the Stomach and that the whole Mass of Blood is infected with ill Humours or the Morbid Constitution of some Parts Out of the abundance of the Heart the Mouth speaketh saith our Saviour our great Physician Is it not sad when there is a poysonsom Juyce under the Lips and a Mouth full of Bitterness Rom. 3. You first charge the Ministry of some and most hereabout know what sort of Men you mean with being the Cause of Men's Security in Sin And why Because they preach the Doctrine of the Gospel in a free Justification of a Sinner by Faith without the Works of a Law according to the Apostle Paul and preach down your Doctrine of Justification by Works But you express the Effects of this dangerous Doctrine to lie in these things 1. Security in Sin A Doctrine that quickens Men that are dead in Trespasses and Sins one part of which Death is Security in Sin doth not cause Security in Sin But the Doctrine of Free Grace in Justification of a Sinner without Works of any Law doth so Eph. 2. I shall not now enlarge upon you 2. Another ill Effect is you say That it causes the mistaking the Motions of sensible Passions for Conversion This is rather the Effect of your own Doctrine wherein you lay the whole Stress of Justifying and Saving Grace upon Sensible Passions and set Men wholly to judge of their State thereby It 's marvellously to be wondred at that any Man should have the Impudency to charge those Effects upon an opposite Doctrine to his which are the natural and palpable Effects of his own and he sees so to be 3. You charge upon it the general Abatement of an exact and humble walking This Charge is likewise of the same Nature Whereas the Spirit of God hath disclaimed any true Cause of exact walking beside the Grace of God that brings Salvation and then teacheth it as hath been proved As for Humble walking what is a greater Inducement thereto than the Doctrine of Faith which ascribes all to the Gift of Grace empties us of every high Imagination and Thought It exalts Christ and makes him all and in all Whereas yours is the contrary no Doctrine tends more to the lifting up of the Creature than that of Neonomianism next to that of the Papists And no wonder say you when so many affirm such and such things Where are the many or the any that you can charge with saying these things in the same Sence you put upon them Many Expressions that taken together with their Connexion in the explained Sence of him that speaks are not only true but safe and sound but abstracted and wrested may be made to look as black as Hell You may say David saith That there is not an honest Man upon the Face of the Earth Psal 12. That he saith There is no God Psal 14. That Moses affirms God to be a Man Exod. 15.3 And in a Thousand Places in your way and manner it 's easie to charge Blasphemy upon the very Scriptures And how often Lying if Hyperbole's be not allowed to be used without Wrong to the Truth As to the particular Charges I shall speak to each in it's proper place and lay open your Prevarications Errors and false Imputations to the World Neonom In this present Testimony to the Truth of the Gospel I have studyed Plainness Pref. D. W. p. 3. and to that end oft repeated the same things in my Concessions to prevent the Mistakes of the less Intelligent tho' I could not think it fit to insist anew upon all Antinom Your Testimony is against the Truth as shall be made appear and is not to be accounted a Testimony For a Testimony is a credible Witness or Evidence As the Apostle Paul saith Our Testimony among you was believed 2 Thes 1.10 And this Testimony is with a good Conscience 2 Cor. 1.12 And Paul testified the Gospel of the Grace of God Acts 2.24 1. Your Testimony is not to the Gospel of the Grace of God but against it and therefore not materially true 2. Your Testimony is formally naught it being not accompanied with a good Conscience but with a purpose and design to deceive You pretend to do Good but you manifestly design Evil to blast the Honour of God's Free Grace as if it were a Sin-teaching Doctrine and blacken a Holy Servant of Christ who is now in Glory for Preaching the Gospel your Testimony can't be believ'd because of your manifold Prevarications Equivocations and False Teachings in this Treatise of yours And whereas you say you have studied Plainness if you mean that in some places is no better than plain Falshood in others plain Error it 's true enough Or if you mean Plainness in respect of Style it 's homely enough and hardly plain Sence But if you mean Plainness of Simplicity without double-tonguedness I utterly deny it For when you speak of things that one would think at first Glance you intend Truth by it 's nothing so No Jesuite in the World can out-do you at Equivocation and there lies your Natural Excellency You have impertinent Repetition enough your Concessions every where fall about your own Ears in your glozing Oppositions to the Truth you deny You design the rectifying the Mistakes of the Non-intelligent This is false it 's manifest you design the blinding of them more else why do you quote Dr. Owen and the Assembly for countenancing those Errors which you know they directly oppose Let but the Mistakes of the less Intelligent be removed their Stomachs will rise sufficiently against you and your Book too Neonom I have in nothing misrepresented Dr. Crisp 's Opinion nor mistaken his Sence Antinom This must be true or false and here is the turning Point of the whole Book Either Dr. Crisp was or you must be If you have not misrepresented him then according to your Representation he was so If you have misrepresented him and unjustly blackened him what are you But that which we have in hand is Falshood and Lying As to this Assertion of yours we shall prove you guilty of Falshood throughout the Book that though you have repeated some of Dr. Crisp's Words from time to time yet you have only repeated such part of his Words as might render him odious not those that give a true and can did Sence of what he intended and herein you misrepresented him and that on purpose Now the Spirit of God lays the Formal Nature of a Lie upon an Intention to deceive or to deal injuriously with others as in the Case of Doeg Though I do not design now to come to Particulars I will give one Instance wherein you in your Book and your Party do frequently expose Dr. Crisp and his Abettors such as you call Divers as also Crispians and Antinomians that he and they do assert Sin can do no hurt and you would have Men understand that he means That no Person in Christ need fear to commit Sin and that Sin
odd things Sanctification is no Blessing with you but only a Condition of getting Blessings Neonom He saith that on the Cross all the Sins of the Elect were transferred to Christ and ceased ever to be theirs Antinom Then there was something more needful to our Title to Blessings than the Electing Decree viz. The transferring our Sins to Christ on the Cross It is a Truth that our Sins were laid upon Christ and that but once and after the manner of Imputation in foro Justitiae Divinae they shall never be laid upon us This I will prove against you when you please and indeed it s this Doctrine viz. of Imputation that you are still bantering it 's that you have the greatest Pique at Neonom That at the first moment of Conception a Title to all those Decreed Blessings is personally applyed to the Elect and they invested actually therein Antinom If that be his particular Judgment in that Point he saith something for it and I know not that you can disprove him If God doth secretly and invisibly apply his distinguishing Fruits of Electing and Redeeming Love upon the Elect as is manifest in Jeremiah John the Baptist yea Paul and without Dispute in the Instance of Jacob that he gives Is any Man the worse for it Must he therefore come under your Anathema for an Heretick Yea is not the Blessing thus applyed to all the Elect dying in Infancy Neonom Hence he saith the Elect have nothing to do in order to an Interest in any of those Blessings nor ought they to intend the least Good to themselves by what they do Sin can do them no harm because it is none of theirs nor can God afflict them for any Sin Antinom You may erect such a Scheme upon Paul's Epistles after this manner and take the Apostle James to prove it in your way He saith The Elect can do nothing in order to an Interest in Eternal Blessings nor when they have Eternal Life bestowed upon them and the Grace of Sanctification as an undoubted part of it ought they to put their Graces and Duties in the place of Christ or design the procuring or deserving so much as de congruo in what they do and that sin can't harm them as to it 's Penal and Vindicative Effects He saith therefore it can do them no real harm and so he explains himself And therefore Gods afflicting them proceeds not from Vindicative Justice he doth not afflict them so as to execute Justice upon them for Sin but to reform them His Term is from Sin i. e. to purge Sin out of them and make them Partakers of his Holiness As the Apostle saith Heb. 12. Neonom And all the rest of his Opinions follow in a Chain to the dethroning of Christ enervating his Laws and Pleadings obstructing the great Designs of Redemption opposing the very Scope of the Gospel and the Ministry of Christ and his Prophets and Apostles Antinom It 's strange a Holy Man as you own he was should do Christ so much mischief Here 's a swinging Bill of Costs but that 's not fair before we have a Hearing and Tryal Your Word is a Law Ego ipse dixi is enough if you pass the Sentence there 's nothing but Death and the Cobler But you say all his Doctrine is link'd together as in a Chain That 's like the Analogy of Faith not like a Scheme that must be erected a new every Minute or else it will not agree with the Heavens Nowmenians or Neonomians must be often erecting new Schemes Your Opinions are so far from Consistency and linking together that they hang together like a Rope of Sand and like Particles of various Shapes that are always justling one another till they break each others Shins Doth this Doctrine incur all this Damage By what Law Nay all this Damage is excluded by the Law of Faith And your boasting too of Works Doth the Apostle Paul's Doctrine preached Eph. 1. 2. Ch. and Rom. 4. and Gal. 5. where he testifies That Christ is become of none effect to whomsoever is justified by a Law dethrone Christ and enervate his Laws and Intercession Doth he plead your Works Doth it obstruct the great Designs of Redemption in advancing him in all his Offices and the Glory of God's Free Grace Your Bill of Costs will never be allowed you till you have confuted Paul's Epistles or by your Canons made them no Canonical Scriptures Neonom The Dr. had not entertained these Opinions if he had considered that God's Electing Decree is no Legal Grant nor a formal Promise to us The Decree includes the Means and the End in order to the last And as it puts nothing in present being so it bars not God as a Governour to fix a Connexion between Benefits and Duties by his Revealed Will. Antinom Here I see I must have a Care of my Crown The Dr. Seraphicus holds up his Fist Well Dr. Cr. you should go to School to learn new Principles in Divinity if you lived in our Times You did not consider that God did not legally Elect you But Sir is not this a very insolent thing of you to say that the Purpose of God in Election was not a Legal Grant Was it a Grant or no Or was it an Election without a Grant Is not God's Designation of Good a Grant so far as designed Is not a choosing in Christ before the Foundation of the World that we should be holy and without Blame before him in Love A granting that we should be holy and without Blame before him in Love and predestinating us to the Adoption of Children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his Will A Granting that we should have the Adoption of Children But you say this was not Legal What! Was it not lawful for God to do this according to the good Pleasure of his Will That we usually mean when we say a thing is not Legal Or do you mean God did not elect by a Law If he had been bound by a Law to Elect he had not Elected freely For a free choice implies a Person under no Obligation external or previous to his own intention and purpose 2. You say nor a formal Promise i. e. Explicit you mean It 's enough that it's an unchangeable purpose to make a formal Promise and as there was an Eternal Election so there was an Eternal Promise the Covenant of Grace between the Father and the Son being eternal And it 's expresly said that God's Purpose and Grace was given us in Christ before the World began 2 Tim. 1.9 Tit. 1.3 We were no sooner efected but the purpose and Grace of it was given us in Promise Election eternal the Promise eternal both equally eternal in puncto Eternitatis though in Nature Election is before the Promise and the Cause of it 3. You say the Decree includes the Means and the End Do you think Dr. Crisp did not know that Yes how to
Calvin So must you too if you understand Wrath in the same Sence that he doth For Christ cannot bear their Sins and the Wrath of God for their Sins and yet they bear it themselves too Shall not the Judge of all the World deal Righteously And you say They continue Objects of his gracious good Will and full Atonement made God cannot be wroth with a Person with whom full Attonement is made Neonom But what if they should die before they should believe Calvin He doth not say They shall be saved if they die before they believe or under the Dominion of Sin c. You fasten that Charge without Ground and never fear that for you say their Justification and Adoption is certain there 's no doubt then but they shall certainly believe Neonom But they are actually Vnpardoned and not Adopted to Life which the Dr. saith they are Calvin The Doctor speaks not here of the Elect's Actual Pardon or Adoption He saith indeed their Sins are laid on Christ and therefore God hath nothing to lay to their Charge And you say Christ hath made full Atonement for them I pray what difference is here He saith They have a secret hidden Right to Life You say by vertue of Election and Christ's Merits they shall certainly have Justification Adoption Glorification So that you own your Jus ad rem He doth not say an unregenerate Man is Adopted or hath received the Spirit of Adoption any where as I know Neonom But the Elect while dead in Sin and Vnbelief are Children of Wrath condemned by the Law not justified by the Promise This I affirm and the Doctor denies Calvin The Doctor in this point for ought I know affirms and denies but as you do He saith a Sinner in respect of his Visible Estate is under the Law-Sentence and dead in Sin and Unbelief He will not deny this but that an Elect Person as such hath a hidden Relation Standing and Right not only in respect of Election Satisfaction and Procurement but a secret passing over of Grace So that to be a Child of Wrath in regard of the Law-Sentence and a Child of Mercy are not contradicentia they may be predicated of the same Subject in divers respects A Man may be a Child of Wrath in one respect and of Mercy in another A Man may be poor in one respect and rich in another as the Church of Smyrna condemned in one respect and secured from it in another Wrath is understood two ways in Scripture 1. For the Sentence of the Law that all the World is under as having sinned and come short of the Righteousness of God 2. For the real Execution of the Sentence of the Law by Essential Vindicative Justice This the Elect are abundantly freed from and the Wrath of God shall never fall upon them as such Neonom But he saith the Elect