new Converts If ye continue in my words then shall ye be my Disciples indeed Iohn viii 31. Why does he not correct the whole Gospel the language of which is He that continueth to the end shall be saved Upon the next Plea he has a learned Dispute about the Pharisees Memories which were better than any Concordance for the Hebrew Text I know the Story as well as he and do not much matter what the credit of it is but is not this a wise reason why our Saviour did not name the Text in preaching to a promiscuous Auditory because it may be some few great Rabbies knew where to find it whereas the generality of the people are said not to know the Law In the next place he disputes as learnedly whether Iudas hanged himself and I perceive this great Critick thinks every one must be as impertinent as himself who cannot meet with the word Iudas or hanged or the like but whether it be to the purpose or not must dispute the case whether Iudas were hanged for if he broke his Neck or had drowned or burnt himself it had been all one to my purpose and I was not disposed to go out of my way to pursue Feathers and Butterflies Upon the next he gravely observes That there are no good men but sleep sometimes unless they be wiser than the five wise Virgins We will allow him this so they do not sleep to let their Lamps go out as the five foolish Virgins did On the next he observes That it is a huge commendation of good Knowledge that I say If a good man have the keeping of it it is never the worse for him though if he think this any disparagement to good Knowledge I perceive he understands Rhetorick as little as Logick or thinks his Readers understand neither On the next when I say That keeping the Lords day strictly is one good thing which doth well in the company of more he is afraid I forgot my self and stumbled upon a Puritanical saying before I was aware and adds that notwithstanding I thus commend a strict observation of the Lords day I could like well enough of a Book of Sports the uncharitableness of which Censure contrary to the express sense of my words I leave to be corrected by his own Conscience if he have any left And here our Author thinks fit to break off for it was not safe to go any farther those other Pleas which this poor man makes to defend himself against the imputation of Hypocrisie are such on which he dares not venture as That he performs all these Duties with life and zeal That he is constant and perseveres in godly courses and that he is conscious to himself of his Honesty and Sincerity in all this that he does all with a good heart for God that is out of a hearty Devotion to God and Reverence for his Laws and if such a man may be a Hypocrite no man can be sure of his Sincerity Only upon this last he observes That Mr. Shephard only says That a man may think he hath a good heart to God and yet deceive himself whereas I wish he had said that a man who thinks he hath a good heart to God must needs be mistaken and then I would say the whole Doctrine concerning Marks and Evidences were at an end Now to make it appear what a fair Adversary I have of this Author I shall transcribe this whole passage Object But some men are conscious to themselves of their own hypocrisie but I do all with a good heart for God Answ. So thou maist think of thy self and be deceived Upon this I observe If this be an Objection let a man have what marks he will the Objection will still be good for after all it may be objected that a man may be deceived in it and think he hath these marks when he hath them not And as a proof of this Mr. Shephard adds There is a way that seemeth right to a man but the end thereof is death thou mayest live so as to deceive thy self and others and yet prove an Hypocrite On which I observe that the sense of this argument is this As if because some men may think themselves good who are in a bad way no man could ever be sure that he were in the right and thus farewel all Evidences So that there is no need Mr. Shephard should say that he who thinks he hath a good heart towards God must needs be mistaken in order to overthrow the Doctrine of Marks and Evidences for if a man who is conscious to himself of his own sincerity that he hath a great reverence and regard for God in all his actions may be deceived in it it is sufficient to destroy all Marks and Evidences For if we cannot be sure what the workings and motions purposes and resolutions and habitual inclinations of our own Minds are we can be sure of nothing and if a man who is as sure of this as inward sense and feeling can make him may be deceived then there is no way to be sure of it this makes men as down-right Scepticks in the Doctrine of Marks and Evidences as to deny the truth of our Senses or of our Faculties does in Philosophy That refined Hypocrisie wherewith men deceive themselves does not consist in such an hypocrisie and deceitfulness of the heart as conceals it self from it self which is absolutely impossible but in a false and hypocritical Religion when they think to please God by some exterior homage or flattering Devotions or costly or pompous Ceremonies or by an Orthodox Faith or counterfeit Reliances or any other mode or form of Religion without a sincere Obedience to his Laws the men know that they are Villains all this while that they are guilty of notorious wickedness as the Scribes and Pharisees were but they flatter themselves that they may be very dear to God notwithstanding this either for the sake of the Righteousness of Christ or some hypocritical performances of their own These are the ways which seem right to a man when the end thereof is death This is the sum of our Authors charge against me for perverting mens words and how he hath acquitted himself in it let the Reader judge and all the amends I shall require of him is to turn his Looking-Glass upon himself and to view his own face in it But there is one Argument still behind to prove that I could have no good design in writing that Discourse and when I have answered that I hope I may pass at least for a well-meaning man And that is That I thrust out my sting against those who have written nothing taken notice of by me that can be supposed to hurt or hinder Godliness And though he mentions those he instances only in one a fault which at all turns he corrects in me now suppose this were true is there nothing fit to be corrected but what has an immediate tendency to
