devoting and giving up our selves to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and renouncing of all that is inconsistent with this Covenant Which Assent Consent and Trust are the effects of the Gospel and Spirit of Christ and are founded on God's Fidelity that is on the Veracity Love and Sufficiency of God Almighty most wise and good and on Christ the Father's great Apostle and on Christ's sub-Apostles and on the Gospel and especially the Covenant of Grace as on God's revealing and donative Instrument and on the manifold obsignant operations of the Holy Ghost miraculous and sanctifying as God's infallible Attestation to the Gospel-Verity § 28. Historical Tradition of the Words Books and Matters of Fact are subordinate necessary means of transmitting the Objects to our sense of Hearing who live at such a distance from the Time Place and Facts § 29. But though all these things aforesaid are in true Faith yet a distinct Perception or Description of them all is not necessary in him that hath them But a more general Conception of it which will but consist with the true Reception of the Things signified by the Words God Christ Grace c. may be certainly saving to a plain and simple-hearted Christian when one that can describe it accurately may be graceless For it is Believing and not Defining Faith which God hath made necessary to Salvation § 30. Therefore we do ordinarily well use shorter Descriptions to the People and sometime we say That Faith in Christ is our Christianity that is our Assent and Consent to the Baptismal Covenant and our Self-dedition to God therein For in Scripture it is all one to be a Believer a Disciple of Christ and a Christian. § 31. Sometimes we say That saving Faith is a fiducial-practical Assent to the Truth of the Gospel and Consent to the Covenant of Grace or an Accepting of all the Benefits of the Covenant as they are and on the terms offered or an Accepting of Christ and Life in and with him there offered us § 32. Sometimes we say It is a practical Affiance or trusting on Christ as our only Saviour for Salvation or to bring us to God and glory And in all these and the like we speak truly and mean the same thing some terms being used on occasion while the rest are implyed and to be understood § 33. Those that will needs call no act by the name of Faith but Assent and confine it to the Intellect do yet seem to differ with us but de nomine about a Word and not the Matter For they confess if there concur not a Consent of the Will it is not saving but as some call it â—ides informis and so that Assent and Consent make up our necessary Condition or means of our Union with Christ or Interest in the Covenant-Rights or Gifts And then seeing we are agreed so far of the matter it 's not worth much striving whether one only or both Acts shall be called Faith § 34. When the first Reformers had to do with men that commended uncertainty of our Sincerity and Salvation and kept People under a Spirit of Bondage and tempted them contrary to the Nature of Faith to love this World better than the next and to be afraid of dying by being doubtful whether they should be saved in the heat of opposition some of them called Faith Assurance or certain or full Persuasion of our own personal Election Pardon and Salvation But those that came after them and those that conversed practically with Men of troubled Consciences and observed the state of the greatest part of good Christians followed not this Example but spake more cautelously and soundly and described Faith as I before have told you For they found that not one of a multitude of godly Christians could say they were certain of their Election Sincerity or Salvation And some that were forwardest to say so were none of the best and had not what they said they had § 35. But whatever the transmarine Divines say I can witness that except ignorant Antinomians or such Sectaries rejected by the Orthodox I remember not that I have met these forty years with one Divine that taketh saving-saving-Faith to be such Assurance of our personal Election Justification or Salvation especially the first act which is not to believe that we are justified but that we may be justified § 36. Indeed you would think those few must hold this who say That Justification is an immanent eternal Act of God But 1. this is but a difference about the word Iustification All confess that God's essential Volition of our Justification is eternal as being himself but some think that his Will may be denominated an Eternal Iustification and others better say Not But all confess that the Law of Grace doth justifie no man till he believe much less the Sentence of Christ as Judge And though some call our Perswasion that we are justified by the name of Faith yet they deny not another act of Faith antecedent to this that maketh us true Christians § 37 And indeed besides Mr. Pemble and Dr. Twisse both excellent Men it 's rare to meet with any English Divine that talks for Eternal Iustification And Mr. Pemble who let fall some such things in his Vindiciae Gratiae did set all right again in his Treatise of Iustification being very young when he wrote even the last And Dr. Twisse who in his Vindic. Gratiae hath some such words speaketh elsewhere soundly as Mr. Iessop his Scholar hath shewed in a Treatise purposely written to prove it when I had taken exceptions against his words § 38. It is therefore shameless Calumny of those who perswade their Followers That the Reformed Churches take Faith for such an Assurance or Belief that we are justified or elected and shall be saved only because they find some such word in some former disputing Doctors of ours when as all or near all have so long renounced that Opinion that he would be a Wonder among us in England Scotland or Ireland and I think abroad that should hold it § 39. Yet we still say That saving Faith is not only a believing that God's Word is true but a believing it with personal Application to my self § 40. But that Application is such as followeth 1. I believe that Christ hath died for my sins as well as for the rest of the World 2. I believe that the Gospel offereth Pardon and Salvation to me as well as to others 3. I believe that God will have mercy on me and Christ and Life shall â—e mine if I shall truly believe and repent and Glory if I persevere 4. Hereupon I accept the Offer and Consent to the Covenant of Grace which giveth me right to these Benefits if I consent 5. And so far as I can say that I am sincere in my repenting and believing so far my Faith helpeth me to conclude that I am justified § 41. But this last is a mixt act and a rational
rather calleth it than a Habit at first even in the Adult And Calvin saith That some men semen fidei qualecunque perdunt Adam had such a Holiness as might be lost And why may we not say that Infants first Grace is of such a sort or degree 2. And yet that none are saved without more but that upon this first degree they have a right to Salvation and that their further Holiness shall be given them whom God will as part of their Salvation to which they have right At furthest at death in the same time and manner as perfect Holiness and Mortification of Sin is given to Believers that are till death imperfect A loseable degree of Holiness like Adam's may be the way to more in all that so die § 23. Divines use to mention three degrees of Grace in order to Faith it self 1. So much Grace as maketh a man able to believe which they call Sufficient Grace 2. So much more as efficiently determineth him to the Act of Believing This they call effectual special Grace and Protestants call it our Vocation effectual 3. So much more as giveth him a fixed habit of Faith Love and all Holiness together This Papists call Iustification and Protestants Sanctification Vid. Amesii Medull de voc sanct Rolloc de vocat Bishop Downame against Pemble Append. to his Treatise of Perseverance c. § 24. Now some hold all these loseable some hold only the last not loseable and almost all hold the first loseable Now 1. What if we think that Infant 's first Holiness besides relative Pardon and jus ad impunitatem regnum is but of the first degree Though a meer moral Power to believe be not enough to the Adult because the Act is necessary to them yet say Protestants The Habit is not necessary to their first Covenant-Right but is given by the Spirit in sanctification as a Covenant-Benefit And why may not Infants be in a pardoned state that at first have but that Grace which giveth a moral Power to believe when they come to age Consider of the matter § 25. I have so fully elsewhere proved That Infants Church-membership was instituted both in the Covenant of Innocency in the first edition of the Covenant of Grace in the Covenant of Peculiarity with Abraham and in the last edition of the Covenant of Grace by Christ and also that God never had a Church on Earth of which Infants were not Members if the adult Members had Infants that I will now supersede that Work CHAP. XX. Of the Nature of Saving-Faith § 1. SO much of this came in before on