have right to the Inheritance Calvin Yes a secret and hidden Right but true and certain though not Possession or Claim till Grace embraceth them and this Grace manifested to them A Child that hath a good Right to an Inheritance may be taken Captive in Infancy and remain in Algiers a Slave many Years and never know of any Estate belonging to him But upon his return to his Native Country finds by Writings and Court-Rolls that he hath had Right all this while though kept out of Possession and knew no Ground of a Claim A Man may be Heir to a Crown and yet during the King's Life be no King yea it may be out in Rebellion against his Father many Years and yet come to possess the Crown upon his previous Right A Man may have a good Right to an Estate in one Court where it is enrolled whenas another Court knows nothing of it Every Elect Person is enrolled by Name in God's Book of Election and the Lamb's Book of Redemption while there 's nothing of this to be sound in Foro Conscientiae nor in Foro Mundi And your own Assertion at first cuts you off from all Pleas to the contrary For you say ch 1. p. 1. It 's certain from God's Decree of Election that the Elect shall in time be Justified Adopted and Saved in the way God hath appointed then they are Heirs of Justification Adoption and Salvation upon some ground of right or other and the whole meritorious Cause and Price of Justification Adoption and Eternal Life were perfect when Christ finished the Work of Satisfaction So now it appears here is a compleat Right adjusted for them the Estate is bought and the Money all paid and the Title is enrolled in their Name what hinders them from being Heirs in Law and having a Right of Inheritance belonging to them Neonom I will prove the Elect before they are effectually called to be Children of Wrath Eph. 2.2 3. Col. 1.21 Calvin As Elect Persons the Scripture no where faith but as Sinners and as dead in Trespasses we acknowledge they are under the Law Sentence imprisoned in their naturall Estate in a State of Bondage and Darkness But this hinders not the Foundation of God in Election and Redemption they have a hidden Safety and Security from Wrath by your own Confession Neonom The Gospel barrs all Vnbelievers and dead Sinners from Pardon and Adoption and denounceth a continuance of Condemnation against them limiting it's Benefits to such as believe John 3.18 ver 36. 1 Cor. 16.22 1 Cor. 6.11 D. W. p. 4. Calvin If the Gospel barrs all Unbelievers and those that are dead in Sin from Gospel Benefits who shall be saved it must barr them from Life for Life is the first and greatest Benefit a Dead Man can receive nay you say it declares continuance of Condemnation against them It 's certainly therefore impossible they should ever be saved And are not Regeneration and Faith Gospel-Benefits And are Unbelievers for ever barred from them This puts a Barr upon their possibility of Salvation and keeps them from ever being Believers The places you quote are nothing to prove your Assertion for the most they say is That whilst a Person is in a state of Unbelief he is in a state of Condemnation under the Law but the Gospel doth not put a Barr to his Salvation but rather take off the Barrs opens the Prison-doors gives him Life gives him a Door of Hope brings him to Christ who is the Resurrection and Life Neonom If it were not so neither the Spirit nor the Word of God would have any Influence in the Saving of Sinners Calvin Non sequitur Can't the state of the Elect be secured by Election and yet Redemption have it's place Why notwithstanding both may not the Spirit have it's place and Influence Neonom Gospel-Benefits imply that there is a time when we are actually guilty and miserable Rom. 7.4 Col. 2.12 Calvin Grant it there is such a time when we are so in our selves but yet quoad Deum Election and Redemption is not in vain they have their Force
insisted so much upon the Conditionality of Works and wherein it 's said they continued not viz. In the Mount Sinai Covenant which God gave them when he brought them out of Egypt Heb. 8.9 4. In regard of that sort of Promises which they stood encouraged by to the performance of this External Obedience they were usually Temporal Blessings only and the Threats and Curses denounced against Disobedience was usually in rsepect of outward things though under all this Cloudiness and Conditionality the Covenant of Promise was applied in its Absolute Nature as at first revealed to Adam and Abraham which was to all the Elect living before Christ the Ministry of the quickning Spirit and a Savour of Life 15. The Original Contract of this Covenant before the World was is by some called the Covenant of Redemption and distinguisht from the Covenant of Grace but such do greatly mistake for both the Original Contract and the Manifestation thereof are one and the same Covenant there 's no Specifick Difference that which is is but secundum adjuncta Ordinis Manifestationis Neonom Next to the Doctrine of Imputation which I think I have sufficiently cleared up according to my Scheme and fully and rightly stated Truths and Errours in those Points Let us now Debate the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace This being a Point of Great Concern I shall premise an Enquiry nto some particulars for the explaining this Subject Q. 1. What is the Covenant of Grace D. W. C. 8. p. 53. A. 1. It is not the Covenant of Redemption between the Father and Spirit as one Party and the Eternal Word the Lord Jesus as the other Party Antinom Who ever put the Father and Spirit on one Party in the Covenant of Grace it's New Divinity and secondly you are very Magisterial in this Negative Position Quadam confidentia non est Virtus ut audacia Methinks the Judgment of the Reverend Divines should have weighed so much with you as not to have blowed it off at one Puff In the Larger Catechism Q. 30. Doth God leave Mankind to perish in a state of Sin and Misery A. God doth not leave all Mankind to perish in the Estate of Sin and Misery into which they fell by the Breach of the first Covenant commonly called the Covenant of Works but of his meer Love and Mercy delivereth his Elect out of it and bringeth them into a state of Salvation by the second Covenant commonly called a Covenant of Grace Q. 31. VVith whom was the Covenant of Grace made A. The Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam and in him with all the Elect as his Seed You say That the Covenant Agreement made with Christ was not the Covenant of Grace You call it a Covenant of Redemption as another thing from the Covenant of Grace I acknowledge the Covenant of Grace is a Covenant of Redemption and the Covenant you call the Covenant of Redemption is the Covenant of Grace and therefore shall not incumber our Discourse with a Debate about Names but shall affirm that there is no such thing as an Essential Difference between the Covenant of Grace and Redemption the distinction made between them is but Novel at least that it was but lately so generally received for it appears by what is here spoken in this Answer of the Assembly so plainly and positively that they owned but two Covenants that of Works and that of Grace They are only distinguished between the making and manifesting this Covenant of Grace A Covenant hidden or secret and manifest is but distributio ex adjunctis therefore after they had told us that this Covenant of Grace was made with Christ the second Adam and with all the Elect as his Seed They enquire next Q. 32. How is the Grace of God manifest in the second Covenant A. The Grace of God is manifested in the second Covenant in that he freely provideth and offereth to Sinners a Mediator and Life and Salvation by him c. So that the Covenant of Grace contains all Grace and Mercy Redemption and the offer and application thereof Neonom Were this Covenant understood I think many well meaning People would be undeceived In that Covenant i. e. of Redemption all the Causes of Man's Salvation are adjusted and secured all Satisfaction and Merit are on Christ as his undertaking c. Antinom It seems then this well-meaning Assembly was deceived and many Able Divines besides who have not admitted of this Novel Distinction between the Covenant of Redemption and that of Grace 2. You talk at least very improperly that the causes of Man's Salvation are adjusted and secured in the Covenant of Redemption which placeth it before Election for I take the Grace of Election to be the first adjusting and securing cause of Mens Salvation and not so only but of the Covenant it self made with Christ I thought all the causes were sufficiently adjusted in the Councel of God's Will and that by the purpose of Grace they were secured to us and Redemption too Christ's Undertaking the charge of Satisfaction and Merit is a cause of our Salvation not adjusting and securing it they were adjusted and secured before Neonom Yea it 's provided there that the Elect shall obey the terms of Life and certainly possess Salvation Antinom 1. It 's manifest that you esteem not Redemption one of the Terms of Life but some other Terms distinct from it I had thought that Christ's Righteousness had been the great condition of our Life and Salvation but it seems it 's but provision for the performing the Terms of Life 2. I thought it had been provided in Election that all the Elect should certainly believe and obey the Gospel but it seems by what you say here they were only conditionally Elected and provision made in the Covenant of Redemption that they should perform the Condition and obey the Term very improper it's to perform the Terms Now what is in such a Covenant of Grace more than Adam's would have had if he had stood for God must have provided that he should obey or perform the Terms of Life which were to him very small and easie no more than giving a Pepper-corn or not so much only to forbear plucking and eating an Apple when he had enough besides There 's no Essential Difference in your Opinion for where-ever the Creature performs a Condition of a Covenant of God's making God must provide for that performance by Grace given and confirmed Neonom Yea as that Covenant was not made with the Elect though for the Elect so they have nothing to do as a Condition of this Covenant Antinom Rare Divinity Mens tua sublimis supra genus eminet ipsum 1. You say that Covenant was not made with the Elect. The Assembly say it was made with the second Adam and his Seed but you I suppose deny Christ to be a second Adam a publick Person and a Spiritual or Mystical Root 2. I would fain
is Actually and Absolutely procured for the Elect before Faith and shall infallibly be applyed to them all in time seemeth to reach the Scope intended by the Godly Learned whose Spirits have more particularly laboured to hold forth the whole Truth in this precious part of Soul-Reconciling Doctrine and Soul-Supporting Mystery of the Gospel To say That we are Justified by vertue of a singular Promise in the Court of Conscience and in our own Persons in which sence the Scripture constantly saith We are Justified by Faith is not that I know of affirmed by any And for this he quotes Chamier Cham. Tom. 3. lib. 12 13. Sect. 18. Nobis persuasissinum est remissa esse peccata antequam Credidimus We are verily perswaded that our Sins are forgiven before we believe for we deny that Infants do believe And Perkins Perkins on Gal. 3.16 who saith Christ is first Justified i. e. Acquit of our Sins and we Justified in him And Dr. Ames saith The Transaction between God and Christ was a certain previous application of Redemption and our discharge unto our Suâ—ety Ames Medul lib. 1. c. 24. § 3. and unto us in him which to that secondary Application to be performed in us hath the respect of a kind of Efficacious pattern so that that the Application to him is the Representation of this Application to us and this is produced by vertue of that And he saith § 3. Hence our discharge liberatio nostra from Sin and Death was not only established in God's Decree but also in Christ and granted and communicated to us in him before it could be perceived by us Rom. 5.10 11. Hence the Father and the Son are said to send the Spirit to the performing of this Application John 14.16 and 16.7 And in the Chapter of Justification Am. Med. c. 27. §. 9. He tells us what the sentence of Justification is 1. It was in the Mind of God as it were conceived by him by his Decree of Justifying Gal. 3.8 2. It was in the Christ our Head pronounced when he rose from the Dead 2 Cor. 5.19 3. Virtually pronounced in that first relation which ariseth from Faith ingenerated in the Heart Rom. 8.1 4. Expresly pronounced by the Spirit witnessing with our Spirits our Reconciliation with God Rom. 5.5 Hence it appears that the Doctrine of our Justification before Faith is not an Errour but a Great and Glorious Truth and it is no prejudice to the Doctrine of Justification by Faith but the Foundation Ground and Reason of it neither is it any Door opened to Licentiousness an unbeliever having no more Confirmation or Encouragement to persist in Sin thereby than by the Doctrine of Election which gives none but as Mr. Norton saith It 's no small part of the Ministry of Reconciliation that God Imputed to Christ the Sins of the Elect before they did believe and will never Impute them unto the Elect. Neither is my speaking of Faith's taking hold of Christ's Righteousness and saying That it brings not Christ's Righteousness to us but presupposeth it given and granted such an absurdity as you would make it For Dr. Ames saith very distinctly Justifying Faith precedes Justification it self as a cause of its Effect but Faith apprehending Justification necessarily presupposeth and follows Justification as the Aâ—â— doth the Object about which it is Conversant and this I take to be the true Notion of Justification That Great Man for Holiness and Learning Chamier saith I deny that Faith is the cause of our Justification for then our Justification would not be of Grace Cham. Parstrat Tom. 3. l. 13. c. 10. Sect. 18. but of our selves but Faith is said to justifie not because it effecteth Justification but because it is effected in the Justified Person and in another place he saith Faith doth neither merit obtain or begin our Justification Lib. 22. c. 12. Sect. 5. and Sect. 9. for if it did then Faith should go before Justification both in nature and time which may in no wise be granted for Faith it self is a part of Sanctification now there is no Sanctification but after Justification which really and in its own nature is before it I think Sir I have cleared my self sufficiently from the Charge of Errour in this Point viz. That our Justification is in being before Faith And now Sir before we proceed to the other part of your Charge concerning the manner of Faith's Justifying let us hear your Arguments against Justification in any sense going before Faith Neonom One Real Difference between us is Whether we are Justified before we believe Which I deny for 1. We are Justified by Faith is the common Language of the Holy Ghost Rom. 5.1 Gal. 2.16 D. W. p. 105. Antinom We own it and say too that we are Justified by Faith and this doth not prejudice but confirm what we assert Neon Faith is enjoyned as an effectual means of Justification by Christ Antinom We deny not that Faith required in the Gospel and wrought by the Spirit is as an effectual means of Application of Justification but therefore it follows not that it 's in being before That which is not in being cannot be applyed Neonom The Gospel denounceth and declareth all condemned till they do believe Antinom The Gospel declares only their state of Condemnation under the Law the Gospel properly condemns not and we own that every one by nature is a Child of Wrath and in the sense of the Law is a condemned Person and every one is shut up under the Law as the Apostle saith till Faith comes his New-Covenant Blessedness belonging to him is not yet made manifest nor is his Nature and State changed Neonom Vnbelief is the Cause why men are barred from Justification and remain obnoxious to Misery Antinom It is God that justifies and no Sin can barr God's Act of free Mercy in pardon of a Sinner in the Pardon of Unbelief as well as of other Sins when God will justifie It 's very absurd to say Sin barrs God's Act of Pardon It 's true Unbelief influenceth a Sinner as to his own Acts and will be charged upon him as his Fault and will aggravate that Condemnation which he hath under the Law because from his own corrupt Will and Affection he will not receive Pardon and Life that is offered in the General and Indefinite Tender thereof made in the Gospel And therefore Christ saith John 5.40 Ye will not come to me that you may have Life Heb. 3.18 19. They could not enter by reason of unbelief Unbelief on our part doth keep us from Christ but hinders not on God's part that effectually draws all the Elect justifying of them and working Faith in them Rom. 8.29 30. Eph. 1. The whole Unregenerate state is a Barr till God break it by Regeneration which is a free Work of Grace as Justification is an Act of Grace and must be found where-ever a Sinner is Justifyed by Faith and that in
