Justification but his granting of this Promise or Act of Grace is the true natural efficient instrumental cause of our Justification even the immediate cause If Christ's Merit was but the remote Cause of Justification then justifying Faith doth respect it but remotely as the procuring cause of the New Covenant and if the grant of an Act of Grace be the only proper and immediate Cause of Justification then Faith only respects that immediately when it justifies and so Christ only as a King or as the Enacter of a New Law Ibid. p. 27. Again he saith It is most evident in Scripture that Merit Satisfaction are but the moral remote preparatory causes of our Justification though exceeding eminent c. and that the perfecting neerer efficient causes were by other Acts of Christ and that all concurred to accomplish the work By this it appears that Justification is an Act of Christ as a King only though his Merit made way for his Kingly Power and his Prophetical teaching promoteth mans obedience that his justifying us is his acquitting us from guilt and condemnation because we have obeyed his Law or New Covenant and that obedience to that Law as obedience to a Royal Law is the condition of our Justification or the thing for which we must be justified and that Faith with these men is nothing but obedience to the Gospel-Precepts grounded upon a belief that they came from Christ and shall be rewarded according to his Promise and therefore when they contend That Faith justifieth not by one act of affiance but by all its acts they do but confound themselves and the question For even according to themselves Faith justifieth properly and immediately by one act only or under one onely notion viz. of obedience to the Gospel and that directed to Christ only as King and that the other acts of it respecting his Merit and Teaching are but accidental to it and without its notion as justifying We are then to prove that obedience to the Gospel is not the condition of our Justification though joyned with or builded upon Faith in the truth of it and thus I argue The First Argument From Rom. 4.16 17. Therefore it is of faith that it might be of grace to the end the Promise might be sure to all the Seed not to that only which is of the Law but to that also which is of the Faith of Abraham who is the Father of us all c. The Faith here spoken of is that whereby Abraham was justified and by which the Promise should be made sure to all his Seed both Jews and Gentiles which is the Promise of being blessed with him in his Seed Christ Now the Apostle saith That Justification or Blessedness comes by Faith that it might be by Grace i.e. altogether free but Justification upon the condition of obedience is not altogether free therefore justifying Faith includeth not obedience as the condition of Justification I prove the Minor thus Grace and Works are utterly inconsistent in God's dealing with Man for his Salvation For Work bring some worthiness though not strict Merit but Grace supposeth nothing but deseâ—â— of Punishment Rom. 11.6 If by grace the not of works otherways grace is no more grace Election of grace v. 5. excludeth all works why doth not Justification also if it be bâ— Grace If obedience to the Gospel be the condition of our Justification as perfect obedience to the Law of Works was formerly how is it Grace more now than it was then Did God gratiously grant the New Covenant to lost Sinners True here was Grace but when he had granted it he justifieth them only for the performance of it or their obedience to it therefore the giving of the New Covenant is of Grace but Justification by obedience to it is not of Grace but of Works Doth a New Covenant accept of imperfect obedience and carry pardon with it It doâ—â— indeed not insist upon perfect obedience to the Law of Innocency as the only way of life but it doth not dispence with or allow the breach of any of those Commands that were perpetual What then It requireth perfect and exact obedience to the Gospel and fâ—â— want of that obedience men shall be condemned there is no pardon for want of sincere obedience under the Gospel no more that there was for want of perfect obedience to Adam therefore all the mercy grace and pardon of the New Covenant lieth in relaxing the Covenant of perfect works in giving a New and somewhat Milder Covenant to men when they might have been condemned for the breach of the former but still their Justification or right to Life dependeth wholly upon their obedience to this New Covenant and so â—â— no more of Grace properly than Adam should have been But they say our obedience is performed by the efficacy of Divine Grace and therefore we may be said to be justified by Grace though by our Obedience As if the Elect Angels that stand were not justified or accepted in and by their own integrity because preserved by the Grace of God or as if Adam could not have been justifyed by keeping the Law unless he had done it meerly by his own connate strength without additions or assistance of Divine Grace throughout his Life What the Grace is which these men allow to our obedience is yet uncertain but this altereth not the nature of Justification if it be by obedience it is not of grace but of works i. e. a man is pronounced Just or Righteous for his own obedience by what principle soever it be wrought therefore the saith here spoken of neither is nor doth include obedience Again It is a Faith that the Promise may be sure or firm to all the Seed but if obedience be the condition of life the Promise cannot be sure to all or any Believers Ergò this Faith doth not include Obedience Professed Arminians grant there can be no assurance ordinarily of any particular man's Salvation yea that there is no absolute certainty thet any Man should be saved though Christ died for them all Others speak more dubiously but if Justification be suspended upon our Obedience to the Gospel to our lives end it cannot be certain to any Man that he shall be justifyed and saved till he be out of the World there may be indeed an objective certainty of the Promise in general viz. He that obeyeth to the End shall be saved but thus the promise to Adam was as certain viz if he had obeyed perfectly to the End he should thereby be justifyed but here was a Promise to Abraham That he and his Seed should be blessed and this Promise was not made to the Works of the Law but to the Faith of Abraham and his Seed that the promise might be certain i. e. that they should certainly attain the promised blessedness and by no means fall short of it but this certainty comes not from persevering Obedience which is it self uncertain Ergò
