Of justification four disputations clearing and amicably defending the truth against the unnecessary oppositions…

This is utterly denied to be at all by Doctor Stoughton, Camer▪ and other solid Divines, against the School-mens judgement: And if it be, yet doubtless as we know not how, so it is not such as faiths apprehension, which we enquire after, Cognitio Abstractiva est quando species rei movet ad cognoscendum rem ipsam, & hoc siveres sit in se praesens, sive absens, sive existat sive non: Exemplum in sensitiva est, ut phantasia imaginatur colorem: Exemplum in intellectiva est ut intellectus cognoscit quidditatem coloris medicante ejus specie. So that if it be either of these, it were at the utmost but a passive reception of the species, and not of Christ or his righteousness. 2. By what physical contact faith doth receive this? might be enquired: and 3. By what physical act of the Agent? to neither of which questions can I imagine what tolerable answer can be given, in defence of this cause. 2. And if faith be a passive physical instrument, it must have a Physical Efficiency? and what is that? to justify? why, even God himself in this life doth that but by a Moral Act (by his word) and not by a physical, (as to particulars.) 3. But that which driveth me to the greatest admiration is, How faith should Efficere patiendo! If I should rip up this, ⟨p. 211⟩or require a demonstration of it in respect to the justification at judgement, yea, or in this life, yea or of any effect, I should lay such an odium on it from its absurdities, that in dealing with you, modesty doth forbid me to insist on it. 4. The fourth requisite will be enquired after in the next Question save one. The fourth Question is, Whether other Graces may not be as properly called physical passive Instruments as Faith, is your sense? And I doubt not but they may, (though its true of neither) For 1. If there be no physical reception of Christs righteousness imaginable but that which is per modum objecti, and if other gracious acts have Christs righteousness for their object, as well as that which you call faith: then other Acts do receive Christs righteousness as well as saith: but both branches of the Antecedent are true, therefore the consequence, the bare knowledge or simple apprehension of Christs righteousness per modum objecti may better pretend to this, then recumbency or affiance:

This is utterly denyed to be at all by Doctor Stoughton, Camer▪ and other solid Divines, against the School-mens judgement: And if it be, yet doubtless as we know not how, so it is not such as faiths apprehension, which we enquire after, Cognitio Abstractiva est quando species rei movet ad cognoscendum rem ipsam, & hoc siveres sit in se praesens, sive absens, sive existat sive non: Exemplum in sensitiva est, ut phantasia imaginatur colorem: Exemplum in intellectiva est ut intellectus cognoscit quidditatem coloris medicante ejus specie. So that if it be either of these, it were at the utmost but a passive reaception of the species, and not of Christ or his righteousness. 2. By what physical contact faith doth receive this? might be enquired: and 3. By what physical act of the Agent? to neither of which questions can I imagine what tolerable answer can be given, in defence of this cause. 2. And if faith be a passive physical instrument, it must have a Physical Efficiency? and what is that? to justifie? why, even God himself in this life doth that but by a Moral Act (by his word) and not by a physical, (as to particulars.) 3. But that which driveth me to the greatest admiration is, How faith should Efficere patiendo! If I should rip up this,