christ, and to make them sensibly to enjoy him with all his benefits. This most wonderfully shows GOD'S infinite mercy, bounty and free goodness. And all these means which are manifested and maintained by our Doctrine of justification, this wicked opinion of the Socinians doth utterly take away. First it denies GOD'S justice to require man's communion of such an infinite satisfaction made by Christ for him: it treads GOD'S justice under foot by his sovereignty of power, and maugre justice, it makes man's imperfect faith to go current for righteousness, and to be accepted for perfect righteouses, to justification. Secondly if GOD by sovereignty of power can bear down justice, and make any weak and imperfect thing such as man's faith is; serve in stead of Christ's full satisfaction and perfect righteousness: Then he might by the same power have appointed the sacrifice of a Lamb, or any clean beast, or the satisfaction of any mere man, and so it will follow that the giving of his son to be made man, was no point of wisdom, but a going far about, and spending much, even Christ's blood, when less might have served the turn. As for GOD'S goodness mercy and bounty, they are hereby made painted shows and shadows, yea needless prodigality, and Christ's satisfaction is made vain and superfluous. Therefore this opinion which brings in such impious consequences, is blasphemous and heretical.  
Fiftly, that opinion which overthrows the sacraments of the Gospel, and takes away the true use of them, is heretical, profane, and impious. This opinion that Christ's righteousness is not imputed to the faithful, doth so. For the sacraments are seals of our union, and communion with Christ: Baptism seals our engraffing into Christ in our new birth, by which we become one with him. The LORDS Supper is such a lively seal of our communion with Christ, in the benefits of his death, passion, and full satisfaction, expressed under the terms of eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, that it is commonly called, the communion of the faithful, when it is rightly received. But these Heretics while by imputing faith in a proper sense, they exclude the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the faithful, they deny their communion, and union with Christ, they take away the truth and the use of the Sacraments, for if the faithful are regenerate, and by one spirit ingraffed into Christ, and united unto him, as Baptism signifieth, and sealeth: and if they have spiritual communion with Christ of his righteousness, and all other benefits which the LORDS Supper signifieth, and is thereof a seal to them: Then GOD whose judgement is according to truth, cannot but impute Christ's righteousness to them, and accept it for them, and account it theirs. They who deny GOD'S imputing of it do either charge GOD with injustice, and error of judgement in not counting, and judging that to be theirs in which they have communion, and interest, or else they deny the union and communion of the faithful with Christ, and make the sacraments lying signs, and seals of false things, and things which are not. Therefore their opinion is most abominable, profane, impious, and blasphemous.  
argument 6 Sixtly, that opinion which is invented, and maintained by Heretics, who deny the eternal Godhead of Christ, and tends mainly to persuade that there is no use of Christ's being GOD, and man, in one person, is Heretical and blasphemous. Such is this opinion of the Socinians, it is an invention of Haretiks, and tends to take away the use of Christ's being GOD, and to persuade men that there is no necessary use of his being GOD, and man in one person. For all Orthodox Divines give this reason, why it was necessary that Christ the mediator should be GOD in our nature, even that the obedience & suffering which he did under go in man's nature, might be the obedience and suffering of GOD, and so of infinite value, and though of him alone, and but for a time, yet of more worth, then if all men in their own persons had obeyed as much as he did and suffered for ever in Hell. They teach also, that first for the removing of so great evils, as the infinite wrath of GOD, eternal death, and torment in Hell: and secondly, for purchase of so great a good, as is the state of righteousness, and of grace, and also of eternal glory in Heaven. GOD'S justice could require no less satisfaction, and righteousness, nor be satisfied with any other, but that which is performed by him, who is GOD and man, in one person, that is the perfect righteousness and satisfaction of Christ which alone by the infinite value which it receives from his Godhead, is fit to remove so infinite an evil, and to procure so infinite a good to men▪ But the maintainers of this Socinian opinion by denying that GOD'S infinite justice stands in strength to exact such a satisfaction being overruled, and oppressed, by absolute sovereignty of power; and by teaching that mercy, and bounty run beyond reason, freeing men from all need of such an infinite satisfaction to be communicated & imputed to them, and justifying them freely without righteousness, they do take away the use of Christ's Godhead in his mediation, and the causes, and reasons, for which it was necessary that he should be GOD as well as man: And in conclusion, in places where they dare be bold to disclose the secret thoughts of their hearts, they roundly deny Christ to be the Son of GOD, of the same substance with GOD the Father. Therefore this their opinion is most impious, blasphemous, and Heretical: And indeed it is never found in Histories, to have been maintained by any but Samosatenian Heretics, deadly enemies to Christ's deity.  
Lastly, that opinion which is builded upon an Heretical, and blasphemous ground, and is upheld, and maintained by blasphemous arguments, which do shake, and even raze the main foundations of true Religion, must needs be most wicked and blasphemous: and such is this opinion; for it is builded upon this blasphemous ground, that GOD by his sovereign power may do and will, things contrary to his justice, that is, count and accept that for righteousness, which is no righteousness, nor worthy to be accounted an act of perfect righteousness, for such is the faith of frail man taken in a proper sense.  
The arguments by which it is commonly maintained are also blasphemous, and wicked; to wit▪ First they argue, that Christ's righteousness is not imputed to true believers, neither can be made or counted theirs by GOD. Because Christ's righteousness is the righteousness of another far different from them: and GOD cannot justify one, by another's righteousness, and therefore we are not justified by Christ's righteousness, neither is it imputed in justification. Now what is this but a denying of the union, of the faithful with Christ, for if he be one with us, and we one with him, then are our sins made his by communion, and in him satisfied, and his righteousness and satisfaction is made ours, and we thereby are pardoned, and justified, by it as it, is made ours, and is not the righteousness of a stranger, nor of one who is another so different from us, but that he and we are one spiritual body, and all his benefits are ours, and we have an interest in them, and possess them, and enjoy them; so far as every one hath need of them. As this argument tends to overthrow our union with Christ, so A. Wotton in a manuscript of essays, doth profess that our union with Christ is only metaphorical. Secondly, they argue that the righteousness of Christ cannot be sufficient for the elect, nor counted to them for all righteousness which is in effect a denying of Christ to be GOD and man in one person, for if they acknowledge him to be GOD, they must needs hold that his righteousness and fulfilling of the Law, is of more worth and value, then if all men in the world had fulfilled the Law, in their own persons without failing in one point.  
Thirdly, they argue that if Christ his righteousness, and satisfaction be so made ours, and imputed to us that the Law may be said to be fulfilled in us, & we may said to have satisfied GOD'S justice, in him our head, and by him our surety, then is there no place left for pardon, and free forgiveness of our sins, for pardon and satisfaction are contrary. By which they overthrew the Doctrine of redemption, and of Christ's satisfaction for us, and deny Christ to be our redeemer, and to have paid our ransom, and made a full satisfaction to the justice of GOD for our sins, contrary to the Scriptures, and the judgement and belief of all Christian Divines, who teach that Christ hath paid our ransom, is our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our redeemer. And though GOD'S justice exacted of Christ our surety a full ransom, and did not abate him the least farthing of our debt, yet we are freely pardoned, and have free forgiveness, and are freely justified by GOD'S grace, because he did freely give his own son to satisfy & fulfil the Law for us, & doth freely by his grace, and the free gift of his spirit unite us to Christ, and make us partakers of his satisfaction, & imputing his satisfaction freely to us doth for it freely forgive our sins, and justify us. Fourthly while they argue that faith in a proper sense is all the righteousness which the faithful have for justification; and yet faith is not any formal righteousness, by their own confession, yea they deny that any formal righteousness is required in justification; hereby they deny the Saints justified to be righteous contrary to the Scriptures which call them the righteous, and the generation of the righteous, Psal. 1.6. and 14.5. and the righteous nation, Isa. 26.2. and in many other places, which title GOD'S spirit would never give to them, if they were not formally righteous, by righteousness, communicated to them after a spiritual & heavenly manner. For to hold as they do, that men are justified and counted righteous without any formal righteousness, which doth constitute and give being to a righteous and justified man, as he is righteous and justified, is a monstrous opinion contrary to reason.  
Fiftly while they deny that the faithful are constituted and made formally righteous by the obedience of Christ communicated, and imputed to them, which the Apostle in express words doth affirm, Rom. 5.19. and 8.4. and Rom. 10.4. they in heat of argument fall into the Pelagian heresy, and are forced to deny, that Adam's sin and disobedience is communicated and imputed to his posterity, so as that they are formally sinners by it. And rather than they will yield that infants which die before they commit actual transgression in their own persons, are punished with death, because they are guilty of Adam's sin; they do blasphemously affirm, that GOD being offended and moved to wrath, by the sins of parents, will out of the magnificence of his judgement, and rage of his justice, destroy innocent babes with their sinful parents, for terror to others; which is contrary to GOD'S word, and Law which teach that children shall not die for the sins of their parents, unless they be partakers with them, either by communion and imputation, or by imitation and approbation. Whereas they bring for instance, that the children of Korah were destroyed with their father, though they were innocent, and not partakers in the sin; herein they contradict the Scriptures, which expressly affirm that the children of Korah died not. numb. 26.11. For they undoubtedly upon Moses his threatening of sudden destruction, fled from their father's tents and escaped, and only they perished who would not be admonished by Moses, to separate themselves from the congregation of Korah, but adhering to him were partakers of his conspiracy, and sin of rebellion.  
Sixtly when they to colour their heresy, proclaim Christ's righteousness to be the meritorious cause of justification, and yet deny communion and imputation of it to true believers; what is this but to hold that Christ's righteousness is meritorious to them, who have no interest in it? which being granted it, will follow, That Christ's righteousness doth merit for infidels and damned reprobates, and doth as much for the justifying of them, as it doth to justify the Elect and faithful. For true reason can conceive no cause, why Christ doth merit more, or confer more to the justification of the elect and faithful by his righteousness, than he doth to Infidels and reprobates; but only this, that he communicates it to the elect, gives them a proper interest in it, and makes them truly partakers of it, so that it is imputed to them, and made their meritorious ransom: this while these men deny, they deny Christ's righteousness to merit any more for the faithful, then for damned reprobates. And thus their bent is to set up Pelagian and Arminian free will, and to make this the only difference between them that are justified and them that are damned, that whereas both alike have equal share in Christ's merits, and Christ hath merited as much for the one, as the other, and given as much grace for justification: the one having power of free will doth use it, and will believe, and so is justified by his faith imputed for righteousness; the other will not use the universal grace given to him, nor believe, which he might do if he would; and therefore is damned: which is a most horrible and abominable Doctrine, and heretical opinion.  
Lastly they argue, that as in the first Covenant, GOD required works of the Law performed by every man in his own person, and this was the condition which man was to perform for justification, and eternal life, and so that Covenant was not free, but conditional. So in the new Covenant GOD requires faith and believing, which we on our part must perform for justification, life and salvation. And hereby they abolish the freedom of the new Covenant, and make it a Covenant conditional, and not of free grace. For what soever is covenanted-and promised, upon a condition to be performed, is not absolutely free nor freely given; and so according to their Doctrine, they that are justified by faith are not freely justified by grace, whereas they plead Scripture for their error, and allege that justification and life is promised upon condition of believing. If you believe, you shall be saved. I answer that, this is a gross and absurd mistake. For every conditional proposition doth not propound the conditition of a Covenant, which the party to whom a thing is promised, must perform, that the promise may be made good to him; for such a condition whensoever it is performed, makes the thing covenanted a due debt which the promiser is bound to give.) But oftentimes a conditional proposition propounds the means, by which a free gift is received; or the qualification by which one is made capable, and fit to receive, and enjoy a free gift, as for example, it is often said in Scripture. if ye will hear and hearken, ye shall eat the good of the land, and shall live, and not be destroyed. Isay 1.19, jer. 26.3. and many other places. If we love one another, GOD dwelleth in us. 1 john 4. If we walk in the light, we have fellowship one with another. 1 john 1.2. If we confess our sins, he is faithful, and just to forgive. 1 Iohn●. 9. If a man be just, and do that which is right he shall surely live. Ezech 18.5.21 In all which, and the like places, there is no condition of the Covenant propounded, but only the way and means to receive blessing, or the quality & condition, by which men are made capable and fit to enjoy the blessing, and sometimes the signs, tokens, and effects of them, that are in a blessed estate. And even so when GOD'S word saith, If you believe, ye shall be saved, There is no condition of the Covenant, propounded to be performed on our part, for justification, and salvation, but only the qualification; by which GOD of his free grace doth qualify, and fit us to be justified, and saved, and the means by which he enables us to receive righteousness, and to lay hold on salvation, which is freely given to us in Christ. Upon these particulars severally observed out of their own words, and writings, I strongly conclude, that this opinion being builded upon such a blasphemous, and Heretical ground, and upheld, and maintained by such blasphemous arguments, must needs be most impious, Heretical, and blasphemous.  
Having already proved the Socinian and Arminian opinion, to be most false, and abominable, I proceed to answer the particular arguments, contained in this 2. Chapter, which was by the Authors own hand delivered unto me to be answered: And because he and his followers shall not complain, of misrelating any of his words▪ I will (as I have done in the former Chapter.) first lay down his own words.   

