never sinned And if we suffered in him for all sins of Omission and Commission we merited glory without any other obedience For the Law requireth nothing but Innocency as necessary to life He that hath no sin doth perfectly obey And pardon of all sin of Omission and Commission is the pardon of all punishment of Sense and Loss and so of the loss of promised Life Besides that one that is reputed to have Legally fulfilled the Law must be unjustly corrected by the punishment of temporal afflictions or death or loss of the Spirit and Grace and hath present right to the reward of that Covenant or deliverance from all penal evil at least so that this Doctrine of strict Legal personating Representation overthroweth the New Covenant and Law of Christ and all his Kingdom of Grace and all Religion III. The third fundamental Errour which we deny and oppose is that the Vnion between Christ and the Elect say some or Believers say others is so near as that his very personal Holiness Righteousness and Sufferings are in Law sense truly our Holiness Righteousness and Sufferings as the accidents of our persons As if Christ and Adam and every Christian were one and the same subject of Holiness Righteousness Suffering Merit or Satisfaction Yet they dare not say that the Union like the hypostatical warranteth such a community of Properties or Attributes as that we may be said to be Divinely Righteous perfectly Holy never to have sinned to have satisfied for our selves to have merited our own Salvation and many such like as seeing the evil of the consequents though not of the premises And here sometime they abuse the similitude of a Husband and Wife whereas they are distinct persons and one is not wise just or guiltless because the other is so nor hath the Wife any propriety so much as in extrinsick goods but by contract in the proportion granted by the Husband Some abuse the similitude of a Head and Members whereas Natural Head and Members make one Natural Body but so do not Christ and Believers And a Political Head and Members are distinct persons and one is not guiltless righteous wise or good because the other is so But of this more before and elsewhere Some here abuse the similitude of Christs being the second Adam which you here though not to this Errour insist upon And then they feign us 1. To have beeâ— otherwise in Adam than we were 2. And his sin to be otherwise imputed to us than it was And 3. The similitude to extend further than it doth I. They feign us to have been Personally in Adam whenas we were but seminally in him and personally from him 2. They feign us to have been in him by a certain Covenant more than we were by Natural In-existence And that his sin was arbitrarily by God through that Covenant imputed to us further than we were guilty of it by any natural In-being or derivation As if God made all men sinners by his arbitrary imputation of that to them which in their natures they were not really guilty of And as if our guilt of Adams sin were just of the same sort as his yea and our guilt and his guilt were individual accidents of the same individual persons But this which Dr. Twisse oft confuteth in most of his Books I have so largely and lately cleared in my published Disputations of Original sin that you shall excuse me for not reciting it here 3. The guilt of Adams sin being ours by Natural Derivation cometh to all alike entirely according to the subjects capacity and necessarily without the consent of Parent or Child Were Adam and all Parents unwilling to communicate it in generation it would nevertheless be done But Christ being not a Natural but a contracting voluntary Root and Cause doth communicate the fruits of his Righteousness only voluntarily by gift of Contract at the time in the â—anner and measure and on the terms that he seeth meet Here it is observable 1. That both Generation and Regeneration have much unsearchable How Souls generate Souls and how the Spirit of Christ communicateth Grace to Souls will never here be clearly apprehended â—ohn 3.8 2. But it 's certain that the Soul of the Parent is not the Soul of the Child but some cause of it and so that they are not one person 3. We were not persons in Adams person either the same or distinct 4. But Adam caused us not as a man maketh a garment house c. but as one Candle doth light another by some mysterious communication of its essence so formae se multiplicant by the Divine benediction Increase and multiply and primary causation 5. Though we were not persâ—nally but virtually and seminally in Adam yet when that seed becometh a person that person is from Adam and so must proportionably be guilty For who can bring a clean thing out of the essence of an unclean 6. Adam had the common Nature of all men specifically and radically and causally though as their nature individually constitute their persons they existed not in him as extra causam 7. So Jesus Christ did more assume the common Nature of faln Man than the persons of any or the Nature as extra causas constituting the individual person 8. Ponum est ex causis integris malum ex partiali Any defeâ—t maketh sin but good must have entire causes Adams sin causeth Original sin in all ex privatione causationis boni But if Adam had not sinned every sin of their own would have made his Children unrighteous 9. Christ having suffered in the common nature of man so far did it in their stead and if you will needs so call it so far represented fallen mankind as that if they will personally receive him by faith in the New Covenant they shall not perish for Adams sin or their own supposing that the parent is the accepter for the Infant none perish for Original sin alone without the addition of neglected and refused grace and remedy 10. It is not only the Spiritual off-spring that Christ was a second Adam to but partly to all mankind For by a resurrection though not to glory all men are made alive by Christ Joh. 5.22 23 29. 1 Cor. 15. And all have a general conditional reconciliation and pardon 2 Cor. 5.19 20. Joh. 3.16 So that actual Justification resulteth to no man from Christs meer representation of him but from his free donation by the New Covenant 11. It 's doubtless that all and only the holy seed or faithful are justified actually by Christs Righteousness But in what sence it is imputed to them is all the doubt 12. It 's also doubtless that Christ suffered in our stead But in what sense how far is all the doubt Because we deserved it he voluntarily assumed it to demonstrate Gods Justice Mercy and Wisdom and deliver us You say before that It was strictest Justice that was shewed on Christ I would not strive about the
