heart Acts 15.9 Therefore it is not love it self or the purity of the heart but something that inclineth and disposeth to love and purity and surely before we can love and obey God there must be an apprehension of his goodness faithfulness readiness to accept and reward which must incline the heart to it We cannot love and serve him 〈◊〉 we neither know him nor his Mind concerning us nor have any confidence in his good wilâ— towards us And this is Faith which we may thus describe Faith is a hearty and practical assent to all divine truth so as to believe the Histories fear the Threatnings trust in the I remises and expect the fulfilling of Prediction which proceed from God All this is easily gathered out of the 11. Heb. where the Apostle having spoken in the end of the 10th Chapter of believing to the saving of the Soul subjoynâ— this description of Faith v. 1. viz. That it is the substance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the subsistence of things hoped for and the evidence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of things not seen which subsistence and evidence things yet suture have only in God's Word and Man's real belief of it things hoped for properly respect the Promises things not seen the History of things past as the belief of the Creation v. 2. and the Prediction of things to come as Noah by Faith feared the Deluge v. 7. and all the Patriarchs died in faith or expectation of the coming of Christ v. 13. Now that Faith hath several acts and causeth several affections as hope trust fear in the soul is because it hath several objects things to be desired things to be feared and things to be hoped for which is common to it with other graces which have their several acts and affections towards several objects or the same objects severally conâ—dered That special act of Faith which reâ—â—ects Promises or affection immediately â—owing from Faith without which it is not â—ompleat in Scripture is called by several â—ames rouling resting leaning relying upon God flying to him for resuge hiding our â—â—lves under him putting of our selves under â—he Shadow of his Wings which and the like â—re Metaphors from the Body and when we â—eak properly of the acts of the Soul are best â—prest by believing or trusting in the Promises which the Protestants express by fiduâ—a affiance or fiducial recumbence which is â—â—so the Scripture term of putting our hope and confidence in God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a pervasion and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a full assurance of â—is Promise Now Faith justifieth a Sinner â—ot in its whole Latitude for so it believeth â—eer Histories as well as practical things and â—e Threatnings as well as the Promises and â—â—useth fear as well as hope But a Sinner cannot be reconciled unto God by fearing his Wrath and Judgment though fearing may â—cite him to look after mercy in the Promise â—or by believing the History of things past as â—â—e Creation and Floud or the Prediction of â—â—ings to come as the Resurrection and day 〈◊〉 Judgment though these things may set forth God's veracity and confirm the Truth of his promise and may excite fear and diligence 〈◊〉 seeking after mercy As trusting in the promises of particular mercies and deliverances is the means of obtaining those mercies as the promises are made to such faith or 〈◊〉 Isa 26.3.4 Thou shalt keep him in perse peace whose mind is stayed on thee because trusteth in thee The promises of deliverant go before and this is added as the means procure the accomplishment of them viz. That they should trust in God so in like mâ—ner the general promise of Pardon and Justfication is made to believing or trusting in and faith gives right to it and is the means having it performed to us Faith then justiâ—â— as it obtains mercy Heb. 11.33 Saintâ— Faith obtained Promises viz. a performan of them and in the Gospel frequently 〈◊〉 Faith hath saved thee and thy Faith hath mâ— thee whole c. As Faith obtains these mercies neither as an act of obedience not the cause or root of obedience but only trusting in the Power and Faithfulness of Gâ—engaged by the particular promises so aâ— Faith justifieth a Sinner by trusting in 〈◊〉 Grace and Mercy of God through Jeâ— Christ expressed in the general Promise of 〈◊〉 Gospel He that believeth shall be saved 〈◊〉 the like We do not contend about the aâ— ception of faith in this proposition We aâ—â— justified by saith whether it be taken objectively only as some think i. e. we are justified by Christ believed on or relatively 〈◊〉 are justified by faith as apprehending the mercy of God promised through Christ and 〈◊〉 by any works of our own it cometh all one at last The Mercy of God is the câ—â—sa proegomena the moving cause of our Justification the righteonsness of Christ wrought for us the meritorious cause procuring our acceptance with God and also the material or formal cause being the very thing for which God accepts us to life The Promise in the Gospel is the external moral or legal means whereby God conveys Justification and this Righteousness having promised 〈◊〉 to them that believe and faith is an internal means on mans part to apply Christ's Righteousness for his Justification by trusting him promising of it and that partly natural is faith is an act or habit or act properly conversant about a promise and partly moâ—al as God hath appointed our faith in the promise of Justification to be a means of obtaining it and this is all that Divines mean by saying Faith justifys as an instrument or intrumentally and when they call it the mouth and the hand of the soul viz. That Man is Justified by the Righteousness of Christ which Justification is proposed and promised in the Gospel to all that will accept it and trust in it which is believing so that Faith it self is â—ot the matter or righteousness which doth Justifie us under the Gospel instead of our Obedience under the Law but it is the means whereby through the Promise of the Gospel Christs Righteousness is imputed or applied to us by and for which we are justified Object It is no better than a cavil which is objected If Faith justifys as an instrument whose instrument is it Gods or Mans if Mans then he justifys himself if Gods then Man doth nothing in the business of Justification which is Antinomian For Answ The like may be asked of all instruments Natural or Moral Our Food whose instrument is it to nourish us If Gods then we need not eat if ours then we nourish our selves The Word and Sacraments are instruments of grace if they are our instruments then we work grace in our selves iâ— Gods then we need do nothing all these and the like are instruments of Gods appointing to be used by us to the right use of which he hath promised a blessing he hath commanded us to take food and
so often repeating his Promises with all manner of confirmations protestations seals oaths examples of the greatest Sinner being forgiven 1 Tim. 1.16 17. Lastly There is no reason why God may not pardon a Sinner and promise him eternal life without interposing the conditions of his obedience so long as he immediately reveals to him That this eternal life consisteth in the love and enjoyment of himself and that holiness of heart and life shall and must be the way to it and doth immediately make the heart of the humbled sinner 〈◊〉 agree to it doth not God sufficiently provide for the Honour of his Holiness in this as in the very act of justifying he did chiefly respect the Honour of his Free Grace Argument 10. The condemning unbelief p. 38. which is the privation of the Faith by which we are justified is the non-believing in Christ as King Priest and Prophet Ergò The Faith by which we are justified is the believing in him as King Priest and Prophet Answ If the word only be put in as it ought viz. That the only condemning unbelief is the non-believing in Christ as King Priest and Prophet I deny the Antecedent But if only be not added the consequence is apparently false viz. This unbelief is one cause of condemnation therefore the contrary Faith is the sole cause of Salvation I suppose this will be admitted for the Scope of what follows is to shew that such a Faith is the only condition of Justification and then the opposite unbelief must be the only sin that damns without remedy that bars all Justification I say therefore directly to the Argument Non-believing in Christ as King Priest and Prophet as it is here taken for subjection to the whole Law of Christ or obedience to him is not the onely damning sin final despair of the Mercy of God in Christ will as certainly damn as final disobedience to Christ and contempt of him yea though there be a willingness to obey if they could have any hope of Mercy but despair is not the oppoâ—â—â—â— of obedience or of faith in Christ as King Priest and Prophet therefore that is not the only unbelief that damns Again If disobedience to Christ be the only damning sin then obedience is the only saving condition then a Socinian that obeys the Gospel Precepts and acknowledgeth Christ to be the Messiah King and Prophet of his Church may and must be