A26977:198
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…
Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sense [sic] sound Protestants hold it and of the false devised sense by which libertines subvert the Gospel : with an answer to some common objections, especially of Dr. Thomas Tully whose Justif. Paulina occasioneth the publication of this / by Richard Baxter a compassionate lamenter of the Church's wounds caused by hasty judging ... and by the theological wars which are hereby raised and managed ...Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sence [sic] sound Protestants hold it and of the false divised sence by which libertines subvert the Gospel : with an answer to some common objections, especially of Dr. Thomas Tully whose Justif. Paulina occasioneth the publication of this / by Richard Baxter a compassionate lamenter of the Church's wounds caused by hasty judging ... and by the theological wars which are hereby raised and managed ...
London: printed for Nevil Simmons and Jonathan Robinson, 1675
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
So pag. 311. Cap. 22. Qu. 2. Whether there be two parts of Justification, Remission and Imputation of Christs Righteousness. 1. He referreth us to what is aforecited against Imputation of Christs Active Righteousness, separated or abstracted for Reward from the Passive. 2. He showeth that Paul taketh Remission of sin and Imputation of Righteousness for the same thing.] So say many of ours.
So pag. 311. Cap. 22. Qu. 2. Whether there be two parts of Justification, Remission and Imputation of Christs Righteousness. 1. He referreth us to what is aforecited against Imputation of Christs Active Righteousness, separated or abstracted for Reward from the Passive. 2. He sheweth that Paul taketh Remission of sin and Imputation of Righteousness for the same thing.] So say many of ours.
In conclusion I will mind the Reader, that by reading some Authors for Imputation, I am brought to doubt whether some deny not all true Remission of sin, that is, Remission of the deserved punishment. Because I find that by Remission they mean A non-Imputation of sin under the formal notion of sin; that God taketh it not to be our sin, but Christs; and Christs Righteousness and perfection to be so ours, as that God accounteth us not as truly sinners. And so they think that the Reatus Culpae as well as Poenae simply in it self is done away. Which if it be so, then the Reatus Poenae, the obligation to punishment, or the dueness of punishment, cannot be said to be dissolved or remitted, because it was never contracted. Where I hold, that it is the Reatus ad Poenam, the Dueness of punishment only that is remitted, and the guilt of sin not as in it self, but in its Causality of punishment. And so in all common language, we say we forgive a man his fault, when we forgive him all the penalty positive and privative. Not esteeming him, 1. Never to have done the fact. 2. Or that ⟨p. 78⟩fact not to have been a fault, and his fault; 3. but that punishment for that fault, is forgiven him, and the fault so far as it is a cause of punishment. We must not feign God to judg falsely.