either the Objectiors speak de nomine or de re If but of the Name One they shall call it One if that will please them and let them only distinguish the Parts of that One If they â—ill say that the Covenant made by the Father with the Mediator and the Law made for him are one and the same with the Covenant made by the Fatâ—â—â— and Son and Holy Spirit with us and that our Baptismal Covenant is no Covenant but only a part of the Covenant of which that with Christ aforesaid is another part I will not use their phrase but let me understand them that it is only the Name of One or Two that they contend about and we will fit our words accordingly I think on several accounts they are to be called Divers Covenants If they dislike it let us enquire whether the various Precepts of one Covenant make not various duties to Christ and to us and whether the various Promises of it have not various Conditions some to be performed by Christ and some by us Our present Question is Whether that part of the Covenant which promiseth and giveth Pardon of sin Justification Adoption and right to Glory have any Condition as the Modus of the gift We will rather follow them in unmeet terms than leave them thence a pretence to confound names and things and hide their errour by the confusion All Divines ancient and modern reformed and and unreformed that I know of agreed with us in the conditionality of the said Promise and by the form of Baptism shewed the Churches consent till Maccovius in Holland and Dr. Crispe and other Antinomians in England began to subvert the Gospel on pretence of magnifying the freeness of Grace and yet they durst never attempt to alter the Form of Baptism as this Opinion will require Contr. 4. By what hath been said the fourth Controversie is already resolved viz. Whether our performance of the Condition of Justification doth efficiently justifie us Some say because we say that Christ doth not justifie us till we perform the condition by believing that therefore we make our own Faith or performance to justifie proximately and Christ but remotely and so to do more than Christ to our Justification Ans 1. As to the phrase Scripture saith that we are justified by Faith that word not signifying an eâ—â—â—ciency but a receptive qualifying condition but it never saith that Faith doth jusâ—ifie us much less thâ—t we by it justifie our selves Our performance or Faith is no efficient cause but as to two parts of our Justification it hath a twofold Office 1. As to our Justification by the Merits of Christs Righteousness against this charge that damnation is due to us for sin our Faith is the Condition of our Pardon and Justification that is the moral qualification which God hath made necessary to make us capable receivers of it As laying down Arms and taking his Pardon thankfully may make a Rebel capable of Pardon but doth not pardon him if the pardoning Act say This shall be the Condition And by his Pardon he is justifiable against the charge of being liable to death 2. But as to the subordinate part of Justification against the falâ—e charge that we are no believers nor repent and so have no part in Christ here our own Faith is the very Matter of Righteousness by which we must be in tantum so farâ— justified As truth and innocency is against every false accusation And to say that because Christs Merits justifie us not before and without our Faith and performance of the Condition therefore our Act justifieth us more than Christ or efficiently at all is a thing unworthy of an answer being below the thoughts of an intelligent Disputer How much the capacity or incapacity of the Receiver doth as to all the various changes in the world both physical and moral when yet efficiently it doth nothing is not wholly unknown to any sober thinking man As the same sun-shine maketh a Weed stink and a Rose sweet so the same Act of Oblivion or conditional Justifying Law or Covenant doth justifie the capable and not the uncapable though no mans Faith doth effect any part of his own Justification Mr. Troughton and such others denying Faith to be the Condition of our Justification by the Promise hath drawn me to speak the largelier of this Contr. 5. Whether we are justified by Christs Righteousness imputed to us and whether the Scripture say so Ans The Scripture oft saith that Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness and that is Faith in Christ And it saith that Righteousness is imputed or reckoned to us that is we are reckoned or reputed righteous Rom. 4.11 22.6 And that sin is not imputed that is not charged on us to punishment or damnation Rom. 5.13 4.8 Psal 32. v. 2. 2 Cor. 5.10 The words of Imputing Christs Righteousness to us I find not in Gods Word and therefore think them not necessary to the Churches peace or safety But as for the sense of those words no doubt but it may be good the Papists themselves own them in the same sense as many Protestant Divines profess to use them as I have proved Contr. 