F. Conclusion
F. Conclusion
We have learned that the basic contours of Vermigh’s doctrine of justification comprise the following elements. Recognizing that humanity after Adam’s sin is under divine condemnation as a massa perditionis, Martyr looks through his “intensive Augustinianism” lens to confront the problem of “Pelagianism.” With this threat in view, he employs the judicial language of forense to underscore the legal nature of justification, that is, the way in which God considers elect sinners to be in a state of righteousness. This reckoning is entirely extra nos and is not responsible for effecting internal renewal; imputatio is employed to explain how exactly this occurs. Such imputation consists of two movements: the accounting of Christ’s righteousness, and the non-imputation of one’s sin, the benefits of which are forgiveness and eternal life. In a few places, Martyr uses the language of “adoption” to capture the legal and relational aspects of this relationship.454 Any suggestion that justification is caused by works is regarded by him as entirely unscriptural.455
In addition to his emphasis on forensic imputation, Vermigh includes regeneration and sanctification in the broader confines of justification. He calls this broader vision “a different kind of justification,”456 insofar as it becomes part of the basis by which we are justified in the final judgment. In this sense, Vermigh maintains a form of duplex iustificatio.457 Too weak and imperfect to withstand the scrutiny of divine holiness on its own, these works are buttressed by the imputation of Christ’s righteousness and thereby made acceptable.458 Such works are pleasing to God, and, while they are never meritorious, they are rewarded on the last day.459 Furthermore, these works are an essential component of salvation. “And if these works are born of God then it is inevitable that they are justified and regenerated (emphasis added).”460 Martyr is careful to distinguish these works from their proper cause, namely forensic imputation.461 Works are the effect (or fruit) and imputation is the cause (or root).
And Christ would want everyone to understand that none except the just are received into the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, he considers these external works so that it might be clearly understood by them that righteousness is imputed to men by faith. For no one can be so ignorant as not to know there are two principles of these: one by which they exist, the other by which they are known.462
In making the above distinction, Martyr posits a doctrine of justification that is “of works” (works validate one’s initial justification) and, in the broader, secondary sense of the term, justification is also “by works” insofar as the future judgment necessitates the fruit of regeneration. This distinction will be valuable in chapter five when we compare the doctrines of Newman and Vermigh.
Faith is the instrument that appropriates two-fold righteousness (duplex iustitia)—forensic imputation and that which is wrought by the Spirit. In the former case, it is simply faith, while, in the latter, it is faith accompanied by the activity of the regenerated mind and volition. Such regeneration produces a habit of virtue (sanctification) in the course of a faithful life. In Vermigh’s Romans commentary, the enlivening work of the Spirit serves as the context for justification, while the same Spirit directly instigates sanctification. Martyr employs the notion of habitus to describe the human disposition that produces good works. Such a disposition is an “inward righteousness which is rooted in us, which we obtain and confirm by leading a continually upright life.”463
For Vermigh, one cannot properly address the cataclysmic crisis of original sin by limiting justification to the problem of guilt. In addition to the legal dimension, it is also necessary for salvation to engage the spiritual and moral consequences of Adam’s transgression. To Martyr’s thinking, one’s union with the crucified and resurrected Christ, which results in a living faith, meaningfully addresses each of these consequences by bringing together forensic justification, regeneration, and sanctification. In this way, Vermigh offers a holistic view of justification that seeks to account for the comprehensive nature of human sin.
Having examined Peter Martyr’s doctrine of justification in the context of his socio-religious milieu, our next chapter will transition into the life and times of the second figure with whom this study is concerned: John Henry Newman.
228. Vermigh, Romanos, 1181–1324 (1182).
229. Vermigh does not use the language of “iustitia aliena” but he affirms the concept when he asserts that justification is grounded in the judicial transference of Christ’s righteousness to the sinner. Vermigh, Romanos, 1182 [87], 1201 [107], 1314 [220].
230. “Verba est forense, quod ad iudicia spectat.” Ibid., 1182 [87–88].
231. Ibid., 1182 [87].
232. Ibid., 1181–1253 [87–160]; 1253–1311 [160–218]; 1312–24 [218–30].
233. One way in which Vermigh captures the legal and relational dimensions of justification is by describing divine acceptance in terms of “adoption.” Ibid., 1232 [139], 1259 [167], 1280 [187].
234. Ibid., 1263 [171].
235. Ibid., 1194 [100].
236. An explanation of this emphasis is found below in section B., “Regeneration and Pneumatic Renewal.”
237. Ibid., 1182 [88]. The latter of these, justification “in judgment,” constitutes the formal cause. Immediately after making this statement, Vermigh explains why the renewal of the Spirit and “way of life acquired from good works” ultimately relies upon forensic imputation to accomplish one’s justification, since such works remain “imperfect and incomplete.”
