in God's sight whatsoever they were in their own but that all have sinned and need that Messias they expected to make Reconciliation for their Sins that our Lord Jesus Christ being that true Messias by his Death answering their Legal Sacrifices hath born the Curse of the Law and so redeemed us from it That God's undeserved Goodness here in accepting of Sinners through this meritorious Sacrifice of his to Pardon and Life upon Condition which he gives the Grace also to perform presupposed and by me acknowledg'd it is another Righteousness and not that of the Jews Not that Paul calls his own as a Jew or not a Righteousness of Works Perfect Works but a Righteousness of Faith which makes the Reward only of Grace Of Faith that it may be of Grace a Righteousness of Faith but a true Faith working by Love which is an Internal Righteousness though imperfect and not as the External Works of the Jews was is that Righteousness of God in opposition to the Terms of the Law whereby we are justified and saved The Apostle I observe in one place speaking of Faith calls it the Obedience of Faith the same Word if you compare that Text Rom. 11.30 31. with the Margin signifying both to Believe and Obey And the People believed God and his Servant Moses I will conclude hereupon that Christ's Redemption in the immediate fruit thereof which is the Grant of a General Pardon through his Satisfaction to all the World on Condition being laid as a foundation To be justified by Faith is to be justified by performing that Condition To be justified by Faith Believe me at parting is in St. Paul's Mind to be justified by the Obedience of Faith in opposition to the task of the Law that is in St. Paul's Mind I say opposing the Jew by embracing the Christian Religion and living according to it Reader In p. 14. l. 34. correct the Word its and make it it with a Full Point after Other Errataes you may find at the end of the Book or mend your self OF THE Righteousness of GOD In the Matter of JUSTIFICATION The First PART BEcause upon the right Understanding of what the Apostle means by the Righteousness of God without the Law revealed now in the Gospel which indeed is dark and hardly understood I think by Papist or Protestant in their Disputes and much less by our Brethren in their present Differences does depend the Elucidation of the Great Article of Justification whereof I wrote some Sheets formerly called The Middle Way and more lately six Sheets called Pacification I have thought good yet to write a few more upon some further increase of my own Knowledge about this Subject And under this Title I beseech God for his Light and Truth and for Integrity of Heart and Pardon of my Weakness and Failings for my self and for the removal of Prejudice from and the establishing the Judgment of others who shall read what is written The Search after Truth is indeed hard Work it is digging in a Mine It was so to me in writing on this Point at first and it is still What I dig up is but rude it is the Ore as it comes naturally and that is best to edifie those that would improve it I am one whose Genius is averse from any Notion imposed and receives none without distrust that does not arise first out of my own Mind or that I see something new to cultivate it I do not only bear with others but do like them often better that they differ from me because I know I differ from the most Where the Mine though is Gold as the Scripture is there is no Dust of it but must be saved The least Dust of Gold is Gold and if any other who hath better Words and Parts will be at the pains to sift and order what I have digged I doubt not but they may make Gold of that which I have brought to be but the Dust of Gold When a Book is so Methodized as it does exhaust its Subject there is no coming after it But when there is only some Ore turn'd up something of Notion for others to refine a riper Wit will be encouraged to an Endeavour of bringing that Something to more perfection It is so with my Middle-Way Books I am content to be but the Digger I expect some others should be the Refiners of what I have digged The Trent Doctrine which is the perfect papists I must confess is lead them bâ— St. Austine They say Justification is the making a Man just Ex impio Christianum by Infusion of Grace inherent or Charity Being justified freely by his Grace Augustine being immersed in his Dispute with Pelagius could think of Grace in no Sence but this and by Freely Gratis justified he understood only that Works preparatory did not merit this infusion which the Trent-Doctors also say after him The Efficient Cause quae efficit is the Spirit the Instrumental Cause qua efficitur Baptism the Meritorious Cause propter quam Christ's Death the Formal Cause per quam of Justification is this Grace infused Gratia Habitualis Habitual Righteousness making the Man before ungodly now righteous in God's sight This habitual Righteousness then being infused by Baptism they say does abolish Sin so that there remains in the Baptized after the Opus Operatum nothing that is Peccatum but Fomes Peccati only and upon that Account is perfect so by the Law justifies and the Works proceeding from it meritorious of Salvation This is their Opinion and they fall foul on us for holding Justification by Pardon only or by Christ without inherent Grace as if Good Works were laid aside by us altogether Our Protestants therefore renouncing this Charge do grant an habitual Righteousness or Grace infused as necessary in the justified Person but deny this Righteousness to be that which justifies him they deny Justification to be Regeneration and distinguish these as two things It is not this inherent Righteousness say they that can be opposed between the Wrath of God and our Conscience of Sin to be the Cause Propter quam we are not condemned No there is a Righteousness they add without us that is the Righteousness of Christ performed for us and by our Faith made ours that we rely upon to do this for us Our inherent Grace is inchoate imperfect and cannot standing in Judgment before God This being now partly well on both sides there is a Middle Way appears which we must take between them It is true against the Papists that there is no such Righteousness inherent though infused by the Holy Spirit as does abolish Sin and make us so just that we can oppose it to Gods Wrath so as to render him appeased with the Sinner or that the Conscience can rest on it as that Proper quod he is forgiven or saved It is true likewise against the common Protestant that there is not any Righteousness without us that can be made ours so as we
Jew in the Second yet hath he such a Faith as belongs to the first such as the Ancients before Abraham had and so long as that Faith he hath does work by Love or by sincere Obedience to God according to his Light it will justifie him as well as that which is now farther required of us under the Gospel So my Book call'd The Axe laid to the Root of Separation p. 4. From Faith or Trust in God ' Goodness Grace or Mercy which any in every Nation that feared God and wrought Righteousness had thus to be accepted and pardoned before they knew this Ground or Foundation upon which the Righteousness thereof does stand to that Faith we have now who do know it From that Faith they had in God to save them of his Free Grace before the knowledge or our clearer knowledge of Christ and our Redemption by him to that Faith we have now to save us by the same Free Grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus Ye believe in God says Christ believe also in me where is a Faith and a Faith Consequently from Faith that is a believing in God to a Faith which is a believing in him through Christ the Foundation of our Faith upon the Revelation of the Gospel Even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ to wit since he is revealed Upon these words Mr. Rutherford supposing the Righteousness of Christ to be the formal Righteousness that justifies us thus opposes If our Righteousness and inherent Obedience may be of Grace esteemed formal Righteousness before God by a free Evangelick Paction and an Act of God's Free Will there is no need of Christ's Satisfaction Cou. Op. p. 172 173. I answer This Learned Man hath I account here understandingly exprest the very thing as it is and that he gives for the Reason of his denial is the very Ground upon which this Righteousness as I have explained it is made good