6. In what sense is Christs Righteousness imputed to us Answ It is accounted of God the valuable consideration satisfaction and merit attaining Gods ends for which we are when we consent to the Covenant of Grace forgiven and justified against the condemning Sentence of the Law of Innocency and reconciled and accepted of God to Grace and Glory Q. But did not Christ represent our persons in his Righteousness so that it is imputed to us as ours as if we our selves had been and done what he was and did as righteous Ans This being the very heart of all the Controversie should be decided only by Scripture and nothing added or diminished That Christ is the second Adam and called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Sponsor Surety or Interposer and a Mediator between God and Man that suffered for us the just for the unjust a price and a sacrifice is all found in scripture Wise and peaceable men here will be as fearful of humane Inventions and Additions as in Discipline or Ceremonies at least But because all are not such we must speak to men as they are There are several sorts of Sureties or Sponsors Few represent the very person at least not all If men will needs impose on us their own word of Representation for peace sake we accept it in a sound sense In a limited sense it is true that Christ represented us that is he suffered in our stead that we might not suffer He obeyed and was perfectly righteous as Mediator in our Natures and so far in our stead as that such perfect Righteousness should not in our selves be necessary to our Justification But he did not absolutely represent us he was not our Delegate Our persons did not in a Law-sense do in and by Christ what he
did or possess the habits which he possessed or suffered what he suffered Nor doth God account us so to have done for that were to mistake I have rendred a multitude of reasons to prove this in my Treatise of Justifying Righteousness The contradiction is enough that we are accounted never to have sinned because Christ never sinned and yet we are accounted to have suffered or satisfied for sin because Christ did so or at least that we need a pardon by his blood and must ask for pardon and must suffer correcting punishments and long be without necessary grace and glory when yet we are accounted never to have sinned but from birth to death to have fulfilled all Gods Law in Christ I have fully proved that this Doctrine subverteth the sum of all the Gospel and Religion to which I refer you Contr. 7. What Righteousness of Christ is it that is ours and imputed to us the Passive the Active the Habitual or the Divine or all Answ Divines are here fallen into four Opinions I. Many of our most famous Divines say that it is only Christs sufferings that are imputed to us as our Righteousness to Justification being Justitia Meritâ— the rest being Justitia Personae to qualifie Christ to merit for us Thus Paraeus Scultetus Wendeline Beckman Vrsine Piscator Olevian Camero with his followers and many more These are far from thinking that we fulfilled all the Law in Christ or are righteous because he fulfilled it II. The second sort think that the Active and Passive Righteousness are imputed to us as our Righteousness III. The third sort are for the Passive Active and Habitual imputed IV. The fourth think so also of the Divine which is the Deity it self for there is nothing in God but God Andrew Osiander is for our Justification by the Divine Essence but I think rather by Communication than Imputation Thus hath our weakness distracted and disgraced us But Mr. Bradshaw truly noted that if the sense of Imputation were well agreed of the rest might well be reconciled viz. that no Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us in the strict sense of Representation as if we our selves were legally accounted to have been done or suffered what Christ did was and â—uffered But in the just sense of Imputation all is imputed to us that is Christs Habitual Active and Passive Righteousness fulfilling his own part of the Covenant advanced in dignity by the Union of the Divine nature and perfection was the true meritorious cause of our Justification and not any one of these alone Cont. 8. Whether Christs righteousness be the efficient material or formal cause of our Righteousness and Justification Ans It s pity that poor people must be thus tempted with Controversies of Logick But what remedy Christs righteousness as materially and formally his merited our Justification But for the accidental relation of righteousness in Christ to be the accidental relation of righteousness to every believer is impossible unless the Subject be the same If Christ be the believing sinner and as many persons as there be such or all these be the same person with Christ then his individual righteousness is formally theirs else not For as noxa caput sequitur so no accident is the same numerically in various Subjects They that deny this wanted but the same advantages to have believed Transubstantiation and renounce the common principles But that Christs righteousness is the meritorious cause of ours is past doubt And therefore they that affirm and they that deny it to be the material cause which is the common Doctrine of Protestant disputers do but differ about a name For if Adam had merited his own glorification had not his works been both the meritorious cause and the material that is the matter of that meritorious righteousness And why may we not say so of Christ It is therefore the material because it is the meritorious that is the meriting matter For righteousness being a Relation hath strictly no matter but a Subject And Christs Acts and habits were the first Subject of that righteousness of his person whose merit justifieth us But the believer is the Subject of his own personal righteousness