saved though he deny his Priesthood and trust not at all in his Bloud For obedience respects not Christ's Priesthood at all though that be here mentioned for a shew Christ as a Priest reconciles us to God and intercedes for us the onely Grace that respects this is Faith or a trust in it for reconciliation and acceptance If therefore obedience be the only saving condition then that will save without a trust in the Bloud of Christ If it be said they make Faith and Obedience both to be the entire condition I answer Their Faith is nothing but Obedience as hath been abundantly proved and is largely insisted on under this Argument particularly from Joh. 3.36 where he that believeth not is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is sometimes rendred Disobedient hence it is in ferred That the only unbelief is disobedience and the only Faith is Obedience to the Gospel Nor is it possible to joyn Faith and Obedience in the justifying a Sinner in the usual acception of Faith for to trust in meer Mercy for reconciliation and life and to obey precepts that we may have life are things toto genere opposite utterly inconsistent nor can there be a trust in the Promise of Life in their Opinion till a man hath obeyed in some measure because the Promise is made to Obedience So trust in the Promise must follow the condition not be a part of it And thus much for these Arguments to all which I oppose this one Justification is the acquitting of a sinner from sin and guilt and the entitling him to life eternal But this is purchased fully and onely by the Obedience and Bloud of Christ the shedding and offering whereof is his Priestly Office only therefore Christ justifyeth onely as a Priest And Faith apprehending Justification must respect only the Priesthood of Christ I prove the Minor The Bloud of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin 1 Joh. 1.7 He loved and washed us from our sins in his own Bloud Rev. 1.5 When he had by himself purged our sins i. e. by the offering of himself he set down at the Right Hand of the Majesty in the Heaven Heb. 1.3 And the Apostle proves largely That Christ as a Highpriest offering his own Bloud in the Tabernacle of his own Body hath obtained eternal redemption for us that by this one offering he hath brought in remission of sins and for ever perfected them that are sanctified sprinkled with his Bloud as all things under the Law were cleansed by the sprinkling of bloud from Heb. 9.11 to ch 10. v. 18. And in this Christ was a more excellent Sacrifice than those under the Law that they did but typifye pardon and cleansing but his Sacrifice doth really cleanse the Conscience they cleansed from ceremonial pollutions as touching dead bodies c. and restored men to the Congregation but his Bloud cleanseth from dead works our own sins and maketh us really accepted that we may serve the living God Heb. 19.13 14. Now the Levitical Priests were Teachers and Rulers of the People some were Prophets as Jeremiah and Ezekiel some were Kings also as the Macchabees but they took away the sins of the People and reconciled them to God only as Priests by offering up Sacrifices for them so also Christ though he be a Prophet and King yet he maketh reconciliation for Sinners only as a Priest by offering himself in sacrifice to God for them Now the reason of the consequence is Faith that it obtain Justification must look to Christ under that notion or in that way only by which he hath purchased Justification therefore it must look to him only as a Priest or which is all one trust in the Promise of Reconciliation through the satisfaction and death of Christ and thus the Apostle concludes from the same Premises Heb. 10.19 20 21 22. Having therefore boldness to enter into the Holiest by the bloud of Jesus by a new and living way which he hath consecrated for us through the vail that is to say his flesh and having a High-priest over the House of God let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of Faith having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water It is Faith in this High-Priest by which we draw nigh to God with boldness confidence of acceptance and then that makes us devote our selves sincerely to his Service FINIS
justified or pardoned and so restored to favour for the sake of Christs Satisfaction Doth it not then follow that the Death of Christ is the Cause of Pardon then it is not meer pardon but pardon procured or merited and if Christs Death be the meritorious cause of pardon to every Believer then it is imputed or applyed to every pardoned sinner For no cause can produce its effects without Application to the Subject in whom the effect is wrought and the Application of a meritorious cause to the Subject for whom it meriteth is Imputation or accounting that what was done by that Cause was done for that Person And thus we see this Doctrine maketh more against themselves than against us But that Justification includeth more than Pardon of Sin even a positive Righteousness whereby Man is accepted to Life Eternal I shall thus evince 1. From the Notation of the Words To Pardon is only to release from the Penalty of the Law but to Justifie is to Acquit in Judgment to discharge from guilt and accusation Rom. 8.33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect it is God that Justifieth It is confessed that to justifie an innocent person is to acquit but to justifie a Sinner they say is only to forgive him But in what Language doth the word so signifie When the King pardoneth an Offender doth any man say doth the Law ever say the King justifies him A Brother is commanded to forgive his Brother from the Heart and so Job did no doubt forgive his Friends and yet he saith God forbid I should Justifie you Job 27. v. 4. Is any Man said to justfie him whom he pardoneth Why should the Scripture besides the familiar words of Pardoning and Forgiving use another term viz. to Justifie which in its Etymology and common use signifieth to declare Righteous and yet mean no more by Justification than bare Forgiveness 'T is said A full Pardon makes a Man righteous forasmuch as he that is discharged from all Sin is accounted not to have broke the Law and not to have broke it is all one as to have fulfill'd it But this is a mistake He that forgives an Offender does not therefore account or make him Righteous though he will not exact the Penalty of him Pardon doth suppose a Man to have been a Sinner and so it leaves him as one that hath deserv'd punishment though by favour he is exempted from it the Law still chargeth him with sin and sentenceth him to punishment though the Judge supersedeth his Sentence and will not execute the Law But it is said Great Prop. p. 121. Pardon is dissolutio obligationis ad poenam dissolveth the Obligation to punishment and when there is no obligation to punishment a man is innocent and hath right to impunity I Answer The Antecedent is untrue The Obligation to punishment ariseth from the intrinsecal Nature of the Law which being broken exacteth punishment as a due Debt The Wages of Sin is death Rom. 6.23 So that if pardon take away the obligation to punishment it maketh sin to be no sin But sin is sin though forgiven and the Sinner deserves to die although he shall not die Pardon taketh away the Ordination or Destination of a Man to Punishment that he is not appointed to die but not the Obligation that he doth not deserve to die I conclude Pardon doth not render a Man as innocent as no Transgressor and therefore 't is not all one with justifying or declaring righteous 2. From those Phrases whereby Justification is expressed Eph. 1.4 It is paraphrased thus As he hath chosen us in him that we should be holy and without blame before him in love He who is only forgiven his Sins is not accounted as holy and blameless Pardon supposeth guilt and that which some call reatum culpae the guilt of the fault remaineth after pardon viz. That such a Man hath broken the Law and by such habits or actions he hath been disobedient to the Commands Pardon only takes away reatum penoe the appointment of a Man to punishment therefore there must be something more to render men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 holy and blameless before God and Objects of his Love Rom 4.3 4 5. Justification is called Imputing of Righteousness And Rom. 10.5 6. Justification by Works and by Faith are opposed by the Names of the Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith To justifie therefore is to reckon or to declare in judgment that a Man is righteous and as if Man had been justified by the Law of Works he had then been pronounced righteous So now he is to be justified by Faith he is to be declared righteous by the Righteousness of Faith though not of Works Therefore Justification is more than Forgiveness Object 'T is said Pardon maketh a Man Righteous as if he had not brok'n the Law Answ Ans w. This hath been answer'd before I am sure we should take it very ill if one that hath greatly offended us and received his life and all from our Mercy should plead that he is as good as an innocent or righteous person because he is exempted