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…

which some Papists (de nomine) call Merit of Congruity, and some will not. The Papists and Protestants say, that Faith is in order of nature, at least, before that Habitual Love, which is called Holiness, and before the Works thereof. The Papists and Protestants say, that Works of Love and Obedience, follow our First Sanctification, and make up but the Second part of it, which consisteth in the Works of Holiness. If you speak not of Works in the same sense in each part of your Assignation, the Equivocation would be too gross, viz. If you should mean [Papists rank the necessity of preparatory Common Works, or the Internal act of Faith, or Love, stretching it ⟨p. 33⟩to the First Justification; and Protestants rank other Works, viz. The fruits of Faith and Love, with Inherent Holiness. All agree, 1. That Common Works go before Sanctification. 2. That Internal Love, and other Grace, do constitute Sanctification in the First part of it. 3. That Special Works proceeding from Inward Grace, are the effects of the First Part, and the constitutive Causes of the Second Part of Sanctification; as the word extendeth also to Holiness of Life: And whilst Papists take Justification for Sanctification, in all this there is De re no difference. (But your accurate Explications by such terms, as [Stretching, Confirming, Province, &c.] are fitter for Tully, than for Aristotle). And is this it in the Application that your Zeal will warn Men of, that we must in this take heed of joining with the Papists? Do you mean [Rank Good-Works with Inherent Holiness, and not with the First Sanctification, and you then do widely differ from the Papists]? Will not your Reader say, 1. What doth Inherent Holiness differ from the First Sanctification? 2. Do you not invite me thus herein to be a Papist, when they rank them no where but, as you say, the Protestants do? 3. Do not you here proclaim, that Papists and Protestants differ not about the necessity of Good-works to Justification? But yet I that would make no Differences wider than they are, can find some greater than you have mentioned. Truly Sir, I am grieved and ashamed, to foresee how Learned Papists will make merry with such Passages; and say, See here how we differ from the Protestants! See what it is for, that the Protestant ⟨p. 34⟩Doctors separate from the Church of Rome! viz.

which some Papists (de nomine) call Merit of Congruity, and some will not. The Papists and Protestants say, that Faith is in order of nature, at least, before that Habitual Love, which is called Holiness, and before the Works thereof. The Papists and Protestants say, that Works of Love and Obedience, follow our First Sanctification, and make up but the Second part of it, which consisteth in the Works of Holiness. If you speak not of Works in the same sense in each part of your Assignation, the Equivocation would be too gross, viz. If you should mean [Papists rank the necessity of preparatory Common Works, or the Internal act of Faith, or Love, stretching it