How much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God to purge your Conscience from dead works to serve the living God And for this cause he is the Mediatour of the New Testament that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first Testament they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance Heb. 7. 25. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the utmost that come unto God by him seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them But it may further be said for I shall deal fairly and let him have what advantage upon the point he can He speaks only of the righteousness of both natures united in Christ and intends this is not imputed I Answer there cannot be the imputation of the active and passive obedience of Christ in his sense without the Imputation of this for consider we his obedience in Life and Death as the obedience of one who is not God Man united and so essentially infinitely righteous as God and perfectly in his nature righteous as Man that obedience could not be the obedience of Christ but if we consider his obedience in Life and Death as the obedience of one who is God Man united in one Person and so essentially infinitely righteous as God and perfectly in his nature righteous as Man then if it be imputed in this Man's sense it must be imputed as the obedience of such an one and how can the righteousness which constituted him a â—it Mediatour not be imputed when the acts as they are the acts of such a Person a Person so and so qualified are imputed And were Christ's acts any further satisfactory and meritorious than they were the acts of such a Person as he was If not then take away that which qualified and made him meet to be a Mediatour and see then if his acts in obeying and suffering can be satisfactory and meritorious and if the Persons have satisfactory and meritorious acts imputed unto them in this Man s sense then that which makes them such they must also have imputed And if they say they have not the righteousness of Christ as satisfactory and meritorious imputed then they must not have it imputed at all and consequently deny all imputation of Christ's Righteousness in any sense which I do not for as I have said above if we could take away from Christ's Righteousness which we cannot it 's satisfaction and Merit that which remains with respect to our Justification and Salvation will be none of his But further saith he it is the acts works doings and obedience of this blessed Mediatour that are imputed and counted to the Elect for their justifying Righteousness Mark if God do impute or count the very acts works doings and obedience of the Mediatour to the Elect for their justifying Righteousness or as he saith in this his Article to be the material and formal cause of their Justification then God must account them to have that Righteousness which in its own nature is a Mediatory Righteousness for such were Christ's acts as Mediatour to be their personal justifying Righteousness Now if any Man be accounted formally righteous in his own Person with that Righteousness which in its own nature is Mediatory then he must be counted to be righteous personally with such a Righteousness as is satisfactory and meritorious after an infinite sort and if he be one that is personally righteous with a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness and this of an infinite value for such was and is Christ's then how should he chuse but be Godded with God and Christed with Christ and be accounted to have that whereby he may be a Redeemer Saviour anâ— Mediatour both for himself and others yea to have Christ's Office wholly put into his hand now I have so much charity for this Man though he be my professed Adversary and for others that have the like notions with him as to believe that they do neither hold nor intend these consequences which are so gross but they themselves lead me by their hot opposition to shew that these are the unavoidable consequences of such a Doctrine if peradventure they may be convinced It is out of doubt with me that many good and gracious Persons have imbibed and stuck to this notion of the strict Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in it self who yet have abhorred the consequences that have been natural therefrom But then their practice hath ever contradicted this notion and hereby they were kept in the way of safety But then I think it somewhat dangerous when God hath set up before Persons more clear light and yet they are so hot in their opposition as that they will not take time to consider whether it be light from the word or no but almost upon the first hearing or upon a very slight trial cry out Popery Quakerism Arminianism Socinianism and what not Suppose we now that such as pass under any of these names do hold this or the truth what must it be a sufficient Argument for me to relinquish that truth because they hold it for my part I do profess to the World let Men think and say what they please that I am for Catholick truth that is truth where-ever or in whomsoever shall be owned by me so far as I can have evidence for the Devil himself believes that there is a great dreadful and terrible God and I believe the same and am certain in that I do well James 2. 19. And I must not therefore because the Devil believes this turn Atheist But after these Men have done what they can they can never make that they oppose into what they fain I am afraid would 13. I believe â—aith he that by this obediential Righteousness of Christ all the Elect of God are or shall be freely justified from all things Acts 1â— 39. for it is by the obedience of one and not by the Faith and Obedience of many that many are justified and made righteous Râ—m 5. 19. Observe the Scripture Acts 13. 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that believe are justified and he saith all the Elâ—ct 〈◊〉 seems he likes not this Scripture expression his Wisdom thinks another better and therefore for all that believe he puts in all the Elect perhaps he is for Justification before Faith and so thinks Elect a term more agreeing to his purpose than believe and he thinks not far amiss if that be his notion but then it might be asked from whence he had his dispensation for such a change I believe according to that Scripture Acts 13. 39. that by Christ and his satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness all that truly believe are justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses i. e. according to the Covenant of Grace have a right to Christ Pardon and Life purchased by him and also I believe the truth of that Text Rom. 5. 19. that
I Answer Luther in Galat. 3. 6. saith Christian Righteousness is an affiance or faith in the Son of God which affiance is imputed unto Righteousness for Christ's sake And in the same place not long after God for Christ's sake in whom I have begun to believe accounts this my imperfect faith for perfect Righteousness And in the 2d Cap. 16. saith he For the Righteousness of the Law a Man is not pronounced righteous before God but the Righteousness of Faith God imputeth freely through Grace for Christ's sake And a little after saith he wherefore God doth accept or account us righteous only for our Faith in Christ Calvin on Rom. 4. 3. saith Wherefore Abraham by believing doth only embrace the grace tendered unto him that it might not be in vain If this be imputed unto him for Righteousness it follows that he is no otherwise righteous but as trusting or relying upon the goodness of God he hath boldness to hope for all things from him Bucer on Rom. 4. 3. saith Abraham believed God and it was imputed unto him for Righteousness that is he accounted this faith or believing for Righteousness so that â—y believing he obtained this that God esteemed him a righteous Man Musculus on Galat. 3. 6. saith What did Abraham that should be imputed unto him for Righteousness but only this that he believed God But it may be said they make the Righteousness of Christ i. e. the Imputation of it the formal cause of our Justification As to this if some Men be guilty of self contradiction I am prone to think they did not intend it But now these worthy Men who say the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is the formal cause of our Justification if they mean only by God's Imputation that God doth account the Righteousness of Christ to be that and that only which hath the form of a Satisfactory and Meritorious Righteousness and so as such for which God justifies us upon believing then there is no contradiction And in the judgment of charity I think no more was intended notwithstanding their unwary expressions which many have made but a bad use of seeing that they have ever affirmed this Righteousness of Christ which they call by God's Imputation the formal cause of our Justification to answer for the violation of God's Holy Law satisfie God's Justice remove the curse of the Law due unto us Sinners purchase Pardon and Life and yet that none shall have in or an actual right unto Redemption from the curse special Reconciliation with God Pardon and Salvation but such as truly believe And therefore when they speak of being clothed with Christ's Righteousness as a robe and garment I would think they mean no more but that it is this which is the screen or sanctuary to secure all true penitent believers from the execution of the Laws curse or the wrath of God but then not this as it is the only Righteousness of their Persons but as it is the proper and only Righteousness of their Mediatour though the blessed benefits hereof as is plain redounds to their Persons And thus as it was for them to remove the great evil that was due and procure all saving good so it is as I have above expressed it the formal satisfactory Righteousness for their Persons by God's Imputation but then not the formal Righteousness of their Person 