Church in relation to a point of so great importance, the learned and judicious Mr. Bull, afterwards Bishop of St. David's, composed, about the year 1660, being then about twenty-seven years of age, his most incomparable piece, entitled Harmonia Apostolica, &c. well known to the learned, which he published A. D. 1669. In which work, and his Examen Censuræ, &c. and Apologia pro Harmonia, &c. written against the several persons who appeared against him in the cause he had undertaken, he hath, in a manner, exhausted the subject, clearing and settling the true nature of the doctrine, to the satisfaction of every learned and impartial judge. But there hath of late years sprung up among us a sect of men, who are reviving the solifidian doctrine ; contending that we are so justified by faith alone, as to exclude good works from being necessary conditions of justification; admitting them to be only necessary fruits and consequences of it": and Bishop Bull's Works, now mentioned, being wrote in Latin, and so of no service to unlearned readers, from whom this sect of men gather their converts; there seemed to be wanting some treatise in English on this subjecte, which might set that important point of doctrine in a clear light to common Christians: and this seems to have been the occasion of Dr. Waterland's writing the treatise here published; wherein he hath reduced the subject to a very short compass, and, under five heads, which take in all that is necessary to be considered for clearing the subject, hath given us a Summary View of the Doctrine of Justification.

He considers, 1. what the name imports; 2. what the thing contains ; 3. how it stands distinguished from renovation and regeneration; 4. what are the concurring causes on God's part, and on man's, to produce it and preserve it; 5. what are the common extremes which many have been apt to run into on this head, and how they may be avoided: and the sum is, that we are justified by God the Father, considered as principal; and by God the Son, as meritorious purchaser; and by God the Holy Ghost, as immediate efficient; and by Baptism, as the ordinary instrument of conveyance; and by faith of such a kind, as the ordinary instrument of reception; and lastly, by faith and holiness, as the necessary qualifications and conditions, in adults, both for the first receiving, and for the perpetual preserving it f.

These several particulars he hath inquired into, explained, cleared, and settled them with all that accuracy, closeness of reasoning, and perspicuity, which are the characteristics of all his writings.

c Harmoniam quidem scripseram circa annum ætatis vicesimum septimum. Apolog. pro Harm. sect. viii. §. 5. p. 60. edit. Grabe.

d Vid. Whitefield's Answer to the Bishop of London's Pastoral Letter,

p. 24, 25.

e There is a small Discourse of Saving or Justifying Faith, by Dr. Stebbing: but it is in a different method from our Author's; and both may be useful.

f Vid. Summary View, &c. sect. iv. 6.

As Baptism hath been too often omitted, or but slightly mentioned, in treatises on the subject of justification; our Author gives it a large and distinct consideration g. Wherein he shews, that Baptism, considered as a federal rite, or transaction between God and man, is, in the New Testament, and the ancient Fathers, either declared or supposed to be the ordinary, necessary, outward mean or instrument, in God's hand, of man's justification, the immediate and proximate form and rite of conveyance on God's part, and consequently of reception on man's. This he proves from many clear texts of Scripture; confirming it from the concurring verdict of the ancients, down from the first age, about A. D. 70, to the end of the fourth century, or later; and from our Church's forms; concluding this head with noting, and accounting for a mistake in some eminent moderns, who have taught that the first justification in adults is antecedent to Baptism, and that Baptism rather seals and confirms it, than conveys it; for which doctrine he sees no sufficient ground, either in Scripture or antiquity, or in the public offices of our Church; but much the contrary.

Our learned Author observes, that the phrase of the instrumentality of faith, very eminent men, Hammond, Tillotson, Bull, and Truman (whom he there refers to) have disliked, and rejected the thing. He therefore distinguishes upon the question; rejecting it according to the false notion some had conceived of it, but contending for it in the true and proper sense of it. He distinguishes the instrumentality of faith to justification into an active and a passive sense; rejecting it in the former, and maintaining it in the latter. Faith cannot be the instrument of conveyance in the hand of the efficient cause; but may be very properly looked on as the instrument of reception on the part of the recipient. It is not the mean whereby the grace is effected or conferred; but may be, and is the mean whereby it is accepted or received.

g As our Author hath remarked, that Baptism "has been too often omitted, "or but perfunctorily mentioned, in "treatises written on the subject of "justification," Summary View, &c. sect. iv. 4. init. I think it just to Bp. Bull to observe, that that learned and judicious writer hath not omitted it in his Works; urging, that the necessity of Baptism for the remission of sins, so often spoken of in holy Scripture and the writings of the ancients, is an argument sufficient alone to overthrow the doctrine of Solifidianism, or justification by faith alone.