Socinianism.  
THe first argument brought to prove that faith and believing are in a proper sense, Rom. 4. said to be imputed to the believer for righteousness in justification, and not the righteousness of Christ.  
First, the letter of this Scripture speaks what we affirm plainly, and speaks no parable about it: yea, it speaks it once, and twice, yea, it speaks it the third, and fourth time, and is not ashamed of it. Abraham believed GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousness verse 3. Again to him that worketh not, but believeth in him that justifieth, the ungodly his Faith is counted to him for righteousness, verse 5. And yet again verse 22. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. The same phrase and expression is used also verse 23.24. Certainly there is not any truth in religion, not any article of our belief, that can boast of the letter of the Scripture more full, express and pregnant for it; what is maintained concerning the imputation of faith, hath all the authority, and countenance from the Scriptures, that words can lightly give, whereas the imputation of Christ's righteousness (in that sense which many magnify) hath not the least relief either from any sound of words, or sight of letter in the Scripture.   

Christianisme.  
HIs first argument reduced into the form of a syllogism, runs thus. That opinion which hath the Letter of the Scripture, more full express and pregnant for it, than any truth in religion, or article of our belief, and hath all the authority and countenance from the Scripture, that words can lightly give, is certainly true.  
This opinion concerning the imputation of faith in a proper sense is such. Therefore it is a true and sound opinion.  
That this imputation of faith, may boast of the letter of Scripture, and of all the authority and countenance that words can give, he proves, because the letter of the Scripture speaks it once, twice, yea thrice and four times, to wit, in this Chapter, Rom. verse 3.5. 22, 23, 24. to which I will add a fifth time verse. 9 
Ans.   
The more true that the proposition is, the more false is the assumption, wherein he assumes most falsely to his opinion, that which in no wise belongs to it, and thereupon infers a most false conclusion. I answer therefore that his assumption is an heap of impudent lies. First the kill letter of the Scripture may give some countenance to it, that is, speeches of Scripture understood, and urged literally, which are spoken by GOD'S spirit tropically and in a figure. This Saint Austin calls the kill letter, because they who take the words properly, and so urge them obstinately, they slay their own souls. But the true literal sense of the words, which are improperly literal, will never give any countenance to this heretical opinion, as I have showed before most fully.  
2 I cannot but accuse him here of most intolerable impudence in that he affirms, that this most Heretical opinion hath more full express, and pregnant testimony from the letter of the Scripture, than any truth in Religion, or any article of Religion, and hath all the authority and countenance from the Scripture, that words can give, when as in all the Scripture, faith is not once said to be imputed for righteousness, in a proper sense, in all the word of GOD, and is only seven times said to be counted, or imputed for righteousness, and that tropically; while the Apostle useth the phrase borrowed from that improper speech which is spoken of Abraham, Gen. 15.6. That when Abraham believed GOD, he counted it to him for righteousness. For it is manifest that in this. Chapter, he altogether insists upon that speech, and doth but repeat it six times: and so likewise Gal. 3.6, Saint james also once useth it, speaking of declarative justification, to prove that Abraham was justified by works, jam. 2.23. that is, declared before men to be righteous, because the Scripture saith, Abraham believed GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousness. So that of Saint james may be believed, faith is not the righteousness for which man is accepted with GOD, (as the Socinians teach) but that by which man obteines the testimony of righteousness, as justine Martyr understands this phrase. Now that Christ, and his fulfilling of the law is truly, and properly, the righteousness by which all believers are justified, constituted, and made righteous before GOD: the Scriptures do in proper literal speech, as well as improperly more often affirm, as Isa. 61.10. Rom. 3.24. Rom. 4▪ 6. Rom. 5.17, 18, 19· Rom. 8.4. and 10.3.4. and Phil. 3.9. and 1 Cor. 1.30. and 2 Cor. 5.24. these twelve places do plainly teach and affirm, that the righteousness by which men are made and constituted righteous in justification, is Christ's obedience and satisfaction, made to the Law, for our redemption, and nine of them are proper speeches; so that here we see the communion of Christ's righteousness which he opposeth, hath more authority, and countenance from the Scripture, and more full express, and pregnant testimony from the letter of it. If I should instance in other truths of Religion, as that there is one true GOD, even Jehovah, and none beside him; or that he created all things, or concerning the deity of Christ, and of the holy Ghost, or concerning redemption by Christ, or the last judgement, resurrection and life eternal: ten express, and pregnant testimonies of Scripture might be brought to prove any one of them; for every one wherein imputation of faith is named. So that here we see what he cannot prove by argument, he goeth about by impudent outfaceing to impose upon his hearers, and readers.  
But let us examine the proof of this bold assertion even his assumption, which certainly is as poor weak, and begerly, as his forehead is strong, like brass, in impudent affirming it. The letter of the Scripture, (saith he) affirms it plainly once and twice, yea a third and fourth time. Therefore it is most certainly true. To this I answer, that the letter of the Scripture affirms that faith and believing was counted to Abraham, and is to other believers, but not in a proper sense, but tropically; and so many things are often affirmed by the letter of the Scripture, which if we understand them in a proper sense, are most false, as for example. GOD is said to repent Gen▪ 6. two several times, to wit▪ ver. 6.7. and jer. 26. three several times, viz. ver. 3, 13.19. and Amos▪ 7.3, 6. and Iud 2.18. and 1 Sam. 15.11. Psal. 135.14. jer. 18.10. with many more. So likewise an hand, and arms, and eyes, and mouth, are often attributed by the letter, of the Scripture to GOD, which speeches if we should understand in a proper sense they would prove a kill letter to us; therefore this is a most absurd and ridiculous proof well beseeming the thing which it is brought to prove. And as he falters in his Logic and his reasons, so he shows ignorance of rhethorik, for he takes it for a certain truth, that one phrase four times used must needs be taken in a proper literal sense. But rhetorik would have taught him that to use divers tropical speeches together, is an Allegory, and elegancy of speech often used in Scripture, as the places last cited show. To which let me add one most pregnant instance, Gal. 3. where the word faith in a discourse of justification is used ten times in an improper sense, for the Gospel which is the word of faith, and teacheth justification by Christ, and by believing in him, and not by our own works, which the Law requires, to wit, verses 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 22, 23, 25.  
Now it may be he perceived little strength in his argument brought for his imputation of faith, notwithstanding, his great brags, and therefore he shoots one fool's bolt against the imputation of Christ's righteousness, which is an argument or syllogism, consisting of an assumption without a proposition, or a conclusion expressed: but I can conjecture what he meant to conclude, namely, that the imputation of Christ's righteousness in justification, is a mere faction, and ought not to be believed.  
The imputation of Christ's righteousness, (in that sense which many magnify) hath not the least relief, either from sound of words, or light of letter in the Scripture.  
To which I answer, first that if this were granted (which is most false) yet it doth not follow that faith alone in a proper sense is imputed. Ridiculum caput (saith he in the Comedy) quasi necesse sit, si justitia Christi non dicitur imputari, fidem reputari pro justitia. It is a ridiculous conceit, to think that if Christ's righteousness be not imputed, therefore faith alone in a proper sense must be said to be imputed. David tells us that Phinees his executing of judgement, was imputed to him for righteousness, and Saint james saith that Abraham was justified by works, & not by faith alone: why then are not works as well as faith imputed?  
But secondly I answer that his assertion is most false, and I prove it from the very words of the Apostle in the 4. Chapter, verse 6. where he saith that to the blessed man righteousness is imputed without works, and verse 11. where he gathereth that to the believing Gentiles, though uncircumcised, righteousness shall be imputed. Now faith is not righteousness (as he himself confesseth) for righteousness is perfect conformity to GOD'S law; & this is not to be found in all the world, but only in Christ, he alone hath in man's nature fulfilled the law. As for faith, even in Abraham himself it was stained with many doubtings, and fears at some times as when he called his wife his sister for better safety: and so it is in the best believers. Believing also is but a duty and a work of obedience to the Law; but this which is here said to be imputed, is a righteousness without works, or any thing performed in our own persons; therefore faith is not the righteousness which is here said to be imputed; but the righteousness of Christ apprehended by faith, and couched under the name of faith and believing.   

Socinianism.  
SEcondly the scope of the place rejoiceth also in this interpretation, that faith should be taken properly in all those passages cited, and from tropes and metonymies it turneth itself away. It is apparent to the circumspect Reader, that the Apostles main intent and drift in this whole discourse of justification, was to hedge up with thorns (as it were) that false way of justification which lay through works, and to put men from attempting any going that way, and to open and discover the true way of justification, wherein men shall not fail to attain that Law of righteousness before GOD: that is, in plain speech, to make known unto them what they must do, and what GOD requireth of them to their justification, and what he will accept at their hands this way, and what not? Now that which GOD precisely requires of men to their justification, in stead of the works of the Law, is their faith, or to believe (in the proper and formal signification.) He doth not require of us the righteousness of Christ, for our justification, this he required of Christ himself; that which he requires of us for this purpose is our faith in Christ. Therefore to certify or say unto them, that the righteousness of Christ should be imputed to them for righteousness, would fall short of his scope and intent this way, which was plainly and directly this, to make known unto them the counsel and good pleasure of GOD, concerning that which was to be done and performed by them to their justification, which he affirmeth from place to place, to be nothing else but their faith in Christ or believing, whereas to have said thus unto them that, they must be justified by Christ, or by Christ's righteousness, and withal not to have plainly signified, what GOD requires of them and will accept at their hand to give them fellowship in that righteousness. For justification which is by Christ, and without which they could not be justified, had been rather to cast a snare upon them then to have opened a door of life, and salvation unto them.   

