was by paying the full value 3 Though by this dispensation our freedom may be as full as upon a repeal yet the alteration is not made in the Law but in our estate and relation to the Law 4 So farr is the Law dispensed with to all as to suspend the rigorous execution for a time and a liberation or discharge conditionall procured and granted them But an absolute discharge is granted to none in this life For even when we do perform the condition yet still the discharge remains conditionall till we have quite finished our performance For it is not one instantaneous act of beleeving which shall quite discharge us but a continued faith No longer are we discharged than we are beleevers And where the condition is not performed the law is still in force and shall be executed upon the offender himself I speak nothing in all this of the directive use of the morall Law to beleevers but how farr the Law is yet in force even as it is a Covenant of works because an utter repeal of it in this sense is so commonly but inconsiderately asserted That it is no further overthrown no not to beleevers then is here explained I now come to prove Here we see the off-spring of the precedent mountainous and swelling distinctions Exit ridiculus mus In the three first Conclusions a meer tattle about the repealing and abrogating or dispensing and relaxing of the Law and of its dispensation in a totality and absolutenes or in a respectivenes to persons circumstances and degrees of execution c. which is as proper to the thing that he drives at as swines flesh and a peacock strangled with all his glittering feathers to the satisfying of a Jewes hungry appetite Surely either Mr. Br. had forgotten or thought we had forgotten that he had before vented this Mysticall learning of his own and Grotius his brain or doubted that it was not finely enough set out there therefore that he might have the full praise of so curious and spiderthreeded a speculation brings it in here again in somewhat a new and more specious a dress Let him rest contented we acknowledge it all very trim If he beleeve us not let him set it as a philactery upon his garment It will tend so much to the strengthening of it as of the cause he hath in hand For the question is not whether the Law be repealed or but dispensed with But whether it be in force to beleevers as a Covenant of works with which the three first positions meddle not The word abrogating some orthodox Divines I confess do use but not in a sense equipollent with the word repeal meaning thereby onely a nullity of the lawes domination over beleevers The alteration not being in the Law as we acknowledge with Mr. Br. but in our estate and relation to it The law reigneth over all that are under it But the Saints are not Inst lib. 3. cap. 19. sect 2. under the Law saith the Apostle But as Calvin saith in Christ above it But his fullnes and plainnes in his fourth Conclusion maketh some recompence for all his Amphibologies all his dark doubtfull locutions in that which went before Here we acknowledge his ingenuity He so speaks as that an English man may understand him Here he tells us what he meant before of nulling repealing c. of the Law to beleevers that it is not so nulled abrogated repealed relaxed or dispensed with but that all their life time they are still under the Law as a Covenant of works And why could not this be spoken without so great a preparative of sophisticall equivocations and distinctions It pleased him surely to act the Alderman that deckt himself with all his robes and rich furniture to go into his stable and cutt off his horses tayl But it shall satisfie us that after some suspension he at last discovers to us his meaning Let us examine it and first we shall finde set forth in two positions two so soul-ravishing priviledges purchased by the Lord Christ for the Elect Saints that whosoever of them will rest satisfied with them may gird himself fast and depart without them 1 That they have so large a discharge from the rigor of the Law for a while as any of the worst reprobates 2 That they have no more discharge from the Lawes curse than the worst of reprobates Must we not account him a Saint that hath a fastidious stomack or sore mouth that cannot relish these dainties The former Conclusion he reacheth to us in these words So farr is the Law dispensed with to all as to suspend the rigorous execution of it for a time and a liberation and discharge conditionall procured and granted them Jam sumus ergo pares In this the sons of God are in as good a case as the reprobates and somwhat before the Devills The latter Conclusion in these words But an absolute discharge is granted to no man in this life Jam sumus ergo pares Yet have we as large cause of exulting and joy in the Holy Ghost as the reprobates that as farr as we can discern we are no neerer to hell than the children of hell whose inheritance is in hell forever To prove the latter assertion that none are that beleevers are not absolutely discharged from the law as a Covenant of works in this life he borroweth matter from Pelagians Papists Socinians Arminians and the whole rabble of professed enemies to the grace of God in Christ manifesteth Scotus like ignotum per ignotius carries us into a dungeon of darknes to discern Colors which we could not judge of in the light to his minde brings seven other Devills many other heresies worse than the first at least so bad as the first to strengthen the first Clavum clavo not extorquet but torquet figit beats in other wedges not to loose the first but to fasten all Having gotten in the paw of the beast beats and beetles in many of his hornes after to wedge fast all The Popish errors which he brings as an addition to confirm that beleevers are during life under the law are these 1 That they which are in Christ have not their sinns fully pardoned neither are themselves wholly justified in this world 2ly That whosoever shall be justified in the world to come must procure it by his own willing running persevering in this world 3 That they which are in Christ may fall away and be damned 4 That no man while he lives can be certain of his salvation 5 To this he addeth one worse than any Popish or Socinian heresie as proper to himself and from himself alone viz. That all beleevers notwithstanding Christs satisfaction for them notwithstanding their persevering faith in him yet must be at last damned forever Some of these errors are in express words asserted the rest by necessary Consequence implyed in this short dispute of Mr. B The first he expresly affirmeth Even when we do perform
then reviving him with the precious comforts of the Gospel to prescribe unto God the same method or to conclude the same to bee the method of God in his operations upon all in converting them The rending whirlwind doth not alway goe before the quickening beams of the Sun of Righteousness To the third if he mean that they taught that Justification by Faith in the Gospel promises might be sound and effectuall though no sanctification but all allowed impurity of life should follow the assertion and doctrine implies a contradiction for there can be no living Faith in the promises that is not fruitfull in good works And herein they declared themselves no lesse Anti-Gospellers then Antinomians But if hee meane that without all such extream horrors of the Law a man may be truly justified by Faith in Christ notwithstanding all his former loose and impure life and so the Publicans and Harlots enter into the Kingdome of God before the self-righteous Pharisees this is not Antinomistick except Pauls doctrine also be such Rom. 4. 5. 2. As for those opinions charged in these latter times with Antinomianism by many the 1 2 and last cannot be excused Onely to give the Assertors their due whatsoever of doctrinal truths to be beleeved or of Moral duties to be practised are expressed both in the Old and New Testament they were conscientious to submit themselves thereunto yet not for the authority of the Law or Old Testament but of the New only The third can bee justly charged with Antinomianism no farther then as either the Maintainers of it were in other points Antinomists or in respect of the foundation which they laid to maintain it which was the abrogation of the Law and old Testament The Law of the Sabbath being one part therof which must stand or sink with the rest But as they denyed the lawfulness of all discrimination or difference of daies by way of Morall or Ecclesiastical or Apostolical order for the more orderly and profitable celebration of publick Assemblies and the ordinances of Christ in publick Communion calling it Will-worship and Superstition This error they drew from the Petrobusians and Anabaptists not from the Antinomians that had been before them As to other questions about the authority of the Sabbath first now of the Lords day what relation they have either to other whether the observation of them be of Natural or Positive right If of Moral and Natural right by what express authority it is altered from the last to the first day of the week If of Positive right whether it began from the Creation or from the Law given