Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n election_n faith_n work_n 2,826 5 6.4066 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A60505 The true notion of imputed righteousness, and our justification thereby; being a supply of what is lacking in the late book of that most learned person bishop Stillingfleet, which is a discourse for reconciling the dissenting parties in London; but dying before he had finished the two last and most desired chapters thereof, he hath left this main point therein intended, without determination. By the Reverend M.S. a country minister. Smith, Matthew, 1650-1736. 1700 (1700) Wing S4134; ESTC R214778 162,043 254

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Imputation of Faith as it unites to Christ the greatest Argument is Authority what Orthodox Divines as they call them say In Answer to which I shall say as the Divines did at the late Portsmouth Disputation My Religion is in the Bible I own my self a Protestant and with such it is a fundamental or Principle that the greatest and best of Men are fallible and therefore our assent is not concluded by meer words of one or other name how great soever we pay a very just deference to the Worthies these our Adversaries intend but we cannot think our selves obliged to believe every thing they have said we must not turn Papists yet and satisfie our selves with a meer implicit Faith a judgment of discretion whether some will allow us or not we must make bold to take It is not very rational for Men to be angry because we will not shut our own Eves and see altogether with other Mens He that is first in his own cause seemeth just but his Neighbour cometh and searcheth him FINIS A DEFENCE OF THE Foregoing Doctrine AGAINST SOME Glowing Opposition Among Neighbours Ministers And Others Printed in the Year 1700. A DEFENCE OF THE Foregoing Doctrine Against some glowing Opposition among Neighbours Ministers c. PART I. HAVING for avoiding the offence of good Men drawn up a Confession of my Faith and sent it abroad for the satisfaction of some that were overmuch concerned at my delivery of something which disgusted them in my preaching A Friend of mine transcribed and sent the same Confession to one that goes under the Name of an Antimonian Preacher what he hath that name for I know not whom he knew with others of his professed who Friends had been hot against me This being received he whether with others I know not took himself so far concerned as that some time after whether by his doing or no I cannot tell there came forth in his Name a Manuscript consisting of 27 Articles of his Faith and at the back of those 25 Interrogatives or Queries all which were intended in opposition to me though not by him sent directly and immediately to me I thought sometimes it would not be worth the while to meddle with such matter but finding my Name so frequently made use of by him and the Doctrine I had preached and writ even scorned and derided I thought it no less than duty for the good of others i. e. for their better information in the truths of the Gospel to take a little notice of and animadvert a little upon some of the Articles of his Faith In the first place 1. I believe saith he first that the Justification and Salvation of poor sinners had its beginning and rise in God's eternal purpose of love and grace Answer I deny not God's eternal purpose of love and grace but I am far from thinking that any were justified from eternity if that be intended by him in this Article and that there is no such thing I have shewn above And though God had an eternal purpose of love and grace yet know God purposed to justifie and save none but by Jesus Christ I do not believe that God did decree the justifying or saving of any sinner without Christ 2. I believe saith he that God in his eternal purpose and counsel secret to us hath freely from the good pleasure of his will chosen a certain number of Persons to Salvation without respect to foreseen Faith Repentance or any other work whatsoever as a condition of the grace of Election I grant that neither Faith nor Repentance nor any other work foreseen were the Impulsive or moving causes of God's choice of any the Impeller being only God's free love and good pleasure but then that God did chuse to bring any to Salvation who live under the Gospel I speak of the Adult without Faith Repentance and sincere Obedience this I deny 3. I believe saith he that in order to the manifesting and bringing forth of the eternal purpose of grace and love for the Salvation of the Elect a Covenant of Grace was made past and agreed upon between God the Father and God the Son in the early morning of eternity c. I grant the Covenant of Redemption or Mediation had respect unto the Salvation of sinners and so the making of it with Christ was of Grace to them but it was not a Covenant of Grace and Mercy with him as Man's Mediatour who was by virtue of this Covenant to fulfill the Law and satifie God's Justice God indeed deals with sinners in a way of Grace and Mercy for Christ's satisfaction