Christianisme.  
His second way of arguing to prove his opinions from the scope of the place, and the intent of the Apostle in this discourse of justification. His main argument reduced into form runs thus.  
The scope of the place, and intent of the Apostle is to hedge up with thorns, the false way of justification which lay through works, and to turn men from it; as also to discover the true way to them, to wit, what they must do, and what GOD requireth of them, to their justification, and what he will accept at their hands, instead of the works of the Law: and that is it which he here saith is imputed for righteousness.  
But faith, and believing (in a proper and formal signification) is that which they must do, and perform to their justification, which also GOD requires of them, instead of works of the Law, and will accept at their hands instead of them. Therefore faith in a proper sense, is here said to be imputed  
To this argument I answer, First, that in the first proposition there is some truth affirmed, but immediately contradicted, and many falsehoodes intermingled. That the Apostles scope and intent is to hedge up the false way of, justification, which lay through works, and to discover the true way, we grant for truth. But like a mad, or drunken man, he immediately contradicts the truth which he had affirmed, and tells us that the right way is doing, and performing, something which GOD requires at our hands to our justification. And what is this, but the way which lies through works? For to do and perform something required of us, that it may be accepted of GOD at our hands to our justification, is to seek justification by the way of working in the judgement of men, that are sober and in their wits.  
Besides this manifest contradiction, I find also much falsehood and evil meaning. 1. In saying the truth, that the false way lieth through works, that is, works performed in obedience to the Law by every man in his own person (which is the true intent and meaning of the Apostle) he hath a further wicked meaning, namely, that our seeking after the righteousness of Christ, which consists in his works of obedience to the Law, is the way which lieth through works to justification, and therefore the false way. And this he declares to be his meaning in that he immediately after labours to beat men off from Christ's righteousness. Wherefore, I justly tax him here, not only of blasphemy, in calling the righteousness Christ (who is the way, the truth, and the life) and seeking justification through it, a false way: but also of stupidity and blindness, in that he cannot see the difference between our seeking justification by the righteousness offered to us in the Gospel to be apprehended by faith, even Christ's righteousness; and our doing works of the Law for our justification; or Christ's performing works of the Law in his own person. For Christ's righteousness as it was performed by himself, was legal and according to the strict terms of the Law: but as it comes to us by communion, and is applied by faith, it is evangelical. 2. In that he saith God requires something to be done of men for their Justification, which God imputes to them, and accepts at their hands instead of the works or righteousness of the Law. Hereby he sets up justification by some thing which a man doth, and performeth, which the Apostle altogether opposeth in this discourse and his whole scope is bend against it; and his whole intent and drift is to show, that we are justified, not by giving or doing, but by receiving that which is freely given of GOD, and reputed for righteousness, even the righteousness of him, who is GOD, and is called therefore the righteousness of God, Chap. 3.21. and 10.3. Hereby also he brings in a doing and performing of something by men, which is accepted of God, over and above that which the Law requireth, which is a mere Popish fiction, tending to dishonour the Law, and to make it an imperfect rule of man's well doing. And withal he makes the new Covenant a condicional Covenant, and not of free Grace, promising justification and salvation upon condition of men's doing.  
In the second place, his assumption, wherein he affirms that faith and believing in the proper and formal signification, is that which men must do and perform, and which God requires and will accept at their hands instead of works of the Law for justification: it contains in it most gross Socinian error, and much absurdity and untruth. First, in that he calls faith and believing a thing done and performed by men, this is directly contrary to the Apostle, who teacheth, that faith is not of ourselves, but is the gift of God, Ephes. 2.8. and that we of ourselves are not sufficient to think much less to do that which God can accept: but our sufficiencies of God, 2 Cor. 3.5. and it is God which worketh in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure, Phil. 2.13. so that faith and believing are not a condition performed by us to oblige God; but a part of the Grace freely promised in the Covenant, and given to us, even the work and motion of his Spirit in us.  
Secondly, in that he sets up faith instead of all righteousness and perfect fullfilling of the Law: hereby he doth profess himself a Socinian Heretic in plain terms, and conspires with those Heretics to overthrow the justice of God in our justification, and to make Christ's satisfaction vain and needless, as I have before showed.  
After his arguing for the imputation of faith, he proceeds here in his second way of arguing, as he did in the former, to dispute against Gods imputing of Christ's righteousness in justification. His reasons are 3. First, because God required Christ's righteousness of Christ himself, and therefore it is not required of GOD for our righteousness, to justification. Secondly, because the scope of the Apostle is to show what must be done, and performed by us, and what GOD requires at our hands, to justification, and Christ's righteousness is not any thing performed by us, and therefore is not here said to be imputed. Thirdly, if the Apostle had said that we must be justified by Christ and his righteousness, without any other thing performed by us, this had been to cast a snare upon us, rather than to open to us a door of life, and salvation.  
To which I answer, that as his denying of Christ's righteousness to be imputed, is Heretical, so also are his reasons brought to confirm his opinion. First in that he saith GOD doth not require of us the righteousness of Christ, for our justification; this phrase is not only harsh, and unsavoury, but also full of calumny, and close slander. It is harsh and absurd, like as if one should say, that GOD requires the same particular, and individual act, done by another, to be not done by him, but by us, which implies a gross contradiction. It is also full of close calumny, for hereby he goeth about to make men believe, that the orthodox doctrine of justification by the communion, and imputation of Christ's righteousness, is a teaching, and supposing, that GOD requires of us for justification, that we be performers of the same individual works of the law, in the propriety, and formality of them, which Christ performed, and so he openly expresseth his mind in another place, which is a base slander, as I have before showed.  
Secondly, in that he saith, God required Christ's righteousness of Christ himself, and not for our justification; This implies, that Christ had need of justification, and was bound to fulfil the righteousness of the Law, as a thing requisite for himself, and it savours very rank of the Samosatenian, and Socinian heresy, which denyeth Christ's eternal deity, for if Christ his humane nature, being from the first conception most pure, upright, and holy, was personally united to the eternal Son God, equal with the father, and so was the Son of God, and heir of all things: who can doubt but that he in himself was worthy of glory at God's right hand from his birth; as his taking of our nature upon him was altogether for us, so his infirmities, sufferings, death, and continuance on earth for the performance of all righteousness and obedience to the Law was for us, and for all the elect, both them who of old before his coming believed in him promised and to come; and also for them who now do believe in him already come exhibited and exalted to glory in his humanity. To say or think that he had need to justify, and make righteous himself by his works, and to merit glory in heaven by his righteousness; is in effect to deny that he is GOD infinitely worthy of all glory, as he was the only begotten son of GOD, and heir of all things.  
His second reason is a manifest falsehood, to wit, that the scope of the Apostle is to show what is to be done, and performed by us, which GOD may accept at our hands to our justification. For the Apostles scope is to show that we are justified freely by GOD'S grace, by the things which Christ did for our redemption, cap. 3.24▪ and that obedience, righteousness, and satisfaction of Christ, we must not obtain by any works of our own according to the Law, it is freely given us of GOD, and faith is the hand by which we receive it, and our evidence, that we are justified by it.  
His third reason is blasphemy, and contradiction of Christ's own words. For our Saviour professeth and affirmeth that he alone is the door, John 10.7. & the way, john 14.6. and he who makes him the way and door, and seeks justification life and salvation by the way of his righteousness, he is a true disciple of Christ, and his Apostles. But to call the teaching of men in this way, the casting of a snare upon them is blasphemy. Far be it from me, and from all true Christians not to detest and▪ abhor such impiety, and not to think him worthy of the curse of Anathema Maranatha, who with his mouth proclaimeth, and with an obstinate heart maintaineth, that teaching of justification by Christ and his righteousness is casting of a snare on men, and not of the door of life and salvation to them.   

Socinianism.  
THirdly that interpretation which is set up against it, and contendeth for the imputation of Christ's righteousness, is clearly overthrown by several circumstances, and passages in the context;  
First it hath no appearance of a likelihood in it, that the Apostle in the great and weighty point of justification, wherein (doubtless) he desired, if in any subject besides, to speak with his understanding, as his own phrase is, that is, that what he himself conceives and understands may be clearly understood by others, should time after time and in one place after another without ever explaining himself, or changing his speech throughout the whole disputation, use so strange & harsh and uncouth an expression, or figure of speech, as is not to be found in all his writings besides, to say that faith and believing is imputed for righteousness, but to mean that indeed it is the righteousness of Christ that is imputed; were to speak rather that he might conceal his mind then reveal it.   

Christianisme.  
IN this third way of arguing he layeth down his arguments against the true Orthodox interpretation of Saint Paul's speeches, concerning imputation of faith for righteousness; which interpretation he goeth about to overthrow by several circumstances, or passages in the context. I will first sift his first argument here laid down, and then propound and answer the rest.   

Answer to the first argument.  
IN this argument there are more impudent lies then full pauses, or sentences. The first impudent lie is, that the Apostle expressing the state of righteousness, or of a man justified by Christ's righteousness; by the name of faith, and believing imputed for righteousness to him, should use an harsh strange and uncouth speech, and expression: what is the man so ignorant of the first grounds of Rhetoric, that a trope or figure of speech, is harsh strange and uncouth with him? It is but a Metonymy to express by the name of Faith, and believing, the state of a believer or a faithful man, or the object of faith, which faith hath laid hold on so fast, that they cannot be separated, but he who hath the one hath the other also, and by righteousness to express the state of a righteous man justified. And when we say faith is imputed for righteousness, to mean that the state of a believer is counted the state of righteousness, or of a man justified; or that faith as it comprehends Christ's righteousness, is counted to him that hath it righteousness: and Christ's righteousness which the believer by faith possesseth, is set on his score for justification.  
A second notorious untruth is, that such a figure of speech as this, is not to be found in all the Apostles writings besides. For the same expression and figure of speeches used by this Apostle, Cap. 2.26. as I have before plainly showed. Yea four times in the four last verses is the same trope used, uncircumcision first for a man uncircumcised, and secondly for the state of an uncircumcised Gentile, and circumcision for a circumcised jew, and again for inward sanctification whereof circumcision was the sign and Sacrament, and ten several times doth he tropically by faith mean the Gospel, and Doctrine thereof, which is the object of faith, Gal. 3 (as I have before noted, where he discourseth about this weighty point of justification.  
A third impudent lie, and manifest falsehood is that the Apostle time after time, and in one place after another useth the word faith or believing imputed, without ever explaining himself, or changing his speech. For that which he calls faith and believing, and faith it is imputed for righteousness, vers. 3. and 5. he explaining himself, and changing his speech, v. 6.11. calls it righteousness, and saith GOD imputeth righteousness, and righteousness is imputed. In a word I do challenge him to show one place in all the writings of this Apostle, wherein he useth this phrase of faith, or believing, imputed for righteousness, except only here in this Chapter, and in Gal, 3. In both which places he citys that testimony of Moses, concerning Abraham, that GOD counted faith to him for righteousness, and urgeth it in the phrase of Moses, but in all other places, where he writes of justification, he useth his own expressions, and saith that we are justified by Christ's satisfaction made for our redemption, as Rom. 3.24. and by his obedience and fulfilling of the Law Rom. 5.19. and 8.4. and 10.3.4. and that Christ is made to us righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.30. and we are made the righteousness of GOD in him, 2 Cor. 5.21. If he cannot show any place besides these, then let him be ashamed of his doings, in that he hath bend his tongue and pen like a bow for lies, and shoots out in every passage so many notorious untruths, that he may be suspected to have full furnished his quiver, from the armoury of the father of lies, the Prince of darkness.   

The second Argument.  
SEcondly verse 5. it is said, that to him that believeth his faith is imputed to him for righteousness. From which clause it is evident, that that faith (whatsoever we understand by it) which is imputed is his, somewhat that ways truly, and properly called, his, before such imputation of it be made unto him. Now it cannot be said of the righteousness of Christ, that it is any man's before the imputation of it to him, but faith properly taken is the believers before it be imputed (at least in order of nature, though not in time.) Therefore by faith which is here said to be imputed, cannot be meant the righteousness of Christ.   

Answer.  
THe righteousness of Christ by spiritual union, and communion, which every true believer hath with Christ, is as truly his, as his faith. For Christ is made unto him righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.30. and he is made the righteousness of GOD in Christ, 2 Cor. 5.22. and that in order of nature before it is counted his righteousness. For GOD whose judgement is according to truth, doth not count that to the believer, which he hath not before communicated, or at the same time doth communicate to him. Secondly I answer, that if faith which is here called his faith, be faith in a proper sense, and be imputed for righteousness to justification, then is man justified by his own inherent righteousness, and by a work done and performed in his own person, which every Orthodox Divine will tell him is flat popery or worse.   

