N00347:57
A brief discourse of justification. Wherein this doctrine is plainly laid down according to…
A brief discourse of justification. Wherein this doctrine is plainly laid down according to the Scriptures. : As it was delivered in several sermons on this subject. / By Samuel Willard, teacher of a church in Boston. ; [Ten lines of quotations]
Boston: printed by S for Samuel Phillips, 1686
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
2. The pronouncing of him Righteous: I therefore name this as a distinct part of justification ⟨p. 13⟩from the other, because, though it doth contain that under it, (for if I do declare such an one to be righteous, I do necessarily and by consequence affirm him not to be guilty, because righteousness and guilt are inconsistent) yet there is here something more in it; for there is not only a negative Righteousness consisting in innocency, (which in some cases is enough to free a man from condemnation among men) but there is also a positive Righteousness required in the Law of God, and it was the condition of a glorious reward; and this is a part of our Evangelical Justification, or it is contained in the Sentence of the Judge, that we have this positive Righteousness; not only that the man is not worthy of condemnation, because he hath not broken the Law, but that he is worthy of life, because he hath kept it, see Rev. 3. 4. They shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy. And though the former of these doth most properly answer the import of the word, yet because they are both inseparable each from the other, and also each of them is imputative, they are therefore suitably looked upon as the constituent parts of our Justification.
2. The pronouncing of him Righteous: I therefore name this as a distinct part of justification ⟨p. 13⟩from the other, because, though it doth contain that under it, (for if I do declare such an one to be righteous, I do necessarily and by consequence affirm him not to be guilty, because righteousness and guilt are inconsistent) yet there is here somthing more in it; for there is not only a negative Righteousness consisting in innocency, (which in some cases is enough to free a man from condemnation among men) but there is also a positive Righteousness required in the Law of God, and it was the condition of a glorious reward; and this is a part of our Evangelical Justification, or it is contained in the Sentence of the Judge, that we have this positive Righteousness; not only that the man is not worthy of condemnation, because he hath not broken the Law, but that he is worthy of life, because he hath kept it, see