Act they are such ungodly ones as believing Abram was 5. Their Faith doth not merit Pardon nor is it the Righteousness by which they are pardoned that 's Christ's alone 6. Faith or the first Grace is far from making a Sinner sound or whole before Pardon it makes him sound but as being the Condition upon which Christ's Righteousness will be applied to him for healing but without this applied to the Believer for Pardon he would be miserable notwithstanding Faith 7. Faith is necessary to our Interest in Pardon see cap. 12. 8. This Faith is an effect of the Work of the Spirit on the Heart of a Sinner in effectual Vocation and by Vocation there is a change of the Soul and its prior to Pardon Whom he called them he justified Rom. 8. 30. Lest they should be converted and I should heal them Mat. 13. 15. Act. 26. 18. The Sanctification which follows Justification doth not import that there 's no Calling before nor that begun habitual Holiness is not infused in Vocation But I would ask 1. Q. What kind of Faith is that by which we are justified if there be no Work of the Spirit on the Heart Is it a vital Act before Life Is it the Faith of God's Elect when it proceeds from an unregenerate Heart Is it an Act of an enlighten'd Mind before the Mind be enlighten'd or Can they see Christ before their Eye be opened Is it an Act of the Will before the Will be at all determined by Grace Is it a receiving of Christ while the Heart is yet under an utter aversion to him Is it a renouncing of all for Christ whilst the byass of the Heart is against Christ and for other things above him and against him Do we believe before we are made a willing People Can it be an Effect of Infinite Power and make no change in the principle of our Actings Or can that Principle be and yet have place neither in Understanding or Will It 's true as they describe Faith a man may be Evangelically ungodly and yet believe because it 's a Faith common to the most prophane who perswade themselves all is safe though Destruction is near and this while they hate and reject Christ with their whole Heart How can it be a Faith unfeâ—…gned while Villany and Hypocrisie reign in the Soul Or be adapted to such great Operations whilst in its whole Essence there is nothing which argues the least alteration on the Soul or operation of the Holy Spirit Here 's the Faith of a dead Soul of an unregenerate Soul of an unconverted Soul and by such a Faith we are justified they say But 2. Q. How dare these men pretend to agree with our Orthodox Divines when they are so plain against them Read the Assemblies lesser Catechism Q. What is Effectual Calling A. Effectual Calling is the Work of God's Spirit whereby convincing us of our Sin and Misery enlightening our Minds in the knowledge of Christ and renewing our Wills he doth perswade and enable us to embrace Iesus Christ freely offered to us in the Gospel Q. What Benefits do they that are effectually called partake of in this Life A. They that are effectually called do in this Life partake of Iustification Adoption Sanctification and the several Benefits which in this Life do either accompany or flow from them Reader is not the Assembly plain that a man is called before he is justified When Justification is a Benefit that the Called and none but they partake of and this Benefit supposeth them effectually called who partake of it let 's next see who are called Is there no change made upon them by effectual Vocation Sure there is and this in order to their embracing Christ which is Believing They are convinced of Sin and Misery their Minds are enlighten'd with the Saving Knowledge of Christ. Their Wills are renewed they are perswaded and enabled to put forth that Act of Faith whereby they embrace Christ. Is here no change Sure it 's a great one in the Understanding and Will too and all this to make a man an Object of Justification And shall these men face us down as if we differ'd from the Assembly Nay do not all our Orthodox plead against the Arminians that there is the infused Habit of Faith before the Act yea and that most Habits are infused at once and included in the vital Principle What heaps of Testimonies could I produce for this Yea is it not our common Principle that Vocation is before Justification Herewith agree the Canons of the Synod of Dort par 1. p. 303. Hooker's Effect Calling p. 344 345. Mr. C. saith p. 123. Hence Justification is set after Vocation and therefore after Faith because Faith is wrought in Vocation Norton p. 260 261 263. Union in order of Nature followeth Vocation p. 291. So also Ball of Cov. p. 334 339. See how Mr. Rutherford exposeth this Error p. 131. and p. 111 112. he sets down this as the Gospel-Order 1. The Sinner dead in Sin a Son of Wrath 2. a Walker after the Errours of this World 3. The Gospel of Free Grace is preached to the Dead the elect Heirs of Wrath c. 4. The Law and Curses of it preached with the Gospel lest they despair to humble them 5. The Sinner legally humbled Rom. 7. 11. with a half hope of Mercy prepared for Christ c. 6. The stony Heart of meer Grace removed in the same moment a new Heart put in him or the Habit of Sanctification put in him 7. In the same moment the Soul believeth in him that justifieth the Ungodly 8. In the same moment God for Christ's sake of meer Grace justifieth the believing Sinner Is not here a new Heart in order of Nature before Faith and that Faith before Justification tho' not in time Mr. C. p. 22. When I had affirmed that in Adam's Law Life was promised to sinless Obedience c. and that Salvation is now impossible by that Law but that God in the Gospel promiseth Blessings on lower Terms viz. unfeigned Faith c. Mr. C. answers To talk of any obedience to that Law besides sinless in respect of that Law in its preceptive part is nonsence for sinful Obedience which you are going to plead for is Disobedience And p. 26. I roundly assert that no Law of God with a Sanction of Life and Death upon performance or non-performance of Obedience doth admit of the least imperfection in the said Obedience He oft speaks in this manner whence I think this is his Principle That God hath not promised any Benefit for Christ's sake upon any terms short of perfect Obedience and sincere Faith Love and Holiness because imperfect are formally downright Disobedience or Sin which is the same Rep. 1. I grant sincere Faith and Holiness be imperfect as to the preceptive part of Adam's Law 2. I grant that nothing imperfect can be a meritorious Righteousness
Mr. Mead who did object nothing against it but a prudential Consideration and the same answer he made to Dr. Bates when he first asked him and before the second Edition came out I telling him what use his Hand might have been of he made the like answer and made then to me no Objection against the Book but that he wished I had left out that of the third to the Phil. All which I mention'd to some with real respect to him and those Brethren But since Mr. C's Book was published Mr. M. tells me and others he is not of my judgment but I know not wherein except in my sence of that Text. Yet there are others that forbare subscribing who declare no disagreement and he must quite alter his useful way of Preaching if he much differ from me Others ask why I raked into Dr. Crisp's Ashes A. It was needful I should instance some Author for they said nobody affirmed those things I mentioned in my Sermon I chose Dr. C. before another not from Prejudice but because he was reprinted with an unhappy Front his Works seemed the Standard of the propagators of these Errors This Book was taking with many recommended to People by Mr. Trayl and others as I can prove and he must never be answer'd if not after his Death and tho' I treat him with all respect yet I wonder his Works should be so applauded now when most of our great Divines opposed them heretofore Yea as Mr. Nesbit from creâ—…lible Hands informs me the Assembly of Divines desir'd to have them burnt Obj. You are said to misquote him A. I cannot find I mistook one word except that once I set Justifie instead of Pardon which is alter'd in the second Edition Obj. You misrepresent his Sence A. Not that I know â—…nd what Mr. C. instanceth I have fully proved it must be his sence tho' I inform you in my Book he oft speaks Contradictions but the most I mention he labours to prove and his Scheme enforceth it Obj. You take Bits of Sentences A. I still give one full period and it 's only to avoid swelling my Book that I mention'd no more in other Clauses yea in what is material I oft set his words at large and if it be needful I shall put him in a fuller light Many Obj. My Book was written against Mr. Cole A. I had no Eye to him at all except in the Digression about Repentance which was much the same as I deliver'd at a third meeting to compose the Debate between Dr. Bates and him tho' since then he broke out against us twice this I preface in my Book with these words Herein I have to do with men of more orthodox Principles than Dr. Crisp. And Mr. Cole must know these words did refer to him yea notwithstanding many strange Passages I hope he doth not hold most of those Opinions nor can he agree with Mr. Chancy unless he disagree with what he hath oft said yea and printed Obj. It 's more than hinted that I intend in that Book to reflect on all them called Congregational A. I am sure I abhor such an Intention nay did not I pitch on Testimonies from among them to oppose these Errors I know many of their Ministers whom I think free from the least disposition towards them the New England Synod effectually oppos'd them Mr. Flavel and Mr. Lob have written well against them I cite Bulkley Dr. Owens c. who are fully for the opposite Truths and