[EN] On Justification and Good Works in General

by Johann Heinrich Alsted in Theologia polemica, exhibens praecipuas huius aeui in religionis negotio controuersias sex in partes tributa studio

CONTROVERSY I: Is there implicit faith?

Orthodox Position: Implicit faith, that is, intricate and not explicit, exists in two ways:

1. Regarding knowledge, when the things necessary for salvation are not sufficiently understood distinctly, as seen in the disciples of Christ, who imagined a worldly kingdom. Similarly, today, in many of the elect, there is a multitude of ignorance forgiven because they know the foundation of salvation.
2. Regarding the apprehension of Christ and His benefits, when at the time of first conversion and temptation, faith wavers (Isaiah 42:3; Matthew 5:6). Here, the desire to believe is accompanied by infinite sighs, which God approves (Romans 8:26).

Position of Bellarmine: Implicit faith is that in which one agrees with the Church and professes to believe what the Church and its pastors believe. The Church is the pillar of truth, and the pastors who agree with the Roman Pope cannot err.

Censure: Knowledge is of the essence of faith (Isaiah 53:11; John 17:3). Furthermore, the Church is called the pillar of truth not by inspiring authority but by the ministry of preserving and witnessing. Finally, there is a fallacy of begging the question involved.

CONTROVERSY II: What is justifying faith?

Thesis: Faith is general or special. General faith is common to both the reprobate and the elect, being historical, miraculous, and temporary. Special faith, called justifying, is a confident acceptance that depends on the mercy of God in Jesus Christ. Its subject or seat, according to some orthodox theologians, is the intellect (like Perkins); others say it is the intellect and will together or the soul (like Polanus, Tilenus, etc.). These opinions can be reconciled by saying that justifying faith resides formally and properly in the practical intellect. It is a certain and firm knowledge of the grace of God, by which the elect man applies to himself the promise of grace in Christ. As for the confidence with which we rest in God as gracious to us, it arises from faith, that is, from this special knowledge. Thus, popularly, it can be said that faith is a light in the intellect, and confidence is in the will or the heart. The common object of faith is the written word of God; the proper object is the Gospel, or Christ.

Antithesis: Justifying faith is one of the dispositions for justification; it is not a certain knowledge of the divine will nor a trust in divine mercy in Christ, but a simple mental assent, by which we accept the whole word of God, even without understanding it, as well as the traditions of the Roman Church.

Censure: 

1. The definition of faith and many examples in Hebrews 11 prove that faith is a confident assent, that is, a trust in God that generates obedience. See Romans 4, where Abraham’s faith is discussed.
2. The phrases "believe in God" (Job 12 and 14; 1 Peter 1) and "hope and trust in God," and similar ones in the Psalms, prove that faith is not a simple assent.
3. The Church Fathers also describe saving faith in this way and recognize the special and infallible certainty of faith; as Augustine says: "There is a way of glorying in the conscience, and you shall know that your faith is sincere, your hope certain, and your charity without simulation."

Confirmation of the Antithesis:
1. "He who comes to God must believe" (Hebrews 11). Therefore, faith is only the beginning, not the complete and sole cause of justification.
2. Those who neither love nor repent are said to remain in death (Acts 2 and 3; 1 John 2 and 3). Therefore, these virtues also contribute to justification.
3. There is no scripture that explicitly says we are justified by faith alone.
4. Charity and sacraments also apprehend Christ. Therefore, it is not only faith.
5. Hearts are purified by faith (Acts 15). Therefore, faith justifies only preparatorily, preparing us for justification by merit.
6. Our justice before God is the infused charity of God (Luke 7:47; Galatians 5:6). Therefore, it is not the justice of Christ apprehended by faith.
7. If faith alone justifies, then it also saves alone. But this is not true, for good works are necessary for salvation.
8. Faith is not alone, that is, without good works. Therefore, it is not only faith that justifies.
9. We are saved by hope (Romans 8:24). Therefore, not by faith alone. 10. Faith can be separated from charity (1 Corinthians 13; James 2; Matthew 7; John 12). But without charity, one cannot obtain justice. Therefore, faith is formless without charity.