upon Mount Sinai Whether the fourth Commandement hath any thing in it Typical now vanished in Christ Or whether wholly Moral and binding for ever how far it did or did not bind precisely to a day not this day of 7 Whether it were of Moral Righteousnes or else only of Moral order Whether the holyness of the 7th be now wholly translated upon the first day of the week By what authority the observation of the seventh day ceased and of the first day of the week was instituted to succeed Whether by virtue of Christs Resurrection or by some express command of Christ and where that command is to bee found Or else by Apostolical appointment And then whether in respect of order or of the aforegoing authority of Gods Commandement about the Sabbath or else by the appointment and consent of the Churches in or after the Apostles times These and many other the like questions Mr. Baxter knoweth to have been in agitation between both the greater and the lesser Divines and Members of the Reformed Churches adhuc sub judice Lis est Onely some within the Church of England ever since a Tractate came forth upon this subject from one Dr. Bownd Anno Christi 1595. seem to fix the observation of the Lords day upon more strict grounds and to bind it to more precise termes then the other Reformed Churches beyond the seas admit or many of the solid Divines have approved But of this there is no proper occasion here given to dispute This assertion therefore any further then hath been specified I doubt not but Mr. Baxter himself will discharge of Antinomianism The 5. 7. Mr. Baxter himself will not have to be ranked among Antinomian errors confessing the former to be the judgement of many learned and godly Divines of singular esteem in the Church of God pag. 53. Ap. pag. 12. The latter hee pronounceth to be the Common Judgement viz. of Churches and Divines therefore of ignorance accused of Antinomianism pag. 68 of his Aphorisms The fourth gives us cause to accuse them of some audaciousnes in teaching the Holy Ghost to speake and pertinaciousness in binding themselves to phrases and words even to the declining of the language of the Holy Ghost in Scriptures To be justified by Faith and to bee justified by Christ or our being found in Christ being ever both in Canonical and Ecclesiastical Writings taken as Equipollent terms until in these few last years Mr. Bax. and some of his fellows irradiated from Rome and by the doctrine of Socinus and Arminius have broached another a new and unheard of interpretation of the phrases For whether we say we are justified by Faith wee were formerly understood to affirm our Justification by Christ to whom our Faith hath united us or by Christ it was understood by Christ apprehended by faith Neither manner of Locution therefore was to be rejected as opposing the other The sixth I take to be a fancy if they understand Gods seeing and knowing in generall without restriction troubling the brains of men with a strife about words without substance God seeth no sin unpardoned upon his people we acknowledge In reference to Judgement and Vengeance hee hath seen them all upon Christ and punished them upon Christ so that he no more sees sinne in beleevers to take vengeance of them for it But it were our loss and misery if God should not at all and simply see sinne in us How then should he purge it from us and us from it He is the Husbandman of his Vineyard sees and cuts out every canker from his Vines seeth and pareth off every unprofitable sprigg from the branches by meanes whereof fruitfullnesse followeth where else there must ensue barrennesse and rottennesse Some Divines therefore thus distinguish that Gods seeing of sin may be considered as either in Articulo providentiae so he seeth all sinns of all men alike to dispose of them to his glory or in Articulo Iustificationis so he seeth the sinnes onely of the unjustified Ier. 18. 23. Forget not their iniquity neither blot out their sin from thy sight but the sinnes of the justified are forgotten and blotted out of his remembrance and sight as the constant phrase of Scripture affirmeth no more to be imputed If they mean onely in this latter sense they erre not By that which hath been
or between the not accusing or condemning of a man and the not imputing any thing to him to his accusation and condemnation CHAP. XXV Arg. of the Causa sine qua non or the condition or the instrumentall cause and whether faith be the instrument And in what sense it is so The absurdities wherewith Mr. Baxter chargeth this doctrine removed and those that follow his doctrine in part particularized TO the first Question we must apply our selves somewhat more fully because in answer to the former Questions Mr. Baxter seems to me to have aimed chiefly to the ostentation of his wit and Logicall both acutenesse and profoundnesse to make himself thereby admired and formidable But in answering this and the next he collects in one all his subtilty and Sophistry â—o beguile and deceive if it were possible the very Elect. And indeed if he carry these two Questions in captivity to his own sense and purpose he shall thereby make at least a seeming way by which to introduce all his Popish soul-subverting errours about justification which follow and hang as at the tayle of these Questions His words in the Thesis are B. The Causa sine qua non is both Christs satisfaction and the faith of the justifyed As much as he thought would be objected against his putting Christs satisfaction in the same place and degree of causality as a collaterall with faith he hath spoken to in his answer to the second Question and the firmnesse of this his answer hath been there examined But what concernes faith that which he thinks he shall be opposed in he formes into two Questions Explication pa. 214. 1. Why he makes it not the Instrumentall cause 2. Why he makes it the Causa sine qua non The former which is his 5. Question he applies himself to answer pa. 219. in these words B. To the fift Question perhaps I shall be blamed as singular from all men in denying faith to be the instrument of our justification But affectation of singularity leads me not to it 1. If faith be an instrument it is the instrument of God or man Not of man for man is not the principall efficient he doth not justifie himself 2. Not of God for 1. It is not God that beleeveth though it 's true he is the first cause of all actions 2. Man is the causa secunda between God and the action and so still man should be said to justifie himself 3. For as Aquinas the action of the principall cause and of the instrument is one action and who dares say that faith is so Gods instrument 4. The instrument must have influx tâ— the producing of the effect of the principall cause by a proper causality and who dare say that faith hath such an influx into our justification Here I know not whether we have more of the subtle serpent or of the roaring Lyon 1. He useth his winding Sophistry to intangle 2. His daring threats to them that being not intangled will be so bold as to contradict him Let us examine what efficacy there is in either or both these and first in his Sophistry To insinuate or as the Apostle saith to creep into the hearts of his Readers to deceive them he tels us Perhaps he may be blamed as singular from all men in denying faith to be the instrument of justification It seems he doubted that some of his Readers for lack of acquaintance with many Authours upon this subject would not or could not take notice that it is a new doctrine which he here delivereth and so he should be robbed of the glory of his new invention That the praise thereof might therefore wholly redound to him he tels them he is the first of men that ever saw and taught Faith not to be the instrument of justification that herein he is singular from all men Bâ—t had he not rubbed his forehead that with open face he thus vindicateth to himself that which he hath received from the Priests and Jesuites Let him name himself singular and abhorrent from all Protestants yea from Christ and his Apostles not from all men he is singular and alone in this and most his assertions from the Orthodox from whom but holds it in common with the whole herd of Antichrist to whom he is fallen Doth not Bellarmine deny that faith can truly be said to justifie us except it doth obtain and in some sort merit Justification from God Do not all his brethren with one voice shake off the instrumentall causality of justification and make it as a perfect quality or good work to merit it A two fold subtlety yea falshood is there to be found therefore in this his insinuation 1. That he affirmes himself singular in this point to catch after an usurped praise to himself as if he had seen what none in the world before him had seen 2. In pretending it to be a new doctrine thereby to draw disciples after him in a time wherein the ears of men itch after new in disdain of sound and true doctrines But further to insinuate he tels us that affectation of singularity leads him not to it We beleeve him without oath or protestation It is not the desire of them that are of his hair to trudge single but accompanied with a whole Brigade of disciple under their conducting and seducing unto Rome But let us come to his Arguments B. If faith be an instrument it is the instrument of God or Man But of neither of these Ergo not at all an instrument His Proposition or Major we grant him And it were enough and full to that which can be expected to refell his reasons which he brings for the proof of the minor Yet because my drift is not so much to answer him as to stablish some weak and unwary Christians against his impostures I shall endeavour first to confirm what he denyeth and seeks to shiver and then to examine the strength of reason which he brings against us When he saith in the Minor that faith is the instrument neither of God nor Man in justification What if I should undertake to prove and defend it to be the instrument of both He speaketh here of Justification as taken Passively declared to and termined upon the conscience For if we should mention justification as taken meerly Actively for that internall eternall and immanent act in God not transient upon an extraneous subject but hid in God before the world was or any justifyed or unjustifyed persons began to live or be Mr. Baxter would be ready to deal with us as did the Jewes with Steven Act. 7. 