thus merited by Christ It 's pity that holy things should be brought down to such Logical trifling but more pity that Church teachers that will do so should abuse them by their ignorance in their own way The matter of the righteousness which meriteth our Justification from the Laws damnation of us is Christs own righteousness unless by the matter you mean the Subject person But the matter of our subordinate righteousness is in and of our selves of which anon Cont. 9. Whether the Vnion between Christ and believers be not so near as maketh them the same Subject and so the accident of Christs righteousness to be ours Ans So some think but this tremendous mystery must not be rashly and profanely handled In a Union Specifick of humanity all mankind is one with Christ that is of one Species of humane nature And so that which is predicated of one as such is predicated of the other In a Political Vnion Christ as the head and the Church as the body make one Society as parts constituting the whole And so whatever is predicated of a part meerly as a part is predicable of both But that which is predicated of the whole as a whole is properly predicable of neither alone And that which is predicated of the Head as a head is not predicable of the body nor that of the head which is proper to the body nor that of one member which is proper to another But some things by way of Communication may be predicated of the whole for the sake of a part So the Church is called sinful and imperfect for our sake though Christ be not so And it is eminently holy and glorious because Christ is so that is secundum quid But no Vnion will make us righteous and personally happy by anothers righteousness and happiness unless it were a personal Union natural or Legal at least as to Relative rights The question then is whether every believer be one person with Christ And if so whether one natural person or one Legal as a lawful vicarius is They that hold the first plead that the same Spirit that is in Christ is the same divine nature and maketh us one natural person But where doth the Scripture say so The Sun is not one Individual with every Plant that it quickeneth nor every plant with it A nettle or rose is not the Sun nor is it the illuminater of the World that maketh day c. But they have so much from the Sun as it communicateth and no more So we are not Christ nor the Eternal and Natural Son of God nor infinite in Wisdom and Goodness nor perfectly just and glorified as Christ is But we have from Christ so much of the Spirit as he communicateth And nothing is ours meerly because it is his and
20. it 's said The blood of God It s a sad case that partiality can so much prevail as that they that cry out of some doubtful words as damnable heresies do yet think it tolerable language to say that by Imputation of the very sin itself to Christ as his sin he was the greatest sinner the greatest Murderer Lyer Adulterer c. in the world I beseech you abstain from such words till you find them in the Scripture Christ never was reputed of God a sinner who did so much to shew his hatred of it Nor ever took our sin unto him any further than to suffer for it to expiate it And if this be the similitude by which we must understand how his Holiness and Righteousness is made ours it will make all very plain It is ours or imputed to us so far as to be reputed the true cause of our Justification Adoption Sanctification and Glory as our sin was the cause of his suffering and death Cont. 12. Doth not Christs righteousness cause our Sanctification in the same sort of causality as it causeth our Justification Ans The effects are divers but both from the same meritorious cause But it is more unapt to say that it is the material cause of our Sanctification than that it is the material cause of our righteousness Though it merit both Because our habitual and actual holiness hath a nearer material cause in itself which our pardon and meer adoption have not Cont. 13. When it is said that faith is imputed to us for righteousness is it faith indeed that is meant or Christs Righteousness believed on Ans A strange and bold question What occasion hath the Holy Ghost given us to raise such a suspicion that when it is so often said by him that Faith is imputed or accounted for righteousness men should make a doubt whether it be Faith indeed that he meaneth If it be not the context is so far from relieving our understandings that it contributeth to our unavoidable deceit or ignorance Read over the Texts and put but Christs Righteousness every where instead of the word Faith and see what a scandalous Paraphrase you will make The Scripture is not so audaciously to be Corrected It 's wiser to believe Gods Word than to contradict it on pretence of expounding it Obj. But it is said also that Righteousness is imputed And that must be either Christs Righteousness or our own But not our own therefore Christs Ans We are not now questioning whether Christs Righteousness be imputed to us Though it be not the Phrase of the Scripture I have shewed you that it is true in a sound sence But the question is Whether Faith be imputed for righteousness And what is the meaning of all such Texts To have righteousness imputed to us plainly signifieth to be Reckoned Accounted Reputed or Judged righteous And it 's strange that it must not be our own righteousness that is imputed or reckoned to us as our own If it were never so well proved that the very Habits and Acts of Christ are by Gift or Union made our own in themselves and not only as the causes of their effects yet still our own they would be and the righteousness given by them our own in order of nature before they are imputed accounted or reckoned to us as our own Some way that righteousness which is reckoned to constitute us righteous is surely