in Christ be improved for Obedience That his Love to us may so powerfully constrain our hearts that we may wholly live to him that dyed for us and rose again who is also at the right hand of God making Intercession for us To him be Glory Amen CHAP. IV. Sect. 1. Of our Union to Christ and Communion with him OUR Author will not in Courtesie or cannot for Shame deny that the Scripture does mention such a Relation between Christ and Christians as may be express'd by an Union and that these Phrases of Being in Christ and Abiding in Christ can signifie no less Now this Union to Christ being a very suspicious Phrase he is deeply concern'd to mollifie it with some such Healing Explication that it may not prejudice or however not utterly destroy his main design To interpret it according to the sound of words is to blow up himsels with his whole Cause and therefore it is judg'd a safer way to accommodate the Expression if it will be tractable or to force it if it proves obstinate to a Complyance with his own espoused Notions and preconceived Opinions And now we see that the True Reason why he so zealously declaimed against that way of Interpreting Scripture in the last Section was that he might without suspition serve himself of it in this Some do not like his Tottering and Staggering way of wording his Matters It may be express'd by an Union and it can signifie no less than an Union A form of speech invented doubtless to let us know how unable he is to deny and yet how loath he is to confess the plainest Truth I have not forgot that he told us p. 108. That the Scripture describes the Profession of Christianity a sincere Belief and Obedience to the Gospel by Having Christ and Being in Christ but now he is graciously pleased to Mount them a little higher and is gently content that they should signifie no less than an Union with Christ. Four Notable Observations he makes to us in this one Section 1 That those Metaphors which describe the Relation between Christ and Christians do primarily referre to the Christian Church and not to every Individual Christian. I am sorry that it must still be my great unhappiness to dissent from him but seeing all Accommodation is desperate we must bear the shock of his Reasonings as well as we can Christ says he is called a Head but he is the Head of his Church which is his Body as the Husband is the Head of his Wife No particular Christian is the Body of Christ but onely a Member in this Body This indeed would do pretty well but that it wants two small Circumstances Truth and Pertinency which being so inconsiderable we may well spare in any of His Writings And 1. Methinks I want that sorry circumstance of Truth in his Argument Christ is the Head of his Church as the Husband is Head of his Wife but the Headship of the Husband over the Wife will not exactly measure the Headship of Christ over Believers we must call in assistance from another Similitude that of the Head in the Natural Body over the Members Christ is a Head of Influence as well as Authority he communicates Grace to Obey as well as commands Obedience And this is that the Apostle would teach us Eph. 4. 15 16. The head even Christ from whom all the Body fitly joyned together and compact by that which every joynt supplyeth according to the effectual working in the measure of every part maketh increase of the Body to the edifying of it selâ—… in love Here 's an effectual Operation in every part the Growth and Increase of every individual Member by virtue of that Influence which the Head communicates to it And now to make the Husbands headship over the Wife to represent the whole of Christs Headship is craftily to seduce us from the Consideration of that Grace which from Christ we receive to help us in time of need The Holy Ghost has singled out the most per and perspicuous Metaphors that outward things would afford to instruct us in the Nature of that Union and Relation that Believers have to Christ the Priviledges and Advantages which they receive thereby and those Duties which indispensably arise from thence and yet such is the incorrigible and untractable Nature of all outward things such is their shortness poverty and narrowness that they do not yield a Similitude that will adaequately and commensurately express the total of Christs Grace Mercy and Authority or of our mutual Obligations and Duty Much of the Poverty and Beggarliness of the Mosaical Types lay in this those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. 4. 9. that they could not represent Jesus Christ to the life whom yet it was their design in some measure to shadow out And when I have named a shadow I have given a sufficient Reason of my Assertion for though a shadow may describe the general Lineaments of its Body yet it will not paraphrase upon the Complexion To supply this defect it has pleased the Wisdom of God to institute that numerous train of Types that so what could not be express'd by any one might yet in parcels be described by Another Hence is it that one Type represents the Death of Christ as a Sacrifice for Sin as the Goat of the Sin-offering Lev. 16. 15. Another the Intercession of Christ at the right hand of the Father as Aarons appearing in the Most Holy place upon the Feast of Expiation The same Wisdom has it pleased the Spirit of God to exeâ—…cise in describing to us the Union and Relation betwixt Christ and Believers for seeing that no one single Metaphor however borrowed from the nearest and most intimous Relation upon Earth could possibly convey to our understandings all that Mercy Grace and Love which from Christ issues to all that are in Covenant with him nor all that Reverence Love and Duty which from Believers is due to a Redeemer therefore has he chosen out many that so by putting together the Mercy and Duty which is comprehended in each we might spell out the Meaning of what is wrapt up in that Relation wherein we stand to him But 2. It wants Pertinency as well as Truth For what if no particular Christian be the Body of Christ. yet is he a Member of that Body and Christ as Head of that Body is related in particular to him without the Intervention of the Body A Body is nothing else but the result of all the Integral parts put together in their due Scite and proper Order and the Church is nothing else but the aggregate of many Christians united under their proper Pastor And as the Head in the Natural Body is immediately related to all the parts so is Christ immediately related to every true Christian. If then he will argue thus No particular Christian is the Body therefore Christ is primarily related to the Body any one with as much honesty may inferre
Every particular Christian is a Member of Christ therefore Christ is primarily related to every particular Christian And thus the Conclusion will be as far to seek as ever Whether this Metaphor of a Head does primarily referre to the whole Body or particular Members But let us go on Christ is called a Husband says he but then the whole Church not every particular Christian is his Spouse as St. Paul tells the Church of Corinth 2 Cor. 11. 2. I have espoused you to one Husband that I may present you a chaste Virgin to Christ. To which renowned Argument I have many things to oppose 1. If the Church of Corinth was the Spouse of Christ then the Church of Ephesus that of Coloss that at Philippi and to be sure the Church of Rome will put in their claims with equal right to that Title and then what becomes of what he asserts p. 14â—… Christ is a great Enemy to Poligamy and has but one Spouse Is it not great pity a Conceit so ingenious should have its Neck broken at the first Encounter And 2. If Christ hath but one Spouse and yet every particular Church be his Spouse it s but crumbling the Metaphor into more minute particles and then he may be a Husband to every individual Believer 3. The Text proves not that Christ has but one Spouse but that the Church hath but one Husband I have espoused you to one Husband 4. Though the Metaphor may perhaps more fitly express Christs Relation to particular Churches than particular Believers yet this hinders not but that Christ may be primarily related to particular Believers For the Metaphor does not express the Order of Christs Relation but the Relation it self The word Church is onely a Term of Art which expresses the same Persons collectively who distributively taken are each immediately related to Christ. Again Christ says he is a Shepheard and the Christian Church is his Flock for the Relation between Shepheard and Sheep doth primarily concern the whole Flock This is but