Xii. Xiii.

Churchman who has not clear conceptions of justification by faith may be saved; yea, a Mystic, (Mr. Law, for instance,) who denies justification by faith. If so, the doctrine of justification by faith is not articulus stantis vel cadentis ecclesiae.”)

It is certain here is a seeming contradiction; but it is not a real one. For these two opposite propositions do not speak of the same thing. The latter speaks of justification by faith; the former, of trusting in the righteousness or merits of Christ; justification by faith is only mentioned incidentally in a parenthesis. Now, although Mr. Law denied justification by faith, he might trust in the merits of Christ. It is this, and this only, that I affirm, (whatever Luther does,) to be articulus stantis vel cadentis ecclesiae.

XII.

MR. W. IS A CALVINIST IN THE POINT OF JUSTIFICATION.

VS. MR. W. HAS LEANED TOO MUCH TOWARD CALVINISM

IN THIS POINT.

57. “I think on justification just as I have done these seven-and-twenty years, and just as Calvin does.” (“We have leaned too much toward Calvinism.” (Page 141.) But not in this point; not as to justification by faith.)

We still agree with him, that the merits of Christ are the cause, faith the condition, of justification.

58. “I have occasionally used those expressions, ‘imputed righteousness,’ the ‘righteousness of Christ,’ and the like. But I never used them in any other sense than that where in Calvin does.” (Goodwin. Nothing.)

XIII.

“MR. W. DOES APPROVE THE EXPRESSION, ‘WHY ME?’” VS.

“MR. W. DOES NOT APPROVE THE EXPRESSION, ‘WHY ME?’”

59. My brother uses it in an hymn. (“Mr. F. says, Mr. W. doubts concerning it.” (Page 140.)

This proof halts on both feet. “But why did not Mr. W. strike out of Mr. F.’s manuscript the honorable expressions concerning himself? “Because he thought them a proper counterbalance to the contumelious expressions of Mr. H.

XIV.

OUR SIN IS IMPUTED TO CHRIST, AND CHRIST’S

RIGHTEOUSNESS TO US. VS. OUR SIN IS NOT IMPUTED TO

CHRIST, NOR CHRIST’S RIGHTEOUSNESS TO US. (PAGE 130.)

60, 61, 62. “Christian Library.” (Nothing.)

XV.

BOTH ADAM’S SIN AND CHRIST’S RIGHTEOUSNESS ARE

IMPUTED. (PAGE 131.) VS. NEITHER ADAM’S SIN NOR

CHRIST’S RIGHTEOUSNESS IS IMPUTED.

63. Nothing against nothing.

In what sense I believe the “Christian Library” to be all true, I have declared above.

XVI.

MR. W. HOLDS FREE WILL. VS. MR. W. WONDERS HOW ANY

MAN CAN HOLD FREE WILL.

64. “Mr. F. holds free will.” (“Mr. W. denies it.”)

This may prove that Mr. W. contradicts Mr. F., but it can never prove that he contradicts himself. But, indeed, both Mr. F. and Mr. W. absolutely deny natural free will. We both steadily assert that the will of man is by nature free only to evil. Yet we both believe that every man has a measure of free will restored to him by grace.