the by as will excuse my brevity here I have before shewed That the Faith now in question is not meerly our general Belief and Trust in God as a part of our Holiness but the mediate Belief and Trust in God our Redeemer and our Saviour which is made the Condition of the Covenant the means of our sanctification And also that as the editions of the Covenant vary and promulgation of it so it is not the same degree or acts of Faith as to the particular credenda or Articles to be believed that was and is necessary to all persons in all times § 2. Though the word Belief in English and Assent in Latin signifie strictly only the act of the Understanding and Saving Faith is oft named from one act yet really that Faith which in Scripture is made the Condition of Pardon and Salvation doth essentially contain the Acts of every Faculty even Assent Consent and Affiance and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and fides do properly signifie Trust even a consenting or voluntary Trust upon believing as is afore said § 3. We do very aptly call both the Act and Object by the same name fides in Latin and Faith in English oft-times For Faith is a trusting on another's Faith Fidelity or Trustiness and so the fides asserentis seu promittentis fides credentis are related § 4. The Faith that hath the promise of our Justification is not to be called one only Physical act in specie much less in numero That were but prophanely to jest with holy things but it is a moral act or work of the Soul containing many physical acts Otherwise we should be all confounded not knowing how to distinguish of all our physical acts of Faith secundum speciem and then to know which of them is the right And it would be but some very little of the true Objects of Faith that justifying Faith must be constituted by In a word the Absurdities are so numerous that would follow that I will not be so tedious as to name them § 5. Saving Faith is such a moral work as we use to express by the names Believing Trusting Consenting Taking Accepting Receiving in Contracts personal with men If we say You shall Trust such a Physician or take such a man for your Physician all men understand us and none is so logically mad as to think that by Taking or Trusting we mean only some one physical act of the smallest distribution If we say I take this man for my King my Master my Commander or Captain or this woman to be my Wife c. every one knoweth here what Taking meaneth viz. our Consent to that Relation according to the nature and ends of it § 6. Therefore though we use divers names for this Faith and also on several occasions give several half-descriptions of it we mean still the same thing and suppose what we omit to make the description entire § 7. When we call Faith a Believing or Assent we mean such an Assent as prevaileth with the Will to accept Christ with his Grace as offered in the Gospel and consent to the Baptismal Covenant and this indeed as a fruit of the assenting act but as essential to justifying Faith § 8. When we call it Consent or Acceptance or Receiving Christ we mean that as Man's Soul hath an Intellect and Will and a true actus humanus vel moralis is the act of both but of the Intellect as directive and of the Will as more perfective or as the Faculty primarily moral so the same Faith which is initially in the intellect's Assent is perfectlier in the will's Consent And it is the Receiving of a Saviour believed or the Consent to a believed Covenant We suppose Assent when we name it Consent § 9. And when we name it Affiance or Trust we include both the former and mean a resolved practical Trust and dedition of our selves accordingly to one that covenanteth to bring us from Sin and Misery to GOD and Glory where Belief and Consent to that Covenant are supposed § 10. And the Terminus a quo and the renunciation of Competitors and Opposites is connoted if not essentially included in Saving Faith And therefore Christ doth so often tell us of forsaking all if we will be his Disciples § 11. I use to express it by this similitude A Prince redeemeth a
extend to the Justification must extend to if perfect § 41. But no man is perfectly and absolutely just or justifiable For instance 1. If we be accused to have sinned we cannot be justified directly against this Accusation but must plead guilty by Confession For factum non potest fieri infectum and that Fact will for ever be culpable Adam did sin will for ever be a true assertion The Guilt of fact or fault is never done away in it self that it was really a fault and that we really did it will be an everlasting Truth Of which more afterward § 41. 2. If the Accusation be That in Adam we deserved Death it must be confessed Yea temporal Death and correcting Punishments are not only deserved but inflicted and not pardoned nor we justifiable herein § 42. 3. If the Accusation be that we deserved to have Abatements of Grace With-holdings of the Spirit and abatement of what Glory we might else have had all this must be confessed § 43. 4. Yea if it be said That our Sin primo instanti deserved Hell it must be confessed and against all this there is no direct Justification § 44. But against these Accusations we must be justified 1. If it be said that we are of Right to be damned or have no Right to Heaven but to Hell this must be denied And we must be justified by these several Causes 1. Because God's Iustice and the Ends of the violated Law are satisfied by Christ and by his Righteousness a free Gift of Pardon and Life are merited for us 2. And this free donation is the Law that we are to be judged by which giveth us Christ to be our Head and Pardon and Life with him § 45. 2. If it be said That we are Unbelievers impenitent or unholy and did not fulfill the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace we must deny it and be justified against this by our Faith Repentance and Holiness it self or else we must be condemned and perish for nothing else will do it § 46. And seeing it will be the work of the day to judge men as performers or non-performers of the said Conditions of the Law of Grace therefore it is that the Scripture speaketh so much of inherent or performed Righteousness and of Christ's judging men according to their works that is their works which are the performance of that Condition § 47. To be judged according to our Works is to be justified or condemned according to our Works For to be judged is the genus and to be justified or condemned are the species Iudging is justifying or condemning § 48. While all are agreed that all men shall be justified or condemned according to their Works it is unreasonable to quarrel at that height that many do about the syllable BY whether men be justified and condemned by their works as if according to them and by them had a different sence when as to judicial justification the sence is the very same though as to the making of men just the sence may differ § 49. We are commonly agreed that no man is justified by Works in any of these following sences 1. No man is justified either constitutively or judiciarily by his Works done according to the Law of Innocency that is by perfect personal Obedience and Love because we have it not 2. No man is justified constitutively or judiciarily by his Works done according to the Mosaical Iewish Law as such 3. Much less by any Works of his own or other mens invention which he accounteth good and are not so 4. No man is justified by any Works set in opposition to or competition or co-ordination with Christ but only in subordination to him and his Righteousness by which we are redeemed and for which we are all first conditionally pardoned and justified by the Law of Grace 5. No man could be justified by his Gospel-Obedience or his Faith if he were to be judged by the Law of Innocency as not redeemed 6. No man's Faith or Obedience will justifie him in Judgment against this accusation Thou art a Sinner or this Thy sin deserved Death Nor as one that hath fulfilled all the preceptive part of the law of Christ. 