made our own Psal 106.30 31. Phinehas's executing Judgment it is said to be accounted to him for righteousness And of Abrahams Justification God saith Because thou hast done this c. What man that ever read the Bible can doubt but that every man that will be saved must have a personal faith repentance and holiness which is called righteousness many hundred times in the Scripture besides the righteousness that was or is in Christ And will not God reckon him righteous that is righteous He that doth righteousness is righteous And shall it not be imputed to him if God account not a man a believer can he be justified and saved Christs Righteousness hath made Satisfaction for all our sins and for our unrighteousness as to the Law that doth condemn us But he made us not lawless but put us under a Law of Grace which saith He that believeth shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned And must we not be judged by this Law and be justified or condemned as we keep or break it wonderful is the power of prejudice that any good men that read the Scripture can doubt whether Christ himself hath made us a Law of Grace according to which as performers or non-performers we must be justified as righteous in subordination to Christs Righteousness or else be condemned as neglecters of so great Salvation Is any thing plainer in all the Gospel Obj. But it is the Object and not the Act Christs Righteousness and not our Faith the Gold and not the Hand that taketh it that is our Riches and Righteousness Ans 1. No question but the Faith that we talk of is Faith in Christ even the Believing Receiving of a Saviour and his Grace freely given us And therefore Christs Righteousness is ever connoted when we talk of Faith For what is the very Specification of the Act but the Object But it is not the essence of Christ or his Righteousness that constituteth Faith but Christ in esse coâ—nito objectivo even as it is not the essence of Sin that constituteth Repentance but the notion of Sin in esse cognito as an Oâ—ject And there is no doubt but Christ is the Souls Riches which Faith receiveth But if the King by Law should restore all the Rebels in Ireland to their Estates and give them their Lives that lay down Arms and ask Mercy and accept it if it come to the Tryal whether they are Accepters or Refusers their Acceptance must be so far their justifying Righteousness though their Lives and Estates be their Treasure and the Kings Act be their Title to it Faith is reckoned or imputed to be that which by the Redeemer himself is required of the Sinner to make him partaker of Christ and his Benefits Reconciliation and Salvation and it is no other Righteousness Christs Righteousness is not imputed to us instead of our Faith and Repentance and sincere holiness which is made by himself the condition of Life As he died not for the Sins which we were never guilty of and are no sins so his Righteousness is not instead of that Righteousness which by his Grace we have but instead of that which we have not Not instead of our being penitent Believers and sanctified before we die but instead of that perfect innocency which we want Not that we are reputed perfect innocent obeyers because he was such but that our want of it shall not hinder our Justification or Adoption Grace or Glory Christ hath done all his part but he hath appointed us a necessary part
it is another The Doctrine which I bend all these words against is that we must have or have as our own any such righteousness as is a conformity to the precepâ—ive part of the Law of innocency whether done by us or Christ Prove that we have any such Righteousness and I yield all the cause to them that plead for the Imputation which I deny If we have such a Righteousness we have no sin nor ever had in the sense of the Law And have no need of Christs Sacrifice or are capable of pardon or punishment I dare plead no Righteousness as mine but subordinately as a condition and medium my faith â—r performance of the conditions of the Covenant and its gifts and principally my right to impunity and life for the sake of the Merits Sacrifice and Intercession of Christ freely given by him in the New Covenant It was Christs perfect Righteousness which meriteth mine but I have no perfect Righteousness of my own either in me or done by me by my self or by my Instrument or Vicar nor given to me saving as metonymically that is said to be given to me which was given for me and the Effects or fruits of it given to me Besides my imperfect Faith and sincere devotion to Christ I know of no Righteousness that I have but that which saveth me from the Laws Condemnation and giveth me right to life which is not perfect obedience to the precept made mine but pardon of disobedience and a freely-given Adoption merited by another whose merits were never mine so much as by proper gift or imputation though figuratively they may be so called mine I tire my self and you with tedious repetitions because I find that without theâ— I am not understood Therefore your next inference that Paul speaâ—eth of that which was not ours before Imputation is not true as is proved And your second that the imputation of Faith as a work is not of Grace is cloudy or untrue or both If by a work you mean a work in Commutation obliging God or any work which maketh the reward to be of debt and not of Grace it 's true that if faith were such a work it would be an act of Justice so to judge it But Faith is no such work and therefore it would be errour so to judge it But if by a work you mean but a Moral act as made by the Law of Grace the condition of pardon and life then to Impute Repute or Judge it to be what it is so made is an act of Truth and Justice but such Truth and Justice as is Evangelical and consistent with Grace and is founded on Grace It is Grace