perswade the world that it has been the great design of late days to cavil at his Writings and to load his Person with reproaches and accordingly that I principally intended my Book against himself and his Book because he was the Author of it which as he says will at last prove to be its only guilt and crime What a mighty conceit has the Doctor of himself to think that he is so considerable that so many men should make it their business to oppose him He might have been quiet for ought I know had he not been troublesome to others and set up for the Great Champion of the Cause and his former miscarriages might have been buried in silence had he not forc'd men to publish them But I assure him as for my own part that I did not principally design that Discourse against him nor any other man much less against any party but against those foolish and absurd Doctrines whoever were the first Inventers or Patrons of them which debauch the practise of Christianity and turn the plain Revelations of the Gospel into unintelligible Mysteries I envy no mans Reputation when it is consistent with the interest of Religion nor do I think that any mans Reputation ought to be so dear to us as to forego the most useful and necessary Truths rather than let the World know that such Men of Name and Renown have been in a mistake But it may be the Looking-Glass-Maker may see more than other men though there is some danger lest such persons should draw other mens faces by the reflection of their own however let us hear what he has to say And he very gravely proves that my design could not be good by several arguments For first if it had then before I had charged any Opinion I ought fairly to have stated and candidly represented that Opinion but may not the want of this sometimes be a defect in Skill not a failure in Honesty Or else what will become of many of his good Friends who are not much versed in Logick and never were acquainted with this knack of stating things fairly But he adds This I seldom find him to do and if I had said I never found him so to have done I should not lie though perhaps I might be mistaken Now I know not how to help him only would advise him the next time to use his Spectacles instead of a Looking-glass and then I hope he may see better and discover a great many things fairly stated Secondly He says That I ought never to charge any man with those consequences of an Opinion which I know to be disowned and disavowed by him Now how this comes in I cannot tell for he has not the confidence to charge me with doing so though he would willingly insinuate that I do But the third is a heavy charge That I draw a bad sense out of words which are capable of a good sense which is a great Sin against God and my Neighbour Now this I confess is a great crime if by capable he means when according to the common acceptation of the words and use of phrases and circumstances of the place and the avowed Doctrines and Principles of the Author it appears to be intended otherwise but when the phrase is doubtful and ambiguous and on purpose contrived so to conceal those Doctrines which cannot endure the clear and open light or when those expressions which may be capable of a good sense are by a traditionary exposition generally understood in a bad sense especially if the bad sense be most agreeable to the professed Principles of the Writer and such phrases be delivered without an express caution against the bad sense in these cases it is no fault to expound such expressions to the worst sense but a great charity to mens Souls to warn them against such easie and obvious mistakes But this is a great charge and therefore let us hear how he proves it He gives too instances of it one with respect to Doctor Owen's Doctrine concerning an Acquaintance with Christs Person this I shall let pass at present because I shall meet with it again in the Doctor but his other instance on which he insists is with reference to Mr. Shephard I show how impossible it is according to some mens Principles to discover our Union to Christ and Justification by him by the marks of Sanctification and among other things I observe That when they have a mind to take down the confidence of men who are apt to presume too soon that their condition is good they do so magnifie the attainments of Hypocrites who shall never go to Heaven that it is impossible for any sanctified man to do more than a Hypocrite may do This I make good by a large citation out of Mr. Shephard's Sincere Convert And here he first quarrels that I say some men do so and prove it only from Mr. Shephard These men I see will never be pleased sometimes they quarrel that I name any body and sometimes that I name no more but I can assure this Gentleman that this was not Mr. Shephard's private Opinion and shall make it good when I find more of his Mind to require a proof of it