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and v. 17. Death reigned had its full power upon Man kind by means of this one Man And v. 18. By the Offence of one Judgment came upon all to condemnation all are condemned for his Offence And v. 89. The reason is because by that one mans disobedience peccatores instituti sunt they are made constituted Sinners whence the Argument is strong All men be condemned dead sentenced adjudged to death for the Sin of Adam therefore that sin is accounted theirs imputed to them not as if they had personally been the Actors of that Sin or that it did inhere or adhere properly to them but Adams sinning as the Head of Man kind and as it were for all men they are accounted to have sinned in him so as to incur all the punishment of his Sin Now let it be observed that ex adverso in like manner cometh the Gift of Life of Justification and the Gift of Righteousness by Jesus Christ by his Obedience men are made righteous justi constitutisunt are constituted righteous But men were made Sinners by Adams Sin and so fell under the Sentence of death before they sinned in their own persons without their own personal disobedience through being destitute of grace they must needs sin and so add to their punishment Therefore they that believe are made righteous in Christ with his Righteousness before any personal righteousness in them without the condition of their own obedience though being made righteous in Christ they receive grace to be obedient and so to be fit to receive the Inheritance giv'n them in Christ Object It is objected by a learned and grave Person that in this place v. 19. we are not said to be justified with Christs Obedience Hotchkis ut supra p. 43 44. but by it and that by signifieth an efficient or meritorious cause but with a formal cause and that we may be said to be justified by the Obedience of Christ as it merited Justification upon the Terms of the Gospel but not with it as imputed to us Answ Forgetfulness of Grammar is no wonder scarce a fault in his Age but that tells us that the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when construed with a Genitive Case doth signifie cum with as well as per by and gives this example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum gladiis The same also say the Lexicons So then by the favour of the Greek word we may translate it with the Obedience of one many are made Righteous Moreover by signifieth the formal Cause which is causa per quam and with an Instrumental Cause Part 1. p. 229 230. not a Formal as hath been shewed And thus this distinction is grounded upon a mistake both in Grammar and Logick But he farther saith that here is no word of Imputation or imputing Christs Obedience to us and that it is barely said By his Obedience we are made Righteous I answer It is necessarily implied we are made righteous by the Obedience of Christ as we were made Sinners by the Disobedience of Adam but his Disobedience made us Sinners by imputation or being imputed to us ergò the Comparison is expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If this Authors sence be admitted in the latter words it must be affixed also to the former i. e. If we are made righteous by Christs Obedience only because he merited that we should be justified if we obey the Gospel then it must follow we are made Sinners by Adam's Disobedience only because he merited by his Fall that if we sinned we also should perish If Christ only brought in a way of righteousness how we might be justified if we observed it then Adam only brought in a way of Sin how men might be condemned if they trod in his Steps but this is absurd To return that Adam's Sin is properly imputed to us I farther prove from Eph. 2.3 We were by Nature Children of wrath even as others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the rest of men Grotius his gloss upon these words viz. That the Apostle meaneth only the Gentiles who were born out of the Church and out of the Covenant and therefore were by nature Children of Wrath is against the words of the Text. For the Apostle having spoken of the Gentiles in the two former verses putteth himself and the Jews into the same condition in this verse saying Amongst whom we all had our Conversation in times past and we were by nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Children of wrath even as the rest All men therefore are by nature Children of wrath i. e. are born Heirs of wrath under the Sentence of Condemnation For as Children of Life Children of the Kingdom signifie those that are Heirs under the Promise of Life so Children of Wrath are those that are Heirs under the Sentence of Condemnation Now I demand how all men should come under the sentence of condemnation and inherit it as their natural though woful Birth-right unless Adams Fall be sharged upon them and so as soon as they have a Being derived from him in a natural way the Sentence pronounced against him is â—n force against them also Suppose God might justly have deprived all Mankind descending from Adam of his present Favour and of the Gifts and Graces Priviledges and Benefits which Adam enjoyed because Adam had forfeited them and could not therefore leave them to be enjoyed to his Posterity Aâ— a Father spending or forfeiting his own Inheritance and Honours doth deprive his Children of them though they are not therefore made guilty of his Offence yet how will it consist with Justice besides the loss of all Privileges to adjudge sentence men to death before any Trial is made of their Obedience whether they will not do better than Adam did or aâ— least do something that in their forlorn Estate may move some compassion to them and mitigate their misery This is our Case we are born Heirs of Death Judgment and Condemnation is past upon all men taketh hold of them as soon as they are men How can this be without any guilt chargeable upon them and if there be any it must be the guilt of Adams Fall Ezek. 18.20 God declared that the Son should not die for the Fathers Sin it would certainly be high injustice in men to deprive the Posterity of an Offendor for ever not only of their Fathers Inheritance but of all possibility of return and recovery of themselves so that they should ever be dealt with as Malefactors Much more is it consistent with Divine Justice to punish all Mankind not only with the loss of Adams Priviledges but with Eternal Death inevitably for any thing the Law provideth to the contrary meerly because they descended from him without trying or expecting how they would behave themselves There must therefore be a Guilt upon all men by nature viz. the Guilt of Adams Sin and that must be imputed to them and