that we have a Saviour to purchase and give all It is grace that we are not under the Law of Innocency which justifieth none but the innocent and perfect that never sinned It is Grace that we have a Covenant and Law of Grace which maketh sincere faith a Mediate or Subordinate Righteousness requiring no more at our own hands instead of what the Law of innocency required It is of Grace that as this faith is the matter of this subordinate Evangelical Righteousness so it is the receptive medium of our right to Christ pardon and life which is our full saving righteousness It being therefore of Grace that it is made so and also that we are made believers it must be of Grace though of Truth and gracious Justice that it is reckoned or imputed to us for Righteousness By debt opposed to Grace Paul meaneth not Debitum Dâ—â—ness by free gifts thankfully accepted but quod debetur ex operis propria dignitate as a workman earneth his wages § 19. Your Description of the Imputation of Christs Righteousness is either to be understood as spoken in proper words or as figurative If the latter it 's unintelligible still till explained If the first it is that same Doctrine which I take to subvert all the Gospel viz. That God maketh an effectual Grant and Donation of a true real perfect Righteousness even that of Christ himself to all that believe accounting it as theirs God accounteth not Christs Divine Righteousness to be our Righteousness nor yet his Humane Habitual Righteousness nor his Obedience to the Law proper to the Mediator nor his Obedience to the Law of Moses which as such bound not you or me nor his perfect fulfilling the Law of Innocency nor his satisfactory Sacrifice for sin nor his Resurrection Ascension Intercession c. But he only accounteth these to be the Causes of our Righteousness and not our Righâ—eousness it self Though the Meritorious Cause may be called the Meritorious Matter in a remote sense as purchasing the free Gift of our Formal Righteousness Though this also is but an unnecessary Logical name the thing being without it plainlier opened Relations having properly no Material Cause and the Subject being it that is usually so called and our Jus being our Formal Righteousness and the Covenant Donation the Fundamentum Juris and Christs Meritorious Righteousness being but the cause of that Fundamentum or Titulus it can be called the Matter of our Right but in a remote sense and such a Matter as is without us paid for us but not ours in it self but the CAVSE of that Relation which is ours The plain inconsistency of a Perfect Conformity to the Law made our own with Christs dying for sin and our need of pardon constrained a great part of the famousest Divines of the last Age to go too far in my Judgment in excluding Christs Active and Habitual Righteousness to our Justification and confining it to the Passive only Such as Olevian Vrsine Piscator Paraeus Scultetus Wendeline Beckman and others in Germany and Camero with his most Judicious and Learned followers in France and Dr. Twisse whose M.S. I before mentioned Mr. Wotton Mr. Gataker and others in England And yet the two last I think go not so far as the rest But Mr. Bradshaw truly told them that it is not the excluding the Active from Imputation that must untie the knot but the taking Imputation it self in a sound sense and forsaking the unsound rigid notion of it both as to the Active and Passive Righteousness Grotius de Satisfactione hath gone the middle way and if that Book had been more studied fewer would have made us a new Gospel in terms who I hope in sense do mean better than they speak § 20. In your explication you further own the subverting sense viz. That Christs perfect Righteousness is made the Righteousness of Believers forma dat nomen and is accordingly judged esteemed and reputed theirs being by free Gift made theirs to all ends and purposes whereto it would have served if it had been their own without any such Imputation Donation or Communication and God dealeth with them accordingly Ans This is plainer dealing than we had before If this were true 1. We are as righteous as Christ 2. We may deny that ever we were sinners
for had we done all this our selves that is kept the Law perfectly from first to last we had never sinned 3. We had never deserved punishment 4. Nor needed a Sacrifice 5. Or a Pardon 6. Nor should we during the time of our unregeneracy have been left under spiritual death or at least after believing be left under remaining sin and a body of death 7. Nor have been penally deprived of any help of the Spirit 8. Nor of any Communion with God 9. Nor so long be kept out of Heaven or the Reward 10. Nor ever have been corrected 11. Nor ever had need of Word Prayer or Sacraments for the helping us to renewed Pardon 12. Nor ever have died and rotted in a grave 13. Nor would the Magistrates Execution of Justice on us for our crimes be owned as Gods Justice 14. All men wouâ—d have the same degree of Innocency and Holiness 15. It would have been a wrong to us when we had perfectly kept the Law of Innocency to suspend our right to Pardon and Salvation upon new Conditions in a new Covenant 16. We having perfectly kept the Law of Innocency as to the death as soon as we believe cannot be under another Law of the Redeemer that hath the true uses of a Law 17. Our own actions besides Christs are not capable of Reward or Punishment 18. All the Texts of Scripture that mention inherent or practical personal Righteousness would contradict our imputed Righteousness or make us supererogate and be more than perfectly righteous 19. We need not fear that any new crime should diminish our Righteousness which is perfect and can neither increase or decrease 20. Whether we should not be as righteous on Earth even under Davids or Peters sin as in Heaven and whether