order thereunto Neonom The other Question in difference between us is Whether the Vse of Faith in Justification be only to manifest our Justification which we personally had before This you affirm and I deny And add That Faith justifies by receiving Christ and therein answers the Ordination of God who hath promised to justifie the Believer by application of Christ's Righteousness in this gracious effect of it upon a guilty Soul D. W. p. 105. Antinom You alter the Terms of my Expression to make for your own turn My Words were these Quest What doth Faith serve for Dr. C. p. 85. Answ It serves for the manifestation of that Justification which Christ puts upon a Person by himself alone that you by believing on him may have the Declaration and Manifestation of your Justification And I say That it is not the Condition without which we receive no benefit from Christ but rather a manifestation thereof My Words are not That the use of Faith is only a manifestation but I say Rather a manifestation of Benefits received than a condition of receiving benefits And I say it is a Declaration and Manifestation And what is the Promise in the hand of Faith but a Declaration of the Grace of God in Justification of a Sinner and thereby a manifestation of it unto the Conscience Whereby Justification comes to be in foro Conscientiae For I say Where the Condemnation of a Sinner is by the Law there the Absolution of the Sinner is by the Gospel but Condemnation of a Sinner is in Conscience by the Law therefore there his Absolution is by the Gospel and that 's by a Gospel-Sentence pronounced and believed which Sentence is God's Declaration and Faith sealing to the Truth of it applies it and is the Eccho of the said Declaration in the Soul And you say Faith justifies as receiving Christ and you say well Christ is received in the believing of the Gospel-Declaration The Declaration in the Gospel is Life by Christ See 1 John 2.25 This is the Promise that he hath promised us evrn eternal Life 1 John 5.11 And this is the record that God hath given to us eternal life and this life is in his Son and this is the witness of God which he hath testifi'd of his Son Ver. 10. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself It should be Testimony 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This very believing is a Testimony of the Truth of the Promise and his part in it as by the latter part of the 10th Verse appears He that believeth not makes God a Liar and as the truth of the Promise concerns himself ver 12. He that hath the Son hath Life this believing he saith is having the Son as declared in the Promise and Record that takes in the Declaration believingly And this is apprehending and applying and relying on the Promise and Christ in it both as Truth and Goodness Believing is our modus recipiendi or manner of receiving and we do believe that we may receive and apprehend him unto Justification You add and say first Faith justifies by receiving of Christ but you say it 's Application of Christ's Righteousness as to gracious Effects you mean only You do not deal above-board you are not for the application of Christ's Righteousness it self imputed to us and put on by us in believing We have noted your Error in this kind already you 'll not have Christ's Righteousness imputed to us for our Righteousness according to all the Language of the Scripture but only the Effects given us as effectual Calling Sanctification and Glorification So that the Righteousness of Christ justifies no otherwise than it sanctifies and glorifies for it doth these as Effects But I pray express your self more clearly how Faith Justifies or what part Faith hath in Justification according to your Sense without so much ambiguity Neonom The difference is not Whether Faith or any other Grace be a Jot of the meriting Righteousness for which we are justified D.W. p. 104. Antinom But it is whether Faith or any other Grace be a qualifying Condition for Justification if it be so let me alone to prove it a meriting Righteousness whether you call it so or no. Neonom Nor whether Faith or any Grace add any thing to the vaine of Christ's Merits These I deny D. W. p. 104. Antinom No wonder for you have rated Christ's Merits S. Clara dicit omnes convenire scientium de causa efficicate meritorià Justificationis efficiens est Deus meritoria Christus solum ergo controversitur de formuli De Justif Peccatoris how much their Value shall be Valeant quantum valere possunt But there are other things quasi merita at least that must give right to the Benefits procured by Christ's Merits which you call your subordinate Righteousness Neonom Yea I add that if Christ's Righteousness could be applyed for Pardon to the vilest Sinner before he believes it would justifie him but God hath declared that it shall not be applied to Vnbelievers Antinom That 's not for God hath declared the contrary that he justifies the ungodly and if Justification as God's Act be not applied to us first before we are Believers there would never be any Believers for Justification is the cause of Sanctification and not Vice versa But Justification by Faith i. e. Justification as applied by a sensible gracious Act of ours is after Sanctification and we must distinguish in Application of Righteousness between Gods Acts and ours for God must apply Grace before we can partake of it Neonom Nor whether we are Justified the same Moment as we truely believe in Christ and the Blessing is not suspended for any time longer This I affirm because God justifies us by the Promise as his Instrument and this Promise declares that he will justifie him that believes Antinom You 'll own then that we shall not stay for the Benefit if we perform the Condition God will pay ready Mony but the Qualification must be first in us by Nature But why I pray Is it not manners at least to give God the Honour of being first in this Work and say We believe in that moment we are justified 2. I find now you will not have Faith to be the Instrument of Justification but have found out another whereas you find fault with me that I will not have Faith the Instrumental Cause of Justification in its being no more than a passive receiving Instrument and you 'll have the Promise to be the Instrument declaring Justification and what can Faith do but receive this Declaration and thereby declare to the Conscience of the Sinner what the Gospel-Instrument declares Neonom Nor whether an Elect Person once justified by Christ shall be kept by Christ's Care in a justified state Antinom You do not suppose then that Justification is certainly durable in it's one Nature that it is an everlasting Righteousness but that it is loosable
express it better than you do He would have said The Decree was of the Means and the End and he would not have said Willing the first i. e. The Means in order to a Will of the End but willing the End to be brought about by the Means Quod primum est in Intentione uttimum in Executione as to our Conception 4. You say it puts nothing in present being I say it puts the Promise in an Eternal Being And if you mean as to Created Beings and the manner of them it puts them into a determinate Futurition 5. You say it barrs not God of his Government No it 's not fit nor possible his own Pleasure should barr him of it neither is it possible it should barr him of what he would have neither is he the more barred because you are pleased to find Fault and it was his Pleasure to govern as he willed to govern and all the Connexion of Events so as they come to pass in a way of Necessity and Contingency But he determined absolutely and nothing that falls out is contingent to him for he judgeth not of Events as probable by Opinion but as certain to his Knowledge and therefore knows them because he willeth them to come to pass according to his Counsel and Purpose in himself Neonom So if the Dr. had animadverted that Christ's Sufferings were the Foundation of our Pardon but not formally our Pardon For them our Sins are forgiven whenever they be forgiven Without them Sin can't be forgiven and they were endured that the Sins of all the Elect when Believers should be forgiven Antinom There 's no doubt but the Dr. was so Learned and Wise that he animadverted as much as you can tell him and undoubtedly what was the main of his Judgment that he insisted upon was not from Inanimad version Ignorance or Mistake But you have found out it seems some subtile Distinction that he thought not of You say he should have said That Christ's Sufferings were the Foundation of Pardon All that he saith and means is that our Sins were fundamentally pardoned in Christ But your fundamentally is only a remote Causality as Election is to Creation and Redemption for that 's the Foundation of both If you had not intended so why had you not said the Material Cause seeing you deny them to be the Formal but you 'l have them to be neither and you say For them our Sins are forgiven Take heed how you touch there Be careful you come not too near Christ It 's a tender Point For them our Sins are forgiven How For them For them as an End Or how for them As a satisfying Reason to the Law and offended Justice of God Or only as a Benefit procured For them remotely or for them immediately For them alone or for them in conjunction with other things All that we have at present of your Meaning of for them is that without them Sin cannot be forgiven A poor Causa sine qua non As a Judge gives Sentence upon a Malefactor or acquits him Why doth he sentence or acquit him For his coming to the Judgment-Hall For say I unless the Judge had come to Court the Prisoner could not have been condemned or acquitted Christ is beholding to you for what you give to his Sufferings But we shall see more of this hereafter Neonom But yet they are not forgiven immediately upon nor meerly by his enduring those Sufferings Antinom But you mean by something else besides them not by an immediate Application of them but mediate and remote a causa fine qua non but not causa solibitaria suo genere Neonom But there was by Divine Appointment to interpose a Gospel-Promise of Pardon Antinom Now we come to the Nicety of the Point We shall split a Hair here with a Beetle and Wedges There 's the Curiosity of it What! The Promise come after Christ's Sufferings to interpose between us and Christ's Sufferings Was not the Promise the Cause of Christ's Suffering in the hidden State and Mystery of it before the World was Tit. 1. Was not the Promise declared and promulgated before Christ's Sufferings to Adam Abraham c. And was not Christ in all his Sufferings and Triumphs the great Gift of the Promise as well as the Condition of the Covenant But you 'll have Christ to be provided as an Indefinite good Medicine to stand in the Apothecaries Shop for some body or other when the Physician prescribes it Nay it 's not an absolute sick Patient neither that must have this Medicine it 's one that the Apothecary hath in a manner cured before But there 's some ugly Chronical Symptom or other remains which the Physician must be sent to for Before the Person be pardoned he must be in a very sound and safe Condition I suppose you mean Neonom There must be a work of the Spirit for Conformity to the Rule of the Promise in the Person to be pardoned and a Judicial Act of Pardon by that Promise on the Person thus conformed to the Promise Antinom The plain English of this Position is that there must be an Inherent Righteousness in the Person to be pardoned upon the condition whereof he is to be pardoned and that the Use of Christ's Sufferings are to compound with God for Sinners upon the Account of the Old Law and put a Bar upon his Proceedings according to that and procure another Law by the Righteousness whereof we are justified which Righteousness is our own inherent Righteousness and not Christ's This I affirm hath two things in it First the Abrogation of the Old Law That we have nothing to do with it at all it 's altogether out a-doors This is Antinomianism higher than ever Dr. Crisp affirm'd or any of his Abettors as you call them Secondly Here is Erection of a new Law of Works for our Justification which is Neonomianism Neonom To clear this Point consider 1. The Law is sometimes taken for the Perceptive part of God's Will with the Sanction of the Covenant of Works Antinom The preceptive Will of God with the Sanction of Rewards promised upon Performance of the things required and Threats of Punishment upon the Non-performance is always a Law or Covenant of Works Neonom In this Covenant Life was promised to sinless Obedience and Death was threatned against every Sin without admitting Repenance to Forgiveness Antinom To talk of any other Obedience to a Law besides sinless in respect of that Law in it's preceptive part is Nonsence For sinful Obedience which you are going to plead for is Disobedience and whereas you say Life was promised in that Law to Adam's sinless Obedience That 's a Supposition but there was no explicit Promise in the Sanction neither was there any need there should For a Sovereign may command a Duty or make a thing a Duty to a Subject upon a Penalty without promising a Reward And whereas you say Death was threatned without admitting Repentance to