hereupon account the Law to be satisfied and like to be purchased for them without any thing to be further done by them as a condition of life But their true Sence is That the Obedience of Christ is ours remotely only sc that it hath merited a New Covenant which if we perform we shall live 2ly According to this Sence Christs righteousness is no way our righteousness It may be the means of benefit to us but it doth in no sence make us righteous or is the cause of our righteousness or justification which the Scriptures alledged do intend This is thus proved It is none of the four kind of Causes nor reducible to them therefore it is no Cause The Antecedent I thus prove It is not the Material or Formal Cause this they grant For then we must be immediately justified by it it must compose our righteousness they sometimes call it the matter of our righteousness but without sence It is not the Final Cause Christs righteousness is not the end for which we are justified It is not the Efficient neither Physical nor Moral Not Physical for then Christs obedience must actively work obedience or righteousness in us which is absurd Not a Moral Cause or Meritorious which they most insist on For Christ did not merit Grace whereby we should obtain the Gospel and so be justified as they acknowledge seeing he died for all alike though thus he would be but a remote meritorious Cause of Justification meriting that for which we should be justified but he merited only the Covenant of Life upon sincere obedience to the Law he should prescribe All then that he is the Meritorious Cause of is the New Covenant for when this Covenant is promulgated it is left to men whether they will obey or no and so whether they will be justified or no He hath merited nothing further Now if any man come to be justified by performing the condition of this Covenant can Christ be said to merit this Justification for him which as to his Merits was contingent might or might not be and depended wholly upon his own Will and Obedience If a man procure a Charter for a Town and make them a Corporation thereby and by virtue of this Charter they that serve an Apprentiship shall have the Privileges and Freedom of this Town shall it be said of those that thus come into the Freedom some hundred years after that their Freedom was merited bought or procured by him that procured the Charter Surely they themselves merit their Freedom the other was but an Instrument of procuring the Charter In like manner if Christ only merited the Covenant by performing whereof men shall be justified surely men themselves are the proper meritorious immediate causes of their own Justification or Righteousness because they fulfill the condition whereto it is promised and which is the formal righteousness for which they are justified and Christ is but an Instrument of procuring the Covenant and an improper remote and contingent cause of their Justification by their fulfilling it And thus in their sence Christ is no true Cause of our Righteousness Argument 4. Fourthly Mat. 20.28 I argue from these Scriptures which say Christ laid down his Life as a Ransom for us redeemed us 1 Tim. 2.6 Col. 1.14 Tit. 2.14 Rev. 1.5 Isa 43.3 Exod. 30.10 11. Num. 18.15 that in him we have redemption and that he washed us from our Sins in his own Blood From whence I argue Redemption is of persons a ransom and price is paid for persons not for Laws and Covenants and this was typified by the redemption of Israel out of Aegypt whom God saith he redeemed and gave Nations for them By the Redemption of the First Born and of the whole People whenever they were numbred and by the year of Jubilee which is called the Year of Redemption I subsume Ransoms and Redemptions if not paid and purchased by the Persons themselves who were in Bondage are imputed to them i.e. they are immediately delivered set at liberty by the payment of them as much as if they had paid the Prize themselves Therefore if Christ properly redeemed bought purchased us paid a Ransom or Prize for us then it is imputed to us we must be delivered by that very prize and ransom as much as if we had paid it our selves Our Opposites are loath to speak down-right with the Socinians and to deny that Christ's Death was a Prize and Ransom for us but they must and do interpret this Ransom Prize Redemption c. to be all improper and metaphysical Thus Mr. Trueman saith That the immediate Effect of Christ's Satisfaction was only a Satisfaction to Justice Gr. Prop. p. 86. that God might be juâ—â— though he should pardon Sinners and that he might pardon them salvâ justitiâ upon what terms he pleases not that he must pardon them come what will of it or else be unjust not that Sinners should ipso facto be pardoner the Prize being undertaken paid and accepted And again p. 89. Christ's Sufferings were not proper payment but a valuable consideration or you may call it a refuseable payment though it be not properly payment at all And Mr. Hotchkis paraphraseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tix 2.6 not a Ransom but something instead of a Ransom they do therefore implicitely yield if Christs death was a Ransom and Prize for us that then we must be immediately delivered by it which is all one with his Righteousness being imputed to us and in denying the Imputation of Christs Righteousness they do deny That his death was a Ransom Prize or Payment for us against the current of the Scriptures They make all the Effect of the Obedience of Christ to be only the removing of that necessity which lay upon God to condemn all men for breaking the First Covenant so that he might if he pleased save Sinners by any other Covenant p. 86. So Trueman exprefly From whence it follows That notwithstanding the death of Christ God might have refused to have made a New Covenant or to have saved any Sinner if he pleased Which also the Synod of Dort charged upon the Dutch Arminians Proprium integrity finem mortis Christi fuisse Act. Syn. Dordr in Judic Theol. Mag. Bri. Art 2. ut Deo Patri acquireret jus potestatem servandi homines quibus vellet conditionibus How far then was Christ from redeeming men if God after the death of Christ would have been just though he should have saved no man Moreover how can we be said to be washt with Christs Blood if Pardon and Justification was not immediately procured by it Under the Law when the People were sprinkled with the Blood of t e Sacrifice in allusion to which Christs Blood is called the Blood of Sprinkling Heb. 12.24 they were immediately discharged from gâ—ilt and reconciled If then we are sprinkled or washt with Christs Blood we must in like manner be justified and reconciled by