238. After quoting the Council of Trent, Vermigh quips, “What else would Pelagius say if he were now alive?” Ibid., 1248–49 [156]. A more accurate reading of Trent, however, would recognize its gracious character. Chapter 8 of the Council’s Decree on Justification explicitly states that justification comes as a “free gift,” and does so on the perennial consent of the Catholic Church, on the basis of faith, “without which ‘it is impossible to please God’” (Heb 11:6). Decree on Justification, in Tanner, Decrees, 2:674.
239. Donnelly, Calvinism and Scholasticism, 151.
240. James, Predestination and Justification, xxxv.
241. Vermigh, Romanos, 1208 [114].
242. James, “De Iustificatione.”
243. These dates indicate the years when Vermigh lectured on these books. Initial publication occurred accordingly: the commentary on Genesis in 1569 (Zürich), the commentary on 1 Corinthians in 1551 (Zürich), and the commentary on Romans in 1558 (London).
244. Given the polemical setting in which Martyr wrote his Romans locus, the text displays a high number of biblical citations. He also gives considerable attention to the church fathers, whereas previous loci only occasionally referred to them.
245. Vermigh, Romanos, 1245 [152]. This is illustrated by the meticulous attention that Vermigh devotes to Hebrew, Greek, and Latin exegesis (1182–85 [87–91]), and also the profusion of biblical texts that he marshals throughout his commentary. McLelland puts an edge on this point when he writes, “Peter Martyr’s quarrel with Rome may be summed up in the phrase, ‘the Scriptures, and not the traditions of men.’” McLelland, The Visible Words of God, 125.
246 Ibid.
247. Ibid., 1249 [156].
248. Ibid.
249. Ibid., 1249–50 [157].
250. Ibid., 1216–17 [123–24].
251. Ibid., 1251–52 [159].
252. Ibid., 1252–53 [159–60].
253. Ibid., 1252 [159].
254. Ibid., 1182 [87].
255. Emphasis added. Ibid., 1191 [96]. Columen totius pietatis: Calvin uses similar language to describe justification: “quae pietatis est totius summa” in Calvin, Institutes 3:15:7. Barth and Niesel, eds. Johannis Calvini Opera Selecta, 4:245.
256. Speaking of justification, Vermigh writes that it is “iustitia nobis collata à Deo, tres habet partes.” Vermigh, In primum librum Mosis, 59.
257. “Sed Iustitia Dei, quando nobis ab eo confertur, tripartita est.” Vermigh, 15. For an English translation, see Vermigh, PMR, 135.
258. Vermigh’s triplex iustificatio differs from that of Martin Bucer, which consists, firstly, of divine election, secondly, of the remission of sins mediated by the Spirit and accessed by faith alone, and, third, by monergistic works in Christ which God enables one to perform. Bucer, Metaphrasis et Enarratio, 119.
259. Prior to his Romans locus, Vermigh employed the language of “impartation” with regard to the transference of forensic and actual righteousness. For instance, his 1 Corinthians locus says that God justifies us “by compassionately imparting (impartiendo) his mercy and promises.” “Primum sane constituatur, deum esse qui nos iustificat, suam misericordiam et promissiones clementer impartiendo.” Vermigh, Ad Corinthios Epistolam Commentarii, 18. For an English translation, see Vermigh, PMR, 143. By the time of Martyr lectures on Romans, however, he discontinues the language of “impartation.” James suggests that Vermigh’s work in England, which sought to achieve greater continuity with the Continent, likely motivated this revision. James, “De Iustificatione,” 301.
260. “Declarat autem Deus hanc suam iustitiam, sive bonitatem erga nos tribus potissimum rebus. Primum nos recipit in gratiam, condonat peccata, non imputat ea, quae nos [note] admittimus, ad mortem: sed e diverso potius imputat Christi obedientiam & sanctitatem. Secundo accendit in animis nostris studium recte vivendi, instaurat voluntatem, illustrat rationem, nosque totos propensos facit ad recte vivendum, quum antea a iusto honestoque abhorreremus. Tertio loco donat puros & castos mores, probas actiones, & synceram vitam.” Vermigh, Romanos, 50.
261. “Iustitia Dei, ut alias docui, triplex est. Prima, qua per Christum in gratiam recipimur, & condonantur peccata, & Christi iustitia nobis imputatur. Ad hanc altera consequitur, ut vi Spiritus sancti reformetur animus noster, totique intus per gratiam instauremur. Tertio consequuntur sanctae & piae exercitationes. nam, qui huc pervenerunt, magno studio flagrant bene operandi.” Ibid., 179.