7. No Works do justifie us as meriting Life of God in proper commutative Justice 8. No man is justified by Tasks of working as contradistinct from believing and trusting on Free Grace or by external works without Christ's Spirit and spiritual Evangelical Duties 9. No good Work or Act of Man was a Condition of God's giving us a Redeemer or giving us a conditional justifying Law of Grace 10. Man's true Faith and Repentance is not before the Grace which worketh it and therefore is no Condition of that Grace 11. Man's antecedent common Works while he is impenitent merit not properly the special Grace which causeth Faith and Repentance 12. We have no Works that are acceptable to God but what are the fruits of his Spirit and Grace § 50. And on the other side we are agreed 1. That we are justified by the Works of Christ as the Meritorious Cause of our Justification 2. That the Justification purchased and given us by Christ is given us by a Law or Covenant of Grace which giveth as God's Instrument Right to Impunity and to Life to all true penitent Believers And therefore he that is justified according to this Law of Grace from the charge of Impenitence and Unbelief must be justified by his Repentance and Faith materially as being the Righteousness in question as is aforesaid 3. That without Holiness none shall see God And if any be accused as unholy and on that account no Member of Christ or Child of God or Heir of Heaven his Holiness must be the matter of his Justification 4. That though our Faith Repentance and Holiness be no universal absolute Righteousness yet they are that on which the judiciary Scrutiny must pass and which will be the question of the great day on which our Life or Death will depend as on the Condition or moral Qualification of the Receiver 5. That in this sence all men shall be judged by Justification or Condemnation according to their Works or what they have done that is as they have performed or not performed the Conditions of that Law of Grace which they were under as aforesaid 6. That therefore they that will be justified at last must trust in Christ that redeemed them and be careful to perform the Conditions of his Law of Grace and both must concurr 7. That that which is the Righteousness which must justifie us in Judgment is the same that must now constitute us just 8. That when our Right to Salvation is the thing in question to be judged that which justifieth our Right to Salvation justifieth the Person as to that Right and so far the same thing is the Condition of our Right to Salvation and to our Justification 9. And if any with Augustine will mean by Iustification God 's making us such
making us inherently righteous or performers of the Condition of the Covenant of Grace hath another form The Act of esteeming us righteous hath another The Act of our Advocate defending our righteousness another The Act of Justifying-evidence and Witness another The Act of sentencing us righteous another And the Act of executive Justification or rewarding and saving us as righteous another And accordingly Iustification passively taken hath as many forms as it signifieth various Effects To be in a state of conditional Iustification to be Performers of the Condition of the Law of Grace to have jus impunitatis right to Impunity that is to be pardoned and to have jus Doni Praemii regni coelestis a right to Glory as a gift and as a reward in several respects are all Effects of God's foresaid Acts and every one hath its proper Being and Form And all this as given us for the Merits of Christ's righteousness concur to make up our whole Iustification as constitutive and virtual in Law and each part hath its proper form And then Apologetick Judiciary or Sentential and Executive Justification are also various Species which have their Forms § 36. Obj. Unius rei unica est forma Justification is one thing and therefore hath but one form Ans. 1. One Iustification is but one thing but there are divers things so called even in Scripture When Christ saith By thy words thou shalt be justified Mat. 12. and Paul saith that we are justified by the â—pirit of God 1 Cor. 6. 10. and Iohn saith He that is just let him be justified still Rev. 22. they have not all the same Sence 2. One thing may have one form and yet it s many parts have many forms Our righteousness taken for the whole of it is one whole whose form is signified by that general Name of our total righteousness and yet its parts are all those before-mentioned which yet each severally are commonly called righteousness But of these things before § 37. Either then let us meddle as little as may be with arbitrary Logical Notions in Theology or let us handle them exactly or else unskilful using them in weighty matters becomes a vain entangling of poor Souls and a childish way of troubling the Church of God The truth is the forms of such Acts are best known by their bare Names if they be rightly named and by the Name many understand what they are where neither they nor their Teachers can find other words by which to give you a fair Definition of them which maketh me think of some of our over-wise and over-righteous Catechizers of the ignorant who use to turn plain honest persons from the Sacrament of Communion if they cannot tell them what God is what Holiness is what Faith Repentance Sanctification Iustification Adoption is by some congruous Description when yet a wise Examination might shew that by the Name they understand the Matter it self though not by distinct Notions and when the Catechizer too often would be found shamefully to seek if he were put to answer his own Questions by a true Definition as I have tried § 38. To conclude there are many sharp Volumes written of late which reproach Imputed Righteousness to which they seem induced by some mens misexplication of it and by such unwarrantable words as some Independents use of it in their Savoy-Confession And they dream that we deny all necessity of Personal fulfilling the Conditions of the Law of Grace as a means of our Justification and Salvation But they utterly wrong the generality of Divines of my acquaintance and notice And I must tell them for the Independents that they did not subscribe or vote that Confession as some present assure me but only a very few men brought it in and read it and none spake against it And some worthy persons of that Assembly upon conference assure me That how ill soever it be worded they themselves did mean it as I and other Protestants do and did disclaim the obvious ill sence And I add Had these Contenders but taken up with the distinction of Imputation which Mr. Bradshaw giveth in the Preface to his reconciling Tractate of Iustification it might have quieted them by informing them in what sence Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us and in what not And they would have seen that which is not ours as Proprietaries of the thing it self in se may be called ours because the Effects are ours and it was given to God for the meriting of those Effects for us CHAP. XXIII How Faith justifieth and how it is imputed to us for Righteousness § 1. ABout this also there are many needless notional Controversies among men that are agreed in the matter it self As whether Faith justifie as it receiveth Christ in all his mediatorial Office as Prophet Priest and King Or only as in his Priestly Office And whether as it receiveth him in all the parts of that Office or which Or as it receiveth his Righteousness only Whether Faith justifie us as an Instrument only Or as a Condition Or as meritorious Whether it justifie us by being it self imputed to us for Righteousness or it be Christ's righteousness only that is so imputed Whether Faith alone justifie us or also Repentance Desire Hope or any other acts of the Soul towards Christ Whether only Faith in Christ justifie and not Faith in God the Father or belief of the Promise or of Heaven c. Of all which briefly § 2. I. The word Receiving Christ Grace c. hath two different sences necessarily to be distinguished 1. Physical Receiving is the strict sence as pati and recipere are all one Which is 1. To receive the meer Act of the Agent terminatively or 2. To receive a further effect of that Act. 2. Moral receiving is nothing but accepting of an offered thing by consent of Will And so to receive supposeth an offer and is nothing but Consent to it § 3. To receive Grace in the strict physical sence is to be made gracious or to be the Patients of the Operation of Grace if it be real But to receive relative Grace physically is nothing but to be made so related So to receive Sanctification is to be sanctified and to receive Justification or Pardon is nothing but to be justified or pardoned § 4. But how is Christ himself physically received That were easily known if you knew how he is physically given But for a Gift of Christ's person by physical attingency we can say nothing of it by Scripture-warrant that I know of It is no matter for our Disputes But in two sences Christ is said to be given to us 1. In Relation as a King to his Subjects or a Husband to his Wife And so we physically receive those Relations as aforesaid That is we are made related to him 2. In the real Communication of the Spirit of Christ to us And so we physically receive the Spirit in its operations that is He worketh them on us