Argument 4. We are justifyed by Christ as Priest p. 24. Prophet and King conjunctly and not by any of these alone much less by his Humiliation and Obedience alone then according to the Opponents own Principles who argue from the distinct interest of the several parts of the Objects to the distinct interest of the several acts of Faith we are justified by believing in Christ as Priest Prophet and King Answ Faith as a distinct habit hath no acts but practical assent to a revealed truth which in respect of the promise is called trust or affiance One habit hath but one sort of elicite acts though it may cause divers effects upon the will and affections according to the nature of divers objects therefore we do not argue from the distinct interest of several acts of Faith but from Faith as trusting in the Promise of Justification as the special object of the act that justifieth Again the Object of justifying Faith according to this Opinion must be the whole declared Will of Christ or the whole Gospel for that is it which we believe and obey and Obedience to it is the form or righteousness by and for which we are justifyed therefore those Terms of Christ's justifying in his whole Person and all his Offices or Faith justifying with respect to them are added in vain they being no more included in the nature of Justification or respected by Faith as justifying in this way than in ours The promise of life by Christ to believing only is as much founded upon his whole Person and all his Offices as if the promise were made to our Obedience to the whole Gospel But we deny the Antecedent let us hear the proof The Word Justification signifieth these 3 acts p. 24. 1st Condonation or constitutive Justification by the Law of grace or promise of the Gospel 2ly Absolution by sentence in judgment 3ly The execution of the former by actual liberation from penalty The two former are more properly called Justification As for the first I argue Christ doth as King and Benefactor on supposition of his antecedent Merits enact the Law of grace or promise by which we are justified Ergò As King and Benefactour he doth justifie us by condonation or constitution As the Father by a right of Creation was Rector of the new created World and so made the Covenant of Life that was then made so the Son and the Father by right of Redemption is Rector of the new redeemed World and so made the Law of grace that gives Christ and life to all that will believe c. Answ Christ as God the same in substance with the Father did together with him enact both the Covenants of Works and of Grace but as Mediator which only is to our purpose he did not enact the Covenant or Law of Grace and it is only said that he did and not proved It was God as God and in special the Father according to the order of the Three Persons that gave the Law of Works that was offended by sin that condemned sinners and therefore he only that could appoint a way whereby they should be saved and he only coul justifie him Christ as Mediator though God in Nature yet in Office was God's Servant Isa 53.11 Mat. 12 18. and his business was not to enact Laws or constitute a way for Man's Redemption but to work out and bring to pass that way which God purchased and to fulfil his Will in it Heb. 10.7 which he did first by satisfying the Law and purchasing Reconciliation as a Priest then by declaring as a Prophet that Pardon was to be had by believing in his Bloud and Lastly as a King yet ministerial under the Father by overpouring the hearts of Gods Elect to believe that God might justify them and then by sanctifying and ruling them by his Word and Spirit to bring them to life It belongeth to the Father to justifie constitutively i. e. to propose the way wherein Men should be justified and through believing to justifie them to the Mediator almost but ministerially to declare it to Men by authority from the Father but most properly to bring it to pass by the execution of all his Offices Rom. 8.33 34. It is God that justifies it is Christ that died rose and intercedeth p. 25. 2ly It is said Justification by sentence of judgment is undeniably by Christ as King for God hath appointed to judge the World by him Acts 17.31 c. Answ Christ in judging the World is but a ministerial King For God is the Supream Judg Heb. 12.23 however we deny what is here took for granted That the sentence of the General Judgment is a declaration of a sinners Justification from the guilt of sin It is only the adjudging of justified Believers to Glory in Heaven for their Obedience according to Gods Fatherly promise p. 25. 3ly It is said For the execution of the sentence by actual liberation there can be little doubt being after both the former Answ Christ is ministerial in this also for he calleth Believers to inherit the Kingdom as being the blessed of the Father and it being prepared for them from the beginning of the World Mat. 25.34 Besides Glory in Heaven is a fruit of Adoption not of Justification immediately and Adoption is the act of the Father not of the Mediator And let it be observed That here all Justification is referred to Christ as King properly and immediately as was before said and he as Priest and Prophet did but make way for his justifying of us as King and therefore these offices are mentioned in the Question only for a shew that they acknowledge we are justifyed by his Bloud This is in effect confessed in the following words As the Teacher of the Church Christ doth not immediately justify but yet mediately he doth Ibid. and it is but mediately that he justifyeth by his Merits It is also said That Christ's granting the Promise or Act of Grace is the true natural p. 25. efficient instrumental Cause of Justification even the immediate Cause So then the whole Gospel as to be obeyed by us is the proper and immediate Instrument of our Justification and our obedience to the Gospel together with God's acceptance of it is the only internal Cause of Justification or the Righteousness for which we are justifyed and Christ's Merit and Righteousness and his Promulgation of the Gospel are but extrinsecal remote and preparatory Causes of it and these not absolutely necessary seeing these Authors do not deny but that God might have saved man without satisfaction and then it will follow if a man obey the Precepts of the Gospel and acknowledge Christ as Lord and King he may be saved although he believe only in a Glorified Saviour as the Jesuites preached to the people of China yea I understand not but a Socinian may be saved by obeying the Gospel though he deny the Merit of Christ having