The wrong which he supposes I have done Mr. Shephard is this That I bring him in answering the Pleas of several Hypocrites for themselves and then suppose the same man to make all these Pleas for himself which is not fair or just As for instance the man accused of Hypocrisie or at least suspected pleads for himself that he has reformed those Vices he once lived in that he prays often that he fasts sometimes as well as prays that he hears the Word of God and likes the best Preachers that he reads the Scriptures often that he is grieved and sorrowful for his past sins that he loves good men and their company that he has more knowledge than others and keeps the Lords day strictly and has many very good desires and endeavours to get to heaven and performs all these Duties with Life and Zeal and is constant and perseveres in godly courses and is conscious to himself of his own Sincerity in all this that he does all this with a good heart for God That Mr. Shephard objects all this in the person of one man whom he designs after all to prove a Hypocrite is so evident that nothing could excuse our Author for supposing that he spoke this in the persons of several men that one pleaded one thing for himself and another another but only his confession that he had not read the Book and how far that will excuse him let others consider Mr. Shephard begins thus In what hast thou gone beyond them that think they are rich and want nothing who yet are poor and miserable and naked Thou wilt say haply first I have left my sins I once lived in c. So that this is but the first thing such a man objects or
which as he observes very well was my design in Writing as well as I could to give them a shameful baffle for I never thought my self concerned to be tender of the reputation of dangerous though popular Errors And that I do not attempt a grave and solemn confutation of Non-sense or absurd forms of speech is no fault Mr. Ferguson himself being Judge who tells us That Non-sense is not to be refuted but exposed For he betrays the Weakness of his own Reason who undertakes to encounter an absurd phrase with Arguments And that the Reputation of Persons is concerned in the Reputation of Doctrines and that the scorn which I bestow on one reflects upon the other I cannot help though they may My only design was to confute their Doctrines and there is not any expression which they call scornful which was levell'd against the personal weaknesses and infirmities of Men but against the fulsome and palpable absurdities of Opinions and when such absurd notions are cried up for great and venerable Mysteries there is the greater reason to speak very plain that they may appear absurd to the meanest apprehension This is the only Reason why my Book is accused of Scorn and Contempt and I do not deny but they have some reason to be angry at this though I shall never be perswaded to like my Book ever the worse for it But the Doctor observes farther That the Discourse which I thus rave against is Didactical and accommodated unto a popular way of Instruction and it hath hitherto been the common ingenuity of all learned men to give an allowance unto such Discourses so as not to exact from them an accuracy and propriety in expressions such as are required in those which are Scholastical and Polemical c. I cannot understand the reason of this Exception when the Doctor pag. 7. had so expresly affirmed That he could not find any Thing any Doctrine any Expressions any Words reflâ—cted on which the Exceptions of this man do give him the least occasion to alter or desire that they had been otherwise either expressed or delivered Now if his Discourse be writ with such accuracy what matter whether it be Didactical or Polemical But as for the thing it self it must be acknowledged that it is very disingenuous to expect a Polemical Accuracy in Popular Discourses for it is not fit to instruct people in terms of Art borrowed from the Schools of Plato or Aristotle which we may be sure the people understand not nor it may be these Polemical men neither But there is another kind of accuracy very necessary for Popular Discourses which I should be very glad to find in Dr. O. and some late Writers that is strict Truth and plainness of expression and when Popular Discourses are defective in these it is no disingenuity to take notice of it for there is nothing does more mischief to Religion than to teach the people a Set of unintelligible and ambiguous Phrases which how-ever they may be forc'd to some tolerable sense by men of Art and Skill yet to the generality of Readers either signifie nothing or that which is very bad But by this the Doctor would fain insinuate that my Book consists only of some cavilling Exceptions about Words and Phrases and improper forms of Speech which if it could be proved would be a more effectual confutation of it than any I have yet seen and yet the Looking-Glass-Maker proceeds upon this supposition and therefore to requite me picks quarrels with my Words and discovers great improprieties contradictions nonsense and writes just such a Confutation of my Book as I should have expected from a Court-Jester or a Prevaricator I shall give some few instances of this nature which may be sufficient to divert the Reader and that is the only reason I know why I should take any notice of them Except for fear the Author should think himself slighted and judge me of the same morose humour with Mr. Hickman who uses to punish such Scriblers with not buying nor reading their Books Thus sometimes I use some popular forms of Speech the sense of which is generally very well understood but they