the First must be justified if ever they be justified by the Second Adam v. 22. The Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all that believe for there 's no difference for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God As all men that ever were are or shall be are sinners under Condemnation so all that ever were are or shall be righteous in the sight of God are so by that righteousness which is by Faith of Iesus So that every pardoned accepted justified sinner must own that he is justified freely by the Grace of God through the Redemption that is in Christ. From these and such-like Scriptures it is that Christians ascribe their Iustification before God not to their own good Works but to the Free Grace of God through Iesus Christ but our Author has a way of proving his Sentiments worth a thousand of these Could men says he be reconciled to plain sence it would need no other Confirmation but the Natural evidence of naked and simple Truth It has been observed of the great Bellarmine from whom our Author has borrowed some things that he never comes in with a Procui dubio but the next words are a Rapper the same I observe in our Author that when he has done just nothing he always makes the loudest cackle It was a handsom Come-of if you did but mind it that when he had pester'd us with his prejudices surfeited us with Arbitrary distinctions filled our heads with empty Notions and when we looked to have been attack'd with one of his old plain kill-cow demonstrations he faces about and pops us off with this It needs no other proof than the Natural evidence of simple and naked Truth But now let the Reader take something warm next his heart let him use his phial of Essences for our Author is just now a-coming to examine those Texts of Scripture which are abused by these men to set up the personal Righteousness of Christ as the only formal Cause of our justification And must not those Texts of Scripture be miserably abused indeed that are thus prest in for such a service What the personal Righteousness of Christ the formal Cause of our justification I have heard some say it was the Meritorious Cause some the Impulsive Cause others the Material Cause and some that it is no Cause but our Author is the first that ever I heard this expression from There was once a good Orthodox Bishop as Orthodoxy past in that Age his Name Downham he has Written many a long page upon this Subject and he acquaints us with the sence of Protestants Lib. 1. Cap. 3. Sect. 1. That the matter of our justification is Christ's Righteousness and the form is God's Imputing it and this way go most of your Systematical Divines but from hence I learn it 's the Mode now-a-days for these Gentlemen to Confute that is to Rail at those long-winded Authors they never had the patience to read nor the Brains to understand but let this pass amongst our Authors Negligences or Ignorances till I understand better where to marshal it In examining the Texts which they abuse he will begin and end with Phil. 3. 8 9. Yea doubtless and I account all things loss for the excellency of the Knowledg of Iesus Christ my Lord for whom I have suffered the loss of all things that I may win Christ and be found in him not having my own Righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith The main Question here will be What was that Righteousness which the Apostle renounces from having any place in his Justification before God Upon this one hinge turns all the Controversie betwixt our Author and his Antagonists They say it was what-ever inherent Righteousness he had attained or could attain what-ever Obedience he had performed or could perform to the Commands of God Ay but says our Author what proof have they for this he can learn none but that they take it for granted that My Righteousness signifies Inherent Righteousness And really they are to be pittied if not pardoned that by His own Righteousness understand his own Righteousness for if Inherent Righteousness be not His own Righteousness it 's plain he could have none at all for an External Conformity of Actions to the Law alone is not Righteousness at all but Hypocrisie and Vnrighteousness but I shall inform him of some other proofs why they take His own Righteousness for Inherent Righteousness 1. That which he calls his own Righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he tells you in the next words is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is from Law from a Law from any Law indefinitely now a Righteousness which is from a Law is such a one as the Law urges presses upon and prescribes to the Conscience but that without question is an Internal Conformity of soul to the holiness of the Law but this the Apostle rejects therefore he rejects Internal and Inherent Righteousness 2. The true Notion of My Righteousness is not to be fetcht from some sorry Conjectures from precarious Hypotheses which men when they are in streights invent to avoid present ruine but from the stable fixed constant use thereof in Scripture but so is this expression My own Righteousness and My own or your own Works used in Scripture viz. for real sineere Conformity of heart and life to a Law therefore so ought we to take it here till we see cogent Reason to the contrary That this is the fixed use of the expression in Scripture we shall see Gen. 30. 