The third Argument.  
THirdly granting a trope, or Metonymy in this place, and that by faith is meant the object of it, or the thing believed; yet it will not follow from hence, that the righteousness of Christ should be said to be imputed here, but either GOD himself, or the promise of GOD made to Abraham For it is said verse 3. that Abraham believed GOD, not that he believed Christ's righteousness, except we set up another trope to maintain the former, and by GOD will say is meant the righteousness of Christ, which would be not a trope or figure, but rather a monster of speech. Therefore the righteousness of Christ is not here said to be imputed for righteousness, but faith properly taken. Yea whereas the object of faith as justifying, is expressed with great variety of words, and terms in Scripture, in all this variety there is not once to be found the least mention, of the righteousness of Christ: as if the holy Ghost foreseeing the kindling of this false fire, had purposely withdrawn, or withheld all fuel that might feed it. Sometimes Christ in person is made the object of this faith, john 3.16. besides many such expressions. Sometimes Christ in his Doctrine, or the Doctrine and word of Christ, john 5.46. had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me. Sometimes Christ in the relation of his person, and that either as he stands related unto GOD as his father, john 20.31. or else as he stands related to those ancient promises of GOD made unto the jews concerning a Messiah, to be given and sent unto them, john 8.24. except ye believe that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. Sometimes the raising up of Christ from the dead, as Rom. 10.9. Sometimes GOD himself is made the object of faith. 1. Pet. 1.21. Sometimes the record or testimony of GOD concerning his son, is made the object of faith, 1. joh. 5.10. In all this variety or diversity of expressing the object of faith, as justifying, there is no sound or intimation of the righteousness or active obedience of Christ. Not but that the righteousness of Christ is, and aught to be believed as well as other things revealed, and affirmed in the Scriptures: yea it is of nearer concernment to the main to believe it, than the believing of many things besides comprehended in the Scriptures as well as it, but the reason I conceive) why it is not numbered or reckoned up among the objects of faith, as justifying is, because though it ought, and cannot but be believed by that faith which justifieth, yet it may be believed also by such a faith, which is so far from justifying, that it denyeth this Christ (whose righteousness notwithstanding it believeth) to be the son of GOD. Thus some of his own nation (the jews) have given testimony to his righteousness and innocency, who yet received him not for their Messiah, nor believed him to be GOD. And this is the frame & constitution of the Turkish faith (for the most part) at this day.   

Answer.  
IN this third argument he undertakes to prove, that if faith were said to be imputed by a trope or metonymy, and that by faith were meant the object of it, yet Christ's righteousness cannot be meant, because the object of that faith which is said to be imputed, is GOD himself, or the promise of GOD: But to understand, that by GOD is meant Christ's righteousness, would be not a trope or figure of speech, but a monster of speech. To which I answer, that Abraham's faith which was imputed, was a believing that GOD in Christ was his shield, and his exceeding great reward. Gen. 15.1. Now no man can in believing by a true faith separate the righteousness, and full satisfaction of Christ GOD and man, from Christ himself. To believe GOD to be our reward is to believe that GOD is become our righteousness, and so our reward; for the reward of blessedness is the reward of righteousness, and is called the Crown of righteousness. 2. Tim. 4. So that the argument may be turned thus against himself. Whosoever truly believes GOD to be his reward, he believes that GOD is righteousness, and so Christ as he is JEHOVAH, his righteousness. Abraham when his faith was counted to him for righteousness, believed that God was his reward: Therefore he believed that God was his righteousness, and so Christ as he is JEHOVAH our righteousness, was the object of his justifying faith. Secondly, he hath here one most gross and absurd speech, which shows either his palpable ignorance in Rhetoric, or desperate impudence. That is, that if one should speak of believing God, and mean believing Christ's righteousness; this were not a trope or figure, but a monster of speech. Here I will entreat him to tell me ingenuously whether he doth hold the Lord Christ (who appeared, and spoke to Abraham, and the Fathers, and whom they believed) to be the true God. If he denyeth him to be the true God, than we shall take him to be in all points of heresy a complete Socinian: if he grants that Christ is God, and his righteousness performed in our nature, is the righteousness of God and inseparable from his person; then he who truly believes in Christ, and enjoys him, must needs believe his righteousness, and enjoy it, and to speak of believing in Christ God our shield, and reward, and to mean not his Godhead barely or his naked person, but his righteousness also, and that he is JEHOVAH our righteousness; this is but a metonymy of the subject, which none can call a monster of speech, but he who is ignorant in the grounds of Rhetoric.  
Thirdly, in his denying, that Christ's righteousness is the object of justifying faith, he doth most openly contradict that which he hath writ in the former Chapter, in the 6 part, where he professeth that Christ and his righteousness, is the object of that faith which is imputed; and if it doth not lay hold on Christ, it is not capable of imputation. His rehearsing of the variety of the objects of faith, mentioned in the Scripture, and denying Christ's righteousness to be any object, or thing believed: he doth notoriously delude and gull his readers, and shows great impudence; for what more often required in the Scripture to be believed, then that Christ is our true sacrifice for sin, and our sacrifice of righteousness, and that he is the end and fulfilling of the Law, for righteousness to every one that believeth? yea, he gives himself the lie, and by his own argument overthrows his conclusion: For among the things which the Scriptures require that we should believe, he reckons Christ himself, and the doctrine of Christ, and the promise of Christ, the testimony which GOD hath given of his Son, and the resurrection of Christ, every one of which includes in it Christ's righteousness; for if we believe in Christ aright, we believe him to be the righteous servant of GOD, in whom his soul delighteth, who hath fulfilled all righteousness, is the end of the Law, for righteousness to every believer, and is jehovah, our righteousness; such a one he was promised to be. The Gospel which is his doctrine, teacheth him to be such a one. The testimony which GOD hath given of him, is that in him we have eternal life, which is the crown of righteousness. His resurrection is the evidence of his righteousness, and that the Law was fulfilled by him, and death therefore could not hold him captive: so that by rehearsing these as the objects of faith, he confuts himself, and confirms our doctrine. And lastly, he professeth vain tergiversation, openly, by granting that Christ's righteousness is to be believed. But whereas he saith that Turks, and jews, believe not Christ, and yet believe his righteousness; this is a monster in speech, sense, and reason; For how can a man believe that a person which is not is righteous, and that righteousness may subsist without a subject. None can believe Christ's righteousness to be, as the Scripture calls it, the righteousness of GOD, unless he believe Christ to be GOD. Some Turks acknowledge Christ to have been a Prophet, but his perfect righteousness performed to the whole Law for us, they do not believe. And the jews to this day blaspheme Christ and call him a liar, an Impostor, a deceiver, and malefactor, justly crucified for his wickedness. And therefore in this argument he showeth that his tongue and pen are applied to lie, and forge, to contradict himself, and to be constant in nothing but in holding obstinately his heretical conclusions.   

4 Argument.  
FOurthly, that faith which is said to be imputed to Abraham for righteousness ver. 3. is that faith by which he believed in God, that quickeneth the dead, and calleth the things which are not as if they were. ver. 17. But the righteousness of Christ can in no tolerable construction or congruity of speech be called that faith by which Abraham believed in God, that quickeneth the dead. Therefore the righteousness of Christ is not that faith which is here said to be imputed for righteousness.   

Answer.  
I Answer, first that a true believer may truly say, my righteousness which I have in Christ is this, that I believe in God, who quickeneth the dead, and graciously calleth and counteth me (who am not righteous in myself nor by my own righteousness) a righteous and justified person.  
Secondly, that God did not quicken and raise up Christ, till he had perfectly fulfilled all righteousness, and satisfied the law for us as our surety. Neither doth he quicken any dead but through his righteousness and by his spirit communicating it to them, the debtor or his surety, laid up in prison, cannot be released, till the debt be fully discharged. And therefore Christ's righteousness is comprehended by that faith which believeth in God who quickeneth the dead, because quickening the dead, necessarily presupposeth their communion of the righteousness of Christ, and under the name of that faith may by a metonymy be truly said to be imputed to justification.   

5 Argument.  
FIftly, the faith imputed to Abraham, ver. 3. is that faith wherein he is said not to be weak, ver. 19 and is opposed to doubting of the promise of God through unbelief ver. 20. But the righteousness of Christ cannot be conceived to be that. wherein Abraham was not weak, neither doth the righteousness of Christ carry in it any opposition to doubting of the promise, through unbelief, being a thing of a differing kind and nature from it▪ But between faith properly taken, or a firm believing, and doubting through unbelief, there is a direct and perfect opposition. And therefore it is faith in this sense, and not the righteousness of Christ which is said to be imputed for righteousness.   

Answer.  
I Answer, that though Christ's righteousness be a thing different from the believers faith: yet when the believer by a strong faith, and without doubting possesseth Christ, and his faith doth spiritually comprehend in it Christ's righteousness; then GOD counts it to him for righteousness, that is, judgeth him a righteous man by communion of Christ's righteousness, but doth not judge his faith and Christ's righteousness to be one the same very thing. This argument is not to the matter. It may be turned against himself thus. The more strong a man is in faith, and far from doubting of the promise through unbelief, the more firmly he is united to Christ, and the more full communion he hath of Christ's righteousness, and with more reason may he being so faithful be counted righteous, and Christ's righteousness under the name of faith be imputed to him: This was Abraham's case he was strong in faith and doubted not, and therefore having firm union with Christ, and communion of all his benefits, GOD justly imputed faith to him for righteousness, and counted him so believing justified, and righteous by Christ's righteousness, and so in like case GOD will deal with other believers.   

The sixth Argument.  
Sixthly, that faith which was imputed to Abraham was that by which he was assured, that he who had promised, was able also to do it, verse 21. and 22. But the righteousness of Christ is not capable of any such description as this, that by it Abraham was fully assured, etc. Therefore it is not that, which was imputed to Abraham.   

Answer.  
I Answer to this, as to the former. It is not to the matter, until he first prove that the name of one thing, may not be used by a Metonymy to express another, except these two things be both one, & the same thing; we will deride such foolish arguments. Though Christ's righteousness be not one and the same thing with faith: yet the more it doth assure us of the performance of GOD'S promise in Christ, the more closely it comprehends Christ's righteousness, and the more just cause there is▪ that under the name of faith, Christ's righteousness should be imputed by a Metonymy.   

The seventh Argument.  
SEventhly that which shall be imputed unto us, for righteousness is said to be our believing in him, that raised up Christ from the dead. verse 24. But the righteousness of Christ is not our believing on him that raised Christ from the dead, therefore it cannot be that, that is said to be imputed for righteousness unto us.   

Answer.  
THere is no faith under the name whereof Christ's righteousness may so fitly be expressed, as that which is a believing on him who raised up Christ from the dead, for we cannot truly believe GOD'S raising of Christ from death, but withal we must believe that GOD'S justice is by him our surety fully satisfied, and his Law fulfilled in our behalf, and we being partakers thereof and enjoying it by faith, GOD may justly impute this faith to us for righteousness. Thus his arguments being all from his matter; are easily turned upon himself.   

8 Argument.  
EIghtly whereas the question, or point of imputation in justification, is handled only in this passage of Scripture (for those other places Gal. 3. and james 2. only mention it, but insist not at all upon any declaration, or explication thereof) it is no ways probable but that the Apostle should speak somewhat distinctly, and plainly of the nature of it, otherwise he might seem rather to lay a stumbling block in our way, then to have written any thing for our learning and comfort. If we take the word faith or believing so often used in this Chapter in the proper and plain signification of it, for that faith whereby a man believes in Christ then the tenor of the discourse, is as clear and full as may be, the stream of the whole Chapter runs limpid and untroubled; but if we bring in a tropical, and metonymical signification, and by faith will compel Paul to mean the righteousness of Christ, we cloth the Sun with sackcloth, and turn Paul's perspicuity into a greater obscurity, than any light in the Scripture knoweth how to comfort or to relieve. The word faith being a term frequently used in Scripture, is yet never found to signify the righteousness of Christ, the holy Ghost never putting this sword into that sheath, neither is there any rule of Grammar or figure in Rhetoric, that knows how to salve up the inconsistence of such an interpretation.   