will not down with our Author because they cannot be reconciled to strict Rules of Logick or terms of Art thus he observes that I say in one place some men where-ever they meet with the word Christ in Scripture alway understand by it the Person of Christ and this I doubt not is true of a great many private Christians and some ignorant Preachers but then in another place I affirm that it is acknowledged by all that Christ sometimes signifies the Church of Christ now this is a contradiction that all sometimes understand by the name Christ the Church of Christ and some always understand the person of Christ But pray what need is there that all should include those some Why could not he by all understand all men of any knowledge and skill in the use of words which some and a great many have not How comes it to pass that he has so soon forgot their beloved distinction of singuli generum genera singulorum whereby they prove that Christ died for all without dying for all Thus I observe that Christ hath told us in the Gospel whatever he intends to do for us and hath charged us to expect no more from him which the circumstances of the place determine to the terms and conditions of our Salvation by Christ but nothing will serve our Author unless whatever be supposed to signifie all the particularities of Christs Providence towards the Church as the very particular time when Kingly and Episcopal Government should be restored here in England Though I doubt not but our Author had much rather know when they shall be pulled down again Thus when I say That now the only true Medium of knowing God is the knowledge of Christ who came into the World to declare God to us that is as I soon add That the only certain way of attaining to the knowledge of the nature and will of God is by knowing Christ whom God sent into the World to publish the everlasting Gospel who hath made more perfect Revelations of Gods will than ever the World had before c. Because I say that Christ is the only true Medium of knowing God he concludes that I am a Fanatick who reject the Light of Nature and the Works of Creation and Providence as false Mediums of knowing God which must be thrown away or not made use of But does he know what a true Medium is It is that which gives us a clear and certain and perfect knowledge as a true Medium of sight is that which conveys the perfect images of things with clearness and certainty now will he say that the Light of Nature c. can give us such a clear and perfect and certain knowledge of the nature of God and his will concerning our Salvation as the
must understand all the difficulties of Quantity and whether it consist of Divisibles or Indivisibles and must understand the differences of Matter and the reason why he can bite one sort of Matter with his Teeth but can make no impression upon another and how the parts of matter hang together and the like There is a more general indistinct apprehension of things which is sufficient to govern our Actions though we do not understand all the Niceties and Philosophy of them But if our Author can find such subtilties in those plain matters which are taught Children in the Church-Catechism which are objections that will indifferently lie against the plainest Instructions what does he think of those sublime matters of the Eternal Decrees and Counsels of God Election and Reprobation and such-like Mysteries which are so familiarly thrust into Catechisms What subtilty is required in Children to understand these deep Points and to comprehend the subtil and artificial Schemes of Orthodoxy This is much like another Cavil against the intelligibleness of our Union with Christ I am sure says our Author that our Union with Christ is an Union No doubt Sir and if it be so it cannot be very easie to be understood because the Metaphysical notion of Union is as difficult as any other transcendental term Why then let the Metaphysicians dispute it out but for all that I can easily understand and I believe any one else can what it is to be related to Christ as Subjects are to their Prince and Disciples to their Master and Wives to their Husbands c. This is enough to give the Reader a taste of our Authors Skill and should I add any more it might bring my own discretion into question for next to making foolish and cavilling Objections it is an argument of a very little Wit to answer them And therefore to proceed Dr. Owen observes that I have writ against his Book which was writ and published near twenty years since I confess I do not well understand the force of this Objection unless he imagine that his Book is now grown venerable for its antiquity but where-ever the force of it lies I am sure it answers another grand Objection against me which is so often repeated that I am a Young Man a defect which time will mend and which Industry will supply However I suppose the Doctor was not very old twenty years ago and it argu'd some Modesty in the young Man rather to attack a Book writ by the Doctor when he was a young Man too than rudely to assault his Writings of a later date which may be presumed to be the effects of a more mature Judgement and riper years and I hope this consideration will plead my excuse with him for not undertaking that task which he has so kindly allotted me right or wrong to answer all his late voluminous Treatises which I think I may as soon be perswaded to do as to read them that magnificent Title of Exercitations which used to be prefixed before some learned Discourses invited me to take a little taste of them till I found my self mistaken and deceived with some jejune or trite Observations which has so