Flesh and the Devil and take God and Glory for thy all § 18. Christ's own righteousness being not essentially given to us in it self but given for us and to us in the Effects to say That the receiving of that which is not given is the only justifying act of Faith is to say That we are not justified by Faith at all But if they mean the Effects of Christ's Righteousness then it is but to say We are justified by no act of Faith but by consenting to be justified by Christ's Merits Which is not true § 19. They contradict themselves that make Christ's Priestly Office the only Object of Justifying Faith and yet make his whole Righteousness and Merit that Object For who knoweth not that all Christ's Righteousness was not performed by him only as Priest § 20. And Christ's Priesthood hath many other actions belonging to it besides his Merits offered for us Even his present Intercession Which must be excluded if Christ's Righteousness here as under the Law were the only Object of this Faith § 21. II. The second Question I had never troubled the World about so much as I have done had I not found too many Protestants scandalize the Papists by laying too much on the Nation of Instrumentality ill explained But the judicious are here all in sence of the same mind § 22. For by an Instrument they mean not 1. an instrumental efficient Cause of Justification 2. Nor of making Christ's Righteousness ours For we give it not to our selves 3. But they take the word Instrument mechanically or less accurately and tell us that they mean a receiving Instrument as a Boy catcheth a Ball in his Hat But so as that it is a moral Instrument that is both materially a moral act and the Instrument of a moral not physical reception § 23. But when they have all done they do but entangle and trouble themselves and others with an unapt Logical notion For as it is so easie to confute the gross Conceit That Faith is an instrumental efficient Cause either God's or Man's of our Justification which I have done so oft that I will here pretermit it so this Notion of a Passive Instrument is unapt because 1. The Act of Assent is essential to this justifying Faith as well as Acceptance and so is Trust which yet are no more Instrumental in reception than many other Acts even Love Desire Hope 2. Because our Consent to other things as well as to be justified and our Faith in God the Father are as truly the Condition of our Iustification as our Consent to be justified 3. And because this Metaphorical use of the Word Instrument leadeth people to dream of proper Instrumentality and misleadeth them from the apter Notions The Covenant-Donation is the justifying Instrument § 24. I conclude therefore summarily 1. Faith as Faith in the Father Son and Holy Ghost in the Sence of the Baptismal Covenant is the apt Matter to be the Condition of our Justification by the Gift of that Covenant 2. If Justification be taken for making us just Performers of the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace so Faith justifieth us 1. Constitutively initially as it is the beginning of that Righteousness it self 2. And by a moral efficiency as it is a cause of Love and Obedience 3. If Justification be taken for the Gift or right to Impunity and Life in and with Christ so Faith is the Condition of it and no otherwise justifieth 4. But if any will call this by the name of a Submerit with the Ancients meaning but that it meriteth Justification as a Child meriteth a piece of Gold from his Father by putting off his Hat and saying I thank you and humbly taking it instead of scornful or neglectful refusing it I will not quarrel with any such § 25. But remember that as wise men seldom make any thing a Condition of a gift which hath no worth in it to please them so God saw and put such a worth or aptitude in Faith or else he had not so much as commanded it § 26. But yet a Condition simply as such signifieth neither Merit nor Causality at all but only the terms on which the gift shall be suspended till they be performed And so the performance of a Condition as such is no efficien 〈…〉 of the gift but a removing of the suspending impediment § 27. Therefore Dr. Twisse oft calleth Faith Causam dispositivam justificationis which belongeth not to the efficient but material or recipient Cause and the true Legal Notion of its next Interest in our Justification is its being Conditio praestita and the true Logical Notion is to be Dispositio moralis materiae sive subjecti recipientis call it Causam vel Conditionem dispositivam as you please And I think this Question needs no more § 28. III. As to the third Question the truth is obvious That Christ's righteousness is imputed and yet Faith is imputed to us for righteousness in several Sences that is each is reputed to be to us what indeed it is Two things make up the Sence of Faith's being imputed to us for righteousness 1. Faith is really the Condition of the Covenant of Grace which whoso performeth he is righteous against the Charge of Non-performance of that Condition and it is reputed our subordinate Evangelical personal righteousness 2. And supposing Christ's Merits and our Redemption by him this Gospel-righteousness is all that is required of us on our parts instead of all that perfect Obedience which the Law of Innocency required So that our Faith taken in the Scripture-sence is our real righteousness related to the Condition of the New Covenant and instead of a more perfect righteousness of Innocency forasmuch as after Christ's Redemption is required to be performed by our selves § 29. This no Christians that are sober can deny as to the thing And as to the Name it is plain to the impartial that will see that Paul Rom. 4. 22 23 24. and Iam. 2. 23. by Faith means Faith it self indeed and not only Christ the Object of Faith as some affirm with too great Scandal read over the Texts and try what Sence it will be if you put Christ instead of Faith § 30. Obj. But it is not Faith in and of it self that 's meant but as connoting the Object Ans. The latter clause is true it is Faith as connoting the Object Christ But the former is a contradiction For Faith it self essentially connoteth the Object If you speak not of Faith in genere for it is not any kind of Faith that is our righteousness but of the Christian or New Covenant Faith in specie who knoweth not that the Object specifieth it And therefore if it be Christian faith as connoting the Object it is Christian faith as Christian faith § 31. But will any sober Christian deny that 〈…〉 ur righteousness in one sence and Faith 〈…〉 inate 〈…〉 in another and that both are accord 〈…〉 ed to us
Salvation it self and the Image and Glory of God upon us § 63. V. About the next Question I may yet be shorter How far any Works of ours may be trusted in I think all agree 1. That nothing of ours or any Creature should be trusted to for any thing proper to God or proper to Christ or any thing that belongeth not truly to it self He that ascribeth any thing to our Faith Love or Obedience which is proper to Christ's Merits or God's Mercy and so trusteth them doth greatly sin and he that trusteth them for more than God hath assigned to them to do § 64. 2. That we must take heed of scandaous Language and therefore must not talk of trusting on any act of our own when it is like to be understood as put in Competition with God or with Christ's Merits as if the Question were Whether we must trust God or our selves Christ's Righteousness or our own For our own is not in the least measure to be trusted for that which belongeth only to Christ's Righteousness to be or do § 65. 3. That yet it is a great Duty to trust every means of Salvation appointed by God in its own place and for its own part alone even to preaching Sacraments Afflictions c. And accordingly to trust our own Faith Love Prayer Obedience so far as they are Means and have God's Promise and no further which is no more than to trust in God that he will bless such means He that trusteth his Sword doth not trust it to fight of it self without his Hand When God hath promised Mercy upon Prayer and to the Obedient or Penitent for a man to think that God will yet do no more for us if we repent pray and obey than if we do not is to be Unbelievers and say rebelliously It is in vain to serve the Lord. He is so far to trust to Faith Repentance praying hearing meditating diligence as to trust that God will bless them and reward them and look for more from him when we use means than when we do not CHAP. XXVI Of Confirmation Perseverance and Danger of falling away § 1. I Shall reduce all that needs to be said on this point to these following controverted Questions 1. Whether all Grace procured and given by Christ be such as is never lost 2. Whether that degree of Grace be ever lost which giveth the posse credere without the act of Faith commonly called sufficient Grace in Adult or Infants 3. Whether any lose actual true justifying Faith 4. Whether any lose true Holiness or love of God in the Habit 5. Whether any degree of this be ever lost or all special Grace have such Confirmation as the Angels have 6. Whether if Holiness be never lost it be possible to lose it and be in danger 7. Whether there be a state of confirmed Persons besides the meerly sanctified that from the degree or kind of their grace never fall away 8. Or whether Perseverance depend on meer Election and God's Will which secureth only some of the justified 9. Whether all or most or many Christians are themselves sure to persevere 10. Whether Certainty of perseverance be fit for all the justified 11. Whether it be unfit for all and a more unsafe Condition than doubting 12. Whether the Comfort of most Christians lie upon the Doctrine of such Certainty 13. Whether the Doctrine of Eventual Apostacy infer any mutability in God 14. Why God hath left this point so dark 15. What was the Judgment of the ancient Churches after the Apostles 16. Whether it be an Article of such evidence and weight as to be put into our Church-Confessions and we should force men to subscribe to it or make it necessary to Ministration Communion or Christian Love and Concord § 2. Q. I. Whether all Christ's Grace given us be such as is never lost Ans. No except Iansenius and his Followers I know of no Christians that ever affirm it and he doth it on this false supposition That the common Grace which worketh only preparatorily by fear is not the Grace of Christ but a grace of other Providence and only Love is the grace of Christ. But it is injurious to Christ who is the Lord and Light and Saviour of the World and God's Administrator-general into whose Hands all Things and Power is given to say That since the Fall there is any Grace in the World that is not his Grace and that our preparatory grace and all that 's common is aliunde some other way He that readeth Ioh. 15. Matth. 