57. stop his ears and cry out against us with a loud voice Blasphemy blasphemy Yet in this sense we acknowledge that saith is neither Gods nor Mans instument of justification But in that sense which alone Mr. Baxter here taketh justification for that gracious act of God by which he dischargeth for Christs sake the sinner from condemnation by vertue of the new
unlesse it be consented unto in calculum fidei non venire opera sed prorsus Idem ibid. §. 18. separanda esse i. e. that works have nothing to do in the borders of faith to justifie but must be wholly separated from it and proceeds that the Law and faith are here opposed Therefore because works are required to the righteousnesse of the one ergo sequitur ad hujus justitiam non requiri it follows therefore that they are not required to the righteousnesse of the other and further in the same place Herein the Gospell differs from the Law quod operibus non alligat justitiam sed in sola dei misericordia collocat that it binds not righteousnesse to works but placeth it in the sole mercy of God And Fides sine operum adminiculo c. Faith without any proppage of works resteth wholly upon mercy And that wherewith he concludes this Section That the righteousnesse by which we are justifyed is not ushered into our possession by works nec operando nos eam consequi sed vacuos accedere ut eam recipiamus i. e. not that we attain it by working but come with our hands empty of all works to be filled with it With those agreeth Ph. Melanchthon Evangelium offert remissionem per imputationem justitiae vitam aeternam sine conditione legis aut operum nostrorum i. e. the Gospell offers remission by the imputation of righteousnesse and eternall life without condition of the Law or our works Again Vulgo imaginantur homines Evangelium esse promissionem conditionalem at ab hac imaginatione abducendi sunt i. e. Men must be drawn off from that vulgar imagination that the Gospell is a conditionall promise And upon Rom. 4. Credens est salvus sola fide sine operibus Neque nostra obedientia aut causa est aut conditio propter quam accepti sumus coram Deo i. e. He that beleeveth is saved by faith only without works Neither is our obedience either a cause or a condition for which we are accepted before God So Zanchius in Hos 2. 21. Notandum est hanc esse simplicem Evangelicam sine omni conditione promissionem Hic nihil exigit Deus sed simpliciter promittit quod velit ipse c. This is a simple and Evangelicall promise which is without all condition where God requireth nothing but simply promiseth what he pleaseth As for Luther it is superfluous to cite him being every where so full both in the positing and confirming of this doctrine let but his Sermon upon Tit. 3. 5. be read he shall be there found calling it devillish doctrine and the teachers thereof Hypocrites who teach salvation to be far off and not already attained and to be sought for by works concluding Quicunque salutem non ex mera gratia per fidem ante omnia opera c. whosoever receives not salvation out of meer grace by faith before all works he shall never be saved I had a purpose to have annexed the Testimonies of some more of the Chieftains against Antichrist but there is no need Mr. Baxter for his part is not a Zizca warreth not by other mens eyes seeth and knoweth against whom he levelleth is not ignorant that all especially the more antient and unsophisticated worthies of all the Churches speak the same things and in the same tone with these against the Papists Neither was it my purpose to deal at all in this passage with Mr. Baxter but to shew the vanity of some Pharisaicall Cabalisticall Sophisticall but little Scripturall and Theologicall Rabbies who with Anti-evangelicall spirits partly to set up again a Babell or Babylon of works as a mount against Antinomianism as they term the liberty and purity of the Gospell and partly in a prostrate devotion wherewith they sacrifice to every Barbarism and Aphorism of exotick arts to which they must submit though it be to the denying of the whole word of God for fear they should not be reckoned Scholars are ready to gallop after Mr. Baxters Sophisticall Lectures into the very Lateran of Rome not knowing whence they run nor whither whose company they leave and whose they follow such levity and giddinesse hath taken their head-pieces that as having gotten a professed Protestant Divine to lead them into the worst sink of Popery they run with head and shoulders thronging who shall be foremost so no doubt if under the profession or misprision of a Jesuite Paul himself should descend to preach again and maintain the Doctrine of the Gospell in all its verity power and purity and not in a dialecticall phrase they would throw it back in his face as Jesuiticall and devillish For without such lightnesse and emptinesse it were impossible for them to be so suddenly and easily whirled into an applause of an assertion so grosly and palpably Popish and Damning by a peevish veneration of the learning and holinesse of the Penman thereof As if among the Jewish Scribes and Pharisees and Popish Monkes and Jesuits there were not to be found in depth of Learning and strictnesse of Legall righteousnesse many to whom this man may possibly serve and but serve as a shaddow But it sufficeth here to have manifested that the Doctrine of Mr. Baxter is totally the same in this particular with the doctrine of the Jesuits Or if in any respect we shall find it in what remains to be examined not wholly the same I doubt not but in every such difference which we shall meet with to demonstrate that it is far worse then theirs Or if it be not so let him produce any one knowing man within any of the Protestant Churches except he will make the Concision of Socinians and Arminians the true Protestants that hath ever taught or held this doctrine CHAP. III. The first Argument for Justification by Works drawn from Scriptures examined The Scriptures cited prepared to Mr. Baxters hand by the Papists and the Protestants answer to all the Arguments drawn from those Scriptures by the Papists by him concealed and the abhorrency of those Scriptures from the conclusion which they are brought to prove demonstrated HAving in part supplyed what Mr. Baxter would have buryed here in silence some of the Scriptures and Arguments from Scriptures which are brought by the Protestants to remove works from having concurrence with faith in the businesse of justifying let us now examine the Scriptures which he quoteth to prove their cooperation with faith to justifie Here as I said we meet not with words but figures partly therefore because he maintains the same assertion with the Papists partly because the Scriptures which he quoteth are all such as the Papists have urged before him against us so that he hath taken them up at the second hand as they were collected to his hand by the Fryers and Jesuits himself not expressing how he would argue from those Scriptures I conceive it is his desire that we should understand he means so to argue
