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
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
Death made with Men doth not consist in that viz. That we are justified before God and saved by Faith as it apprehends the Merit of Christ but in this that the Demand of perfect legal Righteousness being abrogated God accounts Faith it self and the imperfect Obedience of Faith for or instead of the perfect Obedience of the Law and graciously judgeth this worthy of the Reward of Eternal Life Which they justly brand as the Socinian Notion Reader I declare against this Error and have affirmed that Faith alone receives Christ and his Merits 2. That it 's the Righteousness of Christ alone which is the Meritorious or Material Cause of Justification 3. That our Faith Repentance or Works are not a jot of the material or meritorious Righteousness by or for which we are Justified They say Christ died that we might be saved if we believe I say Christ died that the Elect should believe and believing have Life through his Name To any one that knows the five Points wherein the Arminian Controversie consists I have said enough fully to acquit me I am positive for absolute certain Election for Christ's not dying alike for all For the Elect he died to secure their actual Reconciliation for others his Death is sufficient and real Offers of Salvation are made to them on the Terms of the Gospel notwithstanding their being condemned by the Law Again I say Man is corrupt and without the Grace of God he cannot believe All the Elect shall be though without violence brought by efficacious Grace to believe and finally persevere All which I oft assert in my Book An Account of some of Mr. C's Principles which he hath set up in opposition to mine I shall begin with Three of them and consider them together Mr. C. p. 24. The Essence of the Gospel is altogether Promise and Free Gift P. 28. The Gospel hath no Law-Sanction of its own but it only establisheth the Sanction of the Law by way of Promise to all that are saved P. 33. The Gospel as such is no Law hath no Sanction c. Which and many more places I may contract into this as his First Principle That the Gospel is in no sence a Law nor includes in it as any part thereof either any Precept nor any Promise upon any Condition on our part nor any Threatning If thou doubt the word Precept should not be added know the words above fully assert it And p. 23. he tells us The Precept of Faith is a Precept of the Law of Nature Mr. C. affirms p. 34. Whatsoever befalls Sinners retaining their sinful state and rejecting Grace is from the Law and not from the Gospel To talk of a Gospel-Threat is a Cataâ—…hresis at best and nothing else can save it from being a Bull. His Second Principles is The Gospel hath no Threatnings When my Question answer'd by him p. 32. was this Doth God promiscuously dispense these viz. Forgiveness Adoption Glory or any other promised Benefit given upon God's Terms I say Doth God dispense these without any regard to our being Believers or no Or whether our Faith be true or no Mr. C. answers I would know whether if God distribute his Free Grace to poor wretched worthless Creatures according to his Election and distinguishing Mercy doth he do it blindly because he finds no Reason in them Whence I may call this His Third Principle That God forgives adopts and glorifies Sinners without any respect to their being true Believers or no and Election and distinguishing Mercy be the only Rule by which he forgives adopts and glorifies Sinners as well as gives the First Grace To put the better gloss upon his Principle he saith p. 13. Doth God dispense Faith blindly c A. The Question was not whether God gave Faith absolutely but whether he gave Forgiveness and Glory promiscuously Nay he knows I oft-times affirm the former And in p. 21. he reviles me for saying That there must be a Work of the Spirit for conformity to the Rule of the Promise in the person to be pardoned Yea this third Principle must follow and is but the same as That the Gospel is no Law or stated Rule of Forgiveness Adoption and Glory And he affirms that Faith is a Precept of the Law and denies that any Precept of the Law is a Rule of Happiness with a Sanction p. 22 23. Repl. Not to insist how in the first Point in what he saith of the Sanction he excludes Forgiveness of Sin altogether yea and as he words it may bind the penal Curse on us He opposeth in these three Principles what he calls my 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 15th Paradoxes but had he considered the 4th and 13th he had answered his few seeming Arguments and prevented his gross misrepresentation of my Principles There he might have seen that I assert 1. There is a Certainty that the Elect shall obey the Terms of the Gospel and be infallibly saved 2. That it is Christ's Righteousness which is the alone meritorious Cause of a Believer's Justification and