Necessitas Baptismi, eorumque quæ ad Baptismum disponunt, ad remissionem peccatorum consequendum, quæ passim

in sacris Scripturis celebratur, atque in scriptis veterum fere utramque facit paginam, argumentum præbet, quod solum sufficiat funditus evertendo Solifidianismo isti, quem multi tum sacris Scripturis, tum Patrum testimoniis astruere conati sunt; uti egredie docuit doctissimus et pientissimus Thorndicius noster ¿ μakapíτns in scriptis suis passim. Namque hinc apparet, fidem per se non sufficere ad justificationem obtinendum ; sed requiri præterea externum Baptismum, ubi haberi potest: omnino vero necessario requiri sponsionem illam novæ vitæ, quæ per Baptismum fieri solet. Apologia pro Harmonia, &c. sect. iv. §. 9. p. 23. Conf. sect. vii. §. 4. p. 41.

Our Author hath here referred to Bishop Bull as rejecting the instrumentality of faith. But, upon considering, upon this occasion, with some care, what Bishop Bull hath said, he seems to me, as far as I am capable of judging, not to reject the instrumentality of faith absolutely, but only in the same sense in which our Author rejects it, and to admit it in the sense our Author admits it. He rejects faith from being an instrument, if instrument be understood strictly to signify an efficient cause of justification, or to have a physical efficiency: for, since justification is the free act of God alone, and produced extra nos; neither faith nor any action of ours can have a physical efficiency in producing the effect of justification h. But if, by faith being an instrument, be meant that it is an instrument by which we accept Christ, and embrace the benefit of justification procured by him; he seems not averse from allowing it an instrument in this sense: but urges, that this act of embracing Christ is totally different from the act of justification; since the former is our act, but justification is the act of God alone and that therefore, although it should be granted, that faith is the instrument of that act whereby we lay hold on Christ; yet it will not follow, that faith is therefore the instrument of justification also that is, he denies faith to be the instrument of justification; because he understands justification here in the active sense, as the act of God alone conferring it on man: but considered in the passive sense, as that by which we lay hold on Christ, and receive the benefit of justification so conferred, he seems to have no objection to calling it an instrument: and he confesses, in the next sentence, that though, if we will have faith to be an instrument, it can be so only when considered as a work prescribed to us, and performed by the grace of God; yet he confesses, I say, that faith, so considered, may in some sense be called a mean or instrument, as being that by which we obtain the thing which is promised upon that

h― Si instrumentum stricte et proprie sumatur pro causa efficiente minus priucipali, clarum est, fidem justificationis instrumentum nullo modo dici posse. Nam primo cum justificatio sit actio Dei solius, eaque tota extra nos producta, quomodo vel fides nostra, vel quævis nostra actio ad justificationis effectum producendum physicam ullam efficientiam habeat, prorsus àкатáληñтov est, &c. Harmonia Apostol. dissert. i. cap. 11. sect. 9. p. 11. Conf. dissert. xi. cap. 18. sect. 6. p. 114.

i-Hunc actum amplectendi Christum a justificationis actu δὶς διὰ πασῶν et toto cœlo distare; cum sit actus noster, justificatio vero solius Dei. Etiamsi

condition: that is, he allows that,

igitur concederemus, habitum fidei esse instrumentum, istius actus, quo Christum amplectimur; qui tamen inde intulerit, fidem esse etiam justificationis instrumentum, manifestissimæ certe inconsequentiæ rens tenebitur. Ibid. diss. i. cap. 11. sect. 9. p. 11.

k Ut ergo quod res est dicam ; Si fidem instrumentum esse velimus, fieri non potest, ut concipiatur alio modo instrumentum esse, quam quatenus opus est ex præscripto, et per gratiam Dei a nobis præstitum. Conditio enim, quatenus præstita est, aliquo modo medium, sive instrumentum dici potest, quo consequimur rem, quæ sub conditione promittitur. Ibid.

though faith cannot be an instrument of justification in the active sense of justification, an instrument on the part of God who justifies; yet it may be an instrument in the passive sense, on the part of man who receives justification from the hand of God.