and Merit but he did not deal in a way of Mercy and Grace with his Son as our Mediatour but in a way of strict justice Here observe he confounds the Covenant of Redemption with the Covenant of Grace 4. Saith he I believe that this Covenant is a free immutable and everlasting Covenant that stands fast in Christ with whom it was made and in whom all the conditions of it are found I grant if he speak of the Covenant of Mediation and Redemption made betwixt the Father and the Son it was freely made on the part of both confederates i. e. the Father and the Son and that Christ is the only performer of what was required on his part in this Covenant But I do not think that Christ is bound unchangeably and everlastingly by this Covenant to be fulfilling the Law in a state of humiliation and suffering of death upon the Cross c. and therefore as to Christ's performing the conditions of this Covenant it was not immutable and everlasting though as to the benefits and blessed fruits thereof the enjoyment of which constitute everlasting happiness it will be granted him it is so we do not deny but affirm the Covenant of Mediation was betwixt the Father and the Son from before all time But then that those Texts he alledgeth 2 Sam. 23. 5. Hebr. 13. 20. Ezek. 37. 26. Do speak of this Covenant of Mediation betwixt the Father and Christ this cannot nor must not be granted him seeing they speak of a distinct Covenant from that i. e. the Covenant of grace betwixt God and his People as is express and if he should say this cannot be because of the term everlasting which is the Adjunct of this Covenant and there could not be a Covenant made betwixt God and his People from everlasting distinct from that which was made with Christ because they only have a being in time I Answer it was agreed upon from everlasting betwixt the Father and the Son that for the satisfaction of Christ Sinners should have Pardon and Life upon a practical Faith i. e. a Faith as I have before shewed inclusive both of Repentance and sincere Obedience for all the chosen of God were given to Christ in his purpose from eternity to be brought in time to glory in this way and upon these terms and so in this respect the Covenant is everlasting
consequences as is plain from the 15th and 16th Verses This may be enough to convince any Person that hath not drunk in a fixed prejudice that their cause must be very weak who are put for the vindication of it so manifestly to pervert the Sense of Scripture as that a Child of an indifferent capacity who can but read may with a very little ado understand it 11. Another Text is in Matt. 22. 11 12 13. concerning the Man which had not on the wedding garment This Wedding garment say they is the righteousness of Christ I shall give here the Sense of the Reverend Dr. Manton upon this In a Sermon upon this Text he puts the Question what this Wedding garment is To find out this let me tell you saith he First That it is usual in Scripture to set forth Sin by nakedness and Grace by a garment that one place which we have in Revel 3. 17 18. sheweth both thou art wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked Therefore I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire that thou mayest be rich and white raiment that thou mayest be clothed and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear Graces are a beautiful ornament to the Soul as garments are to the Body therefore we are said to put on the new Man which is created in holiness and righteousness Ephes 4. 24. And again to put on as the elect of God holy and beloved bowels of mercies kindness humbleness of mind meekness long suffering Coloss 3. 12. It is such a garment as becometh the solemnity of the Marriage feast of the King's Son Christ's Gospel-feast is a Royal feast and a Spiritual feast becoming the nature of God's Kingdom Therefore the ●●NR●● the Wedding garment is that new array which becometh such a solemaity As 't is a Royal feast it must be something more than ordinary excellency that is required of us at a Spiritual feast a Spiritual excellency Therefore the Wedding garment is holiness habitual and actual which is the glory of God and the beauty of God and his People Habitual holiness Revel 19. 8. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linnen clean and white for the fine linnen is the righteousness of Saints ●●NR●● the righteousness of Saints these are those graces which constitute us Saints By the way Observe how far this Reverend Author was from thinking that which is here called the righteousness of Saints to be the righteousness of Christ as some have taken it and Mr. Hildersham among the rest And then saith he actual holiness is an holy conversation Philip. 1. 27. Only let your conversation be as it becometh the Gospel of Christ Ephes 4. 