tho' I sent Mr. M. word that in the mind I was in I would forbear Testimonies from his Writings but that I would not bind my self for any time yet I have since met with great reason to cite him as one fully for the Truth Yea Mr. N. tho' I never requested it in my House declared That if Mr. M. and three more such had subscribed he would not have been unwilling to do it and he desired me to add Congregational to the Divines in and about this City who forbear to subscribe only from prudential Considerations which I refused He remembreth the latter part and owneth it and he told Mr. Hume that if one Passage or two were rectified he would subscribe my Book It 's true some clamorous People that cry up these Opinions happen to be of that Perswasion but I hope far the greater part are better principl'd and many seem on the wrong side only from Misrepresentations Obj. Why do you use the word Rector A. It 's a proper word used by Dr. Owens Mr. Charnock and most This Book hath met with various entertainment with many it hath pleas'd God to grant it acceptance and many Ministers out of the Country offered their Subscriptions but of the four seeming Answers to it I 'll give these hints To Mr. B. I am obliged for his Christian usage and while he allows that I speak the Language of Time and of the Dispensation I am under I will comply with his Proposal not to enter the Lists unless I have occasion to prove my Sence of Phil. 3. which I find patroniz'd by Augustin Of Mr. Keach I would but ask 1. Doth not he believe that persons are bound to agree to the Covenant of Grace and thereby engaged to love God and sincerely obey him and is not refusing to agree to this Covenant the damning Sin yea is not this Refusal the Heart of Unbelief And that 's all I there affirm 2. Is his Spirit in a right frame when he shall bring these words in my Catechism to prove that we are not justified upon believing till we do Good Works when in that short Catechism there is this Q. Is not a Believer pardoned before he can put forth any other Act of Obedience A. Thô true Faith is a certain Principle of Obedience yet so soon as we believe we are pardoned even before there can be time to put forth any other Acts of Obedience Yea how oft do I say in my Book that no Act of ours is a jot of the Righteousness for or by which we are justified but that is Christ's alone and yet this person fixeth the quite contrary on me and so batters in the dark and warneth all from hearing me The Lord humble and forgive such The Letter from the City c. seems rather to design a Turn than argue a Truth for as it weakly saith some things true and others erroneous so throughout he belies their Principles whom he exposeth if it be wilfully let his own serious Reviews give him his Character if ignorantly why should he intermeddle There are few Books written that pretend so much which may be so easily and much exposed Mr. C. is the Author I here deal with I have long read Books and from five years old have had no Employment besides my Studies yea before nineteen I was regularly admitted a Preacher yet I never met with a Tract parallel to his for abusive Language violent Rage and uncharitable Censures Many great Divines
disswade me from a Reply assuring me it was at best needless with their Advice I had complied but that I find the Ignorant believe his Misrepresentation of my Principle It 's amazing what Eye they read with if they read at all What 's become of Truth or Ingenuity that Professors dare affix these Doctrines to me which I a thousand times disown and never can ascribe any Passages to ground them on but are still forced to cry This is your meaning against my plain words and entire Scheme as thou wilt see in this Reply Mr. C. saith I juggle and equivocate when I declare I still speak my mind and must be the most inconsistent Fool if it were not so But what should induce me to juggle or equivocate I value not the Purses of any and in God's Cause I fear not the Abilities of the whole Party yea by more of God's presence I shall be reconciled to their fiery and clamorous Tongues which is their only formidable strength tho' the liberty they take doth not evidence a good Cause or a Christian Spirit They give out that I oft meet with Noblemen about a great Affair when I never spake with one of these Noblemen nor ever was once in any Meeting about that matter They assert Mr. How said he had not put his Hand to my Book but that I assured him Mr. M. would do the same when Mr. H affirms he never said any such thing but that after he had signed he desired me to ask Mr. M's Hand Others say that Hands were affixt without their leave which is too gross to reply to Nay they turn the effects of my sinking Distempers to my reproach the worst I wish them is Forgiveness and more Charity and Wisdom Obj. They say some of the first Subscribers did not read the whole Book A. The whole substance of the Book is in the Truths and Errors which they did peruse Obj. Do not some of the Subscribers recant A. Tho' they have been abused yet the only one that to me seem'd willing that his Name had been left out and that only because of the noise I offer'd to publish that he desir'd it but he hath forborn any such desire Two of these Authors pretend to great Piety in their Party above others the Lord encrease it in all but I am perswaded they call many Serious ones of their Party who live under the power of the contrary Truth and understand not the Errors of those for whose persons they may have regard There be a far greater number of humble meek heavenly Christians that abhor these Errors which they observe to alter much the Christian Calm and tender Frame of such that I hope are upright in the Substance And I heartily desire all of us would lay these Texts to Heart 1 Cor. 13. Though I have all Faith and have not Charity I am nothing Iam. 1. 26. If any man among you seem to be religious and bridleth not his Tongue but deceiveth his own Heart that man's Religion is vain Iam. 3. 13 to 18. But the Wisdom that is from above is first pure then peaceable gentle and easie to be entreated And it 's evident notwithstanding what Mr. C. saith of Passions p. 12. that a holy Fear with a siducial Consent to Christ tâ—…ds more to make a man's state safe and his walk exact than sudden Confidence or easie Perswasions It 's true Assurance should be endeavoured in our working out our Salvation with trembling and with fear yet Mr. Sedgwick was a man I 'll believe before Mr. C. or the Letter and he saith In my Conscience this is the general Opinion of ungodly men they hear Christ died to take away Sin and to make Peace for Sinners and therefore they will take no thought after Christ but will live basely and boldly in their sinful ways c. but Christ never yet made such a Reconciliation that all Sinners whatsoever though they live in Unbelief and Impenitency shall share in it but only penitent Sinners and believing Sinners S. of Cov. p. 258. I shall represent the true state of the points in debate that if any men will engage me to Edification and with Truth they may be directed The Controversie with Dr. C. my Book doth it so plainly that I hope all may see it there but the present Specimen more especially shall refer to Mr. C. who differs from many that help the noise though they will not see it 1. It is not whether a certain number of Sinners are of Free Grace elected to Faith and Iustification which I affirm but whether the Elect are required by the Gospel to believe that they may be justified which Mr. C. denies and I affirm 2. It is not whether the Gospel be such a Law as that Acts of Obedience to it stand in the place of legal Works so as that for them we are saved which I deny but whether the Gospel doth assure Salvation for Christ's Merits to such as obey it and threaten an exclusion from this Salvation against all such as disobey it This Mr. C. denies and I affirm 3. It is not whether we are justified by our Faith or any Act of ours as if they as Works or Qualifications were a jot of that Righteousness for which or by which we are justified this I deny but whether God hath fixed this as the Revealed Gospel-Rule that a man must be a penitent Believer whom God will justifie for Christ's Righteousness This Mr. C. denies and I affirm 4. It is not whether the Faith and Forgiveness of the Elect be the Fruits of Election and Distinguishing Mercy which I affirm but whether God hath a revealed Rule by which as Paternal Ruler he gives Pardon and Glory to Believers for Christ's sake and judicially withholds them from others whom he condemns not for their being unelected but for their final Impenitency and Unbelief This Mr. C. denies and I affirm To other of his Citations under his Third Principle add this p. 32. If you understand Judicial in respect of any Duty Grace or Qualification found in us tho' wrought by the Spirit I abhor it 5. It is not whether we are immediately justified upon believing before any Works which follow the first Act of Saving Faith this I affirm but whether if Faith should be ineffectual to Acts of sincere Holiness and to prevent Apostacy and utter Ungodliness would we be subject to Condemnation by the Gospel-Rule This Mr. C. denies and I affirm 6. It is not whether Holiness or Good Works are necessary to Salvation this they and I affirm but whether God doth require them as indispensible means of obtaining the possession of Salvation through Christ and declares that the total want of them and much more their Contraries shall expose to Misery This Mr. C. must deny and the Necessity they speak of is only a Physical Necessity not a moral Note 〈◊〉 two last Questions refer to the Adult that have time 7. It is not