If it were not for this Satisfaction of Christ there could be no such Righteousness on God's part or on Ours God should deal with us in his strict Justice and no Man be found righteous accounted or dealt with as so in the Earth But seeing upon this Satisfaction of Christ God may be righteous and abate the Terms as they were in one Covenant and impute them however for Righteousness by another we see how our Evangelick Obedience is indeed the Formal when Christ's Righteousness is the Meritorious Cause of our Justification Our Justification I must say passively taken that is the Formal Cause or Formal Reason or Form itself of that Righteousness whereby we are justified That which we do our selves through Grace or the Spirit acting us is this our Formal Righteousness and that is the Condition of our Justification actively taken and so of the Impunity and Life that follow as the Fruits of it That we may not stray here but keep our Middle-Way between the Extreams of Papist and Protestant we must distinguish Remission and Justification The Papists say Justification is Remission and Regeneration the Protestants say it is Remission and the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness When both then make Remission to be but part of Justification and Totum and Pars may be distinguished these may But I go farther That which goes before and that which comes after Justification must be distinguished from it but such is Remission Remission therefore is Two-fold Universal and Conditional the one Particular and Absolute the other Universal Conditional Remission goes before Justification Particular Absolute follows as its Effect and so Neither must be made the Formal Reason of it He hath given us the World of Reconciliation to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself not imputing their Trespasses And we are his Embassadors beseeching you in Christ's stead to be reconciled unto God 2 Cor 5.18 19 20. Here we see a Reconciliation of God to us obtained for the World so that a Non-imputation of Trespasses belongs to all which yet precedes our being Reconciled to him and consequently our actual Believing and Justification The Reconciliation of the World to God by the Non-imputation of Sin in this Text is indeed no other but what the Apostle otherwhere calls Redemption In whom we have Redemption through his Blood even the Forgiveness of Sins Eph. 1.7 Col. 1.14 Now that Redemption does precede Justification both in the Nature of the Thing and Intent of the Apostle is manifest Rom. 3.24 Being justified freely by his Grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus Redemption is the Ground we see of our Justification and the Ground is necessarily first to be supposed before that which is built upon it And what is Redemption Redemption is Christ's procuring or purchase of Man's delivery from Wrath due to us according to the Law for Sin or of our discharge from the Penalty called sometimes Freedom from the Law sometimes Forgiveness of Sins by the Price of his Blood or Satisfaction in our behalf but to be given out to us no otherwise than as God and Christ please and that is upon the Terms of the Gospel Of this Remission which preceding Justification must be Universal for where it is Particular the Man is justified and Conditional for if it were Absolute all must be saved no Man must conceive me to imagine our Righteousness the Formal Cause or any Cause nay or Condition Nevertheless this General Remission being given out I say to particular Persons by a new Law or Covenant which requires of us to the participating thereof that we believe repent and walk sincerely before God this Evangelical Righteousness upon that Account is the Thing that Formally justifies us Upon our Faith God does account us Believers or Performers of this Law or Covenant that is righteous by the Righteousness of Faith the Forma per quam we are made so and then this Remission before Conditional becomes Absolute or Actual Remission so commonly called as the Effect together with a Right to Heaven of this Justification Now when the Protestants ordinarily that distinguish not Remission from Justification are vehement here in reference to Grace and Works and say that no Man does or can do any thing in order to the Remission of his Sin That there is nothing and can be nothing in the whole World interposed between our Sins and God's Wrath to stave that off us but Christ's Satisfaction which was made by him and accepted of God for us while we are Sinners Enemies and have no other Qualification so that therefore our Righteousness is so far from being any Cause Efficient Material or Formal that it is not so much as a Condition of it I say it is all true it is all granted The Absolute Free Grace of God and our Redeemer is to be received with the utmost Humility of our Hearts and Thankfulness Only one thing is necessary which is that it be understood aright It must be understood of
the Form of that Imputation but of Justification passively taken I add at last upon the Account of Christ's Merits or through Christ or for Christ's sake because this Faith of ours or Evangelick Righteousness hath so many Defects in the best of Christians that if through the Sacrifice of Christ they were not pardoned and through his Merits that imperfect Duty which is done accepted it could not be imputed to us for Righteousness And I do more especially signifie thereby that Christ's Righteousness which cannot be imputed to us as the Formal Cause of our Justification is and must be very carefully brought to our Account and granted to be imputed as the Meritorious Cause of that Acceptation And in making it the Meritorious I have learn'd of Mr. Baxter to allow it to be the Material also which he says is nothing else but to be the Matter of that Merit because I make our Faith the Formal in our Justification After this I distinguish between this pardoning and bearing with the Defects of our Faith Repentance New Obedience which are the Conditions of the Gospel Covenant and so our Gospel Righteousness or that which is imputed for Righteousness and that General or Total Pardon which the Covenant promises and becomes Absolute upon performing the Condition The one of these is that very Grace or Act of Grace itself as goes into that Act of Imputation or Act that imputes our Faith for Righteousness when the other I say still is the Effect or Benefit following Justification Justification being thus defined by God's imputing a Man's Faith to him for Righteousness it may be understood what Mr. Baxter still tell us that Justification is the making us righteous as well as the accounting us righteous and dealing with us as righteous I have been shy hitherto of admitting the first of these because of the Papists but I will now distinguish There is a making a Man just or righteous by Infusion or by Imputation Gods making a Man just by Infusion is Regeneration which the Papists hold and we distinguish from Justification I suppose Mr. Baxter once intended no other Those that will have Justification nothing but Forgiveness do readily grant this that Justification makes one just for when Sin is forgiven so that there is not the Guilt of any Omission or Commission imputed to a Person he is made Righteous by Non-imputation But I am for neither of these Justification is not making a Man righteous by Infusion nor by Non imputation but by Imputation God imputing our Faith to us for Righteousness Per formalem Justificationis causam justi constituimur Our Faith and Evangelick Obedience is imperfect and sinful and we are unrighteous in the Eye of the Law for all that but God in his judging us according to the Law of Grace does allow of that for Christ's sake instead of all which the Law requires to our Justification By this may that Expression of the Apostle that God justifies the Ungodly be rightly understood Not in the Sence or either of the former that take it only in Sensu diviso so that he who before his Justification was ungodly is no longer so after but In sensu composito Our Faith I say or Evangelical Obedience in regard to the Law or in regard to those Works that are required by the Law to our Justification are no Righteousness no Righteousness which in its own Nature would justifie us but God constitutes it such by the Law of the Gospel and according to that Law imputes it to us for Righteousness A Man believes Let us suppose that Sound Faith The