hine libet it makes me not onely to wish but even to hold my self almost in a desart as impatient of the company of some of our distinctionary Rabbies that admire and are ready to blesse themselves at the wit and profoundness of such wilde barbarous prophane senseless distinctions of this incomparable man that hath not his Peer in England when in this piece of his worth there is not a ploughboy so rustick but would easily whistle so prophanely in this kinde as he And if the reason were given to Mr. Br. why he is in this artifice more full than others it might be given in the Poets words Non tibi plùs cordis sed minùs oris in est Bax. pa. 309. 3 Paul doth by the word Faith especially direct your thoughts to Christ beleeved in For to be justified by Christ and to be justified by receiving Christ is with him all one Though I might except in some sense against this assertion yet because I cannot apprehend waking what he dreams sleeping how he will from this assertion prove that Paul either doth not exclude works from Justification or doth not attribute it to Faith alone I leave it unexamined If by Receiving Christ he means our taking him as our Lord to be obeyed in all his Commandments that we might thereby be justified enough hath been said before in the examination of his 66 72 73 Thes in answer to the fourth Argument that he brings for justification by works unto it I refer the reader Bax ibid. 4 And when he mentioneth Faith as the Condition he alwayes implyeth Obedience to Christ Therefore beleeving and obeying the Gospel are put for the two summaries of the whole Conditions The vanity and falsity of this assertion hath been discovered in the examination of his 62 70 Theses in which is Comprehended his 2 Argument for Justification by works What is there said being perused will take off I suppose from the reader all expectation of any more to be here said to it Onely by the way all may note 1 That what he saith here labours of the same disease with the former it is onely said not proved We must all sit at the Feet of this Gamaleel and beleeve because this great Doctor and Magister noster hath spoken it 2 That although it be the Popish Cause which he here mainteineth yet he with a holy Craft makes use rather of the Arminian than Popish Phrase the more easily to beguile the simple Calling works not as the Papists do plainly Works but Obedience to Christ and Obedience to the Gospel How doth he fitt his bait to be swallowed by gudgeons that cannot discern a line from a halter He knows there is a generation of men that detest swines flesh yet feed every morning upon pistles of pork as the greate â—â—elicacie Change the name and they disaffâ—ct not the substâ—nâ—e 3 Yet what he here saith he hath received in matter though notiâ—n words from Stapleton the Priest and his fellows We are justâ—â—ed saith the Apostle by Faith not by works i. e. saith Stapletâ— not by works without faith but by works and Faith that is saith Mr. Br. not by works or obedience out of Faith but by works implyed in Faith Let him that can decide which of these two is the finer Sophistâ—r and Papist 4 And no less harmoniously do Pauls words and Mr. Brs exposition and distinction upon them agree together than a harp and a harrow Paul affirms Justification or imputation of Righteousness to be without works Rom 4. 6 Mr. Br expounds his meaning to be without works which are not but by works that are implyed in Faith As good a distinction as if I should distinguish between the brains that a man hath out of his head and the brain which he hath in his head How great is his self-Confidence that he should think such absurd distinctions should take with any rationall man onely upon this Authority because such a Cathedral scholar hath said it And when Paul saith so frequently Not by works but by Faith he should mean by Faith works also implyed in Faith This were to affirm that Paul in the delivery of the sacred doctrine of the Gospel speaks by Contraries and that what things he setts in opposition we must take to be in a Conjunction so that if he had said a man seeth with his eyes not with his heels we must understand him to mean that he seeth with his eyes and heels together or with his heels implyed in his eyes What he addeth of beleeving and obeying the Gospel that they are the two summaries of the Gospel hath been before examined and both found to be the same thing Obedience to the Gospel being nothing else but the hearts submission to the voyce of Christ and doctrine of the Gospel in stretching forth faith to apprehend Christ alone to Justification illumination sanctification c. resting upon him both for salvation and for grace and power to walk worthy of it as hath been more fully before expressed Thus much in way of examination of the third part of his vindication viz. that his doctrine in nothing dissents from Pauls And in this poynt I doubt not but we have found Paul and him no less Cohering than Christ and Antichrist CHAP. XXII Whether there be any validity in Mr. Brs Apologizing for his Doctrine that it is not derogatory from the Righteousness of Christ THe 4th part of his vindication is to free his doctrine of Justification by works from being derogatory to Christ and his righteousness Here unto his endeavours bend in many parts of this his Tractate In stead of all I shall mention onely two or three places which Comprehend the summe and whole of all the rest Bax. pa. 307. The Righteousness which we must plead against the Lawes accusations is not one grain of it in our Faith or works but all out of us in Christs satisfaction Again Appendix pa. 78. Our dooing or works are required not to be any part of our Legall Righteousness nor any part of satisfaction for our unrighteousness but to be our Gospel Righteousness or the Condition of our participation in Christ who is our Legall Righteousness and so of all the benefitts that come with him What his meaning is he expresseth Aphor. Thes 79. pa. 313. in a Syllogism thus This Doctrine is no whit derogatory to Christ and his Righteousness For He that ascribeth to Faith or obedience no part of that work which belongeth to Christs satisfactory righteousness doth not derogate in that from that Righteousness But he that maketh Faith and Obedience to Christ to be onely the fullfilling of the Conditions of the New Covenant and so to be onely Conditions of Justification by him doth give them no part of the work of his Righteousness Seeing he came not to fulfill the Gospel but the Law Ergo c. I shall speak onely to the Syllogism because in it is fully Comprehended all that Mr. Br. hath
act absolved the conscience there followeth also the sense of our remission and justification So that besides this sense and apprehension there are two things in our justification by faith over and above that which was in our eternal justification in Christ viz. 1. A total diffidence and denyal of our own righteousnesse and a trusting and adhering wholly and onely to Christ for pardon and justification 2. Gods act upon our consciences declaring and assuring us that our debt is paid by Christ and we discharged upon the satisfaction which our surety hath made so that the obligation is cancelled and we depart with a full and general acquittance in our consciences Neither of these were there in the former justification i. e. in the justification in the former sense before mentioned and so that there is more than the bare knowledge of our justification in our being justified in the latter sense is evident Whatsoever else is conteined in the doctrine of the Protestant divines about this question we shall have occasion to adde in examining what Master Baxter saith here and afterwards to oppugn it But the chief thing is yet behind may some say viz. the proof of these positions by sound Arguments or by evidencing Scriptures and the main thing to be proved is that there is such a justification as is an immanent and eternal act in God It is Master Baxters lowd challenge pag. 93. Let all the Antinomians shew but one Scripture that speaketh of justification from eternity I will be so charitable as to conceive he expects not that we should produce Scriptures that say in those very words but that which is the Tantundem that say it in sense and substance else if he reject the matter and stick to words I shall challenge him to produce one sentence of all the sermons which Christ preached and in the whole doctrine that he personally delivered which speaketh at all of justification by faith But in words equipollent to Master Baxters the Scripture delivereth this doctrine which he opposeth viz. justification from eternity First What lesse is to be gathered from 2 Tim. 1. 9. God hath saved us and called us with a holy calling not according to our workes but according to his purpose and grace which was given us in Christ before the World began What can be said more fully to Master Baxters challenge He will not deny that the word saving doth include in it justifying for so should he both contradict himselfe and lose elswhere more than he can gain here by denying it It will then run thus that we are justified and called of God with a holy calling not according to our works these words destroy the end of Master Baxters opposing the eternity of our justification if our own qualifycation and workes may not come in collaterally with Christ to constitute us justified he little regards whether the act be immanent or transient but according to his purpose and grace which was given us in Christ before the world began and that is from eternity See the grace of justification and salvation was given us in Christ from eternity Object Master Baxter may probably object that the grace was indeed given us in Christ from eternity that is God had decreed from eternity to justifie us in Christ when we should come to beleeve in him to justifie or save us in time as to call us in time For the grace here mentioned given us in Christ before times is as much affirmed to be the grace of our vocation or calling as of our saving and justifying But our calling must therefore our justification also must be in time And thus by the grace given must be understood Gods gracious purpose and decree to give us salvation and justification So Mr. Baxter I know God hath decreed to justifie his people from eternity But it is done in time page 93. Sol. 1. That Covenant justifying or the declaring of us in our own Consciences to bee accepted as just in Christ is not denyed to be an act accomplished in us in time Nor yet that God decreed from Eternity to declare us in our consciences Righteous when wee should beleeve But the granting of all this nothing advantageth Master Baxters cause For neither doth this Act of God in time terminate upon our conscience nor his eternal decree so to justifie us beleeving in our selves deny that wee were justified in God and in Christ from Eternity 2. It appears not that the Apostle here speaketh of our calling to the participation of Christ and of justification and sanctification by him in time but rather of that calling mentioned Rom. 4. 