262. So, for instance, after unpacking the tres partes of righteousness from Romans 1:17, Martyr writes: “Sed primum horum trium, & capitale, & summum est, quod alia complectitur, & dicitur esse Dei iustitia, quae in nos ab illo provenit. Non enim viribus humanis eam acquirimus.” Ibid., 50.
263. Martyr’s work, Una Semplice Dichiaratione sopra gli XII Articola della Fede Christiana, surveys Christian doctrine from the viewpoint of the Protestantism that he had recently embraced.
264. Vermigh, Early Writings, trans. and ed. Di Gangi and McLelland, 53.
265. Ibid., 49.
266. “Ad hanc rectam vitam sanctorum, consequitur quaedam alia species Iustificationis, qua scilicet laudamur, approbamur, & iusti praedicamur. Nam bona opera licet illam primam iustitiam quae gratis conceditur non afferant, attamen indicant, & illam adesse demonstrant . . . Et hac eadem ratione à Christo in extremo iudicio commemoratione bonorum operum iustificabimur, id est iusti declarabimur, ex testimonio misericordiae proximis exhibitae.” Vermigh, Ad Corinthios Epistolam Commentarii, 19. For an English translation, see Vermigh, PMR, 147. Cf. Vermigh, Romanos, 1182 [88].
267. Vermigh, PMR, 147.
268. James suggests the reason why Vermigh uses the tres partes concept of justification in his commentary and not in his locus is probably based on later reflection in Zürich, when he made final revisions before publication in 1558. James, “De Iustificatione,” 330.
269. James, “Romans Commentary: Justification and Sanctification,” 314.
270. Ibid., 1182 [87], 1215–16 [122].
271. Ibid., 1249–50 [156–57]: “In iustificatione duos esse interiores motus: quorum alter ad rationem pertineat, quae, uti diximus, non tantum docenda sit, sed etiam persuadenda, traducendaque in sententiam spiritus sancti. Alteri autem ad voluntatem, ut illa flectatur ad ea omnia suscipienda que spiritus sanctus promittit et offert. Ea est fides, qua iustificamur, et per quam peccata nobis nostra condonantur.”
272. Ibid., 1284 [191].
273. “At postquam spiritus corda audientium semel permoverit, ut credant, tum demum Evangelium vim suam ad servandum obtinet.” Vermigh, Romanos, 609.
274. Ibid., 1284 [191]: “quoniam causa est fidei.”
275. Ibid., 1196 [102].
276. Ibid., 1249 [157]: “Sed animus humanus nisi innovetur spiritu.”
277. Martyr employs various phrases to describe this enlivening work: “God renews the heart of man,” “the illumination of the Holy Spirit,” “inspiration,” and the activity of being “called and stirred by grace.” Ibid.
278. Vermigh’s understanding resembles that of Calvin. Calvin, Institutes, 3.16.1.
279. Vermigh, Romanos, 1196–97 [102]: “Sed iam nunc liberati Dei gratia, Christo per spiritum copulamur, Christo, inquam, excitato a mortuis, ex qua coniunctione iam Deo fructificabimus non amplius morti et damnationi.”
280. Ibid., 1201 [107]: “Qui iustificantur, spiritum sanctum accipiunt, nam iustificari absque illo prorsus est impossible.”
281. Ibid., 1305 [210]: “Quam primum inquit homo credit, confestim, inquit iustificatus est.” See also 1233 [139–40].
282. Vermigh, Romanos, 1260–61 [168]; 1290 [197]; 1320 [226].
283. Ibid., 1282 [190]: “Praeterea rixatur etiam de productione fidei, quaeritque, unde ea in nobis generetur. Nos uno verbo facilè respondemus a Spiritu sancto.”
284. Ibid., 1272–73 [180–81].
285. Ibid., 1182 [87].
286. Ibid., 1305–6 [211]: “Postquam autem semel sumus iustificarti, non satis est ad obtinendam salutem dicere, Credo: Accedat etiam oportet sancta vita, et bona opera.”
287. Ibid., 1318 [224]: “[W]e grant that Christ requires more of us than faith, for who doubts that he wants those who are justified to live uprightly and to practice virtue of all kinds.”
288. Ibid., 1196 [102]: “Fructus autem sanctifatio nisi ibi est nullus, verum ipsam regenerationem sequitur.”
289. Ibid., 1250 [158]: “et gratia, atque spiritu instauratus cum divina virtute una cooperatur.”
290. Vermigh quotes Augustine with approval regarding “the righteousness that adheres in us” (Augustinum sensisse de iustitia inhaerente). Ibid., 1320 [226].
291. Ibid., 1299 [205]: “sed de illa intrinseca nobis inhaerente, quam recte vivendo perpetuo acquirimus, et confirmamus.”