Spirit must have been given to work it in him Where the Spirit is given to work inherent Grace in a Person he is Regenerate But this Regeneration is not Justification For suppose a Regenerate Man should live all his Life as righteously as he is able yet if God should deal with him according to the Law of Works he is still ungodly in that regard and he could not be justified and God's dealing with him otherwise according to his Law of Grace and accounting or adjudging him righteous by that Law notwithstanding all his Failings for Christ's sake is this imputing Faith to him for Righteousness which is the Formal Reason of Justification I must take leave to rake this again a little over for I see some need and I must confess Mr. Baxter hath perplexed me often as to this particular In some of his Books he speaks of Justification making us just by Pardon which freeing us from the Guilt of all Sin Omission and Commission does make us he accounts righteous as we can be made In others he seems to understand with Augustine that Justification makes us just by Grace inherent A Man must believe and repent before he is justified He cannot do that without God's Grace God does therefore first make him righteous by this inherent Grace before he accounts him just or deals with him as such Mr. Baxter was induced to this I think by the Judicious Le Blanc who apprehends that there are three or four places for which he quotes some of our chief Protestants that make Justification the same with Sanctification Unto which Texts I should choose rather to give Answer according to others than to consent to this because it comes so near the Papists as to leave us almost no difference from them I will therefore advance here a Distinction to the same purpose as but now which among the many Mr. Baxter hath he yet has not and it is this There is a threefold making a Man just By Conversion or Regeneration and this is Austine's and the Papists Justification By Pardon and this is Mr. Wotton's Justification Or by the Righteousness of God which I made the Subject of these Sheets as something between Protestant and Papist and this is God's imputing our Faith for Righteousness which is my Justification and I will call it mine because I take it to be the Scriptures where it is expresly delivered as cannot be gainsaid The Papists Opinion to make things clear is that the Grace of God infused is the Formal Righteousness that justifies us or makes us just in God's sight according to the Law of Works Justitia Habitualis à Deo infusa satis est ut homo illa indutus possit in Divino judicio sisti vere justus haberi In this Sence the Protestants lay down this contrary Position that a Sinner is justified not by any Formal Righteousness in himself but by the Mercy of God through the Satisfaction of Christ. The Protestants I own here against the Papist according to the Papists Sence Our Faith or Evangelick Righteousness or inherent Grace I must say this over is imperfect and cannot be our Formal Righteousness according to the Law it is no Conformity to the Law of Works and they of Trent thought of no other but our imperfect Faith Repentance New Obedience is a Conformity to that which God hath made the Condition
Son that an Evangelical only may be accepted from Man A perfect one offered for us to God that our inchoate and imperfect one may be imputed to us for Righteousness through him and that is to make it serve the turn as that a perfect one would have done if we could have performed it Faith is really says Mr. Baxter the Condition of the Covenant of Grace which who so performeth he is righteous against the Charge of Non-performance of that Condition And supposing Christ's Merits and our Redemption by him this Gospel Righteousness is all that is required of us on our parts instead of all that perfect Obedience which the Law of Innocency required Let Mr. Williams therefore be here perswaded that there is no making Christ's Righteousness Ours any otherwise than in the Effects Yet let him believe too that Christ's Righteousness is made Ours in the Effects for the Effects are Ours And this is one Effect wherein it is made Ours that our Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness and also that consequently there needs no perfect one In se to be imputed because this imperfect one is instead of one or as good to us as one by that Imputation But if Christ's Righteousness was Legally Ours or imputed to us otherwise than in the Effects then could not our Faith be imputed to us for Righteousness that is instead of a perfect one because a perfect one were imputed to us already in Christ That there are two Righteousnesses concur in our Justification I am satisfied with Mr. Baxter but when he speaks of one to be subordinate to the other or subservient I cannot but hear Dr. Owen objecting That upon this Supposition Christ's Righteousness is made to serve Ours which else could not be imputed for Righteousness and therefore Ours is not subservient to That It is necessary therefore for us to keep in our Minds that our Righteousness and Christ's concur in our Justification but not on the same Account not under the reason of the same but diverse Causes and therefore if they be held Co-ordinate I see no hurt so long as they are not Co-equal the one being of infinite Value and giving Virtue to the other If as there are two Righteousnesses we conceive with Mr. Gibbons two Bars two Justifications that is that Christ's Righteousness is our Legal Righteousness and the Formal Cause of our Legal Justification and our Faith or Evangelick Righteousness the Formal Cause of our Evangelical Justification there were no question in making one Righteousness and Justification subordinate or subservient to the other Righteousness and Justification But if Mr. Williams when he says The very Righteousness of Christ is imputed to a Believer besides the Effects and Mr. Gibbons apprehended the Matter so we are to know Mr. Baxter must not apprehend with them who teaches that the Righteousness of Christ is not imputed In se and consequently is never to be allowed our Formal Righteousness in regard to the Law or Gospel It is something hard therefore for me to set this right only thus much we know and say with Mr. Baxter that Christ by his Obedience and Sufferings hath obtained a Grant of Impunity and Life for Sinners which he gives upon Terms we performing those Terms have a Right to those Benefits And so a Righteousness by that Right Hereof Christ's Righteousness being the meritorious procuring Cause his Righteousness is said to be Ours in regard to that Effect But there being other Effects of Christ's Righteousness besides these and this one more especially that Our Faith or the Evangelick Condition is upon that Account imputed for Righteousness which else were none how is it that our Evangelical Personal Righteousness can be said subordinate subservient to or required in order for the obtaining of the Righteousness of Christ when we have it already as to that Effect or in that Imputation It appears to me therefore not unfit to say here that the Righteousness of Christ and the Performance of the Evangelick Condition do concur to our Justification as to the Form of is which is the imputing to us that Evangelick Condition performed for Righteousness in a Co-ordination of diverse Causes as to that Effect but in a Subordination as to the Effects or Benefits both of Christ's Righteousness and Justification that follow The Fourth PART I Know in this Discourse of the Righteousness of God I do assert that which our Protestants hitherto have denied but scarce taken into their Thoughts to examine with the Bereans whether it be so or no to wit that Faith which is a living working Faith is our Formal Righteousness the reason of their denial having been much because they have confounded the Causa per quam and Propter quam and spoken of them as one as appears by Davenant before quoted and others their meaning in the Main being only that it is not our Righteousness but Christ's which is Id propter quod or Cujus merito we are justified unto which we all agree But it is time if they have understood otherwise to set the Matter right now By Faith says the Scripture again and again we are justified By is Id per quod the Causa formalis and I avert accordingly that it is Formaliter or Per modum Causae formalis that by Faith we are justified And why should I not stick to