33. My Righteousness shall answer for me in time to come which our Author would paraphrase thus My Righteousness that is My Roguery Iob 27. 6. My Righteousness I hold fast my heart shall not reproach me as long as I live My Righteousness that is would he say My Hypocrisie Matth. 5. 16. That men may see your good works that is in the New Glossary Your Complement Dan. 9. 18. we present not our supplications before thee not for our Righteousnesses but for thy great Mercies The Prophet in the Name of the Church must be supposed here not to renounce real Righteousness but the Sceleton of Obedience Now had the Apostle designed only to reject his own Hypocrisie he was not so barren in expressions but he could have fitted it with its Proper Name 3. The Apostle expresly renounces both what-ever he had attained before or after his Conversion v. 7. These things that were gain to me whilst I was a Pharisee those I accounted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 loss for Christ But is that all No! Yea doubtless v. 8. and I do now account 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all things but loss I have accounted all things attained in my Iudaism loss when I was first convinced and I do now account all things even my own Righteousness loss and dung for Christ
Covenant made a Covenant his Righteousness and Obedience have procured a Covenant are the Meritorious cause of a Covenant when the total Summe of all is no more than this That God has promised to Pardon and Save us if we Believe and Obey the Gospel though we Obey not perfectly So that at last it 's our own Obedience that Recommends us to God our own Righteousness for which we are Iustified Whereas the Apostle is Peremptory That by the Obedience of Christ we are constituted Righteous His Conclusion is therefore this That the Righteousness of Christ is not the formal Cause of our Iustification but the Meritorious cause of that Covenant whereby we are declared Righteous and rewarded as Righteous I perceive the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Obedience of his Death are like to prove something ere long One while they Confirm and Seal another while they Procure and at last they Merit a Covenant I cannot but Examine particulars though I have often done it 1. The Righteousness of Christ is not the Formal cause of our Iustification Indeed I think it is not Never any Man in his Wits affirmed it so Give but us leave to call it the Material cause or the Meritorious cause immediately and properly of Justification and he shall take Formal cause and deal with it at his pleasure I think I have a Commission from all the Systematical Divines of Germany the Voluminous Tigurines and Bulky Low-Dutch with those few that are left in England to make a Bargain with him Hard and Fast That the Righteousness of Christ is not the Formal cause of our Iustification 2. Says he It is the Meritorious cause of that Covenant whereby we are declared Righteous A Meritorious cause sounds very high if it had an honest Meaning But what has it Merited Iustification By no means What then Any particular Mercy or Priviledge or Blessing By no means for then it would be a proper cause of it there 's an Exact and Severe proportion betwixt the Reward and the Work in all Merit What is it then the Meritorious cause of Why of a Covenant But are we made Righteous by the Covenant Not at all only we are declared Righteous But how does the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Obedience of his Death Merit such a Covenant at Gods Hands Nay That he will not tell us God was well pleased with them but why he should be so is a Secret which must be reserved for the coming of Elias 3. The last thing I shall Exmine is his Exceptions against our Interpretation of the Apostle 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shall be made Righteous says he is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shall be Iustified Well I agree to him But then I say the former Expression explains the way of our being Iustified that it is by Vertue of a Gospel-Law-Constitution or Appointment of God who considering all Believers as one with their Redeemer does Constitute them Just and Righteous there 's the Formal Cause in the Righteousness of Christ there 's the Material Cause of Justification as all the Posterity of Adam are constituted Sinners and liable to Condemnation by the Constitution of the old Law as Represented by him their Common Head 2. He excepts That the Apostle tells us ver 17. Who they are that are Iustified by Christ and shall Reign with him in Life not those who are Righteous