Infinite Power moreover to the act and none to the cessation And by this Rule it would follow that all Motion in the World is supernatural For if God cause it ut sons naturae he causeth it in the natural course if he do not it 's all supernatural and miraculous Moreover if all this satisfie not Disputes if it be worth the Cost they may try the Case thus Supposing that God hath told no man his Secrets when he will immediately move any thing without second Causes and that no second Causes nor his own Operation by them can move any thing without another immediate Motion Let them cut down the Pillars or undermine their Houses and say that by meer natural Causes the House cannot fall Let them set fire on their Houses and say that by meer natural Causes they cannot be burnt Let them drink Poison and say By meer natural Causes it cannot hurt us Or let them cut their Flesh c. For God never told them that he will immediately concurr and then there is no danger Perhaps they will say That Experience telleth us that God doth usually concurr with them I answer And is not that because he worketh by them What Experience or Reason have you that God should still work immediately with them and yet not by them We can prove that He worketh as the first Cause But if you will prove that He doth it not as the first Cause moving the second Causes but by immediate concomitancy let us hear your proofs Lastly let it be noted that when they that affirm all Motion to be by immediate concomitant Concourse or Predetermination do pretend that they do it lest God's Causality should be denied or extenuated it is a meer deceit For all are agreed that there is no less of God in the Operations done by second Causes or Nature than in immediate Operations without second Causes such as God exerciseth on the first created Motor and how else he please God is as much in one as in the other § 14. For the understanding of the nature and use of miraculous acts of Providence it must be considered 1. That God that made the World of Natural Agents and things Passive moved by the Active is not to be feigned without good proofs to alter any of the Works which he hath made which we see he continueth in the course that he made them without any mutation of their Natures § 15. God can change and cross and use as he pleaseth the Actions of Natural Agents without changing their natures and inclinations One Natural Agent or moved Passive may be resiâ—ed and turned back or overcome by another â—nd yet there may be nothing but natural motiâ—n in them all A stronger Stream may drive â—ack a weaker A Canon may cross the ordiâ—ary motion of the Air As a great Dog may â—aster a little one or a Woolf devour a Lamb â—nd a Bird a Worm or Fly and yet there be â—one but natural and sensitive motion So God â—an dry up or stop the Red Sea or Iordan and â—y Winds carry Caterpillars to and from Aegypt and such like and by one natural â—otion overcoming another It 's hard for us â—n most Miracles to say that God doth more than this § 16. But it is certain that God hath a rank of free Agents that act arbitrarily and that these have a great measure of power over natural and necessary Motions As man is a free Agent and driveth his Sheep to what Pasture he pleaseth and guideth his Horses and Oxen in their way and furrow to do his will by their natural and sensitive necessitated motion and as a Miller can make the natural course of the Wood and Water and Mill-stones and Horse all to serve his intention without changing the nature of any one of them so much more can God and free Agents under God attain their freely chosen ends by Ordering and not Changing Natural and Sensitive Movers § 17. We so little know what Arbitrary Free Agents that are invisible Spirits God hath set over this Passive World and what power he hath given them to use Natural Agents as they themselves freely will that it greatly disableth us to resolve all the Difficulties of the Cause of Sin and Misery and about the nature of Miracles But it is a clear truth that it is by such Free Arbitrary Agents primarily that natural Agency is crost and overcome in Miracles the one Natural Agent be employed to resist another as to quench the heat of Fire to stop the course of Winds and Water c. Yet it is some voluntary free Agent that thus useth natural Agents against each other Scripture tells us that God useth Angels as Rulers and Protectors of lower Agents And that there is a kind of a war between these and Devils And how far the prevalent Wills of good and bad Angels or voluntary Agents may be the Cause of Evil or be the Actors of Miracles by setting one moved Agent against another and yet all but Natural motion that is caused by these free Agents Mortals do not know and therefore should not be peremptory in judging § 18. But though we know not that in Miracles God useth not second Causes some natural and some free in waies unsearchable to us yet may we be assured by Miracles of his will and attestation when we find that things are done quite out of the way of his ordinary Providence in the uncontrouled confirmation of some prophetical Revelation For God is the Governour of the rational World and his moral Government must be by the intelligible signification of his will de debito what shall be due from us and to us And if Miracles be used to deceive us they cannot be done without him whatever second Cause there be And if he should use them tho' by second Causes to deceive us we are utterly remediless and therefore guiltless And God that 〈…〉 at h neither impotency ignorance nor badness cannot need a Lye to govern Man when he hath 〈…〉 de it part of his Image on Man and needful to Mens Justice to each other to hate Lying § 19. A Miracle controuled by contrary Evidence is no notification of God's Attestation It may be permitted for several good ends For God by controuling it giveth us sufficient remedy against Deceit And there are two waies by which a Miracle may be controuled First by greater conquering Miracles used for some contrary Doctrine or Cause so the Aegyptian Magician's Miracles were controuled by Moses Secondly when it is some unquestionable Truth or Duty or Word that is already better proved which that Miracle pretendeth to contradict As if a Miracle were done by a Deceiver to prove that there is no God no Life-to-come or against Mercy or Justice or to disprove Christianity the greater Miracles which have confirmed the Gospel and the evident Light of Nature which proveth the Deity and Life-to-come and the Duty of Love and Justice do controul such deceiving
bound or conquer'd that can turn Nothing into Something at his pleasure Non-futurity is nothing therefore it hath no Cause Is this Nothing the Ruler of God and All things because he causeth not that which is not causable Alas that good men should keep up dividing Controversies at this rate of reasoning You say If it have no Cause it can have no Impediment and so there is Fatum Stoicissimum We all talk at the rate that we understand The World was nothing before it was made and so had then no Cause in the esse causae as being no effect Relations in esse being simultaneous Doth it follow that God was subject to Fate There was no Impediment indeed to Nothingness it is not necessary that Nothing be hindred lest it become Something God can make somewhat where there is nothing at his pleasure and can make a future Nothing to become an existent Something And what should be the medium I wonder that tempted you to think otherwise Did the nothingness of Angels before their Creation hinder God from making them Or can nothing have a ruling Power Ad 6. Again you stick not at the repeating of the contradiction of a self-originated Future or Nothing and think God's Decrees endangered by nothing because it hath no Cause What a dreadful thing is this Nothing To be self-originated is to be Something of it self And if Futurity be nothing then it is something of it self And you offer not a Syllable to prove these Contradictions You add To what purpose shall Decrees be Ans. To produce the thing decreed in its proper time and place and not to make them something before they are any thing nor to make an ens Rationis to be a real extrinseck Entity You strangely say To decree such a Futurity is a nullity for it can never come to pass What can never come to pass Futurity Say also To decree Non-futurity or that there shall be to us but one Sun but one Saviour is a nullity because Nothing can never come to pass What is it for Nothing to come to pass It is come to pass without a Cause that there is but one Sun to us but one Saviour and other Nothings The Decree or Will of what shall come to pass is no nullity for it shall all come to pass and yet the Decree made not the word shall be to signifie a real Entity distinct form or model of the thing that shall be The Decree that there shall be a World was fulfilled and yet shall be was not a being before t 〈…〉 World unless it was God's Essence You Phrase importeth as if Futurity must come to pass as a thing Decreed and question whether there was a futurity of that futurity and so in infinitum For the word Coming to pass importeth futurity of futurity and not eternity You say To decree in compliance with it is below God over All for it will come to pass whether God decree it or no. Alas that Speaking should be so hard an Art What iâ— it to decree in compliance with nothing Hath it any sence How is it that Nothing will come to pass It 's true that Nothing will be Nothing without a Cause and therefore without a Decree And therefore let the reverence of God make you consider whether it be meet for us in the dark to ascribe to God such Decrees of nothing and to number Nothings and make as many Decrees Such a dance and game of notions we may more boldly use about our selves than about God till we know him better You add God in decreeing doth not decree the thing into being in the instant of decreeing but He decreeth the Futurity of it and if that be nothing he decreeth nothing Ans. Wrong thoughts will have wrong words All that you should have inferred is That His Decree effecteth nothing till the time come which is true For He decreed only to effect it at such a time But doth it follow that God decreeth nothing but Futurity because the thing decreed is not presently done Thus you must say That God decreed not the World nor CHRIST nor Salvation but Futurity only The Decree or Will of God was That the World CHRIST Resurrection c. shall be at such a time shall be is no being and yet it is a being when existent which God decreed but his Decree maketh it not a being till it exist Dr. Twisse will over and over tell you that God's immanent acts do nihil ponere in objecto And I have oft told you truly that you or I little know what we say when we divide God's Eternity into parts and assign him his praeteritum futurum And it would put you hard to it to tell me clearly and surely what God's Eternal Decree is before the effect exist our present common-received School-Divinity will call us Blasphemers if we say that before the Creation there was any thing but God and any thing in God but God and that God had any real accidents And therefore it saith that he doth operari per essentiam and not per accidentia And therefore that God's Decree before the effect was nothing but his Essence But it is his Essence denominated not as such but as related to the things decreed though yet they be not If you will forsake this common Theology and place acts in God which ex parte agentis are but Accidents and not his Essence and say This is consistent with his Simplicity and Perfection you will let in a Body of new Divinity and we shall not know when we have all God's Accidents noâ— how to order them His freest Acts are his Essential Will freely acting but those free acts themselves before the effect are nothing but God himself We must not place in God a number of Thoughts Images Notions Accidents as we do in Man But your Phrase savoureth of other Thoughts Ad 7. Here you are for yea and nay you will suppose no Propositions in God and yet you argue that then what will remain of a Decree I said But that God knoweth not by Propositions bâ—â— yet that he knoweth Propositions If you hold That God knoweth by Propositions and Argumentations say so that I may know what to speak to If you hold That He hath no Decrees what is it that you plead for But to answer your Question God's Decree is not a forming of Propositions in his mind or any change in himself or addition to his Being But it is His simple will that such and such things shall be emanative communicative productive of them in their season There are some that think that as Time-Divisions are the measures of imperfect Creatures and God's Eternity hath none such so that it is an ascribing Imperfection to God to say That he hath Decrees de futuris distinct from a productive Volition which in the most proper sence should be denominated from the produced Existent as such But in this I interess not my self as knowing that we
An END of Doctrinal CONTROVERSIES Which have Lately Troubled the Churches BY Reconciling Explication WITHOUT MUCH DISPUTING Written by RICHARD BAXTER Psal. 120. 6 7. My Soul hath long dwelt with him that hateth Peace I am for Peace but when I speak they are for War Luke 9. 46 49 50 54 55. There arose a reasoning among them which of them should be greatest c. LONDON Printed for Iohn Salusbury at the Rising SUN in Cornhil M. DC XCI THE PREFACE WARS are most dreaded and hated by the Country where they are but not so much by the Souldiers who by them seek their Prey and Glory as by the suffering Inhabitants that lose thereby their Prosperity and Peace who yet are forced or drawn to be siders lest they suffer for Neutrality Religious irreligious Wars are of no less dismal Consequence being about God himself his Will and Word and that which more nearly toucheth our Souls and everlasting state than our Houses and worldly Welfare does And yet because Men are more sensible of their corporal than their spiritual Concerns these Dogmatical Wars are far less feared and too commonly made the Study and Delight not only of the Military Clergy but also of the seduced and sequacious Laity Though those that have the Wisdom from above which is pure and peaceable condole the Church's Calamity hereby knowing that Envy and Strife the earthly sensual and devilish Wisdom causeth Confusion and every evil Work And it is a heinous Aggravation that the Militants being Men consecrated to Love and Peace profanely father their Mischiefs upon God and do all as for Religion and Church Having these four and forty Years at least been deeply sensible of this Sin Danger and Misery of Christians I have preach'd much and written more against it To confute those Extreams which cause Divisions and to reconcile those that think they differ where they do not sometime also using importunate Petitions and Pleas for Peace to those that have power to give it or promote it and that use either Word or Sword against it And with the Sons of Peace it hath not been in vain But with those that are engaged in Faction and malicious strife I am proclaimed to be the militant Enemy of Concord for perswading them to Concord and writing many Books for Peace and Love is taken for writing them against these Controversies I have written of but only to end them and not to make them And who can reconcile them that never mentioneth them or arbitrate in a Cause unheard and not opened But Readers I must tell you that my title An End of Doctrinal Controversies is â—ot intended as prognostick but as dedâ—ctical â—nd directive I am far from expecting an end â—f Controversies while consecrated Ignorance is â—y worldly Interest Faction and Malice mixâ—d with Pride sublimated to an envious Zeael Jam. 3. 15 16. and hath set up a Trade of slandering all those that are true Peace-ma 〈…〉 ers and concur not with them to destroy it on â—retence of defending it by their impossible perâ—icious terms He that will now be taken for a Peace-maker must be content to be so called by a few even by the Sect that he chuseth to please and be contrarily judged of by all the rest And this satisfieth some because their Faction seemeth better than others be they never so few and others because their Faction is great or rich or uppermost how noxious and unpeaceable soever For vespae habent favos saith Tertullian Marcionitae Ecclesias We could wish the Bees seldom used their stings for it is their Death but those of Wasps and Hornets that make no Honey are less sufferable It is partly for unprejudiced Students that I write and partly for the times to come when the Fruits of malignant Faction and Wars have disgraced them and made the world a weary of them I am blamed by Dissenters as coming too near by Conciliatory Explications to some things which they call dangerous Points of Popery Arminianism and Prelacy but whether it be by Truth or by Error I leave to trial Sure our English Universities and Canonists are not like to receive any hurt by it who will not read a Book that they see my Name to though the Doctrine would never so much gratifie them And others at home and Foreigners are satisfied by Knowledge and Prepossession against such seeming Danger The great blemish of this and other of my Writings is That I say oft the same thing which I have said before Much of this Book is in my Catholick Theology and my Meth. Theol. and my Treatise of Iustifying Righteousness But 1. Forgetfulness in Old Men that have written so much is no wonder 2. But it sheweth that I have not forgotten the Matter nor take it up suddenly and superficially which I so oft repeat 3. And there may be great use for such Repetitions when it is for clearer Method or for epitomizing larger Writings which many cannot or will not read but those that can may have the benefit of more Explicatory Copiousness If it profit the Reader I am not sollicitous for the Reputation of the Writer You will find here one Chapter answering Exceptions about Futurity concerning which you must know that my Catholick Theology was so bold and large an attempt to reconcile the Calvinist and Lutheran or Arminian and the Dominican and Jesuit c. that I lookt to have been sharply assaulted for it by many But after many Years expectation I have heard of nothing written or spoken against it save one MS. Paper of Objections about the Cause of Futurity and Physical Predetermination to sin by Mr. Polhill a Councellor a Man of extraordinary Knowledge and Godliness now enjoying the Fruit of it with Christ O Blessed England if its Rulers Senators and Lawyers yea or Bishops and Teachers were all such men having many Years past sent him my Answer and having no Reply as to the question I refused to answer the second having said so much to it in my Methodus Theol. and lest the quality of the Subject should make my Reply seem sharp to so good a man And I thought it meet to publish this because it is an unusual Dispute and as no one else hath called me to it so I know not where the Reader that differeth from me will find so much for him nor whither to refer him for an Answer I publish not Mr. Polhill's Paper because I recite so much of it as may tell the Reader what it was and I must not swell the Book too much The Glorious Light will soon end all our Controversies and reconcile those that by unfeigned Faith and Love are united in the Prince of Peace our Head by love dwelling in God and God in them But falsehearted malignant carnal Worldlings that live in the fire of wrath and strife will find so dying the woful maturity of their Enmity to holy Unity Love and Peace and the causeless shutting the true Servants of Christ