one Doctors opinion at most and will hardly mount it up to the Credit of Probability For 1. A Shepheard may be related to one single Sheep and that one is enough to keep alive and maintain the Relation one Sheep will denominate him a Shepheard though there must be more than one to constitute a Flock As there was a first Man related to God as a Creature to his Creator before there was A Church so there was a first Disciple a first Believer or Convert and that one under the Pastoral Charge and care of Christ the great Shepheard ipso facto as a sincere Convert and sound Believer and yet that Individual would not make a Society under Bishops or Pastors 2. A Flock is made up of many Sheep now that which constitutes is at least in order of Nature before the thing constituted The whole is made up of parts and I have been taught to presume that the parts are in order of Nature before the whole A Shepheard does not muster a company of howling Wolves and roaring Lyons and then by that Collection make them a Flock of Sheep but he gathers particular Sheep together unites them into one Fold and thereby they become a Flock The way of Christ is not to amass a Medley of debauched Varlets and Scoundrels and by making them a Church make them Christians but he seeks out for his own Service particular Christians and out of these Materials he forms his Church Again Christ says he is the Rock upon which his Church is built and the Christian Church is a Holy Temple Let him take it â—…or granted if it will do him any service but is this Rock this Foundation this Corner-stone related primarily to the Building or to the particular Stones The Apostle Peter who was a wise Master-builder in Church-work understood the Method much better 1 Pet. 2. 5. To whom coming as to a Living Stone ye also as lively Stones are built up a spiritual House Hence ordinary understandings would conclude that the building did not make the materials but the materials made the building the Spiritual House did not make the Lively Stones but the Lively Stones made the Spiritual House Such Language the Apostle durst use these lively Stones were first united to the living Corner-stone and the product of all was a beautifull Fabrick And thus was Solomon's Temple built the materials were exactly fitted and squared for their respective uses and places and there was nothing to doe but to joyn them together and out of those after seven years Labour there grew up a Holy Temple Had He built of Bricks the Edifice would never have converted them into hewen Stones and had he used onely Sycamores they had never been turned into Cedars by being Sleepers in the wall I must therefore abate him an Ace or two of his general Conclusion All these Metaphors in their first and most proper use referre to the whole Society of Christians In Isa. 9. 6. Christ is called the Everlasting Father which Metaphor if it be a Metaphor does primarily express the Relation of Christ to every adopted child and not the Relation of Christ to Children in gross and in the Lump A Father is as really so to one child as to Twenty he may be a Father to more but not more a Father It will sound harshly in the Ears of any that have not lost them under the Cataracts of Nilus to say That Father does not primarily describe the Relation of Philip v. g. to Alexander Iohn c. but to children in the first place and then at second hand and through a remove or two to Alexander and Iohn Thus is the Everlasting Father primarily related to every childe by virtue of his Adoption and Regeneration and secondarily to them all as brethren related to one another living under the same Discipline and Laws of the Family 2 He observes further to us for our Learning That the Union of particular Christians to Christ is by Means of their Union to the Christian Church Which he as Learnedly proves from 1 Cor. 12. 27. Ye are the Body of Christ and Members in Particular Where the strength of this Argument lies I confess I see not That the Church of Corinth was the Body of Christ That I plainly see That every particular Member of that Church was a Member of Christ I think I see that too But that it was therefore a Member of Christ because it was United to that Body of the Church of Corinth I own my Dulness that I cannot see And I have some scruples that makes me Halt and not so Nimbly go on both Feet into our Authors Opinion For 1. If particular Christians by being United to the Body become the Members of Christ then what Medium of Union have these particular Churches to Unite them to Christ We poor Folks of the Laity have an Expedient found out to Unite us to Christ namely by Uniting us to the Church under the
prevent Objections It 's evident says he from the Chapter that Christ when he speaks in the First Person I and in Me cannot mean this of his own Person but of his Church Doctrine and Religion But where lies the Evidence of this great Demonstration Why Christ says I am the true Vine and ye are the Branches He that abideth in me and I in him bringeth forth much Fruit for without me you can do nothing Well what of all this Why our Author would willingly Learn what sence can be made of all this if we understand it of the Person of Christ And I will as willingly Teach him if he be not too proud to Learn I Iesus Christ the Mediator of the New Covenant am very fitly compared to a Vine and ye my Disciples are as fitly compared to the Branches of a Vine Now he that really abideth in me by a true lively faith and I in him by the Quickening Operations of my Spirit the same bringeth forth much Fruit of holy Obedience for without derivation of Grace from Me your Root you can do nothing that is truly good and acceptable to God Oh! but he has two or three formidable Objections against this Interpretation 1. It 's not very Intelligible How we can be or abide in Christs Person No more it is If we bring Capernaitical understandings along with us who Puzled their Heads with a gross Notion of Carnal eating the Flesh and drinking the Blood of Christ. If by being in Christ were understood a Local Physical or Natural being in Him it were somewhat Unintelligible but when no more is meant by it but that every true Believer is by Constitution of the Covenant of Grace one Person morally with Christ so considered and dealt with by God there 's no more insuperable Difficulty than what unbelief will create in the clearest Truths of the Gospel But 2. It 's more unintelligible still How we can be in the Person of Christ and the Person of Christ at the same time be in us Which is a new piece of Philosophy called Penetration of Dimensions But there 's no great danger in that Christ may dwell in us by his Spirit and we in him by Faith and yet Faith and the Spirit never disturb each other in their Motions but what the Dimensions of the Soul in its actings of Faith or of the Spirit in it's working of Grace are this I confess is to me unintelligible And that a Christian should be in the Church and the Church at the same time be in a Christian had been equally Unintelligible and as much danger of the Penetration of Dimensions But that our Author stumbled upon a happy Expedient that I should signifie a Doctrine and Me a Church to heal the Contradiction 3. That our Fruitfulness should depend on our Union to Christ is as hard to my understanding Truly I cannot help that I have no Medicine to cure Crazed Intellectuals He that cannot understand that Believers do receive Actual assistance from Christ by his Spirit to help them in the way of their Duty and to encourage them against the Difficulties they meet withal in their Duties cannot I presume understand very many Lines in the Gospel 3. Our last Task is to Examine what improvement he has made of this Interpretation and in short it is this That the Union of particular Christians to Christ consists in their Union to the Christian Church And now I am abundantly satisfied that our Author is a very Philomel Vox praeterea nihil One whose Volubility of Tongue and Pen supplies the place of Argument and Demonstration I hope our Author will not meet with many Readers who have so far parted with their Memories as not to remember what that was he Propounded to himself to Evince viz. That the Union of particular Christians to Christ is by means of their Union with the Christian Church And yet now when he comes to cast up his Accounts we have gotten another Conclusion That the Union of particular Christians to Christ consists in their Union to the Christian Church Surely the Purblind will espie some small difference Eating is a means to Living yet none but a Swine