transferring of Sin from us to Christ and this being done before Christ made Atonement we are discharged not for the Atonement of Christ nor by any Act of Forgiveness for the sake of this Atonement I need not add that by this Notion Heathens may be in a pardoned State and there 's no need of the Gospel or Knowledge of Christ to bring them out of a state of Wrath. Antinom I hope by this time you have pretty well spent your Powder and Ball. I told you before when we spake of laying Sins on Christ we understand his offer to bear them the Charge and Imputation laid on him and the payment he made of our Debt all which is the Atonement for bearing of our Sins was an Essential part of it as shedding his Blood was of the Payment this payment and bearing Sin was in the Eye of God from Eternity as if already done hence the Patriarchs were Actually and Personally Justified by it and doth it follow that they were Justified without Christ's Atonement And whereas you talk of God's Acts of Forgiveness you should tell us what you mean if Immanent there 's but one Act of Forgiveness there 's no new Acts arise in God and it was the Promise of Eternal Life before the World began Tit. 1. If you mean a Transient Act it 's but one viz. the performance of that Promise to Christ our Surety and Head and to us in him Virtually and Fundamentally 1 John 5.11 This is the Record that he hath given us Eternal Life and this Life is in his Son and from him derived to us terminates in and upon us by the same Effectual Grace of God in Christ towards us so that the same Forgiving Act of God terminates in Christ and in us and therefore you must allow our Life of Forgiveness first in Christ and then bestowed upon us in and through him whereby we are as Sinners brought in to him and receive of his fulness both for Justifying and Sanctifying Grace Whereas you say Heathens by this Notion may be in a pardoned state you foist in another term to impose upon us as if we had said that immediately upon laying Sins on Christ all the Elect were in a pardoned state there 's none can be in a pardoned state before a being natural nor before a being Spiritual at least beginning but what hinders but that the Eternal Life which is given me should be in Christ before I was Born and inferrs not that therefore when I come into the World there will be no need of Gospel or Knowledge of Christ to bring me out of my Natural Estate into Christ See Colos 1.25 26 27. Ephes 3.3 4 5 6. And are not Gentiles as well as Jews pardoned through Christ Neonom The Assemblies at Westminster and the Savoy are both against you Antinom They say in a manner but as we do if you distinguish between a Forgiveness in Christ and Forgiveness bestowed between Impetration and Application Justification and Justified Neonom I will shew you your mistake Mr. Antinomian because it was God's Act to appoint Christ to suffer for our Sins that we might in his way and time be discharged therefore you think we are immediately discharged by that Act. Antinom You take greatly upon you to tell what I think and makes me think contrary to what I have exprest you take upon you to make me speak what you please and to think what you please I take you to be a fit Man to be a Guide was there nothing but God's appointing Christ to suffer for our Sins was there not God's accepting of his Sufferings for us Was not Christ Justified from the Sins of the Elect for when he rose was there not a Radical Justification of all the Elect in Christ If there had not been so they could never have been personally Justified but you would have Christ only purchase our Justification by something else but I must believe and say that he wrought out our Justification which being in him is the same that we do partake of and that our Discharge is begun and carried on in Christ and is compleated in him and received by Faith in his Blood Neonom Because Christ's Atonement is the Sole Meritorious Cause of Forgiveness therefore he thinks God suspends not Forgiveness till he works any thing else in the Soul which he made requisite to our being Forgiven though not as a Meritorious Cause Antinom No you mean Christ shall have the Honour of being the Meritorious Cause but it is that way of Justification intended that Christ hath merited that though we have broken the Law and cannot be Justified by it that a new way of Justification should be set up not through his Blood but by something else a peculiar qualification that shall make us meet to be forgiven that there may be some reason found in the Sinner why he should be forgiven this is now the new Divinity to sham off the Satisfaction of Christ from the Justification of a Sinner and you think you have been very kind to Christ to say this new Qualifications are not Meritorious Causes but Christ's Suffering was though they must stand afar off and look on upon a Justification by something else Calvinist I think as you said Mr. Antinomian's Ambiguity lyes in the word Discharge concerning which you must distinguish there 's liberatio in Christo liberatio à Christo though Mr. Antinomian hath abundantly cleared himself as to his Intention and Meaning but you Mr. Neonomian are so harsh in your Censures that nothing but the worst Interpretation of his words can be admitted by you My Opinion is that as Christ bore our Sins by Imputation so he made full payment of our Debt and had a Discharge so far as concerned himself and us represented by him and in him and hence through this Discharge and the perfection of the New Nature in freedom from all Original and Actual Sin and perfection of all Righteousness our Eternal Life which God hash given us is fully and compleatly in him both for Grace and Glory I say fully Fundamentally Originally and as in a Fountain or Root and of this fulness we do receive even Faith the first Vital Act and by Faith all discharge in Justification and all conformity to him in Sanctification through the operation of the Spirit of Holiness so that it was impossible but Christ must be discharged bearing our common Nature and standing in our stead and that we were in our measure discharged in him but it is also as impossible that we should be discharged personally and in ours till we had our Personal Beings and were first in that State and under that Wrath in some regard from which we were to be delivered and brought into the New Nature by Reconciliation and Actual Union on our part and till then we are Prisoners of the Law without God without Hope Aliens to the Covenant of Promise This account I trust may give both
Justitia Mediatoris not Justitia Mediatoria 2. You say this Righteousness is so Imputed to a true Believer as for the sake thereof he is pardoned I am sure by your so you mean another sence than we mean that we are only pardoned effective and that 's no more than we are sanctified and glorified for it's sake and this appears by your second Difference p. 39. where you say the difference is not Whether our Justification and all other Benefits when we are partakers of them be the Fruits of this Righteousness as the only Meritorious Cause So that you have no reason to quarrel with me for saying That through Christ's bearing of Sin we appear in perfect Holiness speaking there of Glory for you say Justification and all other Benefits flow from it therefore in the same manner as we are Justified by the Righteousness of Christ in the same manner we are sanctified and glorified i. e. effective in your sence 3. You say also pleadable for these Uses i. e. for all Uses in a like manner 4. As if they had personally done and suffered what Christ did as Mediator for them your meaning is That it 's as well done as if they had done it themselves A Man may do a thing as well as another that he doth not for another in his stead yea a Man may do a thing for another and not do it in his stead as a Taylor makes a Minister a Suit of Cloaths but doth not do it in his stead because it 's not his Business to make his Cloaths but it 's another thing for a Man to come and preach for him that is to do it in his stead because it 's his proper Work Profession and Business 5. And hereby you say they are delivered from the Curse What mean you by the Curse We shall find this Curse is not the whole Vindicative Wrath of God only Eternal Curse And for our Comfort you tell us this is all the Attonenement or meriting Price of saving Benefits that God can demand of us It 's so in our stead as that God can exact no other Atonement and so a Security from God's hurting us In a Word the Description of Imputation here that you have given is but a meer piece of Sophistry that Imputed Righteousness may be any thing for all this and we shall see by and by what you will have it be Neonom Nevertheless this Mediatorial Righteousness is not subjectively in them nor is there a Change of Person betwixt them and Christ neither are they as righteous as he but there remain Spots and Blemishes in them until Christ by his Spirit perfect that Holiness begun in all true Believers which he will effect before he bring them to Heaven Antinom Now you come to the Negative part of your Description which should have been first and having said nothing of the thing at first you tell us it 's nothing at last 1. You say this Mediatorial Righteouscess Sir is not subjectively in us I know no Judicious Divine ever talked so nor would you if you understood mediatorial Righteousness as it 's apparent you do not 2. You say there 's no change of Person betwixt Christ and them You mean that the Believer becomes not Christ nor Christ the Believer We mean so too 3. You say too that Believers are not as righteous as he you mean such a Righteousness Mediatorial 4. You basely insinuate that their Righteousness in Justification is imperfect for the Spots and Blemishes we speak of is in respect of Righteousness Neonom I question not whether Christ by his Righteousness merited for all the Elect that they should in his time and way be certainly Partakers of it's saving Effects and did not only purchase a conditional Grant of those Effects viz. That Proposition He that believeth shall be saved P. 39. Antinom It seems Christ then merited a certainty of Salvation only of the Elect I thought their Salvation was made certain by Election the Foundation of God stands sure 2 Tim. 2.19 Your meaning is Christ's Merits made our Salvation certain which in respect of Election was uncertain 2. And but certain in another way viz. Of a Conditional Grant that is not yet performed and belongs to the Non-elect as well as to the Elect and there 's yet an Uncertainty remaining notwithstanding the Certainty purchased 3. It 's very odd to say Christ purchased a Proposition and a conditional one too the Condition whereof must be something not purchased to be performed by us that we may have the Gift promised For if the Certainty depend upon the Merit and Purchase then both the Condition and Promise is purchased and then the Purchase is absolute I would know whether the certainty of the Salvation of the Elect be purchased conditionally or absolutely if purchased conditionally then this Proposition The Elect shall be saved is yet uncertain in respect of the Purchase of Christ and is but a contingent Proposition and not certain which is a Contradiction If you say Christ purchased absolutely the Salvation of the Elect all your contingent Purchase falls to the Ground But Christ purchased Persons absolutely not conditional Propositions and is he that believes shall be saved a conditional Proposition indeed Neonom Nor whether besides these Effects being made ours the very Righteousness of Christ be imputed to true Believers as what was always undertaken and designed for their Salvation and is now effectual to the actual Pardon and Acceptance to Life yea is pleadable by them for their Security and is as useful to their Happiness as if themselves had done and suffered what Christ did Antinom Gentlemen you would think that Mr. Neonomian had here owned the Doctrine of Imputation but it is nothing so he doth but sham it still Mark he says Besides the Effects of Christ's Righteousness the very Righteousness of Christ is imputed as to Effects or Effectualness i. e. Pardon and Acceptance is the Effects but he tells you not that it is the proper and immediate Righteousness he will have the Righteousness of Christ to have some Effects and is imputed as to such So that Sanctification and Glorification being Effects are as much the Imputation of the very Righteousness of Christ It 's a strange thing to confound the Cause and Effects to tell us the very Cause is imputed and presently to tell us he means the Effects This is to talk Daggers for Cause and Effect are opposita But he saith the Righteousness of Christ is what was undertaken and designed for their Salvation and is effectual and in that Sense imputed Very good so that it was a subordinate means to accomplish that end as was also Creation which was by Christ Col. 1. preaching the Gospel their Calling Sanctification hence the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is but to give it a place in the order of means for our Salvation and in that order of means hath it's Effects But he saith there is a Priviledge by it as
well as a proper Effect it 's pleadable for their Security I would know how it comes to be pleadable is it from its own certainty to us and our Salvation by it or from our performance of the condition of the Grant if a Conditional Grant he purchased we cannot plead the certainty of our state from the purchase but very remotely after another plea first if the condition of the Grant be never so small we must first plead it before we can plead the purchase we must have a plea for the right to the purchase before we can have any plea to the Grant by the purchase Lastly he saith The Righteousness of Christ is as useful this way as any as if Christ had suffered in their stead he means i. e. a New Gospel will do your business as well as the Old and True Neonom I question not whether Christ by his Righteousness merited that Believers shall be perfectly Holy even without Spot and Blemish Antinom But you say Christ's Merits are Imputed only as to their Effects and in that sence the Merits of Christ are Imputed for Sanctification in the same manner as to Justification Neonom I doubt not but Spots and Blemishes may consist with his Justified State c. Antinom Nor I Spots as to Inherent Holiness but by vertue of Christ's Righteousness Imputed unto Justification he is without Spot before God this Righteousness hath no Spot in it but you charge it for Errour to say they are so Righteous that they have no Spot in them Neonom The difference lyes in these Points 1. Whether there be a change of Person between Christ and the Elect this you affirm and I deny Antinom I affirm there is in the true Gospel Sence not in such a forced inviduous Sense that you would put upon us Neonom 2. Whether the Mediatorial Righteousness of Christ be subjectively in us This you affirm and I deny Antinom It 's false I affirm it not Neonom Whether we be as Righteous as Christ be a proper and safe Speech This you affirm I deny though I yield that we are for the sake of his Righteousness delivered from the Guilt of Sin and entitled to Life yea accepted with God against all Excluding Bars Antinom We deny a Believer is as Righteous as Christ in respect of Justitia Meditoria the Righteousness Imputed is not that Righteousness neither is it communicable by Imputation but it 's the Justitia Mediatoris that is quasi the Material Cause of our Justification materia ex quâ you make it Imputed but in the Effect and in the best sense you make it but a cujus gratia res est and so we are Sanctified and Glorified but we say the Righteousness of Christ is the Material Righteousness of our Justification no other Righteousness or Condition coming in with it in the Imputation and that thereby Believers are as free from the Condemnation of the Law and in the Eye of Justice as Christ himself if his Righteousness had not been such he could not have arose from the Dead You say you yield that for the sake of Christ's Righteousness we are delivered from Guilt How Is it not because he bore the Guilt and satisfied for it It 's this bearing Guilt and satisfying God's Justice that we by Faith stand in and all our Guilt covered by it 's this very Satisfaction in the full Nature of it is Imputed to us You say accepted of God against all Excluding Bars This is little better than Nonsence however your meaning lyes very fair in it that our acceptance