that the Scripture does so expresly warrant Davenant that here is quite opposite and holds that it is Christ's Righteousness which does Formaliter justifie us does yet acknowledge that we are in Scripture still denominated or accounted righteous by God in regard to our Evangelical Righteousness and never in regard to Christ's Now Justificari is Justum esse censeri Justi autem censemur according to him à justitia inchoata and yet Ab inchoata justitia non justificamur but à justitia Christi imputata Justi censemur says he à justitia inchoata Justificati dicimur à justitia perfectissima Christi imputata What is this but Apparent Conviction and Authoritative Tergiversasation There are two Reasons I find move our Protestants One is they are startled by a Word the Word Cause they will not have our Works nor Faith as a Work to justifie because that makes it a Cause of our Justification which to Avoid they will call it a Condition only Now a Condition being Cause sine qua non does make our Evangelick Righteousness as necessary so as we cannot be justified without it as the making it a Cause does And I find it no regret in my Mind to call it a Cause as well as a Condition for it is both only we must consider what Cause we make it If we made our Works or Faith as a Work to justifie us Sub genere Causae Efficientis it must be that which is Procatarctick and so the Meritorious Cause thereof which were to bring our Works or Faith into the Office of Christ's Righteousness and to derogate from Grace a thing we
to be Pardon because the Formal Righteousness of our Justification which is the Righteousness of Faith only imputed to us for Righteousness is not a Righteousness that hath offended in nothing and obeyed in every thing as Mr. Truman describes Pardon but is an inchoate imperfect Righteousness that hath Failings covered with Christ's Satisfaction and its Work done I may say still accepted only through his Merit so that the more acute this Man is and the further he does go the more he is out and must be so long as he hath not once the Sence upon his Mind through his whole Book called The Great Propitiation nor in his other two of the Righteousness of God which the Apostle himself gives us as the Handle and the only Handle to understand his Doctrine of Justification by This one thing yet is to be noted that these worthy Men that define Justification by Pardon only and say it is impossible that a Sinner can be justified or made and accounted righteous any otherwise do yet plead for a Personal Evangelical Righteousness as necessary to Justification as much or more than others Witness Sir Charles Wolesley This now to me is a Contradiction unless it be understood à parte post only For if Pardon only can make a Sinner righteous how can there be any Personal Righteousness preceding it The Matter is thus Before a Man believes and repents he is not pardoned or made righteous by Pardon that is certain When a Man performs the Evangelick Condition it is the Evangelick Law or God by it as his Instrument makes him or constitutes him righteous and being thereby so made God must account him so which is all one with imputing that Condition performed for Righteousness or justifying him This Constitutive Justification then proceeding in Order of Nature though not in Time Pardon and Life do follow as the Fruit or Benefits of it Note here that when the Evangelick Law does constitute the Performer of the Condition righteous it is righteous quoad hoc only for he is ungodly that is Not righteous still as I say before in regard to the Law but righteous as not guilty of the Accusation of his Non-performance of the Condition of the Gospel So that after this Righteousness Quoad hoc a Universal Righteousness of Not Guilty of any Omission or Commission that brings a Man into a State as if he had offended in nothing and fulfilled the Law in every thing as Mr. Truman describes Pardon does manifestly appear to be a farther Benefit or Blessing than Justification strictly taken What may be understood by it largely taken may be considered hereafter before I have done The Third PART BEfore I come to any Close of my Discourse there is a matter of Four Things to be proposed whether by way of Question or Objection it is indifferent as necessary for the Satisfaction of such as have the Reason Candour and Christian Humility to seek it The First is this The Scripture and those therefore that duly preach it does call upon all Men to believe and repent in order to their Justification and Salvation and when Faith and Repentance are required as Conditions of being justified how can that which is pre-requisite as a Condition be made or become the Form Formal Cause or Formal Reason of Justification This I put first because I believe here that nothing almost that a Scholar who hath got Aristotelian Terms in his Head putting his Physical Constructions on Divinity Points is like to be more gravell'd at than at this But it is nothing let Terms or Words be once look'd through for it is this is the very thing I affirm and stand upon that what God hath made the Condition of his Covenant and the Blessings thereof and so of our Justification before it is performed when perform'd does become the Formal Righteousness that justifies us God does by that Act of Imputation Instrumentally done by his Word make our Faith which is not in itself a Righteousness to become our Righteousness and as it becomes a Righteousness it is made the Formal Reason of our Justification There is the Carpenter's Work the Bricklayer's Work the Smith's Work goes to the Building a House There must be therefore Timber Bricks and Iron prepared and the preparing these are Conditions of the Building or Materials before but when the House is built they all put together are the House it self and as a House the Formal Cause Formal Reason or Form of it A Second Thing to be proposed is this Our Divines we know do ordinarily bring together Remission of Sin and the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness into the Matter of our justification and when the Assembly have given us a Definition comprizing the same Things I do in mine why should I offer another Unto this I will make that Answer as ought to content any honest Man that would have but such a one as he would be allowed himself to give and I say that I do readily give my Suffrage to the Assembly's Catechism to be learned and used above any I know and am not concern'd though a Learner of it be not so accurate in his Understanding as to see any Difference between my Definition and theirs when what is in mine is in theirs and what in theirs is in mine I am perswaded that a believed grosser Knowledge of the Principles of Religion is better for ordinary People than that which is more exact and I receive all that is in their Definition only with liberty of Explication In Justification I acknowledge a Forgiveness and an Imputation of Christ's Obedience but I do not acknowledge either as our Formal Righteousness I say Forgiveness is a Benefit we receive by it but it is not the Formal Reason of it and I acknowledge Christ's Righteousness imputed Sub genere causae efficientis per modum meriti and so received by Faith not in itself but in the Merit of it only And I give Notice that he who thinking more does say that Christ's Righteousness In fe is made ours Legally tho' Physically and Morally he disowns it that Man must make it to justifie us Sub ratione causae formalis when perhaps he does not know it which is an unadvised Position I look upon as that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of our former great Divines which gave the Rise to Antimonianism A Third Thing to be proposed is Our Protestants have their Mouths full of Christ's Righteousness imputed when the Scripture hath no such Expression and what hath not Authority from Scripture may be again refused Eadem facilitate says Hierom as it hath been received It is sit therefore this be a little examin'd into and there may be two Questions ask'd The one What is there in the thing at bottom as to the reality and truth of it The other And what then shall we say to it For the First That which is in reality in this Matter The Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is that Christ by the