of Epicurus his Stye will say that Living consists in Eating The High-road is a means to bring the Traveller Home yet it will be hard to perswade us that being at Home consists in Travelling Trading is a mean to Riches yet Riches do not formally consist in Trading The end may possibly be separated from the Means but nothing can be separated from that thing wherein it consists But let that pass If he has proved either the one or the other I am content he be reputed an Artist The thing he has a good will to prove is That the Union of particular Christians to Christ is either by means of their Union to the Christian Church or else that it consists in it Now for the Proof of this He has told us That the Church is the Body of Christ The Church is the Temple of Christ The Church is the Spouse of Christ The Church is the Flock of Christ. And had it been referred to a thousand Persons not one but would have thought that that Christ who is the Head of that Body is a Person He that is the Husband of that Spouse is a Person He that is the Shepheard of the Flock is a Person and He that Dwells in that Temple is a Person But things are not so far gone but our Author shall have his Opinion and choose what he will abide by for my part I am much unconcern'd let him please himself he shall not displease me at all Say then Shall it be Christs Doctrinal or Christs Ecclesiastical that is the Head of this Body The Husband of this Spouse The Shepheard of this Flock I can rest satisfied But then the Sence runs thus A Doctrine or a Church is the Head of the Church A Doctrine or a Church is the Husband of the Church A Doctrine or a Church is the Shepheard of the Church If this does not please him let him try the other way and allow it to be a Person that is all these A Person that is the Head Husband and Shepheard of the Church And now I must plainly acquaint him That he has Entangled his Affairs in such confusion that he will never be able to Extricate them For 1. If the Person of Christ be here intended then it seems at last whatever the means be of that Union yet there is an Union to the Person of Christ and whereinsoever that Union consists yet such an Uunion there is How absurd would it be to enquire whether our Union to Christ's Person consists in our Union with a particular Church If Union to Christs Person be a Non-entity Or Whether our Union with a particular Church be the means to our Union with Christ If there be no such thing And then 2. He is as much concern'd as his poor Neighbours to salve the
Difficulties of being in Christs Person and yet at the same time Christs Person being in us of the depending of our Fruitfulness upon that Union with whatever other Incongruities a strong Fancy may impute to it And then 3. If the Person of Christ be intended in the Question then his last and tedious Argument from Iohn 15. 1. which he has managed with so much Industry upon which he has bestowed so much Cost and in which he places so much Confidence concludes something very near to Nothing For the Abstract of his Medium is this that Christians are in the Church which will never conclude that therefore our Union to a particular Church is the Means of our Union to Christ much less that our Union to Christ consists in it From the Scriptures we are posted over to the Ancient Fathers who if we may believe him Interpret all those Metaphors which decypher the Union between Christ and Christians to signifie the Love and Unity of Christians among themselves He that will reproach his own Mother will not much Reverence the Fathers They do indeed argue from the Unity between Christ and Christians to an absolute Necessity of Unity between Christians themselves they are members of one body under one common Head and therefore it presses sore upon them that there be no intestine Broyls among themselves they are Sheep of the same Fold under one Shepheard and it were unnatural for Sheep to devour one another which is the Province of Wolves they are subjects in the same spiritual Kingdom under Christ the Sovereign Monarch of the Church and therefore all heats and animosities all seuds and broyls are alien from that place and Relation they fill up towards Christ and each other So the Fathers so the Scriptures argue Mal. 2. 10. Have we not all one Father hath not one God created us why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother The Process of the Argument is very clear if we be Children of one Father we ought to love our Brethren but to conclude from thence that A Childs Relation to his Father consists in the Love and Unity of the Children among themselves is somewhat more than ridiculous Thus from the Union between Christ and Christians there is an unanswerable Argument drawn for the Unity of Christians amongst themselves but that the Union of Christians with Christ does formally consist in their mutual Agreement and Concord each with other is a piece of Logick for which we are indebted to our Author but thus Chrysostom expounds Eph. 2. 19 20 21. where the Apostle speaks of that spiritual building which is erected on the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Iesus Christ himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being the chief Corner-stone to signifie the Unity of the Church in all Ages that both the Iewish and the Christian Church are united in Christ as the several parts of the building are kept together by the Corner-stone Now though Chrysostom be little beholden to our Author for traducing his honest meaning yet we are all beholden to Chrysostom For then 1. There have not been so many sorts of Churches in the World as he would perswade us but both Iews and Christians constitute one universal catholick Church though differing in the Oeconomy and some variety of Administration both the Jewish and Christian Church are the several parts of one and the same Building And then 2. The Iews we may presume knew something at least of Christ what he was to be to them what he was to doe for them if they and we Jews and Gentiles in all Ages are United in him To the same purpose St. Ambrose Yes I believe it as little to our Authors purpose as St. Chrysostom Duos Populos in se suscepit Christus Salvator fecit unum in Domino sicut Lapis Angularis duas parietes continet in Unitate Domûs firmatas which our Author Englishes thus Christ united two People in himself and made them one in the Lord as the Corner-stone unites two Walls in a building and makes it but one house Now if we cannot agree about the Construing a piece of familiar Latine we shall strangely differ in the Interpretation of its design and tendency And here Ambrose is less beholden to our Author than Chrysostom for that he may not cross our Authors sence he is made to speak Non-sence Christ united two people and made them one That is he made them one and made them one or he united them and united them for what uniting should be but making one I cannot divine But Ambrose his Latine runs thus Duos populos in se suscepit fecit unum in Domino He took two people upon himself and so made them one in the Lord He bore their Iniquities carryed their sins in his body upon the Cross and thereby reconciled them to God and then their reconciliation to one Another would be easie but our Author who is never wanting to his Concerns was not at leisure to take notice of that However says he this is the plain design of the place to prove that Christ hath taken away the enmity which was between Iew and Gentile and hath reconciled them both to God Well I can be content it should be the Plain design but not the Main design not the whole design of the place Some men think themselves wondrous witty in the Contrivance that they have found out some Reconciling work for Christs Death But then it must not be to reconcile God and Sinners but to remove an old grudge between Iew and Gentile which is an Invention of the latter dayes utterly unknown to the Ancient Fathers and the whole Catholick Church that they might not seem to say there 's no Reconciliation by the Blood of Christ I would turn over our Author for satisfaction in this point to the Reason not the Authority of Dr. E. Stillingfl against Crellius p. 558. A Difference being supposed between God and Man on the account of sin no reconciliation can be imagined but what is mutual For did Man only fall out with God and had not God just reason to be displeased with Men for their Apostacy from him If not what made him so severely punish the Old World for their Impieties by a Deluge what made him leave such Monuments of his Anger against the Sins of the World in succeeding Ages c Well then supposing God to be averse from men by reason of their sins shall this displeasure alwayes continue or not If it alwayes continues men must certainly suffer the desert of their sin If it doth not alwayes continue then God may be said to be reconciled in the same sence that an offended party is capable of being reconciled to him who hath provoked him Now there are two wayes whereby a party justly offended may be said to be reconciled to him that hath offended him First when he is not onely willing to admit of Terms of Agreement but doth declare his Acceptance