out of their Churches which should be the Porch of Heaven is the way to be shut out themselves of the heavenly Jerusalem If those that have long reproached me as unfit to be in their Church and said ex uno disce omnes with their Leader find any unsound or unprofitable Doctrine here I shall take it for a great favour to be confuted even for the good of others excluded with me when I am dead Jan. 21. 1691. Richard Baxter THE CONTENTS Chap. 1. HOW to conceive of GOD. Pag. i. Chap. 2. How to conceive of the Trinity in Unity p. vii Chap. 3. How to conceive of the Hypostatical Union and Incarnation p. xxiii Chap. 4. How to conceive of the Diversity of God's Transient Operations p. xxx Chap. 5. Whether any point of Faith be above 〈◊〉 contrary to Reason p. xxxii Chap. I. Prefatory Who must be the Iudge of Controversies The true Causes of the Divisions of Christians about Religion p. 1◠Chap. 2. The Doctrines enumerated about which they chiefly disagree p. 22 Chap. III. Of God's Will and Decrees in general Th. Terms and several Cases opened p. 2◠Chap. IV. Of God's Knowledge and the Differenc◠about it p. 4◠Chap. V. Of Election and the Order of Intentio◠and Execution p. 3◠Chap. VI. Of Reprobation or the Decree of Damnation the Objects and their Order p. 4◠An Answer to Mr. Polhill of Futurition p. 4◠Chap. VII Of God's Providence and predetermining Premotion Of Durandus's way p. 7◠Chap. VIII Of the Cause of Sin What God doth and doth not about it p. 82 Chap. IX Of Natural Power and Free-will p. 89 Chap. X. Of Original Sin as from Adam and nearer Parents p. 94 Chap. XI Of our Redemption by Christ what it doth how necessary p. 89 Chap. XII Of the several Laws and Covenants of God p. 99 Sect. 1. Of the Law or Covenant of Innocency made to Adam Divers Cases p. 113 Sect. 2. Of the Law of Mediation or Covenant with Christ When and what it was p. 121 Sect. 3. Of the Law or Covenant of Grace in the first edition What it was p. 126 Sect. 4. Of the same Law with Abraham's Covenant of Peculiarity and the Mosaical Iewish Law of Works p. 132 Sect. 5. Of the Law or Covenant of Grace in the last edition the Gospel Divers Cases about it opened p. 138 Chap. XIII Of the universality and sufficiency of Grace What Grace is How far universal and sufficient p. 154 Chap. XIV Of Man's Power and Free-will since the Fall Adrian's Saying That an unjustified man may love or chuse God's Being before his own What to ascribe to Grace and what to Free-will in good p. 173 Chap. XV. Of Effectual Grace and how God giveth it Doubts resolved p. 181 Chap. XVI Of the state of Heathens and such others as have not the Gospel What Law the Heathen World is under and to be judged by Whether any of them are justified or saved The Heathens were the Corrupters of the old Religion and the Jews of the Reformed Church Mal. 1. 14 15. and Sodom's Case c. considered p. 188 Chap. XVII Of the necessity of Holiness and of Moral Virtue p. 203 Chap. XVIII Of the necessity of Faith in Christ where the Gospel is made known p. 212 Chap. XIX Of the state of Infants as to Salvation and Church-membership p. 216 Chap. XX. Of the nature of Saving-Faith its Description and Causes p. 226 Chap. XXI Of justifying Righteousness Iustification and Pardon The several sences of the words and several sorts of them Our common Agreement about them p. 238 Chap. XXII Of the Imputation of Righteousness Christ's righteousness in what sence ours and imputed and in what sence not p. 256 Chap. XXIII How Faith justifieth and how it is imputed for Righteousness Several questions about it Repentance c. resolved p. 267 Chap. XXIV Of Assurance of our Iustification and of Hope What Assurance is desirable What attainable What Assurance we actually have Who have it The nature and grounds of it Whether it be Divine Faith p. 279 Chap. XXV Of Good works and Merit And whether we may trust to any thing of our own 1. What are Good Works 2. Whether they are necessary to our Iustification or Salvation 3. Whether they are rewardable or meritorious 4. What is their place use and necessity 5. Whether to be trusted to p. 282 Chap. XXVI Of Confirmation Perseverance and danger of falling away 1. Whether all Grace given by Christ be such as is never lost 2. Whether that degree be ever lost which to Infants or Adult giveth but the posse credere 3. Whether any lose actual justifying Faith 4. Or the Habit of Divine Love and Holiness 5. Whether some degree of this may be lost 6. If Holiness be not actually lost is the loss possible 7. Whether there be a state of Confirmation above the lowest Holiness which secureth Perseverance 8. Or doth Perseverance depend only on Election and God's Will 9. Whether all most or many Christians are themselves certain of their Perseverance 10. I◠such Certainty fit for all the justified 11. Is it unfit for all and doubting a more safe condition 12. Doth the Comfort of most Christians rest upon the Doctrine of Certainty to persevere 13. Doth the Doctrine of eventual Apostasie inferr Mutability in God 14. Why God hath left the point so dark 15. What was the Iudgment of the ancient Churches herein 16. Is it of such weight as to be necessary to our Church-Communion Love and Concord p. 300 Chap. XXVII Of Repentance late Repentance the time of Grace and the unpardonable sin p. 314 BOOKS Printed for and Sold by Iohn Salusbury at the Rising Sun in Cornhil A Rational Defence of Nonconformity wherein the Practice of Nonconformists is vindicated from promoting Popery and ruining the Church imputed to them by Dr. Stillingfleet Bishop of Worcester in his Unreasonableness of Separation Also his Arguments from the Principles and Way of the Reformers and first Dissenters are answered And the case of the present Separation truly stated and the blame of it laid where it ought to be and the way to Union among Protestants is pointed at By Gilbert Rule D. D. The Christian Laver Being two Sermons on John 13. 8. opening the nature of Participation with and demonstrating the necessity of Purification by Christ. By T. Cruso Six Sermons on various occasions By T. Cruso in 4◠The Conformists Sayings or the Opinion and Arguments of Kings Bishops and several Divines assembled in Convocation A new Survey of the Book of Common-Prayer An END of Doctrinal Controversies c. CHAP. 1. How we may and must conceive of GOD. § 1. A True Knowledge of God is necessary to the Being of Religion and to Holiness and Glory No man can love obey trust or hope beyond his knowledge Nothing is so certainly known as God and yet nothing so defectively known Like our Knowledge of the Sun of which no man doubteth
Conceptions and rectifie my Judgment and give me that practical Faith and Knowledge of Him which constituteth Christianity according to the Baptismal Covenant and which is it that He calleth Eternal Life Amen CHAP. 4. How to conceive of the Diversity of God's Operations seeing he is immutable and intimately near to every Patient § 1. IT is certain That no Change wrought by God signifieth any Change in God and that no diversity of Effects signifieth any real Multiplicity or Diversity in God But all Diversity â—loweth from Unity and Change from Immutâ—bilâ—ty § 2. It is certain That God is intimately present in Essence with every Creature and every Effect and so all his Effects are immediatione proximâ—tatis immediately from God he being as near the Effect when he useth second Causes and having as much Causality in producing what is done as when he useth none § 3. Yet it is certain That God useth second Causes and therefore that all Effects are not so â—mmediately from him as to be sine medâ—is and the highest usually work on the lower § 4. Therefore it seemeth plain that Energy â—r utmost transient Operations go not as far as his Essential Presence nor are equal to his Omnipotency He doth not all that in primo instanâ—â— he can do but suspendeth freely such Acts. § 5. Therefore God may so far suspend some Operations on inferior Patients as to confine them to the Capacity or Aptitude of the superior created Causes as he doth in the ordinary Course of Nature He shineth not by the Moon so much as by the Sun nor in a cloudy day so much as in a clear nor in the night as in the day and nourisheth us not by every sort of Food alike nor cureth alike by all Medicines § 6. As God doth thus in Naturals so may he do in Morals or spiritual Changes As he is the God of Kingdoms and People he may use its Mercies and Judgments by Kings and Magistrates and according to their good or bad Dispositions as he did in the Death of Christ. He doth not use to govern Nations as happily by wicked tyrannical inâ—iâ—el Rulers as by the good and faithful Pagan Rome was more unhappy under Nero Domitian Commodus Heâ—iogabulus c. than under Nâ—rva Trajan Adrian Antonine Alexander Severus And the Empire was delivered by the fall of seven Tyrants by a Constantine § 7. So God usually prospereth or afflicteth Churches and particular Souls working his Grace according to the qualifications of the Pastors and Teachers and fitting them to be meet Instruments of the intended Good though he do not always so confine his Operations This is evide 〈…〉 in the different successes of Ministers that are skilful or unskilful wise or ignorant good or bad concordant or schismatical And it is notoriouâ— in the success of the Education of Youth in Schools Universities and Families § 8. According to this Method we may judge also of God's working according to variety of Company-helps Temptations and Hinderances and how much of God's Work of Grace is thus sapientially and mediately exercised though as to the internal manner of the Agency of his Spirit we are told by Christ That every one that is born of the Spirit is as the Wind bloweth where it listeth and we hear the sound but know not whence it cometh and whither it goeth It is much herein to know a little § 9. It greatly darkeneth us in judging of God's Providences on Earth as to the Welfare or Misery of Nations and Souls Believers and Insidels Peace and War c. that we know not how much God doth here by Spirits good and bad and how far such Spirits are left to their Free-will as Adam was in their Ministration and Executions here below God gave Satan power over Iob and power on the Sabeans that robbed him and power on the Fire that fell from Heaven on his Estate Christ said This is their Day and of the Power of Darkness What Laws the superiour Worlds are under as to us and one another is much unknown to us yea what power for our sins Satan may have against not only the wicked but even those that fear God both on their Bodies by Diseases and on their minds by troubling and seducing Temptations Sad experience â—elleth us that yielding to former Temptations giveth him advantage for easier access to our imaginations and to more dangerous fresh Assaults § 10. But yet we may be sure that all God's Promises shall be fulfilled and that he will never give Satan power to break them nor suspend his Operations so much on any second Causes as to violate any word of safety and hope that he hath given us to trust to which Assurance may serve to keep us in Faith and Hope and Comfort CHAP. 5. Is any point of Faith above Reason or contrary to it § 1. I Have answered this at large in Method Theol. It is a confused and ill-worded Question Distinguish 1. between Faith taken objectively and Faith subjectively as an Act or Quality 2. Between that which is required of all men to be believed and that which is required but of some 3. Between Reason in Faculty and Reason in Act and Habit. 4. Between Reason advanced by improvement and Reason unimproved and buried in Ignorance 5. Between Reason that hath only the Revelation of common Nature and Reason that hath supernatural Revelation § 2. I. It being only objective Faith that is meant in the Question that is no Object of Faith which for want of Revelation a man is not bound to believe There are Millions of Things above our Reason which are no Objects of our Faith And more may be the Object of one Man's Faith than of anothers that had it no way revealed to him § 3. II. Almost all the matter of Faith is above the Reason of ignorant Sots that never improved their Reason or studied the Evidences of Truth It is above their Reason as dispositive and active though not above the possibility of their Faculties being better cultivated and disposed hereafter § 4. III. The Doctrine of Faith is not only above but centrary to the false reasoning of ignorant deceived Fools for so is the very Being of God and such are many that boast of Reason § 5. IV. The Gospel of Christ and many points of Faith are above his Reason that hath only such natural Light as the Creation can give him without any Gospel supernatural Revelation Who can know in India that never heard of Christ that he was incarnate and rose from the dead and ascended c. § 6. V. Nothing that God commandeth us to believe is either contrary to or above Reason that is the reasoning Intellect informed by Evangelical Revelation or Notice and honestly and soundly qualified to judge otherwise as Law Physick Astronomy so Divinity is above the Reason of the unqualified § 7. This is apparent 1. Because we have â—o Faith in us but what is an act of Reason and
no Cause nor Dependance upon any Creature § 12. But there are other Acts of God's justice which are comprized in Reprobation or Rejection as the word is commonly understood As 1 Cutting off a sinner untimely in his Impenitency 2. Denying him some inward helps of Grace which once he had or was fair for so far as that is quid positivum and depriving him positively of some Means of Grace for his sinful refusal or abuse or for abuse of other Means and Mercies And all these punishments God so far decreeth as he Executeth which is upon none but such as by sin against the Law of Grace deserve them § 13. But where Negations are no Punishments nor Privations they fall not under the notion of Positive Effects or Objects and so are not fit to denominate a Positive Decree or Will Therefore when it is not a Punishment Not to give Faith Repentance Preaching c. is no act of Reprobation As not to give that Faith Repentance and Pardon which he needed not to Adam in Innocency not to give them in act to Infants c. § 14. Yea when a Penal Privation is only the consequent of God's not Acting and not of any Positive Act there the Ratio Poenae is of God and is quid positivum and God causeth it by that Law which did make the debitum poenae But yet the Negation or Privation in which it consisteth is Nothing or nothing of God's causing and therefore not fit to denominate a distinct Decree e. g. Not to give special Grace Pardon Iustification Glory to Iudas is nothing and so as nothing not the object of a positive Decree But both the positive acts by which any Mercy is withdrawn and also the relation of Punishment which is in these Nothings or Privations is caused by God and therefore Decreed by him As if God say This shall be his punishment that will not Eat that he shall die of Famine Here not eating is nothing but the penal reason which is in Famine which is but the privation of Meats resulteth from the Law of Nature and will of God § 15. By all this it appeareth that Election and Reprobation go not pari passu or are not equally ascribed to God For in Election God is the Cause of the means of Salvation by his Grace and of all that truly tendeth to procure it But on the other side God is no cause of any sin which is the means and merit of Damnation nor the Cause of Damnation but on the supposition of Man's sin So that sin is foreseen in the Person Decrâ—e'd to Damnation but not Caused seeing the Decree must be denominated from the Effect and Object But in Election God decreeth to give us his Grace and be the chief Cause of all our Holiness and doth not elect us to Salvation on foresight that we will do his Will or be Sanctiâ—ied by our selves without him Therefore Augustin Prosper and Fulgentius still make this difference That the decree of Damnation goeth on foresight of sin but the Decree of Salvation containeth a Decree to give that Grace that shall certainly Save us An ANSWER TO Mr. Polehill's Exceptions about Futurition SIR IAm much chidden already for writing many Books and Answering so many that object and am told That if the Case well Stated will not satisfie men no Answer will do it