this Comfort here tho' none else in the World for this alone is worth a World that we may must ought to trust lean cast our selves upon the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ for pardoning all our Failings and accepting our poor Mite and if the Soul remains in doubt it must quiet itself upon him If with the Pharisee I justifie myself God may condemn me If I condemn myself with the Publican he may acquit me And what must I do in this Case Behold O Lord I am at thy Bar and I commit my Cause unto my Judge Thy Bar is a Bar or Throne of Grace I cast myself on thy Grace And the Lord send me a good Deliverance at the Great Day As for Actual Pardon and Life that follows Justification the Merit is to be attributed to that which procured Justification on that Condition There is nothing of Merit but Christ's throughout It is Christ's Satisfaction runs through all I must still say as the Meritorious Cause when Performance of the Condition becomes thereby the Formal Cause of our Justification I know how hardly this is like to be received by many when Dr. Owen will allow nothing of any Personal Righteousness or any Works Legal or Evangelical but excludes them all from our Justification supposing that if it be of Works any way it is not of Grace at all when it is therefore of Faith or upon the Evangelick Condition that it may be of Grace Dr. Owen is a Person whose Name I honour for his Worth Learning Comprehensive Parts and one in whom was more of a Gentleman as to his Deportment than in any Divine I knew ever among us Yet is he more Authorative sometimes in his Book than he needs which being liable to hurt the humbly Inquisitive I will speak the more positively in this matter that the Doctor is out as I believe and never came to the plain true knowledge of what Paul means by the Works he opposes to Faith in this Point of Justification Which Works are such as would justifie a Man in the Apostles Account if he had them but that no Man is justified by Works because he has them not This I am past doubt is Paul's meaning and in this particular the Learned and Honoured Sir Charles Wolesley before quoted is rather to be attended A Man says Sir Charles that has not a Legal Sinless Perfection is that Paul means by the Ungodly Rom. 4.5 In my first Papers I wrote I had this Sence of the place and I have it before and in my Pacification I say the like of that Text * For solving this Matter Austin and from him the Schools distinguish of Opera Naturae and Opera Gratiae We are not saved by Works or according to Works done in our own Strength but by Works done by Grace But is this the Apostle's meaning No I have shewn in my Book of Just that One Thing of Three wherein Austin was out and hath misled the Schools is this Notion of Grace By Grace he understands still this inherent Grace or Operation of God's Spirit in us when Paul understands it of that without his Favour or Condescension to us Not of Works but of Grace is all one as not of Desert but of Favour only Grace is Mercy without or contrary to Merit Now when the Papist receives the Solution mentioned the Protestants generally will have all Works tho of the Regenerate to be but Rags and Christ's Righteousness alone to save us But they are both out for Paul's meaning it plainer than they think Not by Works of Righteousness we have done The Righteousness which the Jew hath done is living according to the Law of Moses The Righteousness which the Gentile hath done is his living according to the Law of Nature There is neither one or the other that fulfil that Righteousness which answers God's Law so as it should be able to save him and therefore it is of Grace or Mercy that Any are saved Pacif. p. 29. Not by the Works of Righteousness we have done but according to his Mercy he saved us Which Words have put so many to the inventing Distinctions when the right understanding is to make none the meaning being only Not by the Works of Righteousness we have done because we have not done them and it must be of Mercy therefore and in another way we are saved or not at all See the Quotation above The Works then I have said there and here and must still say which Paul means are such as would justifie us such as would make the Reward of Debt if we had them that is perfect Works Such says the Judicious Le Blanc as the Law requires to Justification And as for that the Doctor hath in answer to this that it is a wild Imagination that the perfect Works of the Law will not justifie us but imperfect Works which answer not the Law will do so it does confirm what I judge of the Doctor 's Conceptions that certainly he never understood the Apostle as to this Matter who I say excludes not Works of the Law from Justification as if they would not justifie us if we had them but because none have them to be justified by them It is therefore the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of the Evangelick Condition that he in his Mercy through Christ's Merits hath instituted in the room of Works to justifie the Christian And as for the Doctor 's quoting Socinus saying this to prejudice the Reader against it I must needs say I like this excellent Doctor 's Judgment the meaner and seeing I took the Notion from Scripture and am sure I am no Socinian myself Socinus was a Man of Reason and it is to be lik'd the better for that It is a thing whether so proposed or not more worth the Thoughts of a serious Man how the Doctrine of Justification as formerly it hath been taught and is maintained by the Doctor can be made to lodge with the Doctrine of Sanctification or Regeneration in the same Scripture or be preached together in the same Gospel The Papists are so careful to have these agree that they make them one The Protestants are so careful to keep them asunder that they will not have any Works of ours not Faith itself as a Work or the Fruits of it Repentance and a Good Life to be brought into our Justification least by going to establish our own Righteousness we submit not to the Righteousness of God and perish Let the Works be wrought in us says the Doctor Of Just p. 524. if they be also wrought by us I fear their Introduction into our Justification doth include beasting This he adds is a dangerous Point even like to make us lose all the Benefit we might otherwise expect by the Grace of God I cannot but remember since I was young holy Mr. Shepherd's Book The Sincere Convert and do reflect sometimes on that Terror the Reading that and the like Books hath wrought in
it and are liable to the Curse Gal. 3.10 Our Justification against this Charge is by an Acknowledgment of the Indictment but we plead a Stature made in the Year of our Lord Christ's Death when and where it is Enacted That whosoever believes and repents shall be freed from that Condemnation That is Our Plea in short is a Pardon upon Christ's Satisfaction But this Pardon being General and Conditional there arises the Charge of the Gospel This Charge is that we have not performed the Condition And our Justification against this Charge is by pleading Not Guilty for the Performance of the Evangelick Condition accepted through Mercy and Christ's Merits is our Righteousness as Not Guilty which is shewn before of this Charge of Non-performance Here De Re I agree with Mr. Baxter but De Nomine I am not satisfied yet to allow any other than one Justification Our Justification at Judgment Come ye blessed for when I was hungry ye fed me is plainly the Evangelick Condition performed and that is the Righteousness according to which the Sentence passes and as is the Justification of the Judge such must be that of the present Law whereby he judges and that is therefore our Evangelical Justification As for the Charge of the Law I count it can have no place at the Judgment of God for the Satisfaction of Christ and the Pardon upon it cannot there be brought in question If a Charge may be supposed the Satisfaction of Christ which is our Plea against it is not Ours or imputed to us for Ours not imputed In se I and Mr. Baxter hold and so cannot be here our Formal Righteousness without which a Legal Justification thereby arises not Besides this the Pardon granted upon Christ's Satisfaction is that Universal Conditional Remission which precedes Justification and when it comes to be Absolute or Actual to any one it is the Consequent of his Justification and must not be Justification itself as some make it I am not willing therefore to apprehend that because here are two Righteousnesses there are two Justifications for Christ's Righteousness as the Meritorious Cause of it goes