1. I therefore beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called We put on the Wedding garment to honour the Marriage Therefore those that come to the Wedding feast without a Wedding garment who take up a bare profession of the Gospel without newness of Heart and Life which may be an honour and ornament to it are a dishonour and disgrace rather unto it Thus far this Pious and Learned Author And let me add Christ and his righteousness together with the gracious priviledges of the Gospel are the feast now certainly the Wedding garment must not be the same thing with the feast 12. A Twelfth Text is in 2 Corinth 5. 21. For he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him The meaning is God made him who was an Innocent Person to be a Sin-offering or a Sacrifice for Sin that we for his satisfactory and meritorious righteousness might be made and accounted righteous according to the Covenant of Grace by Faith in him For observe that which is the meritorious cause of a thing the thing of which it is the meritorious cause cannot be the same thing with that which merits it but the effect of it therefore plain it is the righteousness of God here spoken of must be the effect of the meritorious righteousness of Christ or the thing merited by it and so cannot be the righteousness of Christ it self but a righteousness appointed by God hereupon which he will accept as the righteousness of our Persons for the righteousness sake of Christ instead of sinless perfect righteousness and that righteousness is no other but the righteousness of Faith which is a conformity to the Gospel Law which Faith as it is the Souls free consent to accept and take the Lord Jesus not only to be its Propitiation but also its head and teacher includes a real engagement sincerely to be obedient to all his commands and so to trust only and depend upon him in faithful Obedience for the gift of all necessary and saving good he hath purchased and God for his sake hath promised Hence we read of the obedience of Faith Rom. 16. 26. Rom. 4. 20 21. 13. Another Text is in 1 Corinth 1. 30. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption Because say they it is said that Christ is made righteousness unto us of God therefore Christ's righteousness in it self is imputed unto us by God I Answer if so be that it will follow that Christ's righteousness in it self is imputed unto us by God because he is made righteousness unto us of God then it must also follow that the Wisdom of Christ and the Holiness of Christ in themselves must be imputed unto us because he is said to be made of God unto us Wisdom and Sanctification for after what manner he is said to be made of God righteousness unto us after the same manner is he said to be made Wisdom and Sanctification c. Now if he be not made of God unto us Wisdom and Sanctification by this strict Imputation then neither righteousness in that Sense As Christ then by God is made over to all his People to be the Purchaser and Author of their Spiritual Wisdom and Holiness so is he also made over to them to be the Meriter and Efficient cause of that Gospel righteousness i. e. a practical Faith which God for his sake accepts instead of a legal perfect righteousness which the Law of sinless works injoins SECT IV. Reasons against the Imputation of Faith and for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness answered HAving spoken something to the principal Texts urged for the strict Imputation of Christ's righteousness and shewed that they can be no proof that Christ's righteousness is our formal personal righteousness let us now hear what in reason may yet be said against the Imputation of Faith 1. Say they Faith is no Righteousness and therefore cannot be imputed for righteousness I Answer If the Antecedent can be proved in that Sense in which faith is called righteousness the Consequent must be granted But know Conformity to the Law of
a perfect conformity to the Law of Innocency is as dung and so abominable to God and sure I am this looks odd on 't for is not this Grace and Holiness a work of God and is not every work of God perfect in its kind hath not a perfection of parts been all along granted and is there not an Evangelical perfection consisting in sincerity which hath been and is acknowledged by Divines was it a strict legal perfection or a perfection consisting in sincerity that David intended when he gave Solomon his Son the charge to serve God with a perfect heart and so when it is said of the People they offered with a perfect heart 1 Chron. 29. 9. Was that a strict legal perfection in Heart and Life that was so sweet to Hezekiah in the reflection after he had received the sentence of Death in himself Isa 38. 