from the Punishment he deserved Object A person of quality argues thus If pardon be not a Sinners Righteousness and maketh him not righteous then a man may be pardoned and be unrighteous still in the eye of the Law which he thinketh absurd Justific Evangelical p. 18. or else there must be a medium betwixt being righteous and unrighteous which he thinketh impossible Answ Both parts of the disjunction are untrue the first that he that is pardoned is not unrighteous still for if by favour punishment be remitted and no satisfaction be made to the Law then the Law remains broken still and he is a Sinner still though forgiven For it is not the Law that pardoneth if that might take effect it would condemn but the Law-Giver by his own Prerogative which pardon is not therefore looked upon as the fulfilling or the Righteousness of the Law But if as in our case the Law was satisfied and by reason of that satisfaction man is pardoned as this worthy Author acknowledgeth a little before then that satisfaction of the Law repaireth the Breach of it and so there is the real righteousness of the Law first imputed to a Man and then by reason thereof he is pardoned i.e. acquitted from punishment to which he was obnoxious before And thus here is a fair Contradiction that a Man is justified by a righteousness satisfactory to the Law yet barely pardoned The second part of the Disjunction That there is no medium betwixt being righteous and unrighteous is also untrue we speak of a declarative Righteousness Now it is apparent that there is a Middle betwixt being justified and being condemned viz. Medium negationis or rather privationis Adam before he fell was not condemned having not yet sinned nor was he justified having not finished
his Obedience or Disobedience must be imputed to them and be Cause â—f their life or death even the immediate Cause Object Some say this Obedience of Christ is only is Sufferings according as he is said to be obedient to the death Phil. 2.6 and to have â—â—me to do the Will of God in offering up his â—wn Body Heb. 10. v. 6. to the 11th Answ 1. This maketh nothing against our main posiâ—â—on viz. That the Righteousness of Christ is â—â—puted to us and we justified by it For â—hether it be his Death only or his Life and â—eath both for which we are accepted and â—stified it is all one in this Question so long 〈◊〉 imputation of that Righteousness to us be â—e way whereby it justifies us And if they â—ean that his Sufferings are his only obedience here mentioned to make us righteous by â—â—ocuring a Covenant of Grace to be fulfilled â—â— us then they might as well have said His â—â—tive Obedience without his Sufferings doth â—â—ake us righteous For the Text leads to â—â—e no more than the other And Mr. Trueâ—â—an when he had disputed against the Imputation of Christs Active Obedience and for the Passive only and yet that must be only to procure a Law of Grace afterwards fairly grants That in this sence viz. of procuring the Covenant of Grace both Active and Passive may be said to be imputed to us 2ly But the words will not bear this sence Adam's Actual disobedience made us formally Sinners and guilty of death So the Obedience i. e. the Sufferings of Christ procureth right to life for us Thus they must run but when is the Parallel The Sufferings of Christ can not be said to make us righteous formally aâ— this Author tells Sufferings are not righteousness much less suffering the Penaltys oâ— the Law for the breach of it but Christ suffered the Curse of the Law for our sin against it his Sufferings delivered us from the Curse oâ— the Law it having been born by him but could not make us righteous according to thâ— Law that we should obtain the reward 〈◊〉 Life It is true Christ was obedient in his Sufferings and did the Will of his Father in offering himself if they had not been voluntary and obediential they could not have been meritorious but that his Sufferings as suffering of the Penalty of the Law are his only Obedience that justifies us or that he performeâ— no other obedience for us doth not folloâ— at all 1 Cor. 1.30 Christ is made unto us of God Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and Redemption that he that glorieth may glory in the Lord. Here is exprest that God hath made Christ our righteousness sc by giving him to satisfie the Law for us and accepting us for his righteousness And here we may observe that the Apostle purposely proveth against the despisers of Christ the Greeks who boasted of their own Wisdom and the Jews who trusted in their own Works v. 22 23. that Believers have all in Christ v. 24. and that they are in themselves weak foolish nothing v. 25.28 29. all their excellency is in and from Christ and therefore their righteousness and Justification as well as their Sanstification Farther observe that Righteousness here is distinguished from Wisdom and Sanctification and therefore must mean that Christ is our justifying Righteousness or that we are justified by Christ as our righteousness â—f we were to be justified by our habitual and â—ctual holiness as the Condition of the Gospel â—hen righteousness and sanctification are all â—ne Lastly The Apostle saith we have all these â—n Christ that he that glorieth may glory in the Lord We may glory in Christ in that we â—ave all grace from him but how shall we glory in him as to our Justification if we be not justified by his Righteousness but by our own though wrought by the help of his grace even as Adam if he had kept the Law of Works would have been justified by his own righteousness and might have gloried in himself that he had done his duty though it was by the power of the grace and assistance of God 2 Cor. 5.21 Christ was made sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in him Here righteousness by a usual Hebraism is put for righteous we are made the righteous of God i. e. before God or acceptable with him in Christ by or through Christ as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Dative case is often used and how are we made righteous by Christ even by his being made sin for us as he satisfied for our sin so by that satisfaction are we made righteous as he that knew no sin was sacrificed punished for our sins so we that had no righteousness are made righteous by him and this must be by imputation Thus B Vsher out of Claud. and Sedul in locum That this righteousness therefore is not ours nor in us but in Christ in whom we are considered as Members in the Head Non nostra non in nobis sed in Christo quasi Membra in Capite Rel. Just p. 15. Object Against these two Scriptures it is excepted that in the former it is only said that Christ is made our righteousness Hotchkis p. 191. not that his obedience is imputed to us for righteousness Answ Christ cannot be made our Righteousness any other way than by imputing his perfect Obedience to us and therefore the Scripture in saying the one in words sayeth the other also in sence Object To the latter place 't is said That it saith only that we are made righteous by Christ being made a Sin Offering for us not by imputing his Obedience to us Answ If Christ was made a Sacrifice for our Sins then our Sins were so imputed to him as that he was punished for them and if this make us righteous then his bearing the Punishment of Sin is imputed to us and so his Righteousness is imputed Phil. 3.8 9. That I may win Christ and be found in him not having my own Righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith The Apostle in this place exhorteth to rejoyce in the Lord i. e. Christ v. 1. and to beware of Judaising Christians who joyned the Works of the Law with Christ v. 2. saying That true Believers are the true Circumcision the true people of God even they who rejoyce in Christ and have no confidence in the Flesh i. e. their own Works v. 3. And then reckoning up what he had to alledge for himself from the observation of the Ceremonial and Moral Law v. 4 5 6. he saith That he counted all this loss for Christ v. 7. and not only what might be alledged from observing the Law but whatever else might be thought excellent or a ground of self-confidence and rejoycing v. 8. Yea doubtless and I count all things but loss for the
