Contr. See in my Dispute of Justification, my Confutation of this Assertion in Mr. Warner. Properly Faith justifieth not at all; but we are justified of or by it as a condition by the tenor of Gods deed of gift. And so far as it is the condition in that gift, so far we are justified by it. But it is one entire Faith in Christ, which is the condition, without such distinction; therefore we are so justified by it. 2. According to that Rule, there must be as many acts of Faith, as there are benefits to be received, and the title to be ascribed to each one accordingly. 3. The natural relation of the act to the object, showeth no more but what the nature or essence of that Faith is, and not how we come to be justified by it. 4. The sense containeth this false Proposition [Haec fides qua talis, or quae fides justificat: Faith as Faith, or as this Faith in specie, justifieth (which some call the (To credere) For it is the essence of Faith which they call its Reception of Christs Righteousness. 5. The true passive Reception of Righteousness and Pardon, is that of the person, as he is the terminus of the donative or justifying act of the Covenant: To receive Pardon properly, is to be pardoned: But our Active Receiving or Consent, is but the condition of it; and there is no proof or reason that the condition should be so parcelled. 6. Yet if by your quatenus you intend no more than the description of the act of Faith as essentially related to its subsequent benefit, and not at all to speak of its conditional nearest interest in our Justification, the matter were less. 7. But the truth is, that if we might distinguish where God doth not distinguish, it were much more rational to say, that taking Christ for a true Messenger of God, and a Teacher, and Sanctifier, and King, hath a greater hand in our Justification, than taking him to justify us (supposing that all be present.) Because the common way and reason of conditions in Covenants is, that somewhat which the party is willing of, is promised upon condition of something which he is unwilling of, that for the one he may be drawn to consent unto the other: As if the Physician should say [If you will take me for your Physician, and refuse none of my medicines, I will undertake to cure you.] Here it is supposed that the Patient is willing of health, and not willing of the Medicines, but for healths sake;
Contr. See in my Dispute of Justification, my Confutation of this Assertion in Mr. Warner. Properly Faith justifieth not at all; but we are justified of or by it as a condition by the tenour of Gods deed of gift. And so far as it is the condition in that gift, so far we are justified by it. But it is one entire Faith in Christ, which is the condition, without such distinction; therefore we are so justified by it. 2. According to that Rule, there must be as many acts of Faith, as there are benefits to be received, and the title to be ascribed to each one accordingly. 3. The natural relation of the act to the object, sheweth no more but what the nature or essence of that Faith is, and not how we come to be justified by it. 4. The sense containeth this false Proposition [Haec fides qua talis, or quae fides justificat: Faith as Faith, or as this Faith in specie, justifieth (which some call the (To credere) For it is the essence of Faith which they call its Reception of Christs Righteousness. 5. The true passive Reception of Righteousness and Pardon, is that of the person, as he is the terminus of the donative or justifying act of the Covenant: To receive Pardon properly, is to be pardoned: But our Active Receiving or Consent, is but the condition of it; and there is no proof or reason that the condition should be so parcelled. 6. Yet if by your quatenus you intend no more than the description of the act of Faith as essentially related to its subsequent benefit, and not at all to speak of its conditional nearest interest in our Justification, the matter were less. 7. But the truth is, that if we might distinguish where God doth not distinguish, it were much more rational to say, that taking Christ for a true Messenger of God, and a Teacher, and Sanctifier, and King, hath a greater hand in our Justification, than taking him to justifie us (supposing that all be present.) Because the common way and reason of conditions in Covenants is, that somewhat which the party is willing of, is promised upon condition of something which he is unwilling of, that for the one he may be drawn to consent unto the other: As if the Physician should say [If you will take me for your Physician, and refuse none of my medicines, I will undertake to cure you.] Here it is supposed that the Patient is willing of health, and not willing of the Medicines, but for healths sake;