17. That God calleth those things that be not as though they were As he called Abraham the father of many Nations when he was yet either childlesse or at least was in reference to the strength of nature without having without hope to have that child from whom those nations should issue and accrew to him as their father So God is said to have called us with a holy calling i. e. to have called and reputed us in Christ his pardoned accepted and adopted children even before we had any actual being in our selves Dedit qui erat accepit qui non erat Quis antem hoc facere potuit nisi qui vocat ea quae non sunt tanquam ea quae sunt Aug. de verb. Apost Sect. 3. If by Calling it be pertinaciously maintained that we must understand that which is done by the Ministry of the Gospel yet all this helps not Master Baxter at all in regard of the exclusive clause following not according to our workâ— where our salvation and justification as well as our vocation are denyed to have any dependance upon our own workes and qualifications as conditions thereof And the whole end of Master Baxters dispute against justification as an immanent Act in God is because if that be granted there will be no place for footing our works and qualifications as necessarily precedent conditions of justification And these fall to ground as well as if we were justified without them though in time as if wee were justified from Eternity 4. But how and whether we can truly and properly be said to have received Grace in Christ before all worlds whereby we are saved and justified and yet not to be saved and justified in Christ before the world was will come to bee examined in drawing forth the sense of other Scriptures which I shall annex In the interim this remaines unquestioned that although the Apostle speak here of Justification in our selves in time yet he affirmes it to be according to the Grace given us in Christ before the world so it was in Christ for us before though not in our selves till we beleeve Againe when the Scripture speaking of the Sonnes of Isaac saith of them while yet unborn and consequently having neither done good nor evill Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated Mal. 1. 2 3. Rom. 9. 11 13. And
to melt out his mercy in justifying us How then was he in Christ reconciling the world to himself before all such actuall intercession and prayers 2 Cor. 5. 19. 6. The like might I say of his objective and occasionall causes that objects and occasions have their being and qualifications from Gods either directive or promissive providence that they may serve to his eternall and absolute volsitions and purposes not that they work any new thing in the will and purposes of God for then like the Masse-priests should they be the creators of their Creator 4. To his second Question Why he cals Christs satisfaction both the Meritorious cause and the Causa sine qua non If he had not I should not have made it a question But because he delighteth both to put the question and to answer it I shall not permit his answer wholly to passe without a short reply B. Pag. 215. That it is the Meritorious cause I know few but Socinians that will deny He must needs mean few Baxterians that are not also Socinians i. e. few of them that with him deny justification to be an eternall immanent act in God For Mr. Baxter himself whether he be or be not a Socinian will and must grant that if justification be and as far as it is an eternall immanent act in God Christs satisfaction neither is nor can be the Meritorious cause thereof But as we look to the justification as in time applyed and declared to the soul and conscience which Mr. Baxter calleth the justification of the new Covenant and the Scriptures justification by faith of this justification I will not contend with him but Christs satisfaction though no where in the word totidem verbis so termed yet may enough properly be termed the Meritorious cause But why he will also have it called the Causa sine qua non a blinde man may easily see his reason what else doth he drive at but to put it in the same order of Causality with faith and good works which also in the whole sequele of this Treatise is with him the Causa sine qua non and consequently to make Christs sufferings and mans qualifications collaterall causes of Justification Hereunto pertaineth his extolling the cause sine qua non and exalting the praise thereof above other causes Pag. 216 217. not so much to attribute it to Christs satisfaction as preparatively to deifie and equalize with Christ the meritorious perfection of mans righteousnesse which he is bringing in as a rivall of Christ for the honor of justification and herein he will rather turn Cynick then leave the praise of man in his justification any one inch beneath the praise of Christ For hereunto pertaines his Quare me non laudas qui dignus sum ut accipiam Plus enim est meruisse quam dedisse beneficium If God be to be praised for giving justification why not I that am worthy to receive it for it is more honourable to have deserved then to have given a Benefit How well this agreeth with that which he hath in and under his 24 26 27. Theses I leave the Reader to consider and how fully he speaks it out in the following doctrine of this book we shall see more fully afterward Yea when he here puts Christs satisfaction in the same kind of causality with faith and works which he here cals the Causa sine qua non elsewhere the conditions of justification and Thesis 62. pronounceth faith to be the principall and works the lesse principall condition what place doth he leave for Christs satisfaction but to be a footstool to our faith and works Ob. Yes he reserves the entire praise of merit still to Christs satisfaction alone Answ Not so for though in words he sometimes asserteth Christs satisfaction to be the merit of our justification yet he makes the worthinesse of our own righteousnesse to be that which makes both Christs merit and justification merited to be ours and so we out-merit Christ deserving not only justification but Christ the meriter and the merit of Christ to be made ours In this he is worse then the Papists They give the praise of our mâ—rit to Christ he hath merited saith they a power â—o our works to merit This man contrariwise that neither Christs merits nor justification the fruit of it becomes ours untill we by our merits and worthinesse have put our selves into the possession of it so according to the Papists the efficacy of mans merits depends upon Christs merits according to Mr. Baxter the efficacy of Christs merits as to this or that justifyed person depends upon a mans own merits as in the fore quoted Thesis he manifesteth himself Let all men judge whether his ambition bends not to be more then an approver even an eminent improver of Popery 5. To his third question somewhat also In the Thesis where he gives us the order of the causes of justification to set up his own not Gods justification he saith B. Materiall cause properly it hath none if you will improperly call Christs satisfaction the remote matter I contend not And in the explication pa. 214. against what he had said in the Thesis he supposeth it will be questioned B. 3. Why he makes not Christs righteousnesse the Materiall cause And pag. 217. He thus answers the question B. Christs righteousnesse cannot be the materiall cause of an act which hath no matter If any will call Christs righteousnesse the matter of our righteousnesse though yet they speak unproperly yet far neerer the truth then to call it the matter of our justification We have here as elsewhere a Momus among the Gods a curious and carping Critick against not only Ecclesiasticall but Canonicall writings also no farther owning what they speak then as they speak it in a dialecticall dialect so setting Aristotle above Christ and weighing all the sentences of the Gospell in the scales of Logicall terms and maxims and Socinus-like submitting all the truths of the Gospell to reason yea to the rules of Aristotles logick or reason Justification is an act saith he and there is no matter of an act ergo it hath no materiall cause Christ therefore and his Apostles yea all the Doctors of the Church that speak after the Scriptures are dunces delivering a vain Theologie not truely Theologicall because not after the Peripateticks precepts totally Logicall But what law of Medes and Persians can binde the holy Ghost never to mention justification but strictly under the consideraration of an act Will Mr. Baxter deny it sometimes to be used in a passive sense Or what he saith of faith Thesis 62. may it not more truly be affirmed of justification That as a whole Country oft takes it name from the chief City so may all the privileges and benefits of the Gospell from justification so that when it is named all the rest are implyed and named under it The thing in question I acknowledge Mr. Baxter granting what he grants is