hereupon account the Law to be satisfied and like to be purchased for them without any thing to be further done by them as a condition of life But their true Sence is That the Obedience of Christ is ours remotely only sc that it hath merited a New Covenant which if we perform we shall live 2ly According to this Sence Christs righteousness is no way our righteousness It may be the means of benefit to us but it doth in no sence make us righteous or is the cause of our righteousness or justification which the Scriptures alledged do intend This is thus proved It is none of the four kind of Causes nor reducible to them therefore it is no Cause The Antecedent I thus prove It is not the Material or Formal Cause this they grant For then we must be immediately justified by it it must compose our righteousness they sometimes call it the matter of our righteousness but without sence It is not the Final Cause Christs righteousness is not the end for which we are justified It is not the Efficient neither Physical nor Moral Not Physical for then Christs obedience must actively work obedience or righteousness in us which is absurd Not a Moral Cause or Meritorious which they most insist on For Christ did not merit Grace whereby we should obtain the Gospel and so be justified as they acknowledge seeing he died for all alike though thus he would be but a remote meritorious Cause of Justification meriting that for which we should be justified but he merited only the Covenant of Life upon sincere obedience to the Law he should prescribe All then that he is the Meritorious Cause of is the New Covenant for when this Covenant is promulgated it is left to men whether they will obey or no and so whether they will be justified or no He hath merited nothing further Now if any man come to be justified by performing the condition of this Covenant can Christ be said to merit this Justification for him which as to his Merits was contingent might or might not be and depended wholly upon his own Will and Obedience If a man procure a Charter for a Town and make them a Corporation thereby and by virtue of this Charter they that serve an Apprentiship shall have the Privileges and Freedom of this Town shall it be said of those that thus come into the Freedom some hundred years after that their Freedom was merited bought or procured by him that procured the Charter Surely they themselves merit their Freedom the other was but an Instrument of procuring the Charter In like manner if Christ only merited the Covenant by performing whereof men shall be justified surely men themselves are the proper meritorious immediate causes of their own Justification or Righteousness because they fulfill the condition whereto it is promised and which is the formal righteousness for which they are justified and Christ is but an Instrument of procuring the Covenant and an improper remote and contingent cause of their Justification by their fulfilling it And thus in their sence Christ is no true Cause of our Righteousness Argument 4. Fourthly Mat. 20.28 I argue from these Scriptures which say Christ laid down his Life as a Ransom for us redeemed us 1 Tim. 2.6 Col. 1.14 Tit. 2.14 Rev. 1.5 Isa 43.3 Exod. 30.10 11. Num. 18.15 that in him we have redemption and that he washed us from our Sins in his own Blood From whence I argue Redemption is of persons a ransom and price is paid for persons not for Laws and Covenants and this was typified by the redemption of Israel out of Aegypt whom God saith he redeemed and gave Nations for them By the Redemption of the First Born and of the whole People whenever they were numbred and by the year of Jubilee which is called the Year of Redemption I subsume Ransoms and Redemptions if not paid and purchased by the Persons themselves who were in Bondage are imputed to them i.e. they are immediately delivered set at liberty by the payment of them as much as if they had paid the Prize themselves Therefore if Christ properly redeemed bought purchased us paid a Ransom or Prize for us then it is imputed to us we must be delivered by that very prize and ransom as much as if we had paid it our selves Our Opposites are loath to speak down-right with the Socinians and to deny that Christ's Death was a Prize and Ransom for us but they must and do interpret this Ransom Prize Redemption c. to be all improper and metaphysical Thus Mr. Trueman saith That the immediate Effect of Christ's Satisfaction was only a Satisfaction to Justice Gr. Prop. p. 86. that God might be juâ—â— though he should pardon Sinners and that he might pardon them salvâ justitiâ upon what terms he pleases not that he must pardon them come what will of it or else be unjust not that Sinners should ipso facto be pardoner the Prize being undertaken paid and accepted And again p. 89. Christ's Sufferings were not proper payment but a valuable consideration or you may call it a refuseable payment though it be not properly payment at all And Mr. Hotchkis paraphraseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tix 2.6 not a Ransom but something instead of a Ransom they do therefore implicitely yield if Christs death was a Ransom and Prize for us that then we must be immediately delivered by it which is all one with his Righteousness being imputed to us and in denying the Imputation of Christs Righteousness they do deny That his death was a Ransom Prize or Payment for us against the current of the Scriptures They make all the Effect of the Obedience of Christ to be only the removing of that necessity which lay upon God to condemn all men for breaking the First Covenant so that he might if he pleased save Sinners by any other Covenant p. 86. So Trueman exprefly From whence it follows That notwithstanding the death of Christ God might have refused to have made a New Covenant or to have saved any Sinner if he pleased Which also the Synod of Dort charged upon the Dutch Arminians Proprium integrity finem mortis Christi fuisse Act. Syn. Dordr in Judic Theol. Mag. Bri. Art 2. ut Deo Patri acquireret jus potestatem servandi homines quibus vellet conditionibus How far then was Christ from redeeming men if God after the death of Christ would have been just though he should have saved no man Moreover how can we be said to be washt with Christs Blood if Pardon and Justification was not immediately procured by it Under the Law when the People were sprinkled with the Blood of t e Sacrifice in allusion to which Christs Blood is called the Blood of Sprinkling Heb. 12.24 they were immediately discharged from gâ—ilt and reconciled If then we are sprinkled or washt with Christs Blood we must in like manner be justified and reconciled by
did they are accounted to have done Christ was a common and publick person in that he intended his Obedience not for himself nor for any one person but for the whole Company of the Elect Christ and they are one in Law in that the benefit of his satisfying the Law was intended for them and in time conferred on them But he was not a common person or one in Law with them so as they might be properly reckoned to have done what he did for this holdeth only where the common person is a Delegate or Commissioner of others when they appoint him their Representative give him his Instructions and Authority to act in their Name then they are lookt upon as doing what he doth and not else But it was God the Father and not Men that sent Christ and appointed him to die for the Elect gave him all his Instructions what to do and suffer and then accepted it for them being done by his own Appointment not by theirs But are we not made Righteous with Christ's Righteousness Quest and so may be accounted to have obeyed or fulfilled the Law in him Answ We are made righteous with his righteousness not morally as if we were made personally Holy and obedient by it or were so accounted by God but legally we are made righteous that is justified by his righteousness acquitted from condemnation and accepted to life eternal Therefore we are justified as sinners as ungodly Rom. 4.5 7. in the way of repentance and acknowledgment of our sins by faith in the promise of life through Christ But we are not justified as innocent or blameless in our selves Justification doth not find us righteous but makes us righteous viz. it acquitteth and reconcileth us guilty condemned sinners for the righteonsness of Christ and thus we are made righteous in Law such as shall not be condemned but have eternal life Are we then justified according to the Premiant and Retributive part of the Law Quest and not according to the Preceptive part also Answ We are justified according to the Precept as well as according to the Promise Christ having fulfilled or obeyed the Precepts for us and thereby procured all the reward that was promised with some addition of happiness because of the eminency of his Person and Obedience He also purchased deliverance from the Curse threatned by undergoing the Curse for us yet we cannot be said to have obeyed the Precepts or to have born the Curse in him in any proper sence He did it in our behalf that we might thereby be justified and brought to life as certainly as if we were innocent but not that we should be accounted really innocent in our own persons M. Baxt. 4. disput of Just p. 263. As for the distinction of Righteousness according to the Precept and according to the Sanction or retributive part of the Law and that again divided into the promise and the threatning Idem Answer to Dr. Tully p. 50. Righteousness according to the Promise being jus ad donum a right to the thing promised and righteousness according to the threatning being jus ad impunitatem a right to impunity or to escape punishment this distinction I say as to the matter of Justification is very needless and impertinent For it is the fulfilling of the Precept which gives right to the reward promised and the violation of the Precept which intituleth to punishment What though the righteousness of obedience to the Precept and the right to the blessing of the Promise differ as the cause effect yet the