I think I have here represented the learned Bishop's sentiments truly and it appears to me therefore from thence, that he is not to be ranked among those who reject the instrumentality of faith absolutely. He seems to me to distinguish upon the case, much as our Author hath done: and though he dislikes the phrase, yet he rejects the thing as the instrument of conveyance only, not as the instrument of reception; though he chooses to call it by another name: for,

It may be noted, that there is this difference between Bishop Bull and our Author; that the Bishop looks upon faith, considered as the instrument of reception, to be a condition of justification: but Dr. Waterland distinguishes that faith which he reckons among the conditions of justification, from that faith which he makes the instrument of reception. Faith, as a condition, means the whole complex of Christian belief: but faith, considered as precisely the instrument of reception, means only, in his account, the laying hold on grace, and resting in Christ's merits, in opposition to our own deservings m

I have observed, that there hath risen of late among us a sect of enthusiasts, who contend, with the old Solifidians, that we are justified by faith alone, in such manner, as to exclude good works from being necessary conditions of justification; admitting them to be nothing more than necessary fruits, signs, or consequents of it. This doctrine hath been lately publicly maintained by one of the chief leaders of that sect; and, in order to support it, he is pleased to claim the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth Articles of our Church, as teaching the same doctrine with him ".

As I did some time since publish a Vindication of the Church of England, in requiring Subscription from the Clergy to the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion in general; I think it the more incumbent upon me, to take this opportunity of vindicating those particular Articles now. mentioned, from teaching any such doctrine as they are here supposed to do: since, if they really could be proved to teach any thing so contrary to the whole tenor of Scripture, I should be so far

1-Si hoc sensu instrumentum sumatur (nempe pro conditione sive instrumento morali) fidem esse unicum justificationis instrumentum omnino negamus: cum (ut jam satis evicimus) etiam pœnitentiæ opera non minus necessaria ad justificationem obtinendam a Spiritu Sancto diserte statuantur. Ibid. He

makes faith considered as an instrument, to be as much a condition as repentance. Conf. the foregoing note k.

m Summary View, &c. sect. iv. 6. n Mr. Whitefield's Answer to the Bishop of London's Pastoral Letter, 24, &c.

p.

o A. D. 1739.

from defending the requiring subscription to them, that I should most heartily join, as I have there declared P, in pleading against it. I shall therefore here take the liberty of giving a brief consideration of this matter, as what may properly enough at this time, when such claims are advanced to our Articles, attend upon the treatise of justification now published.

Before I enter upon this subject I shall observe, that it is, in general, objected to our Articles, that they are formed upon the plan of Calvinism. Now one of the five points of Calvinism is, that we are justified by faith alone; and therefore our eleventh Article, which so speaks, may be urged as teaching the Calvinistical doctrine concerning justifying faith: therefore I beg leave, for a confutation of this pretence, that our Articles are Calvinistical, to refer to Dr. Waterland's Supplement to the Case of Arian Subscription, vol. ii. where the reader may receive sufficient satisfaction on that head ¶. I now pass on to the Articles themselves.

ARTICLE XI.

Of the Justification of Man.

In this Article it is said, that “we are justified by faith only———and "not for our own works or deservings." And it is insisted upon, by those I am here concerned with, that the Article hereby ascribes our justification to faith only, in such sense as to exclude good works from being necessary conditions of it г.

But when the Article teaches, that we are justified by faith alone, it does not mean that all other virtues and good works are to be excluded thereby from being necessary conditions of justification; nor, that faith does more in the business of justification than other virtues do but that this proposition, viz. " we are justified by faith alone," is true so far only as the word faith signifies such an obedience as is joined with a trust in Christ's merits, and a renouncing all merit of our own, all merit or deservings in our own works s. Such is the faith meant in the Article, when it is said, "we are justified by faith only." Not such

p Church of England Vindicated, &c. justificationis negotio, quam cæteræ sect. iv. p. 47.

q P. 340-353.

r Whitefield's Answer, &c. p. 24, 25. 8 Summam rei paucis complectar: cum veteres Protestantes docuerunt, sola nos fide justificari, illud non ita intellexerunt, quasi per eam fidem excludendæ essent cæteræ virtutes, cæteraque bona opera, tanquam ad justificationem obtinendam nullo modo necessaria, aut quasi fides plus aliquid ageret in ipso

virtutes; sed propositionem istam eatenus tantum ut veram recipi voluerunt, quatenus vox fidei denotat talem obedientiam, quæ cum fiducia de meritis Jesu Christi, ac meritorum nostrorum perfecta abrenuntiatione, conjuncta est, quæque adeo ea opera omnia excludit, quæ cum fiducia et opinione meriti nostri fiunt. Bull. Harmonia Apostolica, diss. ii. c. 18. sect. 6. p. 114.