Censure:
1. "Coming to God" here means becoming a child of God, not any approach.
2. The necessary connection between faith, love, repentance, and other virtues is ineptly used to conclude justification.
3. The teaching is written, though not with those words.
4. Only faith apprehends Christ as a hand. Charity and sacraments apprehend Christ, but through faith.
5. Hearts are purified by faith, not merely preliminarily but completely. Furthermore, this is not due to the merit of faith but to its object, which is Christ.
6. The word "because" here denotes the cause, not the driving cause of the forgiveness of sins, but the notificative cause. For charity is a sign of justification. Furthermore, charity is a fruit and companion of faith, not a co-cause of justification.
7. More things are necessary for salvation as the ultimate end than for justification as the means.
8. The eye is not alone, that is, separated from the body; it is alone only in terms of sight. Thus, faith alone justifies, though it is not alone but accompanied by other virtues. When we say that only faith justifies, we do not mean an empty faith or one without good works, but in opposition to the merit of our works. In short, when we say that man is justified by faith alone, we mean that nothing in human nature or all its actions contributes to the act of justification except the grace of God apprehended by faith. Faith justifies only as an instrumental cause.
9. The apostle says that we are saved by hope, that is, we possess salvation by hope.
10. The faith mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13 and James 2 is historical or hypocritical faith, that is, dead.

CONTROVERSY IV: How are the words "justice" and "justification" used in Scripture?

Orthodox Position: The word "justification" and "justify" are rarely used in Scripture in the sense of acting justly, as in Revelation 22:11. Ordinarily, it is used properly or improperly. Properly, it can be understood broadly or strictly. Broadly means considering or declaring someone just, whether this is true or false (Proverbs 17, Isaiah 5). Strictly, it refers to God or men. It refers to God actively, in that God justifies man in a forensic sense (Romans 3 and 8), or passively, in that men justify God by recognizing and proclaiming His justice (Luke 7:29, 1 Timothy 3:16). It refers to men, meaning the declaration of justice (James 2). Hence, good works are said to justify declaratively, not effectively. Improperly, it is used metonymically, as when faith is said to justify (Romans 4 and 5) or the ministers of God (Daniel 12:3), or metaphorically, when excessively wicked men cause others to be considered righteous or less unjust (Jeremiah 3:6, Ezekiel 16:9, 51). Additionally, "justice" means justification (Romans 4, rarely) or the condition and state of man: the justice of the person or the cause. The justice of the person is legal or evangelical: the latter is imputed, like the justice of Christ, or inherent, whether habitual or actual. The justice of the cause or conscience refers to this or that act.

Position of Bellarmine: Justification in Scripture does not mean the judicial absolution of our sins or the free reconciliation with God but the total extinction of sin in us and the infusion of charity and inherent justice as a habit. Thus, the word refers to the first justification, which makes the sinner just (Romans 4 and 8), or the second, which acquires greater justice.

Censure: These meanings are not present in the texts cited. And justification is an indivisible act. Therefore, it is not correct to divide it into first and second, for what is attributed to second justification should be attributed to sanctification.

CONTROVERSY V: What is the form of justification?

Thesis: Our free justification, considered formally, is not an infusion of charity but only the remission of sins, with which necessarily coexists the imputation of Christ’s justice, which we obtain by true faith in Christ. The remission of sins and the imputation of justice differ only in terms of from where and to where.

Antithesis: The form of justification is not the remission of sins nor the imputation of an alien justice, but the infusion of an inherent justice, that is, charity and other similar virtues.

Thesis:
1. Scripture teaches that our blessedness consists in the remission of sins (Psalm 32), in the imputation of justice (Romans 4), not in the imputation of sin (2 Corinthians 5), and in absolution (Romans 8), which all indicate a judicial absolution.
2. Our justice before God depends on either imputation or our inherent justice. There is no third option. It does not depend on our inherent justice, for this is imperfect (Psalm 130).
3. To justify in this matter never means to infuse justice but to declare someone just.
4. The Church Fathers teach this, like Bernard: "Death is removed by Christ’s death, and Christ’s justice is imputed to us."
5. It is absurd to make the form of divine action depend on our quality or works, thus confusing two predicaments.

Confirmation of the Antithesis:
1. By the obedience of Christ, we are made righteous, just as by Adam’s disobedience, we are made unrighteous (Romans 5), that is, habitually.
2. Scripture teaches that we are washed, sanctified, and justified (1 Corinthians 6). The Holy Spirit is abundantly poured out in our hearts (Titus 3), and many other things are said that refer to similar virtues.
3. Those who keep God’s testimonies are called blessed (Psalm 119).
4. The righteous are thus called because of inherent justice.
5. Justification transforms God’s enemies into His friends and children. The remission of sins does not do this, for it does not immediately make someone an heir, as the due penalty may still apply.
6. Nowhere in Scripture do we find the expression "imputation of justice."
7. The imputation of justice is unnecessary; whoever is truly righteous is the one whose sins are forgiven.
8. By the imputation of justice, we cannot be formally righteous, for every form inheres in the subject. Just as an Ethiopian is not called white by wearing a white garment.
9. Through Christ, we regain the justice lost in Adam, which was inherent.
10. Just as Christ cannot be called a sinner and unjust because our sins were imputed to Him, neither can we be called righteous by the imputation of Christ’s justice.
11. The Church Fathers teach the same.