manifest it he proves this fully So Calvin God forgives no Sins but such as Men are displeased with themselves for c. The excellent Mr. Clerkson will help thee to resolve some seeming difference thou findest among Authors who in one place seem to deny the Covenant to be conditional and in other places affirm it See p. 132 133 134. After he had asserted the first Grace to be absolute viz. in Effectual Calling c. he adds The subsequent Blessings of the Covenant those that follow the first are in some sence conditional and so offer'd and promised in a conditional form and yet are nevertheless gracious There are Terms and Conditions taking the word Conditions in a Latitude as comprizing Qualifications Adjuncts and necessary Antecedents which do no way derogate from Grace neither detract from its freeness nor obscure but rather illustrate it Rom. 10. 8 9 10. Rev. 3. upon such Terms are Iustification Adoption and Salvation offered and not offered but upon Terms and yet most freely and graciously c. and not only Faith but holiness of Heart and Life and perseverance therein are the Terms upon which Salvation is promised c. P. 134. And hath constituted an Order amongst them so that one must go before another we must believe before we are justified and be holy before we can see God and hath appointed one of them to be the means or way to obtain the other We are justified by Faith we are created unto good Works that we should walk in them Acts of holy Obedience are the way wherein we must walk to Salvation So that here is an antecedence of some Duty and that necessary by divine Appointment and Command and this tending to obtain the Favour freely offer'd And by this we may understand what a Condition is in a sence very innocent and no way injurious to Grace It is an Antecedent necessarily required as the way to attain or arrive at what is promised And in this sence it must not be denied there are Conditions in the Gospel and its Promises unless we will deny that there are Duties necessary to Salvation and made necessary by Divine Command for such a Condition is nothing but something of a Command joyned with a Promise in a conditional form c. He commands all to Repent and He promiseth Pardon put this Promise and that Command together and it becomes a conditional Promise If you repent you shall have Pardon 1 Iohn 1. 9. But p. 137 138 140. he justly excludes meritorious natural and legal Conditions By which Legal he means not whatever is commanded with an annexed Promise for that were to contradict all here cited but such Conditions as do entitle us to the Benefit as the very Righteousness for which we merit or obtain them which I have oft denied Gospel-Conditions to be And so he explains himself Reader it 's evident what a number of Men fall under Mr. C's Curse as well as I and judge thou what reason he hath to pretend to the old Gospel and arraign us for a new one My Paradoxes appear the common Sentiment of the notedly Orthodox while his Principles must be content with the Patronage of new sangled Antinomians The Testimonies under the 1 2. Principles prove this Rule Because the Paradoxes may be entire I 'll add the 10th viz. the Wedding Garment Mat. 22. 11. is true Uniting Faith of which Mr. C. p. 32. your saying the Wedding Garment was Faith and not the Righteousness of Christ apprehended by Faith â—…is a wretched wresting and abuse of Scripture c. Repl. 1. Doth a true Uniting Faith exclude Christ's Righteousness or include it Keep to this Rule when you speak of being justified by Faith and what will become of the Object justifying 2. Is it Christ's way to condemn Men meerly because they have not a Privilege or else because they neglected the Terms on which that Priviledge was promised The former was meer Misery and no Fault the latter is a Fault by which he is obnoxious to that Misery and therefore fittest to ground a Sentence on 3. I 'll joyn two to help to bear this Calumny Fox p. 343. Sed per solam fidem c. But by Faith alone therefore Faith is that Garment made white in the Blood of the Lamb which properly cloaths us for the Wedding And Mr. Gale p. 197. Should you this night hear the Cry Behold the Bridegroom cometh are you ready to enter into the Wedding-Chamber Have you the Wedding-Garment of Faith and Holiness As to Phil. 3. 8. I have tryed stronger Arguments than Mr. C. is like to offer and yet my sence of that Text is not alter'd and fear not to defend it in due time Mr. C. p. 27 As for the Notion that the Covenant of Redemption is a distinct Covenant from the Covenant of Grace I deny it Repl. By the Covenant of Grace is meant the Gospel-Covenant made with Men. Mr. R. proves that the Covenant of Redemption and the Covenant of Grace are two distinct Covenants p. 308 to 313. So doth Mr. Gilaspie Cap. 1. 2. and shews the Difference between these two Covenants cap. 5. The same is proved by Mr. Sedgwick p. 3 4 5. and by Bulkley p. 29 to 32. It 's affirmed by Mr. Norton Orth. Evan. p. 113. It 's oft asserted by Dr. Owens by Mr. Mead in his Book of Early Obedience p. 72. c. and Sermon for Mr. Rosewell Nay the Author of the Letter grants it p. 24. Reader I shall not now descend to argue this Point only hint to thee that the Parties are distinct the Terms are distinct the Promises are distinct's moreover one hath no Mediator the other hath c. It 's true some worthy Divines formerly speak of these two Covenants as if one which render'd their Notions less plain but yet they did not deny but affirm that there was part of that Covenant to be actually engaged and performed by Man tho' giving Ability was undertaken by Christ in the other part of it and also that as it was promised to him that upon Man's compliance with the Conditions they should be Partakers of the Benefits so 〈◊〉 it was a Promise made to them upon complyance with the Terms Whereas Mr. C. asks me Do not we plead Redemption or the Promise made in Christ Repl. I had said that the Promises of the First Grace were pleadable only by Christ as the stipulating Party And what 's that to Redemption But can he think that unregenerate men can plead a personal Right to the First Grace And it 's Right that is included in the word pleadable Mr. C. p. 29. Pardon is not promised to Faith and Repentance as things distinct from the Promise but Pardon is promised together with Faith and Repentance to the Sinner c. Pardon is rather the Condition of Faith and Repentance and much more having a causal Influence thereunto than Faith and Repentance of
A DEFENCE OF Gospel-Truth Being a REPLY to Mr. CHANCY's First Part. AND As an Explication of the Points in Debate may serve for a Reply to all other Answers Wherein the Mistaken may at least see that I. I affirm that we are Justified for or by Christ's Righteousness alone and not by Works II. That we are Justified as soon as we truly Believe III. That the Righteousness of Christ is imputed to the Believer and not only the Effects of it IV. That Gospel-Conditions are not our Justifying Righteousness which Legal Works were to be V. How the Gospel is a Law explained and proved c. VI. That I am not for the Popish or Arminian Doctrine of Justification c. as stated by our Divines VII That all I contend for is the way which God hath appointed for the application of Christ's Merits and dispensing the Effects of Free Grace and for a Gospel-Ministry suited to this purpose By DANIEL WILLIAMS LONDON Printed for Iohn Dunton at the Raven in the Poultry 1693. TO THE READER HAving by the Good Hand of GOD contributed so much to the restauration of Peace in the dissenting Congregations in Dublin and somewhat to the Union here a Reason may be expected how I become engaged in the present Debates with grief of Heart I shall nakedly render it Soon after the reprinting of Dr. Crisp's Works his Errors that lay hid for many Years appeared with open Face Many pleading that there are no Humblings or preparatory Works in order to Conversion Saving Faith is nothing but a Perswasion that our Sins are pardoned yea we are justified before we are born Christ was accounted the very Blasphemer at God's Bar Sin cannot hurt the Believer Men have nothing to do in order to Salvation no assurance by Signs from Sanctification c. Eleven Counties the Flame broke soon into under the conduct of Mr. Davies and several others the faithful Ministers were deserted as Legalists Churches divided and Town and Country filled with Debates and Noise These Errors and Disorders were imputed to the Body of Nonconformists and Attempts against our Liberty thereupon threatned Dr. Crisp's Son puts out a Book of his own to abett some of his Father's Opinions and therein reflects on me by Name and other Books to this purpose were set forth hereupon once and but once I deliver'd at Pinners-Hall that which is the Appendix to my Book hoping that a plain state of the Differences might convince some well-meaning People or at least vindicate us that we were not Papists Arminians c. as these represented us nor Antinomians as by others we were all accused In that Sermon I charged no person yea to prevent a Iealousie that I might intend Mr. Cole c. I inserted this It 's true there are some small Differences among the Orthodox in wording some of these things but shall we hereby give advantage to such Errors c A great Clamour is thereupon contrived and in his next turn Mr. Cole with great severity exposed us to vulgar notice affirming many Notions that some worthy Divines were startled at Some Friends of Mr. Coles proposed to me a Meeting with him in the presence of Dr. B. Mr. M. and Mr. H. In this Meeting it was agreed that I should read my Sermon after which Mr. Cole declared he had no Exception and so we were agreed which was now the second time Mr. Cole in