of the Mediation of a third Person and that he is so well satisfied with what he hath done in order to it that he appoints it to be published to all the world to assure the Offender that if the Breach continues the fault lyes wholly upon himself The Second is when the Offender doth accept the Terms of the Agreement offer'd And these two we assert must necessarily be distinguished in the Reconciliation between God and us For upon the Death and Sufferings of Christ God declares to the World that he is so well satisfied with what Christ hath done and suffer'd in order to the Reconciliation between himself and us that now be publishes Remission of sins to the World upon those Terms which the Mediator hath declared by his own Doctrine but because Remission of sins doth not immediately follow upon the Death of Christ without supposition of any act on our part therefore the state of Favour doth commence from the performance of those Conditions that are required of us c. And now let the Authority of the Church of England interpose Art 31. Of the one Oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross The Offering of Christ once made is that perfect Redemption Propitiation and Satisfaction for the sins of the whole World both Original and Actual and there is none other Satisfaction for sin but that alone But we shall be soundly pelted with the Fathers and therefore he cites a great many more from Chrysostom and from all concludes That according to the sence of this Holy man particular Christians are united to Christ by Means of their Union to the Christian Church otherwise I cannot understand how our Union to Christ can be an Argument to Union and Concord among our selves But if that be the worst on 't that he cannot understand it Charity commands me to relieve his labouring understanding It 's a good Argument that Children should entirely love one another because they are Children of the same Father and yet for all that they become not Children to their Father by means of their Union one to another as Brethren but they are therefore Brethren because they are Children of the same Father It 's an Argument that Subjects should study and follow the things that make for Peace among themselves because they are all Subjects to the same Prince aud his honour the strength and security of his Kingdom lyes much in it and yet their Union among themselves is not the Means whereby they become related to their Prince but because they are all Subjects to him they become fellow-subjects each with other And now methinks a very ordinary pair of Brains might have understood how our Union to Christ is an Argument to Christians to unite amongst themselves though by their union amongst themselves they had not been united to Christ And thus he might as well have quoted the Ancient Father Mercurius Gallo-Belgicus as either Ambrose or Chrysostom but that we are all mightily concerned to know that he reads the Fathers to very little purpose But from hence he will give us a very seasonable word of Exhortation That they would seriously consider it who boast of their Union to Christ and yet rend his Church into a thousand little Factions I am glad however that they are not great Factions And I would have them seriously consider it also who broach such Doctrines so contrary to the main design of the Gospel that if owned by any Church must necessitate an absolute and total separation if we will be true to Christ. There have been many sad Controversies amongst us but they have been about Mint Anise and Cummin in comparison of the great and weighty things of the Gospel but the Question now must be Whether Christ be a true and proper High-priest whether 〈◊〉 death upon the Cross be a proper Sacrifice offer'd unto God to reconcile him to sinners The Question is now Whether we must hold Communion with God in Prayer or no Whether Faith and Repentance will unite us to Christ Nay whether there be any such thing as an Union with Christs Person or no Nay upon the Matter whether there be a Person of Christ or no or that all must not be interpreted into Doctrine Church Office and I cannot tell what Some I perceive are hugely afraid least differences should be accommodated they dread The tombe of Controversies almost as much as their Own they are more solicitous how Quarrels may live than about their own Deaths and therefore fearing those smaller Bones of Contention would not set the World together by the ears long they have thrown more considerable ones before us to entail Contentions upon Posterity and propagate Divisions to Eternity It 's the Interest of some men to make loud clamours against Divisions variety of Opinions difference in Judgements and yet to take special care that there shall never want matter for them to complain of the Fire and yet pour in Oyl to quench it and if they may but warm their own hands can sing over the flames which they have kindled and do still foment It has been the Policy of Rome to build partition-walls of Separation and then to rail at all that cannot leap over them to thresh the Wheat out of the Floor and then rage at it for Dividing from the Chaffe to beat their Servants out of doors and then send Huy-and-cry after them with all the Marks and Descriptions of Run-awayes Thus far our Author has led us out of the way and it will be high time to return The Fathers may now go to bed and sleep our Author will give them no further trouble Authority is but an inartificial Argument and now have at us with down-right Demonstration and Club-law Those Sacraments our Saviour hath instituted are a plain demonstration that our Union with Christ consists in our union with the Christian Church 1. For Baptism Baptisme is the Sacrament of our Admission into the Visible Church but in Baptisme we make a publick Profession of our Faith in Christ Therefore the Union of particular Christians to Christ is by Means of their Union with the Church This is that plain Demonstration we are threatned with and in a while if our Author does but eat a dish of Beans and Bacon it will be a plain Demonstration In Baptism we make a visible Profession of our Faith in Christ and if this Profession be true such a one as the Church of England requires as prerequisite to Baptism we are thereby United to Christ antecedently to our Baptism If Baptism finds us not in Christ it puts us not into Christ If it finds us not qualified for a Church state it makes us not so it is a Symbol but it supposes the thing signified and conferrs it not It is a Seal but presupposes a Covenant But that we are admitted into the visible Church by it he will prove and indeed he is excellent at proving what none deny and very untoward at proving the thing
in Question but hear his proof 1 Cor. 12. 13. By one Spirit we are all baptized into one Body In which says he the Apostle seems to allude to Baptism which conferres the same Holy Spirit on us All and thereby makes us all Members of that one Body which is his Church I think he is resolved never to produce a pertinent Scripture to prove the plainest Truth For 1. here 's but an Allusion at most and has he scolded all this while against Allusions Allegories and must he lay the main stress of his Argument upon an Allusion 2. It but seems to Allude neither and that weakens the Credit of it exceedingly An Allusion a seeming Allusion A shadow the dream of a shadow Any thing or Nothing will serve his turn for plain demonstration when a Mans Name is up for a demonstrative Man he may lye in bed till noon 3. This Baptisme says he conferres the same Holy Spirit upon us all But the Apostle sayes no such matter but the contrary by the Spirit we are baptized and not by Baptism receive the Spirit Thus the Spirit Unites us to Christ then comes Baptism which looks backward as a Seal of what we have received and forward to our visible state in the Church and hence it appears that our Union to Christ is the Reason of our Union to the Church and not our Union to the Church the Means to unite us to Christ. 