Salvation and that our complyance with the Terms of the Gospel by the Grace of God is no more than our answering that Rule by which God bestows on us Justification and Salvation for the Satisfaction and Merits of Christ. He that cannot distinguish between the Righteousness for which we are saved and a complyance with that Rectoral Method wherein God doth save us for that Righteousness and the Interest arising from that method complied with had better sit still than meddle with these Disputes Reader tho' I did not once call the Gospel a Law in all my Book and only said in my Preface that the Apostle called it a Law of Faith with respect to what I had discoursed yet because the whole of Mr. C's Book runs on this I shall insist most on this Head 1. by explaining the word Law then 2. in what sence it is not a Law 3. shew in what sence it is a Law which I shall prove c. 4. answer his Objections 5. produce some Testimonies 1. As to the name or word Law It hath pleased God to call the way of his application of Grace to fallen Sinners by various names and by that variety to help our Apprehensions which one name would not so well contribute to It 's called a Law a Covenant a Testament a Promise a Word c. none of them exclude the others and are easily reduced to each other A Promise of God that sets down an Order in conferring Benefits wherein he enjoins any Duty on Mans part in that Order hath the nature of a Law yea tho' he engage to enable the Person to do that Duty We must also consider that God in some respects varies these Terms from their common use among men both his Dominion and his Grace abating their rigid Sence He calls it a Law but yet his Mercy resolves thereby to confer such Benefits as brings the Law
down to a Promise He calls it a Promise but his Dominion renders the Term enjoyned a Duty and so be raiseth up the Promise to a Law The word Covenant implies the certain performance on his part in the way he sets down and our restipulation to that way In the very word Testament as he notes the ratification of the Covenant by Christ's Death so it excludes not the appointed Condition of the Legatees to whom he makes a disposition of the Benefits So that the Word the Law of Grace or the Law of Faith is no other than the Covenant of Grace the Gospel-Promise of Salvation the Testament of Christ or the Word of the Gospel or the Gospel it self Whereas Mr. C. exposeth it as a New Gospel and New Law it 's the first Gospel GOD delivered to Men for he never promised to give Glory by Christ to any unbelieving impenitent person A new Law indeed it is as being a little younger than the Law of Innocency which condemns for the least Sin and gives Life to none but the Perfect by which Law no man but Christ was ever justified and by whose answering it for us we shall be justified in a Gospel-way But yet it is a Law older than Cain or Abel otherwise Abel's Sacrifice had been no more acceptable than Cain's which by Faith it was and which Faith in Christ must have been commanded as well as the Sacrifice though the brief account which Moses gives of above two thousand years doth not express it nor was it needful Yea God's Words to Cain imply it as Mr. Ball on Covenant p. 43. saith These are a Promise of the Covenant that took place after the Fall 2. I do not say the Gospel is a Law in the following sence 1. I do not say that the Gospel includes nothing besides this Law it gives us an account of the Covenant of Redemption and the absolute Promises There be many Prophecies the History of our Blessed Lord c. Doctrinal Truths Prophecies c. yet these may be called Adjuncts 2. Nor do I judge it a Law in that sence our Divines fix on the Socinians and Arminians viz. as if Acts of Obedience to this Law are the Righteousness for which we are justified or saved as Perfect Obedience was under the Law of Adam This I deny for we have no Righteousness for which we are justified or saved but Christ's and the Fruits of that are we blessed with upon complying with the Gospel Our Faith or inherent Righteousness c. are not the paying a Farthing of Debt to the Creditor but our submitting to that way by which we have Forgiveness of all the Debt and are Partakers of Glory both which God had in his Eye as to be purchased by Christ before he fixed on this way for our obtaining them 3. Nor do I take it in the Popish sence which the Socinians and Arminians espouse but true Protestants oppose viz. as if the moral Law were not perfect in its kind but that the spiritual extensive sence of the Precepts were new Precepts of our Lord and that the Old Testament did not include the Gospel-Precepts of Faith in Christ and Repentance for Pardon as well as the New though it did not discover the Objects and Motives c. so clearly 4. It is not a Law that supposeth a moral ability in Sinners to perform its Precepts that was necessary in God's Dealings with Men as his Creatures just come out of his Hand but not so when he deals with Man about his recovery when he had virtually sinned in Adam forfeited all yea had undone himself Whatever Mr. C. saith p. 23. I affirm if the Subject be rational or have natural Power If such Ability comes so with this Law that the Elect are made effectually able and others are wilfully faulty if they finally rebel it 's enough to justifie the Divine Order Will not and cannot are distinct things with Mr. Fenner in his Book of Wilful Impenitency Yea with D. Owens on Ps. 130. p. 248. 