his turn at P. H. publickly declared there was no real Difference as Mr. H. also did and I repeated it with great satisfaction hoping that the Errâ—…neous would be less confident when they lost that Cover which they made of his Name This Calm did not long endure for Mr. Cole I fear by Instigation revived at P. H. the same Reflections and Dr. Batâ—…s practically preaching the Necessity of Repentance to the Forgiveness of Sin Mr. Cole soon after brake out into the wonted Exclamations and charged us as Opposers of Christ's Righteousness in Iustification c. and I was accounted by most as the chief Mark level'd at Friends entreated me to take no notice of these Reflections in my Sermons there and tho' thus oft provoked I never expressed any Resentments in any Discourse there since that first Nevertheless many assured me of the necessity of printing somewhat to clear our selves and if possible to stem this Tide Peoples Mouths were filled with the grossest Misrepresentations of our Doctrines Ministers were accused as Legalists when they only preached that men had somewhat to do if they would be saved if a man did but plead with Sinners from Gospel-Threats or argue Obedience and Duties he was no Gospel-Preacher Yea some arrived to that daringness as publickly to assert there were but three or four Ministers of Christ in London the Reverend Mr. Mead himself escaped not the Title of a Legalist These things caused in me many sad Thoughts and at last I was convinced unless we should prostitute our Ministry suffer the infecting of our People which would end in Divisions as I found attempted on some of my own and be all guilty and branded abroad as Complyers by our silence something must be published I was sensible of the Trouble Reproach and Hazards attending it especially since I was informed that some out of the Union were the Spring in this Affair who having failed in their Unchristian Methods to oppose that Agreement it seems judged by the Notions of some few of whom I was ignorant that either these Opinions must prevail by our silence or that the Union would be endangered if we appeared against them At last I found the effects of Mr. Davies's and others Practises abroad and in the City that the hazard to our Peace would grow by further delay especially seeing as yet so very few if any of the United Brethren were suspected to abett these Errors and Mr. Cole with all the rest that appeared their Advocates in City and Country were not of the Union Nay I believed if some others did not act Mr. Cole he could not be offended with what I should write he having at three meetings expressed himself so reconciled to my Principles and then disowned what I should oppose The reason why I desired any Testimony to my Book was because the People do oft value Names more than Arguments the Opposites so unscrupulous in their Clamours might prejudice men against the Truths as if I was singular And considering the delay of 〈◊〉 Testimony against Mr. Davies this might be some Antidote till we arrived at more Yea I heard also Mr. Cole was printing when I was about mine These are the Considerations which induced me to print my Book at the desire of several Brethren and I have Peace in this that it appeared an absolute Duty Some object Why I did not get some of the Brethrens Hands formerly called Congregational and it looks like forming a Party c. A. I did ask some of them that I thought would not scruple it particularly
Endowments I suppose by Moral Endowments he 〈◊〉 such as the unconverted have to which I answer There is a moral specifick difference the one is Saving the other is not the one is from the effectual Work of the Spirit whereby the Soul is truly regenerated the other is not And this difference thou wilt see me own as far as I had occasion 2. I am charged as that I hold there must be Qualifications in a Sinner to entitle him to the first Grace or to the Promise of it But as there is not a tittle leading to either in the words he cites so I pray weigh the places under each Head 1. There is a specifick difference between Grace and meer moral Endowments P. 224. I condemn it as legal to press men to Faith and Repentance and other Duties as if to be performed in our strength without the Grace of Christ and influences of the Spirit P. 57. The Conditions of the Covenant of Grace are performed by the Grace of Christ freely given to Sinners Cap. 11. p. 90. Every man is without Christ till he be effectually called but when by this Call the Spirit of God enclineth and enableth him willingly to accept of Christ as a Head and Saviour a man becomes partaker of those Influences and Priviledges which are peculiar to the Members of the Lord Jesus Cap. 11. p. 92. I affirm that Christ's giving us the Spirit of Grace doth begin this Union and the Spirit given in order to Saving Operations produceth this Faith whereby the Union is consummated P. 83. I affirm There may be Knowledge Assent Humblings c. and yet a Soul fail of an interest in Christ for want of true Conversion 2. See how positive I am that there are no Qualifications to entitle a man to the First Grace or the Promise of it Tho' I wonder that he makes no difference between the Promise of Grace which is absolute and Promises to Grace which are conditional Cap. 10. p. 83. I affirm The worst Sinners are often the Objects of God's effectual Calling in order to an Interest in Christ. Cap. 8. p. 61. I affirm the First Grace is absolutely given though dispensed ordinarily in the due use of Means P. 66 The Gospel or Covenant tells us that there is a Promise of the First Grace made to Christ for the Elect and by vertue of that Promise the Elect do consent to the Covenant and this Gospel or Covenant is the Means whereby that Faith is wrought VIII Mr. C. It is this Doctrine viz. of Imputation that you are still bantering it 's that you have the greatest pick at Repl. Reader weigh my plain words Cap. 7. p. 37. The Mediatorial Righteousness of Christ is so imputed to true Believers as that for the sake thereof they are pardoned and accepted unto Life-eternal it being reckoned to them and pleadable by them for these uses as if they had personally done and suffer'd what Christ did as Mediator for them whereby they are deliver'd from the Curse and no other atonement nor meriting price of Saving Benefits can be demanded from them P. 39. I affirm That besides these Effects viz. all the saving Effects of Christ's Death being made ours the very Righteousness of Christ is imputed to true Believers as what was always undertaken and designed for their Salvation and is now effectual to their actual Pardon and acceptance to Life yea is pleadable by them as their Security and is as useful to their Happiness as if themselves had done and suffer'd what Christ did And a few lines before I affirm That Christ's Sufferings and Obedience were so in our stead that God cannot exact from us any other atonement for Sin or price of any Gospel-Blessings P. 43. Had not Christ suffer'd for us we could not be absolved for the sake of his Obedience and Sufferings The like may be seen p. â—…47 Reader I would inform thee that I can agree to any Expressions to note Christ a Representative Surety Head c. that are consistent with Pardon of Sin and our not being the persons in God's Account who suffer'd and obey'd But I think Forgiveness for the sake of what Christ did and suffer'd for us is what we must take comfort in and Christ suffer'd in the person of a Mediator IX Mr. C. p. 1. For the Doctrine of Iustification especially we are in a manner return'd to Aegypt that of Iustification by Works being brought into the room of Iustification by Faith Repl. Here and in many places I am arraigned as being for Justification by Works and not by Faith which must be to import 1. That I am for Works being joyned with Faith to our admission into a state of Justification 2. That Faith and other things do justifie us as the Righteousness for or by which we are justified As to the last review what is cited under the 3 4 5 6 misrepresented Principles and sure thou wilt see that it 's Christ's Righteousness and not ours which is that for and by which alone we are justified as the sole Merit The former then remaineth as a Charge as to which see if I do not positively assert that we are justified as soon as we truly believe Cap. 12. p. 104. I affirm that we are justified the same moment as we truly believe in Christ and the Blessing is not suspended for any time longer This I affirm because God justifies us by the Promise as his Instrument and this Promise declares that He will justifie him that believes It 's Christ truly believed on doth justifie us and a Christ so believed on cannot but justifie us P. 247. We say we are upon repenting and believing put into a justified State before any other Workâ—… Reader I did to prevent this mistake preface that Chap. 13 of the Necessity of Holiness and Good Works with these words P. 120. Note that whatever is spoken in this Chapter of any Act of Grace except penitent Believing refers not to the forgiveness of Sin or the Sinner's admission into a justified state the Benefits I here treat of are the not forfeiture of Pardon the possession of Heaven and particular Blessings as encrease of Peace Joy Returns of Prayer c. So p. 113. Obj. The only Pretence for this Charge must be That I make Repentance necessary to Forgiveness Ans. But 1. I expresly deny Repentance to be any part of the Righteousness for which we are forgiven It 's no Merit c. this thou mayest see in a hundred places in my Book some are cited in the 4 5 6 Heads 2. I deny it to be any cause of Forgiveness I say in p. 119. I own my self to be among them who deny Repentance of any Grace in Mâ—…n to be a Cause of Forgiveness â—… I deny that Justification is equally ascribed to Repentance as to Faith c. See p. 113. I deny Justification to be equally ascribed to Faith and Repentance for we are said to