by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness to them But I do not hear the Apostle telling me one such word whatever he has told our Author privately by way of Cabala I hear him saying plainly That as by one Mans offence many were made sinners so by one Mans Obedience many were made Righteous And because I cannot devise how possibly one Man should be made a sinner dealt with as a sinner Condemned and Judged as and for a sinner by another mans sin unless he be some ways or other guilty of sin and because it is not the making of that one mans sin their own by Immitation and Example that the Apostle speaks of but by a constitution of a Covenant or Law Therefore till I can find a better Term to express the Doctrine by I shall call Gods charging Adams sin upon his Posterity to their Condemnation his Imputing it to them And then because I cannot neither devise with my self how one man should possibly be made Righteous by the Obedience of another but that others Obedience must some way or other become his own and because to say Christs Obedience is ours by Imitation of his Example is to cross the Apostles paralel and to cross the Truth for we Imitate it but in part and very Imperfectly therefore I shall take the Freedom also to call Gods constituting Believers righteous by the Obedience of Christ his Imputing that Obedience to them for their Justification provided always that when more convenient and expressive Terms shall be found out to satisfie the Apostle this of Imputation be left indifferent Well but if not these who are then Why those who have received the abundance of Grace and of the Gift of Righteousness these are justified by Christ these shall Reign with him in Life It 's very true the Apostle does tell us no less And I cannot imagine how he should more fitly describe a justified person that others may know him and he should know himself than by the Fruits and Effects of Justification such as abundance of Grace are For whatever our Author thinks of the Apostle he does not use to describe a thing by it self or something equally obscure but by that which is more known and Obvious than the thing described and therefore the Apostle seems not to describe Justification but a justified Person by Sanctification They that have received abundance of Grace and the Gift of Righteousness these are justified Persons not that Justification is from any Inherent work but that the justified Person is only known to himself to be such by an Inherent work and to others by the fruits of it This answer I will deal truly with my Reader came next to hand I had it from our Author and I presumed he would accept a bad one of his own before a better of another mans The Apostle says he tells who those are that are thus justified by Christ Nay then thought I that will kill no body for a justified Person may be described by his Qualifications and yet his Righteousness wherein he stands accepted before God not consist in those Qualifications But to deal plainly with him I do humbly conceive that the Apostle describes an Imputed Righteousness by that expression They which receive the abundance of Grace and the Gift of Righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was the over-flowing and Redundancy of Divine Love to accept a Surety to fulfill all Righteousness and Suffer for us and abundance of Grace too to let us in by Faith into the Righteousness of Christ's Life and the Sacrifice of Christs Death
them and the only thing that gives a right to the promises of Future glory is to obey the Laws and imitate the Example of our Saviour and to be transformed into the Nature and Likeness of God We must crave his leave to take his words in pieces that we may the better deal with them 1. The Gospel says he makes a different Representation of it tells us expresly that he is righteous that doth righteousness But say I This is no representation of our justification different from what the Doctor has assigned And let the words be Interpreted how he will they make nothing against the Doctors assertions 1. Let these words He is Righteous signifie He is Inherently righteous or holy and then the plain Sence is that he that doth righteousness that practises an Uniform and Universal conformity in his Life to the Gospel may charitably be judged by others and certainly known by his own Conscience to be such a one as a Tree is known by its fruits For so are we warranted by our Saviour to make a Judgment Mat. 7. 16. And the same warrant we have from the Church of England Art 12. Insomuch that by them good Works that necessarily spring of a true and lively faith a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a Tree discerned by the Fruit. 