's by God's Imputation i. e. God doth for this Righteousness of Christ account them upon such a Faith as I have above described personally righteous in the sense of the Gospel and so to have interest in Christ and a right to Pardon and Life promised but then not personally righteous with it seeing as I have said it cannot in it self after any sort be communicated to Believers although it be in its fruits and benefits I think if this little which I have here inserted was but well considered and our old Divines thus understood the difference would not be great betwixt them and those that are called new upon the matter But the holding ungrounded notions from the manner of expression keeps us far from an accommodation And if some Men will stick by such notions the consequences we have collected from the very nature of the thing whether we will or no devolve upon them though as to such as are practical Christians their practice as I have said must contradict such notions and agree with those very same I have laid down wherein through Christ is their safety though yet holding such notions from whence such consequences flow I know from mine own experience they must be attended with confusion and act but in the dark while yet they may think they have the greatest light for whatsoever the notions of a true practical Holy Christian are yet I am certain he dares not conclude his interest in or right unto Christ Pardon and Life purchased by him any further than he hath ground of hope that he is a true penitent sincere obedient Believer And sure I am when he pleads with God for Pardon Grace and Acceptation he dares not plead as the Merit of this any Righteousness upon himself or wherewith he is formally personally righteous with Christ's Righteousness yet he dare not plead this no but only the Righteousness of the Mediatour Jesus Christ without him as the merit of Pardon Grace and acceptation and this includes the whole that can come within a Christians practice upon this matter I dare appeal to any practical Christian herein And though this be that I hold in this point yet saith this Man if this opinion prevail both Law and Gospel is overthrown truth and saving light extinguished and we lose our Crown and that which we have laboured for This as much as if he had said that which must and will be found in every true and real Christian's practice if this prevail both Law and Gospel is overthrown c. And not having done enough he adds and many Holy Men of God lose that they have laboured for and lost their lives What a Man is this did he ever know or hear or read of any of the Holy Men of God who lost their lives for the opposing such notions the practice of which as Holy Men must unavoidably be found in their own practice Let him give me an instance any where at any time of any one Holy Man of God indeed or Woman that lost their lives and so suffered Martyrdom for opposing this Doctrine i. e. That true Faith unites to Christ gives interest in him and so through and for him an actual right to Pardon and Life and that no true Christian dare conclude that he hath this union interest and right any further than he hath ground of hope that he is a true penitent sincere obedient Believer and that he dare not plead any Righteousness that is in him or upon him as the merit of Pardon Grace and Acceptation but only the Righteousness of Christ the Mediatour without him I say let
and the inferences must be shewn or else when Persons call them absurd they understand not what they say Dans formam dat consequentia formam And hath it not been generally affirmed That the Righteousness of Christ considered as Mediatour is made the Believers by Imputation as really as if it had been wrought and performed by them and it being the sole matter of their Justification they are made formally righteous hereupon by God's Imputation who knows not that hath read any thing almost that the active and passive obedience of Christ by the most that have been accounted Orthodox hath been made the material and God's Imputation the formal cause of our Justification And yet some have made a challenge saying Where did any of our Orthodox Writers ever assert or intend that we were justified by the very formal personal numerical intrinsick Righteousness of Christ Whoever imagined that the Righteousness of Christ by Imputation is made ours according to its universal value but according to our particular necessity I Answer Certainly tell I cannot who these Persons mean by Orthodox Writers but this I know that many of those Holy Men of God whose works are extant and who were very Orthodox in their Lives and in the most of things in their judgment also yet held as much in this point of Justification as what is in the challenge comes to Mary saith Mr. Norton in his Orthodox Evangelist under the Cross was more just imputatively than Christ which was also true of every believer then living If Adam's peace had been perfect in case of his fulfilling all Righteousness then the Believer's Peace is perfect who hath fulfilled all Righteousness in his surety Page 324. In Justification saith Mr. Tho. Vincent we are not only acquitted from guilt but accepted as perfectly righteous in God's sight through the Imputation of Christ's perfect righteousness Supplement to the Morning Exercise Page 716. Having spoken of Pardon the other part of our Justification saith Downham is that whereby God imputeth unto every believer the righteousness of the Mediatour Jesus Christ as if it were properly their own and performed by them that being clothed therewith they may be perfectly righteous in God's sight and so obtain right unto everlasting life and happiness Christian Warfare Lib. 2. Cap. 50. Pag. 271. But it is needless to take up time or fill up Paper in quoting Authors Dr. Manton might have served for all whom I account as moderate a Man as any that dissent yet hear what he saith upon Hebr. 11. 4. Being united to Christ we are interested in all his actions as if they were ours for when we are one with him in the Spirit we are considered by God to be one with him in Law therefore by union we are said to put on Christ with all his personal merits and righteousness upon this God looks upon us as righteous and this by the donation and application of Christ's Righteousness and this righteousness must be in justification and is such a righteousness as satisfies God's justice and the Law Now upon the matter I ask can God look upon us as righteous and this by the donation and application of Christ's Righteousness which is such a Righteousness as satisfies God's justice and the Law and put us on upon union with Christ with all his personal Merits and Righteousness and yet we not have the very formal personal numerical intrinsick Righteousness of Christ What is not a satisfactory and meritorious Righteonsness the very essential formal and numerical Righteousness of Christ's Person as Mediator And is not this affirmed to be imputed in it self in our Justification and to be in it self our personal justifying Righteousness If not why am I and some others so much opposed for the denying of it and holding that it is only imputed unto us in its fruit and effects If they affirm it is imputed or accounted by God to be in it self our personal justifying Righteousness then I ask how can it be accounted ours in it self for our Justification and not be one and the same essential formal and personal Righteousness of Christ as Mediator can that be the Righteousness of Christ in it self that is not one and the same essential formal Righteousness which is Christ If so then we may say idem non idem the self same and not the self same which is manifestly absured and contradictory And whereas it is said further whoever imagined that the Righteousness of Christ by Imputation is made ours according to its universal value I Answer he that says the Righteousness of Christ is imputed in it self and not only in its blessed effects how can it be it self and want its full value let any Man find me that can a Righteousness of Christ as Mediatour that is not satisfactory to infinite justice and meritorious of all good and is not here its full value take away as I have said above it 's satisfactory and meritorious property from Christ's Righteousness as Mediatour which is its value and see then if that which remains can be the Righteousness of Christ I am afraid if some men were left to act according to their own notions it would be an odd sort of a Righteousness they would make at last to be their justifying Righteousness for according to what they say it cannot be Christ's and Faith it must not be and what then must it be it is well if they know themselves for sure I am I do not And what can a Man think of that which remains which is that the Righteousness of Christ is made ours by Imputation according to our particular necessities But that in the opinion of these Persons God doth divide and parcel out Christ's Righteousness one part to this and another part to that Believer and that some have need of more and some of less of it and is this God's manner of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness According to these Men it is but I say it is not and for any to assert such a thing is grosly absurd Indeed I had like to have said this is a notion but of yesterdays coining but I find the substance both of this latter and the former part of that I have now spoken to by Mr. Burgess in his Book called Vindiciae Legis Pag. 135. As for me I say I must either have interest in and a right unto the whole of Christ's Righteousness or I am undone for no less than the whole will satisfie God's justice for any Soul or merit Pardon and Life for it And when I plead with God for Pardon Life and Acceptation I plead the whole and not a part only of Christ's meritorious and satisfactory Righteousness but then observe I plead it as it is properly Christ's as Mediatour and so in it self incommunicable though some Persons speak of its communication to us which in its blessed fruits I grant but in it self I deny For the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in it self and against the