Answer.  
THis argument is no more but his own bare affirmation, that it is probable the Apostle in this place where he handles the point of imputation, would speak plainly, and it is more plain to speak of faith, imputed in a proper sense: the tropical and metonymical sense or interpretation brought in, is a compelling of Paul to mean by faith the righteousness of Christ, and thereby we cloth the sun with sackcloth, in which multiplicity of words, we find much vanity. As for imputation in justification, it is not the main and principal point which the Apostle insists upon, the main and principal points of justification are in the 3. and 5. Chapter handled plainly, and in the 8, 9, and 10. Chapters, where he plainly teacheth that the righteousness by which we are constituted, and made righteous before GOD, is Christ's obedience and fulfilling of the Law. The imputation of faith comes in only by the way, being occasioned by that testimony of Moses concerning Abraham, which the Apostle brings to prove that justification is not by our own performance, or works of the Law, but by a righteousness which GOD gives, even the fulfilling of the Law by Christ for our redemption, which we receive and enjoy by faith so certainly, that if we be faithful believers in Christ, then are we righteous even in GOD'S account; for true faith cannot be nor subsist in any who hath not communion of Christ's righteousness. This to all judicious men is more plain, and limpid and clear, then to take faith in a proper sense, and to set on it the Crown of Christ's righteousness, especially seeing the Apostle in the 6. and 11. verses showeth that the thing properly imputed is righteousness, and therefore not faith, which cannot properly be called or counted righteousness: yea he tells us, it is a propitiation to cover our sins, which in no case can be properly said of faith. As for his words wherein he affirms, that there is more comfort in faith imputed, then in the righteousness of Christ imputed; they are most wicked and more hateful than any popery, yea blasphemous in exalting man's faith into the royal Throne of Christ's righteousness, and calling the teaching of the imputation thereof, the laying of a stumbling block in our way. It is to be feared that he who thus speaks and writes hath stumbled at Christ the precious stone, which GOD hath laid in his Zion, as the Apostle intimates, speaking of them who make the righteousness of Christ a stumbling block, and stone of offence. Rom. 9.33. In the next place after these frivolous arguments, he takes upon him to answer some places of the Apostle which are produced by us and objected against him, wherein faith and hope are used to signify their objects, that is, the things believed and hoped for, as Gal. 1. 22·S and 3.23. and Colos. 1.5. And here he doth use notable trifling, and most absurd tergiversation. First he grants the Apostle doth use in his writings such tropes of speech, which is a thing so manifest, that impudence itself is ashamed to deny it. And by granting this, he contradicts what he hath before affirmed, to wit, that in all the Apostles writings such a trope is not to be found.  
Secondly he opposeth what before he granted, by a forged and false distinction, affirming that the habit of faith may be used to signify the object, but not the act, Cujus contrarium est verissimum. For in the places objected, the act as well as the habit, and especially the act of faith and hope are to be understood, for the habit is ordained to be exercised about the proper object, but it never is exercised about it, nor reacheth to it but by the act, faith by believing comprehends Christ and his righteousness, and so doth hope by the acts of it, reach that within the veil. And indeed, if we observe it, we shall see in this discourse, that faith which signifies the habit, as well as believing which is the act, is here said to be imputed for righteousness, as ver. 5. and 9 and therefore this distinction helps him nothing at all.  
Thirdly, he contradicts himself again, and grants that the act may be used to express the object, but then he flees to his old shift saying that Christ's righteousness is not the object of justifying faith, or of faith as justifying, which error I have before confuted, and indeed it is contrary to all reason; for the proper object of faith, as it is an instrument of justification is nothing else but righteousness.  
Fourthly, he utters a notable untruth, when he saith, that the Scripture where it speaks of faith as justifying, makes not the least mention of Christ's righteousness, and fulfilling of the Law. Let him read Rom. 3.24. and 10.4. and tell me whether the believing of the man, to whom Christ is the end or fulfilling of the Law, for righteousness be not justifying faith, & when we are said to be justified by the redemption which is in Jesus Christ, whether our believing of that our redemption be not a true justifying faith.  
Lastly, he argues without reason, that though Christ's righteousness be a thing which is to be belived, & so is a partial object of faith, yet it is not the object of justifying faith, because creation of the world, & Christ's being born of a virgin, and his ascension are partial objects, and yet not of faith as it is justifying; but either Christ himself, or the promies of God, concerning the redemption and salvation of the world by him. To which I answer, 1 that his syllogism is without mood or figure: it is as if I should thus reason, That Master Goodwin, though he be a living creature, yet because some living creatures, as Asses, and Apes, are not reasonable creatures, therefore he is not a reasonable creature. 2. I must tell him there is but one true saving faith, and that is justifying faith: and he who can by true holy faith believe aright the creation, or the nativity of Christ borne of a virgin, or his ascension, he hath justifying faith, though when faith is acting about justification, the proper object is righteousness, even Christ's full satisfaction for our redemption, and salvation, and the justifying act, is believing that Christ is made unto us of God righteousness, and we are made the righteousness of God in him. And faith imputed for righteousness, ver. 3. is righteousness imputed. ver. 6. and 11. Thus you see all circumstances in the context stand up in contestation with his exposition, which by faith here said to be imputed, understands faith in a proper sense, and per se, not faith in respect to Christ's righteousness.  
But that I may not seem to conceal any thing, nor give any thing for his upon trust, I will set down these tergiversations in his own words.   

Socinianism.  
IF it be objected, that faith is sometimes put for the object of faith, as Gal. 3.23 before faith came, and Gal. 1.22. he preacheth the faith, etc. And may be so used with a good propriety of speech, (mark this bull, that faith put for the object of it, is a proper speech) as hope is put for the thing hoped for, which is an expression usual in Scripture. To this I answer, first by concession, it is true, the name of the faculty is sometimes put for the object appropriated to it, neither is there any hardness or cause of offence▪ or mistake in such an expression, but it rather adds a grace and countenance to the sentence wherein it is used seasonably, and with judgement, as might be exemplified by several Scripture instances, if it were pertinent. But 2. by way of opposition, I answer (Here observe how he plays Jack a both sides.) First though the faculty be sometimes put for the object, yet the act is seldom or never (to my remembrance) the act or exercise of hope, is never put for the things hoped for; but hope itself is sometimes found in that signification, as Col. 1.5. for the hope which is laid up in heaven, so Tit. 2.13. looking for the blessed hope. Now that which is here said to be imputed to Abraham for righteousness was not the habit of his faith, but Abraham believed GOD, that is exercised or put forth, an act of faith, and it was imputed to him for righteousness.  
Secondly though it should be granted, that as well the act, as the habit or faculty may be sometimes put for the object, yet when the act and object have been named together, and the act expressed and specified by an object proper to it, and somewhat immediately ascribed to the act under that consideration, all which is plainly seen in this clause (Abraham believed GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousness) in this case to conceive or to affirm, that what is so ascribed is neither ascribed unto the act itself, there mentioned (which is here Abraham's believing) nor to the object mentioned likewise with it (which is here GOD, Abraham believed GOD) but to something really differing from them both, & not so much as once mentioned in all the discourse (as namely to the righteousness of Christ, what is this but to turn a man's back upon the text, to look out an interpretation & to exchange that which is plainly affirmed, with what is not so much as is obscurely intimated, or employed, & to make the Apostle to speak as never man spoke besides, not for the wisdom and excellency of his speech, but for the uncouth abstrusenes of his meaning. Doubtless no instance is to be found of any Author whatsoever sacred, or profane, who so far abhorred to be understood in what he spoke, as to put his mind into words of such a construction.  
Thirdly and lastly, neither is the righteousness of Christ the object of faith, as justifying (as hath been said) nor doth the Scripture where it speaks of faith, as justifying, which are places not a few, make the least mention, or give the least intimation of such a thing. It is true the Scriptures often propound the righteousness of Christ, or his obedience to the law, as that which is to be believed, and so it may be termed a partial object of faith, somewhat that is and aught to be believed: but so the creation of the world is propounded to be believed, and that Cain was Adam's son, is somewhat to be believed. And generally whatsoever the Scriptures affirm, may be called a partial object of faith. But the object of faith properly as it justifieth, is either Christ himself, or the promise of GOD concerning the Redemption and salvation of the world by him. The righteousness of Christ is no more the object of faith as justifying, then either his being borne of a Virgin, or his ascending into heaven, or the like, and either the one or the other might as well be here said, to be imputed to Abraham for righteousness, in that respect as his righteousness. Thus you see at large how many passages and circumstances in the context, stand up in contestation with that exposition which by Paul's faith in this Chapter, will needs understand Christ's righteousness.   

Answer.  
THat which I have noted before gives light to see many tergiversations, and much trifling in this passage. Let me only here desire him to repeat the words which he chiefly stands upon, to wit, Abraham believed GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, and tell me whether righteousness be not named, which was imputed to Abraham▪ and all who truly believe, as appears, verse 6. and 11. and what righteousness can be found fit to justify a man before GOD, besides Christ's righteousness?   

Socinianism.  
FOurthly and lastly, this interpretation we contend for, according to which the word faith, or believing is to be taken properly in all the passages mentioned, and not tropically or metonymically) was the common interpretation anciently received, and followed by the Church of GOD from the primitive times, and for 1500. years was never questioned or contradicted, neither did the contrary opinion ever look out into the world, till the yesterday of the last age, I speak this somewhat above the analogy, and proportion of mine own reading in matters of antiquity, (which I confess will not amount to any such confidence) but I am confident in this behalf upon the undertaking of another, who searched diligently what interpretation of this Scripture ruled amongst the learned and Orthodox writers from time to time, so that it is but a calumny of evil report brought upon the opinion and interpretation of this Scripture which we maintain, unworthy the tongue or pen of any learned or sober man, to make either Arminius or Socinus the Authors, or first founders of either. And for the last hundred years and upward, from Luther and calvin's times, the fairest stream of interpreters so runs, as to water and refresh the same interpretation: you will easily incline (I presume) to believe both the one and the other, that both former and latter times have been friends and favourers to the interpretation given; if you will please with diligence, and without partiality, to examine these few testimonies, and passages following, as they stand in their several Authors respectively.   

Christianisme.  
HEre he enters into his fourth & last way of confirmation, that is, to confirm his opinion, and interpretation, by testimony of learned Divines, both ancient and modern writers, even from the Primitive times, to the year 150. after Christ. His beginning is with great swelling words, and with wonderful confidence, though builded not upon any reading, or knowledge, of his own, but upon the testimony of another, doubtless of some Socinian braggadogo, or impudent Arminian, whom he is ashamed to name, who are all of this spirit, that when they build upon weakest ground, and are most strongly convinced by testimonies of Scripture, and unanswerable arguments, than they affirm and outface most impudently, and brag and lie, as if they contended to win the whetstone: Nay, we think that this confession of his small reading, is out of modesty, or out of Satanical subtlety? that as the Devil in the person of the Serpent vented his lies to our first Parents, so he may belch out desperate lies and forgeries under the person of another concealed Author, verily I fear the latter. because on another's word, he doth so boldly, and impudently, charge all the learned of the best note in this age with calumny, and false report, raised upon his opinion, (unworthy the tongue and pen, of sober and learned men) in that they make Arminius or Socinus, chief and first Authors of it, and with out blushing affirms that the fairest stream of interpreters from the time of Luther, and Calvin runs as water to refresh his interpretation. In both which I find such manifest falsehood, that no man of any reading can so speak and affirm, without a brazen face, maintaining wilful and manifest lies against his own conscience. First to the bold charge of our learned Divines with calumny, for taxing Socinus, and Arminius, as chief and first Authors of his opinion, I answer, That although that infamous heretic, Petrus Abailardus, who was gelded for his incontinence, by a man whose daughter he had abused) laid the first ground of this opinion, that Christ's satisfaction is not imputed to justification: (as Saint Bernard shows, Epist. 190.) Yet the first Authors who expressly affirmed that fides per se, that is, faith by itself in a proper sense, without a trope, is by the Apostle said to be imputed, for righteousness, were Servetus, as Calvin shows, in opusculis, Socinus, part 4. cap. 4 and 11. de Christo Servatore. And Arminius in Epist. ad Hippolitum de collibus. thes. 5. Secondly to his false pretence of the main stream of writers, since Luther, and Calvin: so running as water to refresh his interpretation, I do answer and confidently affirm, that there is not one Orthodox writer to be found since that time, which ever held, that faith in a proper sense is imputed for righteousness, and denied the imputation of Christ's righteousness. Servetus, Socinus, Arminius and the rest of their sect, branded for heretics, are the only maintainers of that opinion.  
To his testimonies and his impudent boasting of the general consent of interpreters, I answer, First jointly and in general, That of all the testimonies which he hath cited, there is not one which either affirms that faith taken in a proper sense is imputed for righteousness, or denies the imputation of Christ's righteousness. Moreover, that all Divines who are the most zealous opposers of his interpretation, may say the same words which he citys out of Authors: and yet hold justification by Christ's righteousness imputed, yea and in proving that truth may with good reason press and urge the same words rightly understood. So that a more odious example of folly and impudence cannot be showed than he here shows himself by, making his folly strive for Mastery with his impudence.  
Secondly, for the particular testimonies which he brings both out of ancient and modern writers. They say no more but what Saint Paul saith, and we all acknowledge and embrace for truth, viz. That Abraham believing that in Christ, and through his satisfaction, GOD was become his reward, was thereupon counted righteous, and GOD counted faith to him for righteousness, and so are we all justified, not by our own righteousness of works performed to the Law in our own persons, but by faith laying hold on the righteousness of Christ, which is counted for righteousness, not in a proper sense, but relatively, as it comprehends Christ and his righteousness, which Calvin calls apprehending the goodness of GOD, and trusting in it. First for Tertullia's words, I take them, as he doth render and rehearse them, and so the rest in order, and will take a light view of them, that we may see his vanity, in citing testimonies which make nothing for him, but some directly against his opinion.   