into that Evangelical one and makes not Another But I would have one only Justification yet set forth in Scripture and spoken of by Divines under a double Consideration as Strictly and Largely taken Under a Strict and Precise Consideration I suppose nothing but what goes into the Form of it may be said of it Under a Large and Complex Consideration I allow the thing and benefit tho' Cause and Effect which was my heretofore Scruple may be comprized in our speaking of one and the same Justification I will press this Difficulty no further nor move any other but will break off with that Resolution I take up from Chemnicius and he by the Stile I suppose from Luther Quae dialectica subtilitate dissolvi non possunt piscatoria simplicitate praecidantur And as to these aforesaid Charges or Accusations I say this only that let as many be raised as any can raise they need not every one a Particular but are all discharg'd by one Universal Evangelical Justification FINIS COROLLARIVM IN the Year 1684 I wrote four or five Sheets entituled Two Steps toward obtaining my Liberty of Preaching and a Third Step after but both at that time without effect I will suppose a Man Episcopally Ordained and one that holds Communion with the Church Such a Man yet cannot have a Living or a Lecture we know without his Declaration of Assent and Consent and his Subscription according to the Canons with Conforming in all Things beside But there is nothing to hinder him the Preaching an Occasional Sermon Prayers being duly read in any Church only the want of a License to Preach Unto such a License in the Act of Vniformity is required his Reading the Thirty Nine Articles and Assent to them before the Bishop and nothing else A Canon need not be urged it were unmerciful when an Act connives The Act indeed as well as Canons requires more to the Preaching as a Lecturer or Beneficed Man but no more to a License to Preach The Uniformity Act requiring this is bound up with the Common Prayer and is made part of that Book In the Preface hereof there is a Clause to this Sence That if any Doubts shall arise about the Vnderstanding any Matter contained in the Book the Person shall resort to the Bishop or Archbishop and he shall resolve the same That the Articles are of various and doubtful Interpretation it is apparent by the Ministers of diverse Judgments some Arminians some Calvinists subscribing them and that with Allowance of the Church If then such a Man as before qualified shall make or set down his own Construction of every such Article as he scruples and then in his reading the Article read also his Sence of it and it be such as the Bishop allows to be Orthodox a License upon this Account Salva Conscientia may be had I cannot give an unfeigned Assent to these Articles all without a Liberty of Explication but with one I may And upon that Supposition there is the Eleventh Article Entituled Of the Justification of Man which concerns me in regard to this present Book We are accounted righteous before God only for the Merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith and not for our own Works or Deservings Wherefore that we are justified by Faith only is a wholesome Doctrine and very full of Comfort as is more largely expressed in the Homily of Justification Art 11. By the Words Faith only I understand what Paul means by Faith without Works that is Faith in opposition to Works that would make the Reward to be of Debt and not of Grace or to the Works of the Law Works which the Law requires to Justification which none have and if any be justified at all it must be therefore without them not in opposition to Repentance and Evangelical Obedience And though it be for Christ's sake or his Merits not Ours that he accounts us righteous yet is our Faith Repentance and sincere Obedience the Condition upon which he does it or rather the Righteousness itself which upon the Account of Christ's Deservings he accepts unto Life everlasting So I have it in these mentioned Sheets J. H. ERRATA PAge 9. l. 28. for First r. Fifth p. 11.21 for Meritory r. Meritoriè p. 14. l. 34. for its r. it with a Full-point p. 15. l. 32. for Sated r. Stated p. 18. l. 26. in the Margin for that r. by which p. 31. l. 32. for rearum r. reatum p. 27. l. 2. for Cause r. Cause An ADVERTISEMENT from the Bookseller THere are several Papers of Four or Five Sheets apiece written formerly by this Author called The Middle Way of Election of Redemption of Justification of the Covenants Law and Gospel of Perfection As also Peaceable Disquisitions which Treat Of the Natural and Spiritual Man of Praying by the Spirit of Preaching by Demonstration of it of Assurance of the Arminian Grace of the Possibility of Heathens Salvation of the Reconciliation of Paul and James of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness with other Incidental Matters One of which Middle Papers that of Justification was Reprinted two Years since with the Quotation of what concerns that Subject out of the other and since that One Sheet so called and his Six Sheets last Year called Pacification All which may be bound up together with this present Discourse for any that desires them In that Book called Pacification there is the Case of Non-Resistance and Passive-Obedience Stated and Resolved the Doctrine whereof Abjured in the two former Reigns is here in this King's Reign Recorded for a Memoriae Sacrum to those which are to come Whosoever hath those Six Sheets they are desired in Page 35. Line 20. to put in the word not which the Printer hath left out to the contradicting the Scope of the Book T. P.
co quod Christus peccatum pro nobis factus est Hoc autem ipsum est Christi Obedientia Ergo Justitia Dei non est Christi Obedientia Wotton Besides That we might be made the Righteousness of God in him is expressed by the Apostle as the End or Effect of his being made Sin for us He was made Sin for us not Formaliter but Effective in suffering for our Sins His Sufferings was his Obedience and that his Righteousness By the Righteousness of God therefore we must not understand the Righteousness of Christ because that which is the End or Effect of a Thing cannot be the very same Thing but another differing from it There is yet that Text more which will receive the like easie Interpretation on that Supposition Christ is the End of the Law for Righteousness to him that believeth the Believer being righteous In and With and not only meritory By his Righteousness according to Rom. 10.4 But the Supposition really is too gross the Notion too hard to be digested as well as dangerous in regard to the Antinomian Consequences of it If in a Law-sence we are righteous and have fulfilled the Law in Christ then in a Law-sence God sees no Sin in us we need no Pardon God cannot in Justice punish for any thing we do with the Lerna of the like Doctrines which follow upon it If in a Law-sence Christ's Righteousness is ours and we have fulfilled the Law in him then are we in a Law-sence justified by Works when by the Works of the Law the Scripture says no Flesh living shall be justified It the Notion of Faith being imputed for Righteousness which is Scripture must be so framed as by Faith we must understand its Object Christ's Righteousness so imputed but first received by Faith or made ours by Faith as the Instrument of that Reception How then shall those many Fathers and Holy Men before Luther who never had any such Notion in their Minds Nay how shall the Patriarchs and all the Holy People from Adam to Christ have been justified as we which is to be Righteous with this Righteousness when they never had the Instrument to receive it An Instrument is that the Efficient works by And when there is not the working Cause how can there be the Effect It is not credible to me that ever any one before Christ or any of his Disciples before his Death did or could believe themselves Righteous by the Satisfaction and Obedience of the Messiah in this sence that his Righteousness should or could be their Formal Righteousness when As St. John tells us He that doth Righteousness is righteous so is this Righteousness done the Formal Righteousness and Christ's Obedience and Satisfaction the Meritorious Cause and the Account we give of its acceptance in the Sinners Justification A Third Text and parallel Place we have in Rom. 8.3 4. What the Law could not do in that it was weak through the Flesh c. That is I suppose when