by the obedience of one i. e. the Obedience of Christ many shall be made righteous but this not by accounting the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ to be the formal Righteousness of their Persons for this is proper to him as Mediatour and cannot be appropriated to them But by this i. e. for the sake of this Righteousness of Christ all those that by Faith accept him shall by the Covenant of Grace be accounted Righteous or their Faith shall be accepted for Righteousness Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his Faith is counted for Righteousness And whereas he adds in this Article for it is by the Obedience of one and not by the Faith and Obedience of many that many are justified that is a meer jumble for who saith that it is by the Faith and Obedience of many that others are justified And who saith that any are justified without the Obedience of that one i. e. Christ giving that its proper place and office which is to be a meritorious Righteousness And whereas they themselves make Christ's Righteousness to be the meritorious cause of our Justification and yet after that make it the material cause or that with which we are personally righteous they themselves affirm hereby that justified Persons are righteous in the sense of the Law and in God's account with the meritorious Righteousness of Christ and how Persons can in God's account have a meritorious Righteousness with which they themselves are in Law-sense righteous and yet be wholly stripped of that in their own Persons that will merit is a great Paradox for Christ's Righteousness is denominated meritorious from its inseperable property merit as he is our Mediatour 14. I believe saith he that this Obedience and Righteousness of Christ imputed is as able powerful and certain for the Justification of the Elect as the Disobedience and Sin of Adam was for the condemnation of him and his posterity It may be doubted whether this Man do believe that those he calls the Elect were of Adam's posterity seeing that he opposeth them in this Article and touching Adam's Disobedience and Sin which he calls his ability and power implicit for the condemnation of him and his posterity alas it was his moral impotency if he had said it was that which merited procured the condemnation of him and his posterity as they derived a guilty and corrupt nature from him it had been more like and near the truth And thus I grant that Christ's Righteousness had infinitely more merit in it to procure Justification for Sinners upon their believing than Adam's Sin had merit to procure his own or his posterities condemnation 15. I believe saith he that Jesus Christ by his Death Blood Merits Righteousness and obedience hath purchased bought and redeemed his Elect Church and People but that he obeyed and died to procure and purchase a new Law or Covenant with terms and conditions to be performed by them to give them a right and title to Justification I see no ground as yet to believe Indeed I believe him such a stranger belike is he to the blessed Covenant of Grace and yet for sure he looks upon himself to be a Gospel Preacher if there be one in the World In this Article further he wants my proof that there is a Law or Covenant of Grace with terms and Conditions to be performed by Souls to give them a right and title to Justification and this purchased by Christ That I have already done as he may find above and if it would do him any good I should be glad of it 16. I believe saith he that the satisfaction made by Christ to the Law and Justice of God gives the Elect a right to Justification and Life in way of title and that the Adult by Faith receive and enjoy that right That Christ gave full-satisfaction to an offended God I grant but then that that satisfaction consisted in Christ's suffering the same in kind which was due to us transgressors by the Laws threat which I suppose is that which he aims at this I deny and have shewed above it cannot be I believe that Christ hath undoubtedly purchased a right to Pardon and Life which is Justification by his satisfaction and merit for all those the Father hath given him But then that any of these I speak of the Adult have an actual interest in him or right and title to Pardon and Life so long as impenitent unbelievers this I deny seeing so long as they remain such they are in a perishing condemned state Luke 13. 3. I tell you Nay but except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish John 3. 18. He that believeth on him is not condemned but he that believeth not is condemned already because he hath not believed in the Name of the only begotten Son of God And is it like Persons should have an actual interest in Christ and an actual right and title to Pardon and Life by the Gospel so long as they are in a perishing condemned state in the account of the Gospel And then further saith he the Adult by Faith receive and enjoy this right I say the Adult receive Christ which receiving is not Physical but Moral which consists in a sincere consent to take Christ to be their Propitiation Head and Teacher and by this consent which is Faith they are united to Christ and have an actual right hereupon to the great priviledge of Adoption which includes Pardon and Life John 1. 12. But as many as received him to them gave he power or the right of priviledge or the priviledge of right to become the Sons of God and this right is continued by our yielding that subjection through Grace to Christ which we promised in our first consent or when we first did consent to be his Servants Revel 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life and may enter in through the gates into the City 17. I believe saith he that all those thus elected and chosen and by the Father given to Christ redeemed c. are in God's appointed time the day of his power effectually called from a state of nature sin and death to a state of Faith Grace Justification and life and that all those who live and die in infidelity being Adult shall as certainly be damned as though they were in Hell already Mark Reader how he hath confirmed by thus much what I have said above But then saith he that any of the Elect being Adult shall live and die Infidels such an one speaking of me quoth he hath not yet proved That many of the Elect do live many years in Infidelity is out of doubt with me But that any of them shall die Infidels this I never said nor thought for saith Christ John 6. 37. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me and him that cometh to me I will no wise
THE TRUE NOTION OF Imputed Righteousness AND OUR Justification thereby BEING A supply of what is lacking in the late Book of that most Learned Person Bishop Stillingfleet which is a Discourse for Reconciling the Dissenting Parties in London but dying before he had finished the two last and most desired Chapters thereof he hath left this main point therein Intended without Determination By the Reverend M. S. a Countrey Minister But now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Even the righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all that believe for there is no difference For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus Rom. 3. 21 22 23 24. LONDON Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns near Mercers-Chappel in Cheapside 1700. THE EPISTLE TO THE READER Courteous Reader THese Sheets were sent from an humble and modest and therefore the more considerate Minister of the Country to a Minister in London to be printed as he thought meet They came up without any Title at all to them and without any Partition and the Title therefore and the Sections are put to them by another when they came hither It is like that the Author never saw nor heard of this late Book of the Bishop seeing few that see it and read it but are displeased and they may well be so with that Person or Persons whosoever they be who were entrusted with his Papers that they should give an unfinished Discourse to the Bookseller or Printer who for their part yet cannot be faulted for accepting their profit to be published to the great disappointment of so many as expected satisfaction from such a hand The truth is they have herein dealt with the Bishop's Book as Hanun dealt with David's Servants they have sent the poor thing out with the garments as it were cut off in the middle and thereby as it needs must be greatly ashamed If for the covering this nakedness now we should have made use of any present clouts that were at hand though we had no such rich attire for it as himself would have put on it we might be excused But seeing the Cloathing we bring is for being home-spun and Countrey made the more substantial it may not only be excused but accepted as like to serve the purpose better then if it were finer in regard to such for whom intentionally the sheets were written By one who was desired to peruse the Manuscript but unknown to the Author THE AUTHOR TO THE READER Readers HAving done my Book there is one thing you are to understand or I am farther to acquaint you with that whereas my Adversaries charge me with contradicting our Reformers and being one with the Papists they cannot make good the charge and therefore 't is a slander For our Reformers what they writ upon the point was against the Papists who contended for Justification by inherent Grace and good Works as a Conformity to the violated Law i. e. the Law of Innocency and also that this Righteousness was in its own Nature Meritorious of Justification and Salvation but here or in this I do as much oppose the Papists as our Reformers and so am one with them in this respect