Spirit to abide with us for ever Joh. 14.16 And the powring out of the Spirit was reserved till his Work of Redemption was finished and he should be possessed of Glory John 16.7 And then he promised the Spirit â—o lead us into all truth to reveal himself to us and to glorifie him in us v. 12 13 14. Lastly He prayed for sanctifying Grace and perseverance for them that did and all that should hereafter believe till they all come to be one in him John 17.15 16 21. And wherefore is the Power of giving Grace committed to the Mediatour if not purchased by him and why doth he interceede for that he never bought and paid for If then Christ purchased Grace as well as a Right to Life then Justification giveth a Right to Grace as well as to Life it self and so is more than Pardon 5. I argue from the Impulsive Causes Pardon is an Act of meer Mercy but Justification is an Act of Justice therefore it is not meer Pardon God justifieth Believers not as a meer Act of Favour though free Mercy be the Foundation and the prime impulsive cause of Justification and all the Fruits of it but immediately it is an Act of Justice Justice being the immediate Impulsive Cause It is not only a Just thing with God to justifie a Sinner through Christ that he may do it without wrong to his Justice as some gloss it but it is an Act of proper Justice having received satisfaction to his Law to justifie and acquit him it would not be just to deny it This is intimated Rom. 8.33 35. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect It is God that Justifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who shall indite or implead them in course of Law or Judgment or else there is enough to be charged against them The Reason is because it is God that justifieth God who is to be Judge to give the Sentence and therefore will justifie judicially or as an Act of Judgment And the ground of this is in the next words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who shall condemn in Judgment seeing Christ has died and so satisfaction is made to Justice When we pardon an Offence which we might justly punish we do cedere de jure forbear our Right and Justice gives place to Mercy but Justice cannot pardon or acquit unless it be satisfied unless it have what is right and due according to Law Object But it is said That God pardoneth legally and judicially by virtue of the Evangelical Law so it is an Act of Justice as well as of Mercy Vid. Justiif Evang. p. 23. So Truman They say a Sinner is not pardoned by Free Grace and Absolute Pardon but upon conditions and terms required in the Gospel to be performed by him which when he hath performed the Evangelical Law doth justifie him pronounce him pardoned and so his Pardon is an Act of Justice according to the Gospel Law though not according to the Law of Works which is content with nothing but Satisfaction Answ Let any fair Disputant judge whether this 〈◊〉 not to shift the Question They have said â—â—at Justification is meer Pardon bare Pardon nothing but Pardon and yet it is not abâ—â—ute Pardon but Pardon upon condition to 〈◊〉 performed by him that will receive Pardon â—â—re not these Conditions when persormed our â—â—angelical Righteousness This they conâ—â—d for And are they not a positive Righteousness Yes they are Gospel Obedience â—â—hat sence is it then to say we are pardoned â—â—thout any positive Righteousness that Pardon alone is all our Righteousness It may be â—â—ese conditions are so small and so necessary to â—â—e receiving of pardon ex natura rei that â—â—y are not to be accounted as any righteousness Nay but in the Gospel Law all the â—â—oral Duties that were required in the Coveâ—â—nt of Works are required still though not â—â—th the same necessity of perfection And â—â—w they are much more difficult than before â—â—me Moral Duties are required also and necessary which were not directly nnd properly â—â—uties under the First Covenant as Self-deâ—â—l Mortification and bearing the Cross â—â—sides these the Gospel prescribeth new posiâ—â—e Duties which neither were nor could be â—â—uties under the Law of Works viz. Faith â—â—ve and Obedience to the Mediator with 〈◊〉 holy and reverend use of all the positive Inâ—â—tutions of the Gospel Are these small things â—â—s it necessary to meer Pardon that the pardoned should not only return to their forme Duty but also receive new Terms and Conditions which were never their Duty before If a Prince subdue Rebels and then promiâ—â— them Impunity if besides returning to theâ—â— ancient Duty and Allegiance they will receive some new Terms which he shall please to impose on them doth he freely pardon them doth he not deal with them as in a way 〈◊〉 Mercy so in a way of Soveraignty givâ—â— them new Laws and making advantage to himself and accession to his Power by occasion 〈◊〉 their misdemeanour Besides this is veâ—â— improper to talk of legal and judicial Pardon Pardon by a Law For a Law is properly preceptive and judicial Proceedings are acquiting or condemning for keeping or breakiâ—â— the Law Pardon is granted by supersedâ—â— the Sentence of the Law at least the Execution of it or by a Promise or Declaration 〈◊〉 Grace which when establisht for securitiâ—â— sake and promulgated is sometimes called aâ— Act of Grace yet it hath not the full Naturâ— of a Law It is the Soveraign Legislator whâ—â— pardoneth who hath power to relax the Execution of the Law a Law cannot pardon But the plain meaning of those men is Thâ—â— God seeing through the Fall it was become impossible for man to keep and so to be saâ—â— by the Law of Works was pleased to maâ—â— a new milder and easier Law and to declaâ—â— that if they would keep it they should 〈◊〉 pardoned and saved Pardon then with theâ—â— is nothing else but a waving of the Covenaâ—â— of Works i. e. God will not proceed with men according to that Covenant if they will submit to his new Covenant so then for all their specious words of meer Pardon to exclude Christ's Righteousness they only mean that God will not execute his First Covenant which men have broken but will save them if they fulfil his Second Covenant i. e. will be righteous and obedient according to the Gospel and thus they acknowledg a righteousness of a man 's own besides pardon whereby he must he justified 6. The Law requireth a positive righteousness by the fulfilling of it The end of every Law being obedience to it Just Evang p. 38 39. Therefore Justification cannot be Pardon of Sin without Imputation of Righteousness 'T is said That the Law of Works required a sinless perfect righteousness which Christ hath satisfied for but the Law of Grace is a better Covenant accepting an imperfect Righteousness But this is nothing to the purpose let the righteousness be