bâ—eause it is for want of their Receptive Capacity which long and right Studies must help them to and not a meer Answer to their Objections I very highly value the worthy Gentleman whose Papers you sent me hearing of few if any among us more commended for Knowledge and Piety The question is but whether it be he or I that by half confused conceptions of the matters in question speaketh in the Dark or which of us hath the more ripe digested and ordered thoughts hereof And must others be troubled with such Cases It is those that he pleadeth for that have made the edge of the Razor so thin that they or I do Cut our Fingers with it and have spun such subtile Notions which if their wits when they have done be not subtile enough to manage they will oft slip through or be as Spiders Webs As to the first Controversie of Futurity or Possibility this Gentleman's method will do me no good being no whit fitted to that which I expect I should expect from him that he had taken notice of my Distinctions and Explications â—f Futurity and that he had directly pleaded only for that sort or sence which I deny and had Answer'd the Reasons which both in the First and Second Part I bring against it But it is not so And to Dispute at such rates is but to try who shall live longest to have the last word it being easie at this rate to talk against one another as long as we live which I cannot expect and therefore shall give any man herein the best All that he hath said against me is materially Answered in the Book already and if he perceive it not how can I help that More Books are not like to do it nor have I leisure for such tasks Yet briefly I return I. As to my sence of the words Future and Possible 1. As they are predicated of the thing future or possible they are termini diminuentes quod realitatem existentem and futurity as it is rei ipsius futuritio is nothing 2. Whether Time be any thing distinct à re durante or Nothing is a Controversie which I conjecture Mr. P 's Pen and mine are never like to decide It is enough for me now to say that I take it for nothing Distinct 3. Yet shallow man that seeth not uno intuitu the Universe as God doth nor hath his essential Eternity is in motion where there is mensura motus and must think of things by partial Conceptions and must make past present and future his differing Notions in Duration 4. The internal Conceptâ—â— in man of a thing as future that it will be is quid reale for it is an act of the mind and a Verâ—um mentis and an act dâ— niâ—ilâ— A mental Negation is a real act To think and say in the mind the World was not from Eternity Darkness Death c. are nothing are real thoughts 5. The verâ—â—â— prolatum ore vel scripto sin will be c. the Suâ— will rise c. is quid reale It is a Word a Proposition 6. The fundamentum or premises from which such a Conclusion may be fetch'd iâ— quid reale e. g. God's Will or Knowledge or any necessitating Cause 7. God that knoweth man knoweth all his mental Conceptions and his Propositions de futuro without Imperfection knowing our Imperfection and so knoweth whether they are true or false 8. God's willing and knowing that things were are or will be are all one ex parte Dei being nothing but his simple perfect Essence thus knowing and willing But ex parte rei cognitae aut
Non-futurity or Nothing be therefore any thing God's knowing that it will be and yet is not proveth that the thing future is nothing and therefore Futurity no modus rei but a Name put by us on Nothing from God's Will to make it Supposing it be not Sin which God will not make but hath another Cause I had thought you had known how commonly the School-men prove That things that are not may be certainly known by God yea how the Nominals prove his Knowledge of future Contingents from his meer Perfection so that Socinus is not unanswered in those things and yeâ— Futures and Futurity are no beings At least you may see Answer enough in Strangius and Le Blank 〈…〉 two Authors well worth your reading Those 〈…〉 hings are certo futura which God will certainly make or certainly knoweth will be done and 〈…〉 et Futurity be nihil reale I would you had told me whether you take the Reality of Futurity to be 〈…〉 n esse rei extrinsecae or in esse objectivo intrinseco The former you are not able considerately to believe that nothing can have any real mode accident or affection if none of these what is 〈…〉 t then You must needs hold to the latter and then in man the futurity of things is nothing real â—ut the mode of his Cogitation or Conception as I have afore said we may have real thoughts that here is not such or such a thing but will be in which we frame a real Idea of that which will be and is not in our minds from the helps of similitudes or words and so say Such a thing thought on and named but not in being will be But in God there is nothing but God the Creature is of him and is in him dependently as their Cause and Comprehender but not as constituent of his immanent acts Why you add Suppose nothing to have some Verity is above my reach I think Nothing hath no Verity But 1. God's Knowledge that it will be hath Verity 2. The Proposition This will be may have Verity 3. But the thing future hath not Veritas rei Futurity as in re hath no more Entity than Possibility But to will or know that quid nominatum can be and that it will be are two real acts in Man and two extrinseck Denominations of the Divine Will and Intellect When you have answered what I said of Dr. Twisse I may review it Ad 4. You say Future is nothing ergo â—â—thing is future I am glad that the Creed a 〈…〉 Bible are not thus worded Future in your fir 〈…〉 Proposition signifieth the Affection or somewh 〈…〉 real of the thing future and so it is nothing 〈…〉 you take future so in the second it is fuâ—ile 〈…〉 true being but a gross expression of Nothing hath real Futurity which is aliquid rei But according to common use your second Propositio 〈…〉 will be taken for a denial of the Saying Somewhat will be and this is a real truth You say th 〈…〉 Proposition is identical as Nothing is Nothing We speak not of the Being or truth of Propositions or Conceptions but of futurity it self as incomplexum You after confess I told you so May you not equally say Negations Non-existents Non-futurity are nothing ergo Nothing is a Negation Non-existent Non-future Answer one and you answer the other Negations in mente are Thoughts and in the Mouth they are Words but in re negata they are nothing So I say of Non-futurity and Non-existence Frail Man dreameth that the mundus naturalis is the same with the mundus fantasticus notionalis in his Brain and Oh! how commonly do Words and Thoughts go in Disputes for Extrinseck Realities Ad 5. Because God decreeth to do any thing you and I when we know it may truly say This will be and will be is no being but Gods will and our knowledg and our words are Alas that so much skill is necessary not to be deceived by ambiguity of words God's Knowledg and your Knowledge and your Words may be all true and yet Futurity ex parte rei futurae hath no proper Verity metaphysical physical or moral being no subject capable of any such You say Did not the Futurity of the World result from a Decree It 's 〈…〉 earisome at every Sentence to repeat Distinction and open Confusion The futurity of the World is nothing Extra mentem Divinam humanam extra propositionem de futuritione Why talk you of our designing another Origin when we are proving that it 's nothing and needs no Cause And why answer you not what I wrote against Dr. Twisse before you call for an Answer to him Or at least why answer you not Strangius but impertinently talk of the Serpent Socinus If Socinus had no more wit than to take the Futurity of Sin for a Being Substance Accident or Mode no wonder if he knew not how to deny that God is the Cause of it And why do you not attempt to answer me who tell you That if you take it to be a real Being and eternal you must take it to be God himself for nothing else is eternal But I pray you say not like your former arguing about nothing The eternal Futurity of Sin is God himself ergo God is the eternal Futurity of Sin The Subject and Predicate are not so convertible as you seem to make them You say if we say Futurity is nothing then it is a wonder an independent on God and his Will self-originated and unpreventable c. You write no wonders to me this rate of Discourse being common in the World and hath been in most Ages Is Nothing a wonder Is it a wonder for nothing to be independent but yet that which hath no dependent Being may so far as a Nothing be at God's will that he continue nothing or make something the first non agendo the second agendo as he pleases that is by willing or not willing And it were a wonder indeed for Nothing to be self-originated or that Nothing should spring from any thing as an efficient Cause But reductively some Nothings may be ascribed to God's Non-agency as Beings good are to his action As God is improperly called the Cause of Darkness because he there maketh not Light so improperly he may be said to be the Cause of Nothings because he made not the contrary Something 's You say then there is fatum Stoicissimum on God and all his Works and this Futurity binds the Almighty that he cannot do as he pleaseth in Heaven and Earth This is a wonder indeed that Nothing should be stronger than God and rule him and the World If Dr. Twisse hold Sin to be nothing doth it follow that it binds God because it 's nothing Doth Death bind God because it is but the privation of Life or vacuity si detur vacuum because it is nothing Or when there was nothing but God did Nothingness bind God Is that God
he hath made Propositions he discerneth theâ— to be true You keep your way and say Wheâ— God declares things to come he declareth something because there is a Proposition But when he foreknoweth them he fore knoweth nothing which is 〈…〉 to fore-know Ans. 1. When God declareth by Propoâ—â—tions things to come the Propositioâ—â— are the Declaration it self and are something but the things declared are nothing till they are Why would you confound these and When he foreknoweth what will be he knoweth that it is not Ergo it is not 3. How prove you That to fore-know from Eternity that there would be no World till the Creation or no Deluge Resurrection c. till the time is no fore-knowledge I do not Dispute it with you but crave your proof having said somewhat my self elsewhere upon that Question You talk of a thing 's beginning to be Future before it 's put into a Proposition c. As if you still begg'd the Question and took Futurity extra mentem signa to be something ex parte rei That which is not is not true A negatione est secundi Adjecti ad negationem Est â—ertii valet consequentia saith Dr. Twisse often You ask Is it true because formed into a Proposition Then all Propositions are true Ans. Is what true That there is a Futurum Is not that a Proposition What is it antecedent to the Proposition that you call true Is it the res futura That 's false Is it the Realitas futuritionis ex parte â—ei That is it I deny Futurum saith Dr. Twisse possibile are termini diminuentes signifying that the thing is not Is it the Conceptus Divinus If that be by a mental Proposition it is not antecedent to it self if not doubtless God's Knowledge is true efficiently it will make the thing true and true perfectively and denominatively knowing things but as they are and therefore not knowing Futurity Rei to be a Being If it â—e human Conceptions they are mental Propositions not eternal nor antecedent to themselves All Propositions that God maketh are true Because true Propositions are true must all be true Because it is a word or Proposition or Syllogism which is the Subject of Logical truth doth it follow that all Words Propositions or Syllogisms are true Ad 9. Possible is a notion relative from God's Power Futurity from his Will or any certain Cause Neither is a real Entity in re In the Conclusion I was about to wish that you would have done somewhat that tended to my Edification and when you had all this while talk'd for the Entity of futurity that you would have deigned to tell me what it is if it be anything why would you not say what Is it a Substance or an Accident What Accident or mode or of what Substance Could you forget that this would be expected from you And whether Futurity be annihilated or turned into somewhat else when the thing existeth But I find that you have made a kind of attempt saying Things have an esse intentionale in God's will though not an esse Reale in themselves And is this all that we shall have instead of the Definition that should have gone before and instead of regarding and Answering what I had said of the Point 1. Here then you intimate that Futurity hath no esse reale in it self and it is the esse reale that I denied Why lost you so much Labour 2. Can you English to any man that takes words for means of understanding things what it is for Things to have an esse intentionale in God 1. Sure the commmon Doctrine of esse intentionale in man needs an Oedipus 2. But alas how shall I know what esse intentionale is in God 3. Much less how millions of millions of Nothings have their esse intentionale in God Qu. 1. Is that esse intentionale any thing real besides God himself 2. Are such esse's as many in God as the things will be in themselves Hath God Accidents and so many millions of millions of Accidents and yet most simple and immutable 3. What are all these things in God from eternity in proper language are they his Volitions or Intellections And are these so numerous Or are they Creatures in esse intentionali Do not you confess that that esse is non-esse as to any Creature If you mean Plâ—â—â—onick Idea's are not Idea's and Species as they are called in man the notes of his Imperfection while his Soul knoweth ut forma in a Body as distinct from perfect intuition I refer you to what I have said of Divine Idea's and pray you to seign nothing in God without proof But if you do prove such forget not the next time that I denied not the truth of any Divine Idea or Knowledge Your concluding line I pardon and it needs no more All that is said in this Paper on this point is materially fully answered in my Book and I even now asked a Friend what I should say to all that object against a Book which containeth sufficient matter of answer to their Objections And he answered Not write for every man a new one but wish them to read the former better Pardon my oft repeating to you my sence of Futurity with which I conclude To man Time in various instants and the narrowness of our understandings that must have various Conceptions and Organical Notions make it needful to us to use names even for things that are not or nothings When God or any certain Cause tells what will be hereafter we frame an image of that thing that is not by the help of Words and the similitude of Things that are or have been Then we put a name on that imagined thing as if it were Then we make use in our discourses of that name and turning a Verb into a Noun as it will be into Future and then an Adjective or Participle into a Substantive Future into Futurity our poor Fancies run on with it as if we had by the name made or mentioned some Substance or real Being When all is nothing but a Relative notion or Ens rationis The knowledge that a thing will be may be a real knowledge And instead of denominating the Act we denominate the Object which is internally an Image externally Nothing real and call it Future and thence name Futurition As Futurition signifieth improperly the relation of the mental act to the thing fore-known it is a real mental act 's relation As the Subject is the thing future so it is nothing real but a feigned organical Notion by which we discourse instead of Verbs The Relatio Conceptus vel nominis is the relation of a real act But the relation of the thing future as future is secundum dici but feigned instead of a Verb. And of God's knowledge I shall here say no more In a word If you take futuritio rei to be the Name of any immanent eternal Act of God whatever we think