2. Let the words be interpreted of that Righteousness by which in which and for which we stand accepted as Righteous before God yet it meets in the same point he that from an honest and good heart brings forth holy Fruit most certainly justified in the sight of God and is accepted of him we may argue â—… hope without Offence from the Effect to the Cause and yet the Cause and the Effect are two things He that is sanctified is justified and yet Sanctification is not Justification we may safely conclude an imputed Righteousness from an imparted Righteousness and yet that Righteousness which we have in Christ may be another thing from that Righteousness which we have by influence from Christ as our Head 2. Sayes he The Gospel tells us that without Holiness no man shall see God It does so indeed but does it tell us that Holiness is inconsistent with our Iustification by the Righteousness of Christ Or does it tell us that upon the account of our own Holiness we shall be justified before God 3. The onely way to obtain the Pardon of Sins is to repent of them and forsake them That without Repentance there 's no possibility of obtaining Pardon of Sin we freely grant they must be Sinners that need a Pardon and they must be penitent Sinners that are qualified to receive one The Gospel has annex'd by express Promise the Pardon of Sin to Repentance 1 Ioh. 1. 9. If we confess our sins he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness But what an absurd way of procedure is this to jumble and confound things together which ought to have their several Apartments and distinct Interests allotted to them in one and the same Effect The Grace of God as the great Spring and Fountain of all Mercy must have a place in the Pardon of a Sinner and the blood of Iesus Christ as the Meritorious Cause justly challenges a great room therein Eph. 1. 7. In whom we have redemption through his blood even the remission of sins according to the riches of his grace and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ will come in for a share too as it gives us an Interest in what he has suffered by way of Atonement to God and Expiation of our sins and godly sorrow for hatred of and turning from sin in Purpose and Resolution at least must have its proper Concern therein too But to assert that Repentance is the onely way of procuring Pardon excluding Faith and the Propitiation made in the Blood of Christ needs more grains of Allowance than he will afford to any he deals with to make it justifiable But the vanity of this Fallacy lyes in this That he opposes the Righteousness of Christ and the Means whereby it 's applyed to our Persons As if one would stiffly contend that we are justified by Faith alone and therefore not by the Righteousness of Christ whereas we are therefore justified by Faith because we are justified by Christ we are justified by the Righteousness of Christ alone as that which God onely considers in the Justification of a Sinner to answer his Law his Justice and we are justified by Faith alone as that which makes Christ ours Say the same here Repentance is a Means to qualifie us for the receiving the pardon of Sin God will never give forth a Pardon to that Sinner that is not brought upon his knees throughly humbled for his Transgressions yet still that which God respects in the pardon of a Sinner is the Blood of his Son without shedding of which there is not there cannot be any Remission Hebr. 9. 22. But no man shall perswade our Author to distinguish betwixt Christs procurement of so great a Mercy and the Way of the Gospel appointment for the Applying it to our selves 4. The onely thing that gives us a right to the Promises of future Glory is to obey the Laws and imitate the Example of our Saviour and to be transformed into the Nature and Likeness of God For my part I conceive far otherwise That though our Holiness give us a Meetness and Fitness to partake of the Inheritance of the Saints in light yet it was the Lord Jesus Christ that procured our right and title to it and the Promise of it The Church of England was of the same Opinion when it decreed Art 13. That works done before the Grace of Christ and the Inspiration of the Spirit are not pleasant to God neither do they make men meet to receive Grace c. And then we may presume will not make us meet to receive Glory much less give us a right and title to the Promises of it And Art 12. That the works which follow after Iustistification are those that are pleasing and acceptable to God and I think we may equally take it for granted that upon our justification with God we have a right to the Promises of future Glory But if this be true that the onely thing that gives us this right be Obedience to Imitation of Christ and Conformity to the Nature of God we may have a Right to when we have actual Possession of Glory for till then it will hardly be true that we have obeyed all Christs Laws But our Author had Wit in his Anger and was aware of an Objection that was coming against him and wisely layes in for it as well as he could It might be returned to all that he had said How can so imperfect an Obedience as ours is so every wayes lame and defective and short of the exact Law of God ever give us a right to the Promises of future Glory Yes