Censure:
1. From Adam, we receive a double injustice, apostasy and corruption; the first is imputed, the second inherent. Similarly, from Christ, we receive a double justice, imputed and inherent.
2. From the close connection between justification and sanctification, it is wrongly concluded that they are identical.
3. Blessedness depends formally on justification, whose fruit is sanctification. The latter is attributed declaratively, which belongs to justification.
4. The righteous are thus called primarily because of imputed justice, for this is the only perfect one.
5. The remission of sins is a universal absolution of all guilt and therefore necessarily implies friendship with God and the right to the heavenly inheritance.
6. The word "imputation" appears eleven times in Romans 4, and seven times it is said that justice is imputed to us. And this reality occurs many other times.
7. The remission of sins does not really differ from the imputation of justice.
8. Imputed justice is not foreign but ours, and thus it is in us. We deny that it is inherent as a habit.
9. See the refutation.
10. Christ is called a sinner and unjust not absolutely but relatively (Isaiah 53).
11. The Church Fathers also speak otherwise and often use the word "justification" not in the theological sense but the philosophical one.

CONTROVERSY VI: Can man be certain of his present justice or the divine grace received in Christ?

Thesis: The certainty of justice or justification in Christ is not a human conjecture but an infallible confidence that excludes final and total doubt and is based both on the promise of grace, which is universal for all believers, and on the special application and infallible testimony of the Holy Spirit.

Antithesis: No one in this life can affirm with certainty and infallibility that their sins have been forgiven without a special revelation. This is a vain confidence and a presumptuous heresy.

Thesis:
1. Scripture teaches that the justified have peace (Romans 5) and are persuaded of God’s grace (Romans 8; 2 Timothy 3 and 4).
2. The testimony of the Holy Spirit in our hearts is infallible (John 16; Romans 8; Galatians 4), being the seal and guarantee with which believers are confirmed and sealed (2 Corinthians 1; Ephesians 1 and 4).
3. True faith confidently trusts and expels doubt or unease from the heart (Romans 4; James 1; Ephesians 2; Hebrews 10 and 11).
4. Through the study of external piety, as an infallible argument, we know that we have true faith (2 Peter 1; 1 John 3 and 4).
5. The promises of grace are universal for believers (John 3; Romans 10) and are conditioned on faith and repentance. Therefore, these promises apply to all who find that condition in themselves.
6. The Church Fathers teach the same. Augustine: "It is not arrogance but faith to proclaim what you have received." Bernard: "Believe that your sins are forgiven. This is the testimony the Holy Spirit gives in our hearts, saying: 'Your sins are forgiven.'"

Confirmation of the Antithesis:
1. "Who can say that their heart is pure?" (Proverbs 20).
2. "Man does not know whether he is worthy of love or hatred" (Ecclesiastes 9:3).
3. Job says he does not know if he is pure (Job 9).
4. Even when we are guilty, we often ignore it. "Who can discern their own errors?" (Psalm 19:12).
5. The apostle Paul says: "Nothing weighs on my conscience, but not for that am I justified" (1 Corinthians 4).
6. Conditions of faith and repentance are frequently required for salvation (Deuteronomy 4 and 30; Isaiah 1; Ezekiel 18; Luke 13; Acts 2 and 8). But no one can be sure they have turned to God with all their heart.
7. It is uncertain whether those who repent are immediately justified (Daniel 4; Joel 2; Jonah 3:9, where it says: "Who knows if God will turn and repent and turn away from us His fierce anger?").
8. We are warned to work out our salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2; 1 Peter 1; 2 Peter 1).
9. The Church Fathers condemn this special certainty.
10. The heart of man is so unstable that it cannot know itself adequately.
11. This certainty breeds presumption and Phariseeism, diminishing the fear of God and true zeal for humility before God.

Censure:
1.3.4.5. The passages deal with inherent purity, which has many defects even among the most holy, who sometimes err unknowingly.
6. The vulgar version is not approved. It speaks of external misfortunes, and the certainty of spiritual grace should not be judged from such events. It is different to speak of spiritual and eternal grace and deliverance, and of corporeal and temporal ones.
7. The expression "perhaps" is used to denote human difficulty as well as to encourage and elevate spirits to trust in God’s promises (Joshua 14:7, 12).
8. Not every fear is contrary to the certainty of faith, but servile fear (1 John 4:18).
9. The Church Fathers condemn the false persuasion of some hypocrites.
10. The heart of the natural man is like the unstable sea, but the heart washed in Christ’s blood and sanctified by the Holy Spirit is like the Pacific Ocean.
11. The effects of hypocritical certainty and carnal security are wrongly considered the effects of spiritual security.