5. It is not a Law that extinguisheth the Law of Nature which hath its special Precepts and which in genere upon Gospel Revelation requires what the Gospel requires and condemns for Faults against the special Precepts of the Gospel tho' it condemns not so as to bar the Relief which the Gospel affords nor promiseth Life upon those Terms which the Gospel doth The Gospel in a large sence takes the Law as subservient to its gracious designs tho' Mr. C. weakly infers p. 24 25. that therefore the whole Precept is hereby made the Condition 6. Neither doth this Law require any thing of us as a Condition of Christ's coming into the World as a Redeemer it supposeth that nor yet any Condition of the first Grace to the Elect. This the Covenant of Redemption secures and it is assured to the Catholick Church by Promise 8. Nor is it a Law Obedience whereto renders any promised Blessing a Debt All is free tho' sure It 's free as to Man's Procurement or Price yet it is as sure by Promise as if it were a Debt but the Price was Christ's Obedience and Sufferings and all comes to us of Gift yet in that way which God appoints to give it 2. I mean by the Gospel being a Law that God in Christ our Redeemer doth by the Gospel expresly command Sinners to receive Christ with a true operative Faith and promiseth that tho' they are condemned by Adam's Law yet upon their so believing they shall be united to Christ and justified by his Righteousness and that persevering in Faith by sincere Holiness they shall be saved for his sake He also threatens that if any shall dye unbelieving impenitent ungodly Rejecters of his Grace they shall be bar'd from these Benefits and they shall perish without relief and have sorer Punishments than if these gracious Offers had not been made to them This is the Law of Faith I 'll add one Caution to this Account which is too needful Give me but the Assemblies Description of Faith Conf. cap. 14. and I desire to use no word as expressive of the Terms of the Gospel besides Faith but men now define Faith by such a small part of it as requires Caution for the sake of Souls 1. Here we have all the Essentials of a Law God is our Ruler and we his Subjects his Will is revealed in a way of Government here 's his Precept which binds us to Duty here 's a Promise made to such as do comply and here 's a Threatning denounced against such as finally rebel Preach the Gospel to every Creature he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved he that believeth not shall be damned 2. Yet this is a Law of Grace it 's made by our Redeemer for fallen Man all the Benefits of it are founded on Christ's Righteousness as the immediate cause of them Effectual Ability to perform the Duty is provided for all
had not promised it upon believing Had Pardon come by an absolute Promise they acted very legally in believing that they might be pardoned Mr. C. may as justly say of them as of me They set up a new Gospel R. 7. The Gospel is at least part of the Rule by which Christ will judge the World at the last day That it must be a Law if it be a Rule of Judgment I suppose none will deny unless they 'l deny that Christ is a Judge The Work of that day is not to try Christ whether he fulfilled all 〈◊〉 Righteousness nor yet whether his Righteousness was impured to all that did believe but by solemn Sentence to decide the Cause of all men to silence all false Apologies and publickly adjudge all to their eternal place unto the Glory of Justice and Mercy That day supposeth all justified or not by the Gospel Christ then changeth no mans state the Godly stand there pardoned and entituled to Life by Christ's Righteousness imputed the Wicked are there without any Interest in Christ these wicked ones if they pretend to sinless Innocency they are cast upon the least Sin by the Law of Adam But if they plead God's general Mercy it will be evident that Mercy adjusted its Rule in the Gospel If they plead Hopes from Christ as a Redeemer and the Offers he made they are convinced by that Book that Christ saved none but such as repent and believe If they plead they did believe and profess his Name Christ will convince them that his Gospel required a true Faith operative in sincere and persevering Obedience the want whereof he will charge upon them as you see in Mat. cap. 7. cap. 22. 