and only watch for the Creep-hole of a bare Possibility If they intended honestly they would lay things together as well as they can labour to find out the meaning of God's Spirit with Sobriety and Humility and never strain their Wits and vex and torture the Scripture with utmost Possibilities The Text tells us that the namâ—… whereby Christ shall be called is the Lord our Righteousness Now it 's granted that this was not designed to be his Praenomen or Cognomen that which should distinguish him in Common Discourse from other persons and therefore He shall be called is no less than He shall Really be our Righteousness Thus 1 Iohn 3. 1. Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us that we should be called that is that we should become the sons of God Isa. 9. 6. His name shall be called i. e. he shall Really be Wonderful Counsellor The Mighty God the Everlasting Father The Prince of Peace The true intent and meaning of which place I know how some have attempted to elude by this fine device of the Possibility of another meaning and whether our Author sharpned his weapon at their forge he knows best But 3. He returns an Answer worse than both the other Righteousness in Scripture is a word of a very large sense and sometimes signifies no more than Mercy Kindness Beneficence and so the Lord our Righteousness is the Lord who does us good But 1. Is it not vainly supposed That for Christ to do us good is inconsistent with being our Righteousness 2. Though Christ be a Redeemer of Mercy Kindness and Beneficence yet he is no-where called The Lord our Mercy The Lord our Kindness The Lord our Beneficence Which clearly proves that when he is called and really is The Lord our Righteousness the expression implies more than an Imparting or Communication of good things to us Hence some would say That if our Author's Conscience were not larger than the sense of this word he had never given so stretching an Answer But says he Righteousness signifies that part of Iustice which consists in relieving the oppressed Isa. 54. 17. Their Righteousness is of me saith the Lord which is a parallel expression to The Lord our Righteousness and signifies no more than that the Lord would avenge their Cause and deliver them from all their Enemies So that all the benefit we are to expect from Christ is Temporal Salvation and Deliverance To which I answer 2. That the Reason of Christ's glorious Name The Lord our Righteousness assigned by the Prophet that in his days Iudah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely is interpreted by the Angel Matth. 1. 21. to be this He shall be called Iesus for he shall save his people from their sins And the end why God raised up his Son Jesus in the World is expresly assigned to be To bless his people in turning away every one of them from their iniquities Acts 3. 26. Thus Rom. 11. 26. Out of Zion shall come the Deliverer and he shall turn away ungodliness from Iacob To turn away iniquity from us and to turn us away from iniquity is I hope something of a more useful import than to relieve the injured and oppressed and deliver them from their Enemies I do not at all envy our Author therefore the glory of his discovery that for God to justifie good men is to deliver them from the violence and injuries of their Enemies And I would gladly hope that all good men have something better wherein to glory In Ier. 33. 16. the Church is called The Lord our Righteousness because she only glories in the Righteousness of Christ her Head and Husband to whom being so nearly related and with whom being so closely united his Righteousness is her Righteousness and therefore she who upon the account of the imperfection of her Inherent Righteousness can find no not the least matter of boasting before God yet has whereof to Triumph in Christ her Saviour Isa. 45. 24. Surely shall one say In the Lord have I Righteousness In the Lord shall all the seed of Iacob be justified and shall glory Now the Apostle whom I take to be a competent Interpreter of Scripture assures us that God has taken special care that in his dispensing of Grace to sinners No flesh shall glory in his presence 1 Cor. 1. 29. which he has well provided for ver 30. since Christ is made unto us of God for Righteousness and therefore he that glorieth let him glory in the Lord Which is exactly parallel to that of Isa. 45. 24. In the Lord shall all the seed of Iacob be justified and shall glory Come we now to our Author's Interpretation of Isa. 61. 11. which is of the same leaven with the former I will greatly rejoyce in the Lord my soul shall be joyful in my God For he hath clothed me with the garments of Salvation and covered me with the robe of Righteousness c. This Text one may perceive struck cold to his heart and he gives us as cold an Answer that 's ready to freeze between his lips The Garments of Salvation says he and the Robe of Righteousness signifie those great Deliverances God promised to Israel Signifie I would our Author would write a Dictionary of the Signification of words We use to say A bad Answer is better than none Reform the Proverb for shame for such an one is worse than none 1. It 's evident that the Triumph of the Church was upon the view of Jesus Christ vers 1. Anointed to preach Good-Tidings to the meek to bind up the broken-hearted to proclaim liberty to the Captives and the opening of the Prison to them that are bound To proclaim the acceptable Year of the Lord Which our Saviour Christ applies to himself Luk. 4. 