put me out of conceit with flattering Titles that I shall never again believe the Titles of Books or Chapters for his sake But this Book has had the approbation of as Learned and Holy Persons it may be as any the Doctor knows living in England or out of it who owning the Truth contained in it have highly avowed its Usefulness and are ready yet so to do I fear that either the Doctor 's Acquaintance with Learned and Holy Men is not very great or that this is not true for I cannot conceive how very holy men should so approve a Book which is so little a Friend to Holiness or that learned men should be pleased with such loose and inconsequent Reasonings but let that be as it will I am sure there are as learned and as holy men who do as little approve it unless the Doctor thinks that Learning and Holiness are confined to his own Party or that the approbation of his Writings is the only sure test of Mens Learning and Holiness But the great charge of all which runs thorow his whole Book is that I have mis-represented his words and perverted his sense which sometimes he attributes to ignorance sometimes to malice sometimes he calls it an impudent falshood sometimes flagitiously false and shows very great Skill at varying phrases which he is much better at than at writing Controversies Whether this Charge be true or not shall be examined particularly as far as I can reduce the several particulars of this Charge into any order But to abate the wonder a little I must inform my Reader that this is Dr. Owen's way of answering Books to deny those Doctrines which he dares not own or cannot vindicate I am not the first who have been charged with such falsifications Mr. Baxter was taxed with it long since in a whole Book written for that very purpose intitled Of the Death of Christ and of Iustification the Doctrine concerning them formerly deliverd vindicated from the Animadversions of Mr. R. B. where this grave man is corrected as magisterially as if he had been such another Stripling as my self Towards the conclusion of that Discourse I meet with a very excellent Prayer If I must engage again in the like kind I shall pray That He from whom are all my supplies would give me a real humble frame of heart that I may have no need with many pretences and a multitude of good words to make a cloak for a Spirit breaking frequently thorow all with sad discoveries of Pride and Passion and to keep me from all magisterial insolence pharisaical supercilious self-conceitedness contempt of others and every thing that is contrary to the Rule whereby I ought to walk It is great pity that Forms of Prayer are not lawful for this is too good a Prayer to be used but once in a mans life which I doubt is one reason why we see no better effects of it in the Doctors Writings But there is a heavier Charge than all this behind which is frequently hinted by Doctor Owen and more expresly managed by Mr. Ferguson who in his Preface tells his Readers That I treat the sacred Writers with as much contempt as I do T. W. and Burlesque the Scripture no less than others have done Virgil's Poems This would be a terrible Adversary were he as good at his proofs as he is bold and daring in his Charge This is a crime of a very high nature to burlesque Scripture and the foulness of the imputation might justly have provoked a tamer man than my self did not his weak and ridiculous proofs more deserve contempt than any serious resentment He waves the proof of this in his Preface but in his second Chapter where he entertains his Readers with a tedious impertinent Discourse about Metaphors and
by him I am charged with deriding all trust and dependence on Christ for the performance of his Promises or the influences of his Grace and because I reject their proof of this from St. Paul's trusting in God in the faithful discharge of his Apostolical Office notwithstanding all the Persecutions he suffered from Jews and Heathens 2 Tim. 1. 12. I am accused of involving the Scripture in the same condemnation and bringing St. Paul himself under the same imputation Certainly these men think themselves all Apostles and that they expound the Scriptures with as infallible a Spirit as first indited them for otherwise they would not be so impudent as to charge every man who laughs at their ridiculous applications of Scripture-phrases with deriding the Scriptures and the holy Spirit And yet this is the true Reason of all this noise and out-cry about burlesquing the Scripture for he directs his Readers to page 62 63 c. of my Book for an example of my sacrilegious abuse of the words of Scripture to make my Readers sport and to render my Adversaries ridiculous and whoever consults the place will only find a Scheme of their Divinity expressed in their own canting phrases without any Art to make it look ridiculously but only a true and naked representation of it and though I cannot deny that it is a famous Example of burlesquing the Scripture yet Mr. Ferguson ought to have laid the Saddle upon the right Horses back and then I doubt his own dear Friends must suffer under this Imputation There is nothing I more heartily designed than to rescue the Scripture from such Abuses as appears from what I immediately added That the whole Mystery of this and a great deal more stuff of this nature not of Fanaticism as he cites my words purposely to create the greater odium which is very familiar with him and agreeable enough to the purity of his Christian Morals consists in wresting metaphorical and allusive expressions to a proper sense When the Scripture describes the Profession of Christianity a sincere Belief and Obedience to the Gospel