25 c. and so leaves them subject to the Law of Adam without Relief by the Gospel yea heightens their Condemnation for disobeying the Gospel But if they yet plead But Lord thou savest some that were Unbelievers as well as we at least they were not such Believers as did yield sincere Obedience This Plea Christ will confound by solemn Declaration of the true Faith and Sincerity of all them whom he now saves and so will evidence that his Judgment is without respect of persons and that his Righteousness is no Plea for any finally unbelieving ungodly Hypocrite whom his Gospel condemned If the Damned or Satan should plead But they were Sinners though not unbelieving Hypocrites the Answer of Christ will be I have satisfied the Law for them and so Justice cannot suffer by my washing them in my Blood nor hinder their being glorious for my sake I humbly think this is being judged according to our Works Rev. 20. 12 13. This is being justified by our Words Mat. 12. 37. And what Iames most intends Iam. 2. 24. I hope none can doubt but this proves the Gospel is part of the Rule of Judgment and it 's plain God will judge the Secrets of all Hearts by my Gospel Rom. 2. 16. And the word that I have spoken to you that shall judge you This is one of the Books that shall then be opened saith Mr. Ch. Father And how awful is that day when the closest Hypocrite will be discovered and yet the doubtful Christian adjudged sincere But blessed be God the Saints Plea will be managed by Christ himself Reader it 's hard reconciling the account we have of the Day of Judgment by any thing below what I have delivered and were not the Gospel to be a Rule of Judgment I cannot see how that could be a Iudgment-day it must be only an Execution-day for by the Law of Adam no Believer could be acquitted that Law must be altered by the Law-giver to admit a Satisfaction and it 's by the Gospel only he hath enacted the way how this Satisfaction shall be applied By that first Law these Unbelievers yea all men were condemned virtually in Adam when he was judged upon his Fall and that Sentence seized them as soon as they had a Being there needed no other It would help thy Thoughts if thou wilt accomodate some of the Circumstances of the last Judgment to them that shall be alive at that time I might multiply Arguments to prove the Gospel to be a Law Whatever proves the Covenant to be conditional proves the Gospel to be a Law Nothing keeps the most sincere Godliness or Act of a Saint here from being downright a Sin if the Gospel be no Law for they are not legally perfect and so are Sins I see not how any man can have grounded Hopes of Glory if the Gospel be no Law and they that deny it and say Faith is but a Sign must set up Works above Faith for they are more evidencing Signs than an internal Act of Faith Yea how can Christ be our King if his Gospel be no Law Many more might be added were there room but I shall omit the rest except what will occur in my Answer to Mr. C's Objections which follow I. Mr. C. objects p. 5. Whoever is justified by a Law is fallen from Grace Gal. 3. 11. It should be read a Law not the Law it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the emphatical Particle is not put in and so it 's every Law is excluded Repl. Upon such Cobwebs in the face of the plain scope of the Bible doth this Cause stand Where 's the Argument Because in a few places the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not put in therefore the Apostle excludes even every Law when he doth plainly exclude only one sort as appears by the whole Context Nay when he at the same time affirms another Species under that general Rom. 3. 27. But farther note 1. Where the Article is elsewhere omitted the word it refers to doth not exclude every sort of Law Rom. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Will you render this For the Gentiles which have not a Law or not any Law the Article is wanting but sure they had some Law even the Law of Nature 2. Where the Article is wanting it doth not infer that every kind under the general word are alike intended Rom. 2. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is not there the written Mosaick Law set in opposition to the Law of Nature unwritten Yet the Article is wanting Rom. 5. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Law was added Was it no special Law Sure there was some Law before So Gal. 4. 4. Gal. 3. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Iust shall live by Faith Is this any sort of Faith Will a temporary or historical Faith serve Yes by Mr. C's Rule 3. The Article is oft added to the word Law in the very Subject before us Gal. 3. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But the Law is not of Faith V. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is the Law against the Promises and v. 24. Rom. 10. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moses describeth the Righteousness which is of the Law 4. The Socinians evade the force of Ioh. 1. 1.