13. Heb. 6 and 10. may see the contrary § 3. Q II. Whether sufficient grace to believe which giveth the meer power of believing to Infants or Adult be ever lost Ans. These Questions suppose that there are these several sorts of Graces disputed of by Divines 1. Common grace 2. Power to believe and repent 3. Actual Faith and Repentance given by that called special Vocation 4. The Habit of love and all grace called Sanctification to pass by Relative grace as Justification c. 5. Confirmation of these Habits And we now speak only of the second And the very Being of that Grace is controverted Whether God ever give besides the natural Power a moral Power to believe to any that never do believe And 1. it is certain by Adam's instance that he gave him a power to have perfectly obeyed when he did not 2. And therefore no man can prove that now he giveth no man a moral Power to believe that doth not 3. But it seemeth most probable that he doth because his Government and Man's Nature are not tota specie changed 4. And it is certain that still all men have power to do more good than they do 5. And even the Dominicans grant this Sufficiency of grace 6. But yet for my part I am not certain of it § 4. But if there be such a power given which never acteth Faith which I think most probable it is either in the Adult or Infants if in the Adult no doubt it 's lost for they that will not believe to the last retain not still the moral power in their Rebellion § 5. But in the Case of Infants I think those of them that die before the use of reason lose it not nor any of the Elect that live to full Age But as to others after long doubt How far Infant-Grace is loseable this seemeth now the most probable solution to me § 6. Viz. There is a Grace that reacheth but to a moral Power to repent and believe before men have the Act or proper Habit Such Grace to persevere did put Adam in a present state of Life or acceptation with God this Grace Adam lost Accordingly such grace that containeth but this mâ—â—al power in an Infant 's Disposition with relative grace of Pardon is sufficient to provâ— his right to Salvation if he so die because he is not bound to the Act nor capable of it and even the Adult
Conclusion helped by Grace whereof the major only is de fide He that believeth is justified but not the Minor I believe Therefore we usually call it a fruit of Faith § 42. Some incautelous Divines in the heat of Dispute do indeed say That it is de fide divina or a Divine Word that I am a true Believer And Chamier too unhappily goeth about to prove it by saying That it is the Word of the Spirit in us which is the Word of God As if the Spirit spake in us new Articles of Faith or a new Word to be believed whose work in those that are not inspired Prophets is but 1. to cause us to believe that Word already given 2. To be a witnessing Evidence that we are God's Children by making us holy as he is holy as similitude witnesseth a Child to be his Fathers 3. And to help us to discern that Holiness or Evidence and to exercise it and to gather Comfort from such discerning it and exercise § 43. We now commonly disown all such Assertions I meet with no sober Divine that owneth them because we grant that Conclusio semper sequitur partem debiliorem But yet we find that those few that call it de fide do most of them mean no more but that it 's partly de fide because the Major Proposition is so and so they differ but about a Logical Notion § 44. Some have said indeed beyond-Sea That a man cannot believe and not know it but we know thousands may believe and yet doubt whether it be a sincere and saving sort of Faith But I have written so many Books of these matters that I here add no more CHAP. XXI Of the nature of Righteousness Iustification and Pardon § 1. THE Controversies about Justification have made a great noise but I think that those de re are few in comparison of those de nomine even among all sorts of Christians and the confounding them by unskilful Heads who have made the ignorant believe that those which are but de nomine are de re hath kindled foolish Wrath and quenched Christian Love and taken up poor Souls with a deceitful Zeal who have thought that they were contending for great and necessary Truths when it was but for Logical Notions Names and Modes of Expression over-commended to them by their several Teachers § 2. The Words Iustice Righteousness and Iustification are very ambiguous used in many sences in the Scriptures and in the Writings of Divines and in the common use of men which I have opened in so many Books and so largely as shall here excuse my breviâ—y The Sences which we are now most concerned to take notice of are these following § 3. Righteousness is considered materially or formally Materially it is 1. immediately 1. A righteous Action 2. A righteous Disposition or Habit 2. And thence a righteous Person § 4. Righteousness materially is 1. in some or other particular Action 2. Or in the main bent of Heart and Life 3. Or in Perfection The first denominateth the Person Righteous in hoc or secundum quid The second denominateth him a sincerely Righteous Man The third a perfectly Righteous Man § 5. In the notion of the material Cause is included also the Comparative or Relative State and Proportion of Actions When the Action is duly qualified and modified in its physical Nature and Circumstances it is materially just § 6. The form enquired of is Quid morale And it is the Relation of the Action and Habit and Person as congruous to the justitia mensurans or the Rule of Righteousness The Rule or Law first maketh jus vel debitum and saith This shall be your Duty and your Neighbour's Due and declareth God's Due And the jus being constituted by the Law natural or positive that which agreeth to it is jâ—stum So that Righteousness formally is a moral Relation resulting from the physical mode and relation of Actions and Habits as compared with the Law or Rule A moral Relation founded in a physical Congruity § 7. Righteousness is both materially and formally distinguishable as towards God or Man Materially as it is God or Man that we deal â—ustly or injuriously by Formally as it is God himself or Men ruling under him who give us Laws and make the debitum vel jus or dispose of Propriety § 8. Righteousness towards God being Relative to his Laws is to be distinguished according to the several Laws that men are under and according to the several parts of the Law which give the word divers Sences § 9. 1. Righteousness as related to the Precept as such is nothing but Obedience whether partial sincere or perfect He that doth righteousness is righteous § 10. 2. Righteousness related to a meer Condition of Pardon or Salvation c. is the performance of that Condition which may be the Causa judicanda § 11. 3. Righteousness as related to the premiant or donative part of the Law or Promise is our jus ad praemium our Right to that Reward or Gift § 12. 4. Righteousness as relative to the penal part is our jus ad impunitatem or when punishment is not due to us according to that Law § 13. 1. Righteousness as related to the Precept of the Law of Innocency is materially perfect personal continued Obedience to our Creator § 14. 2. Righteousness as related to the Condition of that Law is the same because nothing but the said perfect Obedience is there made the Condition of Life § 15. 3. Righteousness related to the rewarding part of that Law is right to that Life which is there promised that is to God's Love and Felicity § 16. 4. Righteousness related to the Penalty of that Law is a Right to Impunity as to the Death which it threatneth to Sinners § 17. 1. Righteousness as related to the meer preceptive part of the Law of Grace is also perfect Obedience for the future not Innocency as to the time past for even Christ maketh perfect Obedience our Duty though he pardon sin § 18. 2. Righteousness as related to the Condition of the Law of Grace is sincere Faith and Repentance as the Condition of our first Right to the present Gifts of the Covenant and also sincere Love and Obedience to the end as the Condition of our final Iustification and Glory § 19. 3. Righteousness as related to the Reward of the Law of Grace is our Right to our Relation to the Father Son and Holy Ghost and all the Gifts of the Covenant Christ Grace and Glory § 20. 4. Righteousness as related to the penal part of the Law of Grace is our Right to Impunity as to the Punishment threatned specially by that Law § 21. The meritorious Cause of both these last our Right to Impunity and to Life is the Righteousness of Christ for the sake of which the Condonation and Donations of the Covenant of Grace are given us § 22. This Righteousness of Christ is his fulfilling the Conditions