18 19. when he was far from working out for the Iews those great Deliverances by improbable means which should make them glorious in the eyes of men 2. The Virgin Mary quotes this very place Luke 1. 46 47. My soul doth magnifie the Lord and my spirit hath rejoyced in God my Saviour where the joy of her heart broke out at her lips in Contemplation of that Eternal Redemption wrought out by him in whom she could more seriously glory as her Saviour than as her Son And it 's a wonder to me then men can patter over their Magnificat every day and not observe it 3. It 's observable that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we render Decketh signifies to Adorn as a Priest and implies that Christ as our High-Priest shall present us acceptable to God upon his Account 4. There 's nothing more familiar with the Spirit of God than to clothe Evangelical Mercies in a Mosaical Dress and to express New-Testament Salvation in Old-Testament Phrase Thus Gospel-Believers are understood by Israel the Church by the Temple Evangelical Ministers by the Legal Priests and the covering of Sin by the covering of Nakedness and by
and then our Authors Argument will hold though his Cause break If God for the sake of Abrahams imperfect Obedience yet as he was the Head of the League gave so many temporal Mercie to Israel surely then God for the sake of Christ the Head of all that the Father hath given him will bestow Spiritual and Eternal Mercies for the Head and Members making but one Body the Obedience of the Head is reputed the Obedience of the Members And as the Blessings which God bestows for Christs sake are Transcendently gâ—…eater than those bestowed on Israel for Abrahams sake so is the Obedience which Christ performed upon it's own account and the Dignity of the Person infinitely beyond the imperfect Obedience of Abraham and the Union which Faith makes with Christ is a stricter Union than any Natural Civil Political Union that could possibly be between Abraham and his Posterity Thus I have endeavoured to Vindicate our Authors Argument but I am sure he had rather it should perish than be thus justified But is it not strange our Author should tell us That he knows how many Blessings God bestowed upon the Children of Israel for their Fathers sakes and yet not acquaint us with one single Blessing that God bestows on us for Christs sake For the sake of Christs Personal Obedience I wish I had so much Interest in any Friend of his that had that Interest in him to perswade him to acquaint us freely and open-heartedly what those blessings are and how procured Why just now he comes to it The Righteousness of his Life and the Sacrifice of his Death both serve to the same end to establish and confirm the Gospel-Covenant God was so well pleased with what Christ did and suffered with the obedience of his Life and Death that for his sake he entred into a Covenant of Grace with Mankind Very good what needed all this Circumlocution and Periphrase To beat about and about the Bush Had it not been more Civil to have given us our doom in plain English than to Tantalize us with sugared hopes and expectations of some great matter from Abraham Isaac and Iacob Some would say 1. That this ascribes more Influence to Abrahams Obedience than thus to Christs for God for the sake of Abraham's Active Obedience entred into a Covenant with Israel and chose them to be his peculiar People without the Death of Abraham but the Obedience of Christs Life and Death must both concur to procure this Covenant and yet it is such a one as I suppose God would not refuse upon as small an account as the sake of Abraham 2. Some will say this is not to Answer the Question but perplex it The Question at first was what influence the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Sacrifice of his Death have upon our acceptation with God He Answers They serve to establish the Covenant they confirm to us that God will pardon and save us if we believe and Obey but what if I Obey without such confirmation shall my Obedience be rejected without it be performed upon that Confirmation Ay but God entred into this Covenant of Grace for Christs sake Still I say that 's not an answer but the bandying the Question upon us again a hundred times over Why should his Life and Death have such an influence upon God to make that Covenant Why should they Operate that way What connexion is there between Christs active and passive Obedience and such a Covenant But sure we forget our selves for we are enquiring into the influence