which Faith is the great Term of the Covenant and includes so much of Repentance as I insist on Q. Shall the Elect fall from a state of Forgiveness A. No the Decree the Intercession of Christ the Promise of Perseverance yea and Forgiveness it self do all assure a perseverance in Grace and so a continuance in a pardoned estate Q. What do you trust in as that for which God will accept of you and save you A. Only in the Righteousness of the Lord Jesus Q. Do not you trust in your own inherent Righteousness as that for which God will save you A. I abhor such a Thought Q What stress do you lay on Good Works A. Not as necessary to my justified state into which I am admitted upon my first believing 2. Nor as any Righteousness for which God will save me Q. What stress then do you lay A. No more than as they evidence my Faith to be true execute my first believing Consent prevent their Contraries which the Gospel threatens with Misery and answer the Rule of any Gospel-promise that God hath made and will execute for Christ's sake to the upright person Q. Do you think that we are justified by our Good Works at the last day as if they were the Righteousness by which we shall be saved at the last day A. No I would tremble at such a Thought and declare it 's Christ's Righteousness alone and unmixed that I hope to be saved for and by Q. What are your Thoughts then as to our inherent Righteousness and Good Works as they fall under Christ's Judgment at the last day A. My whole Heart is 1. That if a man truly believe and dye before he hath opportunity to do more he shall be sentenc'd Happy as a Believer notwithstanding he was prevented by Death from professing the Truth and proceeding in Holiness performing Acts of Worship c. 2. God hath declared that none shall at last be saved by Christ's Righteousness that are Infidels Ungodly utterly unprofitable or Apostates And therefore all that God will then save for Christ's Merits must truly be and will be declared to be no Infidels Ungodly utterly unprofitable nor total Apostates but the contrary and they shall be judged free from the guilt of final Infidelity 3. The most eminent in Faith Holiness Sufferings and Labours shall be adjudged to greater degrees of Glory which added degrees will be as truly the effects of Christ's sole Merits as the lesser degrees All this is exactly consonant to my Book and my full Perswasion Because I see that well-meaning People are imposed on by a noise of Popery and Arminianism I shall let thee see how our Protestant and Orthodox Divines do represent and oppose the Popish and Arminian Points in this matter and so thou maist judge how the Antinomians secure their destructive Errors by this clamour The sum of the Popish Principles our Divines oppose may be thus reduc'd They think that 1. by Attrition or a 〈◊〉 legal feaâ—… of Punishments Men do ex congruo or meetness merit Charity and Faith which be the beginning of Sanctification and that this begun Sanctification is all our first Justification 2. That whatever be the efficiency of the Spirit in working Faith it is determinable by Man's free Will whether any believe or no. 3. That upon our improvement and exercise of this first Charity and Faith we truly and properly merit the encrease of Holiness and Eternal Glory and that ex condigno This they call the second Justification 4. That by the Absolution of the Priest on Confession in the Sacrament of Pennance our Sins of Age are forgiven as original Sin was by Baptism and venial Sins and temporal Punishments of mortal Sins by Satisfaction and Indulgences and all in a way of merit The Points that can be at all pretended as my Concern I 'll give you as stated by Dr. Ames in his Bellarminus Enervatus with râ—…y own Answers to his Questions Tom. 3. lib. 5. Q Whether Prayer Fasting or Alms are satisfactory Works A. I plainly deny it oft p. 240. Q. Do our Works truly and properly make satisfaction to God for that Obligation to Punishment which remaineth to be expiated A. I say No for we make no satisfaction by any thing Tom. 4. p. 109. Q Whether Faith alone justifieth A. I say Yes that is we are justified by Faith alone as that which alone receives Christ and before Works of Obedience But yet I think Ames well explains this p. 112. Something may be before Pardon as a pre-requisite Disposition so that it be not the cause of Pardon And this is all I say of Repentance and agree with him in p. 112. Repentance taken for legal Humiliation goes before Iustification as a Disposition in Order pre-requisite but not as a Cause 2. Evangelical Repentance is taken for Conversion of which Faith is a principal part Yea add That a great part of Repentance is the effect of Justification 3. I agree with him in the next words Quocunque modo c. Which-ever way Repentance is taken neither Grief nor detestation of Sin is the cause of Iustification Nay more I agree with Ames in his Account of Faith cap. 2. p. 101. Fides specialis misericordiae duplici ratione vocatur c. Faith of special Mercy which is Trust or Relyance is taken in two respects 1. whereby it apprehends Christ or cleaves to him for apprehending special Mercy by him 2. As it apprehends special Mercy as already bestowed In the first sence it goes before Iustification in the latter sence it follows Iustification Lib. 6. Cap. 1. He treats of imputed Righteousness and p. 139. saith that this is the Protestant Judgment Christi justitiam catenus imputari c. Christ's Righteousness is so far imputed to us that by the vertue thereof we are as much esteemed just before God as if we had somewhat in our selves wherewith we might be esteemed just before him P. 205. Q. An opera bona c. Are the Good Works of Men truly and properly the Merits of Eternal Life A. I positively and oft deny it and dare not assert that Condecency which Ames and others do Reader if thou art a man of any Skill in these things thou wilt find that they oppose the Papists concerning our Graces and Works only as merirorious and causal of Saving Benefits and I deny them to be either See even Chemnit Exam. par 1. p. 172. Davenant de Iustit actuali cap. 30. q. 1. arg 1. Ames Bellarm. Enerv. tom 4. lib. 6. Downam of Iustif. p. 15. I shall now shew thee what our Calvinists and Orthodox Divines oppose the Arminians in as to this Doctrine of Justification The Synod of Dort in their Canons Part 1. p. 289. of the Errors under the Head De Morte Christi thus condemn the Arminians Qui docent foedus illud novum gratiae c. That teach that the Covenant of Grace which the Father upon the intervention of Christ's
the Elect and declared in the Gospel and God doth not fix on these terms for any Worth in them or profit to him 3. The Gospel is the Instrument or Sign by which this Will of God is expressed This is not the Language of God in Adam's Law if this were not superadded to that we had been utterly miserable 4. This fixeth that Rule of the Promise which Mr. C. p. 33. is at a loss to know God promiseth he will justifie him that truly believes and save the upright in Heart Hereby he that in Truth believes and is upright answers that Rule which the Unbelievers and Hypocrites do not and so God doth not hereby promise to save them yea he declares they shall not have an Interest in these Mercies because they continue such and condemns them as such at last It 's Faith not Infidelity it 's Faith in Truth not Faith in Perfection nor Hypocrisie I shall offer thee some few Reasons why I say this is some part of the Essence of the Gospel and that God hath fixed this Rule therein R. 1. The Gospel is oft called a Law by the Spirit of God Isa. 42. 4. He shall not fall nor be discouraged till he have set Judgment in the Earth and the Isles shall wait for my Law Mic. 4. 2. Many Nations shall come c. for the Law shall go forth of Zion c. Rom. 3. 27. The Law of Faith Rom. 10. 31. The Law of Righteousness the Law of Liberty Iam. 1. 25. 2. 12. A converting Law Psal. 19. 7. The Law of Christ Gal. 6. 2. The best Commentators expound these to be the Gospel yea many say this is that Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Rom. 8 2. Many more places might be added R. 2. Mens Behaviour towards the Gospel is expressed by words that denote it to be a Law Rom. 10. 16. They have not obeyed the Gospel 2 Cor. 9. 13. Your professed Subjection to the Gospel 2 Thess. 1. 8. To take vengeance on them that obey not the Gospel 1 Pet. 4. 17. What will the end of them be that obey not the Gospel R. 3. Justification is a judicial Act and therefore it must be by a Law if we allow God to be a Ruler when He doth it We dispute this against the Papists who deny it to be a forensick Term. It 's true the Righteousness for which we are justified is Christ's which answer'd the Law of Innocency but the application of it to one man rather than another and to the same man at one time and not before is by the Gospel It 's not the voice of the Law of Works that the believing Sinner shall be justified for Christ's Righteousness Rom. 3. 26. So Gal. 3. 22. And I might shew that in Justification is a Right to Impunity And can any thing but a Law give this for Condemnation by Law cannot be reversed without a Law R. 4. The Gospel gives a Right to its Benefits upon believing Ioh. 1. 12. to as many as received him to them gave he power to become the Sons of God even to them that believe in his Name What did God by his Gospel give to these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Right a Title to be the Sons of God Very many places of this kind might be urged And little do men see what follows from denying this Gospel-Rule when we read such Places as they were worthy Rev. 3. 