CONTROVERSY VII: Can a faithful man be certain of his election and final perseverance?

Thesis: A faithful man can be infallibly certain of his salvation in this life, though this certainty may be contested by various temptations.

Antithesis: The faithful cannot be convinced of their final perseverance and predestination to salvation except probably or extraordinarily; that is, if this is revealed to them.

Confirmation of the Tesis:
1. Election and faith are connected as cause and effect. For Scripture teaches that the children of God are elected and predestined for salvation (Romans 8). Believers are called the elect, holy, and chosen people (Matthew 24; Luke 18; 1 Peter 2). Therefore, from true faith as its own effect, divine election, its certainty, and consequently, final perseverance are rightly concluded.
2. True faith does not doubt (Matthew 14:31; Romans 4:20; Hebrews 11:1). These verses show that doubt is the fruit of unbelief.
3. God has given to all who believe in the name of Christ the power to become children of God (John 1).
4. The Holy Spirit testifies to our particular adoption (Romans 8:15, 16).
5. There is no blessedness for God’s children in this world if they do not know they are blessed, for true happiness consists in knowing that one is free from evil and abundant in good.

Confirmation of the Antithesis:
1. The mystery of predestination is so high and deep that the apostle says: "Who has known the mind of the Lord?" (Romans 11).
2. Scripture frequently exhorts to fear and concern for salvation (1 Corinthians 10; Romans 11; Philippians 1; Revelation 3).
3. Salvation depends on the condition of good works (Matthew 5: "Unless your justice exceeds"; 2 Timothy 2: "No one is crowned unless he competes lawfully"; Romans 8: "If we suffer with Him, we shall also be glorified with Him"). Therefore, the justice of works is necessary, as Calvin himself admits.
4; Many believe for a time and then fall away (Matthew 13; 1 Timothy 1:4 and 6; 2 Timothy 2).
5. The opposite doctrine extinguishes humility.
6. Faith and the word of God are correlative. Where there is no word, there is no faith. But there is no word that says: "You, Peter, you, Cornelius, shall be saved."
7. In no article of faith are we commanded to believe in the salvation of each individual in particular.
8. If we were certain of salvation, Christ would not have commanded us to pray daily for the forgiveness of our sins. Certainly, perseverance is made uncertain and doubtful by the sins of the righteous.
9. The Church Fathers teach this, as Bernard says: "Who can say: 'I am of the elect'?"

Censure:
1. No one knows the mind of the Lord, that is, the reasons for His counsels and acts. Otherwise, the faithful know their election directly and indirectly. Directly, insofar as the Holy Spirit reveals it to them; indirectly, insofar as they infer the cause from the effects. 2. The certainty of salvation does not exclude pious concern and holy fear.
3. Salvation does not depend on the condition of works as a meritorious cause. Furthermore, the condition of faith and piety is not unknown to the truly pious.
4. The passage deals with temporary faith.
5. The effort for humility is not incompatible with the certainty of election and the sure hope of perseverance. Humility is an effect of faith.
6. The word of God is general or special, and it is triple. The general word is applied by the internal voice of the Holy Spirit, by the ministers of the word, and by the use of the sacraments.
7. Each article of faith includes a special faith. Particularly, this applies to the article on the forgiveness of sins and eternal life.
8. We pray for the increase and sense of this certainty. Our heart is like a narrow vessel that can only be filled gradually. Furthermore, this certainty does not depend on faith or anything else in us but on divine election and God’s unchangeable benevolence towards His own.
9. The words of the Church Fathers should be understood relatively, referring to the false persuasion of hypocrites, the certainty of the final experience, or the vision or evidence that is without signs, as is the certainty of things perceived by the senses.

CONTROVERSY VIII: Can justifying faith be lost?

Thesis: Although the elect frequently fall into grave sins and thus lose faith in its act, time, and part, they are not completely abandoned by God, nor do they totally and finally lose faith and the other gifts of the Holy Spirit in terms of the root and habit, even if they may lose them in terms of quantity.

Antithesis: Justifying faith and justice not only can be totally and finally lost but are sometimes indeed lost.