necessary part of our Religion so must we resolutely do still or else we shall be worse than the Light of Nature teacheth Heathens themselves to be § 14. God hath many waies to cause the Effects of Sin without causing the Sin it self as by impediments to other waies by altering Recipients Objects Concauses and many others which I have elsewhere enumerated He can will and procure that Christ shall die by the sinful malice and action of the Iews without willing or causing their malice will or action as bad As he can procure a man to be in the way where a Murderer cometh with a disposition to murder and can direct the Bullet c. § 15. When one and the same word doth signifie both the Sin and the Effect of the Sin it occasioneth the error of men that cannot distinguish And so if the Scripture should say That God is the Cause of it they think it includeth the Sin with the Effect So Murder signifieth both the will and action of the Murderer and the death of the man murdered as the effect Absolom's Constuprations signifieth both his sinful will and action and the effect of both The revolt of the Israelites from Ieroboam the giving up of Kingdoms to the Beast and many such-like in Scripture are ascribed to God as the Cause not as the words signifie the sinful will and action of the Malefactor but only the produced effect of both saving when God's permission only is understood § 16. They that deride it as absurd that God should decree will and cause the Effect and not the Wills forbidden Act are too bold with God in measuring his Counsels and Actions by the rule of their vain Imaginations Yet many give us instead of Scripture and Reason but such a confident derision and say How absurd is it to say that God willed decreed and caused that Christ should be murdered and yet willed decreed or caused not that any should murder him That God should will and cause David's Concubines to be defiled and not will or cause that Absolom should defile them That He should will and cause the Kingdom to be rent from Rehoboam and yet not cause any one to will or do it c. But is all false that is not agreeable to their imagination Or is this a convincing way of reasoning It is not from imperfection but perfection that God doth not will or cause mens Sin But it is from his perfection that he causeth the effect as being the Lord and Ruler of the World Sin is not a capable Object of God's Volition or an effect which he can cause But the effect is God cannot love or cause Iudaâ—'s will or act in specie of betraying Christ nor the Iews will or act in murdering him But God can will and cause that Christ shall be betrayed and killed by such individual persons as he foreknew were by their wickedness disposed thereunto § 17. All good men have so deep a hatred of Sin and zeal for God's Holiness and confess that Sin is of the Devil and it is his special character to be the Author of it that when zeal against an Adversary in Disputation can yet make many put that character on God yea as the prime Efficient which is more than a Tempter and this as a part of the Honour of his Providence and think they serve God and his Truth by bitter reviling the contrary-minded it is a dreadful instance how far Faction and Contentious Zeal may carry men And yet when we see how carefully many avoid Sin when they have thus honoured it as God's work it is a notable instance how far good men may err in notions and yet practically hold the contrary truth and what great notional Errors must be pardoned to each other as they are pardoned of God § 18. God punisheth Sin with Sin without causing that Sin at all that is 1. He justly demeth his Grace to the rejecters of it and their Sin is the consequent of that Privation as a drunken man's wandering is to ones denying to lead him 2. God maketh it a punishment when man hath first made it a Sin q. d. If thou wilt commit such a Sin it shall have this penal nature and effect As if in the Law of Nature God decreed that excess of Drink or Meat should breed Sickness that taking a sweet Poison should torment you that Venery should bring the Pox that Prodigality shall impoverish men c. Here Man first maketh it a Sin and then God maketh it a Punishment And Sin it self being the deformity and misery of the Soul hath two relations at once in time the first in order of Nature is the sinfulness caused by Man and the second the penal relation caused by God whose Act indeed was antecedent in his Law of Nature making Nature such that it should so suffer if it will so do and yet the Effect is consequent to mans Act. CHAP. IX Of Natural Power and Free-will § 1. THE Glory of God on his Works is their expression of his Perfections by the Impression of them which he hath made And He hath communicated Being and Substantiality as the substratum and therein the Virtues of Vital Power Wisdom and Goodness or Love and these are his Image upon Man § 2. The more Power therefore a Creature hath the more he glorifieth the Power of God And the most powerful Creatures as the Sun do more shew forth his greatness than the most impotant Therefore to deny or extenuate any Power given of God is to dishonour him in his works So absurd is it to think that the Power ascribed to Man is dishonourable to God as if you took from the Workman all the Praise that you give to his Works § 3. All Man's Power is passive from GOD and superiour Causes but it is naturally active as to things inferiour and in it self § 4. God endued man at first with a threefold Power 1. Natural 2. Moral 3. Political which is a Ruling Power over Inferiours § 5. Man's Power was partly essential or inseparable and partly accidental or separable 1. To have the three Powers or Faculties of Vital Activity Intellection and Will is essential and Man cannot be a Man without them But to have these in promptitude and strength is but as health or strength to the Body a separable thing 2. To have some moral Power to know and desire and practise some moral Good it seemeth is inseparable from Man in via for all men naturally have some notitiae communes and differencing sense of moral Good and Evil Else men should be as bad as Devils But to be truly Holy was separable as Health and so was lost 3. To have some superiority over Brutes and Parents over their Children it seems is inseparable or is not separated for it continueth in Nature But the true Majesty of this superiority was lost by Sin § 6. No Creature hath any Power but what is totally derived from God and
meet right and just for God to pardon and save us which is a remote disposing the fall'n sinner to be a due Recipient of God's following promised Grace And thus it is in both senses a moral Cause as it is a Cause of our Right and of Congruity and as it is though not indeed yet morally reputatively or Quasi causa physica realis of our Pardon Grace and Salvation by making them become just right and due And being thus far a Cause of the effects ad extra per extrinsecam denominationem ex connotatione relatione ad objectum it may be called with cautelous sobriety a Cause of God's own Intellections and Volitions For though in themselves they are God's Essence yet for God to know us to be redeemed and to will our present Pardon and Salvation as Redeemed ones are words that speak more than God's Essence as in it self and include the termination of his Acts on these Objects as such and so denominate God's Essence distinctly from the Objects which else would never be distinguished nor have but one name being really but one § 12. Yet all these diversifying distinguishing denominating Causes of God's Intellections Volitions and Operations must not even denominatively or relatively be counted or called Efficient Causes of God's Acts nor strictly final but objective And therefore here it must be considered what Cause an Object is which Philosophers are not well agreed in But I think I may safely say That as to moral acts the Object is to be reduced to such a cause materialis or constitutiva as they are capable of not of the Act as an Act but as this act in specie denominated from the receptive terminating matter or object And though to Man to know this or that and to will this or that ad extra seem somewhat really different or modally at least from knowing and willing our selves or some other Object yet in God it is not to be called ex parte sui a real or modal difference at all § 13. Yet I assert not that the Ratio prima of all these Diversities of the Divine Acts is ex terminis seu recipientibus For the first Reason is in and of God himself For it is God that maketh all diversities of Effects and Changes and so it is from those divers Effects of his own Will that his Will is relatively ex connotatione termini diversly denominated But that in God which is the Ratio prima diversitatis is not divers but his one simple essential Will so that it is the diversity of Objects which is the immediate Reason of distinguishing God's acts of which before § 14. These things premised I come nearer to the Question if that which existeth not do truly cause it must be either efficiently constitutively or finally The two first are denied by the common Reason of Mankind That which is not cannot effect Nothing can do nothing And to say it is not is to say it constituteth not And as it is certain that causa finalis non efficit yea is but causa metaphorice operans so it is certain that no Creature causeth any thing in God no not finally § 15. Those that say That Christ and his death and merits did not cause before Existence in esse existenti but in esse cognito as constituting the Divine Idea's 1. Must remember that the esse cognitum as they call it is no esse rei cognita at all Therefore if only the esse cognitum do cause then it was not Christ and his Merits that caused 2. In Man for an esse cognitum to cause his further acts is but for one Thought to cause another Thought or a Volition or Nolition And these Thoughts and Volitions are really divers and constituted by reception of intromitted Objects But God is no Recipient nor knoweth any Object as we do by intromission Nor hath he any such Thoughts or Idea's of Creatures as are really divers ex parte Dei but only by extrinsick denomination § 16. If it be said That then God should know nothing till it is because a denomination must be from something and nothing can be no Object or terminus and so of his Will I Ans. 1. God doth not know any thing as existent now which doth not exist now But our Now is in his Eternity and his Eternity without partition comprehendeth all our Times prae and post ab and ad are Prepositions of no signification in and of Eternity but only In And therefore as Augustine saith his Prescience is but his Science so denominated from the Order of Objects but noteth not any difference in him who hath neither prae nor post How this is to be understood without making the Creature eternally exist I have elsewhere fully opened § 17. That plain truth therefore which must here satisfie us is That God who is the first efficient and ultimate final Cause of all things and caused by none did of his free abundant Mercy undertake the saving of sinful Man and notwithstanding his Threatning and Man's Defect resolving to make advantage of our Sin and Misery for the Glory of his Wisdom Love Mercy and Justice he promised that the Eternal Word should in due time assume Man's nature and therein do and suffer that which should glorifie him more than Man's Perdition would have done and which should make it just and meet for him to save the Guilty both inceptively at the present under the Promise for 4000 years and afterward more fully at Christ's Incarnation and finally to perfect all in Glory So that the Work of our Salvation is one entire frame composed by Divine Wisdom and Love where one part is the Reason of another though none be the Cause of any thing in God And Christ's Mediation though coming after 4000 years yet was then to do that which should make it meet and right and just for God to pardon Sin before Even as in a Building the several parts may be the reason of each other because they must be all compaginated and fitted to their relative places and uses And though the Foundation make not the Superstructure it upholdeth â—itâ— And as Aquinas briefly faith Deus non propter hoc vult hoc sed vult hoc esse propter hoc nothing is the Cause of God's Will but it is God's Will that one thing shall be for another And when all his Work must be one Frame the part last made may be a reason of the former And so Christ's merits and sacrifice though after 4000 years perform that for which it became just and meet before for God to pardon Sinners For though it was not then existent yet besides the Decree the Promise Prediction and Publication made it useful to its ends in respect to GOD and Man § 18. So then though the Cause be not truly a Cause till it exist and though all the Pardon and Salvation given for 4000 years was before the existence of the merits and sacrifice of
effect But if you will put the Question as of All together it must be so explained § 35. III. The Grace therefore meant in this Question can be no other than either some effect on the Soul as tending to a further effect or the aforesaid comprehension of necessary extrinseck means If the former be meant as it is by almost all Schoolmen and Disputers of this Case then 1. It must be enquired Whether such a thing be and 2. What it is if it be § 36. 1. Bradwardine and some that go his way do deny the being of any such thing as we now dispute of and say That God's essential will as a will is the immediate Efficient and the Act of Man is the Effect e. g. Faith and because God willeth that Act it doth immediately exist as the World did by his creating will And so here is no place for the Dispute of Sufficient Grace For God's Will is certainly sufficient to cause what he will cause And Man's Act either is existent or not And there is no Grace antecedent to it to be called insufficient unless you will vainly say that Gods essential Will is sufficient to nothing but what he preduceth which is a Dispute unfit for sober men § 37. 2. But because the contrary Opinion is far more common that there is an inward Grace e. g. to believe or consent antecedent to our Act whose sufficiency is questioned it poseth the Wits of all the Schoolmen much more is it above many Contenders that never so much as studied it to say what it is The Notions of Alvarez who calls it motus and of Vasquez and others I have elsewhere considered and here pass by And I have shewed that I take it to be so far past man's reach as to be unfit for hot Contention But so far as we may conceive of it it must be in this twofold notion 1. As it is some Divine Impress on the Soul which is Analogus to the Vis impressa received from the Mover in the Patient in corporal Motion 2. That this Impression received doth in primo instant◠put the Faculty into such an immediate Ability to the Act or such a state of Disposedness to the Act as may be called a Moral Power the natural Faculty being supposed and puts the Will in such a state as to the act of Consent as that it can do it but is not necessitated to it nor actually determined but can forbear And this is called sufficient Grace 3. And in the next instant when the Will doth consent God and Man are both Causes or Agents and the Grace is effectual by both Causes God the first and Man the second § 38. 2. The Pelagians and some others seem to think that God doth not operate immediately on mans Soul as to proximity of Causation but immediately on superiour Causes and Means as Angels Word Objects c. and that when all means are duly ordered man may be said to be able in his meer natural powers for the Act because those means are now Grace sufficient to excute it And that when one Means of an hundred is wanting it is insufficient Grace § 39. We all confess that God worketh by means and we cannot name an Act on us which he always or ordinarily doth without any means or second Cause And we acknowledge that there are gracious means and that ordinarily these must have a sufficiency in their kind But withal we must say that God worketh immediately as to proximity of Causation when he worketh not so immediately as without second Causes And that whether by means or without means as he pleaseth there must be such a Disposition communicated to a depraved undisposed Soul as shall be a moral power and put it into an immediate capacity to consent or act And to dispute the sufficiency of the means is one thing and to dispute the sufficiency of this inward Disposition or Power is another And this must be the question § 40. The common disputed question is Whether all men have Grace sufficient to believe which must be negatively answered They have not Those that never heard the Gospel have not § 41. But 2. have all that hear the Gospel sufficient Grace to believe Ans. No many of them are hardened by former sinning so as to be set at a greater distance and enmity than many Heathens § 42. But 3ly All the World hath Grace or merciful Help sufficient to enable them to do less evil and more good than they do and to use some means better than they do which tend to further Grace And they that do not this are justly denied further Help § 43. 4. But the sticking difficulty is Whether any men in the World have Grace sufficient to repent and believe savingly who do not To which I answer 1. The Question is of less moment than it 's commonly made to be seeing those are unexcusable who use not that Grace which was sufficient to their foresaid use of means and less resistance to God's Grace 2. But certainly to answer the question negatively or affirmatively I cannot as not knowing any more of Gods working on mens Souls than he himself hath told us of 3. But if we may conjecture upon Probabilities it seemeth to me most likely that there is such a sufficient Grace or Power to repent and believe savingly in some that use it not but perish For 1. if Angels had and used such a sort of Grace 2. And if Alam had such a sort of Grace and used it a while 3. And if unregenerate men have such a grace for lower Acts which tend to Faith 4. And if the Faithful have such a grace to do more good and less evil than they do 5. It seemeth very improbable that only to the fifth Instance to repent and believe none in the World should have such a sufficient grace § 44. And though Iansenius seem very singular in denying that there is now any such sufficient grace of Christ in the World which is not effectual either to believe or to do any other good that is That Christ's grace enableth no man to do any more good than he doth yet indeed it is most in two ambiguous Words that Iansenius differeth from others though many unskilful Disputants suppose it to be much more material a difference viz. 1. In one Syllable GOOD For he will call nothing good in man's Actions but Holy Love and its Effects and so saith That no unsanctified Man doth good and therefore hath not Grace sufficient to do it But moral Good is taken in three Sences or Degrees 1. Good secundum quid in a degree not predominant And so Infidels and ungodly Christians have some good 2. Good secundum quid vel imperfectum but in a degree predominant And so the Godly do good though mixt with evil 3. Good in perfection and unmixt with evil and so none do good till they are perfected in Glory To say nothing of essential simple Good