to God's positive Favour and Love is not here but elsewhere and Acceptance as to Excluding Bars is only a Negative acceptance an Acceptance and no Acceptance the removing the Bars and Obstacles to acceptance supposeth there may be an acceptance upon some other Terms It is a miserable thing that Christ's Righteousness should do no more than remove a Bar. The Apostle saith We are accepted in the Beloved Eph. 1. he should have said The Bars of acceptance are removed by the Beloved now provide for your Acceptance as well as you can Neonom Whether because Christ is perfectly Holy can we be said to be perfect in Holiness upon the account of any Imputation of his Holiness to us or we so Esteemed by God This I affirm you deny Antinom You should affirm it upon your Principles allowing no Imputation but as to the Effects of his Righteousness and I tell you in a perfect Person such as Adam in Innocence and Christ the Second Adam there is no difference between Personal Righteousness and Holiness Neonom The Question is Whether the Elect Believer before he is perfectly Holy is wholly without Spot Filth and Blemish This you affirm and I deny though I grant that those Spots Blemishes and Filth shall not subject them to the Curse and Wrath of God nor forfeit Saving Benefits Antinom We say in respect of the perfect Righteousness of Jesus Christ that is Imputed unto a Believer he is perfect and without Spot in the Eye of God's Justice and that in Christ this Righteousness is perfect Holiness and as such is theirs as in their Head Col. 1.19 21 22. Chap. 2.10 And in your Divinity you say these Spots c. shall not subject them to Curse and Wrath If so it hath perfectly freed them from the Charge of Sin in the Eye of God's Justice all their Iniquities are forgiven and their Sin covered with the Righteousness of Christ that they stand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before the Throne Rev. 14. For if Justice charge them with Sin i. e. lay it to their Charge it must condemn them to the Curse and Wrath due but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who shall lay any thing to the Charge of God's Elect it is God that Justifieth Rom. 8.33 And then follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who shall Condemn Therefore where there 's just Accusing before God there 's also Condemning and hence though there be remaining Sins and Corruptions in the holiest Believer yet God mark◠them not so as to lay them to their Charge in the way of Vindicative Justice they are not say you subjected to Curse and Wrath. Neonom I shall confirm my Positions 1. There is no Change of Person between Christ and the Elect. D. W. p. 41. Antinom I pray what do you mean by that Position Neonom Christ was the Saviour and never ceased to be so we are saved Christ was the Redeemer and we the Redeemed Christ forgives we forgiven Antinom Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in Redemption for Justification or Forgiveness doth not denominate us Saviours or Redeemers Relata sunt contraria negantia and as they stand mutually affected cannot be converted into each other you are now upon a sure side A Father cannot be the Son in that respect as he is the Father and yet he may be a Son too and therefore relata sunt contraria quia referuntur ad idem subjectum attributionis and
cannot Impute Sin to Christ and the Elect both yea he accepteth us in the Beloved Eph. 1.6 Loving the Persons of the Elect Rom 11.28 though hating their Sins and also their State under the Curse of the Law Rom. 6.14 Chap. 7.6 Eph. 2.3 The second is wrought at our Conversion when the Enmity of Nature is slain by the Infusion of Grace Neonom You ask But what doth Faith serve for D. W. p. 103. Dr. C. p. 85. You answer It serves for the manifestation of that Justification which Christ put upon a Person by himself alone Antinom Adding that he by believing on him may have a declaration and manifestation of his Justification Faith is the Evidence of things not seen Heb. 11.1 A Man is Justified and that by Christ alone but it is nâ—t known to him it is an unseen thing Well how shall he see this The Text saith Faith is the Evidence by Faith we apprehend it and rejoice in it as we apprehend it to be our own I tell you in another Discourse Whatever the Scripture speaks concerning Faith Justiâ—ying Dr. C. p. 596. it must of necessity be understood objectively or declaratively one of these two ways either Faith is said to be our Righteousness in respect of Christ only who is believed on and so it is not the Righteousness of its own Act of Believing Or else you must understand it declaratively i. e. Whereas all our Righteousness and all our Discharge from Sin flowing only from the Righteousness of Christ alone is an hidden thing that which in it self is hid to Men doth become evident by believing and as Faith doth make the Righteousness of Christ evident to a Believer so it 's said to justifie by it's own Act declaratively and no otherwise Neonom He saith We do not believe that we may be Justified but because we are Justified Antinom Yes we do believe that we may be justified declaratively I say there Tho' Faith it self cannot be called our Righteousness Dr. C. p. 86. yet in respect of the Glory that God ascribes to it that it seals to Men's Souls the fulness of Righteousness how can you consider a Person a believing Person and withall an ungodly Person When Persons are Believers they cease to be ungodly but if Men be not justified till they do believe Christ doth not justify the ungodly but rather we must believe on him that justifies the righteous But as I said we do not believe that we may be justifyed but we do believe and truly believe when we are and because we are Justified So that still it stands firm we are not justified we are not in Covenant we partake not in the Covenant by any Condition we perform till which Performance the Covenant cannot be made good unto us but we are in Covenant and Christ makes us to be in Covenant for his own sake without any Condition in the Creature God will have mercy on whom he will without any-thing in the Creature to partake first Neonom He saith God doth add never a tittle of Pardon it self more to him that is a Believer than to that Person not yet converted to the Faith c. D. W. p. 104. Antinom He still gives you but part of my Sence and Misrepresents it my words were these Beloved Dr. C. p. 578. for my own part I cannot conceive any other considerable difference between the plea of Christ for a Converted Person and the unconverted Elect but this Circumstantial difference namely that the value of his Blood is of equal force to Believers and Unbelievers being Elected saving that the Believers have this priviledge that the Lord Christ pleads for the Manifestation of this discharge unto this Converted Person but pleads not for the present Manifestation thereof unto the Unconverted Elect Person till such time as he shall be called to the Faith and by that Faith that thing be made evident which before was hid Now follows what he would blacken me with I say the Pardon of Sin by the Blood of Christ is as full for the Unconverted Elect Person as fully passed over in Grant to that Person as to the Believer himself God doth add never a Title of Pardon it self more to him that is a Believer than to that Person not yet Converted to the Faith in regard of the substance of the Pardon it self and this I clear as a great Truth if any will give themselves the trouble of reading it which I stand to Neonom He saith Faith as it takes hold on Christ's Righteousness it doth not bring this Righteousness of Christ to the Soul but doth only declare the presence of that Righteousness that was there even before Faith was and there denies Faith to be so much as an Instrumental cause of our Justification Dr. C. p. 597. Antinom I added That I did abhor to walk in the Clouds in a Truth of so high Concernment as you too much do Sir and that I knew I had many very catching Ears about me such as you are I said That Faith as it lays hold upon the Righteousness of Christ c. as he hath told you and the reason of that saying I gave in as plain words That there is no Person under Heaven Reconciled unto God Justified by God through the Righteousness of Christ but this Person is Justified and Rconciled unto God before he doth believe and therefore Faith is not the Instrument Radically to unite Christ and the Soul together but rather is the Fruit which follows and flows from Christ the Root being united before-hand to the Persons that do believe Shew me how any Person ununited to Christ can believe and how any one that is unjustified can be actually united to Christ as he must needs be before he can believe Neonom He tells you that Justification is from Eternity in several places Antinom You know that to be a false charge for I have told you a Man cannot be said to be Justified before he hath a Being I have often enough told you in what Sence I apprehend Justification to be before Faith but deny noâ— the Justification by Faith spoken of by the Apostles in the true Sence of it according to my best understanding I have told you that Justification is first in its provision is fully procured and provided and it 's first in Grant Gift and Application applyed unto us before we make Application of it by an Act of Faith whereby we do not bring it into the Heart but the Grace of God doth which we see behold and improve there by Faith manifesting and declaring our Justified Estate whereby our Consciences are freed from Guilt and Condemnation hence I call it Justification in Conscience in foro Conscientiae Mr. Rutherford Rutherford Exc. 1. c. 2. who wrote against the Antinomians saith There is a Justification in the Mind of God Eternal and a Justification in time terminated in the Conscience of a Believer Norton p. 315. That Justification
in it's own Nature and needs a continued flux of Supply as our Graces in Sanctification As thus a Traytor pardoned by the King is not unalterably pardoned but shall be kept by the King's Care in a pardoned state Neonom Or whether God hath decreed that the Elect shall certainly believe and so be justified Antinom But hath he decreed that the Elect shall never be justified in any Sence before they believe or that Faith should be wrought as a qualifysng Condition for Justification Neonom Nor whether true Faith be an infallible sign of Justification Antinom But you make it nothing else to us if it justifies as a Condition if your Condition doth not foederally merit the Promise it 's nothing to God but an infallible Sign whereby he sees when to justifie us and to us that we are justify'd by him And what is this better than a manifestation you making it only a manifesting Condition You 're excellent good to multiply Whethers to no purpose You might bring in a 1000 Whethers more and say it 's not the Question Whether it be further to the East or West Indies nor whether Brittain be an Island or Continent Neonom I 'll come to the Point and tell you the Truth Tho' Faith be no way a meritorious Cause of a Sinners Justification yet God hath promised to justifie all such as truly believe Antinom That 's true so he hath promised to Sanctifie and glorifie them Neonom And requires Faith as an Indispensible Qualification in all whom he will justifie for Christ's merits Antinom This now is to the purpose now we see how Faith justifies as an indispensible Qualification a greater Condition than was laid upon Adam a thousand-fold For a clearer understanding the Justification of a Sinner by Faith Norton Evang. p. 110. let these Three Acts be considered the one looked at to succeed the other in Order not in Time First God actually imputes the Active and Passive Mediatory Obedience of Christ unto a Believer Rom. 4.6 therein God is freely given Secondly The Soul having before in order of Nature not in Time received Christ as its Head and Saviour by the same Faith receiveth his Obedience as the matter of it's Righteousness herein the Soul is taking Rom. 1.17 Ch. 6.11 Gal. 3 13. Thirdly God hereupon in the Court of Conscience Judicially declares and pronounceth the Sinner to be righteous and to have right unto Eternal Life by vertue of the Promise John 5.4 Rom. 3.22 30. By this Act of Grace the Person of a Sinner is Justified in himself really yet not inherently but imputatively c. Faith acknowledges 1. That we are Justified for the Righteousness sake of another viz. Christ God Man 2. Acknowledgeth our Justification is free 3. Renounceth our own Righteousness You see the Justifying Nature of Faith is Metonimically ascribed to it as the Eye is said to be the Light of the Body because it lets in the Light so Faith as the Spiritual Eye sees the glory of Christ as the Ear lets in the Justifying Promise declaratory Hence it 's said this is Life Eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent which is to acknowledge him by Faith as he is revealed Mr. Norton tells you We are justify'd by Faith alone i. e. Faith as it is justifying is not a work Rom 4.5 Nort. Evang. p. p. 208. 2 Because we are not justified by our own Righteousness i. e. The Righteousness whereof we are the Subjects 3. Because we are justified by the Righteousness of another sometimes called God's Righteousness whereof God is the Ordainer and whereof he who is God-Man is both the Worker and Subject 4. Because we are justified by a Righteousness that 's made ours by Imputation not by Infusion but as Abraham was justified 5. Because we are justifyed by a Righteousness that is actually procured before we believe our Righteousness is compared to a Garment which we put on by believing Rev. 19.8 Rom. 13.14 Gal. 3.27 yet Faith never took stitch in it Calvin That Faith justifies not as a Qualifying Condition is manifest 1. Faith as a Quality is a Work of the Law The Law commanded Faith a leading Duty in it But no Man is justified by the works of the Law Rom. 3.28 So Wolleb Willet This Proposition we are justified by Faith understood legally with the Papists is not true but blasphemous but understood correlatively is true Vosin Cat. p. 2. Q. 63. 2. That which cannot stand with Grace in Justification cannot have any Influence on Justification as such but for Faith to have any causal Influence as a Work on Justification is inconsistent with Grace The Minor is prov'd Eph. 2.8 Ergo. 3. That which gives no more to Faith in the business of our Justification than to other Works of Sanctification cannot be true but to make Faith to Justifie as a Qualification gives no more to Faith than to other Works of Sanctification Ergo. The reason is because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our Justification unto Faith and in a way of Opposition to all Works of Sanctification Rom. 3.28 Gal. 2.16 Chap. 3.11 4. If you say That Faith justifies only as an antecedent Condition not at all meritorious Virtute eompacti then it 's no more a Condition than our coming into the World or Acts performed by us before Faith and it gives no more to Faith than to the Works of Nature as Worldly carnal Sorrow Legal Repentance and such moral Acts as carnal and unregenerate Men daily perform such as you call your Preparatory disposing Conditions and they are the cause of Faith as much as Faith of Justification and consequently the causes of Justification Causa causae est etiam causa causati and are in in eodem genere causarum 5. Whatever justifies as a Foederal Condition is meritorious but Faith justifying as a qualifying Condition upon which Life is promised justifies as a Foederal Condition The Major is true in the account of all for the Condition need not to be adequate to the Reward in Intrinsick Value tho' it be never so small yet upon Performance of the Condition the Reward is due Debt And indeed all Conditions in Contracts and Covenants are proper meritorious Causes by vertue of the Compact and Agreement made between the Covenanters For the Minor If it justifies as a qualifying Condition it must justifie as a Foederal Condition or meer Antecedent Condition And if you say as an antecedent Condition it 's at best but Causa sine qua non which we call No Cause 6. The Scripture doth sufficiently explain it self in what it says of Justification by Faith when it says we are redeemed saved justified by Christ by his Blood by his Death c. That the Spirit of God when it says we are justified by Faith intends not any Moral or Physical Causality in Faith as a Qualification but only by vertue of it's Object Mr. Bradford the Holy Martyr reasoneth thus