in the point so far am I from contradicting them So that if the Persons my resolved Adversaries will have me to be one with the Papists and against our Reformers when I affirm that Faith in Christ is the qualifying though not the meriting matter of our Justification or that which is the Qualification giving right to Christ and his purchased saving benefits which follow hereupon they must prove that it is so accounted by me as it is a Conformity to that Law which requires sinless perfect Works and condemns for non-performance of the same and also to be meritorious of Life according to that Law or else all they say contradicts not me and if not then all their noise is but a beating the Air and so to no purpose seeing they are quite off from the matter in question The Papists affirm that the Law of God may be perfectly kept in this Life and that they intend the Law injoining perfect sinless Works is manifest seeing that our Protestants in opposition assert that no mortal Man is able to keep the Law of God perfectly in this Life and that it is no way possible to keep the same perfectly for if Man by Grace as the Papists say might perform the Law he might deliver himself by Grace from the Curse but now are we redeemed from the Curse only by Christ who was made a Curse for us and again say they if the Righteous Man keep the Law then he is without Sin for where there is no transgression of the Law there is no Sin but no Man is without Sin so that the opinion of the Papists upon the point is that the uniea formalis causa Justificationis est justitia Dei qua nos justos facit quam quisque in se recipit i. e. The only formal cause of our Justification is the Righteousness of God whereby we are not reputed just but are made just indeed This is the Righteousness which a Man hath within himself and is inherent in him and this justice or Righteousness it is plain they account an exact Conformity to the Law which requires perfect sinless Works for they teach that it is not only possible for Men to keep the Law of God in this Life but to do more than is prescribed or commanded in that Men of their abundance may allot unto others such works of supererogation These therefore who bring me into such worthy company as Mr. Baxter Mr. Humfrey Mr. Clerk whom they charge with Popery as they do me in the Doctrine of Justification because they affirm a practical Faith to be the qualifying matter of right to Christ and his saving purchased benefits which follow thereupon when every where they deny it to be the meriting matter asserting that to be Christ's Righteousness and his only do manifestly wrong and slander them and me for before our Adversaries can make us one with the Papists upon the matter in Question i e. in the point of Justification they have to prove that we hold these following things 1. That a Man in this Life by the Grace of God received may be perfectly conform'd to that Law which requires sinless Works 2. That Grace and good Works in their own nature considered as inherent do justifie 3. That they do so in the account of the above mentioned Law which injoins sinless Works 4. That the same Law which requires sinless Works is the Instrument of our Justification or that by which God doth judge or account Persons righteous upon their Conformity thereunto and so justifies them by it Now these things are so far from being holden
by us as that we oppose them more than any of our Adversaries who account themselves such great Antipapists yea and are further of from the Papists herein than they for upon the principles our Adversaries go in the point it cannot be avoided but they make that Law which injoins perfect sinless Works which as such condemns us all to be God's Instrument whereby he justifies seeing that they say the matter of their personal justifying Righteousness not only meriting but qualifying or else they oppose not us observe that must be that which is every way perfect in the sense of the violated Law of Innocency And indeed were we to be justified by that Law we must say the same with them So that let any Man who is not altogether prejudiced against the cause judge whether those Men be not much nearer the Papists in this point than such as they charge to be one with them for the Reverend Persons named above and others with them proceed in this point upon another Principle then either the Papists or such as profess to be their Adversaries holding God's Covenant or Law of Grace to be the rule of judgment and so the Instrument by which God doth justifie us or that by which God doth justifie for the sake of Christ's satisfactory and meritoriorious Righteousness when by the Grace of God we are conformed thereunto which Conformity consists in a turn from Sin and an unfeigned consent sincerely to be Obedient unto Christ and his Law to our Lives end upon which God doth account or reckon us Righteous in the sense of the Gospel and so such who have that right unto and interest in Christ which impenitent and disobedient Souls have not and this for the Righteousness sake of Christ as I have sufficiently proved And whereas Readers some Persons would bear you in hand that we give Repentance and Faith the place Office and use of Christ's Righteousness and look to be justified only by this as inherent 't is either an Ignorant or Malicious slander for we say that although the Lord Jesus hath satisfied offended Justice and merited all saving priviledges yet we can neither have peace with God nor right to Christ nor his purchased benefits nor be accepted of God through Christ until we be qualified with that Grace the Gospel requires which Grace doth not give us the right in its own Nature or as it is inherent but as God accounts and reckons it to do so that is as he imputes it for Righteousness The Papists place Justification in the Infusion We in the Imputation Whatever you hear therefore from Adversaries or read in any Books that is or shall be an indeavour to prove these forementioned Persons or others of their mind to be one with the Papists in the point of Justification you may assure your selves 't is nothing but a slander and the slanderers are nearer themselves in the point to the Papists until they have fully proved that we whom they abuse do hold the four particulars I have mentioned above which I am sure they cannot do so long as they have a Tongue to speak with and if they cannot all their attempts against us are in vain and not to be regarded for if they do not this they do nothing to invalidate our Doctrine and therefore I desire you Readers to observe this that if any Answer be made to mine that you will see whether in the pretended Answer it be proved that I hold the four things above mentioned and if you find they prove not that which they are not like you may assure your selves their Answer is none M. S. An Advertisement WHereas the Author of this Book seems warm against the Righteousness of Christ being the formal cause of our Justification and argues that if it be so then it must be the Believer's proper personal Righteousness which those Divines who say that Christ and the Believer do so coaless into one Person that his Righteousness is transferred to them upon that account must assert and if it be his personal Righteousness his Person being not seperable from his Nature which is himself then he must be the subject of Christ's Righteousness and consequently it must be inherent in him as the subject thereof the candid Reader is to observe First That he drives the Argument thus home for conviction only of his Adversaries who know that Imputed and Inherent is a Contradiction Secondly That he understands well they need no driving to a concession that his Righteousness therefore is not and cannot be the Believer's Physically but they say Legally only and by Imputation nevertheless so long as they say it is imputed so as to be his formal Righteousness the Absurdity remains Thirdly That to hold Christ's Righteousness to be the Believer's or accounted his legally or in a Law-sense so as God looks on him as having fulfilled all Righteousness in Christ as our legal Person is that Doctrine which Mr. Baxter hath set himself to oppose in all his Books as such which subverts the Gospel and he that will go about to maintain it must Answer his Arguments which I suppose cannot be done by any Lastly That if the more Judicious of his Adversaries would consider a little more of the matter and come to be content with such an Imputation of Christ's Obedience as answers the End of his performance of it which is that upon our believing Men shall enjoy the benefits then would they soon find out the right knowledge how to give a fair construction of what is said by former Divines who agreeing in this that there is indeed an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to the Believers but because it is not express in Scripture they not considering or mentioning any such distinction are misconstrued to understand an Imputation in se when there is indeed or can be no such but Quoad fructus aut Effectus only By the Hand unknown aforesaid THE TRUE NOTION OF Imputed Righteousness AND OUR Justification thereby c. SECT I. The Subject Matter proposed SEeing the apprehensions of Persons are so different about the Doctrine and Nature of Justification and so much depends upon the having a right notion hereof At the intreaty of some of my Friends for their satisfaction and for the benefit of others I shall God assisting with all possible plainness declare my Sentiments in this particular 1. I do believe that by and through the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of our Redeemer the Lord Jesus Christ a Covenant of Grace hath been purchased for and granted by God unto sinners after they by their sin had violated or broken that Law which injoined perfect sinless works and thereby made themselves incapable of performing obedience to that Law which at the first it required as a condition of life and so of having Justification thereby Heb. 12. 24. Christ is called the Mediatour of the new Covenant and that because he hath purchased by his death a grant of pardon and life by