through the Fall no Man could perform the Condition of the Law of Works God sent his Son as it follows to be a Sacrifice for Sin to procure a Law of Grace That the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit How is that when none can fulfil the Law through the Weakness of the Flesh do we fulfil it Yes It is not said fulfilled in Christ but in Us and it is fulfilled by this Righteousness of God which being on our part all one with the Obedience of Faith God upon Christ's Account imputes that to us for Righteousness or reckons it instead of fulfilling it making it as good to us and rewarding us alike as if we had perfectly performed it It is an Obedience or Righteousness indeed not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have it before according to the Rigour of the Law but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Equity of the Gospel It is not in its own Nature a Righousness falling short of the Law that would justifie us but it does it by Divine Institution and therefore called the Righteousness of God It is an Ordination of Grace through Jesus Christ and therefore is God righteous in what he does But on our part it is called the Righteousness of Faith I do observe therefore how that Religiously Learned Gentleman Sir Charles Wolesley having wrote his Book of Justification after I had wrote and he had read my Sheets on the same Subject hath these Words upon that forementioned Critical Place 2 Cor. 5.21 The meaning is this says he Christ that was without all Sin was ordained of God to be a Sacrifice for Sin that we might thereby be made righteous with the Gospel Righteousness for that is the general meaning every where of the Righteousness of God Sir C. W. p. 64. This I know I delivered as my Judgment in those Sheets and his saying the same after is as much as if he had said I have considered what you say and am convinced that this is the meaning of that Text and that you are right in your Sence of the Righteousness of God It is a walking after the Spirit not after the Flesh though not perfectly up to our Duty And the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus after which we walk in our measure does set us free from the Law of Sin and Death I will proceed to some Consequences like to be good or ill as they follow upon a right or mistaken understanding of this Righteousness If by it the Righteousness of Christ imputed be understood By the exercise of Faith in apprehending the same to be made ours so as to bring it before the Tribunal of God's Justice for our Justification thereby according to the Law of Works the very Life of that Faith or Comfort of that Life which consists in trusting resting relying on God's Mercy and Goodness for pardoning all the Failings of our Performances and accepting them even our very Desires and weakest Endeavours through the Merits of Christ unto Life so as by that Faith we have access to the Throne of Grace and are justified according to the Gospel is stopt perverted if not quite contradicted and lost Nay if the End of Christ's Obeying and Satisfying the Law was that his Satisfaction and Obedience should be made ours upon Condition for our Divines here are cautious and do generally take heed to put in that to wit upon Performance of the Terms the Gospel requires of us in order to it and not otherwise then cannot the Merits of Christ be so rationally I think applied thus as I speak to the Performance of the Condition Our Divines indeed do say that Christ hath not only procured this Imputation on Condition but Grace also for the Performance of the Condition some say General Grace for all that will some Special that makes some to will but this Condition must be performed by our Free-Will or Grace so
of it which I have been careful to keep to in my last Sheets Nay tho' I say farther that when the Satisfaction of another is imputed to the Justification of a Man the Trespasses of that other after a sort must be said imputed to him and yet neither is that Satisfaction Formaliter made his that is justified nor that Trespass Formaliter made his that makes the Satisfaction but Effective or Meritorie only in the one's bearing the Punishment and the other obtaining the Benefit of it This being understood when our Divines do account that we are justified by Christ's Satisfaction so as to be made just by it and accordingly to be made righteous by the Righteousness of another which is being made just by Imputation Such Words I count ought to be a little changed and the Sence verified It should not be said by but through Christ's Satisfaction through his Righteousness through the Imputation of it and then that Truth which is in it is this that through Christ's Satisfaction or Righteousness or Imputation of it as the Meritorious Cause which we know is an external Cause moving the Efficient to act we are indeed justified but by no means must we understand them so as that it is the Formal Cause of our Justification But the truth is here that our former Polemical Divines even the chief in opposition to a Man's being justified by any Works Merits or Righteousness of his own maintain'd against the Papists that it is by Christ's Righteousness Sub genere causae formalis that we are justified or that Christ's Righteousness is so made ours by Faith as to be the Formal Reason of our Justification Our excellent Dr. Davenant undertook this Task whosoever in those times did not but where the Scripture is for us we are to trust no Mortal against it The Question as he proposes it is Quae qualis illa justitia sit quae coram Deo hominem justificat hoc est cujus intuitu ipse Deus hominem à peccato poena peccati liberum pronunciet atque favore suo vita aeterna dignum reputet Let us define the Thing by its Form and speak this Hoc est in short Cujus intuitu hominem credentem justum reputat Now Cujus intuitu all know is all one with Id propter quod that is the Meritorious Cause only when he would maintain that Christ's Righteousness is the Causa formalis that is Causa per quam we are justified He therefore being put to it is forced to affirm thus In Justificatione talis formalis causa ponenda est quae simul meritoria esse possit His Reason for it is out of the same Quiver that is more Words for the bearing out an absurd Affirmation by putting some Face upon it I am sufficiently assured he hath shot beyond the Mark and I will not go after his Arrow By the way there are two places I remember where we are said to be justified by Christ's Blood but it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and should be translated through his Blood and must be interpreted no otherwise than Cujus intuitu that is as the Meritorious Cause I say not as by Faith in his Blood which is the Formal Cause of our Justification When we speak therefore and allow our Divines to speak of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as they ordinarily do we must understand them so as never to make our selves the Proprietors of that righteousness Legally or any way else impossible or that Faith so makes it ours as to be our Formal Righteousness which when we see such great Divines have held no wonder if the lesser Fry do swallow but that it is the Cause for which as I have said before not the Cause by which we are justified And here I will give Mr. Williams Notice that this is the Reason why the very Righteousness of Christ cannot be imputed to us but in the Effects because I say that if it were imputed to us In se it must according to our opposite Brethren be then our Formal Righteousness which he and I are to deny I must confess I think Mr. Williams might not have so fully digested this before as likewise myself as he may now and that the Expression of his which I have exagitated in my Book with that which follows in his that Christ's Righteousness is pleadable by the Believer as if himself had done and suffered what Christ did as also To impute to one what is suffered by another is to esteem the one undertaken for in the Sufferings of the other and to deal with him as if himself had suffered are shot too high For if a Man had made Satisfaction himself or God did impute Christ's Satisfaction to him so as if himself had made it then were this his Formal Righteousness and there were no need of that of Faith this alone being that which must immediately justifie him If therefore there be such a thing to be expected ever from Mr. Williams as any Vestigia