As the Israeiltes were healed by beholding the Brazen Serpent so are we saved by believing in Christ Fox p. 1659. but the Looking up of it self did not procure Health to the Israelites but the Promise made in the Object which was the Brasen Serpent therefore in the same manner are we saved by our Faith and Spiritual looking upon the Body of Christ Crucified not that the Action in it self of Believing as it is a quality in Man doth so deserve but because it taketh that Dignity and Vertue from the Object Jesus Christ Augustine compares our Souls to Lanthorns that hath no Light in them of themselves till Christ shines there The latter Helvetian Confess saith c. 11. Because Faith doth apprehend Christ our Righteousness and doth attribute all to the praise of God in Christ in this respect Justification is attributed to Faith chiefly because of Christ whom it receiveth and not because it is a work of ours Belgia Artic. 22. We do justly say with St. Paul We are Justified by Faith without the Works of the Law yet to speak properly we do not mean that Faith by it self and of it self doth justifie us which is but only as an Instrument whereby we apprehend Christ who is our Justice But if we say it justifies Conditionally we must say it justifies of it self What was accounted to Abraham for Righteousness Zanch. on Phil. 3. not the Action by which but that which he did believe or Faith not in respect of it self apprehending but in respect of the Object apprehended Faith taken as a Quality doth not Justifie us c. Rivet Cathol Orthod Bellarm. l. 1. de Justific c. 17. Rhem. in Annot. Rom. 3. The Papists tell us That Faith doth not justifie as an Instrument in apprehending the Righteousness of Christ but as a proper and true cause it actually justifieth by the Dignity Worthiness and Meritorious Work thereof and say these words in Scripture justificari ex fidem per fide do betoken an Actual force and power in Faith to Justification and then saith the Jesuite Faith is a Work we are justified by Faith Ergo by a Work To this he adds That Faith is our Justice it self Ergo not the Apprehension only of Righteousness This he Builds on Rom. 4.5 They tell us That Faith justifies us per modum causae efficientis Meritoriae as a Proper Efficient and Meritorious Cause And Bellarmine tells us That if we could be perswaded that Faith doth justifie Impetrando promerendo suo modo inchoando Justificationem then we would never deny that Love Fear Hope and other Vertues did justifie as well as Faith Now to avoid the Absurditities they are forced upon by the Protestant Arguments they have two shifts 1. That this Merit is not from us but from God because Faith is the Gift of God's Grace and therefore though we be justified by Merit we are justified by Grace too and that it is of Grace that our Faith Merits 2. They say That Faith Merits Justification non ex condigno of the worthiness of it but de congruo of the fitness of it and this is that which our Neonomians say That it qualifies and disposeth us to Justification so that the justifying a Believer is the doing a thing that is fit and meet to be done the Person being disposed and qualified thereunto It 's sad that Protestants should now come to lick up the Papists Vomit and re-assert those gross Errours in Fundamental Truths that all our Orthodox and Famous Opposers of the Popish Heresie have refuted and decryed by one Consent But that this Errour might the better be swallowed by Protestants the subtle Enemy of Truth and Mankind forgeth it again gives it a good heat and brings it upon his Anvil polisheth it and makes it much more plausible to look upon The Arminians say Faith justifies sensu proprio the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere the very Act of believing is imputed to us for Righteousness being accepted of God and accounted to us as the whole Righteousness of the Law So we are justified by Faith in the sight of God not by its Merit for they ascribe all the Merit of Justification to Christ but only they ascribe to it a conditional subordinate Righteousness by vertue of the Ordination of God For Arminius saith Armin. in declar sentent ad ordines Holland Westfris Ipsa fides tanquam Actus juxta Evangelii Mandatum prestitus Imputatus coram Deo in sive ad Justitiam idque in gratia cumque non sit ipsamet justitia legis i. e. Faith it self as an Act performed according to the command of the Gospel is Imputed before God in or unto Righteousness and that in Grace when it is not the very Righteousness of the Law * J. Goodw. Treatise of Justif p. 22. I shall give the refined and sublimed Notion of this Arminian Doctrine from a Man of no small dexterity in pleading for it He saith That that which God precisely requires of Men to their Justification instead of the Works of the Law is Faith or to believe in the proper and formal signification he doth not require of us the Righteousness of Christ for our Justification this he required of Christ himself for it that which he requires of us for this purpose is our Faith in Christ himself not in the Righteousness of Christ i. e. in the Active Obedience of Christ if Paul had certified and said to Men That the Righteousness of Christ should be Imputed to Men for their Righteousness it had been quite beside his Scope which was plainly to make known the Counsel and Pleasure of God concerning that which was to be performed by themselves though not by their own strength for their Justification which he affirms from place to place to be nothing else but Faith or Believing To have said thus unto them That they must be justified by Christ or by Christ's Righteousness and withal not to have plainly signified what it is that God requires of them to give them part in Christ's Righteousness without which they could not be justified had been to cast a Snare upon them rather than open a Door of Life and Peace and hence proceeds to prove that Abraham's Faith or Believing it self was Imputed unto him for Righteousness and he palliates it thus That he understands it but as a means of coming at the Righteousness but he defends this Proposition That we are justified by Faith sensu proprib non Metonymico Now see what the Neonomian says expresly of your indispensible Qualification though you Sir always will look one way while you row another The Question in one of you is plainly asked and answered by a great Leader and Guide among you Con. 13. When it is said that Faith is Imputed to us for Righteousness Is it Faith indeed that is meant or Christ's Righteousness believed on Mr. B. Scripture Gospel Defended p. 32. Contr. 13. Answ A strange and bold
Question if it be not Faith it self that is meant The Context is so far from relieving our Understandings that it contributeth to our unavoidable Deceit and Ignorance Read over the Texts and put but Christ's Righteousness every where instead of the word Faith and see what a Scandalous Paraphrase you will make the Scripture is not so audaciously to be corrected Calvin Now I shall shew you how by the Orthodox Protestants this Doctrine of Neonomanism hath been opposed as Antichristian and Destructive to the Grace of God Pemble's Treat of Justif c. 2. p. 164. fol. The Learned Mr. Pemble gives the Anatomy of this Doctrine after that he had shewed that Faustus Socinus Michael Servetus Christophorus Ostodorus and Arminius were the Forgers next to the Jesuits and Propagators of this Doctrine Armin. saith he branches out his Opinion in three distinct Propositions 1. Justitia Christi Imputata nobis Christ's Righteousness is Imputed to us 2. Justitia Christi non Imputata in Justitiam the Righteousness of Christ is not Imputed for Righteousness 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere Imputatur in Justitiam Believing it self is Imputed for Righteousness We now meddle with the last more roundly expressed Ipsum fidei Actum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere Dito Imputari in Justitiam Armin. Epist ad Hippolitum idque sensu proprio non Metonymecè The same is the Opinion of his Fellows the Remonstrants of Voetius Peter Bertius Episcopius c. with whom Bellarmine agrees in the Interp. of Rom. 4. de Justific c. 17. lib. 1. In summ their Opinion runs thus God in the Legal Covenant required exact Gbedience of his Commandment but now in the Covenant of Grace he requires Faith which in his gracious estimations stands instead of that Obedience to the Moral Law which we ought to perform Which comes to pass by the Merit of Christ for whose sake God accounts our imperfect Faith to be perfect Obedience This Assertion exactly Neonomianism and in place thereof we defend this Proposition God doth not Justifie a Man by Faith properly imputing unto him Faith in Christ for his perfect Obedience to the Law and therefore accounting him Just and Innocent in his sight which we prove by these Reasons I 'll but name them 1. We are not Justified by any Work of our own though given by Grace but believing is an act of our own Ergo not by believing The Major is manifest by Scripture which teach we are saved by Grace Eph. 2.5 Tit. 3.6 Rom. 11.6 The Minor is evident that Faith is a Work of ours for though John 6.29 Christ saith this is the Work of God c. yet our Adversaries will not conclude thence that Faith is God's Work within us and not our Work by his help for they 'l say It 's not God believes and Christ repents c. They have two shifts 1. We are not Justified by any Work of our own done by our own strength but by the Aid of Grace A. This distinction of Works done without Grace and Works done by Grace was devised by one that had neither Wit nor Grace being a trick to elude the force of such Scriptures as exclude them indefinitely to our Justification c. Wherefore it s without all ground in Scripture thus to Interpret these Propositions A Man is not Justified by Works i. e. by Works done by the Power of Nature before and without Grace A Man is Justified by Grace i. e. by Works done by Aid of Grace 2. They say We are not Justified by any Works of our own i. e. by any Works of the Law but by a Work of the Gospel such as Faith is we may be Justified by there 's no ground in Scripture for this distinction nor in reason for both tell us that Works commanded in the Law and in the Gospel are one and the same for the substance of them Luke 10.27 Deut. 6.5 What Sin against the Gospel that is not a Transgression of the Law Is Charity one doth not the Law command it Is Faith one doth not the Law enjoyn the same Obj. But it commands not Faith in Christ A. It doth for that which commands us in general to believe commands us to believe whatever God shall make known to us Arg. 2. God only accounts that perfect Righteousness of the Law which is so in deed and in truth but Faith is not the perfect fulfilling of the Law Ergo Here our Neonomians will except and say They differ from the Arminians in saying That Christ only hath merited that our Imperfect Righteousness shall be accepted instead of perfect which hath worser absurdity in it as shall appear Arg. 3. We are not Justified by two Righteousnesses existing in two divers Subjects but if we are Justified by Christ's Righteousness and the VVork of Faith we are Justified by two Righteousnesses existing in two Subjects Ergo. I shall only leave with you the Opinion of the Orthodox Protestants concerning Justification by Faith who have strenuosly opposed the Papists Socinians Arminians and Neonomians in this Point He is Justified by Faith who excludes the Righteousness of VVorks Calv. Instit lib. 3. c. 111 de Justific fidei and apprehends the Righteousness of Christ wherewith being cloathed in the sight of God he appears not as a Sinner but Justified So that we Interpret Justification simply an Acceptance whereby God doth account us for Righteous Ones who are received into his Favour and we say That it i. e. Acceptio Acceptance is placed in the Remission of Sins and Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ Justification hath two parts Remission of Sins and Imputation of Christ's Righteousness Mr. Perkins in the Order and Causes of Salv. c. 37. p. 81. Remission of Sins is that part of Justification whereby he that believes is freed from the Guilt and Punishment by the Passion of Christ Colos 1.21 22. 1 Pet. 2.24 Imputation of Righteousness is the other part of Justification whereby such as believe having the Guilt of their Sins covered are accounted Just in the fight of God through the Righteousness of Christ 2 Cor. 5.21 Psal 32.1 Rom. 4. tot cap. Phil. 3.8 9. The form of Justification is as it were a kind of Translation of the Believers Sins unto Christ and again Christ's Righteousness unto the Believer by a Reciprocal and Mutual Imputation Justification is the Gracious Sentence of God whereby for the sake of Christ apprehended by Faith Ames Medul c. 27. he absolves a Believer from Sin and Death and counts him Righteous Rom. 3.22 24. § 17 18. Christ is the adequate Object of Faith as it justifies Faith also upon no other account justifies but as it apprehends that Righteousness for which we are justified and that Righteousness is not in the Truth of any Axiom to which we give Assent but in Christ alone who was made Sin for us that we may be the Righteousness of God in him 2 Cor. 5.21 Hence those Sermons in