latter doth oppose the former when we are to be justified before God so that if we have right to life on the account of Gods Promise to the righteousness of Christ and this righteousness be his obeying the precept of the Law then his obedience to the precept is imputed to us also and is the foundation of our right to the Promise The like is to be said of our right to impunity which is founded upon Christs suffering the punishment for us and therefore his suffering the penalty is imputed to us also and thus that which is built upon this distinction falls to the ground viz. That Righteousness as to the Promise and Threatning of the Law being in some sort distinct from the Righteousness of Obedience to the Precept that therefore we may have the former without the latter i.e. we may have a right to life by the promise of the Gospel and a right to be delivered from wrath and yet Christ's Righteousness of Obedience and Suffering not to imputed to us For this is the immediate Cause and Foundation of our right both to avoid the penalty and inherit the promise The rest of Mr. Trueman's Arguments I pass by as being directed against the Antinomians only and not touching us as also what he writes against the Imputation of Christ's active and passive Obedience in the sence before explained which is repeated by a later Author Just Evang p. 54. as being partly impertinent and partly answered in the first Chapter This later Author giveth us three Arguments against the Imputation of Christs Righteousness p. 56. though he doth as the others before him miss the state of the Question reporting our Opinion thus That Christ's Righteousness is so imputed to us as if we are accounted to have personally done and suffered what he did p. 57. His third Argument runneth wholly upon this mistake therefore I shall pass it by the two first deserve some consideration The First Argument is If every Believer be personally righteous before God in the very individual Acts of Christs Righteousness p. 58. one of these two things will thence ensue Either that Christ in his own person did perform all the particular Acts of Righteousness required as due from each saved person or else That every saved persons righteousness before God is identically and numerically the same with Christ in his publick capacity as Mediator and so every saved person is personally righteous with a Righteousness that hath a stock of merit in it sufficient to save the World Answ This Argument is untrue both in the dilemma and in the consequence In the dilemma because there is no opposition betwixt the Members of it viz. Christs performing the obedience due from every Believer and their being righteous with a Righteousness that hath an infinite merit in it These are not destructive the one of the other The consequence is untrue because neither of these things follow from the Doctrine of Imputation The Error of this worthy person proceeded from his thrusting two Arguments into one when the Form of it would not bear it I shall therefore take leave to separate them and answer them apart The one is If we be justified by the very personal Righteousness of Christ then he must have performed all the Duties that belong to every particular Believer the Ceremonial and the Moral to the married and to the
Law of Works in our stead so that his Righteousness is accepted for our fulfilling it then must we be justified by his righteousness without any further righteousness or conditions For the Law being fulfilled for us must acquit us and give us life this we defend but he means not so Christ is our legal righteousness with him not by proper fulfilling the Law of Works for us but by taking it out of the way so that no such perfect innocent righteousness should be required of us to Salvation and this he mean by pro-legal instead of our legal righteousness This is still hiding his sence with ambiguous words It remains then that by imputing Christ's Righteousness they intend nothing else but that Christ procured a Covenant of Grace by fulfilling whereof we shall be justified and saved though sinful and imperfect which Justification and Salvation we must originally yet remotely ascribe to Jesus Christ because he procured this mild Covenant for us but the righteousness which constituteth us Just in Law and for which we shall be pronounc'd righteous and Heirs of the Kingdom at Judgment is our own sincere Obedience not Christ's Obedience as appears at large from this Author It is pretended that Luther in the heat of his Spirit and Zeal against Popish Superstitions Object let fall some words which sounded as if he thought Christ's Personal Righteousness was every Believers righteousness Answer to Dr. Tully p. 15. § 11. and their Sins were made his which afterwards he qualified shewing that Christ's Righteousness is â—urs and our Sins his only in the Effects Answ But that Luther maintained the same Imputation as we do in opposition to all works his Sermons and Comments on the Gal sufficiently shew and all both Papists and Protestants do acknowledge And if by imputing Christ's Righteousness in the Effects be meant its Immediate Effects viz. that we should be justified immediately by that righteousness trusted in immedietate formae without the interposition of any other righteousness to be wrought by us it is the Doctrine we contend for but â—f this be meant as the drift seems to be that â—t is imputed so as to merit a New Covenant by performing of which we shall be justified and so it be imputed only in its remote Effects it is manifestly untrue Object It is said again That most of our Reformers rightly asserted that Christ's Righteousness was ours by the way of meriting our righteousness Ibid. p. 16. § 13. though some of them followed Luther's Expressions of the Imputation of Christ's Personal Righteousness Answ Calvin and Melancthon who do not much follow Luther's Expressions affirm That our Justification consisteth in remission of sins for the Merit of Christ received by Faith only and it is most untrue that any of our Reformers talked That Christ only merited that we should be justified by our own Righteousness according to the Gospel Covenant as is here meant Problem loc de Just 6.25 Aretius Melancthon's Scholar defineth Justification by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness and doth charge Thammerus once his fellow Pupil under the same Master with deserting his Masters and the Doctrine of all Reformers for teaching That Faith in the business of Justification includeth Obedience to the Gospel and that we are justified by it as the Fulfilling of the Gospel and that the Works which St. Paul excludeth from justifying are the Works of the Law not the Works of the Gospel also that gratis per gratiam being justified freely by his Grace was meant only that for Christ's Sake our imperfect obedience is accepted to Justification and sinless obedience not insisted on where the Reader may find Thammerus his Arguments and interpretation of Scripture there cited at large for substance the same produced by our Authors and sharply taxed as a deserting from the Reformation Object It is farther said The Papists fastning upon those Divines who held Imputation of Christ's Personal Righteousness in its self Ibid. § 16. in the rigid sence did hereupon greatly insult against the â—rotestants as if it had been their common â—octrine and it greatly stopt the Reformation Answ Thus Bellarmin pretended that amongst the â—rotestants there were several Opinions about â—â—e Imputation of Christ's Righteousness one 〈◊〉 Luther another of Calvin a third of some â—â—hers besides that of Osiander de Just. cap. 22. p. 312. to which B. â—avenant answers Secundam sententiam illoâ—â—m commemorat qui Christi obedientiam juâ—tiam nobis imputatam statuunt esse formalem â—â—usam justificationis at haec communis est nostroâ—â—m omnium sententia neque quod ad ipsam rem â—â—tinet quicquam é nostris aliter aut censit aut â—â—ipsit He reckoneth this a second Opinion our Writers That they say Christ's Righteousness is the formal cause of our Justification i. e. its self is our Righteousness but â—â—is is the common opinion of all of us nor did â—â—er any of us write or speak otherways as to â—â—e substance of the thing He also affirms â—â—at all the difference betwixt our Reformers â—â—as only in the manner of expressing themslves and that Calvin who placeth Justification in Remission of sin did yet mean that Reâ—â—ssion to be granted for the Imputed Righteousness of Christ and that to be the Immediate Cause of it and therefore adds as the â—â—mmon Protestant Doctrine p. 313. Absque imputaâ—â—ne obedientiae Christi nulla remissio peccatorum â—â—inetur haec causa est remissionis haec cauâ—â— acceptationis haec causa translationis à statis â—â—rtis ad statum vitae i. e. without the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness there is no forgiveness this is the cause of Pardon this is the cause of our acceptance with God and of our translation from the state of death to the state of life It is suggested that this offence of the Papists occasioned the German Divines to deseâ—â— the Question of Imputation Object So Dr. Tully § 17. q. 17 18 and to dispute what Righteousness of Christ it is by which we are justified and many Learned Men maintained that it was the Passive only Answ This Question arose and was agitated among themselves as Paraeus informs us in his Miscellanies nor did it at all concern the Papisâ—â— who are Enemies to the proper Imputation of Christ's Righteousness passive as well as active against his bearing our sins as well as performing the Law for us And these Divines who maintain the Imputation of Passive Obedience only yet maintain that to be our Formal Righteousness by and for which we are justified and not that it procured a Covenant of Grace only Th. Theol. de Justif Thus Vrsin Justitia Evangelica est poena peccatorum nostrorum quam Constus pro nobis sustinuit credentibus à Deo grâ—tis imputata So Paraeus in the Treatise alledged and Windeline also in his Theologia capde Justif Thes 6. he saith That the instrumental cause of Justification is