are we If it be said not in our selves but in Christ we are I answer if not in our selves then we are not nor cannot be personally righteous or righteous in our own persons by a perfect legal righteousness and so according to your grant the righteousness of Christ is not nor cannot be our formal personal righteousness seeing that that is a perfect legal righteousness If it be said we are personally righteous in the sense of the Law of Innocency in Christ then we must be righteous in our selves and this contradicts the former that we are not thus righteous in our selves for how can a Man be righteous in his person but he must be righteous in himself Find me who can the person of a Man without the nature of a Man and further to say we are perfectly legally righteous in another suppose by imputation or in God's account in our own Persons is to say that God accounts us to he perfectly legally righteous in our selves â— for so he must if he account us thus righteous in our own Persons and not to be perfectly legally righteous in our selves because only so in another and not in our selves and does this become the infiniâ—â— wise God of Truth Now then if Justification be a Law act or the act of God as Legislator by his Law and it is not nor cannot be the act of God by the Law of Innocency then we must either have another Law and such a righteousness as is a conformity to that Law or else we must have no Justification And look what Law it is conformity to which gives us for the sake of Christ a right to Pardon and Life that conformity must be our justifying righteousness and God by this Law doth judge assert or account which is all one with â—mpâ—tation that we have a right for Christ's Merits sake to the priviledges above mentioned what Law now can this be but the Law of Grace the Gospâ—â— called the Law of Faith because it commands Faith and threatens damnation in case of unbelief and promises â—or Christ's sake Pardon and Life upon believing Johâ— â— 16. This Faith is a practical Faith and so includes the whole of what the Gospel commands and consequently repentance and sincere obedience to 〈…〉 of the Moral Law Isa 55. 3. for I am for from thinking that a notional Faith is a 〈…〉 â—â—ne manifest it is that God by his Law 〈…〉 justifies us for the â—â—isfaction and merits of Christ upon conformity hereunto and this conformity in our personal righteousness or that which gives us right by this Law to the benefits respecting eternal Salvation which Christ hath purchased and thus it must be unless Persons will say and prove that to justifie is not to have a right in Law and then Justification must not be a Law act if it be granted it is then this right must be a righteousness and the righteousness of our persons as we through God's Grace in our own persons do yield conformity to it But some may say it must 〈◊〉 sinless perfect righteousness which must justifie us but Faith is no such righteousness This Objection speaks great Ignorance in the Objectors 1. Of the nature of the two Covenants i. e. the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace and 2. Of the nature of Justification or justifying righteousness as it is jus secundum legem a right in Law But to the Objection I Answer If you speak of Justification by the Law of Works I grant it must be such a righteousness but what do you hope to be justified by that Law if so you must not be offended if I tell you in the words of the Apostle you are fallen from grace Galat. 5. 4. But if you speak of Justification by the Gospel which is the Justification I plead for and I hope shall ever stand by then such a righteousness is not required but faith is that righteousness as hath been proved though still this faith is neither accounted nor accepted for a justifying righteousness but for the sake of a sinless perfect righteousness that is to say the righteousness of Christ God man Mediatour Rom. 3. 24 25 26. But it may be further said faith is our own righteousness and if we be justified by faith we must be justified by our own righteousness I Answer that we are justified by faith relatively or as it respects Christ as the Object the Scripture is express and full for it Rom. 3. 30. Gal. 3. 8. Rom. 3. 28. Rom. 5. 1. Galat. 2. 16. Acts 13. 39. let any Man prove that in these Scriptures faith is not intended but only its object But further for Answer if by our own righteousness be meant such a righteousness of which we are the Efficient Causes or Authors or the purchasing meritorious Cause I deny that faith is our own righteousness but if by our own righteousness be meant such a righteousness as is the gift of God and the fruit of Christ's Merits and of which we as qualified Subjects are the performers so I grant faith is our own righteousness and though we are justified by it yet we are justified freely by Grace Rom. 4. 16. Ephes 2. 8. But the Objection may be retorted when it is said Christ's righteousness in its self or in its own nature in our Justification is by God accounted our very â—ormal personal righteousness doth not God so far as he accounts it make it ours if not then we have no propriety at all in it and if not how can it then be our very formal personal justifying righteousness if he do make it ours in this imputation then it must be ours by gift and what is ours by gift must be our own So that those who are for this strict imputation of Christ's righteousness must hold also Justification by their own righteousness or by a righteousness which by God is accounted their own But again it may be said if we be justified by faith we must be justified by an inherent righteousness and we are not I Answer if God's imputing or accounting by his Law or Covenant of Grace faith for righteousness which is the form of Justification be Justification by inherent righteousness then God's imputing Christ's righteousness unto us for Justification must be justifying us also by an inherent righteousness for the form is the same in both and if it be the form that makes the justifying righteousness inherent then justifying righteousness must be inherent in the one as well as the other But the form speaks that Justification is not by Faith absolutely inhering But if it be said further that Christ is the subject of that righteousness which is our formal personal justifying righteousness but we are the subjects of Faith I Answer if the righteousness of Christ be our formal personal righteousness then whatever Christ be we must however be the subjects of this righteousness and if so it must be our inherent as well as our imputed righteousness Thus then
consequences as is plain from the 15th and 16th Verses This may be enough to convince any Person that hath not drunk in a fixed prejudice that their cause must be very weak who are put for the vindication of it so manifestly to pervert the Sense of Scripture as that a Child of an indifferent capacity who can but read may with a very little ado understand it 11. Another Text is in Matt. 22. 11 12 13. concerning the Man which had not on the wedding garment This Wedding garment say they is the righteousness of Christ I shall give here the Sense of the Reverend Dr. Manton upon this In a Sermon upon this Text he puts the Question what this Wedding garment is To find out this let me tell you saith he First That it is usual in Scripture to set forth Sin by nakedness and Grace by a garment that one place which we have in Revel 3. 17 18. sheweth both thou art wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked Therefore I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire that thou mayest be rich and white raiment that thou mayest be clothed and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear Graces are a beautiful ornament to the Soul as garments are to the Body therefore we are said to put on the new Man which is created in holiness and righteousness Ephes 4. 24. And again to put on as the elect of God holy and beloved bowels of mercies kindness humbleness of mind meekness long suffering Coloss 3. 12. It is such a garment as becometh the solemnity of the Marriage feast of the King's Son Christ's Gospel-feast is a Royal feast and a Spiritual feast becoming the nature of God's Kingdom Therefore the â—â—NRâ—â— the Wedding garment is that new array which becometh such a solemaity As 't is a Royal feast it must be something more than ordinary excellency that is required of us at a Spiritual feast a Spiritual excellency Therefore the Wedding garment is holiness habitual and actual which is the glory of God and the beauty of God and his People Habitual holiness Revel 19. 8. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linnen clean and white for the fine linnen is the righteousness of Saints â—â—NRâ—â— the righteousness of Saints these are those graces which constitute us Saints By the way Observe how far this Reverend Author was from thinking that which is here called the righteousness of Saints to be the righteousness of Christ as some have taken it and Mr. Hildersham among the rest And then saith he actual holiness is an holy conversation Philip. 1. 27. Only let your conversation be as it becometh the Gospel of Christ Ephes 4. 1. I therefore beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called We put on the Wedding garment to honour the Marriage Therefore those that come to the Wedding feast without a Wedding garment who take up a bare profession of the Gospel without newness of Heart and Life which may be an honour and ornament to it are a dishonour and disgrace rather unto it Thus far this Pious and Learned Author And let me add Christ and his righteousness together with the gracious priviledges of the Gospel are the feast now certainly the Wedding garment must not be the same thing with the feast 12. A Twelfth Text is in 2 Corinth 5. 