4. the Reward a Right to the Tree of Life Are these Terms proper from the meer nature of Mens Actions That 's Popish Merit Or from the Law of Works That 's false and anti-Evangelical But it 's safe to say it 's a Gospel Worthiness Reward Right c. God having for Christ's sake promised to give Blessings in such a way The Gospel-Law is so entirely founded on Christ and refers to him so fully that there is no more than an inviolable Connexion between Terms and Benefits there 's no boasting when the Claim is strongest yea not boasting but ascribing all to Christ is one of the great Terms R. 5. If God hath no Gospel-Rule beside Election and Distinguishing Mercy to confer Glory by then God will not nay cannot forgive or save the Non-Elect though they should believe in Christ. Say not they will not believe that makes no alteration as to the Point in hand Hath not God declared he will save them if they believe That is his Law and their rejecting his Salvation God arraigneth them for He is condemned because he hath not believed c. What an allay to their Misery would it be to think Tho' I had believed I had not escaped this Woe I have lost neither Christ nor Heaven by my Unbelief Read God's Pleas with all Sinners remember Christ's Tears over lost Ierusalem What do Men speak of a Day of Grace that Men may sin away Nay what are the serious Pleas of Ministers with every Soul to believe and repent All are delusive Mockery whilst God is as free to pardon the Elect whether he believes or no He is at liberty to damn others though they should believe nay He is sure to do it should they believe because they are not Elect. If this leads not to Hobbism I see nothing I own that Forgiveness is an Act of Soveraignty that is he is free to give Faith and Forgiveness upon it to whom he will But they that think God hath left himself absolutely free to forgive the Adult whether they believe or no and to condemn the Believer seem to forget their Bible Would men of this Principle but preach according to their Scheme I think their Influence would abate with all that seriously mind Heaven not withstanding Mr. C. says that Pardon will not leave them impenitent R. 6. The Apostles with all the Saints may be arraigned as fallen from Grace and turned from the Gospel if it be no Rule according to which God applies Christ's Righteousness for Justification How could Peter say Repent and be baptized for the remission of Sin c. when the People cried What shall we do How could Paul answer the Goaler's Question What shall I do to be saved Believe on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalâ—… be saved This is not an Advice to Signs but to appointed Terms q. d. God hath commanded you to repent and believe and hath enacted that if you do so the Blood of Christ shall wash and save you So Gal. 2. 16. We have believed that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ. They believed for this very end If any say it was Christ justified it 's true but it was upon believing Faith is not the justifying Righteousness but it is the Condition of our being justified by this Righteousness and the Saints did ill to believe to this end if God had not enacted it to this end Nor could they do it in this assurance that they should be justified when they believed if God
and so deny the Deity of Christ even by Mr. C's Argument 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Article is wanting to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore it 's to be thus render'd The word was a God not the God a God by Office for that is a God but not by Essence which would be the God 5. The Context doth manifestly specifie this Law and not exclude every Law It 's true the Gospel argues à fortiori against Justification by the Law of Innocency yet he directly speaks of Moses's Law as any may see in reading the places Mr. C's Proof is taken from Gal. 3. 11. And doth not the Apostle v. 17. say The Law which was four hundred and thirty years after cannot disannul the Covenant c. Was it every Law that was given 430 years after Abram So from Rom. 3. 28. cap. 4. And is not the Apostle in the three Chapters express That that Law was the Jewish Law or at most the Law of Nature together with it But more of this last hereafter Reader Mr. C. seems fond of this Argument from the Article and thence oft repeats it but do thou but read one Book in the Greek Testament by his Rule viz. that where the Article is omitted from a word in negative Propositions there every Species is excluded yea bring it down to Names and where the Article is omitted then it is any Peter any Iohn who is there spoken of Obj. II. Mr. C. oft objects as p. 5. Works performed under a Law-Sanction are legal Works and do make the Covenant enjoyning them a Covenant of Works And a few lines before saith he The performance of Duty as Terms enforced by a Law-Sanction is a Covenant of Works so that such men are Preachers of a Law no matter what Law P. 21. The preceptive Will of God with the Sanction of Rewards promised upon the things required and Threats of Punishment upon the non-performance is alwaies a Law or Covenant of Works This runs through his Book and he oft saith The Gospel hath no Sanction and if we say so we make iâ—… a Covenant of Works P. 10. Christ is of no effect to him that is justified by a Law Repl. 1 He oft seems not to understand what a Sanction is for p. 24. he takes it to be meer Life and Death considered abstractedly but not as determining the way of giving of the one or inflicting of the other Whereas a Sanction consummates a Law and determineth what the Benefit or Penalty shall be and the certain Connexion between the Benefit and the Condition and between the Penalty and the want of that Condition c. Now will any except Mr. C. say That God hath not by the Gospel given Assurance that upon believing we shall be saved Have not we God's Word Oath and Seals for this 2. A Law-Sanction doth not exclude the greatest Mercy and Grace in conferring the Benefit It 's true that if the Condition be in it self meritorious then in that respect the Benefit is of Debt and was made a Condition in the Covenant because of its condignity if exactly proportionable or congruity if less valuable But God chuseth a Condition that hath â—…o merit either of Congruity or Condignity nay the Benefits are purchased by Christ qua good things in themselves and they be freely given tho' in this way Is it not a gracious Law though a Law that If fallen wretches will duly accept of my Son they shall have Life by him and this I command them to do 3. His Mistake seems to be in his Notion of Reward and in his upon and not upon performance of the Condition Gospel-Benefits are no Reward of Debt and yet they are given in a way of reward The Benefits are given not for our Faith yet upon believing not upon it as a meriting consideration yet upon it as that the presence whereof is made necessary by the Gospel this having required Faith and confined the Benefit to him that believes If a man says I 'll give you a thousand pounds if you will come to my House and fetch it is it not a free Gift though the poor man must come if he will have it And the Giver is yet bound by his Promise to give it if he come and not bound to give it if he refuse to come Do not say receiving Pardon is only naturally necessary and not as a Condition enjoyned for God might have applied Christ's Merits for Pardon though the Sinner consented not A Lunatick may be pardoned by a King and the Rich man might have sent the thousand pound to the Poor man's House whether he came for it or no but Christ resolved to shew his governing Authority in the displays of Grace and excite to Duty by Motives from Benefits though the Benefits shall be so given as that what we do shall be no cause or Merit of them 4. Hath the Gospel Covenant no Sanction What think you of Heb. 8. 6 He is the Mediator of a better Covenant which was established upon better Promises I hope he 'l grant this Covenant is the Covenant of Grace in a greater opposition to the first Covenant with Adam though more immediately opposed to the Jewish Covenant yet this second Covenant hath a Law-Sanction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sancitum est saith Beza It 's a greatest part of the new Name Mr. C. hath reproached the Gospel with here 's a Law a Law-Sanction which the new Covenant is consummated by Men skilled in the Socinian Controversies lay the stress of the Cause of Truth upon Arguments from Condemnation and Justification being God's Rectoral Acts but what a loss will they be at if God do not 〈◊〉 by a or any Law as Mr. C. saith p. 18. Where 's Dr. Owen's Law of Iustification Yea We must part with the Force of Rom. 5. 19. 5. But why must it needs become a Law or Covenant of Works meerly by a Sanction The great difference between the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace lies in this What is the Righteousness for which we are saved Is it the Righteousness of Works or the Righteousness of Christ But it is not how we come to obtain Salvation by Christ's Righteousness Doth God make our Faith or Sincerity to be our Justifying Righteousness If he saith If thou truly believe I will justifie thee by Christ's Righteousness but if thou believe not thou shalt remain condemned something might be said tho' not enough if we were to believe by our own Strength but that is not so More might be said yea enough if our Faith and Sincerity were to be the Righteousness for which we are pardoned or entituled to Life but neither is it any thing like that nor doth the Gospel design it nor its Law-Sanction at all infer it It 's one thing to be justified for Faith as a Work or inherent Qualification though it be such a Qualification it 's another thing to