excellency of the Knowledge of Christ Jesus c. that I may win Christ and be found in him c. From hence it appeareth that the Apostle speaks of Justification by Christ in opposition to being justified by any thing else and of rejoycing in him contrary to any rejoycing in our selves In the 9th v. therefore he opposeth being found in Christ to having his own Righteousness which is of the Law sc of any works whatsoever and explaineth it by having the Righteousness of Faith the Righteousness which is of God by Faith What can the Righteousness of God mean when opposed to his own Righteousness of the Law but either the Righteousness of him which is God or a Righteousness which God provideth for him and which he did not work himself which is Christ's Also the Righteousness of Faith is opposed to the Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of God by Faith opposed to the same Righteousness of the Law must be a Righteousness which God gives us by believing and this is the Righteousness of Christ imputed Object It is excepted By the Law he means the Jewish Law and by his own Righteousness he means that which was his own when a Jew Hotchkis p. 190. not that which was his own when a Convert to the Christian Faith and that the things there opposed are Judaism and Christianity or Judaical Observances and the practical knowledge of Christ so that our own Evangelical Righteousness is not there opposed to the Obedience of Christ 1. Answ If the Apostle here only compare the Jewish and Christian Religion then all he meaneth is that the Christian Religion is far more excellent than the Jewish but he cannot oppose them properly in the matter of Justification For the sincere Practice of the Jewish Religion did justifie the Jews according to this opinion as well as the Practice of Christian Religion justified Christians Yea methinks these Authors who some of them can allow the Idolatrous Heathens to be justified by their obedience to the Law of Nature and hope in God's Mercy though they have no express knowledge of Christ should not deny that Jews may be saved by their Religion and their Hope in the Messias if they be only ignorant who he is and not malicious against him If so there must be more meant by opposing Faith to the Works of the Law then the Law meerly as Jewish 2ly The Apostle doth not only renounce the Works of the Jewish Law but all other things which may be thought matter of confidence in our selves v. 8. 3ly There is the same reason for the renouncing Christian as Jewish Works in Justification and those are Works of the Flesh when trusted and rejoyced in as well as these For the Moral Law is the same to Christians as it was to the Jews and all the Evangelical Precepts were the same to the Jews as to us if then they could not justifie them they cannot justifie us But if this Author intend only the Ceremonial Law it is contrary to the Text for after mention of the External Rights and Privileges the Apostle saith He was blameless as touching the Righteousness of the Law which must mean the Moral Law and the Ceremonial Law when in force had its part in justifying as well as the Moral and now it is abrogated it cannot be damning if practised out of ignorance only Acts 21.20 c. But that the Righteousness of the Law here doth by parity of reason exclude Christian Obedience from Justifying is thus proved This is not the Righteousness of God sc of God's providing but our own Righteousness as well as Jewish Obedience was It is also the righteousness of a Law the Gospel Law though not the Jewish Law Melanct. in Rom. p. 8. Vocari lex debet ubicunque praecepta leguntur sive in libris Mosis sive in libris Apostolorum c. And further It is not the righteousness of Faith or by Faith any more than the Works of Jews For No Law is of Faith but be that doth it shall live by it Gal. 3.12 It is spoken immediately of the Jewish Law but the Reason extendeth it to every Law he that is justified by obedience to any Law liveth by it is justified by doing it not by believing And it may be said of the Gospel in our Authors Sence He that doth it shall live by it as truly as of the Law of Moses or Adam It hath also been shewed that the Law hath some Faith joyned with it viz. the trust to be justified by performing that Law and therefore when doing and believing are opposed as irreconcileable extreams in Justification believing must mean a trust in anothers Righteousness not in our own for that is doing and thus the righteousness of Faith here excludeth all our own Works therefore must be the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us Add to all this That the Apostle in this place doth not speak of Christian Religion as this Author saith or of the Doctrine of Christ but of his Person and what he wrought for us For having exprest his desire of being found in him not having his own righteousness c. he subjoyneth immediately v. 10 11. That I may know him and the Power of his Resurrection and the Fellowship of his Sufferings c. If by any means I might attain unto the Resurrection of the Dead And v. 12. That I might apprehend that for which I am apprehended of Christ These things concern Christ himself not the Precepts of his Religion Object The general Evasion whereby those men wave the force of these and the like Scriptures is this Hotchkis p. 44 c. That Christ's Righteousness or Obedience is ours in the Fruits and Effects of it but not our Righteousness properly viz. That Christ's Righteousness is not that for which we are accepted of God immediately Trueman Gr. Prop. p. 116. but that it is the morally efficient or meritorious Cause of our Righteousness i. e. that we shall be accepted with God if we fulfill the Commands of the Gospel because Christ hath removed the Old Covenant of Works and purchased this New Covenant for us 1. Answ Here it may not be amiss to advertise the Reader of the equivocation that lies in these Words especially as used by some Authors whereby they hide their sence and deceive many sc when they oppose the Imputation of Christs righteousness to the Fruits and Effects of it which with us are not opposite For by imputation of his righteousness we do not mean that Christs righteousness is transferred to us and made inherently ours or that we can be denominated righteous by it as if we had wrought that righteousness but we mean that for the obedience of Christ God doth immediately pardon and justifie them that trust in it and give them a right to all the Fruits of it as truly and validly as if it were their own personal righteousness so that God doth