as the Iudge will justifie by Sentence and Execution then our Conversion is part of that Justification 10. That Scripture sometimes taketh Justification in that sence and most frequently by Righteousness meaneth that which consisteth in our Acts and Habits In all this there is no place for Controversie or Disagreement § 51. They that say That we must have inherent and performed Righteousness but that no man is at all justified by it must take justifying in some particular limitted sence which therefore they should explain by distinction or else they speak gross contradiction For it is no Righteousness if it constitute not the owner righteous so far or in that point nor yet if the owner may not be justified by it in Iudgment against the accusation of being in that point or so far unrighteous If he that doth Righteousness is righteous that Righteousness will materially justifie him against the false accusation of the contrary § 52. Yea while they make Faith Repentance and Holiness but Signs and Evidences of our right to Life-eternal they thereby allow it some place in Justification For Evidence hath its place in Judgment And they are moral Evidences and not physical only § 53. If men understood how atheological and perilous it is to conceit that either Faith or any thing of ours no though we were innocent is any proper efficient Cause of God's own internal acts in our Justification and would understand that all can be no more than dispositio receptiva which Dr. Twisse calls causa dispositiva a meer receptive Aptitude which is but the Qualification causae materialis that is of the Subject to be justified it would presently lead them out of their vain Contention about Faith and Gospel-Obedience herein and shew them how each in several respects and instances qualifie Man for the beginning or continuance of Justification or for Right to Glory § 54. It seemeth strange to some to find the whole Old Testament and all Christ's Sermons and all the other Apostles inculcating inherent and performed Righteousness as that which Men must be judged about to Life or Death and yet to find Paul so oft pleading against Justification by Works But if we will take the Scripture together and not by incoherent scraps the reconciliation is evident Man is now sinful and condemned by the first Law and is now under a Law of Grace that freely giveth Pardon and Life through a Redeemer to those that believingly accept the Gift according to its nature and consent by Repentance to turn to God and live a holy life in sincerity Now God doth through all the Scripture tell us That no one shall pass with God for a just man or be saved that will not do this but shall be condemned further for refusing it And thus he that doth Righteousness is righteous and all shall be judged according to their works thus required by the Law of Grace To deny this is to deny the scope of the whole Scripture and the Government of God But Paul disputed against those that taught that the Gentiles must be proselyted and keep the Law of Moses or else they could not be accounted just men nor be saved And he proveth that the Gentiles being under the Law of Grace may pass with God for just men and be saved if they Believingly accept the Gift of Grace according to its nature and consent by Repentance to turn to God and live a holy life in sincerity though they keep not the Jewish Law Yea further that though the Jewish Fathers were obliged to keep that Law it was as it belonged to the Covenant of Grace and of Faith and that before that Law was given Abraham and others were just and saved by Faith according to the universal Law of Grace and that the Task of Works according to the Mosaical Law will of it self make no man just or savable and consequently no other Task of Works which would make the Reward to be not of Grace but of Debt and is opposed to or separated from Redemption and the free condonation and donation of the Covenant of Grace This is the plain drift of Paul § 55. Works of Evangelical gratitude love and obedience according to the Law of Grace subordinate to and supposing Redemption and the free gift of Pardon and Life to penitent believing Accepters are those that Christ and Iames and all the Scripture make necessary to Salvation and our Consent and Covenant so to obey is necessary to our first or initial Iustification and our actual Obedience to the Continuance and Confirmation of it But a Task of Works either of Moses's Law or any other set against Redemption and free Grace or not as aforesaid duly subordinate to them is disclaimed by Paul and all Christians as that which can constitute no man just in God's account nor such a one as hath right to Salvation § 56. I verily think that were their verbal and notional differences discussed and men understood themselves and one another it will prove that this aforesaid is the true meaning of almost all Christians and that they agree in this sence while they mischievously contend about ill or unexplained words § 57. What I have said of Justification is mostly true of Pardon of Sin Pardon is threefold 1. Constitutive which is God's giving us a Right to Impunity This is God's act by the pardoning Covenant or Law of Grace 2. By Sentence judging us so pardoned 3. Executive taking off or not inflicting Punishment deserved § 58. God's non punire and nolle punire not-punishing and his will not to punish are true pardon when the Sinner and Sin and Guilt are pre-existent But they are no pardon before because not capable of such a relation and denomination for want of a real terminus Therefore God's eternal will to pardon or his not punishing man from Eternity before Man was Man or sinful must have no such name which afterward it may have without any change in God but in man only § 59. Some worthy men say that Pardon is not Justification nor to be pardoned is to be righteous and that Righteousness is never taken in Scripture for Pardon but many score or hundred times for our performance of our Duty according to the Law of Grace Therefore they would have Righteousness and Pardon still distinguished § 60. But I have plainly before proved that Righteousness hath many parts and the word many sences and though Pardon be not that Righteousness which consisteth in a Conformity to the Precept and so is not our universal Righteousness yet Pardon is passive that Righteousness which consisteth in our right to Impunity both as to the punishment of Loss and Sence And Pardon with Adoption or the Gift of Life is that Righteousness which consisteth in our right to Life eternal § 61. 1. All mens sins are pardoned potentially and conditionally in the Law of Grace 2. No mens sins are pardoned actually as to a right of Impunity till they are penitent
Believers or consent to the Covenant of Grace if at age 3. These penitent Believers sins are pardoned virtually before they are committed supposing them but Sins of Insirmity but this is properly no Pardon nor so to be called because it is but the position of those things which will cause Pardon hereafter To be only virtual is not to exist but to be in causis But it is too grosly inferred hence by some That it is not God then that actually justifieth but Man that performeth the Condition as if the Condition which is but a suspension of the Donation and the performance a removal of the suspending Cause were the donative Efficient and so the Receiver were the Giver As if he that opened the window were the Sun or efficient Cause of the Light or he that lets off a Crossbow by removing the Stop were the spring that effecteth the motion of the Arrow § 62. Neither Pardon nor Justification are perfect before death For there are some correcting Punishments to be yet born some Sins not fully destroyed some Grace yet wanting more Sins to be forgiven more Conditions thereof to be performed The final and executive Pardon and Justification are only perfect CHAP. XXII Of the Imputation of Righteousness § 1. THE great Contentions that have been about this Point tell us how needfull it is to distinguish between real and verbal Controversies The opening of the Doctrine of Redemption before Chap. XI hath done most that is needful to the solution of this Case we are commonly agreed in these following Points § 2. 1. That no man hath a Righteousness of his own performance by which he could be justified were he to be judged by the Law of Innocency that is all are Sinners and deserve everlasting Death § 3. 