Faith or Affiance in that thing for which we are acquitted in the Judgment of God and taken into favour even the Merit of Christ Instrumentalis of sides h. e. fiducia qua id amplectimur nobis â—pplicamus per propter quod in judicio Dei absolvimur à maledictione legis in gratiam reâ—ipimur nempe Christi meritum And Thes 7. That the satisfaction of Christ for our sin or his Passive Righteousness is that for which or by which we are justified Materia ejus est id â—â—er quod propter quod coram tribunali divino â—â—maledictione legis absolvimur innocentes â—â—usti reputamur est id perfecta Christi pro nobis satisfactio qua poenas propter peccata nobis deâ—â— it as nostro loco ipse fuit c. And that Mr. Gataker hereafter quoted was of the same mind â—s evident from his learned posthumons Treaâ—ise of Justification In all this here is no footstep of our Author's Notion of Imputation â—or the question is not What Righteousness of Christ is imputed but How it is imputed whether formally properly and immediately as all these Divines affirm or remotely only â—â—mediately and metaphorically as some of late â—â—contend In England most Divines used the Phrase Object Ibid. § 18. That we were justified by the Forgiveness of Sin and the Impputation of Christ's Righteousness and being accepted as righteous unto life thereon but the Sence of Imputation few pretended accurately to discusse c. Answ True they did not distinguish away the sence of Imputation leave only an equivocal term Our Homilies speak expresly that we may be said to have obeyed and suffered in what Christ hath done and suffered for us ut supra cap. 2. The Doctrine of the Church of England hath been constantly that we are justified by Faith as an Hand receiving as an Instrument applying the righteousness of Christ as is manifest by the Homilies King Edward's Catechism composed by Dr. Ponet B. of Winchester where the Phrase of Faith being an hand is extant by the 39 Articles with Articles of Lambeth the whole University of Cambridge in the Recantation which they enjoyned Barret by the Articles of Ireland composed by English men mostly and by the publick Question disputed in both Universities collected out of their publick Records by Mr. Prin in his Antiarminianism and sure this is nothing to Christ's procuring a Covenant of Obedience and justifying us by that Nor do Mr. Wotton's three Assertions as here alledged overthrow the substance of our Doctrine We grant there is an over rigid sence of these words We are justified by Christ's fulfilling the Law as if we had fulfilled it in him Yet this proveth not That we are not justified immediately by Christ's fulfilling the Law as intended and wrought for us Pag. 24 25. the Author gives us his own sence viz. That all the Righteousness of Christ habitual active passive and divine as advancing them in value is the meritorious cause of our Justification But are we accepted and justified immediately for this Righteousness No Yet that is the Imputation all former Divines maintained How then Why for this Righteousness God maketh a Covenant of Grace in which he freely giveth Christ Pardon and Life to all that accept the Gift as it is so that the Accepters are by his Covenant or Gift as surely justified and saved by Christ's Righteousness as if they obeyed and satisfied themselves c. viz. That the conditions of the Gift in the Covenant of Grace being performed by every penitent Believer that Covenant doth pardon all their sins as God's Instrument and giveth them a right to eternal life for Christ's Merit This is a confession of what we represented before sc That the fulfilling the Gospel-conditions of faith repentance c. is the righteousness which gives us the immediate right to pardon and life and that Christ's righteousness only merited this grant of life upon those conditions It might be expected by this History of the controversie that some Divine should have been quoted which taught this Doctrine but alas here is not one since the Reformation Therefore I shall quote the true Authors of this Opinion after I have vindicated B. Davenant and Mr. Bradshaw who are here and elsewhere ingeniously represented as laying the ground of this Opinion and as maintaining Imputation in another sence than all had done before them For the most Learned and Pious Bishop It is said p. 18 19. That though he most stifly defended Imputation in words yet when he telleth what Protestants mean by it he saith That our own Actions and Passions and Qualities may not only be imputed to us but also some extrinsecal thing neither inherent in us nor done by us de facto autem imputantur quando illorum intuitus respectus valent nobis ad aliquem effectum aequè ac si a nobis aut in nobis essent i.e. They are imputed when the sight or respect of them doth profit us for any effect as much as if they were in us or done by us Note that he saith but ad aliquem effectum non ad omnem i.e. to some not to every effect Answ By this we are to understand that the Bishop meant Christ's Righteousness was imputed for some certain Effect viz. To procure a New Covenant not immediately to justifie us I see I need not despair but my Books hereafter may be quoted for metaphorical imputation In truth the Bishop doth not say ad aliquem tantùm but to some effect but aliquem effectum simply meaning quemvis any effect sc That things without us he intends Christ's Righteousness may be imputed i.e. profit us to any effect as well as things in us or done by us and that the following Similitudes shew of a slothful person promoted for the Merits of his Ancestors or a Malefactor pardoned by anothers suffering in his stead which in both cases is done by the immediate impâ—tation of such merits and suffering without performing conditions by the Parties But that the Bishop maintained imputation in the same sence that we do and almost in the same words is so evident that I am ashamed to produce the Proofs in so clear a case His 37th Determination is That Justifying Faith is fiducia affiance in God for the remission of sins through the satisfaction of Christ that this is the very formal Act of Justifying Faith His 8th Determination is That the Sanctified may be sure of Salvation which will not consist with conditional Justification and one Proof is Arg. 4. As it is most certain that Christ paid a sufficient price for all men so it is no less certain hanc satisfactionem omnibus fidelibus paenitentibus imputari applicari quasi ab illis ipsis Deo oblata praestita fuisset i.e. That this satisfaction is imputed to all Believers as if they themselves had made it and offered it to God But I shall confine my self to
because we fulfil or obey the Command of believing in Christ Against this I thus argue 1. If Faith justify as a fulfilling the command of believing then the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere Faith it self is our Righteousness and Christ's Righteousness hath only procur'd a Covenant of Faith by fulfilling whereof we should be justifyed as we should have been by fulfilling the Law of Works For in this Opinion Faith justifyeth as Obedience to the Command of believing and Obedience cannot be the Medium of applying Christ's Obedience for our Righteousness but is it self a righteousness according to the Law that requires it So then Faith must be our Righteousness now as perfect Obedience was under the Law and must justify as the Work of the Gospel 2ly Faith is the unfittest of all Graces to be the condition of life because it is only a trust in Free-Mercy and carries with it an acknowledgement of our unworthiness and nothingness and so bringeth nothing to God but a bare object of Mercy and Compassion All other graces bring some positive Honour to God together with a denyal of our selves and our inordinate desires to the Creatures but Faith bringeth nothing but a confession of Misery with a desire and hope of Mercy therefore is unfit to be our Righteousness and to come into the room of Perfect Obedience 3ly If Faith justify as a condition then Man hath a natural power to believe in Christ how else can Faith be required of him as a new condition of life