4. Baptism admitts not into a particular Church but the visible Church at large and then it will be harder still for our Author to prove from thence that the Union of particular Christians to Christ is by Means of their union with a particular Church under the Bishops and Pastors But if Allusions will not pass currant Then sayes he more expressely in Eph. 4. 4 5. There is one Body and one Spirit as you are called in one hope of your Calling one Lord one Faith one Baptism That is the Christian Baptism is but one and is A Sacrament of Union making us all the Members of that one Body of Christ this is called being Baptized into Christ i. e. Admitted into the Christian Church by a visible Profession of our Faith in Christ Now for a small matter I could grant him all this and yet despair of seeing his Conclusion Baptism is but one be it so It 's a Sacrament of Union take it for granted It makes us all Members of that one Body of Christ which is his visible Church let it be supposed But still I wait for proof of this That by Baptism we are all really united to Christ. But here are some things very pretty 1. Baptism is but one and is a Sacrament of Union Very good and so is the Spirit but one and therefore he is the Means of Union 2. By Baptism we are made Members of the one Body of Christ that is of the Visible Church but is there no means to make us Members of the Invisible Church 3. This is called being Baptized into Christ. But is there no other way of uniting us to Christ but by Baptism 4. We are admitted into the Christian Church by a publick Profession of our Faith in Christ Very true we are solemnly admitted into a Visible Station in the Visible Church thereby alwayes supposing Repentance whereby we forsake sin and Faith whereby we steadfastly believe the Promises of God made to us in that Sacrament which has already united us to Christ. 2. The Lords Supper is a Sacrament of Union and signifies that neer Conjunction between Christ and Christians Signifies it It presupposes an Union both with Christ and a particular Church All are supposed in one sence or other to be in the Church to be in Christ that are admitted to it Read over the Exhortation in the Liturgy at your best leisure My duty is to exhort you to consider the Dignity of this Mystery And so to search and examine your Consciences that you should come holy and clean to a most Holy Feast for otherwise receiving of the Holy Communion doth nothing else but encrease your Damnation Again in the other Exhortation For as the benefit is great if with a true penitent heart and lively Faith we receive that holy Sacrament for Then we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ and drink his blood Then we dwell in Christ and he in us so the danger is great c. and therefore if any of you be a Blasphemer of God N. B. an hinderer or a slanderer of his Word N. B. an Adulterer or be in Malice N. B. or Envy or any other grievous crime bewail your sins and come not to this holy Table least the Devil enter into you as he did into Iudas But what can be more evident our Author supposes we are united to the Church united to Christ by Baptism and therefore surely this other Sacrament confirms our Union and does not first Create it I have long waited for an Argument to enforce his Conclusion and now we shall have it The Intention of our Lord and Saviour in what he did and suffer'd for us was not to reform and save some single Persons but to erect a Church and to combine all his Disciples into a publick Society A fairer Truth never dropt from his Pen which some will like the better because it is so handsom and proper a Confutation of the whole Section For if this be Christs design to combine all his Disciples into a publick Society then sure they were his Disciples related to him as their Lord and Master before such combination Now to be a true Disciple of Christ is no such slighty and trivial matter that we may be such a one and yet not united really to Christ It implyes Self-denyal taking up the Cross and following Christ and that will go a great way to an Union with Christ and yet of such as these it 's granted the Christian Society must be composed But he copes up all this with a little Reason And therefore our Saviour does not own any Relation to particular men as such but as they are Members of his Body As such Now for an Explication of the Quà He owns no Relation to particular men as such that is as particular men No I am very well satisfied of that for then he should own a Relation to all particular men for à quatenus ad omne valet consequentia But does he own a Relation to particular Believers as Believers will he own a Relation to a Disciple as a Disciple I am sure he has promis'd to own those that own them as Disciples and I am as sure that if a particular Church be a combination of Disciples he will own his Disciples wherever he finds them so that I was just a concluding the clear contrary if our Author had not given me timely Notice That because Christ does combine all his Disciples into publick Societies that therefore he does own and is so related to united with and will have
and a new Spirit will I put within you and I will take away the stony heart out of your Flesh and give you an heart of Flesh and I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my Statutes and ye shall keep my judgments and do them where the order and method of God in this great work is laid down with such a convincing evidence that he must have no eyes or shut those he has who does not see it And 1. God promises that he will remove the great principle of resistance that which makes head and opposition to the Commands of God the stony hard inflexible-Heart 2 That he will bestow another a better a new heart a soft Spirit a heart of Flesh that may comply and close in with Gods Commands 3. That from this new heart all new obedience all service acceptable to God must proceed as from its spring or root I will put my Spirit into you and cause you to walk in my Statutes and ye shall keep my judgments 4. That all obedience inward and outward obedience keeping the Commandements of God with the heart and doing them in the practice of our lives yet all must proceed from this new heart this new Spirit which God promised to put within them But he comes to close Argument we are exhorted that the same mind be in us that was in Christ Phil. 2. 5. And to be his disciples is to learn of him who was meek and lowly in spirit Math. 11. 29. We question not that it s our duty to imitate Christ to copy out all his imitable excellencies and if he can prove that we can do this viz. imitate Christ in Acts of self denyal taking up the Crosse bearing reproach forgiving enemies without a better heart and Nature than we brought into the world with us he will then begin to speak to the purpose But says our Authour Christ transcribed his own nature into his Laws and therefore a sincere obedience to his Laws is a conformity to his Nature To which I answer 1. He that transcribed his Nature into his own Laws must yet transcribe it once more even into the heart of a son of Adam e're he can give to him that new Obedience which is acceptable to him It was not enough that God wrote his Lawes in Stone unless they be written upon the Tables of the heart with the finger of God 2. Obedience to the Laws of Christ does increase our conformity to the Nature of Christ but still there must be a renewed heart and Nature upon which all progressive conformity to Christ in obedience must proceed 3. Transcribing of Christs Nature into his Lawes is a Metaphorical expression which our Authour may explain how he pleases but I observe alwayes when he can cloath an Argument with Metaphors he is then secure yet still he presses upon us from Rom. 8. 9. If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his That is says he Unlesse he have the same Temper and disposition of mind that Christ had Now let the Reader look well about him and he shall see rare sights we do all remember that to be United to Christ or to be one of Christs signifie to be United to a particular Church And now we are told That by having the Spirit of Christ is meant being of the same temper and disposition and now from hence we have these consectaries 1. That if any man be not of the same Temper with Christ that is be not holy as he is holy he cannot be United to a particular Church And our Saviour has vouched for it John 3. 