Confirmation of the Thesis:
1. Scripture teaches that Christ’s sheep cannot perish (John 10) and that nothing can separate them from the love of God (Romans 8).
2. Faith is our victory by which we overcome the world (1 John 5).
3. God does not abandon the work of His hands (Psalm 138), nor does He tempt His own beyond their strength, but provides a happy escape (1 Corinthians 10).

Confirmation of the Antithesis:
1. "The righteous can turn from their justice" (Ezekiel 18).
2. Some fall temporarily (Luke 8), and the charity of many will grow cold (Matthew 24). Many fall from the grace of God (Galatians 5). Many also depart from the faith (1 Timothy 4 and 6).
3. Some branches in Christ do not bear fruit and are thrown into the fire (John 15).
4. The apostle says he subdues his body to avoid being disqualified (1 Corinthians 9).
5. Some, after tasting the grace of God, fall back (Hebrews 6).
6. Some, like dogs, return to their own vomit (2 Peter 2).
7. Examples of fallen angels, the first parents, Saul, David, Solomon, Peter, etc., who fell into grave sins, show that some lost all final justice.
8. The nature of faith or justice is not such that it cannot be lost. Experience shows that many fall from faith every day. Many, though baptized and justified in baptism, fall.

Censure:
1. It does not concern here the living root of justice but the external appearance, so that the name "justice" refers to our senses, not to God’s hidden judgment. Moreover, the hypothesis is not correctly turned into a categorical.
2. Faith here means the doctrine and profession of faith, not the heart’s trust. The charity of hypocrites, which seems like fire, cools in winter, that is, in calamities.
3. It concerns hypocrites who, for some time, are branches in their own opinion and that of others.
4. Paul speaks of pious concern, not of a final event.
5. 6. It concerns hypocrites who, on the one hand, taste the grace of God, insofar as they receive various gifts of the Holy Spirit, on the other hand, seem truly to be elect.
7. Examples of fallen angels and Saul are irrelevant and unequal; the others are false.
8. Perseverance is attributed not to the merit of faith but to God’s mercy in Christ. Hence it is said: "Faith is immovable because of the Father’s election, the Son’s satisfaction, and the Holy Spirit’s seal." Moreover, many hypocrites fall from faith. Finally, it is false to say that baptism justifies by the act itself. In short, in this controversy, the fallacy of "secundum quid ad simpliciter" is commonly used, that is, what is true in a certain sense is considered true absolutely; this is the fallacy of arguing from appearance to essence.

CONTROVERSY IX: Are all equal in imputed justice?

Consensus: Some are more righteous than others concerning inherent virtues. Thus, Job is described as having no equal in zeal for justice (Job 1), and reason demonstrates that neither virtues nor vices are equal.

Orthodox Position: All men are guilty before God and are justified only by Christ in the same way, by faith (Romans 3, 4, 5; Galatians 2, 3). Therefore, all the justified are equal in relation to imputed justice, though they may be unequal concerning the sense of divine grace.

Position of Bellarmine: The justified are unequal concerning formal justice. The reasons are:
1. The light of the righteous grows (Proverbs 4).
2. God increases our justice (2 Corinthians 4).
3. Those who are righteous become even more righteous (Revelation 22).
4. Charity admits degrees, and this is formal justice.
5. The crown of justice in heaven varies, that is, the rewards of the righteous are unequal (John 14; 1 Corinthians 15).
6. The Church teaches this, as Augustine says: "The saints are clothed with justice, some more, others less."

Censure:
1.2.6. It refers partly to the habitual gifts of the Holy Spirit in us and partly to the sense of God’s grace.
3. To be justified here means to receive justice.
4. There is a fallacy of begging the question.
5. The degrees refer to eternal life, not to justification (for Christ merited eternal life for all His), but to sanctification or regeneration; they refer as an antecedent or condition, not as a meritorious cause. Thus, if a king proposed prizes to ten young men, the smallest of which would be equivalent to the kingdom’s riches, on the condition that whoever arrived first at the goal would obtain the best prize, no one would say that the race would be the meritorious cause.

CONTROVERSY V: Are good works necessary?

Position of Bellarmine: Good works are necessary not only by necessity of presence but also of efficiency, as Scripture, the Church Fathers, and sound reason teach.

Orthodox Position: Good works do not precede the justified but necessarily follow him and precede the one who will be saved. They are necessary for adults in an orderly manner, by hypothesis or necessity:

1. Of presence, as signs and effects of faith.
2. Of divine commandment.
3. Of means, for they are the way to salvation, condition, and sine qua non cause.