he hath out of Schiblers Mâ—taphysicks sound enough I acknowledge as Schibler proposeth it in Thesi but fallacious and misapplyed by this man to his Hypothesis Yet what ever it be though not the least portion of Gods word in it let us examine the strength of it It is the principall efficient of the act or effect that worketh by the instrument saith he but man is not the principall efficient therefore worketh not in this businesse by instruments or instrumentall helps I answer 1. not only in resevence to this but to that which also followeth in his Argumentation We are to distinguish between instruments that they are of two kinds effective or receptive Effective so is a knife the instrument of cutting Receptive so is the hand the instrument of receiving Mr. Baxters Arguments are applyed to the former only not at all to the latter For 1. Of an Effective instument it may be said the knife cuts and the Man cuts likewise But a Receptive instrument hath a double relation 1. To the giver 2. To the receiver As if a rich man give a great treasure to a poor man he receiveth it in his hand the receptive instrument of the poor mans inriching is his hand Now if a man should argue as Mr. Baxter doth the hand if it be an instrument it is an instrument either of the giver or receiver not of the receiver for he doth not inrich himself he is not the principall agent inriching not of the giver for he doth not receive any riches but the act of the hand is to receive therefore the instrument of neither nor at all an instrument Who sees not the vanity of such an Argument Yet such is this paralogism of Mr. Baxter I say therefore that the Canons of an instrument which he citeth out of Aquinas and Schibler hold only of effective not of receptive instruments Yet as faith is Gods effective instrument to justifie man and not himself as Mr. Baxter trifleth so these Canons hold of it also in the sense before specifyed 2. I deny the Assumption or Minor he proves it thus Man doth not justifie himself This is an equivocation and besides the question None ever made man the causa prima of his justification none I mean of all those whom Mr. Baxters disputes against Himself indeed and his followers asserting the perfection and merit of mans righteousnesse consisting in faith and good works and affirming that this righteousnesse of man and in man doth give him title to the righteousnesse which is by Christ cannot well be cleared from making man the first tause of his justification But we speak nothing tending to this purpose and in no other sense do we say that man acteth to his justification but by this apprehending and applying to himself the justification of God And in this respect man is not only the principall but also the sole efficient of apprehending or receiving Christ to justification and faith his alone receptive instrument therein by the instrumentall subsurviency of his faith in receiving Christ We make it not mans instrument of Christs satisfaction or of Gods acceptation or of his declaring but only of our applying it to our soules That it is not Gods instrument he hath these reasons to prove B. 2. Not of God for 1. It is not God that beleeveth though it 's true he is the first cause of all actions A meer bull with which he jeers and scoffes not only at all the Protestant Divines but also at Christ and his Apostles as poor sorry animals and asses unworthy to be answered with reasons but with absurd non-sense 1. Faith in one was never used or ordained to be an instrument of justifying another much lesse faith in God to justifie man 2. He can conclude nothing else hence but this God beleeveth not therefore God is not justifyed or discharged from condemnation by the new Covenant 3. He doth in the Magisteriall confidence of his heart implicitely accuse Christ his Apostles and faithfull Teachers in his Church to hold that God is the instrument of our justification that the Principall agent and the instrument are the same thing that the instrument must be in the Agent or cannot be his instrument so that faith must be Gâ—d himself for whatsoever is in God is God himself the immanent acts of God are Gods acting These are all but slanderings of the Lords servants to make odious the doctrine which they deliver 4. We make faith in man not in God Gods effective instrument which he infundendo creat creando infundit and having wrought it in the soul he doth put it also in acting thereby to evidence to man his justification As some great and munificent Lord having laid up a great treasure for one of his poorest and most abject servant in some secret place tels him first what he hath done bestowes it fully and freely upon him but the servant not finding it is never the richer because he hath not the possession of it At length the Lord lights a torch guides his servant to the secret place and by the light of the torch shewes him the treasure which before in the minde and purpose of the doner was wholly his bids him to see and possesse Here the torch is that Lords instrument by which he discovered to his servant the treasure and evidenced him to be indeed enriched So and much more compleatly is faith Gods instrument by which he justifies us to our selves i. e. declareth and evidenceth us to be just and justifyed B. 2. Man is the causa secunda between God and the action and so man should be still said to justifie himself Either I understand him not or he speaks words without matter or words that are nothing to the matter in hand He is speaking of justification as of a transient act of God upon man in time This act of God we acknowledge no other but Gods declaring and evidencing man to himself justifyed Gods manifestation or pronouncing his justification to his conscience How man in this act of God should be the causa secunda between God in the action he explaines not and I perceive not That man is the causa secunda between God in the application of justification so manifested I deny not But in this doth man no more justifie himself then is above expressed Or because it is faith in man which we pronounce to be Gods instrument of justifying is therefore man causa secunda or a self-justifyer nay faith even in man is Gods Creature and the same nothing of mans essence Not of our sâ—lves it is the gift of God Ephes 2. 8. May not God lay up his own instruments where it pleaseth his will and wisdome for his own use or ceaseth it to be Gods instrument or in Gods hand when it is laid up in the heart of man for his good Obj. But faith acts not in man without man as the second cause acting it and by such acting his faith man should justifie
further to take his pastime in his Logicall and Metaphysicall learning which may possibly please him but never justifie or save him and partly by shewing the weaknesse of the objection to gull his unwary reader with an opinion of the weaknesse of their cause who are forced with such Egyptian reeds for lack of better pillars to sustain it It is one of the Jesuits principles to fetch armes indifferently either from heaven or hell to storm the Church and truth of Christ and to promote the holy mother harlot of Rome But I am weary following him while he brings nothing but the Socinians right reason to be judge of the Mysterious doctrines of Christ and fear whether it be answerable before God to spend time in answering his babble with babble again for the truth of Christ doth neither stand nor fall by what can be said for it or against it out of the principles or learning of abused Aristotle Let Mr. Baxter call to minde what he hath read as elsewhere so in his adored Schibler in the second book of his Metaph. Cap. 3. in his interserted oration a little before the end of that book pa. 211. of the book printed at Oxford concerning the sophister convinced by an unlearned Confessour after his almost victorious disputes against all the Doctors of the Nicene councell many dayes together If he take it for a truth it may help to convince him that God is more effectually present in disputations about Evangelicall matters when they are totally confined to the Word then when they are handled after the rule and in the Predicament of carnall reason It argues that he undertakes a businesse not for God but against him else would he not cast away spirituall and take up fleshly arms to maintain it But fith Mr. Baxter is Mr. Baxter we shall crave leave to