Impotency Pravity or ill Disposition by which it is averse to Holiness and prone to Sensuality must be cured by Grace where common Grace and special cause common and special Effects in the Cure § 13. The moral Power given by Grace consisting in the right Disposition of the Will is not of the same kind with the Natural Power or Faculty And the Words CAN and CANNOT used of both sorts have not the same signification but are equivocal otherwise Sin and Grace should change mans Species Those Disputants therefore that confound them for the sounds sake deceive the Auditors § 14. We must say then That quoad vires vel potentiam naturalem every man can believe who hath the use of Reason Objects revealed and extrinseck necessary Causes that is He wanteth not the natural Faculty or Power nor needeth another natural Faculty but only the Excitation Illumination and right Disposition of that which he hath But as to the said right Disposition or moral Power no one can truly repent and believe without that Grace which must so dispose him Common Grace must dispose him to a common Faith and special Grace to a saving Faith § 15. It is more proper to say That an Unbeliever and unholy Sinner will not repent and believe than that he cannot though that also may be truly said if well explained But the meaning is not that he cannot though he sincerely would Nor yet that he cannot be willing for want of the natural Power of willing But 1. That he hath a Logical and 2. A moral Impotency that is an Indisposition he wanteth both Disposition Habit and Act but not the Faculty § 16. It is an abusive miscarriage of those Disputants who in the Words CAN and CANNOT use to confound not only as aforesaid natural and moral Power but even Logical also which is neither and signifieth no more but that in ordine probandi such Premises being put the Conclusion Can or Cannot follow For so it may be truly said That no man can do speak or think any other than he doth and nothing can ever come to pass but what doth come to pass even from Gods fore-knowledge this will follow For seeing nothing ever will be otherwise than God foreknoweth it will be a Disputant will say It can be no otherwise but he must only mean that posita praescientia divina the Conclusion cannot be true that the Event will be otherwise when yet as to the nature of Causation we must say sensu physico morali that it Can be otherwise oft-times though it will not be otherwise § 17. These things considered it appeareth that we are commonly agreed as followeth 1. That all Men have natural Powers and Free-will to good even spiritual good that is Whenever such good is chosen or willed it is done by the natural Power or Faculty and when it is not willed it is not for want of a natural Faculty but its due Disposition § 18. 2ly That as to Civil or Law-power and Liberty all men have much more than Liberty granted them by God to repent and believe For Helps and a Command are more than Leave or Liberty But Liberty from the Penalty for sin belongeth only to the pardoned § 19. 3ly That as to Ethical Power and Liberty which lieth in a right Disposition of mans Faculties every man hath it so far as Grace hath prevailed and wrought it in him and none any further § 20. Or as Liberty is denominated from the Evil which we are free from 1. All mens wills are free from being constrained to sin 1 By natural inclination of the faculties themselves 2. Or by the senses 3. Or by Objects 4. Or by Men 5. Or by Devils 6. Or by God Because the rest cannot and God will not no not physically premove and predetermine it thereto § 21. 2. The wills of all men are free from any Commands to Sin that is God cannot command it for else it were no Sin and if men command it their Commands are null and lay no obligation on the will to obey them § 22. 3. We are free from sinful Dispositions so far as Grace freeth us and no further Therefore by common Grace men have common Liberty and by special Grace saving Liberty but none perfect Liberty here and no unsanctified man hath saving Liberty of Will that is such by which he is duly disposed to such acts as have a flat Promise of Salvation And where now doth our difference remain § 23. Obj. The difference is Whether a bad man can change his own will Ans. Your can meaneth the natural Power or the due disposition As to the first he can that is he hath those faculties which want not natural Power to act better But as to the latter he cannot without Grace that is through indisposition he will not § 24. Q. But is not Grace the only cause of the Change Ans. Grace only causeth the first Impress on the Soul which moveth it to act but the Soul or will it self is a Cause of the Act else it were not Man but GOD that doth repent believe obey c. § 25. Q. But is it Grace or Free-will that is the chief Cause Ans. Grace no doubt Which is commonly acknowledged by the several Parties § 26. The very marrow then of all the question about the Power and Liberty of the Will is that so often before mention'd Whether Man's Will be made of GOD such a self-determining Power as can truly do any more good than it doth or forbear more evil without any more Grace from God than that which it hath while it doth no more And whether ever the Will can and do make a various use of the same degree of Divine Assistance And this as is said is confessed of the Angel's Case and Adam's For if Adam had not Power to have stood when he fell by the same Grace that was given him but fell because God withdrew or with-held such necessary Grace without which he could do no other than he did we may then lay by these Controversies and think how to answer Infidels § 27. Those persons that make others odious by their revilings for holding Free-will or denying Free-will without telling men what Freedom it is that they mean natural ethical legal or logical Freedom from Coaction necessitating Premotion natural Inclination or viâ—ious Disposition c. should be rebuked by the Lovers of Truth and Peace as the Peace-breakers of the Church and World that presume in their proud ignorance to reproach others for that which they understand not § 28. They that say That the Liberty of the Will as natural is not violated but by Coaction and that Coaction is nothing but making a man will against his Will in the same respect and act and so that to will and to will freely is all one and that to will by Coaction is a contradiction viz. to will and nil the same and that God predetermineth all mens wills to all sinful
Slave and also promiseth him great Possessions and Honours in a Kingdom in the East Indies or at the Antipodes if he will leave his Servitude and his Country and all that he hath there and go with him in his Ship and patiently endure the Sea-trials till he come thither Here he must 1. believe that the Prince hath paid his ransome 2. That he is a wise man and knoweth what he promised and skilful to conduct him safely through all the perils of the Seas 3. That he is an honest man and intendeth not to deceive him 4. That he is sufficient or able to perform his word 5. And if upon this belief he trust him he will let go all and venture in his Ship and follow him And here one tells him that the Ship is unsound another tells him that the Prince is a Deceiver unable to perform his Word or unskilful or dishonest and some way untrusty and another tells him that small matters in his own Country are better than greater with so much hazard and sets out the dangers and terribleness of the Seas Now if the man be ask'd Do you believe or will you trust me or will you not here every one by believing and trusting knoweth that a practical Trust is meant which lieth in such a confidence as forsaketh all and taketh the promised Kingdom for all his hope Such is our Saving Faith § 12. As many Acts and many Objects go to constitute Saving Faith so if you will logically anatomize it all these following must be taken in § 13. 1. The principal Efficient Cause is God the Father Son and Holy Ghost respectively according to their several operations § 14. 2. The Instrumental Cause is the Word of God and the Preaching and Preachers of it or Parents Friends or some that reveal the Word unto us § 15. 3. Subordinate auxiliary means are Providential Alterations by some awaking Judgments or inviting Mercies or convincing Examples c. § 16. 4. The Soul of Man in all its three Faculties Vital-active Intellective and Volitive is 1. the Recipient of the Divine Influx and then 2. the immediate Efficient or Agent of the Acts of Faith § 17. 5. Preparatory Grace and Duty is ordinarily Man's Disposition as he is the Recipient of God's Grace and the Agent of believing But God is free and can work on the unprepared but it is not to be taken for his ordinary way § 18. 6. The formal Object of the assenting Act of Faith is veracit as Dei revelantis the Veracity or Truth of God revealing his Will § 19. 7. The formal Object of the accepting and receiving Act is the Goodness of the Benefits offered us by the Covenant as offered § 20. 8. The formal Object of our Trust or Affiance is God's fides Fidelity because of his aforesaid Veracity in promising and his Power Wisdom and Benevolence as a Performer and this full Act comprehendeth all the rest It is God's Trustiness § 21. 9. The material Objects of the assenting Act in genere are all God's Assertions or Revelations More especially the Gospel or the Christian Faith objective according to the Edition of the Covenant which we are under § 22. The Essentials of our objective Christian Faith constitute the Essence of our active Saving Faith and the Integrals of it constitute the Integrity § 23. And it is of great importance to distinguish here as to the Word and Objects between 1. the signa or words 2. the signification or sence 3. the things matter or incomplex objects as distinct from words and sence viz. God Christ Grace Heaven Goodness Iustice Men c. And to hold 1. That the words are not necessary for themselves but for the sence and therefore Translations or any words which give us the same sence may serve to the being of Saving Faith 2. That the sence it self is not necessary for it self ultimately as if Holiness lay in notions but for the things which that sence revealeth viz. God to be loved and obeyed Christ to be received the Holy Ghost to be received and obeyed Holiness and all Grace to be received loved used encreased our Brethren to be loved Heaven to be desired c. All sence will not bring us to the reception of the things for all is not apt but any that doth this which must be divine and apt will constitute us true Believers § 24. 1. The material Objects of our acceptance and consent are the Word of God commanding offering and promising and the good of Duty and Benefit commanded offered and promised that is All that is given us in the baptismal Covenant God the Father and his Love the Son and his Grace and the Holy Ghost and his Communion The Father as reconciled and adopting us the Son as having redeemed us to teach rule justifie and save us the Holy Spirit to sanctifie comfort and perfect us § 25. 11. The material Object of our Trust or Affiance is God himself the prime Truth Power and Good and Christ as his Messenger and our Saviour and the Holy Ghost as the Author of the Word and the Word as being the Word of God You must pardon us as necessitated to call God a material Object analogically for want of words § 26. 12. The ultimate or final Objects of Saving Faith are 1. God himself the ultimate ultimum that is the perfect Complacency of his will in his Glory eternally shining forth in our Glory and the Glory of Christ with all the Church triumphant 2. Next to that This Glory it self which is a created thing and the Perfection of the Universe and of Christ's Church and our selves in which it consisteth And therein our own Perfection and our perfect sight love and praise of our glorious God and our Redeemer 3. And next under that the first fruits of all this in this World in the foresaid love of the Father and Grace of the Son and Communion of the Holy Spirit and the Church § 27. If therefore we were put to give a full description of Saving Faith we must be as large as this following or such-like in sence viz. The Faith which the Adult must profess in Baptism as having the Promise of Justification and Salvation is a sincere fiducial practical Assent to Divine Revelations and especially to the Gospel revealing and offering us God himself to be our God and reconciled Father Christ to be our Saviour viz. by his Incarnation meritorious Righteousness and Sacrifice Resurrection Doctrine Example Government Intercession and final Judgment and the Holy Ghost to quicken illuminate and sanctifie us that so we may live in the Love of the Father the Grace of the Son and the Communion of the Holy Spirit and of the Christian Church being saved from our Enemies Sin and Misery initially in this Life and perfectly in eternal perfect Glory With a fiducial acceptance of the Gifts of the Covenant according to their nature and a sincere federal Consent and with a sincere
Conclusion helped by Grace whereof the major only is de fide He that believeth is justified but not the Minor I believe Therefore we usually call it a fruit of Faith § 42. Some incautelous Divines in the heat of Dispute do indeed say That it is de fide divina or a Divine Word that I am a true Believer And Chamier too unhappily goeth about to prove it by saying That it is the Word of the Spirit in us which is the Word of God As if the Spirit spake in us new Articles of Faith or a new Word to be believed whose work in those that are not inspired Prophets is but 1. to cause us to believe that Word already given 2. To be a witnessing Evidence that we are God's Children by making us holy as he is holy as similitude witnesseth a Child to be his Fathers 3. And to help us to discern that Holiness or Evidence and to exercise it and to gather Comfort from such discerning it and exercise § 43. We now commonly disown all such Assertions I meet with no sober Divine that owneth them because we grant that Conclusio semper sequitur partem debiliorem But yet we find that those few that call it de fide do most of them mean no more but that it 's partly de fide because the Major Proposition is so and so they differ but about a Logical Notion § 44. Some have said indeed beyond-Sea That a man cannot believe and not know it but we know thousands may believe and yet doubt whether it be a sincere and saving sort of Faith But I have written so many Books of these matters that I here add no more CHAP. XXI Of the nature of Righteousness Iustification and Pardon § 1. THE Controversies about Justification have made a great noise but I think that those de re are few in comparison of those de nomine even among all sorts of Christians and the confounding them by unskilful Heads who have made the ignorant believe that those which are but de nomine are de re hath kindled foolish Wrath and quenched Christian Love and taken up poor Souls with a deceitful Zeal who have thought that they were contending for great and necessary Truths when it was but for Logical Notions Names and Modes of Expression over-commended to them by their several Teachers § 2. The Words Iustice Righteousness and Iustification are very ambiguous used in many sences in the Scriptures and in the Writings of Divines and in the common use of men which I have opened in so many Books and so largely as shall here excuse my breviâ—y The Sences which we are now most concerned to take notice of are these following § 3. Righteousness is considered materially or formally Materially it is 1. immediately 1. A righteous Action 2. A righteous Disposition or Habit 2. And thence a righteous Person § 4. Righteousness materially is 1. in some or other particular Action 2. Or in the main bent of Heart and Life 3. Or in Perfection The first denominateth the Person Righteous in hoc or secundum quid The second denominateth him a sincerely Righteous Man The third a perfectly Righteous Man § 5. In the notion of the material Cause is included also the Comparative or Relative State and Proportion of Actions When the Action is duly qualified and modified in its physical Nature and Circumstances it is materially just § 6. The form enquired of is Quid morale And it is the Relation of the Action and Habit and Person as congruous to the justitia mensurans or the Rule of Righteousness The Rule or Law first maketh jus vel debitum and saith This shall be your Duty and your Neighbour's Due and declareth God's Due And the jus being constituted by the Law natural or positive that which agreeth to it is jâ—stum So that Righteousness formally is a moral Relation resulting from the physical mode and relation of Actions and Habits as compared with the Law or Rule A moral Relation founded in a physical Congruity § 7. Righteousness is both materially and formally distinguishable as towards God or Man Materially as it is God or Man that we deal â—ustly or injuriously by Formally as it is God himself or Men ruling under him who give us Laws and make the debitum vel jus or dispose of Propriety § 8. Righteousness towards God being Relative to his Laws is to be distinguished according to the several Laws that men are under and according to the several parts of the Law which give the word divers Sences § 9. 1. Righteousness as related to the Precept as such is nothing but Obedience whether partial sincere or perfect He that doth righteousness is righteous § 10. 2. Righteousness related to a meer Condition of Pardon or Salvation c. is the performance of that Condition which may be the Causa judicanda § 11. 3. Righteousness as related to the premiant or donative part of the Law or Promise is our jus ad praemium our Right to that Reward or Gift § 12. 4. Righteousness as relative to the penal part is our jus ad impunitatem or when punishment is not due to us according to that Law § 13. 1. Righteousness as related to the Precept of the Law of Innocency is materially perfect personal continued Obedience to our Creator § 14. 2. Righteousness as related to the Condition of that Law is the same because nothing but the said perfect Obedience is there made the Condition of Life § 15. 3. Righteousness related to the rewarding part of that Law is right to that Life which is there promised that is to God's Love and Felicity § 16. 4. Righteousness related to the Penalty of that Law is a Right to Impunity as to the Death which it threatneth to Sinners § 17. 1. Righteousness as related to the meer preceptive part of the Law of Grace is also perfect Obedience for the future not Innocency as to the time past for even Christ maketh perfect Obedience our Duty though he pardon sin § 18. 2. Righteousness as related to the Condition of the Law of Grace is sincere Faith and Repentance as the Condition of our first Right to the present Gifts of the Covenant and also sincere Love and Obedience to the end as the Condition of our final Iustification and Glory § 19. 3. Righteousness as related to the Reward of the Law of Grace is our Right to our Relation to the Father Son and Holy Ghost and all the Gifts of the Covenant Christ Grace and Glory § 20. 4. Righteousness as related to the penal part of the Law of Grace is our Right to Impunity as to the Punishment threatned specially by that Law § 21. The meritorious Cause of both these last our Right to Impunity and to Life is the Righteousness of Christ for the sake of which the Condonation and Donations of the Covenant of Grace are given us § 22. This Righteousness of Christ is his fulfilling the Conditions