Tertulian Lib. 5. c. 3 against Martion.  
But how the children of faith? and of whose faith, if not of Abraham's? for if Abraham believed GOD, and it was deputed to him for righteousness, and he thereby obtained the name of the father of many nations; we by believing GOD are therefore much rather justified, as Abraham was. And lib. de patientia cap. 6. Abraham believed and was deputed by him to righteousness; but he tried his faith by patience, when he was commanded to sacrifice his son.  
All this we grant, 
Answer  for here is not a word of imputing faith in a proper sense, only an affirmation that Abraham by believing, obtained this at GOD'S hands, that he was accounted and reputed to be in the state of a righteous man, which we all profess.   

Origen in Epist. ad Romanos, Cap. 4. verse 5.  
IT seems in this present place, that whereas many beleeving of Abraham work before, now in this believing his whole faith was gathered together, and so was reputed to him for righteousness, and again in the same place Abraham was not by GOD testified to be righteous, for his circumcision, but for his faith, for before his circumcision, he believed GOD'S and it was counted to him for righteousness.  
If origen's meaning be, as Beza gathered from these, 
Answer  and other words in that place, that Abraham's faith and all his acts of believing made up a perfect righteousness, and conformity to GOD, will and law; then is he in as great an error, as the Papists who set up justification by a man's own inherent righteousness, and his testimony is to be abhorred. But if his meaning be that by his believing, and not by his circumcision, he obtained from GOD this testimony, that he was righteous by a righteousness believed, than he is full for us, and against his interpretation.   

Justine Martyr Dialog. with Trypho.  
ABraham not for his circumcision, but for his faith obtained the testimony of righteousness: for before he was circumcised, it is said of him, Abraham believed GOD, and it was counted to him for righteousness.  
We grant that Abraham believing GOD to be his reward in Christ; 
Answer  this faith was the evidence of his being righteous by apprehension of Christ, and his righteousness, and therefore by it he obtained a testimony from GOD, that he was in the state of righteousness. And Justine Martyrs words say the same, and so he is clear for us against them, who make faith the righteousness imputed in a proper sense, and not the evidence of righteousness.   

chrysostom on Rom. 4.23. saith that the Apostle  
HAving spoken many and great things concerning Abraham and his faith, saith, wherefore is it written but that we might learn, that we also are justified as he was, because we have believed the same GOD? and on Gal. 3.6. For what was he the worse for not being under the Law? nothing at all, for his faith was sufficient to him for righteousness. All this we grant. For as Abraham's faith laying hold on GOD, as his reward in Christ by communion of his righteousness, was sufficient to him for righteousness, so is our faith also sufficient for us to justification, because by it we possess Christ's righteousness.   

Augustine on the 148 Psal. saith,  
FOr by believing we have found what the jews lost by not by unbelieving, for Abraham believed GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, and on Psal. 140. for I believe in him who justifieth the ungodly, that my faith may be imputed to me for righteousness, and in his book de natura & gratia. For if Christ died not in vain, the ungodly is justified in him alone, to whom believing in him that justifieth the ungodly, faith is accounted to him for righteousness, and in his 68 sermon de tempore, Abraham believed GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousness. See that without any work he is justified by faith, and whatsoever was possible to be conferred on him by his observation of the Law, his believing alone gave it all unto him, where note that believing gives righteousness, and is not the righteousness given in justification.   

Primasius on Rom. 43. saith.  
Abrahams' faith by the gift of GOD was so great, that both his former sins were forgiven, and this faith alone is said to be accepted before all righteousness: that is, before all righteousness of his own, not instead of Christ's righteousness. For if it had not laid hold and possessed the full satisfaction of Christ, it could not have gotten pardon of his sins.  
Beda's words which he citeth concerning the faith which is imputed, are only these, not every faith, but that only, which worketh by love. This is a certain truth, for no faith can bring to us a true sense and assurance of our communion with Christ, but that which worketh by love.  
Haymo on Rom. 43, saith, Quia credidit Deo, etc. Because he believed GOD, it was imputed to him for righteousness, that is, for remission of sins, because by that very faith by which he believed, he was made righteous: These words show that faith by way of efficiency, and as an instrument makes men righteous, even as it brings remission of sins by applying Christ's satisfaction to them.  
Anselmes words are, that he believed so firmly, this was by GOD counted to him for righteousness, that is, by this belief he was reputed righteous. And I say there was good reason, that he who by firm faith is partaker of Christ's righteousness, should be reputed righteous before God.  
These are his testimonies which he citys out of the Ancients whose main stream, as he boasted, did so run as to water his opinion. But we see they so run as to overwhelm and wash away his muddy, and slimy opinion and interpretation. Not one syllable of faith in a proper sense counted for righteousness: Thus the mountains have traveled of a child, and have roared out, and have made a terrible sound, and bustling, and when it comes forth in the birth, it is ridiculus mus, nay not so much as a poor drowned Mouse, in the eyes of judicious readers.   

I proceed to his testimonies of modern Divines.  
LVther on Gal. 3.6▪ Christian righteousness is an affiance or confident resting on the Son of GOD, which confidence is imputed for righteousness, for Christ's sake, and a little after, GOD counts that imperfect faith for perfect righteousness for Christ's sake, in whom I have begun to believe. We cannot desire plainer words to prove that faith is not the righteousness by which we are justified, nor so in a proper sense counted, but propter Christum, that is, by reason, of him which it possesseth with all his benefits and full satisfaction.  
Bucers' words are, Abraham believed God, & he accounted this faith to him for righteousness: & therefore (saith he) by believing he obtained this, that God esteemed him for a righteous man. These words show, that his faith was not his righteousness, but the thing by which he obtained the estimation of a righteous man. Peter Martyrs words are, To be imputed for righteousness in another sense, signifieth that by which we ourselves are reckoned in the number of the righteous, and this Paul atributs to faith only, mark the words, he doth not say, that faith properly is our righteousness, but the only thing by means of which we come to be reckoned in the number of the righteous Calvin on Rome 4.3. Abraham by believing, doth embrace the grace offered to him, that it might not be frustrate: If this be imputed to him for righteousness, it follows, that he is no other way righteous, but because trusting in God's goodness he hath boldness to hope for all other things from him. And again▪ on verse 4. Faith is counted for righteousness, not because it brings from us any merit unto GOD, but because it apprehends the goodness of GOD. These and such speeches of Calvin affirm no more, but that faith is imputed for righteousness, not properly in itself, nor for any merit or worth of it, but merely for that which it apprehendeth and embraceth when it is tendered. That is, GOD'S goodness in giving Christ with all his benefits, and righteousness.  
Musculus in his common places. ss. 5. This faith ought to be commended, not in respect of any proper quality, but in respect of God's purpose, by which he hath appointed, that it, to believers in Christ, should for his sake be imputed in the place of righteousness. These words cut the throat of his interpretation; for they tell us, that faith is imputed for righteousness, not for itself, or any proper quality in it, but for Christ's sake, which is his righteousness sake. Also on Gal. 3.6. What did Abraham that should be imputed to him for righteousness, but only this, that he believed GOD? Indeed, believing is the only means to receive Christ's righteousness, and therefore by believing only we come to be counted righteous. Also on Gen. 15. He so speaks of Abraham's faith, that it is plain he disputes of that faith by which men do not simply believe GOD, but believe in him. That is, trust only in GOD, and rely on the righteousness of Christ, God and man.  
Again afterwards: But when he firmly believed GOD, promising, that faith was imputed to him in the place of righteousness, that is, he was reputed of God righteous for that faith, and absolved from all his sins. It is true, it must be an holy faith, and a firm belief which must so receive Christ and his righteousness, that it may be reputed to us for righteousness, and we may be reputed righteous, and absolved from our sins.   

Bullinger on Rome 4.  
Abraham committed himself to God, and that very thing was imputed to him for righteousness. These words show, that faith in a proper sense, is not imputed, but our committing of ourselves wholly to GOD, by faith, and relying on his righteousness, is that which is counted for righteousness. He adds also on Gal. 3.6. That same faith of Abraham by which he believed on GOD was imputed for righteousness: And very well it might, for by that he laid hold on GOD, as his reward, and his righteousness, and shield.  
Gualthers' words on Rom. 4.4. are no more but the bare words of Moses Gen. 15.6. Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness. You see he is put hard to it, when he citys the bare words themselves to prove his interpretation of them.  
Aretius' his words prove, that faith is so acceptable to GOD, that he counted Abraham righteous upon his believing, by the righteousness of Christ, imputed and set on his score, not inherent in him: For thus his words run, (as he here citys them) Rom. 4 He imputed righteousness, that is, he so far accepted his faith, as thereupon to account him righteous, by a righteousness which is imputative. That is, not by any righteousness of faith, or other works or graces inherent in him, but by Christ's righteousness, which is imputative, such as may be communicated spiritually, and set on the believers account. Also on verse 22. A faith so firm and pious, was imputed to Abraham for righteous. Hereby he notes that it must be a firm and godly faith which is accepted of GOD, for no other but a firm and pious faith can possess Christ's righteousness, by reason of which it may be imputed to the believer for righteousness.   

Illyricus on Rom. 4.3.  
That same believing was imputed to him for righteousness, yea, for true righteousness. These words show that the righteousness for which faith is said to be counted is true righteousness, that is, only the righteousness of Christ only, for faith of itself is no true righteousness.  
The words cited afterwards are directly against himself. That begging faith laying hold on Christ's righteousness, was imputed to him in the place of his own inherent righteousness: It is not therefore faith per se proprio sensu, but faith holding fast Christ's righteousness, which is counted for righteousness.   

Pelican in Gen. 15.6.  
He simply believed GOD'S word, and asked no sign of the LORD, and he did impute that very faith unto Abraham himself for righteousness, by which GOD is believed to be propense or ready for our good.  
Hunius also saith, The faith by which Abraham believed GOD promising was imputed to him for righteousness.  
Beza saith, Here the business is concerning that which was imputed to him, namely, his faith▪ Inius, and Tremellius on Gen. 15.6. GOD esteemed or counted him for righteous, though wanting righteousness, and reckoned him to be in the state of righteousness, because by firm faith he embraced the promises.   