preserve the state of Justification Bona opera sunt necessaria ad Justificationis statum retinendum conservandum But how Not as causes that work or deserve the continuance of Justification but as means without which God will not continue it Non ut causae quae per se efficiunt aut mereantur hanc conservationem sed ut media seu conditiones sine quibus Deus non vult justificationis gratiam in hominibus conservare He explaineth himself That a life of obedience is necessary that a justified man may improve and enjoy the Fruits of Justification and also obtain the remission of following particular sins and to prevent a course of sin which is contrary to the nature of a justified man In a word That they are no otherways necessary to the continuance then they were to the beginning of Justification sc by way of concomitance and order not of influence Nam ut nemo recipit Justificationem generalem quae liberat à reatu omnium praecedentium peccatorum nisi concurrente paenitentia c. ita nemo retinet statum à reatu liberum respectu peccatorum consequentium nisi mediantibus iisdem actionibus credendi c. Ratio est quod haec abesse non possint perpetuo ut non ad esse incipiant illorum opposita quae pugnant cum natura justificati Ibid. Again Quia Deus non vult carnales c. frui beneficio justificationis requirit assidua opera fidei c. quorum praesen tiâ arcentur incredulitas c. aliáque gratiae justificationis venena at que particularium peccatorum particularis condonatio obtinetur p. 405. And Hae autem actiones non conservant vitam gratiae propriè per se attingendo ipsum effectum conversationis sed impropriè per accidens excludendo removendo causam destructionis He acknowledgeth also that the falls of the Godly do not lose their Justification Ibid. Concl. 7. Vtcunque justificati in via bonorum operum claudicare atque aliquandiu extra hanc viam per abrnpta libidinum suarum aberrare possint statu filiorum haud amisso Lastly He saith good works are necessary to â—alvation and our coming to Heaven Non necessitate causalitatis sed ordinis not as causes â—f it but as the order that God hath appointed that we should first glorifie him on earth and then be glorified with him in Heaven Now what they have gained by the Bishop's Testimony let the Reader judge We willingly â—ubscribe to all this in substance Mr. Bradshaw's Testimony will serve them to better Praefat. de Just they cite his Preface for their purpose his words are Quid enim prohibet quo minus â—traque Christi obedientia ad peccati cujusque reâ—tum tollendum ad peccatorum nostrorum omnium veniam consequendam necessaria statuaâ—ur quid obstat quo minus etiam ad imputationem utriusque hoc sufficere dixerimus quod Deus utramque cum bono nòstro admiserit obediâ—ntiam propter cam utramque nos acceptos â—abeat ac si nos ipsi eo quo par erat modo legem â—livinam implevissemus qut paenas aeternas ex eaâ—em nobis debitas apud inferos sustinuissemus Here he endeavoureth to reconcile those that contend for the Imputation of either the Active or Passive Obedience alone and saith That we may say they are both imputed both performed for us i. e. for our benefit in that way that God thought fit and that we are justified by both as much as if we had fulfilled the Law or suffered Eternal Death But doth Mr. Bradshaw here express the manner how we are accepted by the Obedience of Christ doth he at all derogate from our being justified immediately by Christ's Righteousness or doth he lay any foundation for Justification by fulfilling the Gospel-Covenant There is not a word of that here or in all his Book He doth indeed speak more accurately and cautiously of the notion of Imputation and what Obedience of Christ may be said to be imputed and what not than others do yet in substance he agreeth with them and asserteth the old Protestant Doctrine particularly Chap. 22 23 24. per totum He affirmeth Christ's satisfaction to be the onely matter of our Justification Chap. 22. Th. 1. In satisfactione Christi supradicta vera sola justificationis posita est materia And that by this Satisfaction we are not onely freed from eternal wrath but made truely righteous before God Th. 2. Redemptio sive satisfactio illa qua pretium ejusmodi persolvitur cujus vi peccator non à debita tantùm poena liberetur sed etiam in foro divino vere justissiméque justus factus dicitur non est fucata metaphorica c. And that the form of our Justification is the alledging of Christ's Righteousness Chap. 23. Th. 2. Hujus Justificationis forma est satisfactionis sive justitiae illius in gratiam ejus pro quo praestita est coram Deo factae vel alligatio vel declaratio quaevis And lastly he saith That the immediate effect of Justification is Reconciliation whereby all sins are forgiven and God receives a Sinner into favour for the Satisfaction of Christ accepted in his behalf Chap. 24. Th. 2. Hominis cum Deo reconciliatio ex vera justificatione orta est qua Deus propter Christi satisfactionem gratiosissimè admissam cum peccatore in gratiam rediens remittit eidem peccata universa ipsámque pro verè justo habet In the Conclusion of his Book he gives us the Sum of what he had delivered immediately touching the point of Justification 1. Deus Pater justificat admittendo imputando 2. Deus Filius satisfaciendo advocatum agendo 3. Sacro-Sanctus Spiritus revelando obsignando 4. Fides apprehendendo applicando 5. Bona opera manifestando declarando This is the whole and usual Protestant-Doctrine We must now seek some other Authors of this Opinion Art 24. Arminius in answer to the 31st Article objected to him saith Christi justitia imputatur in justitiam mihi non probari dixi Having in general terms as our Authors profess to acknowledge that Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us and that we are justified by it yet he here denyeth That Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us for Righteousness and gives this reason Quicquid imputatur in justitiam vel ad justitiam vel pro justitia ad ipsum non est ipsa justitia strictè rigidè sumpta At Christi justitia quam ille praestitit Patri obediendo est ipsissima justitia strictè rigidè sumpta Ergò non imputatur in justitiam i. e. That which is imputed to us for righteousness must not be righteousness strictly and properly so called But Christ's Righteousness was a strict and proper Righteousness or obedience to his Father Ergò Arminius we see taketh imputing Christ's Righteousness for nothing else but that it procureth Justification for us not that