speak the lesse to him henceforth where we find him to have little of the word and reserve our selves to speak more largely where the man for his recreation vouchsafeth to abase himself so low as to meddle with Scriptures B. Quest But though faith be not the instrument of justification may it not be called the instrument of receiving Christ who justifyeth us Ans I do not so much stick at this speech as at the former yet is it no proper or fit exprâ—ssion neither For 1. The act of faith which is it that justifyeth is our actuall receiving of Christ and therefore cannot be the instrument of receiving To say our receiving is the instrument of our receiving is a hard saying 2. And the seed or habit of faith cannot fitly be called an instrument For 1. The sanctifyed faculty it self cannot be the souls instrument it being the soul it self and not any thing really distinct from the soul nor really distinct from each other as Scotus Dr. Orbellus Scaliger c. Dr. Jackson Mr. Pemble think and Mr. Ball questions 2. The holinesse of the faculties is not their instrument For 1. It is nothing but themselves rectifyed and not a being so distinct as may be called their instrument 2. Who ever calleth habits or dispositions the souls instruments The aptitude of a cause to produce its effect cannot be called the instrument of it You may as well call a mans life his instrument of acting or the sharpnesse of a knife the knives instrument as to call our holinesse or habituall faith the instrument of receiving Christ I have before expressed in what sense we make or at least hold faith to be mans instrument in applying Justification to himself And 2. have manifested the testimonies and authority of the Scripture herein so that Mr. Baxter if he list as it listeth him to cavill cavils not so much against all godly Protestant writers whom he opposeth as against the holy Ghost speaking by the mouth of Christ himself and his Apostles whom thorow the loins of those he smites at It is not the first time that he hath accused Christ and the holy Ghost in this manner of impropriety and unfitnesse of expressions in Scriptures And why because they speak not enough logically and in all probability never read thorow Aristotles Metaphysicks But let us hear what he can say here to prove the unpropernesse of that language which calleth faith an instrument of receiving Christ and justification in and by him His reasons are above in his own words rendered To the first I answer Mr. Baxter makes and layes his own principles of Religion and from them as from an impregnable mount he battereth Christ and his doctrine Should we grant him that faith is the receiving of Christ yet 1. How shall it appear otherwise then by Mr. Baxters own Magisteriall dictates that justifying faith is nothing else but the receiving of Christ 2. Why else doth he make it simply and only a quality or act of the soul without the adjection of its originall from above but to ingenerate into the minds of men an opinion that it hath its emanancy and rise from nature from freewill that every man may have and act it if and when he will and that it is not infused of God to be instrumentall by his appointment for the producing of any spirituall effect 3. How doth he prove that onely the act of faith justifyeth Yet 4. If all these dubious things were granted to him his own words therein tend to the confirmation rather then the infirming of the main conclusion which he opposeth that faith is the instrument of justification For if the act of faith be the receiving then must faith it self so acting be the receptrix or that by which we receive Christ but that by which man receiveth Christ is instrumentall to his receiving of justification for Christ is made of God to us righteousnesse he that hath Christ hath life specially this will follow upon Mr. Baxters principle of Christ and justification given to all universally to none in particular he must be made ours therefore by receiving him and if faith doth receive how doth it receive but as an instrument or whereas the well is deep and we have nothing of our own to draw with what shall be the instrument of drawing and receiving if faith be not it 5. And in this lyeth Mr. Baxters Sophism that he puts the act of faith for faith actuated Though the act of faith were the receiving of Christ yet faith actuated and acting is that by which we receive Christ and to say that by which we receive is the instrument of our receiving is not a hard but a proper saying The act of Mr. Baxters hand was the writing of these lines To say that his writing was the instrument of his writing is a hard saying but to say his hand acted in writing was his instrument of writing it is not a hard saying To the second It is wholly Sophisticall For when he saith 1. The sanctifyed faculty it self cannot be the souls instrument because it is the soul it self what is this to the purpose
Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall Rom. 10. 13 14. be saved How then shall they call upon him in whom they have not beleeved His argumentation runs thus Whosoever do rightly call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved but beleevers only call rightly upon the name of the Lord ergo beleevers only shall be saved He argues here from the effect to the cause from acceptable prayer to faith from whence it floweth concluding that salvation is promised to prayer not as it is an act performed in its self but as it is a fruit of faith ascribing all the furtherance unto salvation by prayer to faith that breaths it out and all the efficacy which faith hath to salvation to the Lord i. e. the grace of God or Christ the Mediatour beleeved in So making faith to be that which in the vertue of its object saveth and not prayer either in its act or in respect of the spirituall disposition of the heart to pray And with the Apostles argument from prayer to faith I might also argue to manifest that the Scriptures which Mr. Baxter quoteth to prove that forgiving of others is a collaterall condition with faith to justification or forgivenesse have no force in them to prove such a conclusion viz. Mat. 6. 12 14 15. Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtours for if we forgive men their trespasses your heavenly father will also forgive you but if ye forgive not men their trspasses neither will your heavenly father forgive your trespasses Mat. 18. 35. So likewise shall my heavenly father do to you also if ye from your hearts forgive not every man to his brother their trespasses The like also in Mar. 11. 25 26. When ye stand praying forgive c. as in the former Scriptures Luke 6. 35. Forgive and ye shall be forgiven Isa 5. 15. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick and if he hath committed sins they shall be forgiven him Joh. 14. 13 14. Whatsoever ye shall aske in my Name I will do it c. 1 Joh. 5. 15. Whatsoever we aske we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him The rest have nothing of sound much lesse of substance to the purpose for which they are quoted How much these Scriptures together with those of the former bunch that were intended by Mr. Baxter for the foysting in of Repentance and of the next bundle that he would have to force in all the works of love and obedience into the office of justification may prevail with some simple and ignorant persons I know not For these not being able to compare Scripture with Scripture and spirituall things with spirituall nor to search into the pith and bottom of Scriptures are carried as the Apostle saith with every wind and sound of doctrine whither their seducers will But I do not comprehend what Mr. Baxters designe is who having compiled this work chiefly if not only for the reading of the Learned should fardle up together these Scriptures to deceive such for the very quotations will send them not only to the Scriptures but also to the Commentators upon these severall Scriptures where they must needs find him and the Jesuits so wresting from them the same doctrine and Mr. Baxter so fully answered in their answer to the Jesuites that his Readers will not be able to decide which is the verier Jesuit he or those whom he followeth I had a thought therefore to transmit the Reader to the Commentators But to manifest to the simple how little there is in substance in these quoted Scriptures making for Mr. Baxter I shall interpose these few things 1 That the Scriptures are all of Gods inspiration concenting together in oâ—e harmony no where dashing either against other no more then God their Author dasheth against himself so that we must necessarily conclude that neither all nor any one of these Scriptures doth in its proper and genuine sense contradict those before alleadged Scriptures of justification by faith and not by works by faith without works by the righteousnesse of faith and not by our own righteousnesse by the law of faith in opposition to the law of works c. as before If then these Scriptures should bring in justification and remission but in part by our own works and righteousnesse Scripture would here be set in commotion against Scripture and God against God 2 Mr. Baxter doth here make this work of forgiving and praying for forgivenesse as also in the next place all love obedience and the works thereof not simply conditions of justification and forgivenesse which in some sense far from Mr. Baxters some of our Theologists admit but collaterally and in the same relation with faith and this is the highest toppe of Papall presumption not the worst of Jesuits speak more derogatorily to the depressing of Gods grace or more proudly to the exalting of mans works worth and righteousnesse 3 From this doctrine of his it would follow that praying and forgiving others must be such a condition of justification that where it is there is justification where it is not there is not justification the positing or not positing of the one including the summe of the other for so it is with faith He that beleeveth shall be saved he that beleeveth not shall be damned Mark 16. 