of his own proper Law or Covenant of Mediation which is materially 1. His habitual 2. and actual Perfection in Resignation Obedience and Love 3. and therein his Humiliation and offering himself a Sacrifice for sin 4. And all this exalted to acceptable Dignity by the Conjunction of the Divine Perfection § 23. The Donative Covenant of Grace to Man being but a meer Instrument of Donation and Condonation that which procured it is the procuring Cause of Pardon and Life that is Christ's meritorious Righteousness § 24. Though this Covenant pardon and justifie no man till he perform the Condition and be a capable Subject by that moral Disposition yet when that Condition is performed its performance maketh us but meet Recipients and it is still the meritorious Righteousness of Christ for which we have the free gift of Pardon and Life for the performance of the Condition doth but remove the receptive Incapacity of the Patient and the suspension of the Donation § 25. Iustification signifieth 1. making us righteous and judicially justifiable 2. Iudicial Justification 1. By Plea 2. By Evidence and Witness 3. By Sentence 3. Using us as Righteous by Execution Or 1. Constitutive 2. Iudicial and 3. Executive Iustification § 26. No man of common Understanding will deny the real difference of these three And if the Name only be questioned no man will reasonably deny That in humane use the name is accordingly applicable to each And that use of it is easily proved also in the Scripture 1 Cor. 6. 11. Tit. 3. 7. Rev. 22. 11. c. And the word Righteous and Righteousness is so frequently used in Scripture for that called Inherent or Self-performed Righteousness incomparably oster than in any other Sence as will help to inform us what Constitutive Iustification is And if any dislike the Name let them call it Making us righteous if that will please them better than the word justifying § 27. Constitutive Iustification is ever first God never judged a man righteous that was not righteous § 28. No man on earth is righteous by the Condition or by the rewarding Part of the Law of Innocency Not by the Condition as performed for that Condition is perfect perpetual personal Innocency which no man hath nor is any righteous in conformity to the Precept unless secundum quid as a damnable Sinner's less unrighteousness may be called Righteousness Nor is any one justified by the Retributive or Promissory part of that Law because perfect Innocency is its Condition § 29. Though that Law perfectly justifie Christ who perfectly fulfilled it we are not therefore righteous in the sence of that Law or justified by it because Christ fulfilled it of which more anon Because the sence of the Law was not Thou shalt obey or another for thâ—e It never mentioned a vicarious Obedience But thou thy self shalt perfectly obey § 30. We are justified from or against the curse of that first Law by deliverance or grace but it is by a Redeemer and not by that Law § 31. The Causes of our whole Iustification whose parts were before-mentioned are these 1. The constitutive Causes called Material and Formal are before opened being divers in their divers parts In brief our Righteousness now is our Interest in the meritorious Righteousness of Christ and our own performing of the Conditions of that Interest or of the New Covenant by his Grace and thereupon our Right to Impunity and Life or to Salvation from destructive Punishment and to Glory 2. The efficient Causes are 1. Principal God 2. Mediatory and meritorious Christ and his Righteousness 3. Instrumental as to our jus ad impunitatem gloriam the Condonative and Donative Covenant 4. The material Dispositio receptiva of this Right is our Faith and Repentance or performance of the Covenant's Condition hereof 5. The principal Cause of this Faith or Disposition is the Holy Ghost 6. The instrumental is the Word 7. The mediate Agent is Man § 32. That Justification which consisteth in our jus impunitatis quoad poenam damni sensus our right to impunity as to Loss and Sense is the same thing with Pardon of sin whether you take both actively or passively § 33. Obj. If the Law of Innocency as a Covenant ceased upon Adam's Fall no man but he and Eve was ever under it And if so they deserved not Damnation for any Sin but final Unbelief and Impenitency according to the Law of Grace And if so no such desert is forgiven them by Christ. § 34. Ans. The Law of Grace taketh in the Law of Nature naturae lapsae though not on the Terms of the first Covenant as it was naturae integrae for preservation of Innocency And still all that God commandeth is our Duty and all that he forbiddeth is Sin and every sin deserveth death in the nature of it for it cannot be Sin and not deserve Punishment but the difference is That under the Law of Innocency it was Desert unremedied but now it is Desert with present Remedy or an affixed Pardon to every penitent Believer So much of the Law of Nature remaineth as maketh Punishment due in primo instanti naturae conjunct with a Pardon which maketh Impunity due in secundo instanti As if the King should grant a future Pardon by a Law to every man that will list himself in his Wars under his Son lest in primo instanti their faults deserve punishment while they are daily pardoned § 35. II. Publick judicial Iustification for private I pass by is virtually in the Law or constitutive Justification before described For when a man is righteous the Law justifieth him virtually And this is the sence that we are said to be justified by Faith in primarily in Scripture A Believer is made just indeed and so is justifiable in Iudgment that is justified virtually by the Law As we use to say The Law doth justifie such a man § 36. 2. But actual judicial Iustification is principally by our Iudge and subordinately by Christ as our Advocate by Plea and by Evidence and Witness which is chiefly by the Righteousness of the Cause laid open to all the World § 37. It is by the Law of Grace the edition which men lived under that Christ will judge the World Therefore we must accordingly judge of his Justification § 38. Seeing the thing to be judged of is the meritum causae the Merits of a man's Cause therefore the same may be the meritorious Cause and the material of this judicial Justification and they err that take this for an Absurdity § 39. Though the great end of God's Judgment of Man will be to glorifie his own Iustice Mercy and Wisdom and to glorifie Christ's Righteousness yet the Cause of the day which is to be decided is not whether Christ be righteous but We Nor whether he fulfilled his mediatorial Law which is presupposed § 40. Iustification being related to real or possible Accusation so many things as the Accusation may
Flesh and the Devil and take God and Glory for thy all § 18. Christ's own righteousness being not essentially given to us in it self but given for us and to us in the Effects to say That the receiving of that which is not given is the only justifying act of Faith is to say That we are not justified by Faith at all But if they mean the Effects of Christ's Righteousness then it is but to say We are justified by no act of Faith but by consenting to be justified by Christ's Merits Which is not true § 19. They contradict themselves that make Christ's Priestly Office the only Object of Justifying Faith and yet make his whole Righteousness and Merit that Object For who knoweth not that all Christ's Righteousness was not performed by him only as Priest § 20. And Christ's Priesthood hath many other actions belonging to it besides his Merits offered for us Even his present Intercession Which must be excluded if Christ's Righteousness here as under the Law were the only Object of this Faith § 21. II. The second Question I had never troubled the World about so much as I have done had I not found too many Protestants scandalize the Papists by laying too much on the Nation of Instrumentality ill explained But the judicious are here all in sence of the same mind § 22. For by an Instrument they mean not 1. an instrumental efficient Cause of Justification 2. Nor of making Christ's Righteousness ours For we give it not to our selves 3. But they take the word Instrument mechanically or less accurately and tell us that they mean a receiving Instrument as a Boy catcheth a Ball in his Hat But so as that it is a moral Instrument that is both materially a moral act and the Instrument of a moral not physical reception § 23. But when they have all done they do but entangle and trouble themselves and others with an unapt Logical notion For as it is so easie to confute the gross Conceit That Faith is an instrumental efficient Cause either God's or Man's of our Justification which I have done so oft that I will here pretermit it so this Notion of a Passive Instrument is unapt because 1. The Act of Assent is essential to this justifying Faith as well as Acceptance and so is Trust which yet are no more Instrumental in reception than many other Acts even Love Desire Hope 2. Because our Consent to other things as well as to be justified and our Faith in God the Father are as truly the Condition of our Iustification as our Consent to be justified 3. And because this Metaphorical use of the Word Instrument leadeth people to dream of proper Instrumentality and misleadeth them from the apter Notions The Covenant-Donation is the justifying Instrument § 24. I conclude therefore summarily 1. Faith as Faith in the Father Son and Holy Ghost in the Sence of the Baptismal Covenant is the apt Matter to be the Condition of our Justification by the Gift of that Covenant 2. If Justification be taken for making us just Performers of the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace so Faith justifieth us 1. Constitutively initially as it is the beginning of that Righteousness it self 2. And by a moral efficiency as it is a cause of Love and Obedience 3. If Justification be taken for the Gift or right to Impunity and Life in and with Christ so Faith is the Condition of it and no otherwise justifieth 4. But if any will call this by the name of a Submerit with the Ancients meaning but that it meriteth Justification as a Child meriteth a piece of Gold from his Father by putting off his Hat and saying I thank you and humbly taking it instead of scornful or neglectful refusing it I will not quarrel with any such § 25. But remember that as wise men seldom make any thing a Condition of a gift which hath no worth in it to please them so God saw and put such a worth or aptitude in Faith or else he had not so much as commanded it § 26. But yet a Condition simply as such signifieth neither Merit nor Causality at all but only the terms on which the gift shall be suspended till they be performed And so the performance of a Condition as such is no efficien 〈…〉 of the gift but a removing of the suspending impediment § 27. Therefore Dr. Twisse oft calleth Faith Causam dispositivam justificationis which belongeth not to the efficient but material or recipient Cause and the true Legal Notion of its next Interest in our Justification is its being Conditio praestita and the true Logical Notion is to be Dispositio moralis materiae sive subjecti recipientis call it Causam vel Conditionem dispositivam as you please And I think this Question needs no more § 28. III. As to the third Question the truth is obvious That Christ's righteousness is imputed and yet Faith is imputed to us for righteousness in several Sences that is each is reputed to be to us what indeed it is Two things make up the Sence of Faith's being imputed to us for righteousness 1. Faith is really the Condition of the Covenant of Grace which whoso performeth he is righteous against the Charge of Non-performance of that Condition and it is reputed our subordinate Evangelical personal righteousness 2. And supposing Christ's Merits and our Redemption by him this Gospel-righteousness is all that is required of us on our parts instead of all that perfect Obedience which the Law of Innocency required So that our Faith taken in the Scripture-sence is our real righteousness related to the Condition of the New Covenant and instead of a more perfect righteousness of Innocency forasmuch as after Christ's Redemption is required to be performed by our selves § 29. This no Christians that are sober can deny as to the thing And as to the Name it is plain to the impartial that will see that Paul Rom. 4. 22 23 24. and Iam. 2. 23. by Faith means Faith it self indeed and not only Christ the Object of Faith as some affirm with too great Scandal read over the Texts and try what Sence it will be if you put Christ instead of Faith § 30. Obj. But it is not Faith in and of it self that 's meant but as connoting the Object Ans. The latter clause is true it is Faith as connoting the Object Christ But the former is a contradiction For Faith it self essentially connoteth the Object If you speak not of Faith in genere for it is not any kind of Faith that is our righteousness but of the Christian or New Covenant Faith in specie who knoweth not that the Object specifieth it And therefore if it be Christian faith as connoting the Object it is Christian faith as Christian faith § 31. But will any sober Christian deny that 〈…〉 ur righteousness in one sence and Faith 〈…〉 inate 〈…〉 in another and that both are accord 〈…〉 ed to us
How fain would some men differ if they could or seem to do it when they do not § 32. IV. As to the fourth Question I answer 1. We are all agreed That God will not pardon justifie or save any without both Faith and Repentance and Desire as necessary moral Qualifications of the Receiver And this shall serve turn if any like not the term Condition and be willing to be quiet § 33. 2. Faith in a narrow Sence as signifying meer Assent is distinct from Repentance but Faith in that sence as is meant in Baptism and hath the Promise of Justification and Life is more the same with Repentance than many perceive For Repentance is the change of the mind from evil to good And the Good necessary to our Salvation is a fiducial practical Consent to the Covenant of Grace or a practical Faith in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost And to turn to this is to repent and be converted even to turn from the contrary Acts and Objects to this fiducial consenting Belief in God the Father Son and Spirit and what else is repenting but this Change § 34. 3. It was never Paul's meaning under the name of Works to exclude Repentance and all Acts of Faith save one and Thankfulness and Desire and Hope and Prayer c. while they keep their place in subordination to Christ They do but confound sacred Doctrines and mens minds that so imagine § 35. And the same Spirit that saith He that believeth shall be saved saith also He that calleth on the Name of the Lord shall be saved Rom. 10. 13. And we are saved by Hope Rom. 8. 24. and we are saved by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost Tit. 3. 5 6. and by believing the Articles of the Creed 1 Cor. 15. 2. and blessed are they that kee◠his Commandments that they may have right to the Tree of Life that right is our righteousness and may enter in c. Rev. 22. 14. By taking heed to himself and to Doctrine Timothy was to save himself and his Hearers 1 Tim. 4. 