Divines at Dort Rationes omnes Act. Syn. Art 2. Ibid. à scripturis fideique analogia petitae quibus Christi incarnatio humiliatio vel exaltatio probatur vel confirmatur eò spectant ut demonstretur divina expressa intentio de fructuoso hujus tanti mysterii effectu non conditionaliter producendo nempe si homines cùm aeque nolle possint velint ut hic fructus in de enascatur sed infrustrabiliter efficiendo potentiâ divinâ id operante i. e. All those Arguments that prove the Incarnation Humiliation and Exaltation of Christ tend to this to shew that it was God's express intention to produce the certain effects of that great Mystery infallibly by his own power and not to leave them to be conditional depending upon Man's Will who might as well neglect and refuse as accept of them I conclude the Sum of this Doctrine comes to this That God took occasion by the Incarnation Obedience and Death of our Lord Jesus Christ to grant men terms of Salvation viz. if they should believe and obey the Gospel not as any satisfaction to his Justice or Law which man had broke but as some kind of salvo to his Honour at least as he was pleased to interpret it And what need Christ have been God to do no more than this How easie is the slip from hence into the dead Sea of Socinianism To lay that Christ came by his Life and Death to declare and confirm only this Covenant of Life on condition of Faith and Repentance and to intercede for the Penitents Indeed the whole platform of this Doctrine was borrowed from Socinus by the Arminians from whom most of our modern Writers have it and some immediately from the Socinian from whom also came that common but illogical Evasion of works being not the meritorious but the causa sine qua non of our Justification Opera ea sunt ex quibus justificamur sunt autem opera ista nostra Soc. de Justif apud Pelt i. e. ut dictum fuit obedientia quam Christo praestamus licet nec essiciens nec meritoria tamen causa ut vocant sine qua non justificationis coram Deo at que aeterne salut is nostrae I do not desire this should be believed on my credit much less do I write to reproach any who do in heart abhor that blasphemous heresie however their words and notions may agree too much with it I only beg that Scholars and Divines would take the pains to examin and compare them before they imbibe this new Doctrine CHAP. VII Of the Nature of Faith that it justifieth as an Instrument applying the Promises of life in Christ and not as a Condition or Part of Obedience T The Apostle Paul was sent to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles Act. 26. v. 17 18. to this end that they might receive the forgiveness of sins and an inheritance amongst thom which are sanctified by Faith which is in Christ therefore forgiveness and a right to the heavenly Inheritance comes by Faith But what this Faith is and how it gives right to Life is now to be inquired into In explaining the nature of Faith I shall wave all that is usually drawn from Philosophy to this Argument from the nature and difference of Man's Soul and his Faculties and the difference of the Faculties from each other also from the nature of Habits intellectual or moral which things are fit Exercises for Scholars but not fit to build the Doctrine of Justification and Eternal life upon and if the best Philosophers can give us no certain account how men see and hear and how the external Senses which yet are more material in their operations than the understanding do exercise their functions there is much less certainty to be had concerning the Faculties Operations and Habits of the rational part and the Scripture speaks of believing as a work of the whole Soul With the heart man believeth unto righteousness Rom. 10.9 The like may be said of every Grace and of every Sin that hath the consent of the Heart that they carry the whole Soul with them What then is this Faith The Socinians affirm Faith and Obedience to be really the same thing Peltius Artic. Parag. 21. distinct only formally or docendi causâ Soc. resp ad Epist Joan. Opera Fides nullo modo distinguuntur à Paulo nec ab ea seperari queant imò animo seu forma fidei sunt The Arminians agree with them in this and our late Authors with them both and make believing and obeying the Gospel all one and to be justified by Faith with them is to be justified by obedience to the Gospel Aphor. Th. 70. Hence it is that they describe Faith to be so to believe God as to love him fear him trust him and obey him in every particular command or more briefly to be an accepting of Christ for our Lord and Saviour i. e. to promise obedience to him Ibid. 69 67. and to desire and expect to be saved by him Now we grant as the Gospel is sometime taken for the whole Doctrine or Mind of Christ containing both Promises Precepts and Threatnings though properly it be nothing but a Promise of Life through Christ in contradistinction to all Law and Precepts so also the Faith of Christ and of the Gospel doth sometimes comprehend the whole Christian Profession whereby we promise both a belief of the doctrine and obedience to the Command of Christ Yet Faith taken properly is to be distinguished from all obediential Graces viz. those that are the immediate cause of obedience as much as those graces are distinct from each from other as Love from Fear both from Patience c. That we may wave that Philosophical question also whether Graces be several distinct habits or one universal habit distinguished by several acts and objects it is sufficient if Faith be distinct by its acts and proper object from all other graces as much as they are distinguished each from other And that it is so is evident because it is an assent of the mind to divinely revealed truth Its acts are to believe or assent its formal object is the revealed truth of God as such we speak of Divine Faith only The immediate End of it is the satisfaction of the mind in the certainty of a true proposition and the like All these are distinct from love fear desire which are the immediate principles of all obedience or practice in doing good or avoiding evil Moreover Faith is the root of obedience not as the immediate principle of the elicite acts of obedience but as a more remote principle which doth excite and direct all the immediate principles of it Thus Faith is prerequired to seeking and serving of God Heb. 11.2 to the End and yet the immediate principles of them were fear v. 7. self-denial v. 25. holy courage contempt of the World and the like Faith worketh by love Gal. 5.6 purifieth the