we should be Deified by being divinely righteous and justified by Gods Essential Righteousness as Andr. Osiandâ—r taught I leave to be considered as you further explain your self So much to your Epitome which if I wrong you by judging it all your own it is long of your self that own it as aforesaid in the gross If the Dr. be wronged it is by you and not by me § 21. In the conclusion you do no more peaceably than provedly pronounce us in a manner agreed enumerating the particulars in which we consent But I have told you wherein we are not agreed in words nor in sense if those words be not mis-used whatever we are in latent sense I still grant that Christ suffered yea and obeyed in some sort in our stead though not in our person Civil or Legal so as that we are Legally reputed the doers of it by or in him And that his assuming our Nature and being the second Adam a voluntary Sponsor and Mediator was a necessary reason of the application of the fruits to us and that we are as certainly and happily justified and glorified as if we had been the doers and satisfiers our selves so many as are saved But not on the same reasons nor in the same method or manner of conveyance Nor when in judgment we are accused as having sinned and deserved death can we deny it plead that we were innocent by another or by imputation as we should have been had we been innocent our selves But we must plead pardon and a free gift of life through the merits satisfaction and intercession of a Saviour § 21. And to all before said I may add That they who account all the Laws obligations on each person to be fulfilled by Christ and not only satisfaction given for our not fulfilling them 1. Must suppose that one person of Christ to have been Legally as many persons as he died for or justifieth For the Law laid as many distinct obligations on them as they were persons and laid them only on their persons It said Thou Adam Thou Eve shalt personally obey perfectly or die And the Law of Nature and of Moses said in sense Thou Solomon Thou Manasses and so of all others shalt do all things commanded and not sin Now that in all Christs Obedience he was Legally and imputatively so many several persons Adam Eve Solomon Manasseh and so that none of these broke Gods Law I find not in the Scripture If you say Adam was Legally as many persons as are born of him in sin I deny it He was the Root of all his Posterity and they were in him seminally and virtually but not personally actually or imputatively But by one mans disobedience as their Root and Cause many are made sinners And by one mans obedience as the Root and Cause all Believers are made righteous It is enough that one Saviour and Mediator in a third person of his own did and suffered that which by its merits and value as attaining the Ends of the Law and Government procured our deliverance from a necessity of perfect obeying as the Condition of Life and from guilt and misery and is become the Root Head and Donor of Grace and Glory 2. And if as you say it be the very thing that is imputed to us as ours to all intents as if we had done it why have you not told us whether it be all that Christ did or but some and what and how from Scripture you prove the distribution and whether we have not thus a Righteousness which is both too much and too little I. Too much For we were not obliged by the Law to be born of a Virgin by the Holy Ghost to fast forty days to turn Water into Wine to cast out Devils to heal all diseases and raise the dead to inaite the Gospel and send out Apostles c. If you say that so much only of Christs Obedience is in it self our own as we must else have done our selves I ask the proof of the limitation And II. Is it not then too little if it must be the Idem and not the Aequivalens For some of us are bound to the Offices of Parents and some of Husbands and Wives some of Servants some of Magistrates some of Souldiers some to actions proper to the sick to the old and other conditions which Christ was never in We are bound to mortifie our sinful lusts to pray for pardon and grace to receive a pardon offered to yield to the mortifying motions of the Spirit c. which Christ was not capable of It was enough that he undertook all that was fit for him and necessary by equivalency to satisfie and merit a free gift of grace and glory for us and that he performed the undertaken conditions and duties of all that Law which was laid on him without doing all the same things which were laid on us § 22. And one thing more I desire you to note which Grotius de satisf hath minded us of viz. The great difference that there is between the case of a Rector and a Creditor and between a Subject and a Debtor or a Debt of Obedience or Punishment and a Debt of Money For the name of
sigâ—s that must coâ—fute them for our Justification And the Judgment is not to be managed as at a human juâ—icature by talking it out with every Person but by an universally convincing Light that at once can shew every man in the World his own partâ—cular case as in it self it is not Sigâ—s not Riâ—htâ—ousnâ—sâ— that hath the promises of Râ—wâ—rd And there is no Righteousness that so far maketh not a man Righteous and so far Justifiable XCI They some of them say that we shall need no Justification against any false Accusation For who should accuse us Christ will not Consâ—ience will not and Devils say they will have something else to do And they know that false accusation will be in vain before such a Judge The sum of this is that there will indeed be no day of Judgment and no Justification by decisive Sentence yea and no Salvation for actual Glorification will be a Sentence manifested by Execution which Mr. Lawsâ—n thought was called the Judgment And if no Judgment then no Judge no Reward no Condemnation and no Punishment If any