after he had failed of life by the first condition of Obedience The Gospel by this Doctrine is a Law of Faith but a proper Law doth suppose power to obey in the subjects of it Quest Obj. Quest 9. Vid. Pelt Art 13. Paragr 2. This Arminius confesseth Deum non posse ullo modo fidem in Jesum Christum postulare ab homine lapso quam ex se habere non potest nisi aut dederit aut dare paratus sit gratiam sufficientem quâ credere possit si velit i. e. God cannot by any means require Fallen Man to believe which of himself he cannot do unless he hath given him or will be ready to give grace sufficient to believe if he will 4ly If Faith be the gift of special grace as is acknowledged by these I now deal with how can it be required of all that hear the Gospel seeing they have neither power of their own to believe nor a promise that Faith shall be given them If it be said that Faith is promised I ask is it promised on some other condition or absolutely If upon condition then we shall have conditions in infinitum unless we stop in something that is in Man's Power to do Ibid. p. 55. as Amyraldus well observeth Fides impetrata fuit non ut offeretur sub acceptandi conditione sed ut ipsa illa conditio esset per quam salus recipitur alioqui res abiret in infinitum nec ullus unquam esset terminus conditionum impetrandarum If absolutely either to all that hear the Gospel and so all should believe or to some only but no such promise can be produc'd that when the Gospel is preach'd to a people such and such shall have Faith given them But if it be said the Promise of Life in Christ is declared to all and God persuadeth whom he pleaseth to trust in it Is it not then better to say that Faith is only an instrument whereby God inableth Men to lay hold of the Promise â—o Justification than to offer violence to the nature of all proper Laws and the conditions of them by making Faith the condition required by a proper Law which Man hath not â—ower to perform nor is sure to have it given when he needeth it and I suppose no instance can be given of any such Law either Human or Divine that requireth a condition out of the power or beyond the ability of the subject before the Law was made and doth not certainly provide that ability for him any other way The Second Opinion is of those that affirm Obedience to be included in Faith and so Faith and Obedience to be the condition of life i. e. that we are required sincerely to believe and obey the Gospel Commands Histories and Promises to our lives end and for so doing we shall be justified and saved Faith in this Opinion is not an immediate trust in the Promise of life through Christ but a general belief of the truth of the Histories and Promises of the Gospel encouraging to obey the Precepts of it yea though there be 〈◊〉 particular persuasion that this man in particular shall be saved if he obey the Gospel 〈◊〉 yet this is not proper trust or affiance but a more practical assent to the general Promises and Doctrine of the Gospel a trust upon an uncertain condition is no more a truâ— and proper trust than a proposition depending on a future contingency is a proper oâ— certain proposition or hath determinate truth or falshood This is the Doctrine 〈◊〉 the Remonstrants as hath been shewed Chapâ— 5. We may also observe That though thâ— Opinion be commonly exprest by believing in or receiving Christ as our King and Prophet as well as Priest yet in truth it maketh Faith or the condition of the Gospel tâ— respect Christ only as a King immediately and as a Prophet and Priest accidentally and remotely For to prescribe Laws and Conditions of Life whereby men must be judged saved or condemned and then to judge them by those Laws and either justifie or condemn them for their obedience or disobedience to them are all Kingly Acts or Exercises of Kingly Power and these only are immediately respected by this Faith which is nothing else but obeying what Christ hath commanded upon belief of the truth of what he hath declared and promised to that Obedience and so is that for which men shall be judicially justified It is true Christ as a Prophet doth explain and teach his own Law but this is accidental to a Legislator and men must obey the teaching of Christ but obedience as such is not because he teacheth but because he that teacheth is also the Law maker and hath authority to command obedience Therefore Faith as obedience and so justifying doth not properly respect Christ as a Prophet nor doth it eye him as a Priest being not a trust in his satisfaction and Righteousness to be saved by it which was the main Exercise of his Priestly Office but an obedience to the New Law which Christ had made as a King and only had purchased as a Priest leave of the Father to make such a Law and that those that obeyed it should be saved The Priesthood therefore of Christ is but remotely respected in believing as the foundation of his Law and Promises annexed to it This Mr. Baxter confesseth in effect 1 Disput of Just P. 25. when he saith Christ's Merit is the remote moral cause of our
Argument 4. We are justifyed by Christ as Priest p. 24. Prophet and King conjunctly and not by any of these alone much less by his Humiliation and Obedience alone then according to the Opponents own Principles who argue from the distinct interest of the several parts of the Objects to the distinct interest of the several acts of Faith we are justified by believing in Christ as Priest Prophet and King Answ Faith as a distinct habit hath no acts but practical assent to a revealed truth which in respect of the promise is called trust or affiance One habit hath but one sort of elicite acts though it may cause divers effects upon the will and affections according to the nature of divers objects therefore we do not argue from the distinct interest of several acts of Faith but from Faith as trusting in the Promise of Justification as the special object of the act that justifieth Again the Object of justifying Faith according to this Opinion must be the whole declared Will of Christ or the whole Gospel for that is it which we believe and obey and Obedience to it is the form or righteousness by and for which we are justifyed therefore those Terms of Christ's justifying in his whole Person and all his Offices or Faith justifying with respect to them are added in vain they being no more included in the nature of Justification or respected by Faith as justifying in this way than in ours The promise of life by Christ to believing only is as much founded upon his whole Person and all his Offices as if the promise were made to our Obedience to the whole Gospel But we deny the Antecedent let us hear the proof The Word Justification signifieth these 3 acts p. 24. 1st Condonation or constitutive Justification by the Law of grace or promise of the Gospel 2ly Absolution by sentence in judgment 3ly The execution of the former by actual liberation from penalty The two former are more properly called Justification As for the first I argue Christ doth as King and Benefactor on supposition of his antecedent Merits enact the Law of grace or promise by which we are justified Ergò As King and Benefactour he doth justifie us by condonation or constitution As the Father by a right of Creation was Rector of the new created World and so made the Covenant of Life that was then made so the Son and the Father by right of Redemption is Rector of the new redeemed World and so made the Law of grace that gives Christ and life to all that will believe c. Answ Christ as God the same in substance with the Father did together with him enact both the Covenants of Works and of Grace but as Mediator which only is to our purpose he did not enact the Covenant or Law of Grace and it is only said that he did and not proved It was God as God and in special the Father according to the order of the Three Persons that gave the Law of Works that was offended by sin that condemned sinners and therefore he only that could appoint a way whereby they should be saved and he only coul justifie him Christ as Mediator though God in Nature yet in Office was God's Servant Isa 53.11 Mat. 12 18. and his business was not to enact Laws or constitute a way for Man's Redemption but to work out and bring to pass that way which God purchased and to fulfil his Will in it Heb. 10.7 which he did first by satisfying the Law and purchasing Reconciliation as a Priest then by declaring as a Prophet that Pardon was to be had by believing in his Bloud and Lastly as a King yet ministerial under the Father by overpouring the hearts of Gods Elect to believe that God might justify them and then by sanctifying and ruling them by his Word and Spirit to bring them to life It belongeth to the Father to justifie constitutively i. e. to propose the way wherein Men should be justified and through believing to justifie them to the Mediator almost but ministerially to declare it to Men by authority from the Father but most properly to bring it to pass by the execution of all his Offices Rom. 8.33 34. It is God that justifies it is Christ that died rose and intercedeth p. 25. 