Therefore, if Bellarmine does not understand efficiency as some merit or inherent force and dignity of good works in obtaining salvation, this phrase can be admitted. Good works contribute to attaining eternal life, but not by merit. Therefore, the apparatus of arguments reported here is useless.

CONTROVERSY XI: Can the justified men fulfill God’s law?

Orthodox Position: None of the justified can perfectly keep God’s law, as Scripture teaches (Romans 8; Galatians 3), experience, and the Church Fathers. The perfection of the righteous, mentioned in Matthew 5:48 and Genesis 6:9, 17:1, Philippians 3:15, consists in the imputation of Christ’s justice and in sincerity and uprightness, which consist in acknowledging one’s own imperfection and firmly resolving to obey all of God’s commandments.

Position of Bellarmine: The justified men can keep God’s law, not by the forces of free will, but by the aid of God’s grace, that is, by the spirit of faith and charity infused in justification. The reasons are:
1. Christ’s yoke is easy, and His commandments are not burdensome (Matthew 11; 1 John 5).
2. God gives us His Spirit, who makes us walk in His ways (Ezekiel 36). That is why the apostle says in Philippians 4:13 that he can do all things.
3. The elect are endowed with charity (John 13, 15; 1 John 3, 4). Charity is the fulfillment of the law (John 14; Romans 13).
4. We read about many saints who kept God’s commandments blamelessly and were perfect and truly righteous (Genesis 6, 17; 1 Samuel 14, 15; 2 Samuel 23; Luke 1).
5. God is not like a tyrant who demands impossible tributes from His friends. Therefore, the Church Fathers teach that no one is obligated to do the impossible.
6. Christ died so that the justice of the law might be fulfilled in us (Romans 8:4). 7. Man can do more than is commanded (Matthew 19:21).

Censure:
1.2. God’s commandments are not only possible but also easy for the elect, not by their own strength but by God’s grace. Furthermore, the defects found in their works are graciously forgiven by God.
3.4. Perfection of parts and sincerity are attributed to the elect, not absolute and supreme perfection, which is called perfection of degrees. Though the elect love God, the mode of this love in this life is imperfect.
5. Not every obligation to do the impossible is unjust, especially when one has incurred a debt by one’s own fault. Moreover, God requires from His own what is possible through Christ.
6. The substance of God’s law is fulfilled in us when we are justified in Christ according to the perfect formula of the law.
7. The conditional is not categorical. Christ is not saying here what the arrogant young man could do but refuting him for his false hope of justice. Moreover, it is true that there are works of supererogation, but in Christ.

CONTROVERSY XII: Are the good works of the justified truly pure?

Orthodox Position: The good works of the justified, considered in themselves, are wrapped in many defects and are therefore not absolutely pure but only relatively, considering the justified person, who is pure in Christ. Scripture teaches this (Psalm 130; Romans 7; 1 Corinthians 13; James 3). Experience also confirms this, as we experience various temptations in thoughts, words, and deeds. The Church Fathers, like Bernard, also approve this: "If there is any justice in us, it is humble, perhaps upright, but not pure."

Position of Bellarmine: The works of the righteous are absolutely, completely, and perfectly just, though this perfection may grow and be obscured by venial sins. The reasons are:
1. Job’s purity is described in chapters 1 and 2.
2. David asks to be judged according to his justice and glories in it (Psalm 7, 17, 18, 26, 119).
3. The whole body is full of light when the eye is simple (Matthew 6; Luke 11).
4. Some works are compared to gold, silver, and precious stones (1 Corinthians 3).
5. "In many things, we stumble" (James 3). Therefore, not in everything.
6. We are warned not to sin (Isaiah 1; 1 John 5). This would be useless if we necessarily sinned in every good work.
7. The works of the righteous please God (Malachi 3; Acts 10; Philippians 4; Hebrews 13; 1 Peter 2). But sins do not please God.
8. The works of the righteous are simply called good (Matthew 5; Ephesians 2; Titus 3). They are not sins.
9. This is the doctrine of the Church Fathers. 10. Reason teaches this. For innate concupiscence is not sin if there is no consent. Otherwise, even faith would be sin.

Censure: Four rules should be observed:
1. The works of the righteous are not, in themselves and by themselves, mortal sins; but relatively and by chance, they are called sins, insofar as the admitted imperfection is not covered by the garment of Christ’s justice.
2. The truth, sincerity, and any uprightness of good works are confused with their absolute and complete perfection, that is, the perfection of parts is confused with the perfection of degrees.
3. The justice of the person must be distinguished from the justice of the cause, and the justice of a particular cause must be distinguished from the justice of the universal cause.
4. The sins of the elect are, in themselves, mortal sins, even when they arise from weakness, though not as grave as those arising from malice and hardness.