16. Many such Texts I have elsewhere cited which are all true § 36. V. As to the fifth Question it is answered before in the Description of Faith As the Father Son and Holy Spirit are one God so Faith in them is one Faith and no man can truly believe in Christ that believeth not in the Father our belief in God as God and Love to him is that Salvation to which Christ is to bring us And the Consent to use the remedy includeth the consent to have Health or to be saved And our Belief in God as our Redeemer even Christ is the chief part of our mediate Faith In a word all that Belief which is necessary to the Baptized is necessary to our Iustification But that is our Belief in Father Son and Holy Ghost in the measure that they are revealed CHAP. XXIV Of Assurance of our Justification and of Hope § 1. ASsurance of Perseverance and Salvation is not here to be spoken of but only of our present Iustification And they are distinct Questions 1. What Assurance is desirable 2. What Assurance is attainable 3. What Assurance we actually have and who have it 4. What is the nature and grounds of this Assurance § 2. I. Some pleaded so much for the usefulness of Uncertainty and Doubting as if it were the safest condition to keep us humble and watchful as excited Luther and other Reformers to take them for utter Enemies to Christian Comfort And certainly Assurance is a most desirable thing it kindleth in us the love of God it maketh Duty sweet it maketh Sufferings easie and Death less terrible and Heaven more desired and consequently cureth an earthly Mind and leadeth man to a heavenly Conversation and putteth Life into all his Endeavours Whereas a man that is still utterly in doubt of his state of Salvation and right to Life will be loath to die and therefore love this present World and have less thankful and loving Thoughts of God and his Redeemer and so all sin will have advantage and Holiness a great impediment An Infidel will confess that such Assurance is exceeding desirable § 3. II. And no doubt but a comfortable degree of Assurance is attainable or else God would never have so fully differenced the Righteous and the Wicked and commanded all to examine and try themselves and to make sure But this I have often elsewhere proved § 4. III. But all true Believers have not Assurance of their Justification because they are not certain that their Faith is such as hath the promise of Justification He that believeth perceiveth that he believeth but yet may be uncertain that his Faith is so sincere as no unjustified man can have § 5. Their Justification is real or true or certain in it self but the Evidence of it may be dark and their perception of the Evidence defective from whence it is to them uncertain that is not known with that full satisfaction of mind which we call Assurance § 6. Yea Experience telleth us That it is but a small part of the most religious Christians who will say themselves That they are certain of their Iustification and of those few that are forwardest to say so all have it not § 7. Therefore justifying Faith is not Assurance that we are justified otherwise all should have assurance that have Faith and justifying Faith in order of Nature goeth before Iustification but Assurance that we are justified followeth it we cannot be assured that we are justified but by being assured that we believe But it 's absurd to say I am assured I am justified because I am assured that I am justified But this is only against the Antinomians § 8. No man hath perfect Assurance that is the highest degree in this Life For if all our Graces be imperfect our Assurance must needs be imperfect § 9. IV. This Assurance then is not properly Divine Faith or a Belief of God's Word but it is a clear and satisfying perception of our own Justification because we are clearly satisfied that God's Promises are true and that we are true Believers § 10. This Certainty is not by an immediate Word or Revelation of the Spirit in us but yet the Spirit is all these ways the cause of it in the Faithful 1. The Spirit working us to God's Image and Will is our assuring-Evidence or the Minor in that Argument whose Conclusion we are assured of as the Spirit in the Word is the Major 2. The Spirit in Believers helpeth them to perceive his own Works in them and know their Evidence 3. And also to rejoyce in that perception This is the Witness of the Spirit which we mean and not immediate Revelation § 11. Though Hope be sometimes about things certain yet it is often also about that which we are not certain of And more have true Hopes of Salvation than have Assurance of it or of their Title
to it For Hope may be exercised upon probabilities and most usually it is so § 12. Strong Probability with little reason of doubting may cause such strong Hopes as may cause us to live and die with comfort If doubting be small and Hope be great the Peace and Ioy will be greater than the fear and trouble § 13. Bellarmin's Moral Certainty is more than most Christians attain to and his and other mens Concession thereof tell us That in this Point our difference is less than those have thought who have said it was sufficient Cause of our Separation from Rome § 14. While we are certain that this World is fading Vanity and that there is no hope of Felicity on Earth and that therefore Godliness can cost us the loss of nothing but Vanity a Faith short of Certainty and mixt with doubting about the very Truth of the Promise it self and Life Eternal may engage a man savingly in a holy Life and the forsaking of all for the hopes of Glory And such doubting even of the Life to come or of the Gospel as keepeth not men from trusting to it for their Felicity and seeking it above all and forsaking all for it will keep no man from Salvation though it be his sin and the cause of other sins Much more may this be done when men doubt not of God's Word or the State of Glory but only of their own Sincerity Justification and Salvation CHAP. XXV Of good Works and Merit and trusting to any thing of our own § 1. HEre are several Controversies that trouble our Peace but few of them that are so great as they are commonly imagined As 1. What are good Works which indeed is of great weight and the chief in which we really differ about Works 2. Whether they are necessary to Justification or Salvation 3. Whether they are meritorious or rewardable 4. What place they have and what is their use and necessity 5. Whether we may trust to them § 2. I. It is one of the Devil 's chief Policies in the World to cast out Christ's Interest by its Counterfeits To expugn true Wisdom by counterfeit Wisdom and true Faith by counterfeit Faith and true Zeal and Piety by counterfeit Zeal and Piety and true Unity and Concord and Peace by their Counterfeits and true Worship Ministry Discipline by their Counterfeits and true Comfort by counterfeit Comfort and so also it is by counterfeit good Works that good Works are oft cast off § 3. The measure of all created Goodness is the Will of the Creator who is the prime essential Good and no Work of Man is morally good but what is made so by the Will of God that is 1. Efficiently by his operative Will 2. Directively by his commanding Will And 3. Finally and Objectively by his pleased or fulfilled Will. Man's Wit Will or Interest cannot serve to make any action morally good § 4. He that intendeth God's Honour and the pleasing of his Will and the good of his own or others Souls or the safety of Religion or the Church or State and useth means hereto not commanded or any way appointed him of God much more if directly forbidden doth not a Work that is truly good but only secundum quid § 5. Could we be sure that such a Work would save Souls or save Church or State or our Neighbours lives it would not make it morally a good Work but only make the Effect to be physically good to others that are benefited by it § 6. Therefore to build Churches or Hospitals to feed and cloath the Poor to save Mens Lives to preach the Gospel are all such as finally do a physical good and they are the matter of moral good but forma denominat Those Actions are not morally good unless 1. done in obedience to God's commanding or ruling Will 2. And finally to please his Will § 7. Those Priests therefore that set carnal ungodly Sinners Fornicators Murderers Gluttons Drunkards Lyers Perjured c. on expiating their Sins by good Works without teaching and perswading them to that internal repentance and Conversion of their Wills and holy devotedness to God by which their Works must have a right Principle End and Form do but delude men and cheat them by flattery into perdition § 8. Much more pernicious is it to take Sin Folly and Superstition for good Works and look to be saved by that which deserveth Damnation and to expiate sin by sin such are the Works of Persecuters that think they serve God by unjust killing or imprisoning his Servants or causeless silencing his faithful Ministers such were the Wars of the Croâ—sadâ—'s against the Waldenses and Albigenses and such are the Works of the Inquisition and their persecuting Executioners such are Rebellions that have fair Pretences as were those against the German Emperors Fredericks Henry c. and of many of such Agents oft against the Kings of England such hath been the zealous killing of Kings and burning of honest desirable Dissenters and such is the alienating Mens Estates from better Uses to maintain a supernumerous sinful vicious idle Monastery or their prelatical needless Pomp and Pride or to buy Pardons or Masses for departed Souls or to build useless Structures to the Honour of some Saint or Angel or to set up useless Formalities and Shadows as Candles by day-light and abundance such And such are long Pilgrimages to the Shrines of such as the Pope hath Canonized and to visit Relicks and the carrying about of Relicks with an ungrounded carnal considence in them with many such like § 9. So wosully hath the Papal Party and not they only but in too great a measure the Greeks Moscovites Armenians Syrians Coptics Abassines and most of the Churches corrupted the Christian Religion by their useless or seducing Fopperies called good Works that they have among them defiled its Purity rejected its Primitive Simplicity obscured and dishonoured its Glory and made it seem contemptible to Mahometans and Heathens and made it less fit to destroy sin and frustrate Satan and to please God and to sanctifie and save mens Souls § 10. II. Were all Sects and Parties of Christians well agreed what Works are truly good it would be a shame to us should we not agree in the main how far they are necessary when the Case is so plain throughout the Scripture I think we are commonly agreed as followeth § 11. 1. Perfect Obedience is not of absolute necessity to Salvation because we are under a Covenant that hath easier terms § 12. 2. The Works of the Mosaical Jewish Law are neither necessary necessitate praecepti vel medii that Law not binding us as such § 13. 3. Obedience to Man's Laws is not necessary when the matter is forbidden us by God's Laws or when they are Laws without power that is such as men have no Authority to make § 14. 4. No Works of special Grace are antecedently necessary to our reception of that Grace oâ— of its necessary means
to this day § 8. God doth not impute Adam's Sin to us because he will do it without any real participation of ours no nor beyond our true natural participation but according to it Otherwise God should have made us sinners meerly because he â—ould do so and not Adam § 9. We receive our Original Guilt and Pravity immediately from our next Parents and but remotely from Adam It could never have come to us but through them from whom we receive our Nature from them we receive the guilt and pravity of our Nature § 10. Therefore thus far at least our next Parents communicate Guilt and Pravity to us and not Adam only In which we see that God's Imputation goeth along with real Natural Participation § 11. It seemeth to me a strange oversight in too many Divines who deny or observe not our Guilt of all the rest of our Parents Sins while we were in their Loins as well as of Adam's seeing 1. there is that same reason of both save what the change of the Covenant maketh of which after And 2. Scripture is so full and express about it § 12. 1st If I have a guilty and deprayed Soul from my Parents it is because I was once in them Virtually or Seminally as truly and naturally as I was in Adam And had not the Guilt been theirs it had never been miâ—e And if it be mine because it was theirs why not one part of theirs as well as another § 13. It will be said Because God so Covenanted with Adam that he should stand or fall for himself and his Posterity I Answer That there was any such Covenant that if he stood his Posterity should all stand or be Confirmed and Saved is more than ever I found in Scripture or can prove or do believe But that it would have been to the benefit of his Posterity I doubt not And that his fall was to the Guilt and Corruption of his Posterity I doubt not but as I said not without and beyond their natural Interest in him and Derivation from him as the reason of it And we were as much naturally in our next Parents And the Covenant of Innocency and the Covenant of Grace do not so far differ as to exempt us from the Guilt of our next Parents sins For the difference lieth not in this That the first only made Death the due reward of all Sin nor that the first did interest Children in the Guilt of their Parents sin But in this that the first made us Guilty without a Remedy But the second giveth us a Remedy presently for Pardon and Recovery and so our Guilt is not so full because it is but a half Obligation having the Pardon annexed The first Law said If thou sin thou shalt be filius mortis and so shall those that are Propagated of thee The second Covenant saith For thy Original and Actual Sin death is thy due but I give thee a Pardon and Remedying Grace procured by the Righteousness of Christ. But note That this Covenant pardoneth our Original Sin as from Adam And yet it followeth not that we had none because it is pardoned Even so it pardoneth our guilt of our next Parents sins and therefore we had it to be pardoned Both are pardonable to us therefore we had both § 14. 2. And the Scripture is more copious and as plain in making punishment due to Children for their next Parents sins as for Adam's though Adam's only was the Original of all Sin and Misery I have elsewhere proved it at large The Case of Cain's Posterity and Cham's and Ishmael's and Esau's and Achan's Family and Ahab's and many more do fully prove it And more fully the Second Commandment and God's declaration of his Name to Moses Exod. 34. and many a Threatning to the Seed of the Wicked and Christ's express Words in Matth. 23. 36. so that Scripture puts us out of doubt § 15. The common Objection is that their Guilt would be greater on us towards the End of the World than on them at the Beginning because all our Ancestours Guilt would be ours But I answer 1. If it were so it would be but many Obligations to the same Punishment when it amounteth to that which God seeth our Nature capable of For a Finite Worm is not capable of more Suffering than is proportioned to his Nature 2. And this Objection vainly supposeth that none of our Ancestours Sins were pardoned Whereas all are pardoned to the Faithful and their Seed and much Temporal Punishment is pardoned to many of the Unsanctified And God himself by limiting it to the third and fourth Generation seemeth to set bounds to his own Justice 3. And the Guilt of our Parents Sins being of a more Diminute Nature than that of our own Actual Sin Coeteris paribus it falleth not so fully on us as it did on the Committers themselves nor as our own do 4. And God offereth us the full pardon of our own and all together And as long as the Law which tells us of our desert of punishment doth also give us a free pardon we have no Cause to complain § 16. That we have all Original Sin is proved in that else Infants should be saved without a pardoning Saviour or a cleansing Sanctifier which cannot be § 17. He that seeth the universal inclination of Mankind to Evil even in their Childhood and their backwardness to Good even that Evil and that Good which Nature it self assureth us are such must needs believe Original Pravity or else think hardly of God's Work § 18. He that seeth still that Drunkenness Gluttony Lust c. do vitiate both the Soul and Bodily Temperament of the Sinner and how frequently a diseased distempered Body inclining Men to particular Vices and an extraordinarily vitiated Soul is in their Children the plain fruit of the Parents Sin may the easilier believe that we drew down Pravity from Adam also when we derive so much from nearest Parents § 19. And they that consider that Mans Soul being made Holy for God this unholiness is not only a Negation but a Privation not of Sensitive and Natural only but of Moral Rectitude will not deny but that the name of Sin or Moral Pravity belongeth to it § 20. And they that consider that Parents Cause not Children as an Artificer maketh an Engine but by Generation which is a Communication of their own Essence and what Natural Interest Parents and Children have in each other and that it is real Sin that is in both and that the Moral Privation in its Nature containeth much of Mans misery will easily grant that it is both a Sin and Punishment and a Moral Cause of further punishment properly enough so called § 21. They that lay that Reason of their denying Original Sin upon the difficulty of understanding whether Souls are new Created or Derived from Parents do too little suspect their frail understandings and their own â—deductions and too easily suspect the