by having Christ and being in Christ and coming to him and receiving him these men expound these phrases to a proper and natural sense to signifie I know not what unintelligible Union and spiritual Progress and Closure of the Soul with him an Union of Persons instead of an Agreement in Faith and Manners If this be to burlesque Scripture to deliver it from the Freaks of an Enthusiastick Fancy and to expound it to a plain and easie sense such as is agreeable to the Understandings of men and worthy of the Spirit of God I acknowledge the Charge and am afraid my Adversaries will never be guilty of that Crime Thus when I shew how convincingly these men prove their darling Opinions from a fanciful Exposition of Scripture-Metaphors and Types and Figures and among the rest observe how many pretty Resemblances of Christ Mr. Watson has discover'd in the brazen Serpent wherein Mr. Ferguson himself acknowledges he has prevaricated I am charged with deriding the Type it self and making scornful Reflections upon the main scope and design of the comparison T. W. among other things tells us that as the Serpent was lifted up to be look'd upon by the stung Israelites which looking implied a secret hope they had of cure so if we do but look on Christ fiducially we shall be cured of our sins by which comparison he would prove that because the Israelites were miraculously cured only by looking upon the brazen Serpent that therefore there is nothing more required of us to be cured of our Sins but only looking fiducially on Christ that is confidently hoping to be saved by him this Mr. Ferguson says is parallel to the words of our Saviour and the true intendment and meaning of them Iohn iii. 15 16. And as Moses lifted up the Serpent in the Wilderness even so must the Son of man be lifted up that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life And now I will acknowledge that I have done very ill in ranking this comparison of T. W's among the rest of his Prevarications if Mr. Ferguson can prove that this believing signifies no more than this fiducial looking on Christ which I am sure he can never prove except it be in Mr. Watson's way What he adds about Mr. Tho. Vincent is sufficiently answered already and shall be considered in another place This is the sum of his Charge against me for burlesquing Scripture in which I cannot think he was serious but only said this because he must say something and had nothing wiser to say Or as it is with some scolding people who wanting wit to make proper and sudden Repartees chuse rather than to say nothing to say the same things which were said to them though the impropriety of the application and the dullness of it serve only to make mirth for the by-standers This I perceive is Mr. Ferguson's peculiar Talent and to give him his due he is very dexterous at it as will appear in two or three instances more of a like narure I charge some of the Nonconformists for I never thought them all guilty of it with perverting the Scripture by expounding allusive and metaphorical expressions to a proper sense Mr. Ferguson dares not deny this Charge for the matter of fact is too evident but he shews great Skill in retorting it and gives several instances how I pervert Scripture in the same manner Thus he tells his Readers That whereas other Expositors of Scripture have expounded Christs being called The Brightness of his Fathers Glory and the express Image of his Person Heb. i. 3. in a plain and proper sense and have accordingly argued from it for the Deity of Christ against the Socinians Mr. Sherlock by Christs being stiled the Brightness of his Fathers Glory c. understands no more but those Discoveries which Christ hath made of God being as true a Representation of the Divine Nature and Will as any Picture is of the Person it represents When he says I understand no more by it he expresly contradicts my own words which are these Upon which account too as well as with respect to his Divine Nature he is called the brightness of his Fathers glory c. So that I acknowledge that Christ is called the brightness of his Fathers glory as well with respect to his Divine Nature as to the glorious Revelations of his Will and for Mr. Ferguson to say I do not and upon that account to insinuate so foul a Charge as Socinianism others would have called a wilful and malicious lye But suppose the worst that I had expounded Christs being called the brightness of his Fathers Glory c. only with respect to those glorious Discoveries he hath made of God he might have said it had been a false and dangerous and Socinian Exposition or what he pleased but it is a very unhappy
the Laws of earthly Marriages and Suretiship c. the only answer I can get from Dr. Owen and his Friends is That Christ is not such a Husband and Surety and Mediator as men are but is all this in an eminent manner that there is something peculiar in him which cannot be affirmed of any other Now this is the answer I desired but could not hope that they had so little wit as to give it for this is plainly to acknowledge that all their Arguments are fallacious for if there be such a vast difference between the Notion of a Husband and Surety and Mediator and the several Duties and Offices of these Relations as applied to men and as applied to Christ then we cannot argue from one to the other this is plainly to give away the best Arguments they have for the Imputation of Christs Personal Righteousness in their sense and with them to yield up the Cause For now before they argue from Christs being our Husband that therefore we have a title to his Personal Righteousness as a Wife has to her