Argument I shall in the strength of Christ evidence that the Law of Nature or Works is not a hindrance to the Gospels being a Law but that the Gospel is another Law distinct in its Precept and Sanction and other respects 1. The Gospel is distinct in its preceptive part from the Law of Innocency Faith in Christ was never commanded by that Law To say Faith in God was a Duty is a vain Objection for Faith in Christ as a Saviour is specified from its Object and is distinguished into temporary historical saving c. The Faith that Mr. C. saith Adam was wounded in was meerly a Faith of Assent which the Devils have or a natural Trust in God as Creator But what 's that to a receiving of Christ or consent to him as Redeemer and relyance on him Of which more by and by Is it not strange that Mr. C. saith The Law never brings us to God then Faith doth not for it's part of the Law c. But let 's hear what others speak Mr. Hooker of New E. p. 337. saith I flatly deny that Adam if the Lord Jesus had been revealed to him was able to believe in him and so to rest upon him c. the Reason to confirm this Point that Adam had not this Grace of Faith is this this believing in the Lord Jesus is that which doth directly cross the Estate of Adam in his Innocency c. He to p. 343. proves it and answers Objections P. 338. to one he thus says I answer that 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 1 Ioh. 3. 23. Rom. 3. 28. Mr. Bulkley p. 327. lays down this That Faith in Christ unto Justification and Salvation the Commandment enjoyning this Faith is no Commandment of the Law but of the Gospel which I prove by these ensuing Arguments This he doth by no less than nine Arguments and answers many Objections from p. 327. to 335. and thus concludes Thus far we are come that the putting of Faith as a Condition of Life in the Covenant of Grace doth no whit derogate from the freeness of Grace D. Goodwin affirms That Faith now is of another kind than the Faith of Adam As to the Principle Objects Light c. ours is supernatural his natural and as you may see at large proves by several Reasons that his was but natural as 1. All other things belonging to him were natural c. and therefore it would be strange that if the Principle of Faith in him which then was not of general use should be supernatural c. 2. For him to have a supernatural Principle of Faith as we have was in him superfluous and vain This he shews because Adam's Covenant would not have brought him to Heaven 3. It would not only have been of no use but it would have made him miserable 4. And therefore our way of Faith must needs be supernatural and altioris ordinis from his c. which he proves 1. in the respect of the Objects revealed to our Faith which his Mind should never have arrived at 2. in regard to the Light by which our Minds are acted and elevated 3. in respect of the way or manner of Knowledge or Assent raised up thereby I might add the Testimony of one whom Mr. C. honoured who gives this reason in the present Debate saying viz. If Consent to the Covenant was a Duty by the Law then the Law did bind to its own dissolution But I suppose this may serve to shew that Faith in Christ was no Duty by the Law of Nature and therefore either it is a Command of the Gospel-Law or it is no Duty at all The like I might shew of Repentance which Melancthon's Followers prove against Flaccius Illyricus Obj. If any one should object Did not the Law of Nature bind us to do whatever God should at any time require A. You must consider 1. the Law of Nature less properly as the Rule of Happiness in the Covenant of Innocency and so it was appropriated to that state and was a particular Law of Works If so considered the several Precepts of it were written on Man's Heart and God and the Creatures ministred Instruction to the innate Light which was inherent in our Minds and that in a natural way Some Ruins of both are still preserved to fallen Man Rom. 1. 19 20. Cap. 2. 