the New Testament are so often repeated which shew Justification to be sought only in the Person of Christ John 1.12 and 3.15 16. and 6.40 47. and 14.1 54. Rom. 4.5 and 3.26 Acts 10.43 and 25.18 Rom. 3.26 A Sinner is justified by Faith not properly as it is a Quality or Action Pemble of Justific ch 11. § 2. which by its own Dignity and Merit deserves at God's Hands Remission of Sins or is by God's favourable Acceptance taken for the whole and perfect Righteousness of the Law which is otherwise required of a Sinner but only in Relation unto the Object of it the Righteousness of Christ which it embraceth and resteth upon Justification is a Gracious Act of God upon a Believer whereby for the Righteousness sake of Christ Imputed by God Nortons Eang p. 300. and applyed by Faith he doth freely discharge him from Sin and Curse and accept him as Righteous in the Righteousness of Christ and acknowledge him to have a Right unto Eternal Life Q. 73. How doth Faith justifie a Sinner in the sight of God A. Faith justifies a Sinner in the sight of God not because of those other Graces that do always accompany it Assemb Large Catech. or of good Works which are the Fruits thereof nor as if the Grace of Faith or any Act thereof were Imputed to him for Justification only as it is an Instrument by which he receiveth and applyeth Christ and his Righteousness Q. 32. What is Justification A. Justification is an Act of God's Free Grace whereby he pardoneth all our Sins Shorter Catech. and accepteth us as Righteous in his sight only for the Righteousness of Christ received by Faith alone Whom God effectually calleth he freely justifieth not by Infusing Righteousness into them but by pardoning their Sins Confess c. 11. and by accounting and accepting their Persons as Righteous not for any thing wrought in them or done by them but for Christ's sake alone not by Imputing Faith it self the Act of Believing nor any other Evangelical Obedience as their Righteousness but by Imputing the Obedience and Satisfaction of Christ unto them they receiving and resting on him and his Righteousness by Faith which Faith they have not of themselves it is the Gift of God We are accounted Righteous before God only for the Merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith Artic. 11. of the Church of Engl. and not for our own Merits and Deservings wherefore that we are Justified by Faith only is a most wholesom Doctrine and very full of Comfort c. The Righteousness of Christ as it 's Christ's and performed by him so it is ours as it 's Meritorious of Grace Efficacious of Faith it self that is to be wrought in us it 's ours therefore I say by way of Right because by the Decree of the Father and Purpose of the Son it 's wrought for us tho' not in our Possession as to Sense and Acknowledgment of so great a Benefit bestowed Haec enim agnitio this Acknowledgment ariseth from Faith The Righteousness of Christ is said to be Imputed to us and his Merits to be applyed by Faith not before God but in our Consciences as there is a Sense of it begotten in our Hearts by Faith and an Acknowledgment of the Saving Application from the Love of God which we taste by Faith and Spiritually perceive Justifying of us and Adopting us to be his Sons from whence ariseth Peace of Conscience Whence the Righteousness of Christ is said to be Imputed to us by Faith because it is not known but by Faith that it is Imputed to us by God and then at length we are said to be Justified by that kind of Justification and Absolution from our Sins which begets or produceth peace of Conscience Dr. Twiss C. 1. p. 2. de Elect. He speaks of Justification in a double Acceptation 1. As the Righteousness of Christ is applyed to us before Faith and Repentance by reason of which Righteousness we obtain Efficacious Grace to believe in Christ and Repent 2. He understands Justification to be that Notification that is by Faith made to our Consciences or in the Court of Conscience and this is saith he that Imputation of Christ's Righteousness Remission of Sin Justification and Absolution which follows Faith There 's none of us saith he say that wicked vitious Person allowing themselves to live in their Sins are bound to believe Christ dyed for them for my part I think otherwise that whilst all are commanded to believe in Christ they are not bid presently to believe that Christ dyed for them but rather to rest themselves upon Christ by Faith to renounce themselves and their own Works and cast themselves down at the Feet of Mercy this is only properly called Faith on Christ fides in Christum the other is only Faith concerning Christ Hence Mr. Norton hath these words Orthod p. 315. These are both Truths 1. Justification hath a Being before the Elect do believe 2. That the Elect are not Justified before they do believe Justification is the Object Faith is the Act or being actually Justified is an Effect Faith is the Instrumental Cause the Cause is before the Effect Maccovius Disput XVI distinguishes Justification into Active and Passive Active Justification signifies God's Absolution of a Guilty Person from Guilt for the sake of Christ's Satisfaction and accounting him Righteous for his Righteousness Imputed The Differences between this and Passive Justification by Faith are 1. This is one undivided Act of God Absolution by Faith is repeated 2. Active precedes Faith Passive follows c. A Digression concerning the Necessity of Repentance to Forgiveness Neonom GEntlemen if you please for a Diversion after this Arduous Attempt that I have made to bring in the true Doctrine of the Catholick Church let us make a little digression for our Recreation and treat upon a Point that hath not so much difficulty in it for having got in Faith to justifie as a qualifying Act I doubt not now but to pleasure some of its Relations and find them a place in Justification too Antinom Stay not so hasty I do not find you have yet attained your End about Faith festina lentè cry not Victoria yet but however Gentlemen seeing he is for a digression let him have it for he hath been in digression from Truth all along I know not how he can digress from the way he hath been in hitherto but by coming into Truth Neonom You judging we are justified before we do believe it 's no wonder if you tell us We are forgiven before we confess Sin p. 255. and repent and therefore I would enquire of the necessity of Repentance to Forgiveness D. W. p. 113. Antinom As a Qualifying Condition Gentlemen this is no digression for it 's the Right Line and Method that Bellarmine and all the Papists have taken in handling the Doctrine of Justification first to bring in Faith to justifie as
a Work and then to bring in other Graces and Duties in the like manner only Faith shall have the honour to lead the way Whosoever saith That a Man is justified only by Faith and that nothing else is required to our Justification Trident. Conc. § 6. Chap. 2. let him be Accursed Faith is not the only cause of our Justification but there are others also as Hope Charity Alms-deeds c. Bellarm. de Justific ib. c. 13. c. 16. The Apostle excludeth not all Works for then Faith it self should be excluded from Justification because it is a Work and if justifying Faith do except every Law then the Law of Faith also should be excepted Looky you see Bellarmine hath got your Remedial Law by the End I thought I should find indeed all your Doctrine in the Original Neonom But he doth not speak fully to the case in hand Antinom But he shall speak fully to your Mind For He adds further Such Works therefore only are excluded which go before Faith which are done only by the Knowledge of the VVord Chap. 19. and by the Power of Free-will without Grace not such Works as are of Faith and proceed of Grace But all I fear is that you may not allow us so much as Bellarmine you will have some Qualifying Condition before Faith to Justifie us whereas he doth in a measure exclude all Works before Faith and he calls not that a Merit in plain English though it 's so in some Countreys I cannot tell how your Language expresseth it Neonom You 're a Pragmatick my Business in this Digression is with Men of more Orthodox Principles who yet seem too doubtful in this Point I shall state the Point between these Calvin Then Sir I find the Province will fall upon me wholly to discuss this Point with you unless the Board will be pleased to appoint an Abler Person Board No Sir by no means Neonom I shall state the Point then and shew you wherein the difference is not Calvin I pray Sir be briefer in stating Points for I find you bring your Adversary out of Breath in stating of Points and when you have stated them no body can tell but by Conjecture where you are in this way of stating Points you may run over the Enclycopeidia Artium in telling us where the Point is not for it can be but in one place Neonom But you must look where a thing is not as well a where it is before you find it I 'll tell you It is not 1. Whether Faith or Repentance be any part of the Meriting Righteousness for which we are Justified Antinom True Bellarmine will not allow Faith and Repentance to be any part of Christ's Righteousness for which we are Justified but only a Meriting Righteousness by which we are Justified .. Neonom I told you Gentlemen I would have nothing to do with this Heterodox Fellow Calvin It is a strange thing Mr. Antinomian that you cannot leave this business to me Antinom I am willing to give you ease that you may keep your Lungs till he comes to the Question for he will tire you before you come at it Neonom Nor is the Question Whether the Habits of Faith and Repentance be wrought at the same time in the Regenerating Principle D. W. p. 113. Antinom You mean you will not discuss this Point and therefore tell us not whether you affirm it or deny it and what you mean by the Regenerating Principle is very doubtful whether a Principle within us or without us Whether a Principle by Nature or by Grace It 's a new term to say We are Regenerated by a Principle it must be sure some Principle in our Nature that Regeneration must spring from Neonom Nor whether Convictions of a lost Estate and some degree of Humblings and Sorrow are necessary to drive a Soul to Christ Antinom The Law is a School-master to bring Men to Christ to cast them into a desperate condition that a Saviour may be acceptable to them that 's Christ's end but it 's no Federal Condition of Justification by Christ nor the Effects of it being the Condemnation of a Sinner which Condemnation and Sin it self are alike Conditions Causae sine quâ non that 's none at all in the sence of Logicians Convictions Humblings Sorrow for Sin before Regeneration and Justification are splendida peccata you have subscribed the Doctrinal Articles and Bellarmine excludes such Works which are before Faith done by the Knowledge of the Law and the Power of Free-will Neonom Nor whether there be an Assenting Act of Faith before there be an Exercise of Repentance under the Power of the Word which must be believed in some degree before it operate such Effects Antinom You should have put in this Question and said Nor whether there should be hearing of the Word before there is Repentance under it and you should tell what Faith you mean whether Historical or common Credulity or Saving Faith c. And whether you do not mean that Natural Men do grow up from a Regenerating Principle under the Word into Saving Grace by degrees Neonom Nor whether Ingenuous Sorrow for Sin in the sense of Actual Pardon be after that Pardon Antinom That need not be brought in to prevent our mistaking of the Question for none that hath any Brains can blunder so as to think a Man can be sorry for Sin in the sence of Actual Pardon before it is it must be after that this whether is next a-kin to a Bull. Neonom Nor whether Repentance as it consists in Fruits meet for it as External Reformation a Fruitful Life and the like must follow Pardon it being against the Tenour of the Promise that Forgiveness should be suspended so long after a Man believes and repents in his Heart Antinom You had better have put the Whether thus Whether Pardon is not to come in between Repentance and its Fruits Or whether Repentance with Fruits appearing or Repentance without Fruits appearing be the condition of Pardon and to what degrees of growth Repentance ought to arise before a Man is qualified for Pardon and how long in an ordinary way a truely Repenting Sinner must expect to continue unjustified And what time is limited in the Tenour of the Promise for suspension of Forgiveness after Faith and Repentance For there 's some time it seems with you that Forgiveness is suspended after Faith and Repentance Neonom Nor whether Justification be equally ascribed to Faith and Repentance For we are said to be Justified by Faith which imports that Repentance is but a disposing Condition and Faith a receiving Condition Repentance without Faith is unavailable as Faith without Repentance is impossible Faith seems to compleat all and in a manner to comprehend all These things the Orthodox Divines are agreed on Antinom That is Orthodox Neonomians of which none are Orthodox in these Points But Mr. Calvinist now he begins to bear up towards the Question I
with a Connexion of Promises and Threats and so performed as such only are legal and must be reckoned as belonging to the Law of Works but all Evangelical Duties are performed from a Principle of Grace and not for Reword or Fear But let us hear your Proof Neonom Who can doubt this if they consider 1. The Covenant of Innocency promised to nothing below sinless and perfect Obedience D. W. p. 104. Antinom It promised to Man upon Obedience which God required and so it is in every Covenant the Obedience required is perfect in respect of the Covenant let it be more or less that is required No Covenant admits of any Abatement or Defect in the Conditions required 2. If this be a Covenant of Innocency your Covenant opposed to it must be a Covenant of Nocency because as you say it admits of a contrary Condition viz. A sinful Obedience Neonom The Threatnings of the Covenant of Innocency admitted no Repentance or after-relief to the Guilty They did fix the Curse irrevocable in case of any Transgression Antinom Who told you the Covenant of Works would admit of no Relief for the Guilty if not how came any How came it to pass that Relief was given before the Sentence was passed upon Man Surely if the Covenant could not admit of it by Vertue of it's Constitution it could not have been just with God to have given it 2. As to Repentance it did naturally belong to the Breach of God's Law and Man's falling into Misery Indeed it did not admit of Repentance as an Expiation of the Sin and a Condition of Life no more doth the Gospel so that Law and Gospel are agreed in that 3. And as to the irrevocable fixing of the Curse grant it was so yet not without admitting a Relief provided it might consist with the irrevocable Curse i. e. That the Law might have it's full Satisfaction both to Sufferings and Obedience as it had in Christ the Sentence of the Law is not repealed or revoked in the Covenant of Grace but confirmed and fulfilled whereby the Guilty have their Relief The Law is not against the Promise Gal. 3.21 No God forbid it 's well pleased with it because it hath all that it can require The Law is not dispensed with in saving Sinners it hath it's Ends Christ being the end of the Law for Righteousness to all that believe The Gospel establisheth the Law Neonom 2. No Overture of Life or door of Hope or Argument to Conversion with Hopes of Acceptance could be framed out of those Legal Threats and Promises Turn ye Turn ye was not the Language Antinom Nor from any other upon Terms of the like Nature viz. Do and Live And why was it that no Door of Hope is open to Man fallen upon those Terms it was because he â—id not do and now is dead and he must live now before he can do till Grace give Life it 's but a Conviction to him that God faith Turn you Turn you for till God give him Life and turn him Turn you turn you is but the Triumph of the Law and all the Turnings of a poor Sinner in his Natural Estate is no more than the turning of a Dead Carcase it 's dead still there 's no returning to Life by turning till the effectual Voice of Christ prevail who is the Resurrection and the Life Neonom See any one of the Calls to Faith and Repentance or Holiness thus back'd with Promises and Threats be not Evangelical Antinom Calls to Faith and Repentance as Commands to Sinners to perform the Acts and Duties thereof upon Threats and Promises and as those Works that shall bring us into Covenant are so far from being Evangelical as they are highly Legal yea super-legal 1. Legal for it makes a Covenant of Works What matter if God require not the same Individual Act as a Condition of Life if he require another What if instead of forbearing to eat an Apple the Condition be now to forbear the eating of a Pear What if perfect Obedience was then required and imperfect now Both were Obedience only now you 'll have a Dispensation for Sin to come into the Condition which reflects upon the Holiness and Justice of God or Power of God