2. That Jesus the Mediator undertook to fulfil all the Law which God the Father gave him even the Law of Nature the Law of Moses and that which was proper to himself that thereby God's Wisdom Goodness Truth Justice and Mercy might be glorified and the ends of God's Government be better attained than by the Destruction of the sinful World and all this he performed in our Nature and suffered for us in our stead and was the second Adam or Root to Believers § 4. 3. That for this as the meritorious Cause God hath given him power over all Flesh that he might give eternal Life to as many as are drawn to him by the Father and given him Joh. 17. 2. He is Lord of all and all power in Heaven and Earth is given him Matth. 28. 19. and he is made Head over all things to the Church Eph. 1. 22 23. Rom. 14. 9 And for these his Merits a Covenant or Law of Grace is made to sinful Man by which all his sins are freely pardoned and Right to Impunity and Life is freely given him if he will accept it and penitently turn to God § 5. 4. Whenever a man is pardoned and justified or hath Right to Life this Law of Grace doth it as God's donative Instrument And whoever is so pardoned and justified it is for and by these Merits of Christ's Righteousness § 6. 5. But Christ doth initially pardon and justifie none by this Covenant but penitent Believers and therefore hath made it our Duty to repent and believe that we may be forgiven and have right to life as the Condition without which his donative and condonative Act shall be suspended § 7. 6. God never judgeth falsely but knoweth all things to be what they are And therefore he reputeth Christ's meritorious Righteousness and Sacrifice to be the meritorious Cause of all mens Justification who are justified and of the conditional Pardon of all the World 2 Cor. 5. 18 19 20. and as sufficient and effectual to the assigned ends as our own personal righteousness or suffering would have been and more though it be not so ours as that of our own performance would have been nor so immediately give us our Right to Impunity and Life but mediately by the Covenant § 8. 7. And as God reputeth Christ's Righteousness to be the prime meritorious Cause for which we are justified by the Law of Grace as afore-said so he truly reputeth our own Faith and Repentance or Covenant-consent to be our moral Qualification for the gift and our Holiness and Perseverance to be our moral Qualification for final Iustification and Glory which Qualification being the matter of the Command of the Law of Grace and the Condition of its Promise is so far our righteousness indeed and oft so called in the Scripture as is aforesaid § 9. 8. Therefore God may in this Sence be truly said both to impute righteousness to us and to impute Christ's righteousness to us and to impute our Faith for righteousness to us in several respects § 10. Thus much being commonly agreed on should quiet the Minds of Divines that are not wise and righteous overmuch and it beseemeth us not to make our arbitrary Words and Notions about the Doctrine of our Peace with God to be Engines to break the Church's Peace seeing Angels preached to us this great Truth That Christ came into the World for GLORY to God in the highest and for PEACE on Earth and for GOOD-WILL or LOVE from God to Man or mutual complaâ—ency and his Servants should not turn his Gospel into matter of strife § 11. That which we are yet disagreed about is the Names and Notions following As 1. What is meant by the Phrase of Imputing in several Texts of Scripture as Rom. 4. 11. That righteousness might be imputed or reckoned to them also Ans. The words seem to me to have no difficulty but what men by wrangling put into them To have righteousness impuâ—ed to them is to be reputed judged or accounted as righteous Men and so used the cause being not in the Phrasâ— it self but fore-described § 12. So what is meant Rom. 4. 6. by imputing righteousness without works Ans. Plainly reputing or judging a man righteous without the works which Paul there meaneth § 13. So what is meant by Not imputing sin Psal. 32. 2. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Rom. 5. 13. Lev. 7. 18. 1 Sam. 22. 15. 2 Sam. 19. 19. Rom. 4. 8 Ans. Not-judging a man as a Sinner guilty of punishment not charging his sin upon him in Judgment which is as 2 Sam. 19. 19. c. because he is not truly guilty or as Rom. 4. 8. c. because he is forgiven § 14. 2. What is meant by imputing our Faith to us for righteousness But of that more purposely anon § 15. 3. Whether imputing Christ's righteousness to us be a Scripture-phrase Ans. Not that I can find § 16. 4. Whether it be a fit or lawful Phrase and whether in so great matters departing from Scripture-phrase and pretending it necessary so to do be not adding to God's Word or the cause of Corruptions and Divisions in the Church and an intimation that we can speak better than the
Holy Ghost Ans. God hath not tied us to use only Scripture-words or Phrases and use may make them convenient and needful for some times and places which else are less significant or congruous And in this case I see not but that the Phrase is lawful well explained But if any will pretend their own Phrases to be more necessary than they are and will calumniate those as not Orthodox who will not use them or subscribe to them I cannot justifie such from the guilt of Presumption and Injury to the Church the Truth and Christ and the Love of Brethren § 17. 5. Whether they that affirm That Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us or those that deny it are to be accounted Orthodox Ans. Perhaps both if they both hold the same sound Doctrine under various Phrases And perhaps neither if by their various Phrases each mean something that is unsound § 18. They heinously err who deny Christ's Righteousness to be so far imputed to us as to be reputed the meritorious Cause of our Pardon and Right to Life or our Justification performed by our Mediator as the Sponsor of the New Covenant for our sakes and his Sufferings in our stead as is afore-expressed § 19. And they heinously err and subvert the Gospel who say that Christ's Righteousness is so imputed to us as that God reputeth or judgeth Christ to have been perfectly holy and righteous or obedient and to have suffered though not in the Natural yet in the Legal or Civil Person of the Sinner or Believer as their strict and proper Representer and reputeth us to have been perfectly holy righteous or obedient in Christ as our Representer and so to have our selves fulfilled all righteousness in and by him and in him to have satisfied Justice and meriâ—ed Eternal Life and Christ's Righteousness to be ours in the same sence of Propriety as it was his own For his Divine Righteousness is the Essence of God and his Humane his Habits Acts and Relations which are the Accidents of his own Person only as the Subject and cannot be in another as is after shewed § 20. Though most of us now leave this Doctrine to the Antinomians or Libertines yet so many Protestants formerly have seemed to own it by their unmeet Phrases in extreme opposition to the Papists or at least to come too near it as hath greatly scandalized and hardened their Adversaries and injured the Reformed Churches § 21. The Person of our Mediator was neither in the Sence of the Law or in God's account properly the person of the Sinner Christ and we are distinct persons § 22. Had we been perfectly holy innocent and obedient in Christ it would follow 1. That we are justified by the Law of Innocency as having perfectly done all that it commanded us which is not true It is by the pardoning Law of Grace that we are justified § 23. 2. That we have no need of Pardon nor of Christ's Sufferings for our Pardon nor of Prayer for Pardon nor any means for it for he needeth no pardon that is perfectly innocent § 24. 3. Therefore they assert Contradictions when they say that we both perfectly obeyed by and in Christ and yet suffered or satisfied in or by him for our Disobedience § 25. 4. It would follow that all penalties even corrective laid on us by God are injuries or no penalties because we are innocent § 26. 5. And that God's denying us any helps of his Spirit and permitting the remnant of our Sin yet unhealed and the weakness of our Graces are an injurious denying us our Right § 27. 6. It would follow that we have present Right to the present possession of the whole Reward both Grace and Glory and that our delay is our wrong because he that is supposed to have done all that the Law maketh his Duty from his Birth till his Death hath right to the Reward by the Law or Covenant § 28. 