14. In this sence Faith and Repentance could have no place at all in the Law for it was a Law to govern and save Innocent Man but not to recover Sinful Man To suppose our own Perfection to be the Condition of Life and yet to be obliged at the same time to repent of Sin or believe in an aâ—…oning Saviour to have our Abilities immediately from God as Creator and a Stock in our own Hands and yet be obliged to depend on Christ as Mediator for all Strength are utterly inconsistent 2. If you take the Law of Nature for the remaining Instincts and Notices of it in Man which ought to be perfect and assisted and directed by the Works of God sure the Gospel must be another Law or else Heathens are able to find out Christ by the Book of Nature and engaged to receive him and rely on him though he were never revealed to them The reason is this the Law of Nature in this sence binds all the Heathens and its Precepts are engraven naturally upon their Hearts and God and his Works consider'd naturally direct their Minds 3. The Law of Nature may be considered most generally viz. as it is an Obligation upon Man to believe and obey whatever God shall any way or time reveal and require and to suffer for Disobedience what God shall threaten In this sence indeed the Law commands all Duty in general but it doth not deny the Gospel to be a special Law for this indeed doth oblige us to obey all God's Laws when he makes them Laws but it doth not determine any one Law nor give a Being to one particular Precept It 's the Foundation of our Obligation to submit to God's Authority as Creatures but appoints not wherein we must instance that subjection It 's the same as an Obligation among men to Allegiance to the supreme Power which I hope prevents not the Ruler's Acts to be Laws This Law of Nature subjects us to God's Threatnings which he shall pronounce at any time for Sin but determineth neither the sort nor degree of the threatned Evils This Law is common to good Angels Devils innocent Man fallen Man yea damned and glorified Man for they are all engaged as Creatures to obey the Laws of God when he enacts them and suffer what he threatens if they obey not But is the Gospel therefore no Law or only this Law of Nature Then Angels Devils and the Damned are obliged to believe in Christ for Salvation Do not say
a Law 1 Iam. 4. 12. 2 1 Ioh. 3. 23 3 Mark 16. â—…5 16. Proved that the Gospel is a Law 1 1 Thess. 1. 5. 11. 2 Col. 2. 18. Heb. 11. 26. Mat. 6. 4. 3 Rev. 22. 14. Iohn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iohn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 2. 3. See my Book Cap. 20. Acts 2. 37 38. Acts 16. 30 31. Of the judgment-day * Ioh. 12. 48. Of Iust. p. 10. Rev. 20. 12. Mr. C's Obj. the Article is wanting A Sanction makes it a Covenant of Works A Law Sanction Every Sanction excludes not Grace The Gospel Sanction infers not merit The new Covenant hath a Sanction Of Iustif. 166 167. A Sanction doth not make the Gospel a Law of Works * Gal. of coming to Christ p. 170. Ball son Covenant p. 114. The Action of Faith is not excluded in Ro. 3. 27 28. How Faith justifies as a Condition tho' it be an Act. Paul affirms the Gospel to be a Law yet not a Law of Works Bulkley of Gospel Covenant p. 325. Ball of the Covenant p. 17. Mr. C. obj No Law but the Law of Innocency The Gospel is not the law of Adam The Gospel differs in its Precepts from Adam's Law Mr. Hooker Souls Effect Calling Bulkley of Gospel Covenant D. Goodwin in 2 vol. of the Creatures c. lib. 2. cap. 7. p. 5â—… to 63. The Law as in Innocency not the Gospel-law The Law as natural in fâ—…lnmen not the Gospel-law The general Law of Nature â—…inders not the Gospel to be a Law The Moral Law now the Gospel Wittichius Epist. ad Rom. Calvin on Psal. 19. 