2ly It is said Justification by sentence of judgment is undeniably by Christ as King for God hath appointed to judge the World by him Acts 17.31 c. Answ Christ in judging the World is but a ministerial King For God is the Supream Judg Heb. 12.23 however we deny what is here took for granted That the sentence of the General Judgment is a declaration of a sinners Justification from the guilt of sin It is only the adjudging of justified Believers to Glory in Heaven for their Obedience according to Gods Fatherly promise p. 25. 3ly It is said For the execution of the sentence by actual liberation there can be little doubt being after both the former Answ Christ is ministerial in this also for he calleth Believers to inherit the Kingdom as being the blessed of the Father and it being prepared for them from the beginning of the World Mat. 25.34 Besides Glory in Heaven is a fruit of Adoption not of Justification immediately and Adoption is the act of the Father not of the Mediator And let it be observed That here all Justification is referred to Christ as King properly and immediately as was before said and he as Priest and Prophet did but make way for his justifying of us as King and therefore these offices are mentioned in the Question only for a shew that they acknowledge we are justifyed by his Bloud This is in effect confessed in the following words As the Teacher of the Church Christ doth not immediately justify but yet mediately he doth Ibid. and it is but mediately that he justifyeth by his Merits It is also said That Christ's granting the Promise or Act of Grace is the true natural p. 25. efficient instrumental Cause of Justification even the immediate Cause So then the whole Gospel as to be obeyed by us is the proper and immediate Instrument of our Justification and our obedience to the Gospel together with God's acceptance of it is the only internal Cause of Justification or the Righteousness for which we are justifyed and Christ's Merit and Righteousness and his Promulgation of the Gospel are but extrinsecal remote and preparatory Causes of it and these not absolutely necessary seeing these Authors do not deny but that God might have saved man without satisfaction and then it will follow if a man obey the Precepts of the Gospel and acknowledge Christ as Lord and King he may be saved although he believe only in a Glorified Saviour as the Jesuites preached to the people of China yea I understand not but a Socinian may be saved by obeying the Gospel though he deny the Merit of Christ having
all the immediate proper causes of Justification both internal and external and wanting only the remote preparatory causes If obedience to the Gospel as the Law of Christ be that alone to which Justification is promised then unbelief of his Merit when a man is not convinced of the truth of it can no more damn him than the unbelief of any other History concerning Christ suppose his being born at Bethlem or living at Nazareth c. when a man is not sufficiently perswaded of them For these were necessary ex Hypothesi because God would have it so and Christ's Merit was no more by their confession nor was it impossible according to their Principles but Christ might have been a King and enacted this Law of Grace though he had not been a Priest and satisfied for Sin And thus we have the bottom of this Mystery Next it is proved that Christ justifyeth as a Prophet p. 25. because the Gospel is a Law that must be promulgated and expounded and a Doctrine that must be taught and pressed on Sinners till they receive it and believe that they may be justified and this Christ doth as a Teacher and Faith must accordingly respect him Answ Faith must believe and trust in the Promise of Life made in Christ and preached by Christ and revealed to the heart by his Spirit But what is this to prove that a professed subjection to the teaching of Christ must justify us as well as Faith and yet methinks he that teacheth That the Covenant of Grace is written in all men's hearts and is a Secondary Law of Nature teaching men that God will forgive them that serve him sincerely though they know not that it was to be brought about by the Mediatour should not make it necessary to Justification to believe That Christ in Person preached the Gospel We have here Scriptures multiplied to prove that Christ hath power to forgive sins which is an Act of a King Mat. 9.6 ch 11. v. 27 28. ch 28. v. 19 20 c. which we grant he hath Ministerially viz. To declare the Promise of Forgiveness and to pronounce Pardon For he received this Power of the Father It followeth therefore that we must trust in him to declare and pronounce us forgiven but it is for his own Righteousness not for our Obedience Argument 5. It is a necessary condition of our being baptized for the Remission of Sins p. 27. that we profess a Belief in more than Christ's Humiliation and Merits Ergò More is a necessary condition of our actual Remission Mat. 28.19 20. 1 Pet. 3.21 Act. 8.37 1st Answ Here is continually ignoratio Elenchi We do not say that Christ's Humiliation and Merits are the only object of justifying Faith excluding his Person or any of his Offices but that Faith as justifying doth trust only in the promise of Reconciliation through the Merit of Christ but that it doth also in subsequent distinct Acts trust in the Promises of Illumination and Sanctification and in Christ himself to work these in us as a Prophet and King and to obtain them for us by his Priestly Intercession but all by virtue of his Merit and satisfaction which as it is the foundation of the other Offices of Christ so Faith always respects it as the foundation of all other Blessings to be hoped for 2ly 2ly I deny that any thing is necessary to Baptism for remission of sins more than a trust in Christ or the promise of Reconciliaon through his Bloud Baptism is as Circumcision was a Seal of the righteousness of Faith Rom. 4.11 i. e. that we shall be forgiven through believing It is God's Seal to his Covenant or Promise which men are supposed to have a right to before they are baptized and so before they can promise obedience Believing in the whole Trinity and then believing Christ to be the Son of God proveth nothing but that the remission which Baptism sealeth is to be expected from the true God in opposition to the Heathen and Jewish false Gods or false Notions of God viz. That we are to trust in the Father to justify us through the Bloud of his Son who will bring us to eternal life by the Operation of his Spirit and that Jesus of Nazareth is this Son of God so to be trusted in Mat. 28.20 Men are first to be baptised being instructed in the Doctrine of Christ afterwards taught all his Commandments and thus the Apostles practised preaching through Christ the remission of sins and then baptising them that believe Acts 10. Acts 13. If a Promise of Obedience be the condition of Baptism then Infants are not to be baptised 1 Pet. 3.21 only sheweth that Baptism as an outward Sign will not profit without reallity in the heart in believing or trusting in Christ which will produce obedience The Covenants of Obedience which the Church annexed to Baptism are not annexed to it as conditions of obtaining Remission of Sins but as conditions of men's Admission into the Fellowship of the Church and those as evidences of the reality of their Faith in Christ Argument 6. The Apostles of Christ themselves before his death p. 28. were justifyed by believing in him as the Son of God and the Teacher and King of the Church yea perhaps without believing at all in his Death and Ransom thereby Ergò Answ If believing here mean as it ought the Apostles acknowledging Christ to be the Son of God King and Teacher of his Church and their giving themselves to obey him then I deny the Antecedent they were not hereby justifyed but by their trust in the Promises of Pardon and Reconciliation through the Messias whom they now knew to be Jesus Christ though they knew not the particular way how he was to reconcile them to God They were justifyed as Abraham and David and all the former Saints were and their Love and Obedience to Christ so far as they understood him was an effect of their Faith All the Proof is The Apostles were justified and they acknowledged loved obeyed Christ as King and Prophet and understood not that he was to die for them therefore this justifyed them Which is no Consequent Argument 7. The Satisfaction and Merits of Christ are not the only objects of the Sanctifying and Saving Acts of Faith p. 30. therefore not of Justifying 1st Answ Faith looketh only to the Satisfaction of Christ or rather to the Promise founded on that merit as the procuring cause for Sanctification and Perseverance viz. That as perfect Justification so perfect Sanctification is purchased for us by Christ But the Sanctifying Act must respect Christ's following applicatory Acts p. 31. and not the purchase of Sanctification only so the justifying act must respect Christ's following collation or application and not only his purchase of Justification Answ 1 This still changeth the Question which is Whether Faith in Christ as Prophet Priest and King i. e. Obedience as well as trust