7. And it would follow That no Duty could be required of us as a Condition of any Benefit purchased by Christ nor any sin charged on us so far as to be indeed our sin because we are reputed perfectly holy and innocent § 29. Many other such Consequents I pass by and other Arguments against this Opinion and the Confutation of the contrary because I have done it all elsewhere especially in a peculiar Discourse on this Subject and in my Disputations of Justification § 30. Christ's own Righteousness habitual or actual is not ours as it is his in strict sence in it self as if we were the Proprietors the Subjects of his Habits or the Agents of his Acts For it is impossible that the Accidents of several Subjects should be the same § 31. And the form of Christ's Righteousness is therefore no more ours than the Matter For Righteousness in Christ and Righteousness in each Believer are distinct Righteousnesses § 32. Many Divines have pleaded That Christ's Righteousness is the form of ours and others that it is the Matter and others that it is the meritorious Cause and have too much troubled the Church with Logical Notions The meritorious Cause it is undoubtedly and they that say That it cannot then be the material Cause must consider that we mean that it is the Matter of the meritorious Cause And had we been innocent our selves would not our Innocency have been both the Matter of our righteousness or Merit and the meritorious Cause of our right to Life § 33. But this supposeth that the Matter of the Gospel subordinate righteousness which consisteth in that Repentance Faith and Holiness which is required in us to our right to life is to be found in our selves and not in Christ for us § 34. But the form of Christ's righteousness cannot be the form of ours as is aforesaid but it is the form of that which is the meritorious Cause of ours But what need have we of thâ—se Disputes § 35. The Not imputing of sin is called also by some the Form of Iustification and by others that and the Imputation of righteousness conjunct and by others that and God's accepting us as righteous others call these the Matter of Iustification and thus mens Logick ill-managed troubleth the Hearers which I would not mention had it not been necessary to disintangle them § 36. They that will dispute what is the form of Iustification must first confess the Ambiguity of the Word and tell us in which Sence they take it There are so many things that are truly the form of Iustification taken in many Sences that without such distinguishing to dispute of the form of Iustification is worse than to say nothing Iustification taken actively as the Act of the Iustifyer hath one form Iustification passively taken for the state of the justified hath another form And â—â—ch of these are subdivided into many Acts and many Effects which have each their form The Act of pardoning sin is one thing and therefore hath one form The Act of
This is the first sence of Receiving § 4. But morally to receive Grace or Christ is but to consent that Grace and Christ be ours As a Subject a Servant a Wife consent to their Relation and this is our Faith and not the former § 5. Where note That moral Receiving or Consent is but a Means of physical Receiving or Having and a means which maketh not the thing ours any otherwise than as the Will of the Giver doth appoint and give it its Power thereunto This moral receiving or accepting is but dispositio recipientis as to having or physical reception as there must be in all things dispositio materiae ad formam recipiendam He that will not accept the Gift is accounted by the Giver morally unfit for it § 6. But this is not spoken of every Gift but of such as are offered by the Giver on the Condition of thankful acceptance For God giveth many things absolutely as Christ was given to be Man's Redeemer and Christ gave his Covenant Gospel and Apostles and sendeth the word to many that before have it not and giveth the first Grace which causeth mens acceptance of the other and all this not on the Condition of their acceptance But the Gifts bestowed by the Baptismal Covenant of Grace are all given on Condition of our moral receiving or acceptance § 7. This necessary distinction of receiving being premised I answer the question as followeth 1. To be justified is to be the physical Receiver of Goa's justifying act and nothing else in proper sence § 8. 2. No man physically receiveth Christ's Person as far as we can prove or understand nor Christ's own Righteousness in it self but we physically receive our relation to Christ and the Spirits operations and our Right to Impunity and Life § 9. 3. We at once sensu physico receive our relation to Christ as our Head that is our redeeming Owner Ruler and Saviour or Prophet as Priest and King and not to one first and to another after § 10. 4. In the same instant of time that we receive our relation to Christ as aforesaid we receive with him as his Grace by the same donative act of the Covenant our Right to Impunity and Life even to the complacential special Love of the Father and the Communion of the Holy Ghost and so are justified § 11. 5. Our moral receiving of Christ himself as our Saviour is the antecedent Condition of our foresaid physical reception or participation being appointed by God to that use or office § 12. 6. This moral receiving is that Faith which I before at large described and is sometime called Believing and sometime Trusting because it is in whole a believing fiducial Consent § 13. 7. This Belief and Consent or Acceptance hath essentially for its object all that is essential to Christ as our Saviour his Natures Person his Humiliation Obedience his Sacrifice and Resurrection his Intercession Dominion Judgment together with his Doctrine Promises and Grace besides God himself and the Heavenly Glory And it is not true Faith that hath not all this at least confusedly and in some degree § 14. 8. They that say Faith justifyeth as it receiveth Christ's Righteousness and not as it receiveth Christ himself in relation or at least not as Teacher Lord Intercessor c. do draw men into deceit by a Phrase which intimateth a false supposition or two viz. 1. It is false that Faith justifieth us if they mean efficiently as shall be shewed anon But it is true though some deny it that Faith justifyeth constitutively so far as it is it self our personal inherent Righteousness of which after But this they mean not Nor is Faith in Christ's righteousness any more our inherent Righteousness than Faith in his Promises his Intercession or his Government or in God the Father 2. It is false that Faith as Faith doth justifie either as it is Faith in this or that or the other part of the Office of Christ for then we should be justified as they call it by that â—o credere and then if God had not made Faith the Condition of Justification yet qua talis it would have justified § 15. 9. But the Case is very plain There is considerable in Faith 1. It s Nature and that is only its material Aptitude to its Office 2. The Office it self and that is to be the Condition appointed by God the Donor of our Interest in his Gifts and so of Justification Now it justifieth not efficiently at all unless you take Justification for making us Holy But it is the Condition of Justification and so we are said to be justified by it as by a Condition but it is not a Condition qua fides or as it receiveth Christ's Righteousness but as it is made by God a Condition in his Covenant But Faith as Faith in Christ is the Matter of this Condition Or its Aptitude to its Office is in Faith qua talis And no other had been so fit But then it is not only our belief or acceptance of Christ's Righteousness that is this Aptitude Nothing but entire Faith in its essentials is this matter and aptitude and the formal reason of its place or office about our Justification is its being the Condition appointed thereto in the Instrument of Donation § 16. 10. Were the Question about physical Receiving it were true that a man is justified quatenus as he receiveth Justification and adopted as he receiveth Adoption and sanctified as he receiveth Sanctification and glorified as he receiveth Glorification and not something else as he is rich as he receiveth Riches and honourable as he receiveth Honour c. But moral acceptance of one thing is oft made the Condition of our having another thing and here our acceptance of whole Christ is our undivided Condition-title to him and his Gifts We are no more justified for or by consenting to be justified than for or by consenting to be sanctified and to learn of Christ and obey him § 17. Yea more men use to put that into the Condition of something which the Person fain would have which he is more backward to and would not else do or have A Physician useth not to say Thou shalt be cured if thou consent to be cured but if thou consent to take my Medicines and follow my Prescript A Father will not say to the Child I will give thee this Apple if thou wilt have it but if thou wilt thank me for it and do thy Duty So if we might make a difference in the reason of the thing we should say That God saith not only Thou shalt have Christ's righteousness or justification by it if thou wilt have it no more than Thou shalt be saved from Hell if thou wilt and who would not be forgiven But thou shalt have Christ and Life Pardon Grace and Glory if thou wilt thankfully take them together as they are or wilt be taught and ruled by Christ and renounce the World the