10. That the Law was the Gospel in David's sâ—…nce Ball Cov. â—…15 Ball on Cov. from 102 to 120. The sanction of the Gospel differs from Adams law The Promises differ D. Goodw. vol. 2. lib. 2. p. 46 c. D. Goodw. p. 45. ubi supra The Threatnings differ Other Differences Calvin and Wittichius see before Syned of Dort acta Synodi Willet Synopsis papismi Steph. de Brâ—…is in Rom. 3. 27. Hooker of N. England Bâ—…lkley ofâ—… Covenant Mr. Ball of the Covenset forth by Mr. Ash. Lawson Theopolitic Dr. Wallis of God's Sovâ—…raignty Dr. Owens on Ps. 130. Downam on Iustif. Sedgwick of the Covenant Dr. Jacomb on Rom. 8. Mr Charnock 2 â—…ol Turretin Instit. Theol. par 2. Mr. M. Mead Early Obedience Ames Bellarm Eâ—…er Tom. 4. lib. 6. cap. 7. Mant. most frequently See 2 Serm oâ—… Rom. 8. Assembly of Divinâ—…s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Owens on Heb. c. 6. v. 9. On Ps. 130. Epist. before the Almost-Christian Gilaspie Ark of the Covenant Mr. Chancy of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the Cov. Acta 〈◊〉 par 1. p. 313. Assembly of Divines larger Catech Mr. Fox that wrote the Book of Martyrs 〈◊〉 Synod par 1. Act a Synod par 2. Dr. Owens on Heb. cap. 6. Dr. Owens on Ps. 130. Dr. Owens of the satisfaction of Christ. Dr. Manton on the Hebrews Charnock vol. 2. Dr. Jacomb on Rom. 8. Dr. Preston of new Cov. Bulkley on the Coven Mr. C. on Iustif. Rutherford Survey of Antinomianism par 2. Mr. Mead Early Obedience Mr. Obad. Sedgwick of the Cov. Beza Epist. 20. Calvin Harm in Mar. 4. 12. Vid. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 17. § 5. Mr. Clerkson of Saving-Grace Calvin is positive that the Gospel-Covenant is conditional but that condition is not the hard one of the Law lib. 2. cap. 5. § 12. Yea he only excludes meritorious conditions when he says it is absolute lib. 3. cap. 3. § 21 22. Of the Wedding Garment Mr. Fox de Christo justificantâ—… Mr. Gale of Christ's Coming Augustin expounds Phil. 3. 8. as I 〈◊〉 Mr. C's Fourth Principle No Covenant â—…fi Redemption distinct from the Covenant of Grace with Men. Rutherford Covenant opened Ark of the Coven Sedgwick of Coven Bulkley of Covenant Mr. Mead. The Author of the City 〈◊〉 Fifth Principle Pardon is the cause of Faith and not Faith the Condition of Pardon c. The first Promise considered Pardon not the causâ—… of conditional Faith Dr. Owens Treatise of Iustif. Clerkson Norton Acta Synod â—… par p. 279 c. Bulkley on the Coven Sheppard's Sound Believer Mr. C's Father of Iust. The Assemb Mr. C's 6th Principle no Conversion or effecteal Vocation bâ—…fore Pardon This the 〈◊〉 Letter affiâ—…ms which I 〈◊〉 regard here in opposition to his denying an habitual change bâ—…f Pardon The Object of Pardon is a Believer tho' ungodly by Adam's Law The first Grace doth not make us sound if abstracted from Christ and the Promise Effectual Vocation before Pardon in order of Nature Eph. 2. 5 6. 2 Cor. 4. 3 â—… John 1. 12. Ps. 110. 3. Eph. 1. 19. 2 Tim. 15. Testimonies that Vocation is before Iustification The Assembly To deny it is to joyn with the Arminians Synod of Dort Hooker Mr. C's Father of Iust. Norton Orth. Evan. Rutherfords Survey of Antin par 2 Mr. C's 7th Principle all sincere Graces and Actions are Sins if they be not perfect The Gospel promiseth Benefits upon 〈◊〉 Grace tho imperfect Sincere Graces not sins thô imperfect Vid my Book cap. 19 Every degree of Duty is not always the Condition of Benefits Sedgwick Jacomb Rutherford Ames Mr. C. of Iustificat Dr. O. on Heb. 6. Mr. C's 8th Principle Christ is King and his Laws bind under a Gospel-sanction Luke 19. 14 27. 1 Rom. 14. 9. 2 Heb. 5. 9. 3 Joh. 8. 51. 4 Joh. 14. 21. 5 Joh. 5. 24 25 26 27. Joh. 20. 31. Mr. C. p. 24. * Icanes against Hammond vide Charnock vol. 2. p. 687. 2. Thes. 1. 8. Mr. C's Challenge accepted Calv. Inst. lib. 3. cap. 24. sect 10 11. Mr. Baxter explained A Rule of Sin and Misery is a proper expression Turret Inst. Theol. par 2. p. 2. Altingius Expl. Catec par 2. p. 12. Mr. C. p. 14 15. A Vindication from the charge of abusing Dr. Crisp. He means sin can do no hurt Dr. C. intends no Graces or Works can do us any good