16. so Joh. 3. 36. Will Mr. Baxter say so of forgiving others and praying for forgivenesse are all that do it justifyed dares he to say it No otherwise but with his caeteris paribus and sensu composito if he doth this and all things else which a Christian should do And thus I might also make every civill and indifferent Action the condition of justification A mans sleeping by night and working by day his eating when he is hungry and drinking when he is thirsty his improving of his groundâ— before he sowes them and sowing them when improved and reaping them when the crop is come to maturity all these and the like may be as well called conditions of justification for these also caeteris paribus when all things else are done which a Christian should do do stand as full in strength to justification as those works which Mr. Baxter particularizeth yea this caeteris paribus makes sin guilt ungodlinesse perdition c. more properly conditions of justification then any of those which Mr. Baxter nameth for without the actuall being of those none can be justifyed in Christ before God For Christ Came not to call the righteous but sinners to Repentance Mat. 9. 13. He hath shut up all under guilt under sin that the promise of righteousnesse by the faith of Jesus Christ might be upon all that beleeve Rom. 3. 19 22 23 24. He justifyeth the ungodly Rom. 4. 5. And saveth that which was lost Mat. 18. 11. Are these duties to be performed coordinately with faith that we may be justifyed surely rather then those which Mr. Baxter nameth for these still go before
Quere It is his doctrine that teacheth a soul-cozening Faith a Faith made up of a fardle of works and rags of our own righteousness as in his larger definition of justifying Faith he hath described it CHAP. XIII Mr. Baxters calumnie that this doctrine doth harden the Papists in their Popery and give occasion to many learned Protestants to turn Papists answered HIS fifth Quere hath no shew of weight in it deserving an examination savouring more of the Spleen than of the judgment of the Author Nevertheless though it declares only the stomach and indignation of the man against the truth rather then any strength in his hand to hurt it yet because it is formed for the deceiving of the simple and unwary upon whom sounds oft times take no less impression than actuall strokes to prevent damage to such I shall examine whatsoever may seem materiall in it as I have the rest B. pa. 329. 5. Lastly Is not this excluding of sincere Obedience from Justification the great stumbling-block of Papists and that which hath had a great hand in turning many learned men from the true Protestant Religion to Popery That by obedience he meaneth all morall qualifications and works as they are vertues and works we have before learned from his own words so his meaning is that the Doctrine of Paul and the Churches which follow him viz. Justification by Faith and not by works is guilty of the damnable and pernicious evills which he here chargeth upon it These evills are two 1 It is the great stumbling-block of the Papists 2 It hath carried back many learned men from the Protestant Religion to Popery To both these I shall speak in order 1 Of its hardning the Papists in Popery Is it not the great stumbling-block to Papists saith Mr. Br. I answer 1 Was not Christ and that in this very point of justifying the ungodly by an imputed righteousness without any inherent righteousness of their own a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence to the Jewes as which they were so offended that to their eternall ruine they reject the Gospel and salvation of Christ unto this day Rom. 9. 32 33. 1 Cor. 1. 23. 1 Pet. 2. 8. What then must Christ be anathematized Nay but let the truth of Christ stand and man be the lyar the transgressor It is scandalum acceptum non datum an offence taken not given And blessed is he who soever shall not be offended in or at Christ Mat. 11. 6. Lu. 7. 23. But if any will be offended and dash the Lord Christ admonisheth him of the danger Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken but on whomsoever it shall fall it will grind him to powder Mat. 21. 44. 2 And as sound a reason is it that our doctrine of Justification hinders the Papists from turning Protestants as was that of some Statists that complained against the Church of Geneva that they hindered the conversion of Papists in those parts by forbidding dancing and the like grave consideration by some great Politicians in England that the forbearing of Bull and Bear-baiting and other sports on the Lords day hardned the Papists of Lancashire in their Popery When Religion is made a meer piece of policy and to have in it at the best no more than a dress of dreggish formality or morality no marvail if such dirty and unspirituall means are made use of to spread it 3 But how deep doth this effect lurk in its cause so that only this one mans sagacity can smell it out That the Papists in the least things will not turn Protestants except we in the worst turn Papists For this Article of Justification is the greatest of all the questions controverted between us and the Papists All the rest not ingredients of or meerly relating to this may the Papists continue in if not of malice or wilfulnesse with a possibility of salvation They are but wood hay and stubble built upon the foundation the very builders whereof may be saved but so as by fire saith the Apostle But a Trentified Papist by the coherent judgment of the best Divines cannot be saved because hee holdeth not the foundation sure and pure but mixeth mans works with the grace of God in Christ to Justification And their judgment is grounded upon the authority of the Apostle Yee are faln from grace Christ is become void or forfeyted to you whosoever are justified by works An ardent love to Romes shavelings out of doubt possesseth Mr. Br. that he doth not only wish himself as did the Apostle but would make himself and all us accursed that they might be not saved but damned with us For if they reject all other their errors and practically retain but this one by it they forfeyt all the salvation of the Gospel 4 Nay contrariwise as long as this Article of the Gospel was diligently preached and stoutly maintained in the Protestant Churches and that not with quiâ—ks and quidities of humane Art but by the nervous arguments of Scripture alone so long the Kingdom of Antichrist more and more decayed and they which were before marked up as slaves to that rivall of Christ brake the fetters and came in by thousands and ten thousands taking the Kingdom by a holy and violent force But since the time this Doctrine hath been less preached and patronized the Reformed Churches have been still in a languishing and the Antichristian Kingdom in a growing condition as Mr. Br. himself so great a Reader and so fully acquainted with the Ecclesiasticall Histories must necessarily grant And why hath this stop to the promoting of the Gospel befaln the Churches but that the Lord Christ doth herein declare his offence taken against us for not making him our all that hee also ceaseth so victoriously as in former times to vouchsafe his presence among us 5 But since Mr. Br. is leapt home to them and many foot beyond many of the more moderate sort of them in the point of justification by works and so hath removed the slumbling-block let him speak by experience how many of them are come in to him to be his Proselytes rejecting the Papacy and other their Popish errors Or whereas his Friends the Arminians have in this and many other of their Tenents so many decads of yeers closed fully with them where is the confluence of Papists to them seen that shaking off their former opinions and practices profess themselves Converts A Cardinals Hat perhaps hath been sent or a fat Bishopprick promised to some of the most deserving men among them in relation to the Romish Cause to allure them to further and higher deservings of this kind But the holy Mother Church I warrant you sticks where she was If shee should permit but one stone of her Fabrick to be loosed it might cause a crack in the whole This part of the Quere I shall therefore upon these Considerations leave as reasonless and examine the next whether there be any more reason in it