Husbands Estate they must prove from express Texts of Scripture that this is the Law of our spiritual Marriage before they argue from Christs being our Surety that therefore we are but one Person with him and that whatever he did as our Surety is accounted as much ours as if we had done it our selves they must prove that this is the Scripture-notion of Christs Suretiship and had they taken this course I dare say I might have looked long enough for an Answer before it had come And here as not finding a fitter place for it I shall briefly take notice of that Defence which Dr. Owen has made for his way of Reasoning from Christs being our Mediator to prove the Imputation of his Personal Righteousness to us Though I must recal that word Defence for indeed he has made none but appeals to the ingenuity of his Readers and leaves his Book to defend it self which it may be supposed to be very well able to do at the age of twenty years especially against a young Adversary And first he would willingly insinuate that I had not truly or fairly related his words but then on a sudden he takes courage and roundly asserts whatever I had charged him with That the Lord Christ fulfilled all Righteousness as Mediator and that what he did as Mediator he did it for them whose Mediator he was or in whose stead and for whose good he executed the Office of a Mediator before God And here he first very nicely distinguishes between these two Propositions Christ as Mediator fulfilled all Righteousness in our stead and Christ being Mediator in our stead fulfilled all Righteousness for us and very truly observes that I do not understand the difference between them and it would have been charitably done of him to have shown the difference for I am still so dull as not to perceive it If Christ as Mediator in our stead fulfilled all Righteousness for us then he must fulfil it in our stead for he is therefore supposed to fulfil Righteousness for us because he acted in our stead which can be no reason unless he acted in our stead in fulfilling Righteousness which I think is much the same with fulfilling Righteousness in our stead And indeed the Doctor himself does expresly assert this in so many words That this Obedience was performed by Christ not for himself but for us and in our stead So that it seems He himself did not understand the difference of these expressions then and I am sure can show no difference now Though I cannot blame the Doctor for being willing to shift off this expression That Christ fulfilled all Righteousness in our stead as fore-seeing the consequence of it that this must needs discharge us from the Obligations of a Personal Righteousness For if Christ have fulfilled the Righteousness of the Law in our stead the Law can no more exact Obedience from us than it can inflict Punishment on us a perfect Righteousness is all the Law can require of us and since we have perfectly obeyed the Law in Christ our Mediator it can make no farther Demands of us Which is to set up the personal Righteousness of Christ in opposition to his Laws and Religion Now as bad a consequence as this is if Dr. Owen would speak consistently with his own Principles he can never avoid it for the foundation of all his Arguments to prove that Christs Righteousness is made ours in a Law-sense is that Christ as our Surety and Mediator fulfilled all Righteousness in our stead for take away this and there is no more reason why the Righteousness of Christ should in his sense be reckoned ours than why the Righteousness of Abraham or Moses or St. Paul should be imputed to us And yet supposing this true That Christ fulfilled all Righteousness in our stead it necessarily overthrows their fundamental Notion of our Justification by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness to us for if he did it in our stead it becomes ours without an Imputation It would be necessary indeed that God should accept of Christ as our Surety and Mediator to act in our stead which may be reckoned an act of favour and accordingly that Christ should fulfil all Righteousness in our stead but when this is done there needs no imputation to make it ours Whatever is done in our stead by a Proxy or Substitute appointed and allowed to act for us becomes ours according to strict Law and Justice and needs not the acceptation of Grace and Mercy which is the Scripture-notion of Imputation to make it so Christs Righteousness would become ours by his acting in our stead without any consequent Imputation And yet to see how Absurdities multiply suppose we take it in Dr. Owen's sense that Christ is only a Mediator in our stead this is a manifest contradiction for it supposes that the Middle may stand in the place of either of the Extreams for a Mediator is a middle Person between two contending Parties and therefore his Office is to act between them both and not in the stead of either And to say that Christ is a Mediator in our stead supposes that we ought to have been Mediators that is middle Persons between God and our selves nay indeed that we are so in the Person of Christ for otherwise though he may be a Mediator on our behalf and for our good yet he cannot mediate in our stead In the next place I made it appear that we cannot argue from the general notion of a Mediator that his Personal Righteousness shall be imputed to those for whom he is Mediator for a Mediator is one who interposes between two differing Parties to accommodate the difference but it was never heard of yet that it was the Office of a Mediator to perform the terms and conditions himself which I shewed particularly in the example of Moses And here the