3. And said Remember now O Lord I beseech thee how I have walked before thee in truth and with a perfect heart and have done that which is good in thy sight and Hezekiah wept sore Mr. Caryl from that part of Job's description This Man was perfect saith not that he had a legal perfection such a perfection as the Papists now contend for and assert to be possibly attainable yea actually attained by many in this Life But saith he the perfection here spoken of is the perfection of sincerity and he observes from the words after his explication First It is sincerity that especially commends us to God Secondly Saith he sincere and sound hearted Persons are in God's esteem perfect Persons It is not all that you can do or all that you can say or all that you can suffer or all that you can lose that can make you perfect in the esteem of God without sincerity add sincerity but to the least and it gives you the denomination of perfect Thus far this Reverend Author which Doctrine some Men call Popish so well are they acquainted what Popish Doctrine is Some Men seperate Faith and good Works and speak of them so as though there might be good Works without Faith Now for my part I know no good Works formally in a Theological sense but such as are done in Faith and I know nothing done in Faith that leads not to Christ and God in him and therefore for Persons to speak of good Works as such seperate from Faith and to speak of Faith leading the Soul off from Christ is manifestly vain Some Men will not grant that Faith is a qualification of right to Christ and his benefits and ●et they say to justifie is to make one legally just or just in Law so say I and can a Man be legally just without a legal righteousness and is not that which is a Righteousness a quality how then can a Man be just legally and not qualitatively Find me a Man that ever was legally just and yet not personally just in the sense of that Law which accounted him just and if personally just then primarily inherently just and if personally just just in his nature As I have said above so I must here say again let it be proved that Thomas is a Person without the nature of a Man or that the nature doth not go to constitute the Person when I speak of Faith as the qualifying matter in a Gospel sense some Persons have inferred from hence that this is all I intend in Justification whereas there is the form as I have said i. e. God's imputation by his Law of Grace his accounting such a Faith as accepts of Christ as our great Propitiation Head and Teacher by this his Law for the sake of Christ's satisfaction and Merit for Righteousness and forma dat esse Hence their inference is a meer fallacy à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter Will the Gospel assert a Person 's right to Christ and his benefits before conformity thereunto and when through grace any Person yields Conformity is it not a Gospel Righteousness and is not a Gospel Righteousness jus quoad eam legem a right in that Law to Christ Pardon and Life promised and is jus ad rem a right to a thing no qualification in a legal sense if not then the consequence must be that a penitent Believer as such subjectively hath no more actual right to Christ and Life according to the Gospel promise then an impenitent Infidel I speak not of a right by merit but both by qualification unto him that hath merited and unto Pardon and Life merited by him for us Faith it self as it is the Soul's first consent to accept of Christ to be its Propitiation Head and Teacher is really Gospel Obedience Rom. 16. 26. But now is made manifest and by the Scriptures of the Prophets according to the commandment of the everlasting God made known to all nations for the obedience of faith and that because it is the Soul's conformity to the Gospel command 1 John 3. 23. And this is his commandment That we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ love one another as he gave us commandment And Faith thus considered is that which unites to Christ and the qualifying matter which first gives the right John 1. 12. But as many as received him to them gave he power to become the Sons of God even to them that believe on his Name And as Faith is the Soul's consent to accept of Christ c. this consent includes the Soul 's free ingagement sincerely to be subject to what Christ commands so long as he continues it in the World in a dependance upon his power and faithfulness And this sincere obedience performed according to the Soul's first Covenant consent during its abode in this World is that whereby its right to Christ and saving blessings is continued Revel 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life and may enter in through the gates into the City And this is agreeable to the mind of a Reverend and Judicious Divine as he Illustrates it by a Marriage Covenant including constant fidelity And this Faith with him is a condition as it relates to the Covenant and a Righteousness in the sense of the Gospel as it is the performance of the condition And when he speaks of Christ's Righteousness being the cause and matter of Justification his declared sense is the meriting matter not that we might merit but have that by virtue of his merit which the Gospel requires to give us right to Pardon and Life and what is this but our sincere consent which is Faith Our Divines excluding good Works from the matter of Justification spoke of good Works with relation to the Law of Innocency and indeed Evangelical Obedience will be no qualifying matter of right in the sense of that Law and that they did so is plain forasmuch as their argument is because they are imperfect perfect therefore say they it must be a perfect