5. Except a man be regenerate and born again he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God We must be like minded with Christ and thereby become one of his and what is now become of the great Proposition that has filled so many pages That the only means of Uniting as to Christ is by our Union with a particular Church 2. He tells us that Union to Christ is described by having the Spirit and then having the Spirit is interpreted by being of the same Temper with Christ so now we have got another Doctrine That our Union to Christ consists in being of the same Temper and disposition with him But 3. We have here an excellent expedient to discharge the World both of the Person of Christ and of the Spirit too For as he can interpret Christs Person into Doctrine office Church Religion Bishops Baptism so he has interpreted the Spirit into Temper disposition and when an exigency calls for it he may explicate it by a strong wind or a vapour and then his work is done But 3. For the explicating of the new Nature he tells us there is a closer Union which results from this which consists in a mutual and reciprocal love which I am glad of amongst other Reasons for this that now it will be lawfull to Love Christ without persecution provided alwayes we do not over love him nor be passionately in love with him but yet there are a few inconveniences which attend this explication For 1. If we be United and closely United to Christ by Love then a Political Union is not the onely one betwixt Christ and Christians And 2. Then it seems for all the sorrow a Christian may be United to Christ without being United to a particular Church for we therefore love Christians because we love Christ and are taken with the imperfect holiness which is copied out into their Natures and lives because we are surprized first with a delightful admiration of Him who is the grand exemplar of all perfect Holinesse 1 John 5. 1. He that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him 3. Why may not this Union with Christ signifie an Union with the Church as well as the other and then to love Christ signifies no more than to love his Church and so we are but where we were 4. It s very strange that our Love should result from our obedience and subjection whereas its hard to conceive how the soul should give subjection without Love and if it should give any a forced subjection without its principle of Love would find as cold a well-come in Christs heart as that cold heart it came from our Saviour had described obedience as the result of love John 14. 15. If ye Love me keep my Commandements No says our Authour keep my Commandements and then you will fall in Love with me but let him give light to his own Notions when we are transformed into the Image of Christ he loves Us as being like him and we love him too as partaking of his Nature He loves us as the price of his blood as his own workmanship created to good works and we love him as our Saviour and Redeemer now love is the great Cement of Union which unites interest and thereby does more firmly unite hearts It is not then quite so bad as was
first created to himself and â—…hen pleads against us which is to Lacquey it after â—…olkelius For so he lib. de verâ Relig. cap. 10. p. â—…38 Christum autem saepenumerò non Christi Perâ—…onam aut Naturam sed per Metonymicam dicenâ—…di figuram à liud quippiam vel ad Christum respiâ—…iens vel ab illo profectum designare ex illis locis â—…erspicuum est ubi Christum accepisse Christum diâ—… Christum induere debere aut eundem 〈◊〉 in Christo esse in Christo denique 〈◊〉 dicimur That Christ oftentimes signifies 〈◊〉 the Person or Nature of Christ but something 〈◊〉 either relating to him or proceeding from him 〈◊〉 a Metonymie is plain from those places wheâ—… we are said to have received Christ to have leaâ—… Christ that we ought to put on Christ and 〈◊〉 have put him on to be in Christ and lastly to 〈◊〉 in Christ And at this rate in a while the Persâ—…nality of Christ shall lye at the mercy of these meâ—… there being no place of Scripture left that shall â—…cessarily prove him to be a Person but with oâ—… of these evasions they can enervate and with a 〈◊〉 dash of a wanton pen strike him clear out of 〈◊〉 Writ But let us a little examine his Consequencâ—… Christ sometimes signifies the Church therefore 〈◊〉 be in Christ to be united to Christ must be so â—…derstood From May be in the premises to must 〈◊〉 in the conclusion is a high leap let our Author 〈◊〉 a care he do not break his Neck for my part I 〈◊〉 not be too sollicitous to answer such Inferences But I had almost forgotten that under the 〈◊〉 Head he interpreted In Christ to signifie in 〈◊〉 Doctrine and now to serve the present Turn it 〈◊〉 signifie to be in the Church To which I onely saâ—… If they be one thing this Head is needless and 〈◊〉 they be two they make a contradiction In the mean time our Author is the most unhaâ—…py man I have met withall that having perhaps 〈◊〉 place or two of Scripture where possibly the 〈◊〉 Christ may signifie the Church mystically consideredâ—… as it takes in the Head and Members the Fouâ—…dation and Building the root and branches the 〈◊〉 and Subjects the Husband and Spouse yet shoulâ—… so unhappily fix upon those Texts which would â—…empt a rigid Antagonist to put him to the proof â—…f what in a sober sence will not be denyed Let us â—…hen attend to his Quotations Rom. 12. 5. We beâ—…ng many are one Body in Christ. All true Christiâ—…ns how many soever they be constitute but one Body but how come they to be One what is that Center wherein they meet that common Bond or Ligament which ties them together who is the Corner-stone that couples together the parts of this Building The Apostle tells us t is Christ He is the Head in whom the members are united the corner-stone in whom the sides of the building are joyned â—…he Center in whom as in a point all the Faith of Individual Believers does meet now cannot they be thus One but the Name Christ must needs signifie Church Well let us hear one of his Id ests i. e. saith he We are all but one Christian Society which is the Body of Christ. Very good according to our Authors Fancy it must run thus We are all one Christian Society which is the Body of the Church But whatever truth there is in the Notion it never grew upon this root all the Apostle asserts is this that Particular Christians are compared to the particular members of the natural body the whole Church collectively taken is compared to the natural body and that he might shew how the particular Members of this Mystical Body are united and become One he tells us it is in Christ. Again Col. 1. 2. To the Saints and faithfull Brethren in Christ. Ergo what Why they are Christian Brethren True but how come they to be so That is indeed the Question to which our Author speaks Ne gry quidem His last proof is from 2 Cor. 5. 17. He that is in Christ is a New Creature It seems somewâ—… strange to me that the word Christ should signiâ—… otherwise in this Verse than it had done v. 14. 1â—… and must do again v. 18. Before the Text v. 1â—… The love of Christ constrains us And that 〈◊〉 dyed for all Was it a Person who out of pure Loâ—… dyed for his Church who offered himself a Sacâ—…fice to God for it and is it all o th' sudden groâ—… a Church The Church I had thought was the Oject and not the Subject of that Love mentioneâ—… After the Text v. 18. we read that God hath recoâ—…ciled us to himself by Iesus Christ And how doâ—… our Author wedge in Church instead of Christ in thâ—… 17th verse Must the blessed Apostle be made 〈◊〉 speak Non-sence argue impertinently conclude aâ—…surdly to gratifie one of his forced and wresteâ—… Notions Well for once that we may not purchasâ—… his displeasure let him paraphrase the eighteentâ—… verse thus God hath reconcil'd the Church to hiâ—…self by the Church What remains in this particular is onely that descant which he gives upon hiâ—… Text i. e. Every sincere Christian is a New Creature Agreed To be in Christ and to be a sincere Christian do explain one another But the descanâ—… upon his descant is the Life of all Whoever professeth the Faith of Christ and lives in society with the Christian Church hath obliged himself to live 〈◊〉 new Life Better and better still What is it to be in Christ Ans. To be a sincere Christian. Qu. Anâ—… what is it to be a sincere Christian Ans. To profess the Faith of Christ and live in society with the christian Church Most admirable The clearest fullest and exactest Definition without all peradventure that ever was in the world of a sincere Christian and out-vies all that Mr. Shepheard's Sincere Convert or Sound Believer can afford us The onely fault that I find with it is that the lewdest and vilest Hypocrite that ever was in the world may be one of our Authors Sincere Christians You have heard what a Sincere Christian is to your unspeakable comfort no doubt Will you but hear what the New creature is and you are made for ever Qu. What is it to be a New creature Ans. To oblige himself to live a New life Nay if an Obligation nay a voluntary Obligation to live a New life will render a Man a New Creature I am sure God has obliged all men so to live and most men have superadded a voluntary Obligation of their own so to live and then what a sad rout of New Creatures is the world pester'd withall The Reader has seen by this time that his first Notion of Christ is false his second onely necessarily True his third very questionable and the fourth unproved and if it had been proved would not have done his work and now it 's high time to