292. Ibid., 1194 [100].
293. Vermigh, Ad Corinthios Epistolam Commentarii, 136.
294. Ibid., Romanos, 1288 [195].
295. Ibid., 1289 [195]: After arguing thus, he concludes, “Therefore, we must take away all merit, not only in those who are not yet justified, but also in those who have been justified.”
296. One way to see this emphasis on renewal and works in Vermigh is in his treatment of James 2:17–18. There are three such places in his Romans locus. In these comments he asserts that faith works (1187 [93]), it is accepted by God (1239-40 [146]), and by works one comes to a fuller knowledge of God (1311 [217]).
297. Ibid., 1189–90 [995].
298. Ibid., 1290 [196].
299. Ibid., 1239 [146]. Martyr quotes Augustine’s work, Against Julian, book four, chap. three.
300. Ibid., 1196–97 [102].
301. Ibid., 1233 [139]: “quod quia nunquam quisquam aut praestiterit, aut praestare potest, nihil superest, nisi ut confugiamus ad Christum a quo per fidem iustificemur, deinde iustificari, id quod praecipitur, incipiamus ut cunque efficere.”
302. Ibid., 1181 [87]: “Iustificentur ne homines operibus, ab fide.”
303. Ibid., 1182 [88].
304. Ibid., 1196 [102]: “Omnes nascentes massa perditionis complectitur, a qua labe homines operibus suis emergere posse, et vendicare sibi iustificationem iuxta sacras literas fieri non potest.”
305. Ibid., 1196 [101]: “Accedit adhaec, quòd tanti mali causa exprimitur.”
306. Ibid., 1196 [102]: “iam inde à prima ipsa origine per primum hominem perditi sumus & damnati.”
307. Ibid., 1301 [201]: “. . . opera hominum non renatorum esse peccata.”
308. Ibid., 1199 [105].
309. James, “The Complex of Justification,” 52–53.
310. Ibid.
311. Vermigh, Romanos, 1248–49 [156]; Pighius, 1282–83 [190]; Smith, 1323 [229].
312. Ibid., 1182 [87]: “Interdum vero iustificat Deus absolvendo a peccatis, adscribendo et imputando iustitiam.”
313. Ibid., 1201 [107]; 1314 [220].
314. Ibid., 1194 [100]: “nos ex operibus non iustificari. Quoque id magis persuaderet, verbum id logizein, quod dicimus imputare, adscribere alicui iustitiam, aut pro iusto aliquem habere urget, et vult habere antithesim ad meritum et debitum, ita ut is cui quippiam imputatur, id non mereatur, neque ut debitum accipiat.”
315. Martyr makes this point by quoting Romans 4:5 and Genesis 15:6, asserting that God simultaneously forgives sins and credits those who believe with righteousness. Ibid., 1252 [159].
316. Ibid., 1194 [100]: “Quibus ex verbis non solum ellcimus iustitiam, qua dicimut iustificari, non inhaere animis nostris, sed imputari a Deo.”
317. Ibid., 1264 [172]: “atque ita, ut ipse in se suscipiat, et portet illorum scelera.”
318. James, “De Iustificatione,” 297. Vermigh, Romanos, 1182 [87]: “verba est forense, quod ad iudicia spectat.”
319. Vermigh, Romanos, 1182 [87].
320. Ibid., 1290 [196]: “participatio aeternae vitae.”
321. Emphasis added. Ibid., 1263 [171]: “Et re vera nihil aliud est Iustificatio, quàm aeterna vita iam nunc in nobis inchoate.”
322. Ibid., 1182 [87]: “Deus absolvendo à peccatis.”
323. Ibid., 1212 [119].
324. Ibid., 1207 [113].
325. Ibid., 1217 [123].
326. Ibid., 1274 [182]: “Quod autem attinet ad remissionem peccatorum, quum nobis promissa sit benedictio, cogitare debemus, caput, & principium eius esse, ut recipiamur à Deo in gratiam, utque nobis peccata condonentur.”
327. Ibid., 1199 [105]: “condonationem peccatorum, utque homines in gratiam recipiantur, non pendere ab illorum operibus, sed a mera propitiaque Dei benevolentia.”
328. James, “Complex of Justification,” 51.
329. Vermigh, Romanos, 1253 [160].
330. Particular attention is given to Romans 4, with Martyr pressing Paul’s statement, “To one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, faith is reckoned to him as righteousness.” Ibid., 1254–55 [161–62]. After surveying Romans up through chapter eleven, Vermigh proceeds to look at 1 and 2 Corinthians. He examines Galatians in some depth, and then looks at Ephesians, Philippians, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 1 John, the Gospels, Acts, and the Old Testament. Ibid., 1258–64 [165–72].