21. For he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him The meaning is God made him who was an Innocent Person to be a Sin-offering or a Sacrifice for Sin that we for his satisfactory and meritorious righteousness might be made and accounted righteous according to the Covenant of Grace by Faith in him For observe that which is the meritorious cause of a thing the thing of which it is the meritorious cause cannot be the same thing with that which merits it but the effect of it therefore plain it is the righteousness of God here spoken of must be the effect of the meritorious righteousness of Christ or the thing merited by it and so cannot be the righteousness of Christ it self but a righteousness appointed by God hereupon which he will accept as the righteousness of our Persons for the righteousness sake of Christ instead of sinless perfect righteousness and that righteousness is no other but the righteousness of Faith which is a conformity to the Gospel Law which Faith as it is the Souls free consent to accept and take the Lord Jesus not only to be its Propitiation but also its head and teacher includes a real engagement sincerely to be obedient to all his commands and so to trust only and depend upon him in faithful Obedience for the gift of all necessary and saving good he hath purchased and God for his sake hath promised Hence we read of the obedience of Faith Rom. 16. 26. Rom. 4. 20 21. 13. Another Text is in 1 Corinth 1. 30. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption Because say they it is said that Christ is made righteousness unto us of God therefore Christ's righteousness in it self is imputed unto us by God I Answer if so be that it will follow that Christ's righteousness in it self is imputed unto us by God because he is made righteousness unto us of God then it must also follow that the Wisdom of Christ and the Holiness of Christ in themselves must be imputed unto us because he is said to be made of God unto us Wisdom and Sanctification for after what manner he is said to be made of God righteousness unto us after the same manner is he said to be made Wisdom and Sanctification c. Now if he be not made of God unto us Wisdom and Sanctification by this strict Imputation then neither righteousness in that Sense As Christ then by God is made over to all his People to be the Purchaser and Author of their Spiritual Wisdom and Holiness so is he also made over to them to be the Meriter and Efficient cause of that Gospel righteousness i. e. a practical Faith which God for his sake accepts instead of a legal perfect righteousness which the Law of sinless works injoins SECT IV. Reasons against the Imputation of Faith and for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness answered HAving spoken something to the principal Texts urged for the strict Imputation of Christ's righteousness and shewed that they can be no proof that Christ's righteousness is our formal personal righteousness let us now hear what in reason may yet be said against the Imputation of Faith 1. Say they Faith is no Righteousness and therefore cannot be imputed for righteousness I Answer If the Antecedent can be proved in that Sense in which faith is called righteousness the Consequent must be granted But know Conformity to the Law of
as to the material part of your Justification Whereas the Scripture saith we are justified by his blood i. e. his Blood must purchase and merit that which justifies as well as God's Imputation of it but will you say that Christ's Blood purchased and merited Christ's righteousness which you say is the very matter of Justification 3. Christ's righteousness only say they must be our justifying righteousness because Believers have union and communion with him This is no Argument we grant that all true Believers have union and communion with Christ but then it is affirmed generally this union is by Faith and communion of his part not by the communication of his righteousness which is proper to himself as Mediatour but by the communication of his Grace the fruit of his purchase by virtue of his righteousness the merit hereof 4. Christ's righteousness say they must be our only justifying righteousness because this was the end of his fulfilling the Law I Answer if they speak of Christ's Obedience to the Law of Innocency I grant he yielded perfect conformity to that Law both in habit and act But then that this was the end that his righteousness should be imputed unto us as our very formal personal righteousness remains to be proved for if they speak of Christ's active Obedience here it was an ingredient into the meritorious cause of our Redemption Reconciliation and Acceptation Galat. 4. 4 5. For when the fulness of the time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman made under the Law To redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the adoption of Sons Heb. 7. 26. For such an High Priest became us who is holy harmless undefiled seperate from sinners and made higher than the heavens And as such it cannot be imputed unto us as our personal righteousness as is manifest And there is this upon the matter I would have considered i. e. in God's justifying you doth he account the righteousness which you say is the very matter of yâ—â—r Justification to be Christs and his only or does he account it to be the righteousness of another if he account it to be his only then how doth he account it to be your personal righteousness If he account it to be the personal righteousness of another suppose of a Believer then how doth he account it to be Christs and his only That which is Christs and his only cannot be mine in it self that which is mine and the very formal righteousness of my Person cannot be Christs and his only because God must account it to be mine as well as Christs True indeed Grace is Christs and his only both as the purchaser Lord Treasurer and the great mean of conveyance but then Christ's righteousness which is proper to him is nor cannot be for communication to us as grace is seeing it is for satisfaction and so respects God immediately and for merit and so the grace of Justification Adoption c. must be the blessed fruits hereof We have upon Repentance and Faith Reconciliation and Peace with God for the satisfaction given to God but we have not that which made satisfaction we have likewise Justification Pardon and Life for his Merits if true penitent Believers but we have not that in it self which merited this Grace It is very strange that Persons should so much as think that that which was the satisfaction and merit should be given to them in it self and that God should account them such as satisfied God's Justice in Christ and merited Pardon and Life in Christ These Men they condemn the Papists for saying Christ merited that we might merit and yet cannot nor will not see that they are holding the same themselves in the strictest Sense True it is for Christ's satisfaction we have Peace and for his Merits we have Spirit and Grace But then to tell of our satisfying in Christ and meriting in Christ as though we might have Peace for our satisfying in him and Grace for our meriting in him 't is mighty gross I know here they will say they hold no such thing I Answer If â—en will hold that they either do not or will not understand what or who can help them But it would do well if they would consider that so long as they hold Christ and themselves to be one legal Person 't is not possible whatever their practice be they should hold any less in the notion 5. Christ's righteousness say they must be our only justifying righteousness because we are debtors to the Law both to perform perfect obedience and also to suffer punishment for the violation of it Now seeing say they we can do neither so as to make satisfaction and have Justification the righteousness of Christ in it self must be our personal justifying righteousness and so accounted by God I Answer Though we can neither by our Obedience nor suffering make Satisfaction and have Justification by the Law yet for Christ's Satisfaction and Obedience whereby the Justice of God is answered and the repute and credit of God's violated Law is kept up and the ends of God's governing Justice secured there is no obligation lying upon any Believer seeing a new Covenant is purchased to perform perfect Obedience nor can any true Believer be under obligation to suffer the punishment threatned by the violated Law seeing that such an one is actually delivered from the execution of the Curse by Christ's satisfactory righteousness Galat. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law being made a curse for us for it is written Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree Rom. 8. 1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit true soul uniting Faith to Christ giving him a right hereunto for Christ's sake and this God imputes unto them for righteousness according to the Law of Grace 6. Christ's righteousness say they must be our only justifying righteousness because Do this i. e. perfectly obey the Law and live is a fixed Rule but no Man can perfectly fulfill the Law of Innocency therefore Christ's righteousness must be so imputed by God that so in his account believers may be said to have done this i. e. perfectly fulfilled the Law that they may live It is manifest by this Argument the Objectors will have Justification by that Law which requires perfect sinless works But let them know do this according to that Law and live or be justified is not a fixed stated Rule to any Man upon Earth but believe and live for the sake of Christ John 3. 26. For God so loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life Mark 26. 26. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned Acts 26. 31. And they said Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt
all Men though in a special distinguishing sort of those that believe 12. I believe saith he that the obediential righteousness of Christ is by the act of God's free grace counted imputed and reckoned to the Elect as the material formal cause of their Justification in the sight of God and yet we are not Godded with God nor Christed with Christ as such an one saith mentioning me for I believe saith he that in Christ there is four sorts of righteousness three of which cannot without blasphemy be said to be imputed unto us First there is the righteousness of his Godhead Secondly Of his Manhood They are Essential to his two natures and cannot be imputed Thirdly The righteousness of both natures united together in one Person which is the righteousness that qualifies fits and makes him meet for the Work and Office of a Mediatour and is Essential to his Office as such and thus he is God's righteous Servant Jesus Christ the righteous a faithful High Priest Fourthly There is the righteousness of his obedience in his life and death to the holy and just Law of God and this is that righteousness which is imputed to sinners for Justification Now he hath led us into the clouds to purpose here is darkness and confusion with a witness yea and such as we have his own testimony for as will be manifest 1. He intimates the Elect are justified but whether as such only while in a state of impenitency and infidelity he tells us not If he intend they are while in that state then they must be justified and condemned at the same time for he that believes not is condemned already John 3. 18. 2. He saith that Christ's Righteousness is counted imputed and reckoned to the Elect as the material formal cause of their Justification and yet saith he we are not Godded with God and Christed with Christ I grant indeed neither he nor any other whoever they be are or ever shall be Goded with God or Christed with Christ but that this must be the consequence which is the thing I say if they hold the Doctrine of being formally personally Righteous with Christ's Righteousness this I have given reason for above Touching his distribution of Christ's Righteousness into four sorts his first and second sort supposeth that the humane nature of Christ did once exist seperate from the Divine seeing he saith the third sort is the righteousness of both natures united Now if the humane nature after it did exist never did exist but in Union with the Divine what ground can there be for this distinction First The Divine Righteousness Second The Humane Third The Righteousness of both Natures united I would know when and where they were disunited after the humane nature had once an existence I deny not that Christ's Righteousness as God is distinct from his Righteousness as Man as well as humane nature is distinct from the Divine though united in one and the same Person But this is that I desire to know when or where there was a Righteousness of both these natures considered as existing disunited If not to what purpose then is that which he calls his two first sorts of Christ's Righteousness I mean the distinction of his Righteousness into Divine and Humane from the Righteousness of both natures united And how can he make three sorts go we upon his own supposition for he saith there is the Righteousness of Christ as God and his Righteousness as Man and then the Righteousness of both natures united Now if he consider the natures as divided and if again as united He hath but still the Righteousness of the Divine and the Righteousness of the Humane nature which righteousness is but twofold where now is his third sort or where will he find it His fourth sort of Christ's Righteousness as he calls it is his obedience in Life and Death and this saith he is the Righteousness which is imputed Now as he makes this a fourth sort and so specifically distinct from the other then this obedience of Christ according to him must neither be his righteousness as Man nor his righteousness as God nor his righteousness as God and Man united for it is blasphemy quoth he to say that any of these sorts of Righteousness as he calls them are imputed and if Christ's Obedience in Life and Death be none of these what or whose Righteousness must it be it cannot according to what he saith be the Righteousness of our Lord Jesus for he is both God and Man and his Righteousness then must be the Righteousness of that Person who is both God and Man And if this Obedience in Life and Death which he saith is the Righteousness imputed be neither the Obedience of the Divine nor the Obedience of the Humane nature as he supposeth in seperation nor the Obedience of the Divine and Humane nature in union then it is manifest it cannot be Christ's according to his Doctrine Hath not this Man thinkest thou Reader run divisions to a pâ—rpose in Christ's Righteousness until he hath whoâ—ly cut off and cast away from him his active and passive Righteousness besides his dividing the Righteousness of his Divine and Humane nature which are but two into three Consider consider I beseech you you that are so stiff for such an Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as to be formally in your own Persons righteous with it what this Doctrine leads to shut not your Eyes against clear light The Lord make it a conviction unto you when you hear that Men will have the active and passive obedience of Christ to be that they are materially and formally righteous with and yet will not have this active and passive obedience to be either the righteousness of Christ as God or the righteousness of Christ as Man or the righteousness of Christ as God and Man and so to be none of Christ's Righteousness at all So that now according to this Man we must have a righteousness and a righteousness imputed for our Justification which is the active and passive obedience of some Person but whose I cannot tell seeing he excludes the righteousness of Christ as God Man Mediatour saying it cannot without blasphemy be said to be imputed to us and without doubt the active and passive obedience of Christ was a righteousness and the righteousness of Christ God Man Mediatour and such a righteousness as was Essential to his Office seeing he would not have been a Mediatour without it But some may say Christ's active and passive obedience was essential to the execution of his Office as Mediatour but not to the constitution I Answer yes to the constitution as an actual and perfect Mediatour so far as respected his undertaken work both upon Earth and now in Heaven Heb. 5. 8 9 Though he were a Son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered And being made perfect he became the Author of eternal Salvation unto all them that obey him Heb. 9. 14. 15.
God administers Grace in a way of Justice as he is faithful to his promise he hath made of Pardon and Life through Jesus Christ upon our obedience to the Gospel And if he would know what he justifies from and for what and upon what God tells him Acts 13. 38 39. Be it known unto you therefore men and brethren that through man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins And by him all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses And if he would know further how he is just in justifying him that believeth in Jesus I Answer Christ having yielded such a conformity as I have spoken of to the Law of Innocency for us in the account of the Lawgiver and satisfied the justice of God his glorious attributes are so much honoured and advanced and the repute of his violated Law kept up as that God can for and upon this meritorious and satisfactory Righteousness of Christ without any wrong to his Justice or any other his Attributes or injury to his Holy Law justifie the Sinner upon Faith in Christ or give him an actual right according to the Law of Grace to Pardon and Life And from what hath been said it is manifest he is faithful and just in forgiving of Sin when and where he doth forgive it and what God doth herein according to the explication I have given neither interferes with Law nor Justice Q. 3. What is the Rule of this righteousness of Faith which is the formal cause of our Justification he should have added by God's imputation for if it be a justifying righteousness it must be by some Rule not the Law of Innocency for it requires a perfect righteousness but faith is an imperfect one Then it is the new Law or Covenant that Christ hath purchased that must be the Rule well then I ask is an imperfect Rule the Rule of our justifying righteousness or doth the same justifie by that which is imperfect or doth this New Law justifie us with the allowed breaâ— of the Old how then is it a better Covenant or how is the Law given honoured thereby In this his 5th which he calls a Question he inquires first what is the Rule of this Righteousness of Faith which is the formal cause of our Justification I Answer the Gospel in which this Faith is commanded John 20. 31. But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his Name 1 John 3. 