of Christs Active Obedience And 1. For Confirming a Covenant let any rational Man satisfie me how The Obedience of a Person perfectly holy pure spotless sinless being accepted of God should prove this promise That therefore God will accept them whos 's best Obedience is imperfect and defective This is so far from confirming it that God will accept me who am a Sinner that it leads to utter dispair of acceptance with him seeing I came so infinitely short of my pattern What hope can a sinner have of acceptance from a consideration that God has accepted Christ who was no sinner If Faith was ready to believe that God would accept him that believes and obeys yet had it seen Christs Faith and Obedience and his acceptance thereon it might have stagger'd him that ever such pitiful things as his Faith and Obedience should find favour with God And if Faith was so strong as to overcome that difficulty as to believe the Promise notwithstanding this staggering Example yet it 's far enough from Truth that a sinner should believe the promise ever the more that his imperfect Service should be accepted and rewarded because Christs entire obedience was so Nay without question it had been a greater confirmation of that promise to have had assurance that God had pardoned some hainous Offender some flagitious wretch who deserved Condemnation than to behold him accepting a Person not obnoxious to Condemnation So says the Apostle 1 Tim. 1. 16. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy that in me first Iesus Christ might shew forth all long-suffering for a pattern to them who hereafter should believe on him to Life everlasting The Pardon of a Blasphemer one injurious a Persecutor is a stronger confirmation that God will pardon a sinner than the acceptance of Him that had done no wrong neither was guile found in his mouth 2. But now for Gods making such a promise for Christs sake or entring into a Covenant to pardon accept for Christs sake this answers not the Question in the least for 1. It onely asserts that God has declared openly that he will do it Now a Declaration of Pardon is not a Pardon a promise of acceptance is not acceptance and therefore a Reason of or Motive to such a Promise such a Declaration is not a Reason of or Motive to Pardon and acceptance Christs Obedience was so well pleasing to God that for his sake he made such a Promise Well but if my Obedience be little Christs Obedience will not make it accepted as if it were great if imperfect it will not render it accepted as if it were perfect 2. That God has made such a promise for Christs sake answers not the Question for it s but turning the Question into an Assertion As if we should enquire what Reason is there that God should accept me for Christs obedience And he should Answer there is a Reason why God should accept me for it but never shew the Reason Or thus What Cause is Christs Obedience of the Acceptance of our Obedience And he should say it is a Cause but not shew the Cause But then further The Obedience and Righteousness of Christs Life was one thing which made his Sacrifice so Meritorious I confess I question the Truth of the Proposition had Christ Sacrificed himself as soon as he came into the World his Sacrifice had been as Meritorious being the Sacrifice of him that as Priest was God and
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obedience in it's common Nature without determining it's signification either to active or passive obedience but do they argue from the Nature and purport of the Word that because Christs obedience is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore it must needs be active obedience No such matter but they argue from another hard word Yeleped Antithesis from the opposition that is there made between Adams disobedience and Christs obedience Thus the Dr. argued if our Author durst have read him Com. p. 185. It 's opposed to the disobedience of Adam which was Active The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Righteousness to the Fault The Fault was an active transgression of the Law and the obedience opposed to it must be an active accomplishment of it If the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Adam was active then the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christ must be active But our Author will have the other bout with him Christs offering himself in Sacrifice is called doing the will of God Heb. 10. 9 10. And whether this be properly said or not I will leave the Dr. to dispute it with the Apostle But I do not perceive the Doctor has any contraversie with though he has maintained many for the Apostle They are very well agreed for ought I perceive nor shall they Quarrel if I can help it The Doctor will not contend that Christs assuming a body in order to the offering a Sacrifice to God was not doing his will no he pleads for it to the cost of somebody But this is that which he disputes that in Rom. 5. 