Word of God And I think that I have elsewhere proved that Generative Traduction of Souls and yet God's present yea immediate Causation of their Essence which may be called Creation are here Consistent Which here I must not now repeat Vid. Meth. Theol. and Reasons of Christian Religion CHAP. XI Of our Redemption by Christ. § 1. SIN having made Man guilty and depraved unfit for duty and felicity odious to the most Holy Righteous God and lyable to his Justice the eternal Wisdom and Word of God did interpose and by Mercy did save Man from the deserved rigour of Justice promising Actual Redemption in the fulness of time and on that supposition giving fallen Man a pardoning and saving Law or Covenant of Grace with answerable help of his Spirit and Means and outward Mercies fitted to his Recovery and Salvation § 2. But God would not have this Recovery and Salvation to be perfect at the first but gave Man a certain proportion of Common Deliverance and Mercy binding him to a Course of Duty in the performance of which he should receive more by degrees till he were perfected As Phisicians cure their Patients § 3. Therefore God did enter into Judgment with fallen Man and did sentence him absolutely to some degree of Punishment even to Labour Pain the penalty of the Cursed Earth and finally to Death which Temporal Punishment God would not remit nor give him a Saviour to procure the pardon of it but only to the Faithful to turn all this unto their Benefit and to deliver them from the greater everlasting Sufferings § 4. And their own sinful pravity and privation of Holiness and communion with God which also was their greatest punishment by Consequence God would not at once nor in this Life perfectly save them from and therefore accordingly pardoned them their punishment but by the forementioned degrees For he is not perfectly pardoned or saved who is yet left under so much penalty § 5. Some thinking it hard that for 4000 Years the World should have no Existent Mediator and that an Existent Faith in the future Mediator should be more necessary than an Existent Mediator and his Work and thinking withal that it would solve many Textual Difficulties objected by the Arians and explain the Appearances of Christ to the Patriarchs have conceived that Christ hath a threefold Nature viz. The Divine Nature a created Super-Angelical Nature to which the Divine Nature was united before the Incarnation and the Humane Nature assumed at the Incarnation and that so we had an Existent Mediator from the time of the Fall But whatever conveniences this Opinion may seem to have I find no satisfactory proof of it in Scripture nor that the Christian Church did ever hold it And it is overmuch boldness to take up so great a Doctrine as a third Nature in Christ which the Church of Christ was never acquainted with And the Texts that seem to be for it are capable of the common Exposition § 6. If any think that this was the Judgment of abundance yea the most of the Antient Writers before the days of Arius because they have such unhappy expressions of Christ which the Reader may find truly Collected to his hand by Petavius de Trinitate and that it is fitter to Expound them as speaking only of Christ's second Nature than to account them all Arians or to honour the Arians by making them on their side I answer I leave every Man to his own judgment upon perusal of the Fathers words allowing all Charity that hath sufficient ground But I cannot perceive that these Writers talk of any more Natures in Christ than two and pious ends must be served by no Fictions and Untruths I think that we must rather gather with Petavius there that the Votes in the Nicene Council tell us that then the greater part of the Church were against Arius and therefore they were so before because they held in so great a point the Faith which they had received from their Fathers And that the greater part of Writers might differ from the greater part of the Church And withal these Writers having more than other men to do with the Heathen Philosophers and Orators who were prejudiced against the Doctrine of the Trinity did shun their Offence by too much stretching their speeches to that which they thought they could easilier digest which gave Arius his advantages The Conclusions either way are harsh and sad but I leave others better to avoid them § 7. The Deity it self may not unfitly be called our REDEEMER before the Incarnation though not so fitly a MEDIATOR and though Redemption by Christ's Death and Merits in the Flesh was not then wrought Because the word Redeeming is oft taken for a merciful Delivering though without a price and also because the Price was promised from the beginning But thus the word REDEEMER is equivocal signifying either the Deity as a promising undertaking Saviour or the Mediator who was promised and who performed the undertaken means § 8. The MEDIATOR himself being purely the Gift of the Divine Love and Mercy it was no inconvenience that God then had all the Glory and that Faith then acknowledged no other existent Saviour but God himself the infinite Good § 9. It troubleth men much to open how Christ was any true Cause of our Pardon and Salvation as a Mediator before his Incarnation And what his merits sacrifice and intercession could do before they did exist And the common Answer is That Moral though not Physical Causes may cause before they exist and so operate as foreseen foredecreed or willed But these Logical notions must not be used to put off the Question instead of satisfactorily answering it This tells us not whether by a Moral Cause they mean a True Cause of some moral Being or something morally called a Cause which indeed is not so but quasi causa Nor yet whether they mean a Cause efficient final or constitutive Nor yet whether they mean a Cause of any thing in God or only of some following effect § 10. It must be concluded that Christ's merits sacrifice and Intercession make no real Change in God his Understanding or Will and therefore have no such Causality § 11. But God's Promise first and Christ's Merits and Sacrifice next make a Change in the state of things laying that Ground-work or necessary Antecedent and Condition upon which it becometh meet right and just for God to give the rest of his mercy which this is the Condition of and the true meritorious Cause And so the Change was neither on GOD nor immediately on Man but for Man on the state of things which God and man were both concerned in It is a causa ordinis while that is done first which is prerequisite to what is to follow And it is a causa rei benefici◠while it not only removeth moral Impediments of our Pardon and Salvation but also setteth matters in such a state in which it becometh congruous
Believers or consent to the Covenant of Grace if at age 3. These penitent Believers sins are pardoned virtually before they are committed supposing them but Sins of Insirmity but this is properly no Pardon nor so to be called because it is but the position of those things which will cause Pardon hereafter To be only virtual is not to exist but to be in causis But it is too grosly inferred hence by some That it is not God then that actually justifieth but Man that performeth the Condition as if the Condition which is but a suspension of the Donation and the performance a removal of the suspending Cause were the donative Efficient and so the Receiver were the Giver As if he that opened the window were the Sun or efficient Cause of the Light or he that lets off a Crossbow by removing the Stop were the spring that effecteth the motion of the Arrow § 62. Neither Pardon nor Justification are perfect before death For there are some correcting Punishments to be yet born some Sins not fully destroyed some Grace yet wanting more Sins to be forgiven more Conditions thereof to be performed The final and executive Pardon and Justification are only perfect CHAP. XXII Of the Imputation of Righteousness § 1. THE great Contentions that have been about this Point tell us how needfull it is to distinguish between real and verbal Controversies The opening of the Doctrine of Redemption before Chap. XI hath done most that is needful to the solution of this Case we are commonly agreed in these following Points § 2. 1. That no man hath a Righteousness of his own performance by which he could be justified were he to be judged by the Law of Innocency that is all are Sinners and deserve everlasting Death § 3. 2. That Jesus the Mediator undertook to fulfil all the Law which God the Father gave him even the Law of Nature the Law of Moses and that which was proper to himself that thereby God's Wisdom Goodness Truth Justice and Mercy might be glorified and the ends of God's Government be better attained than by the Destruction of the sinful World and all this he performed in our Nature and suffered for us in our stead and was the second Adam or Root to Believers § 4. 3. That for this as the meritorious Cause God hath given him power over all Flesh that he might give eternal Life to as many as are drawn to him by the Father and given him Joh. 17. 2. He is Lord of all and all power in Heaven and Earth is given him Matth. 28. 19. and he is made Head over all things to the Church Eph. 1. 22 23. Rom. 14. 9 And for these his Merits a Covenant or Law of Grace is made to sinful Man by which all his sins are freely pardoned and Right to Impunity and Life is freely given him if he will accept it and penitently turn to God § 5. 4. Whenever a man is pardoned and justified or hath Right to Life this Law of Grace doth it as God's donative Instrument And whoever is so pardoned and justified it is for and by these Merits of Christ's Righteousness § 6. 5. But Christ doth initially pardon and justifie none by this Covenant but penitent Believers and therefore hath made it our Duty to repent and believe that we may be forgiven and have right to life as the Condition without which his donative and condonative Act shall be suspended § 7. 6. God never judgeth falsely but knoweth all things to be what they are And therefore he reputeth Christ's meritorious Righteousness and Sacrifice to be the meritorious Cause of all mens Justification who are justified and of the conditional Pardon of all the World 2 Cor. 5. 18 19 20. and as sufficient and effectual to the assigned ends as our own personal righteousness or suffering would have been and more though it be not so ours as that of our own performance would have been nor so immediately give us our Right to Impunity and Life but mediately by the Covenant § 8. 7. And as God reputeth Christ's Righteousness to be the prime meritorious Cause for which we are justified by the Law of Grace as afore-said so he truly reputeth our own Faith and Repentance or Covenant-consent to be our moral Qualification for the gift and our Holiness and Perseverance to be our moral Qualification for final Iustification and Glory which Qualification being the matter of the Command of the Law of Grace and the Condition of its Promise is so far our righteousness indeed and oft so called in the Scripture as is aforesaid § 9. 8. Therefore God may in this Sence be truly said both to impute righteousness to us and to impute Christ's righteousness to us and to impute our Faith for righteousness to us in several respects § 10. Thus much being commonly agreed on should quiet the Minds of Divines that are not wise and righteous overmuch and it beseemeth us not to make our arbitrary Words and Notions about the Doctrine of our Peace with God to be Engines to break the Church's Peace seeing Angels preached to us this great Truth That Christ came into the World for GLORY to God in the highest and for PEACE on Earth and for GOOD-WILL or LOVE from God to Man or mutual complaâ—ency and his Servants should not turn his Gospel into matter of strife § 11. That which we are yet disagreed about is the Names and Notions following As 1. What is meant by the Phrase of Imputing in several Texts of Scripture as Rom. 4. 11. That righteousness might be imputed or reckoned to them also Ans. The words seem to me to have no difficulty but what men by wrangling put into them To have righteousness impuâ—ed to them is to be reputed judged or accounted as righteous Men and so used the cause being not in the Phrasâ— it self but fore-described § 12. So what is meant Rom. 4. 6. by imputing righteousness without works Ans. Plainly reputing or judging a man righteous without the works which Paul there meaneth § 13. So what is meant by Not imputing sin Psal. 32. 2. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Rom. 5. 13. Lev. 7. 18. 1 Sam. 22. 15. 2 Sam. 19. 19. Rom. 4. 8 Ans. Not-judging a man as a Sinner guilty of punishment not charging his sin upon him in Judgment which is as 2 Sam. 19. 19. c. because he is not truly guilty or as Rom. 4. 8. c. because he is forgiven § 14. 2. What is meant by imputing our Faith to us for righteousness But of that more purposely anon § 15. 3. Whether imputing Christ's righteousness to us be a Scripture-phrase Ans. Not that I can find § 16. 4. Whether it be a fit or lawful Phrase and whether in so great matters departing from Scripture-phrase and pretending it necessary so to do be not adding to God's Word or the cause of Corruptions and Divisions in the Church and an intimation that we can speak better than the
Holy Ghost Ans. God hath not tied us to use only scripture-Scripture-words or Phrases and use may make them convenient and needful for some times and places which else are less significant or congruous And in this case I see not but that the Phrase is lawful well explained But if any will pretend their own Phrases to be more necessary than they are and will calumniate those as not Orthodox who will not use them or subscribe to them I cannot justifie such from the guilt of Presumption and Injury to the Church the Truth and Christ and the Love of Brethren § 17. 5. Whether they that affirm That Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us or those that deny it are to be accounted Orthodox Ans. Perhaps both if they both hold the same sound Doctrine under various Phrases And perhaps neither if by their various Phrases each mean something that is unsound § 18. They heinously err who deny Christ's Righteousness to be so far imputed to us as to be reputed the meritorious Cause of our Pardon and Right to Life or our Justification performed by our Mediator as the Sponsor of the New Covenant for our sakes and his Sufferings in our stead as is afore-expressed § 19. And they heinously err and subvert the Gospel who say that Christ's Righteousness is so imputed to us as that God reputeth or judgeth Christ to have been perfectly holy and righteous or obedient and to have suffered though not in the Natural yet in the Legal or Civil Person of the Sinner or Believer as their strict and proper Representer and reputeth us to have been perfectly holy righteous or obedient in Christ as our Representer and so to have our selves fulfilled all righteousness in and by him and in him to have satisfied Justice and meriâ—ed Eternal Life and Christ's Righteousness to be ours in the same sence of Propriety as it was his own For his Divine Righteousness is the Essence of God and his Humane his Habits Acts and Relations which are the Accidents of his own Person only as the Subject and cannot be in another as is after shewed § 20. Though most of us now leave this Doctrine to the Antinomians or Libertines yet so many Protestants formerly have seemed to own it by their unmeet Phrases in extreme opposition to the Papists or at least to come too near it as hath greatly scandalized and hardened their Adversaries and injured the Reformed Churches § 21. The Person of our Mediator was neither in the Sence of the Law or in God's account properly the person of the Sinner Christ and we are distinct persons § 22. Had we been perfectly holy innocent and obedient in Christ it would follow 1. That we are justified by the Law of Innocency as having perfectly done all that it commanded us which is not true It is by the pardoning Law of Grace that we are justified § 23. 2. That we have no need of Pardon nor of Christ's Sufferings for our Pardon nor of Prayer for Pardon nor any means for it for he needeth no pardon that is perfectly innocent § 24. 3. Therefore they assert Contradictions when they say that we both perfectly obeyed by and in Christ and yet suffered or satisfied in or by him for our Disobedience § 25. 4. It would follow that all penalties even corrective laid on us by God are injuries or no penalties because we are innocent § 26. 5. And that God's denying us any helps of his Spirit and permitting the remnant of our Sin yet unhealed and the weakness of our Graces are an injurious denying us our Right § 27. 6. It would follow that we have present Right to the present possession of the whole Reward both Grace and Glory and that our delay is our wrong because he that is supposed to have done all that the Law maketh his Duty from his Birth till his Death hath right to the Reward by the Law or Covenant § 28. 7. And it would follow That no Duty could be required of us as a Condition of any Benefit purchased by Christ nor any sin charged on us so far as to be indeed our sin because we are reputed perfectly holy and innocent § 29. Many other such Consequents I pass by and other Arguments against this Opinion and the Confutation of the contrary because I have done it all elsewhere especially in a peculiar Discourse on this Subject and in my Disputations of Justification § 30. Christ's own Righteousness habitual or actual is not ours as it is his in strict sence in it self as if we were the Proprietors the Subjects of his Habits or the Agents of his Acts For it is impossible that the Accidents of several Subjects should be the same § 31. And the form of Christ's Righteousness is therefore no more ours than the Matter For Righteousness in Christ and Righteousness in each Believer are distinct Righteousnesses § 32. Many Divines have pleaded That Christ's Righteousness is the form of ours and others that it is the Matter and others that it is the meritorious Cause and have too much troubled the Church with Logical Notions The meritorious Cause it is undoubtedly and they that say That it cannot then be the material Cause must consider that we mean that it is the Matter of the meritorious Cause And had we been innocent our selves would not our Innocency have been both the Matter of our righteousness or Merit and the meritorious Cause of our right to Life § 33. But this supposeth that the Matter of the Gospel subordinate righteousness which consisteth in that Repentance Faith and Holiness which is required in us to our right to life is to be found in our selves and not in Christ for us § 34. But the form of Christ's righteousness cannot be the form of ours as is aforesaid but it is the form of that which is the meritorious Cause of ours But what need have we of thâ—se Disputes § 35. The Not imputing of sin is called also by some the Form of Iustification and by others that and the Imputation of righteousness conjunct and by others that and God's accepting us as righteous others call these the Matter of Iustification and thus mens Logick ill-managed troubleth the Hearers which I would not mention had it not been necessary to disintangle them § 36. They that will dispute what is the form of Iustification must first confess the Ambiguity of the Word and tell us in which Sence they take it There are so many things that are truly the form of Iustification taken in many Sences that without such distinguishing to dispute of the form of Iustification is worse than to say nothing Iustification taken actively as the Act of the Iustifyer hath one form Iustification passively taken for the state of the justified hath another form And â—â—ch of these are subdivided into many Acts and many Effects which have each their form The Act of pardoning sin is one thing and therefore hath one form The Act of