Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…

And hence he is so much against this merit of Justice, as to infer, that [Christ himself could not satisfy God according to strict Justice properly, by the works of his Humane nature; because the whole Value ⟨p. 275⟩came from the Godhead it self, sanctifying the humanity and making his works worthy. Cap. 6. he proceedeth to show that though it be not true that some say, that full equal satisfaction may be refused, it being not the ipsum debitum, and that he proveth that a full equal satisfaction to proper justice cannot in justice be refused, and if it be refusable, it is unequal; (though it may be equal condignitate meriti quae ad justitiam propriè non pertinet;) Yet even from Gods promise it self, it is no obligation of proper justice, that is on God to us. Confuting Sotus that saith that Gods Fidelity is not to be referred to the virtue of verity, but properly belongeth to commutative Justice. If this be not enough, Disput. 86. he cometh to the other branch, Whether God have distributive Justice to us? and denieth this also in proper sense. And proveth it by the authority of Bonavent. in 4. d. 46. art. 2. q. 1. ad 1. Scotus qu. 1. Durand. ib. q. 1. & in 2. d. 23. q. 2. num. 5. Palud. in 4. d. 46. q. 1. a. 1. Gabriel supplem. in 4. d. 49. q. 4. a. 3. dub. 3. Alex. 1. p. q. 39. in 1. & Thom. &c. & ex Anselm. & Aristot. Cap. 3. he proveth it by many Reasons. Yet Cap. 4. granteth that Justice distributive is in God, secundum quandam rationem generalem, non autem secundum propriam; concluding, Distinguendum est; Aut enim Propriè opponitur Metaphoricè, aut opponitur Communiter: si priori modo, Deo Propriè convenit Justitia distributiva; si posteriori, non convenit. If in all this you can justify this Jesuit and all the Schoolmen who he saith agree with him, from giving too little to humane merit, and Gods Justice, I suppose few Protestants will accuse him of giving too much.

And hence he is so much against this merit of Justice, as to inferr, that [Christ himself could not satisfie God according to strict Justice properly, by the works of his Humane nature; because the whole Value ⟨p. 275⟩came from the Godhead it self, sanctifying the humanity and making his works worthy. Cap. 6. he proceedeth to shew that though it be not true that some say, that full equal satisfaction may be refused, it being not the ipsum debitum, and that he proveth that a full equal satisfaction to proper justice cannot in justice be refused, and if it be refuseable, it is unequal; (though it may be equal condignitate meriti quae ad justitiam propriè non pertinet;) Yet even from Gods promise it self, it is no obligation of proper justice, that is on God to us. Confuting Sotus that saith that Gods Fidelity is not to be referred to the virtue of verity, but properly belongeth to commutative Justice. If this be not enough, Disput. 86. he cometh to the other branch, Whether God have distributive Justice to us? and denyeth this also in proper sence. And proveth it by the authority of Bonavent. in 4. d. 46. art. 2. q. 1. ad 1. Scotus qu. 1. Durand. ib. q. 1. & in 2. d. 23. q. 2. num. 5. Palud. in 4. d. 46. q. 1. a. 1. Gabriel supplem. in 4. d. 49. q. 4. a. 3. dub. 3. Alex. 1. p. q. 39. in 1. & Thom. &c. & ex Anselm. & Aristot. Cap. 3. he proveth it by many Reasons. Yet Cap. 4. granteth that Justice distributive is in God, secundum quandam rationem generalem, non autem secundum propriam; concluding, Distinguendum est; Aut enim Propriè opponitur Metaphoricè, aut opponitur Communiter: si priori modo, Deo Propriè convenit Justitia distributiva; si posteriori, non convenit. If in all this you can justifie this Jesuite and all the Schoolmen who he saith agree with him, from giving too little to humane merit, and Gods Justice, I suppose few Protestants will accuse him of giving too much.