God doth not require this of them for they are under this Law of Nature and so he doth require it of them or else it is some distinct special Law whereby he requires it of others and not of them By this Notion God never made any Law beside this one Law of Nature no positive Law no ceremonial Law for this Law of Nature did bind Man to observe them when God was pleased to command them and yet they were special Laws for all that And why then must the Command of Faith in Christ and Repentance for Remission be no Law when God commands them because the Law of Nature requires us to obey them when God doth command them What a Government do these men assign to God who allow him but one and the same Law to govern the whole Creation by when their state and circumstances be so different though all are his Creatures 4. As for such as confound the Law of Nature with the Law to Israel as taken into the Covenant of Grace I shall not think fit to say more to than this Though the carnal Iews did turn it into a Covenant of Works as if their imperfect Obedience and chargeable Sacrifices were the very Righteousness for which they were justified and so neglected Repentance and Faith in the Promise of Forgiveness for the sake of Christ who was typified in their Sacrifices nevertheless it was a Law of Faith and Repentance as Wittichius calls it p. 106. in cap. 2. v. 25. and therefore such great Titles are given it in the Old Testament and not as such is it opposed by the Apostle Paul in the New Testament it was the base perverting of it as exclusive of Faith in Christ and as opposing Gospel Institutions by Jewish Ordinances that he reprehends See Calvin on Ps. 19 9. he states the difference between the Law commended by David and as represented by Paul and saith that Paul had to do with the perverse Interpreters of the Law which separated it from the Grace and Spirit of Christ c. and sums up all in these words Haec diversa legis acceptatio c. This different acceptation of the Law easily reconciles the seeming difference in the words of David and Paul because Paul's purpose is to shew what the Law of it self viz. as it sincerely requires the Duty we owe to God without the Promise of Grace can do in us or for us but David commends the whole Doctrine of the Law which is the same with the Gospel and therefore includes Christ therein See Mr. Ball 's Arguments for the Covenant with Israel being the Gospel-Covenant and how the Precepts were Gospel-Precepts Indeed it 's true the matter of the Ten Commandments were much of the matter of the Law of Innocency but God did not deliver it to his Church as a Law to innocent Man but to fallen Man for his direction and recovery Therefore when any Authors take the Law as given on Sinai to be the Covenant of Grace they deny Faith to be commanded Adam in Innocency though they grant it requir'd in the Law at Sinai 2. The Sanction of the Gospel is not the same with the Law of Innocency which I shall evidence in the promissory and minatory parts I 'll begin with the promissory part I. The promissory part of the Gospel differs from that of the Law of Innocency 1. There are many things promised in the Gospel which that Law never promised Did that Law ever promise Union with Christ or the indwelling Spirit or Forgiveness of Sin or Perseverance Surely no But the Gospel doth all this Nay Dr. Goodwin urgeth many Arguments to prove that the Reward of Adam was to be only a continuance in the same Life he had in Paradise and not a translation to Heaven 2. The Rewards of the Law of Works were not promised on the same account as the Benefits promised by the Law of Grace be those were on the account of Works as a meriting Righteousness ours are by Free Grace on the account of Christ's sole meriting Righteousness Dr. Goodwin saith The Reward of the Law was in a just sence due of Debt unto the Creature and that from God Not that God can owe any thing to his Creature or be obliged for any thing to him but because in a way of natural Justice or rather Comeliness and Dueness such as is by the Law of Creation to be between a just Creator and a holy Creature there is an approbation due to him from God whilst that Creature obeys him and that as a Debt of Nature But I say all the claim we have is for Christ and ex pacto as the Free Promise assureth us 3. The Benefits are promised on different terms By the Law all was for perfect Sinless Obedience but the Gospel promiseth Pardon upon our true repenting and believing and we forfeit not our Interest in its Blessings if our Faith be effectual and persevering in sincere Holiness and Obedience 4. The Law of Adam did not justifie till the whole time of the trial of Obedience was finished It 's true it did continue the Blessings he had while he sinned not but it did not fix his state of Happiness till his trial was over but the Gospel puts us in a justified state upon our first believing II. The threatning part of the Gospel differs from that in Adam's Law 1. The Evils threatned are not wholly the same Here 's not only Death but that in sorer degrees Heb. 10. 29. 12. 25. God's Wrath will be more poured out and Conscience will find matter of sorer Reflections Here 's a privation of Christ and his Spirit and Pardon We are not only without them but we are barr'd from them because of our wicked refusal when they were sincerely offer'd us after our Apostacy If the Gospel were no Law we could not be obliged to more Misery than Adam brought us under yea and Adam could not be our full Representative in his Covenant if we are capable of encreasing our Misery by that Law without disobedience to a new one 2. The Gospel doth not denounce Death for the same Sins as Adam's Law did that Law threatned Death for the least Sin yea for one Sin but the Gospel threatens Death not for every Sin it doth not bar every Sinner from actual Relief but the impenitent unbelieving and utterly ungodly Hypocrite 3. The Gospel binds not Damnation on us unless we are finally impenitent Unbelievers If at any time of life we truly repent and believe we shall find Mercy but Adam's Law denounced him miserable on his first Sin III. There be a great many other Differences viz. in Adam's Law God acted as meer Creator in the Law of Grace he acts as Redeemer as well as Creator in Adam's Law Men were considered as innocent and sinless in the Gospel we are considered as Sinners by that Law God governed us as happy in order to
a fixing us in our happy estate in the Gospel he deals with us in order to our recovery from a lost estate in that there was no Mediator in this there is a Mediator who also is our King-Redeemer Many more might be added Reader weigh all these things and if the Gospel must be a special Law so that it be not the Law of Innocency what can be more plain than that it is not the same with the Law of Innocency or Nature either I could farther demonstrate that the very appropriation of Faith tho' it were a legal Precept to be the grand Condition of Salvation doth argue the Gospels being a distinct Law for otherwise any Duty would be of equal use But because Mr. C. charges me as a New Gospeller I 'll give thee a few of the hundreds that oppose his three former Errors and consent to my Paradoxes as orthodox TESTIMONIES that 1st the GOSPEL is a LAW Our Divines in the Synod of Dort say par 2. p. 104. Ex sacris literis c. It 's evident from the Scriptures that some are judged and condemned for Sins committed only against the Light of Nature who yet are excused for not performing the Law of Faith through invincible Ignorance which Excuse can have no place where God publisheth this Law and men are required to obey it Many other places from this Synod might be added Willet saith p. 888. We exclude not every Law but the Law of Works but the Law of Faith is not the Law of Works And p. 635. The Publican finding Mercy and departing justified no doubt had also an express purpose in himself for ever to forsake his Sin for otherwise he could not have been justified nor found remission of Sin for this is the Law and perpetual Rule of Forgiveness Ezek. 18. 21. Lex evangelica clamans the Gospel-law cries Believe and thou shalt be saved Hooker of Effect Calling p. 338. saith I answer not believing in the Lord Christ is not a Sin against the Moral Law but it is a Sin against the Law of the Gospel as he proves fully Saith p. 328. Hereto agree the words of the Apostle Rom. 3. 