that he did not nor could give us Life in a way of perfect Obedience and sinless but must have Recourse to sinful Likewise the only Obligation that lies upon a meer natural Man to obey God when he commands Faith and Repentance is the Law for he is under no other Law but that of Works 2. It is also super-legal 1. To bring fallen Man into Covenant upon working Conditions is more than was with Adam he did not work himself into Covenant God took him freely into Covenant without Conditions all the Condition was Perseverance for keeping him in Covenant as yours is 2. God here requires Works where there 's no Power God gave Adam the Power before he required Obedience Calvin In my Approbation Gentlemen you do but lose time Mr. Antinom argues at a mighty low rate I will take his Position and put it into right Terms and then see Mr. Antinom how you like it Salvation by Gospel-Grace is so necessary to a Sinner for the working Faith Obedience Good Works and Perseverance in the way to Heaven that without it he cannot perform them or continue in them Antinom So I like it well Neonom That 's quite contrary to my Sence For I do not say that Salvation by Grace is the Cause of sincere Faith and Obedience and Perseverance but that Sincerity in Performance of Faith and Obedience with Perseverance is necessary as a Cause of Salvation I spake before of coming into Justification by qualifying Faith and Repentance by the Government ef a Rule of Righteousness and Misery our Minds being thereby affected with Hopes and Fears I will now shew you that by this Gospel-Constitution Persevering Holiness sincere Obedience or good Works are necessary to Salvation D. W. p. 137. Antinom I have told you that if these be right i. e. True Gospel-Holiness they be a great part of Salvation and they are no more necessary than a Part is to the Whole All Graces and Duties are the necessary parts of a saved Sinner And there are two sorts of Necessaries Essentially necessary and Necessary as to well-being as Anima rationalis is essentially necessary to a Man But there are many things as to Integrity Ornaments and Usefulness Now I say as these things are in Salvation or belonging to it for being in their kind for well-being Usefulness Adorning c. so they are necessary But if you look upon them and Salvation as two distinct things they are not necessary to give you right to any part of Salvation Neonom He that made Faith necessary to Justification hath made Obedience necessary to Salvation Antinom It seems by you Justification and Salvation are specifically distinct which they are not they differ but as Genus and Spectes
how that Fruit shall grow without the Influence of the Root Unless you will say a Branch out of Christ can bring forth Fruit. I will not undertake to tell how long the Union made by the Spirit is before Faith appear but I am sure Faith cannot so much as arise into the first Act without the Sinners Union and Spiritual Communion so far as to have from the Root but as to his active and apprehended Union it can't be before Faith Neonom You think because all Grace after Vnion comes from Christ as our actual Head therefore Christ by his Spirit can work no Grace in us as our designed Head Antinom I know not how you put that Paradox upon me or what you mean by it very well I can but guess at it by your other Notions all that I can say to it is that Christ works Grace as our Actual Head That Christ Works Grace in us as a designed Head is a Riddle for so Grace must be wrought in us before we are in Christ Neonom You think because God Soveraignly decreed what Benefits he would bestow therefore he hath as our Ruler stated no rectoral Method of bestowing those Benefits Antinom I never thought God to be any other than a God of Order and that he is wise in all his ways and holy in all his Works and always thought that as God hath decreed to us all Covenant-Blessings so he hath provided the best method and way for bestowing them most to the Honour and Glory of his Free-Grace Neonom Because the Covenant is everlasting as to future therefore you judge there can be no Condition on man's part nor remembring that the Covenant secures our perseverance in performing those Conditions Antinom Because the Cnvenant is eternal before the World began I judge it was compleat and that the Condition was as ancient as the Covenant and the Security both in Condition and Promise as ancient Neonom Dr. O. in his Treatise of Justification p. 264. saith That Christ undertook that those who were to be taken into this Covenant should receive Grace enabling them to comply with the Terms of it fulfill it's Conditions and yield Obedience which God required therein How frequently doth he assert That our Interest in the Benefits of the Covenant depends on our Answering the Terms of the Gospel 270 30◠351. And so Mr. Norton Calvin Dr. Owen shews what Christ undertook as Sponsor Praes Fidejussor 1. To answer for all the Sins of those who are to be and are made Partakers of the Benefits of it 2. That those who are to be taken into Covenant by their Actual embracing it should receive Grace enabling them and whatever Christ undertook God promised and this Grace of Compliance is no other than what Christ procured undertook and God promised To say that the Promises are Conditions one of another is to say no more than that they stand in an order of Application and i◠a constituted relation one to another And these are all the Terms the Doctor means and that he doth mean so and not in your Sence is manifest by noting other Notions of these things two of which he rehearseth wherein I am sure your Notion is comprized at length and breadth He tells us what some say we owe to the Death of Christ the Procuratum of the New Covenant and that he suffered what God appointed he should not that the Justice of God required any such thing c. as in their stead but what by a free Constitution of Divine Wisdom and Soveraignty was appointed and hereon God remitted the Terms of the Old Covenant and entred into a New Covenant suited unto Reason c. These are Faith and sincere Obedience c. Others say The whole Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us so far as that we are made Partakers of the Benefits thereof And that the way of the Communication of them unto us is by the New Covenant which by his Death the Lord Christ procured For the Conditions of the Covenant are establisted in the Covenant it self whereon God will bestow all the Benefits and Effects of it upon us which are Faith and Obedience Wherefore what the Lord Christ hath done for us is thus far accepted as our Legal Righteousdess as that God upon our Faith and Obedience with respect thereunto doth release and pardon all our Sins Upon this Pardon there is no need of any positive perfect Righteousness unto our Justification or Salvation but our own personal Righteousness is accepted with God in the room of it by vertue of the New Covenant which Christ hath procured So is the Doctrine hereof stated by Cursellaeus and those that joyn with and follow him as I take it you do This Doctrine he refutes As for what you quote from Mr. Norton Orth. Evang. p. 172. it 's not to the purpose His Design is to prove the Gospel is preach'd in an Indefinite Proposition which is not to our purpose you quote Mr. Norton in the wrong place Look ch 10. p. 227. The Application both of Grace and Glory and all the good of the Covenant of Grace are free to us though conditioned unto Christ Free Grace excludes not Christ's Merit but Man's Merit Obj. Faith is a Condition though not of it self yet of Salvation and that in the Elect themselves Therefore the Application of Salvation seems not to be free in respect of the Elect. A. A Condition is either a Condition properly so called i. e. an Antecedent Condition or a Condition improperly so called i. e. a Consequent Condition A Condition properly so called is a Law or Observation annexed to a business the performance whereof lyeth upon the Covenant and accordingly the business becomes valid or null Such a Condition was Works in the first Covenant If Faith were such a Condition there would soon be an end of the Covenant of Grace yea the Covenant of Grace were indeed no Covenant of Grace A Condition improperly so called or a consequent Condition is such a Condition whose performance by the Covenantee is absolutely undertaken for and irresistibly wrought by the Covenanter and not left in Suspence upon the Covenantee to be performed by his own strength Faith is a consequent Condition not an antecedent Condition So as this Proposition I will give Eternal Life to the Elect if they believe is equivalent unto this I will out of my absolute Will give unto the Elect Eternal Life because I will out of my absolute Will give unto the Elect to believe Particula si 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 si feceris hoc vives Particula si non est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in si credideris Buc. loc 21. q. 3. Obj. Repentance and new Obedience are necessary to Salvation Luke 13.3 Heb. 3.13 Therefore the Application of the good of Election is not to be free in respect of us A. Good Works which is also true Repentance are necessary as the way appointed of
God unto Salvation but not as the Cause this were to change the Covenant of Grace into a Covenant of Works our good Works are the effects of Grace the Reward of good Works are a Reward of Grace Good Works are necessary to Salvation as the Way not as an Instrument or Cause Faith is necessary to Salvation as an Instrument The Active and Passive Obedience of Christ is necessary as a meritorious Cause Calvin Mr. Antisozzo I pray do you now speak impartially to this Point Antisozzo I think I have met with his Scheme before now and as I take it it runs thus and the Question that lies before us is this What Influence the Sacrifice of Christs Death and the Righteousness of his Life have upon our acceptance with God The Gentleman that I once disputed with stated the Question so and resolved it as follows Antisozzo p. 580. All that I can find in Scripture about this is That to this we owe the Covenant of Grace That God being well-pleased with the Obedience of Christ's Life and the Sacrifice of his Death for his sake entred into a new Covenant with Mankind wherein he promises pardon of Sin and eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel I think this is exactly your Scheme Mr. Neonomian Neonom Yes and something more D. W. p. 8. viz. That the Gospel barrs all Vnbelievers and dead Sinners from Pardon and Adoption and denounceth the continuance of Condemnation against them limiting it's Benefits to such as believe Antisozzo This Scheme contains three things 1. A Description of the Covenant of Grace 2. An Assertion that this Covenant of Grace is owing to the Sacrifice and Righteousness of Christ 3. A Supposition that this Righteousness and Sacrifice of Christ hath no other Influence upon our acceptance with God but that for his sake he enrted into such a Covenant with Mankind 1. His Description is this A Promise of the pardon of Sin and Eternal Life to those who believe and obey the Gospel Neonom You will not I hope deny this to be a true Description of the Covenant of Grace Antisozzo But I will for all your hast It is a Description so liable to Exceptions that it describes neither the whole of the Covenant nor a New Covenant nor upon the matter any Covenant at all Neonom If you prove what you say Eris mihi magnus Apollo I 'll strike out your Name from my Book and if I can be convinced I must subscribe yours Antisozzo You shall see what I can do presently 1. This Description gives us very little of a true Covenant of Grace For 1. Tho you think to put us off with a Promise of Pardon and Life to those that believe and obey the true Covenant of Grace hath given us a Promise of that Faith whereby we may believe and of that New Heart whereby we are enabled to obey the Gospel And First We have the Promise of the right Faith in the true Covenant John 6.37 Eph. 1.8 And least it should be said Faith is a common Gift as other things are the Apostle hath his reply ready Eph. 1.19 Secondly We have a direct and express Promise too of that New Heart from which we give to God new Obedience Ezek. 36. Ver. 26 27. c. 2. This Description gives but very little of the true Covenant of Grace there 's a Promise of Pardon and Life to them who believe and obey but Perseverance in Faith and Obedience is left to the Desultory and Lubricous Power of Free Will whereas in the true Câ—venant of Grace there 's an Undertaking that the Covenant shall be immutable both on God's part Jer. 32.38 4. God hath said He will not turn away from doing them good And 2ly He hath promised That they shall not depart from him c. p. 583. 2. As it describes not the whole of the Covenant so it describes not the Nature of a new Covenant 1. It describes no New Covenant in opposition to the Old Covenant of Works The Covenant with Adam promised Life upon condition of Oâ—edience and those Commands as easie as those now given to Mankind and much easier too if we consider Adam's Natural Strength 2. We are told by you that Christ hath added to the Moral Law i. e. to the Moral Duties required by the New Law Faith and Repentance which is to lay more Load on those that were overcharged before So that as you make Covenants Adam's was much the better Covenant of the two but you have wisely shuffled in a Promise of the Pardon of Sin which may seem to give this Covenant a Preheminence above that of Adam But that will not mend the matter both because it 's better to have no Sin in our Natures than such a Remedy better to have no Wound than such a Plaister and also because the Promise of Pardon as you say is suspended upon the condition of Faith and Obedience which without a Supernatural real Influx of immediate Divine Power reduceth the Promise to an impossibility of Performance 2ly This Covenant described is no new Covenant in opposition to the Old Administration of the Covenant of Grace there were the same Promises then that we have now the same Moral Precepts that we have now Though the Word Gospel come in for a Blind yet the Apostle assures us the Gospel was preached to Abraham 3. Upon the matter it 's no Covenant of Grace at all p. 584. For 1. A Promise of Pardon and Life upon condition of believing and obeying is neither better nor worse than a Threatning of Condemnation and Death to them who believe not and obey not It may with equal right be called a Threatning of Death as a Promise of Life It 's no more of Grace than a Covenant of Wrath And therefore 2ly If it be lawful to consider Man as the Word of God describes him dead in Sins and Trespasses It 's no Covenant at all to him For what is the nice difference betwixt the Promise of Life to him that obeys when it 's certain before-hand he cannot obey and no Promise at all c. Neonom Well Sir pray let us call another Cause Do you argue like a Voucher to my Book Mr. Calvinist he is a sharp Man and he doth this only for Argumentation sake he is of my mind for all this Antisozzo No do not you believe that you wheadled me in to vouch for your Book I know not how but I shall stick the closer upon your Skirts for that I have not done with you yet Calvin I will then propound one Question to Mr. Antisozzo Whether the Covenant of Grace be owing to the Sacrifice of Christs Death and so be distinct from that he calls the Covenant of Redemption Because our time now is up speak only what your Judgment is in this Point Antisozzo Mr. Neonomian I must tell you I have narrowly pryed into this Paradox That the Covenant of Grace is owing to procured by and