retrorsum I will be ready to look for the Prints thereof made in the Words I have quoted as well as his Brethren may in any others But the Difficulty concerning the Point of the Concurrence of Christ's Righteousness and Ours in the matter of Justification is not yet off our hands For there is a Sermon of Mr. Gibbons that Mr. Baxter often commended which I think fit to mention This Gentleman hath treated the Doctrine of Justification as I. Righteousness says he is a Conformity to the Law A Man is actually justified when he is constituted righteous The New Law runs thus He that believes shall not perish The Believer keeps or fulfils this Law Faith therefore is imputed to him for Righteousness The Law-Giver by his very making the Law constitutes him righteous and the Judge must pronounce him so The Gospel then justifies Qua lex Lata Faith justifies Vi Legis latae As the King's Stamp gives the Value to the Money I set this together and quote it for the clearness of it and my approbation to it Nevertheless he tells us also That it is Christ's Satisfaction in respect to the Law of Works that is our proper Legal Righteousness and I call it says he Our Righteousness because it becomes imputed to us upon believing These are Words that in appearance are Ambidextrous holding with the Hound and running with the Hare as the Proverb is unless we put an Understanding upon them which I am not sure that very ingenuous but young Man did As likewise such Words or Sence as Mr. Williams hath somewhere concerning this double Righteousness Christ's and Ours accounting the one the Principal and the other Subordinate to it Now if Mr. Gibbons or Mr. Williams hitherto should have conceived our Righteousness we call Evangelical to be Subordinate to Christ's which was His but not Our Legal Righteousness Sub ratione ejusdem causae they are Mired But when thus much is forelaid that Christ's Righteousness
utterly disclaim But when we make it the Formal Cause only of our Passive Justification we do nothing thereby but advance God's Grace and Christ's Merits as having obtained for us not only than God should require of us no other Condition but our Faith or this inchoate Righteousness unto Life but also that he should constitute by his Now Law this Condition performed to be our Righteousness in the room of that perfect one required by the Old So that as Adam if he had perfectly obeyed his Obedience had been his Formal Righteousness in regard to the Law so is this Ours in regard to the Gospel The other Reason then of their denial is the Supposition that both Protestants and Papists have gone upon to wit that the Law is the Rule of that Righteousness which they on both sides contend for as the Formal Reason of their Justification And upon this Account they both of them are out for the Papist on one side speaks up for inherent Grace and his Works done by it so as he would have them Meritorious and Perfect for the Papist pleads for Merit and Perfection but he can never bring them up to answer the Law seeing he must still pray Enter not into Judgment and forgive us our Trespasses and therefore the Protestant denies that our Faith or Works are any Formal Righteousness that can justifie us and I say the same in the Sence they understand one another for our inchoate Obedience cannot be so when the Law is made the Rule of it On the other side the Protestant pleads therefore for Christ's Righteousness which is a Righteousness indeed that answers the Rule they both make so but this Righteousness being without us though it be upon the Account thereof Id propter quod or Cujus merito we are justified the Papist says stiffly it can never be made Formally Ours so as to be Id per quod we are justified and I must say the same for Truth is Truth and Absurdity is Absurd whether on one side or the other The Supposition then the Ground on which they go being a Mistake it must be rectified Let us understand therefore here that there is a double Rule a Rule of Life and a Rule of Judgment there is Norma Officii and Norma Judicii as I have it in my Pacification and although the Law of Works be the Rule of Life or Duty and being the Law of Nature it must abide so for ever yet Jesus Christ having perfectly obeyed it in our stead for the fleeing us from it in regard to its Condition it is relaxed as I shew there through Grace and the Gospel made the Rule of Judgment and consequently of that Righteousness which is the Formal Cause of our Justification Christ's Obedience was perfect according to Law but it is not by the Law that God pronounces the Believer righteous The Law is not of Faith and Righteousness cometh not by the Law If it be by the Gospel then not by the Law God pronounces a Man righteous it is not by the Righteousness of Christ imputed which is a Righteousness according to the Law but by the Evangelick Condition performed which is a Righteousness accordingly accepted through the Merit and Satisfaction of Christ that the Believer is justified Inter Protestantes certum est fidem etiam vivam non esse justitiam illam per quam coram severo Dei Judicio stamus says Le Blanc This is true I have just now acknowledged but I wonder that this very considerate Man should never come to understand that that severe Judgmen of God he speaks of is the Judgment of God according to the Law and that we stand not at that Judgment I acknowledge again that at that Judgment our inchoate inherent Grace is not any Formal Righteousness or the Justitia per quam we can stand there But there is a Paternal Judgment of God according to the Gospel and at this Judgment our Faith is the Righteousness Per quam or Formal Righteousness by which we are justified If here you will conceive of two Bars you must not conceive of them as before so as if after you are justified upon a Personal Righteousness you must come to another to be justified by Christ but you must conceive of the Bar of the Law as erected first There was but two Persons ever brought to that Bar and they were Adam and Christ where the one was condemned and the other justified They were both Publick Persons and as we all were condemned in Adam so are we all freed from that Condemnation by Christ but upon the Terms of the Gospel We are then as it were already passed the Bar of the Law in Christs answering there in our Persons for us and God will never call him to any move Account so that what Charge or Accusation soever may be raised thence they are all Terrors only as those or Children going in the dark when the Charge alone we are concerned in is the Charge of Non-performance of the Gospel Condition I know our Divines are still ready to state the Question between us and the Papists thus What is that when the Conscience is â—said under the Sence of Sin that we can oppose against the Wrath of God and rest upon for our Peace It is our own Righteousness Works or Merits or is it the Satisfaction of Christ But this is partial and wide there is no Man but will answer streight to the Question and say Christ's Satisfaction It is that we all know that did or could appease God's Justice And this we all know too that we are so far from doing this our selves by our Works or Merits that Christ hath done it without our doing any thing at all towards it It was wholly of Free Grace and there can be no doubt or fear upon the Conscience in regard to that This is therefore not the Question but the Satisfaction of Christ and our Redemption by it presupposed and so a General Pardon proceding Justification already obtained which being Conditional the Question only is whether it be not by performing the Condition that we are justified to make that Pardon absolutely Ours or to have Christ's Righteousness or Satisfaction made so as to that Effect which can be ours no otherwise but Quoad fructus out effectus only This indeed is the Question between some of Ours and the Papists the more is the pity but the Question as to the terrified Christian himself can be only whether the Condition be performed If that be so the Danger is all over If you will ask further What we must rest upon and trust to here in this Case I say to the Satisfaction and Merits of Christ upon the Performance Tho' we trust not our Duty we must trust on God in Duty and I have no apprehensive fear about resting in Duty but this least we sit down short of Sincerity It is by the Performance through Christ's Satisfaction the Believer is justified There is yet