A26977:685
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.
That both freedom from Punishment, and right to Glory are the conjunct effects of His Habitual, Active, and Passive Righteousness, as an entire Cause (in its kind); as Guil. Forbes, Grotius, Bradshaw, and others truly say: Besides that many conclude with Gataker, that these▪ are indeed but one thing and ⟨p. 62⟩effect, (to be Glorified, and not to be Damned or Punished)▪ seeing not to be Glorified is the Paena damni, and that the remitting of the whole Penalty damni & sensus, and so of all Sin of Omission and Commission, is our whole Justification. And I need not tell any Man that hath read such Writers, that they ordinarily distinguish of Justification, and give not the same Definition of one sort as of another, nor of the Name in one Sense as in another. Many confess (whom you may read in Guil. Forbes, and Vinc. le Blank) that the word [Justify] is divers times taken in Scripture (as the Papists do) as including Sanctification: And so saith Beza against Illyricus, pag. 218. as cited by G. Forbes, [Si Justificationem generaliter accipias, ut interdum usurpatur ab Apostolo, Sanctificatio non erit ejus effectus, sed pars aut species]: And as I find him (mihi) pag. 179. Quamvis Justificationis nomen interdum generaliter accipiatur pro omni illius Justitiae dono quam a patre in Christo accipimus, &c. And how little are we agreed whether Reconciliation be a part of Justification or not? Yea, or Adoption either? Saith Illyricus [Hoc affirmo, recte posse dici Justificationem esse Causam omnium beneficiorum sequentium: Nam justificatio est plena Reconciliatio cum Deo, quae nos facit ex hostibus filios Dei:] To which Beza ibid. saith, (distinguishing of Reconciliation) Neutro modo idem est Reconciliatio ac Justificatio. — Si Remissio peccatorum est Justificationis Definitio, quod negare non ausis, &c. Of the three sorts or parts of Christs Righteousness imputed to make up three parts of our Justification, ⟨p. 63⟩see him de Predest. pag. 405. Col. 2. which Perkins and some others also follow. Olevian (as all others that grossly mistake not herein) did hold, that God did not judg us to have fulfilled all the Law in Christ; and that our righteousness consisteth only in the Remission of Sin, and right to Life as freely given us for another's Merits: But Beza insisteth still on the contrary, and in his Epistle to Olevian, (pag. 248. Epist. 35.)