Paraus Rom. 4.3.  
We understand by the word faith, which is said to be imputed for righteousness, abraham's resting, not in himself, or his own merits, but in the promise and good will of GOD. These testimonies are brought to beg the question, for they only affirm, that faith is imputed: and by believing, men come to be counted righteous: but there is not in any one the least intimation, that faith is imputed in a proper sense, but their own words in the same places show, That faith by reason of that which it believeth, and apprehendeth, that is, Christ with all his merits, and benefits, is counted for righteousness, which is our true, genuine & Orthodox exposition of the Apostles words.  
And thus I have answered all whatsoever he hath said for his interpretation, only his several falsehoods, and manifest untruths in several phrases, and boasting words prefixed before the testimonies, of every Author whom he nameth. I leave to the Reader to observe; For indeed they are most palpable, that every man of understanding may run and read them.  
But because I will not have such a forger, and false suborner of witnesses escape away without the just brands of forgery, and notorious impudence. I will bring in the best learned of the Ancients and also of late Orthodox Divines, even those whom he calls to witness for him; and will make them speak in their own words, and testify to all the world, that by faith imputed for righteousness, they understand not faith by itself in a proper sense; but the satisfaction and righteousness of jesus Christ GOD and man, performed according to the Law, in our nature and in our behalf, that through him the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who believe in him, and are lead by his spirit.  
First justin Martyr testifieth that we being in ourselves transgressors, and ungodly, cannot possibly be justified but in the only son of GOD: now if only by being in him, and by that union and communion which all have with him who are in him, then only by his righteousness. For as the same Author saith in the same place, It is his righteousness and nothing else, which can cover our sin. justin Martyr in Epist. ad Diognetum. and in exposit● fidei, he saith that Christ as well by his exact conversation of life (that is, his perfect righteousness) as by his undeserved death hath abolished and covered our falls and failing which came in by Adam.  
Irenaeus is so strict for our communion with Christ in his obedience unto death, and for our reconciliation and justification thereby, that he imputes Christ's obedience to us, and saith. In secundo Adamo reconciliati sumus, obedientes usque ad mortem facti. In the second Adam we are reconciled, being made obedient even unto death. lib. 4. c. 14. adversus haereses.  
Athanasius in his 2 Tom. pag. 270. of Cornelius' edition, saith that it is most necessary for us to believe the Scriptures, that Christ who hath freed us from the curse, is the first fruits of the mass of mankind who are by him redeemed, and that the perfect fulfilling of the law by him the first fruits, is imputed to the whole mass, his words in greek are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And in his book the incarnate. verbi, he affirms that we shall live, and be saved, because we are partakers of the righteousness without spot, which Christ GOD in the flesh brought into the world.  
Gregory Nyssen Orat. 2. in Cantica saith, Christ having the filth or guilt of my sins transferred upon himself, hath communicated his perfect purity to me, and made me partaker of that beauty which is in himself.  
Ambrose saith, as Adam is the pattern of death because of sin, so Christ is the pattern of life, because of his righteousness, in cap. 7. Lucae lib. 5. And our justification by faith, and not by works, he saith was prefigured by jacob's getting of the blessing in sweet smelling garments. jacob was a type of every true believer under the Gospel, Rebecca of the Church. The garments of the first born Christ's righteousness. The jews of the elder testament, like Esau, sought righteousness by their own works, and true believers put on the righteousness of Christ by faith, being so taught by the Church their mother, and obtain by the merit of it the blessing.   