331. See especially his “Contra Pighius” section. Ibid., 1264–72 [172–80] and “Pighius Redux.” Ibid., 1273–98 [181–204]. A helpful summary of Pighius’s doctrine of original sin is found in Feiner’s PhD thesis, entitled, “Die Erbsündenlehre Albert Pigges.” Although Pighius disavows Pelagianism, in the final analysis his position bears a striking resemblance to it. The human will, according to Pighius, is weakened on account of sin, but not to the extent that it prevents one from choosing God. According to Feiner, this is the essential weakness of Pighius’s position—while claiming to uphold original sin, he in fact locates the cause of human guilt in an individual’s willful transgression. Feiner, 63, 66, 70, 74, 83.
332. Ibid., 1286 [193].
333. Ibid., 1287 [194]; 1289–90 [196]; 1292 [198]. In this last example, Martyr writes, “Here indeed I cannot restrain myself, but must say that Pighius lies badly.”
334. Martyr’s “Smith Redux” section is significantly smaller. Ibid., 1298–99 [204–5].
335. Ibid., 1261 [169] 1283 [190], 1292 [198], 1321 [227].
336. Ibid., 1262 [170]: “apprehendimus promissiones Dei.”
337. Ibid., 1183 [89], 1187 [93], 1285–86 [192], 1271 [179], 1188 [93], 1266 [174].
338. Ibid., 1183 [89]: “id est, ut nunquam sit nuda, sed trahat secum semper multos ac varios animi motus.”
339. Ibid., 1183 [89].
340. Ibid., 1184 [90]: “Est itaque firmus certusque animi assensus verbis Dei a spiritu divino afflatus ad salutem credentium.”
341. James, “De Iustificatione,” 307.
342. Vermigh, Romanos, 1183 [89]: “Iure igitur a professoribus purioribus Evangelij statuitur, credere, cum actione, seu motu fiduciae, spei, et similibus affectibus maximam habere coniunctionem: sed potissimum cum syncera firmaque fiducia.”
343. Ibid., 1286 [193].
344. Ibid., 1286 [193].
345. Ibid., 1188 [94].
346. Ibid., 1312 [218].
347. Ibid.
348. Ibid.
349. Ibid.
350. Ibid., 1321 [227]: “Cumque dicimus, hominem iustificari sola fide, nihil sane aliud dicimus, quam hominem iustificari sola Dei misericordia, et solius Christi merito: quae non alio instrumento apprehendere possumus, quam sola fide.”
351. Ibid., 1312 [218]: “Ita oculus non potest esse sine capite, cerebro, corde, epate, & aliis partibus corporis: & tamen colorem, & lucem solus oculus apprehendit.” Martyr offers a similar analogy a few pages later: “Surely the meat that we eat is distributed to all the members and into the whole body, and yet it is received with the mouth only and not with the whole body.” Ibid., 1322 [228].
352. Ibid., 1318 [224]: “Quod ad primum attinet, fatemur, Christum plus a nobis requirere, quam fidem. Quis enim dubitet, eum velle homines iustificatos recte vivere, seseque per omnnia virtutum genera exercere.”
353. Ibid., 1318 [224]: “alioquin ad aeternam salutem non perventuros?” Martyr follows this directly with the qualifier that such virtue is the “fruit” of faith and not its cause “Atqui fructus isti sunt fidei, & iustificationis effecta, non causae.”
354. Ibid., 1218–19 [125].
355. Ibid. [125–26].
356. Ibid., 1217 [123–24]: “Desiperet supra modum, qui diceret nos ad nostram conversionem praevenire auxilium Dei. Ille prius nos diligit, quàm à nobis diligi incipiat.”
357. Ibid., 1219 [125]: “pugnare cum verbo Dei.”
358. Pressed through the framework of his intensive Augustinianism, Vermigh cannot begin to countenance the idea that meritorious works of the unregenerate are somehow pleasing to God. Ibid., 1195 [101], 1199 [105], 1214–15 [121–2], 1235–36 [142–43], 1260–61 [168], 1288 [194], 1313–14 [219–20].
359. Ibid., 1216 [123]: “Est enim, inquiunt, gratia quaedam generalis omnibus exposita, & communis etiam hominibus non regeneratis, qua utcunque adiuti, possint mereri iustificationem, & facere opera, quae placeant Deo. Sed hoc quum dicunt, incidunt in haeresim Pelagii.”