27. where the Apostle distinguisheth between the Law of Works and the Law of Faith by the Law of Works understanding the Moral Law by the Law of Faith understanding the Gospel c. he adds Here are two distinct Laws having two distinct Commandments as two distinct Conditions of the two Covenants This he proves at large P. 102 to 122. proves the Law as given to Israel was the Gospel Covenant for Substance P. 113. saith Faith in Christ is not commanded in the Moral Law as it was engraven in the Heart of Adam in the state of Innocency but as it was given to Israel to be a Rule of Life to a People in Covenant it was presupposed and commanded Lib. 2. Cap. 1. proves at large that God published a new Law as Redeemer to Man upon his Fall P. 17. Christ will proceed at the Day of Judgment according to a double Law the Moral Law and the Law of Faith the Moral Law saith Cursed is every one that continueth not in all the Law to do it Now by this Law we are all cast but the Law of Faith affords to Mankind a mitigation of the Moral Law and begins where the other ends God having sent his only begotten Son to this end that whosoever believes on him should not perish notwithstanding the Condemnation of the Moral Law but have everlasting Life Much like the favourable Law amongst us which affords the Benefit of Clergy c. P. 19. Those therefore whom Christ shall then acquit are acquitted by the Gospel or Law of Faith those whom he condemâ—…s he condemns by both Laws P. 230. They that really believe Forgiveness in God do thereby obtain Forgiveness Believing gives an interest in it it brings it home to the Soul concerned This is the inviolable Law of the Gospel Believing and Forgiveness are inseparably conjoined P. 139. he saith Repentance was no Duty to Adam in Eden it is none for the Angels in Heaven nor for the Damned in Hell what then may be the Language of this Appointment O Sinners come and deal with God by Repentance c. It 's true many do deceive themselves they raise themselves unto an expectation of Immunity not on Gospel-grounds But God deceives none whoever comes to him on his Proposal of Repentance shall find Forgiveness It 's said of some He will laugh at their Calamity c. But who are they Only such as refuse his Call to Repentance with the Promises of Acceptation annexed See p. 254. P. 375. Faith is the only Condition of the Covenant of Grace which is therefore called the Law of Faith P. 7. The Covenant of Grace the Apostle calls it the Law of Faith and it is especially expressed thus He that believes shall be saved P. 308. The Precept of Believing is a Gospel-Precept only and the Punishment for Unbelief is threatned and inflicted in relation to the Gospel as he oft shews at large and in p. 10. instanceth in five things a great difference between Faith in Adam and Gospel-Faith one of which is that tho' there was a kind of Faith in Adam yet it was not to be the Condition of that Covenant c. But the Faith required in the Covenant of Grace comes in purposely as the Condition of Life and Justification for the Sinner P. 18. Oh saith the Law such Duties have been omitted such Sins have been committed such Sabbaths have been prophaned c. such Tenders of Grace have been slighted Here saith he the Gospel Law comes in as an Accuser too And p. 55 553. You must so confide and rely on Christ's one most perfect and all-sufficient Sacrifice as yet withal to be careful that you on your part do perform those Gospel-Conditions which God enjoins and requires of you in order to Remission Justification and Glorification c. The whole Business of Merit and Satisfaction lies upon Christ but as to Believing and Repenting the two grand Gospel-Conditions they lye upon your selves with respect to the Act tho' not the Power and must be done by your selves yea and the doing of these is as necessary on your parts under the notion of Conditions as suffering and dying was on Christ's part under the notion of Merit And it is most certain that the latter without the former will not profit you because Christ never designed to impute or make over his Merit to any further than as they should make good these Conditions of Faith and Repentance P. 553. he shews the Rock of Popery is to trust in these as Merits and the Rock of Antinomianism is to deny that respect to Holiness Obedience Faith and Repentance which is due to them as Means and Conditions P. 157. you read Rom. 3. 27. the Law of Faith and the Law
He is the Author of eternal Salvation to all them that obey him If a man keep my Sayings he shall never see death He that doth my Commandments and keepeth them he loveth me and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father The dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God and they that hear shall live For as the Father hath life in himself so hath he given the Son to have life in himself and hath given him Authority to execute Iudgment also because he is the Son of Man He that heareth my word and believeth him that sent me hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation It seems too that Church-Censures bind nothing of eternal danger even when rightly administred Dr. Owens in his Treatise of the Sabbath says near these words That our worshipping Christ in his Ordinances on Earth is the Condition of our being with him in Heaven 4. The Reason for all this is strange such Obedience is part of the Life promised then he rendred the Elect Libertines when he made such Promises He promised to make the Elect obedient therefore he cannot command them to be so Pursuant to his Promise he 'll make them obedient therefore the Terms to be obeyed are no foederal Conditions of other Blessings promised on those Terms because he 'l see they shall believe therefore he must not thus enact Believe and thou shalt be saved 5. But is there no distinction admittable in the word Life It 's sometimes put for Grace in us sometimes for Glory consummated sometimes it 's put strictly for the saving priviledge part of the Covenant as consequent to the Terms of it and that believing ye might have Life In this sence he saw I took it And doth God in every Promise of Life in this sence promise Obedience to the Terms of it 6. A few lines after these he determines the Judgment committed to Christ It 's not Legislation at all nay all of it is not Gospel-Iudgment he might have said none of it for with him the Gospel is no Law and so no Rule of Judgment Nay worst of all his Judgment is only to destroy not to save i. e. his Reward as Redeemer is to be Executioner of Adam's Law without conditional Offers of Pardon to any that are not saved for if there be no foederal Sanction in the Gospel there can be no conditional Offer to any that are not saved nay to none that are saved Now Reader see how Christ as Redeemer is honoured by Mr. C. He shall be of use to excuse us from loyal subjection while himself is dethroned as to the rectoral way of the application of his Merits This very point of Christ's regal Authority as Redeemer hath been defended by our Divines hitherto and I am sure he 'l take vengeance on them who obey not his Gospel I might instance others of his Principles which I suppose agree with Dr. Crisp as in his Description of Faith which he hints p. 36. and I have heard him more fully define it by assurance of our Pardon In that place he makes Faith of no use but to claim Possession to which it seems we had as full a Title before we believed And p. 17. Mr. C. After the manner of imputation in foro justitiae our Sins shall never be laid on us viz. the Elect qua-Elect Which I will prove against you when you will Rep. Let 's understand the Question for it is too confused What is this After the manner of imputation in foro c Do you mean the Elect shall never come to God's Bar of Judgment before they believe and are forgiven If so I grant it But if you mean that the past Sentence of God binds not the Sins of the Elect upon them while they are Unbelievers and that this Act of his by his Word is not an Imputation in foro divinae justitiae I freely accept your Challenge so that you will engage to avoid unruly Passions And it 's well if those Effects of Electing Love which Paul had applied to him in the Womb are not semen quoddam electionis which Calvin so condemns Of the same sort is what Mr. C. saith p. 34. of 2 Cor. 5. 18. Rep. 1 God is so reconciled that no want of atonement shall prevent Peace 2. That upon this atonement God offers Peace on the lowest Terms 3. That the Elect shall in time be enabled to obey those Terms and be actually reconciled 4. But the whole Canon of the Word and unopposed in this place assures me that the Elect are in a state of Wrath till they believe yea were God actually reconciled to them he could not suffer them to remain Enemies in their Minds by wicked Works and a total absence of his Spirit But I have not room for these and the like Mr. C. p. 10. After a certain zealous Neonomian had taken his Leave of us And p. 22. you play the Iugler more He saith Quoniam Christus Mediator c. being that both Christ the Mediator and Faith in Christ are only means of the restauration of Man to God by Holiness and Love Therefore it must doubtlesly be said that from the nature of the thing Faith Holiness and the Love of God are more necessary to Salvation than either Faith in Christ or the Sacrifice of Christ himself There 's a â—…one for you to pick. Rep. These are Mr. Baxter's words and had I been in his stead I should not have given so much occasion to simple Readers to startle but being the only seeming Difficulty Mr. C. hath put me to except the exercise of Patience I 'll see if the Offence may be prevented 1. Mr. B. doth not here compare the causal Influence of Christ's Satisfaction with our Holiness nor the use of Faith in Christ with Faith in God as the way of Life is now appointed by the Divine Will If any man had asked Mr. B. Is Holiness as meritorious of Salvation as Christ's Satisfaction is he would have answered No for Christ's Satisfaction is the sole meritorious cause of Salvation and Holiness is none at all If you had ask'd Mr. B. Is Faith-Love to God of that use to receive Christ for our Justification as Faith in Christ is he would have answer'd No Faith in Christ is in it self most apâ—… and by the Lord appointed to this use to receive Christ. Both these he ofâ—… affirms 2. Mr. B. here speaks only of the comparative necessity of these to Salvation with respect to the nature of the thing it self that is as he explains himself it cannot be a Salvation without Holiness at least habitual it 's a Contradiction as it would be to say Salvation without Salvation It is not whether is more necessary now to my obtaining Salvation as if I should ask whether is more necessary to the Essence of Man his Humanity or Christ's Satisfaction you would say from the nature of the thing