Judgment there must be Persons and a Cause to be tryed and judged 1. The Cause of that day will not be whether Christ be a sufficient Saviour or have made sufficient satisfaction It is not for Christ to judge himself It is not to judge God whether he elected us It is not to judge whether we were of the Seed of Adam or whether we ever sinned Or whether the Law of Innocency condemn us And our sin deserve everlasting Punishment There is no justifying us against any such Accusation It must be all confess'd we were the sinful Children of Adam we deserved Condemnation But the Cause will be 1. Whether we are lyable by Guilt to future Punishment And against this our Pardon justifyeth us 2. And whether we have Right to the Heavenly Inheritance And in this the Gospel-Donation Covenant or Promise justifieth us and both thro' the Merits of the Sacrifice and Righteousness of Christ 3. And the other part of the Cause of that day is whether we have part in Christ and the Merits of his Righteousness In which our Faith and God's Covenant will justifie us 4. And the Question being Whether this Faith be that which had the promise and not a Counterfeit the description of it by its Acts and Part and not only by adventitious Signs must be our justifying Evidence The faith that hath the Promise is essentially Christianity or a Covenant accepting of God the Father Son and Spirit of Christ as our Teacher Priest and King by affiance expressed in assent consent and subjection And all that is essential to this yea the necessary integrality and modification have their parts in being the Cause of the day And as to the Case of Accusation 1. A Virtual Accusation by the Law which we have broken and condemneth us requireth a Justification if there were no more 2. The Glory of Christ's Merits Righteousness and Grace requireth a Justification of us against our real Guilt 3. And is not Satan the Accuser of the Brethren and that before God And did not his Malice so work against Job though God contradicted him It is certain that sentential and apologetical Justification relates to Accusation virtual or actual and Condemnation Who shall condemn us it is God that justifieth us And if we are not justified against false Accusations we shall never be justified against any But we all confess that we are made righteous efficiently by Grace and constitutively by Righteousness in despight of all Satans true accusations and against all our own unworthiness ungodliness antecedently and guilt and that before all Works and Perseverance save a true accepting Faith in Christ But if we shall in judgment be decisively deâ—lared righteous by that which constituteth us righteous of which no knowing man herein can doubt God judging all things truly as they are then certainly will men by decisive declaration be judged righteous as being pardoned and adopted by the Merits of Christ and qualified by true Faith Repentance and Obedience for that Guift XCII They absurdly hold that to be justifâ—ed as to the sincerity of our Faith from the charge oâ— Hypocrisie or unsoundness it is not the Justification of the Person A contradiction that I am ashamed to be long in confuting Is it the Faâ— and not the Person that is to be judged Is it not as it is the Persoâ—s Faith What is it to â—â—stifie his Faith but to justifie him to be a true â—elieving Christian and so to be an Heir of the Prâ—mise The necessâ—ry qualifâ—cation of Faith 〈◊〉 â—t be operative is as truly a part of the condition of the Promises as that Faith be Faith indeed Indeed some sound Divines say That Faitâ— justâ—fiâ—th us as sinnâ—rs and Works justifiâ—th our Faith as â—câ—usâ—d Believers But they never meant thâ—â— by justifying our Faith it â—ustiâ—eth not our Persons But that we are at fâ—rst coâ—stitutâ—d just and adopted upon the â—â—ndition of a consentiâ—â— covenanting Fâ—ith bâ—fâ—re we hâ—ve time to sheâ— it by outward Works and that we are contiâ—ue and judged jâ—stified and intitled â—â— Liâ—e oâ— condition of our Performance of the Essentials â—f oâ— Covenant XCIII Thâ—â— hold thâ—t we are justified â—â— the sâ—me Law or Câ—vâ—â—â—â—t of Innocency which condemneth â—â— Because â—ay they we have fulfilled it in and by Câ—â—â—â—t falsly as is aforesaid supposing that Câ—râ—st was either such a Surety as wâ—â— in the same Bond diâ—jâ—nctively with the principal or else that the principal man was allowed to do his Duty or â—ear his Suffering by another And so they deny the Gospel-Covenant and Gift which is that indeed which justifieth us by the way of Redemption falsly supposing that the very damning Law doth justiâ—e us by way of Prevention as innocent as having fulfilled it in Christ XCIV They suppose that Christ will not judge and justifie us acâ—ording to any Law by which he governed us but only by declaring his absolute Deâ—ree and Will giving no Reason of his Sentence from the cause of different performance or â—on performance of the Persâ—ns jâ—dged and so that Judgment is no act of Moral Government or of Reward contrary to all the Scripture XCV They falsly suppose that Paâ—â—â— of siâ— iâ— no Justification constitutive or senteâ—tiâ—l Because say they that doth but save us from Punisâ—ment but to be Righteous is to be by imputation such as have kept all the Law and so hâ—ve never sinned But we have no such Righteousness aâ— they thus feign when the Question is whether we are sâ—nners We must confess it and â—ot plead that we have no sin But when the Question is whether we are to be condemned Pardon is oâ—r Righteousness and having the Pardon of all sin original habitual and aâ—tual of omissiâ—n and commission we are in stâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 pâ—â—â—uâ—â— and if thâ—◠〈◊〉 enough to intitle uâ— tâ— Glory Aâ—option added to it is And so 〈◊〉 Riâ—ht is â—â—stiâ—â—â—d XCVI