18 19. The Opposition between Adams Disobedience and Christs Obedience will prove them both of the same kind It 's acknowledged that Christ did actively obey in suffering his sufferings were Activo passiva But yet the Obedience mentioned in the place before us was an Active Obedience because Adams Disobedience was so One blow more and then our Author will yield us the Cause There is no express mention says he made in this Chapter of any other Act of Obedience whereby we are reconciled to God but onely his dying for us which makes it more than probable that by his Righteousness and Obedience the Apostle understands his Death and Sufferings I assure you I like it well when Men argue from the Context provided they do not destroy the Text and had our Author Religiously observed this Rule he had not turned his Readers stomacks so often with nauseous Interpretations but yet I have a few things to offer to him 1. That though there be no other act of Obedience mentioned whereby we are reconciled yet there may be another act of Obedience mentioned whereby we may be compleatly justified 2. Though there be no other act of Obedience mentioned in the fore-going verses yet there may be one in this No Laws of Cohaerence or Contexture ever obliged an Author that he might not pass to new matter and so has the Apostle done in this place and Case as the Opposition most undeniably proves 3. All that he says makes it but more than probable Now had there been any colour for Truth of his Conceit his confidence does not use to dwindle away into probabilities but he had fetcht the Great Commander and knock'd us all dead with irrefragable Demonstration for do you understand the Mystery of this more than probable when you hear him confess that Matters seem to be against him and but probably or a little more than probably for him You need not lay your Ear to listen in what quarter the wind â—…its But then 4. Nay hold Our Author yields Good Nature begins to work But yet says he these Expressions his Righteousness and Obedience seem to take in the whole compass of his Obedience in doing and Suffering the will of God All is well then and Dr. Owen is a very honest Man again And we will not vex our selves how to reconcile more than probable Con with seeming Pro. I have made some attempts formerly and once more whilst our Author is in the tractable vein I le try whether the Doctor and he may not be made good Friends for since our Author is coming towards a willingness to take in Active Obedience it 's but attempting however to prevail with the Doctor not to exclude the Passive Well look once more Com. p. 185. That the Passive Obedience of Christ is here Onely intended is false so that all that the Doctor contends for is that the Passive Obedience is not solely intended to the exclusion of the Active We are all agreed then in the meaning of the simple Terms and it 's well if we do not fall out again about the Propositions that result from them Let us now hear his Comment upon the words The meaning of the words says he is this That as God was so highly displeased with Adams sin that he entail'd a great many evils and miseries and death it self upon his Posterity for his sake So God was so well pleased with the Righteousness and Obedience of Christs Life and Death that he bestows the Rewards of Righteousness on those who according to the strictness and rigour of the Law are not Righteous that for Christs sake he he hath made a New Covenant of Grace which pardons our past sins and follies and rewards a sincere though imperfect Obedience There are two Questions which he here undertakes to Answer First What Influence Adams sin hath upon his Posterity and Secondly it is to be hoped that from thence we may at last know What Influence Christs Righteousness and Obedience have upon our acceptance with God 1 Quest. What Influence hath Adams sin upon his Posterity To this he returns God was so highly displeased with Adams sin that he entailed a great many evils and miseries and death it self upon his Posterity for his sake Now all this is true very true but whether it be the whole Truth that which will satisfie the design of the Text I shall examine by and by At present I shall onely make some short Notes upon it 1. God says he was so highly displeased with Adams sin that for his sake he entailed a great many evils Now had it not been fair to have shewn the Iustice as well as the Highness of Gods Displeasure in such a proceeding with his Posterity That God was justly as well as highly displeased with Adams Sin never created a Doubt to any man but that he should be so highly displeased with the Sin of one single Man to entail Evils upon Millions upon all his Posterity this would invite us to examine the Righteousness of the Entail The Posterity of Adam knew nothing of Adams Sin were not conscious nor consenting to it and yet God involves them in the Consequences of Adams Sin 2. God says he entail'd those Evils upon his Posterity for Adams sake Now here 's the old Blind again For to say that God did it for