23. And this is his Commandment that we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another as he gave us Commandment And Obedience to the Gospel is this Righteousness of Faith But saith he this Faith is an imperfect Righteousness so it is if the Law of Innocency which injoins sinless perfect works be made the measure of it but not so if we bring it to the Gospel where it is commanded that accepts of sincere Obedience and such is the Obedience of Faith in all God's People for in them strict legal perfection cannot be found But to pass on this Man accounts the Gospel an imperfect Rule If compared with the Law of Innocent nature and what it requires I grant it but that it is so absolutely or in its own nature I deny seeing it contains the whole of that which God wills and requires to give us interest in Christ and a right to Eternal Salvation by way of direction or instruction Let him prove the Gospel to be insufficient here and then let him scoff at it as the Papists calling it an imperfect Rule If he judge that what God commands in order to Salvation be imperfect he must tell us what is wanting and so see if his wisdom can make up the defect In the mean time I shall hold that the Righteousness of Faith is perfect with relation to the Rule i. e. the Gospel which it is a conformity unto our Divines have ever distinguished of a Legal and Evangelical perfection but of this I have spoken more above And whereas he adds in scorn doth this New Law which I call the Gospel justifie us with an allowed breach of the Old I Answer God doth not allow of Sin so as to approve of it in any he being an infinite Holy God and Sin being so opposite to this his nature But I would have him know Christ having made satisfaction to justice God is pleased for the sake of this Blessed Redeemer and Mediatour in his abundant Grace and Mercy to Pardon the Sins of all sincere returners and accept of their sincere Obedience of Faith to the Gospel instead of strict Legal perfection God justifies not pardons not upon sincere Repentance and Faith without a satisfaction given to him as Lawgiver and when God insists upon satisfaction for the violation of his Holy Law and will not pardon any Sinner though a penitent Believer without this when then satisfaction is given and accepted if God hereupon according to the Gospel justifie and pardon a penitent and believing Sinner as such doth he by this justifie and pardon with the allowed breach of his Law If so this is as much as to say God allows of Sin when for the sake of Christ he justifies and pardons any Sinner upon sincere Faith and Repentance How the Lawgiver is honoured though he justifie by â—he Covenant or Law of Grace upon a true Faith I have elswhere shewed Q 6. Seeing Faith must be our formal justifying Righteousness then I ask saith he what degree or how many acts of Faith are required to constitute this Righteousness that justifies us Is it the faith of adherence or the faith of assurance Is it our first act of faith that justifies or our whole life of faith which consists of many acts If by our first act then all after acts are insignificant as as to Justification Mark here Reader this Man by this last branch grants that not only the first act but all after acts of Faith are significant as to Justification for he saith if we are justified by the first act of Faith then all after acts are insignificant as to our Justification which plainly implies that he accounts not only the first act but all after acts of Faith to be requisite to Justification or else he understands not well what he hath writ And thus he runs himself upon that which follows this with a design to insnare Men i. e. If by our whole Life of Faith Mark it is like the Life of Faith consists only in act according to this Man so that there must be no Life of Faith in a Soul but so long as it is in exercise which consists of many acts of Faith then our Justification is suspended till our lives be finished then saith he where is the Man that is justified or sure that he shall be I never and I question whether any beside this
the truths of the Gospel and if there be not that God would work it God in some measure I hope helps me to discharge that commanded duty of praying for and wishing well to the Souls of mine Enemies Q. 13. Whether a Covenant with terms and conditions for fallen Man to perform to give him right to Justification and Life be properly a Covenant of Grace yea or nay I have shewn there is a conditional Covenant or a Covenant that insists upon such or such conditions to be performed by Man through assisting grace purchased and given before Man have any interest in Christ or right to Pardon and Life after an actual sort Texts of Scripture might be multiplied for the proof which are very express both in the Old Testament and New In the Old Testament such as Isa 1. 16 17 18. and 55. 7. Ezech. 18. 21 22 In the New Testament Luke 13. 3. John 3. 16. Acts 3. 19. 10. 43. and 13. 38 39. God in these Scriptures through Christ offers and promiseth Pardon and Life to all penitent believing obedient Sinners upon which then I put the Question whether Sinners I speak of the Adult have actual pardon and right to Life after a special sort while yet they remain in a state of impenitency and unbelief and so in actual rebellion against God or the grant of pardon and right to life is suspended until such time as they by grace become sincere penitent Believers If any should say the former then they must hold that an impenitent unbelieving Soul one that is and continues an actual Rebel against God may yet have special pardon and an actual right to Salvation which is plainly repugnant to Scripture If it be said that these benefits as to the actual donation are suspended until Repentance and Faith must they not then be the terms of conditions upon which these blessings are made over to Sinners If they were not then I ask why the actual donation or gift of them is suspended until Repentance and Faith If it be said first They are no such terms or conditions which Sinners as Efficient causes do work in themselves or perform without the special concurrence and assistance of the Holy Spirit I grant it If it be said 2dly They are no such terms or conditions which though they be wrought by the Holy Spirit and performed by the concurring assistance thereof as are meritorious of or do purchase a grant and donation of the forementioned blessings this I also grant If it be said 3dly That they are no such terms or conditions which in their own nature procure our acceptation with God this I as the former grant for they themselves are accepted of God only for the meritorious and satisfactory Righteousness of Christ But now if Persons will grant that God hath so knit and joined the blessings of Pardon and Life with Repentance and Faith as that none I speak of the Adult shall have through Christ any interest in or actual right unto these benefits but such as are qualified by the Holy Spirit with this grace whereby they may turn from Sin and give their consent sincerely to be the Lord's Servants and own this to be the order or method in which God through Christ dispenseth us saving grace they say the same I intend for I intend no more when I speak of conditions and terms in the Covenant of grace And this same Man after he hath made a great pother and stir in stating most of his remaining Questions with respect to the denial of the condionality of the Covenant yet under his 24th Question he grants if he will stick to what he hath writ that Faith is a condition of Connection and Order so that if he grant thus much which I affirm with relation to the conditionality of the Covenant which he must do or he understands not himself when he saith that faith is a condition of connection and order he owns as much the conditionality of the Covenant as I. And if so be he own condition of the Covenant of this sort then he must hold that Pardon and life as connected to Faith do immediately according to God's appointed order in the Gospel devolve upon him that hath this Faith or else he must eat his words and deny a connection And if so be that these benefits according to God's appointed order in the Gospel immediately devolve upon him that hath this Faith then they must be promised unto him as such an one and so they are as the Scriptures I have mentioned above are express and if they be promised unto him as such an one then he must have that right to these blessings promised which another that wants this condition of connection and order hath not Now then to our purpose I ask is it Christ that this condition of connection and order respects or is it a Sinner if Christ then we must suppose him antecedent to this Faith which he calls a condition of connection and order to have been an unbeliever if the sinner then this condition of connection and order must be on his part and not on Christs and when he hath it he must be a confederate and not Christ according to this Man 's own grant and if the believing Sinner be one of the confederates hereupon then God promising the blessings that are connected with this Faith must be the other and that with relation to the believing Sinner seeing the blessings of Pardon and Life connected with his Faith respects him and not Christ for Christ himself needed pardon or a right to Life for he never was that I can find in a guilty perishing condition as a Sinnerâ— So that now if there be no Covenant of grace as this Man hath affirmed made betwixt God and Sinners but only betwixt God and Christ And yet Christ can be no paâ—ty in this Covenant but believing Sinners go we upon his own concession how must these things be reconciled or this Man be consistent with himself I shall leave it he may see what he can make of it for he hath granted a condition of the Covenant on our part and this there cannot be without a Covenant respecting us which hath no relation to Christ as a party i. e. in his sense There have been many and great contests about this matter i. e. some affirming the Covenant of grace to be absolute others conditional Now in my thoughts there might be a very fair accommodation for under a different consideration the Covenant may be said to be both absolute and conditional Absolute as the whole of the grace and saving benefits of it are free of meer favour through Christ without respect to any merit or procuring desert in us Conditional as God in his infinite wisdom hath stated in his order of dispensation by Christ that there shall be such a connection or conjunction betwixt true Faith Pardon and Life as that none I speak of the Adult shall have any actual interest in or