Ambrose lib. 2. c. 2 de jacob & vita beata.  
chrysostom saith, If a jew ask thee how can all the world be saved by the righteous doings of one Christ? thou mayest answer him, even as all the world is condemned by one Adam's disobedience, on Rom. 5. homil. 10.  
And in his book de recta fide, It is absurd (saith he) to think that we should be made heirs of the punishment of the first Adam, by his disobedience, and should not be partakers of the righteousness of the second Adam, who doth bring us to life by his most perfect obedience, Theodoret. Serm. 10. the curand. Graec. affect. saith, It is very convenient that he who highly praised righteousness, should in his coming in the flesh fulfil righteousness for men.  
Augustine Enchirid. ad Laurent. c. 41. saith, he was made sin, that we might be made righteousness, not our own, but GOD'S righteousness; not in ourselves but in him: even as he was sin, not his own sin, but ours; not in himself, but in us. And serm. 6. de verb. Apost. he saith, GOD the father made him sin, that we might be made the righteousness of GOD in him. Behold here two things: the righteousness of GOD not our own● 〈…〉 not in ourselves.  
Leo the 〈◊〉, Epist. 70▪ saith▪ that, by the innocency of one we are all made innocent, and that by righteousness from him, derived unto men, who hath taken man's nature upon him.  
Bernard. Epist. 190. as one hath borne the sins of all, so the satisfaction of one is imputed to all. It was not one which forfeited, and another which satisfied: for the head, and the body is one Christ. Also in serm. ad Milites templi he saith, Death is made to flee away in the death▪ of Christ, and Christ's righteousness is imputed to us: and a little after, He who hath willingly been incarnate, willingly suffered, and willingly crucified, will he keep back his righteousness from us? and again one man sinned, and all are made guilty, and shall the innocency of one (Christ) be imputed only to one?  
Anselm on Rome 5. saith, that by the righteousness of one, coming upon all the elect, they come unto justification, that they may be justified by participation of Christ's righteousness. These with many other testimonies which might easily be gathered out of the Ancients from the primitive times, until Luther, do abundantly show the impudence of this man, who so peremptorily affirmeth, that the communion and imputation of Christ's righteousness for justification, was never dreamt of among ancient writers, but only faith imputed for righteousness in a proper sense, all these Ancients before named testify the contrary. But to descend to Orthodox writers, of this last age since Luther: It is well known that they generally hold imputation of our sins to Christ, and of Christ's satisfaction and righteousness to us for justification, to be the form of justification, by which believers are justified.  
Luther acknowledged, that it was the doctrine of Saint Bernard, concerning justification by Christ's righteousness imputed, and not by our own works; which moved him to suspect the popish doctrine, and to grow into dislike, and loathing of their religion.  
And in his commentary on Galat. where he doth debase the righteousness of works, and doth most highly extol the righteousness of faith, he telleth us, that faith being weak in many of GOD'S children, cannot be accepted for righteousness of itself, that is, in a proper sense, and therefore there is necessarily required imputation of righteousness for justification, on Galatians 3.6.  
In editione Jenensi. Tom. 1. pag. 32. he saith, faith obtains what the Law commands, and what is that but obedience and righteousness? and again, by faith Christ is in us, yea one body with us▪ but Christ is righteous and a fulfiller of the Law; wherefore we all do fulfil it, while Christ is made ours by faith.  
Also Tom. 3. p. 539. when Paul ascribes justification to faith, we must of necessity understand, that he speaks of faith laying hold on Christ, which makes Christ of efficacy against sin and the Law.  
Also Tom. 2. pag. 515. Faith settles us upon the works of Christ without our own works, and translates us out of the exile of our sins, into the kingdom of his righteousness.  
And Tom. 1. pag. 410. Sin is not destroyed unless the Law be fulfilled, but the Law is not fulfilled, but by the righteousness of faith, and page 437. To keep the Law is to have and possess Christ the fulfiller of the Law. And Tom. 4. pag. 44. Faith justifieth because it comprehendeth and possesseth that treasure, to wit, Christ and page 45. we say that Christ doth form faith, or is the form of faith. And Tom. 2. upon Genesis The laying hold on the promises is called sure and firm faith, and doth justify, not as it is our work. These speeches show plainly, that Luther conceived Christ's righteousness to be after a sort the formal righteousness of the believer, though not formally inherent, yet formally possessed, and enjoyed by faith.  
Concerning this justifying righteousness Luther also teacheth, that it is not in ourselves, but in Christ, even his fulfilling of the Law, for us, made ours▪ and imputed to us. Tom. 1. pag 106. By faith (saith he) are our sins made no more ours, but Christ's, upon whom GOD hath laid the iniquities of us all, and he hath borne our sins: And on the other side, all his righteousness is made ours, for he lays his hand upon us. And pag 178. The righteousness of a Christian is the righteousness of another, and comes to him from without. It is even Christ, who is made unto us of God righteousness; so that a man may with confidence glory in Christ, and say, Christ his living, doing, and suffering, is mine, no otherwise then if I had lived, done, and suffered, as he did: as the married man possesseth all that is his wives, and the wife all the goods which are her husbands, for they have all things common, because they are become one flesh: and so Christ and the Church are one spirit; by faith Christ's righteousness is made ours, and all his are ours, yea, himself is ours.  
And Tom. 2. pag 86. The righteousness by which we are justified before GOD, is not in our own persons, but without ourselves in GOD, because man shall have no cause to boast of his own proper righteousness before GOD.  
And Tom. 2. pag 385. A Christian is not formally righteous, by reason of any substance or quality in him, but relatively in relation to Christ, in whom he hath true righteousness.  
Melancthon in Epist. ad Rom. 8.4. saith, wherefore Paul's meaning is thus to be taken; that Christ is given for us, that we may be counted to have satisfied the Law, by him, and that for him we may be reputed righteous; Although we ourselves do not satisfy the Law, another's fulfilling of it is freely given to us, and is imputed to us, and so the Law is imputatively fulfilled in us. And so when the Apostle saith that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness, that is, he who hath Christ is righteous, he is reputed to have satisfied the Law, and he imputatively hath that which the Law requires. And on chap. 10.4. upon these words (Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness, &c) he saith, this is the simple meaning, Christ is the fulfilling of the Law to the believer, and he who hath Christ, that is, believes in him, is righteous, and hath imputatively, what the Law requires.  
The Book of concord subscribed by so many hundreds of Evangelicall Ministers, of the reformed Churches in Germany, in the Articles of justification saith, that when we speak of justifying, it is to be known that these three objects concur, which are to be believed. 1. The promise of the benefit, that is, mercy for remission of sins, and justification, 2. That the promise is most free, which excludes our merits. 3. The merits of Christ, which are the price and propitiation, and a little after, faith doth not justify, because it is a work worthy by itself, (that is, in a proper sense) but only because it receives the mercy promised. And again, How shall Christ be our mediator, if in justification we do not use him for our mediator: that is, if we do not feel that for him we are reputed righteous.  
The Divines of the Augustane confession, condemned Osiander, who held that the righteousness of faith, was the essential righteousness of GOD, and also them who taught that Christ is our righteousness, only according to his humane nature. And in the Epitome of the Articles, controverted by some, they with one consent affirmed▪ that the righteousness of faith, is remission of sins, reconciliation, and adoption to be Sons of God, for the obedience of Christ only which by faith alone of mere grace is imputed to all believers. Artic 3. de fidei justitia.  
And this obedience of Christ which is imputed for righteousness, they affirm to be the obedience which he performed both in his death and passion, and also in his fulfilling of the Law, for our sakes. Ibid. Artic 3. And concerning faith, they teach that in justification before God, it trusteth neither in contrition nor love, nor any other virtues but in Christ alone, it is the only mean and instrument which receives the free grace of GOD, the merit of Christ, and remission of sins, and resteth on Christ's most perfect obedience, by which he fulfilled the Law for us, which obedience is imputed to believers for righteousness. Ibid Artic. 3.  
Calvin is so zealous, and so plain and perspicuous in teaching and maintaining the doctrine of justification, by the communion and imputation of Christ's perfect obedience to the Law, even his full satisfaction, and righteousness, that among Christians who read Calvins institutions, one would think the very Father of liars, the Devil himself should, if not blush and be ashamed, yet in policy and subtlety be afraid, to call Calvin for a witness on his side, in this point, lest the most simple should see and discern him for an open liar, and forger, and abhor and hiss him out with derision. The Doctrine of Calvin concerning justification, I will lay down in certain Articles, gathered from his own writings, especially his Institutions. Lib. 3. cap. 11. and 12.  
First he affirms in plain words▪ that justification consists in remission of sins, and the imputation of Christ's righteousness. cap 11. ss 2.  
As for the word remission of sins, he useth it two ways; sometimes in a large sense, for that act of GOD, by which he doth communicate, and impute the full satisfaction of Christ unto his elect, and faithful, so that the whole guilt of all sins, both of commission, and omission, is thereby taken away, and they are no more accounted, nor appear in his sight as sinners. In this sense he calls remission of sins in his comment on Rom. totum justificationis, and in his Instit. 3. cap. 11. sect 4 totam justificationem. For indeed when the guilt of all sins of omission, and commission are taken away by that part of Christ's satisfaction imputed, which is called his passive obedience, or voluntary suffering of the penalties of the Law, and the defects which come in by the sins of omission, supplied by his active obedience, in fulfilling the righteousness which the Law requires, which is the other part of Christ's satisfaction imputed; so that now the elect are reputed, and esteemed as righteous men, who have the defects which came by omission supplied, and, have no more the sins of commission or omission imputed, the guilt being taken away: this is perfect and whole justification, and is very fitly called by the name of remission, to distinguish it from justification by our own works, and by our own inherent righteousness.  
But sometimes he useth this word remission, in a more strict sense, for that part of GOD'S act of communicating, and imputing Christ's satisfaction, which respects the passive obedience of Christ, which takes away the guilt of sins committed, but doth not supply the omission of righteousness, and in this sense he makes remission of sins, but a part of justification. And GOD'S imputing of the active part of Christ's satisfaction, and counting the faithful righteous by it imputed; he makes the other part of justification in the words before cited, Lib. 3. cap. 11. ss. 2.  
Secondly he constantly teacheth, and affirmeth that there is no righteousness, by which a man can stand before GOD'S tribunal, and be accepted for righteous in his sight: but only the full satisfaction of jesus Christ, and his perfect righteousness, which he GOD and man performed in our nature. For that which is not entire and absolute, and without all stain, and spot of sin, such as never hath been nor shall be found in any mere man, can never be accepted of GOD, but is with him slighted and vilified beyond all measure. And whosoever prate of any righteousness in men's own works, or doings, they have no true thought, nor least sense of the justice of GOD, but make a mock of it. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 12. ss. 1.3. and 11.16.  
Thirdly he affirmeth that man is justified by faith, when he is excluded from the righteousness of works, and by faith layeth hold on the righteousness of Christ, with which he being clothed doth appear in the sight of GOD, not as a sinner but as a righteous man, Instit. 3. cap. 11. ss. 1.  
And the same chap. ss.. 11. This is that admirable way of justifying, that being covered with Christ's righteousness, men do not fear the judgement of which they are worthy, and while they deservedly condemn themselves, they are reputed righteous without themselves.  
Fourthly concerning the office of faith in justification, he teacheth, that faith being in itself weak, imperfect, and of no dignity, worth, price or value, is never able to justify us by itself, but by bringing Christ unto us, who is given to us of GOD for righteousness, it is not our righteousness, but it makes us come with the mouth of the soul wide opened, that we may be capable of Christ. And it is as a vessel or pot; for as the pot full of money enricheth a man, so faith filled with Christ and his righteousness, is said to justify us, and to be counted for righteousness. It is a foolish thing to mingle our faith, which is only the instrument of receiving righteousness, with Christ who is the material cause, and both the Author and minister of this great benefit, cap 11. ss. 7. And again, ss. 17. Faith is hereupon said to justify, because it receiveth and embraceth righteousness offered in the Gospel.  
Fiftly he affirmeth that the righteousness by which believers are justified, and stand righteous before GOD, is not in themselves, but in Christ, even his perfect obedience, and righteousness communicated to them by imputation. ss. 23.  
Lastly he showeth how this righteousness comes to be the righteousness of believers, and to be so communicated to them, that GOD doth justly impute it to them for justification, and accepteth it as if it were their own, to wit, by means of their spiritual union, and conjunction with Christ, by which they are made partakers of Christ, and with him and in him, possess all his riches, Sect. 10.20.23. This is the sum of calvin's Doctrine, concerning justification briefly comprised, and collected out of his words in the places before cited, where the Reader may be fully satisfied.  
Beza in the doctrine of justification, by faith doth fully agree with Luther, and Calvin, in all the former articles. First he saith, that faith is not any such virtue as doth justify us in ourselves before GOD, for that is to set faith in the place of Christ, who alone is our whole and perfect righteousness. But faith justifieth, as it is the instrument which receiveth Christ, and with him his righteousness, that is most full perfection, and we say, that we are justified by faith only; because it embraceth Christ, who doth justify us, with whom it doth unite and couple us, that we may be partakers of him and all his goods, which being imputed to us, are sufficient that we may be absolved before GOD, and deemed righteous. Confess. cap. 4. ss. 7. in notes on Romans 3.22.24.  
Secondly, that faith sends to Christ for perfect righteousness, to justification, and that it assures us of salvation through his righteousness alone, because whatsoever is in Christ is imputed to us, as if it were our own, if so be we embrace him by faith: The righteousness of Christ which is imputed, he describeth to be the greatest, and most absolute perfection of righteousness, consisting in these two things. First that he hath no sin in him. Secondly that he hath fulfilled all the righteousness of the Law. confess. cap. 4 ss. 8. in his notes on Rome 3.22.26. and Rom. 4.5. and 5.12. and Phil. 3.9.  
Thirdly he showeth that we come to have communion of Christ's righteousness, by spiritual union, and marriage with Christ. If (saith he) we be united, and joined together into fellowship with Christ by faith, nothing is more properly ours then Christ, and whatsoever is Christ's, confess. 4. ss. 9  
Fourthly he pronounceth that it is no less than wicked blasphemy to deny the mutual and reciprocal imputation of the sins of believers to Christ, and of Christ's perfect satisfaction to believers, Lib. contra Anonymum de justificatione.  
Fiftly he affirms, that righteousness which justifieth men before GOD, must be both a full satisfaction for sin, and also a perfect fulfilling of GOD'S commandments in every part, on Rome▪ 3.20. Our learned Whitakers in his answer to Campions 8th. reason, pag●8 ●8. and in the 8 Book against Duraeus pag 177.182 183. doth pithily dispute, and stoutly maintain the Doctrine of the righteousness of Christ imputed, which he proves to be the only perfect righteousness, able to justify us before GOD.  
Master Perkins also in his Golden Chain. Chap. 37. makes the translation of the believers sins, to Christ, and Christ's righteousness to the believer, by a mutual & reciprocal imputation, the very form of justification.  
Polanus in Syntagmate Theolog l. 6 c. 36. doth maintain the same doctrine with Luther, Calvin, Melancthon, Beza, & Whitakers, & proves every point fully by plain testimonies, & invincible arguments out of the holy Scriptures. And in his Symphonia catholica, he brings testimonies of the ancients affirming every article of our doctrine, and in his Theses de iustifis. he shows the consent of the most famous Orthodox Divines of the reformed religion since Luther.  
As for Musculus and Junius, whom he brings as favourers of his error, with other later Divines, let their own writings speak, and declare how wickedly he doth abuse them in bringing their words to overthrow the imputation of Christ's righteousness. Musculus on Rom. 8.4. expounds the Apostles words, (that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us) to be meant, first of all imputatively by the righteousness of another, even of Christ, which is also ours, for we are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones, and Rom. 10.3.4. and by the righteousness which justifieth believers, he understands Christ's perfect righteousness imputed to us. Also junius, thes. 35. and 36. doth affirm that the righteousness of faith imputed to believers, is the righteousness which the Law requires, performed by Christ, differing only in this, that legal righteousness is every man's fulfilling of the Law, in his own person; but this Evangelicall is the fulfilling of the Law by Christ, GOD and man, our surety and mediator. And for this Socinian heretical opinion of faith, imputed in a proper sense, for righteousness in justification, No man can show greater enmity against it, nor with greater detestation oppose and condemn it, than Paraeus in his commentary on the Romans, and in other his works. Thus much for the vindicating of the best learned both Ancient writers, and modern Divines from the foul slanders, most falsely belched out against them by this most impudent forger of false witnesses without any fear of GOD, or shame of men. And by their own testimonies, and plain words rehearsed out of their own writings, I have made manifest their unanimous consent in the true Doctrine of justification, by the righteousness of Christ imputed to true believers, and of them apprehended, and applied by faith. Now I leave it to all indifferent readers, and zealous Christians to consider whether it be not their duty, both to take heed to themselves, and also to admonish others, that they have no fellowship with so openly professed Socinian sectaries, as this man and his followers are: you see the Doctrine which they maintain is wicked, and blasphemous heresy. And after many admonitions given by grave, & learned Divines & divers public confuatations, & censures often passed in public, against this error, they still persist in their pestilent heresy, and are more mad to disperse it then before. And when truth cannot help them, they flee for aid to the father of liars, and make lies their refuge, and in forging lies they sin being condemned of themselves, even against their knowledge, and conscience, as the Apostle foretold of heretics, Tit. 3.11.  
How wilfully against the known truth, and his own conscience, this desperate man hath proclaimed Luther, Calvin, Beza, Musculus, junius, and others to be of his opinion, I have sufficiently proved; & if ever he hath looked into the writings of any of them, his own eyes have taught him how opposite they are to his heresy.  
But it is no new and strange thing for heretics to sin being condemned of themselves, when they are once subverted. The Apostle hath foretold us that we must expect no better from such, in that place before named. Tit. 3 11. Now in conclusion, I appeal to all Christian readers, and desire their opinion and judgement, in the particulars following.  
First whether I have not in all this answer declared, and expressed what I mean by the righteousness of Christ, which I have proved to be imputed to believers for justification. If I have made manifest by plain profession, that by the righteousness of Christ, I understand his perfect fulfilling of the whole Law of God, and performing whatsoever the Law requires of man for righteousness, even a full satisfaction made in man's behalf, to the Law of justice; Then I appeal to the judgement of all reasonable men, whether my adversary hath not most wickedly belied me in word and writing: for he hath both ways charged me, that I neither hold Christ's habitual holiness, and uprightness, of his humane nature, nor his active obedience to the whole Law, or any righteousness of works by him performed, nor both these together, to be the righteousness of Christ imputed, and thereupon he clamours against me, that I hold and teach a righteousness of Christ, which never was in Christ: I confess I have ever taught and held, That neither the habitual nor actual righteousness of Christ, alone nor both together, without his satisfaction of justice, by bearing our sins, and suffering the punishments due to them, are a sufficient ransom to redeem us, nor a complete and perfect obedience and fulfilling of the whole, able to justify us, in the sight of GOD, and to reconcile us to him. Now to affirm that all three together are imputed, is not to deny the imputation of the two first, though they that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Calumniators may so wrest the words.  
Secondly, whether he who hath believed and preached, and in writing maintained, for 28 years' last passed to this hour, what he in this answer hath professed, held and maintained, can without wilful lying, and more than Jesuitical forging, be reported abroad, & confidently charged for a turnecoat, whom this Adversary by this his Socinian learning, and Sophistry hath so confounded, and convinced him, that he is wholly turned to be of the same opinion, and hath vowed to maintain his Socinianism, both publicly, and privately, to the utmost of his power. So this man's followers have reported, and have withal added, that so many as have come within his breath, are all illuminated by him, and being converted to his opinion, do rejoice in the light, by which he hath shined into their hearts.  
Thirdly, whether this Answer to his Socinianism be such, that both it, and the Author of it have nothing in them but words and passion, and that herein he is strangely, and monstrously metamorphosed from a Minister of Christ, into an Angel of darkness, besmearing the brightness of his face, with the foot and grease of Hell, that the words and phrases of this answer, are the black Prince's coin, and there is little in it besides cursing, and railing. For many such fiery darts hath this Adversary thrown against the Answerer in a scurrilous Libel fraught with lies, forgeries, absurdities, contradictions, and blasphemies, and sent forth under the name of a reply; which is also confuted by the Answerer, and the filthiness thereof so plainly discovered, that all true Christians, and modest men, will say of it, that the reciting of it, is a full confutation. From all such wicked spirits, the GOD of truth defend his Church and People, and grant a free passage to his Gospel, and to his faithful Ministers, a door of utterance, that they may preach among all men every where, the unsearchable riches of Christ. To this GOD of truth, let us consecrate our tongues, and pens, and resolve with both to maintain his truth, by his grace, and the assistance of his Spirit, so long as strength, breath, and life shall last. And to him let us give all glory, now and ever, Amen.   
FJNJS.   

December. 8. 1640.  
Jmprimatur THOMAS WYKES.