of the shell That our Union to Christ consists in our union with the Church And all along I Dream't that that Christ about whom the Question was He that was the Shepheard to whom the Sheep are United the Husband to whom the Spause is United the King of the Church to whom all Christians are United had been a real and very Person and that it had been supposed that Christians are some way or other United to him Only all the Question was Whether they were so United by Means of the Church or no For if we are not united to Christ at all it s a needless Enquiry How or by what means we are United to him Or wherein that Union consists For this takes away the Subject of the Question What is it then wherein this Union with Christ consists Why It consists in a sincere and Spirituall communion with the Christian Church And now the Question must be Trimed over again Whether our Union with the Church consists in a sincere communion with the Church That is this Face of the Question will do best in this place for I always observe our Author Writes just from Hand to Mouth and if he can but make a Rubbing shift for the present Page let the next take care for it self 2 And now let us hear his plain Demonstration Otherwise says he this External communion with the Church could be no visible signification of our Union to Christ. A notable Argument no doubt if any Living-body understood it In the words fore-going he tells us He means by Union with Christ a sincere and Spiritual communion with the Church And then the old question would have stood thus Whether our union with a particular Church be the means of our sincere and spiritual communion with the Church And if he had thus spoke out I am assured he had met with no Opposition But he intended another thing then and entertain'd new Councels upon new Successes and greater hopes from atchieved Victories But still the Reader is Importunate for the Demonstration Then take it and make your best on 't External communion with the Church is a visible signification of our Union to the Church that he means by Christ and therefore our Union to Christ consists in a sincere and Spiritual communion with the Christian Church And if he had told us plainly that there is no such thing as Union with Christ but that the Phrase of Union with Christ is an empty Name and has no more in it than union with a Church it had been easie to have understood the strength of his Will and the weakness of his Reason without half this Circumlocntion 3. His next Observation is That the Union between Christ and the Christian Church is not a Natural but a Political Union That is says he such an union as is between a Prince and his Subjects It was but just now that he told us That our Union with Christ is not an union with his Person and yet now he will explain the Nature of this Union between Christ and the Church And indeed he has so Bewildred himself that it needs a great deal of Explication and I doubt all will be too little to deliver it from Non-sence For his Explication must be this The Union between the Church and the Christian Church is not a Natural but a Political Union such an union as is between a Prince and his Subjects Now this has two Faults in it First That if it were true it would Over-turn his whole Design which I can be very well content withall And Secondly which is the Misery on 't its False and therefore will neither Overthrow nor Support his Design And therefore his Interest will lie in this one â—…hing if he could but see it to Prove his Assertion to be False that there may be some hopes left of his conclusion 1. As it stands it apparently Overthrows his whole Design For if this Politick Union be such a one as is between a Prince and his Subjects Then 1. There is such a thing alive again in the World as Union with and Relation to Christs Person For surely Subjects are Related to and united with the Person of their Prince 2. Then this Union to Christ denotes Primarily a Relation to and Union with the Person of Christ and only Secondarily an Union with and Relation to his Laws and Commands and the rest of our fellow Subjects For I think the Reason why Subjects give Obedience to any Laws is because they are the Laws of him who is the Legislator The Reason why the Sheep are subject to Pastoral Orders is because they are the Orders and Instituted by him who is their Shepheard and has a right to Enjoyn them And the Reason why the Wife subjects her self to the Commands of her Husband is because she is united to him upon those Terms in the Marriage-covenant All Duty is founded in Relation It 's impossible to conceive Conjugal Duty without a Preconception of Conjugal Relation If therefore such be our Relation to Christ such our union to Him as of Sheep to Shepheard Wife to Husband Subjects to a Prince then are we first Related to his Person and as far as such Relation will Unite united to his Person and then his Negative is blown up That our Union to Christ is not an union to his Person but consists in our communion with his Church Which is as if he should say Our Relation to our Prince is no Relation to his Person but consists in our Union to the Common-wealth which is a neat Engine to hook in Democracy But 2 It s False which is the worst on 't our uuion to Christ is not fully explain'd by a Political union It 's true It is not a Natural union but yet it 's well Explain'd by and bears a full Analogy with a Natural union The Relation is not Natural but Spiritual and yet it has pleased the Holy Ghost to express the Spiritual Relation by the Natural The Relation between a Prince and his Subjects expresses something of that Relation that is between Christ and Believers but not the whole All the Similitudes used in Scripture to Illustrate the Relation between Christ and Christians have something in common with each other All imply absolute Soveraignty and Authority contempered with tenderness of Affection on Christs part and all imply an absolute Subjection to be given to Him with delight and complacency on our parts yet some of them express a nearer union and more endeared Affections than others That of a Master Lord and King express Authority and Power yet not that Intimacy and union which is expressed by that of Husband and Wife That of a King implies Christ to be a Head of Government but that of the Head in the Natural Body implies the Communications of Grace of Strength Counsel and Power to Obey and withal that there 's such an Intimate union between Christ and true Believers that the Members in the Natural are