360. Ibid., 1217 [123].
361. Ibid., 1127 [134].
362. Ibid., 1227–28 [134].
363. Ibid., 1229 [136].
364. Ibid., 1278 [186].
365. Ibid., 1302 [208]: “amitti . . . aut ita consopiri ut suum.”
366. Ibid., 1288 [194]: “Quare, qui quaerunt Deum ut ab eo iustificentur ex fide, quemadmodum Apostolus docet, assequuntur id, quod optant: Illi vero, qui iustificari volunt ex operibus, exicidunt a iustificatione.”
367. Donnelly, Calvinism and Scholasticism, 154.
368. Vermigh, Romanos, 1275 [182]: “Neque vero iustificatio semel tantum apprehenditur, sed quoties promissionibus divinis, vere atque efficaciter assentimur. Nam quum assidue labamur, et incidamus in peccata, opus habemus subinde repetita iustifcatione.” Donnelly quotes from Vermigh’s Loci Communes (1583), 545.
369. In footnote 319 on page 349 of his thesis, De Iustificatione, James mentions that Donnelly’s Calvinism and Scholasticism “cites from the 1587 edition of the Loci Communes.” In fact, it is the 1583 version from which Donnelly quotes. This is noteworthy since James takes Donnelly to task for referencing the wrong edition and incorrect pages. Even so, Donnelly’s reference to a second statement by Martyr which purportedly undermines the doctrine of perseverance is still lacking (he cites page 491 of Vermigh’s 1583 Loci, Calvinism and Scholasticism, 154n 91). There were fourteen editions of Vermigh’s Loci Communes following the first edition in 1576, thirteen in Latin and one in English. McLelland, “A Literary History of the LOCI COMMUNES,” 488–94.
370. Vermigh, Romanos, 1273–75 [181–82].
371. Ibid., 1273–74 [181–82].
372. Ibid., 1275 [182].
373. Ibid.
374. James, “De Iustificatione,” 351.
375. Calvin, Institutes, 3.2.11, 3.24.4–11.
376. Martyr expresses general agreement with the causal framework of Trent in terms of the “final” cause (the glory of God), the “efficient” cause (divine mercy), and the “meritorious” cause (the death and resurrection of Christ). After addressing each of these, Vermigh explains that the point of contention is the “causam formalem.” Unlike Trent, which defines the formal cause in terms of the righteousness with which one is counted and made just, Vermigh limits the strict sense of justification to the forensic reckoning of righteousness. He thus concludes this section, “Therefore, we say that justification cannot consist in that righteousness and renewal by which we are created anew by God. For it is imperfect because of our corruption, so that we are not able to stand before the judgment of Christ.” Vermigh, Romanos, 1251–52 [159].
377. So Vermigh’s quotes John 6:40 and then concludes, “Therefore, we infer this: I believe in the Son of God; therefore, I have now and shall have what he has promised.” Ibid., 1293 [1990], see also 1252 [159].
378. Ibid., 1278 [186].
379. Ibid., 1253–54 [160–61], 1292–93 [198–200], 1315–16 [221–22].
380. Ibid., 1208–9 [115–16].
381. Ibid., 1212 [118–19].
382. Ibid., 1212 [119]: “vim iustificandi.”
383. Ibid. Later in his locus, in proposition three, Martyr makes a similar point: “As to the sacraments, we have often taught how justification is to be attributed to them, for they stand in relation to justification as does the preaching of the Gospel and the promise of Christ offered to us for salvation” 1318 [224].
384. Ibid., 1251 [158].
385. Ibid., 1251 [159]. See also 1315 [221]. Martyr envisages adult believers in his analogy to Abraham. In the case of baptized infants, it was the faith of one’s parents extended covenantally to their children that constituted the justification which properly preceded baptism. For an explanation of Vermigh’s view of baptism in the context of his covenantal theology, see Lillback. “The Early Reformed Covenant Paradigm,”, 70–96. McLelland also addresses this subject in The Visible Words of God, 152–59.
386. Ibid., 1230 [136].
387. Ibid., 1315 [221–22].
388. Ibid., 1316 [222].
389. Ibid., 1252 [159]. For other references to the cause(s) of justification see 1228 [135] and 1253 [160], although neither of them specifically deals with justification’s formal cause.
390. Ibid. Vermigh cites Romans 4:5, Psalm 32, and Genesis 15:6.
391. Ibid.
392. Ibid., 1182 [88]; 1251–52 [159].
393. Ibid., 1182 [88].
394. Ibid., 1203 [109]: “Atque adhuc magis quod dictum est, confirmavit, Christus vobis factus est ociosus: nam si iustificationem habetis, ut fructum operum vestrorum, Christi adventus, mors, et sanguinis effusio non fuerunt necessaria.”