CONTROVERSY XIII: Is man justified before God by good works?

Orthodox Position: Man is justified before God only by faith, not by works (Romans 3, 4).

Position of Bellarmine: Man is truly justified before God by good works, not by the first justification that makes the ungodly righteous but by the second that makes the righteous more righteous. The reasons are:
1. This is clearly taught in James 2.
2. We must present our members as instruments of justice (Romans 6).
3. By sanctification, we purify ourselves from all filthiness (2 Corinthians 7).
4. God increases the fruits of our justice (2 Corinthians 9).
5. The righteous are further justified (Revelation 22).
6. He who loves God is loved by God (John 14).
7. The righteous can fulfill God’s law, and good works are perfectly pure.

Censure: All arguments have already been refuted previously. However, the following rules should be observed:
1. Good works justify before men, insofar as they are effects of faith that testify to justification before God.
2. Inherent justice is confused with imputed justice; the former has its degrees and increments; the latter is perfect at once, though it grows successively in terms of sense and knowledge.
3. Justification is poorly distinguished into first and second, for neither is properly called justification. The first is the initiation of regeneration, which transforms a servant of Satan into a servant of justice; the second is a fuller and daily increasing sanctification.

CONTROVERSY XIV: Do good works truly merit eternal salvation?

Orthodox Position: No one can be saved without merits; but the root, source, and origin of these merits is Christ. Although God adorns and rewards our works, both in this life and the next, with the most abundant rewards, not only by His mercy but also by justice, due to the previous promise or covenant, however, speaking properly, we do not merit eternal life with them.

Position of Bellarmine: Good works are properly meritorious, and this by merit of congruence or condign. The merit of congruence is in relation to moral works performed before justification. For these, by their nature, do not merit salvation, except concerning what is promised to them by God’s goodness. The merit of condign is that by which the reward is entirely due. And this is attributed to good works after justification. The works of the righteous merit eternal life by condign in two ways: first, in reason of the covenant or justice, which makes God our debtor; second, in reason of the intrinsic dignity of these works; for they are proportional to the reward in an arithmetical proportion, as seen in commutative justice.

Confirmation of the Thesis:
1. God’s grace and our merit are contrary (Romans 4, 11).
2. Christ merited for us the beginning, middle, and end of salvation (John 2; Acts 3, 4).
3. Good works do not meet the conditions of proper merit, which are contained in this verse: Gratia, si non debes, est gratia. Good works are the fruits of the Holy Spirit, and for that reason, we owe them to God. There is no proportion between our works and eternal life, for here everything is perfect and infinite, there everything is imperfect, as admitted by Scotus and Durandus.
4. The Church Fathers teach this. Bernard says that our merits, that is, our works, are the way to the kingdom, not the cause of the kingdom. And Augustine: "In your justice, Lord, not in mine. Not because I deserved it, but because you had mercy." And also: "All my hope is in the death of my Lord. His death is my merit, my life, and resurrection. My merit is the mercy of the Lord. I will not lack merit as long as the Lord of mercies does not lack me."

Confirmation of the Antithesis:
1. The word "merit" occurs in Scripture, both explicitly in Hebrews 13, where it is said that God is pleased with such sacrifices, and implicitly in 2 Thessalonians 1, Revelation 3 and 16, where it speaks of dignity.
2. Eternal life is the denarius given for work as a just reward (Matthew 20).
3. Eternal life is given according to the measure and proportion of the work (Matthew 16; Romans 2; 1 Corinthians 3; 2 Corinthians 5; Galatians 6; Revelation 22).
4. The cause by which eternal life is given to the righteous is sought in the works, as the words "because," "for this reason" (Matthew 25; Revelation 7) teach.
5. The reward is given to good works as a crown, which is rightfully due to those who run and compete (1 Corinthians 9; James 1; Revelation 2). For this reason, it is said that this reward is given by justice (2 Thessalonians 1; 2 Timothy 4; Hebrews 6).
6. The worker is worthy of his wages (Luke 10).
7. The promise of eternal life depends on the condition of works (Matthew 19; James 1; 1 Timothy 4).
8. God estimates each one according to his works (Acts 10; Romans 2; Galatians 2; 1 Peter 1).
9. Eternal life is grace for grace (John 1).
10. Grace is the seed of glory (1 John 3). The seed is equal to the plant in potential.
11. Eternal life and good work are supernatural actions, and there is proportion between both in terms of dignity.
12. Reward and merit are correlates.
13. Our merits flow from the merits of Christ as our head. He, by His death, merited that our works merit eternal life.
14. Our works merit by covenant or alliance. God has promised to reward them.
15. Our works are perfect and without any defect or stain. They are works of the Holy Spirit and therefore deserve properly.
16. This is the doctrine of the Church, often inculcated by the Church Fathers.

