Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sense [sic] sound Protestants…Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sence [sic] sound Protestants…

I take explication to be here more useful than argumentation: And therefore I shall yet fuller open to you the state of our differences▪ and my own judgment in the point, with the reasons of it, in such necessary Distinctions, and brief Propositions, as shall carry their own convincing light with them. If any think I distinguish too much, let him prove any to be needless or unjust, and then reject it and spare not. If any think I distinguish not accurately enough, let him add what is wanting, and but suppose that I have elsewhere done it, and am not now handling the whole doctrine of Justification, but only that of Imputation, and what it necessarily includeth.

I take explication to be here more useful than argumentation: And therefore I shall yet fullier open to you the state of our differences▪ and my own judgment in the point, with the reasons of it, in such necessary Distinctions, and brief Propositions, as shall carry their own convincing light with them. If any think I distinguish too much, let him prove any to be needless or unjust, and then reject it and spare not. If any think I distinguish not accurately enough, let him add what is wanting, and but suppose that I have elsewhere done it, and am not now handling the whole doctrine of Justification, but only that of Imputation, and what it necessarily includeth.

Though a man that readeth our most Learned Protestants, professing that they agree even with Bellarmine himself in the stating of the case of Imputation, would think that there should need no further stating of it. I cited you Bellarmine's ⟨p. 49⟩words before with Vasseur's consent: I here add Johan. Crocius de Justif. Disp. 10. pag. 500.501. Vide hominis sive vertiginem sive improbitutem, clamat fieri non posse ut Justitia Christi nobis imputetur eo sensu qui haereticis probetur — Et tamen rectam vocat sententiam, quam suam faciunt Evangelici. Quod enim cum rectâ ratione pugnare dicit, nos per Justitiam Christi formaliter justos nominari & esse, nos non tangit: Non dicimus; Non sentimus: Sed hoc totum proficiscitur e Sophistarum officinâ, qui phrasin istam nobis affingunt, ut postea eam exagitent tanquam nostram: (yet some of our own give them this pretence.) Nos sententiam quam ille rectam judicat, tenemus, tuemur; sic tamen ut addamus, quod Genti adversariae est intolerabile, non alia ratione nos justos censeri coram Deo.] But by Justification the Papists mean Sanctification: And they count it not intolerable to say that the penalty of our sins is remitted to us, by that Satisfaction to the Justice of God according to the Law of Innocency, which Christ only hath made. But though many thrust in more indeed, and most of them much more in words; yet you see they are forced to say as we say whether they will or not: For they seem unwilling to be thought to agree with us, where they agree indeed.] And the following words of Joh. Crocius pag. 506, 507. &c. show the common sense of most Protestants, [When Bellarmine observeth that Imputation maketh us as righteous as Christ, he saith, [If we said that we are Justified by Christs essential righteousness. — But we say it not. Yea above all we renounce that which the Sophister puts in of his own, even that which he saith of Formal Righteousness: For it is not our opinion, that we are constituted formally Righteous by