395. Ibid., 1195–96 [101]; 1201–2 [107–8]; 1213 [120]; 1238 [144–45]; 1279–80 [186–88]; 1312–13 [218–20].
396 Ibid., 1189–90 [95–96]; 1202–3 [108–9]; 1209–10 [115–16]; 1251 [158].
397. 1209 [116]; 1224 [131]; 1315 [221–22]. Against those who argue that one can be justified by observing the moral law, Vermigh marshals a catena of biblical texts from Paul’s epistles (especially from Romans) before finally concluding, “I would like to find out from these fellows why they remove the power of justifying from the works of ceremonies and so easily attribute it to our moral works.” Ibid., 1211 [118].
398 Ibid. 1188–89 [94–95].
399. Ibid., 1228 [135]: “Illi enim semper statuunt bona opera causas esse iustitiae: cum ea re vera iustitiae effecta sint, non causae.”
400. Vermigh, PMR, 147.
401. Sturm, Die Theologie Peter Martyr Vermiglis, 69.
402. Gleason, Gasparo Contarini, 259; Anderson, Peter Martyr, a Reformer in Exile, 46.
403. McNair, PMI, 233.
404. Simler, “Oratio,” in Vermigh, Life, Letters, and Sermons, 24–25.
405. McNair, PMI, 234.
406. James, “Complex of Justification,” 57.
407. Ibid.
408. Ibid., 56.
409. Vermigh, In primum librum Mosis, 59.
410. This is the position of Sturm who recognizes fundamental compatibility between Vermigh and duplex iustitia, even though Vermigh doesn’t formally uphold the position. Sturm, Die Theologie Peter Martyr, 69.
411. Sturm, Die Theologie Peter Martyr, 62–68.
412. Donnelly, Calvinism and Scholasticism, 154.
413. James, “Complex of Justification,” 45, 53, 55; Cf. Sturm, Die Theologie Peter Martyr, 62–68.
414. Sturm, Die Theologie Peter Martyr, 69.
415. James provides evidence to this effect such as Vermigh’s ardent opposition of Trent, and that he was acknowledged as a Protestant by opponents and supporters alike. James, “Complex of Justification,” 56.
416. Donnelly, Calvinism and Scholasticism, 39.
417. Ibid., 105; James, “Complex of Justification,” xxvii.
418. Calvin, The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, xx.
419. James, “Complex of Justification,” 55.
420. In the context of this second proposition, Vermigh reflects on the causes of justification from Romans chapter 1. The efficient cause is God’s power. The final cause is our [future] salvation, the instrumental cause is faith. Vermigh, Romanos, 1252–53 [160].
421. Vermigh, Romanos, 1276 [184].
422. Ibid., 1282 [189].
423. Ibid., 1260 [167–68].
424. Vermigh makes essentially the same case against the Council of Trent. Ibid., 1249–53 [156–60].
425. Ibid., 192, 194–95. This position follows naturally from Pighius’s anthropology: that in original sin Adam’s offspring embraced guilt and death, but not corruption. For this reason, Pighius argued that man has the power to choose righteousness, leading to the appropriation of actual righteousness. In view of this emphasis, Jedin speaks of Pighius’s “almost Pelagian view of human moral ability.” Jedin, Studien über die schriftstellertätigkeit Albert Pigges, 11.
426. Sturm, Die Theologie Peter Martyr, 67; James, “Complex of Justification,” 46.
427. James, “Complex of Justification,” 46, 56.
428. Yarnold, “Duplex iustitia,” 204–23.
429. Lugioyo, Martin Bucer’s Doctrine of Justification, 189.
430. According to Vermigh, Pighius emphasized the obedience of God’s commandments on the strength of one’s will as the way to be justified. Vermigh, Romanos, 1273–82 [181–89]. See also Feiner, Die Erbsündenlehre Albert Pigges, 66.
431. Jedin, A History of the Council of Trent, 145, 153.
432. Schaff, The History of Creeds, 4th ed., 474.
433. While it is true that Contarini was shunned by Carafa and other rigid conservatives following Regensburg, it was not on account of heresy. Gleason, Gasparo Contarini, 257–76. Just thirty years later, the Sorbonne was to pronounce Contarini’s position acceptable. Dickens, The Counter Reformation, 105.
434. Lugioyo, Martin Bucer’s Doctrine of Justification, 190.
435. Ibid., 202–3; Matheson, “Martin Bucer and the Old Church,” 5–16; McGrath, “Humanist Elements in the Early Reformed Doctrine of Justification,” 5–20.
436. Eells, “The Origin of the Regensburg Book,” 355–72.
437. Bucer describes this impartation as “a certain persuasion of the Holy Spirit concerning the gospel,” (certa Spiritus sancti de Evangelio persuasio). Bucer, Metaphrasis et enarratio, 425.