Refutation:
1.2.6.12. The vulgar version is not adequate. Hebrews 13 is incorrect and barbaric. Moreover, the reward properly speaking is due by debt. But eternal life is called a reward metaphorically, for it is given at the end of life and freely. This distinction of reward occurs in Romans
4. Thus, the reward is either by debt or by mercy. Moreover, eternal life is called a reward and crown in relation to Christ’s merit. Therefore, the direct relationship is between eternal life and Christ’s merit applied to us. The dignity is either proper, based on our qualities, or dependent on grace and someone else’s graciousness, as is our dignity before God. We are not worthy in ourselves but in Christ, insofar as we are enriched with the merits of Christ. For this reason, it does not refer to our dignity but to divine graciousness or acceptance, by which God deigned not only to promise us life but also to enable us to attain it. Here, too, the distinction between unworthy and not worthy should be maintained: the reprobates are unworthy; the righteous, considered in themselves, are not worthy. Hence the poet says: "It is more worthy of God to give to the unworthy." We say we work inasmuch as, being moved, we act in the vineyard of the Lord. This results in eternal life being called a denarius.
3.4.5.7.8.9.10.11.14. Between eternal life and good works, there is a proportion not of dignity or value, but of order and measure. Moreover, this reward is given by justice of fidelity in relation to the covenant, not by justice of equality or exact compensation in relation to value and our work. Thus, here is distributive justice. Just distribution does not seek exact equality (which is proper to commutative justice) but is satisfied with any kind of order proportion, that is, likeness and correspondence. Therefore, it is wrong to conclude equality from likeness. God’s debt is not absolute nor based on our merits, but it is conditional and entirely dependent on God’s covenant and His gracious promise. No mortal can fulfill the condition of the legal covenant, but only of the Gospel. There, eternal life is promised to those who do good, here to those who believe, and therefore because of Christ’s merit, between which and eternal life there is a proportion of parity. Therefore, good works are causes of salvation, but not meritorious. They are metonymical locutions, so that good works are taken by faith, of whose effects and signs they are. Christ did not merit for our works to be meritorious, but He Himself, as the perfect Mediator, merited eternal life for us. Our works would be without stain if they immediately and directly emanated from the Holy Spirit, but this is not so, for they are done through the will of the sinful man. Thus, we see clear water at the source but muddy in the dirty pipes. Therefore, good works are perfect, but not in the highest degree. Merit is taken properly and strictly, or improperly, broadly and popularly, and by metonymy. The Latin Fathers sometimes take merit in the latter sense, so that merit is the very good work that pleases God, not by its own value but by divine graciousness because of Christ, who receives its reward, though freely. And also, merere means to obtain, to achieve, or to gain something from God; also, to be accepted, to please, and to be considered worthy because of Christ.

CONTROVERSY XV: Can one trust in good works?

Position of Bellarmine: The principal hope and trust in salvation should be placed in God’s mercy, but there can also be some trust in our own merits. As God has promised eternal life under the condition of piety (1 Corinthians 2; Revelation 2), it is therefore possible to place some trust in this condition. And certainly, the saints did so (Nehemiah 5; Psalm 18; Isaiah 38; 2 Timothy 4).

Orthodox Position: As there are no proper merits, trust cannot be placed in them. However, we can trust in works insofar as they are infallible witnesses of election and faith. Thus, a good conscience arises from them. And this is what is proved by the cited passages.

CONTROVERSY XVI: Is it lawful to do good for the sake of the eternal reward?

Position of Bellarmine: It is lawful and useful to do good for the sake of the eternal reward as a meritorious work. The saints were moved to true piety in this way, like Moses (Hebrews 11), David (Psalm 119), and Paul (Philippians 3). And the apostles use this argument to exhort to piety (1 Corinthians 9; Galatians 6; Colossians 3).

Orthodox Position: In doing good, we should primarily seek God and His glory as the ultimate end (Colossians 3) and secondarily our salvation. Subordinate ends are not incompatible. And our salvation is closely linked to God’s glory. Moreover, this is done to stir our zeal. And this is what is proved by the cited passages. Care must always be taken to love God for Himself, not for our own benefit, with the love of friendship, not of concupiscence, so that it is not a mercenary friendship. Therefore, Bernard says: "God is not loved without reward, though He should be loved without the intention of reward."