438. Vermigh conveys his adherence to duplex iustificatio when he contrasts the two meanings of justification: the present reckoning of imputation and the future realization of actual righteousness. Vermigh, Ad Corinthios Epistolam Commentarii, 19 [147]; Ibid., Romanos, 1182 [88]. McGrath suggests that a “doctrine of double justification’, in the strict sense of the term (as it is encountered during the Tridentine proceedings on justification), is essentially a doctrine of a double formal cause of justification.” McGrath, ID, 313. In this sense, Vermigh’s doctrine (because it posits imputation as the single formal cause) is not a strict duplex iustificatio.
439. Bucer, Metaphrasis et enarratio, 232. We noted in our introduction Lugioyo’s helpful point that “Bucer’s use of secundaria hints not to a [temporal] following (secunda) but to an inferior or second-rate justification that highlights the superiority of the first.” Lugioyo, Martin Bucer’s Doctrine of Justification, 189.98n297.
440. This assertion, once again, is predicated on Vermigh’s distinction between a present, forensic justification versus an actual realization of justification which occurs in the future. Vermigh, Ad Corinthios Epistolam Commentarii, 19 [147]; Romanos, 1182 [88].
441. Lane, Justification by Faith in Catholic-Protestant Dialogue, 56.
442. Lane, “Calvin and Article 5,” 233–63.
443. McNair opens his Introduction of Peter Martyr in Italy describing Vermigh as Jewel’s theological father and as Hooker’s grandfather. McNair, PMI, xiii.
444. Jewel remained an affectionate disciple thereafter, writing of his mentor, “Doctor Peter Martyr, of whom I cannot speak without great reverence.” Jewel, The Works of John Jewel, vol. 3, 646.
445. Jewel, The Works of John Jewel, 300. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes describes how Jewel maintained a fierce commitment to sola fide without denigrating the necessity of works. Hughes, ed. Faith and Works, 39.
446. In addition to his connection to Vermigh through Jewel, Hooker may have learned about Peter Martyr from his Uncle, John Hooker, a historian and scholar from Exeter, who had lodged with Vermigh while studying at Strasburg. MacCulloch, The Reformation, 486. Gary Jenkins states that Martyr also influenced Hooker through his Puritan tutor, John Rainolds. Jenkins, “Peter Martyr and the Church of England,” 47–69.
447. Simuţ, Richard Hooker and His Early Doctrine, 104.
448. Hooker, The Works of the Learned and Judicious Divine, vol. II, 309.
449. Gibbs, “Richard Hooker’s Via Media Doctrine of Justification,” 219–20. This notion of in tempore is roughly analogous to Calvin’s great simul, Institutio. Calvin, Institutionum Christianae religionis libri quatuor, 210.
450. Simuţ, The Doctrine of Salvation in the Sermons of Richard Hooker, 117–18. Yarnold also describes Hooker as a proponent of duplex iustitia, emanating from Saint Paul’s theology of Christological union. Yarnold, “Duplex iustitia,” 204–23.
451. Lane, for example, analyses Contarini’s Epistola de Iustificatione (a letter written from Regensburg on May 25, 1541 in which he defends his views against Messer Angelo, Cardinal Gonzaga’s theological advisor) and concludes, “Because of the duplex iustitia and the double sense of justification, it follows that there is a double formal cause of justification: ‘charitas et gratia Dei nobis inhaerens et iusticia Christi nobis donata et imputata’ (29:1-4).” Lane, “Cardinal Contarini and Article 5 of the Regensburg Colloquy (1541),” 163–90 (179).
452. Vermigh, In primum librum Mosis, 61: “Quare illa opinio omnino evertitur, quae ita nos iustificari fide dicit, ut tamen operibus tribuat partem, quod scilicet una cum fide ad iustificandum concurrant.”
453. Sturm, Die Theologie Peter Martyr, 67–68.
454. Vermigh, Romanos 1232 [139], 1259 [167], 1280 [187].
455. Ibid., 1224 [131].
456. Ibid., Ad Corinthios Epistolam Commentarii, 19 [147].
457. Ibid.; Romanos, 1182 [88].
458. Ibid., Ad Corinthios Epistolam Commentarii, 19 [147].
459. Ibid., Romanos, 1222–23 [128–29],1227–28 [133–34], 1290–91 [196–97].Ibid., 1194 [100]; Ibid., 1288 [195].
460 Ibid., 1232 [139]: “Quod si nati sunt ex Deo, necesse est, eos iustificatos, et regeneratos esse.”
461. Ibid., 1128 [135], 1235–36 [142].
462. Ibid., 1228–29 [135].
463. Ibid., 1299 [205]: “sed de illa intrinseca nobis inhaerente, quam recte vivendo perpetuo acquirimus, et confirmamus.”