Bishops and Pastors But what shall become of the Bishops and Pastors themselves What Provision is made for them VVhich way shall they be United to Christ Some indeed talk of Uniting them by their Metropolitans and them again by their Patriarchs and then these by the Pope But who shall Unite him poor man I see here 's a Design laid to prove the Pope to be Antichrist 2. VVhen a Church is first Collected I am perplexing my self how the first Convert the first Believer comes to be United to Christ when there is never a Church existing by which he should be United And it troubles me to think what a long while that unhappy Creature may be Holy and very Religious and yet cannot be united to Christ because others will not consent to become a Church and thus he must necessarily perish though he be thus Holy and Devout because others will not go to Heaven with him But 3. VVe must suppose that Baptism Unites us to the Visible Church Now either this single Person was United to Christ before his Baptism or not If he was then the Cause is lost for then Union with the Visible Church is not the only Means of our Union to Christ. If not then 1. What a sad Generation of Wretches must be the Ingredients of a Church And some will define it as others have made it A Cage of unclean Birds and a Hold of every filthy and unclean Spirit And then 2. It will be the unquestionable Duty of the Pastors of the Church to admit into the Society the most Profligate Rascals that offer themselves For what would you have them do Shall they be so Barbarous and Inhumane such bloody Murtherers of Souls to deny them the only Means of their Union to Christ And what would you have the poor wicked wretches do Repent and believe and turn from their sins Alas all 's to no purpose they can never be United to Christ without the only Means of Union were they as Meek as Moses as Patient as Iob as Believing as Abraham they are never the nearer Christ and therefore as good come Loaden with all their Villanies and Triumphing in their Rogueries and be but united to the Church and all in good time they may come to be United to Christ But surely the Church of England has Instructed her Children otherwise I shall not press our Author with the Articles because he 's no great admirer of them but because he so adores the Catechism I shall remit him thither for Satisfaction Qu. What is required of Persons to be Baptised Ans. Repentance whereby they forsake sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the Promises of God made to them in that Sacrament If now such a Faith such a Repentance as are here described must qualifie a Person for Baptism that he may be United thereby to the Church and so to Christ I would gladly learn whether such a faith and such a repentance will not serve to Unite him to Christ antecedent to his Baptism And if not whether the Church can contribute any more to his Union with him Another Reason of our Authors proceeds thus The Church is Christs Flock and every Christian who is of this Fold is one of Christs Sheep In good time but is he therefore and onely therefore one of Christs Sheep because he is one of this Fold Or rather taken into the Fold because he was first one of Christs Sheep But if indeed this be the real way to Create sheep by taking any thing that has four Legs into the Fold it will be a Noble piece of Charity to revive the Tribute of Wolves and if the Breed should be worn out in England we know from whence to recruite the Sheepfold but still he proceeds and I perceive he has a mind to prove something if he knew what The Church is Christs Spouse every Christian is a Member of that Society which Christ owns for his Spouse but every Christian is not Christs Spouse No Why not Now comes the Knocking-argument He is a great enemy to Poligamy and hath but one Spouse Wonderful So is Christ a great Enemy to Monsters and Prodigies and has but one Body And yet for all this our Author could allow the Church of Corinth to be his Spouse to be his Body and then I will allow the Church of Smyrna to have been his Body and his Spouse and others as their affections lead them will no doubt allow other particular Churches to be his Body his Spouse and then Christ shall have as many particular Bodies and Spouses as there are particular Churches upon the Face of the Earth and so this Doughty argument Vanishes into Smoak and nothing and in lieu of it I will offer him another It 's impossible to be United to Christ without the only Means of Union but it 's possible to be United to Christ without being United to a particular Church therefore to be United to a particular Church is not the only Means of Uniting us to Christ. The former Proposition we will for once humbly beg at his hands and do not doubt but he will charitably grant it the second is Evidenced from hence When particular Churches are broken in pieces by Persecution or otherwise yet the true believing Members are not thereby separated from Christ they cease not to be Christs Friends because the World is their Enemy Yea indeed says our Author pag. 165. If there be no Visible Society as it may happen in time of Persecution it must of necessity alter the Case That is in plain English his Discourse had been Strong if it had not been Weak and our Union to the Church had been the only Means of our Union to Christ but for one ill favoured Business that there is another Means of our union to him and we may be united to him without it I grant indeed with much readiness that it is our unquestionable Duty and when all Circumstances concur our Indispensible Duty for every Christian to joyn himself to some particular Church the Command of Christ has made it so The Edifying our own Souls in Faith Love Comfort adds to that necessity the Glorifying of our God and our Redeemer in a visible Profession of and Subjection to all his Ordinances heightens that Necessity the enjoyment of many Gospel Ordinances which presuppose a Church-state add more weight to the Necessity and that our Union with Christ has more Bonds laid upon it by this means I freely own but that our Union with the Church is the only means to Unite us to Christ I must see better Arguments to prove it before I know how to believe it Our Union with Christ is by Invisible and Internal Ligaments and if there were no other than what a Visible Church can afford I do not see but all Christians are Obliged to be Hypocrites The great Promises of the Gospel those of Justification Adoption and Sanctification are made to Individuals and how to apply them to
whole Churches otherwise than by the Individuals is unconceivable They are single Persons that are Justified Sanctified Adopted Pardoned and Saved and not a Complex Notion which is only an Operation of the Mind conceiving of singular things as they relate one to another There is yet one Text of Scripture which our Author has reserved as the Triarij to the main Battle and though his Jelites be Cut off and his Body shaken yet so long as his Reserves are entire and unbroken he cannot be totally Routed The place is Iohn 15. 1 2 3 4 5. I am the true Vine and my Father is the Husbandman Abide in me and I in you As the Branch cannot bear Fruit except it abide in the Vine no more can ye except ye abide in me Now because he lays such a Stress upon and places all his Hopes and Confidence in this place I shall particularly Examine 1. His Interpretation 2. His Reasons for that Interpretation 3. The Use he makes of this Interpretation 1. For his Interpretation it has more Faces than Ianus and more Colours than the Rainbow I am the true Vine Where I signifies Christ together with his Church There 's one Face But pag. 146. He repents that ever he took the Person of Christ into the Paraphrase for fear some ill disposed persons should make an ill use on t and therefore he Glosses it thus I am the true Vine that is the Church So I is grown a Church But yet that neither will not answer all his Occasions nor stop all Gaps and therefore it must put on another shape pag. 147. When Christ speaks in the first Person I he cannot mean this of his own Person but of his Church Doctrine and Religion And yet for all this it will not do the Feat but it must pass through one Metamorphosis more and it signifies a sincere and hearty Belief of the Gospel So here we have got the Act and the Object Married together in this one word I A man would conclude he had found at last Aristotles Materia Prima it 's Omnium formarum capax Nothing in Act but every thing in Power a piece of soft Wax that 's plyable to any Impression a mere blanck Paper you may Write down your own Conditions But what is meant by the Vine Why that 's the Church too pag. 146. That is the Church which is founded on the belief of my Gospel is the only true Church Or I am the Vine that is the Church is the Church but let us proceed He that abideth in me In me that is the Christian Church I in him that is the Christian Doctrine For without me you can do uothing That is without a sincere belief of my Gospel And now he presumes he has laid his Matters so Closely Evenly and Regularly together that he may defie the Cunning of the most expert Caviller to disturb them And yet to deal openly with him he has not lead me Captive by his fair Colours and regular Proportions For 1. I find his way of Interpretation meerly Arbitrary such as has no other Foundation but the Soveraign will of the Commentator he deals with Scripture as if it were his perfect Vassal and he the absolute Monarch of the Word of God and that his Paraphrase knew no other Language than his Car tel est nostre plaisir For such is our Will and Pleasure Let the Reader take but a taste He that abideth in me and I in him Where Me must signifie the Christian Church and I the Christian Doctrine For we must know for our Learning that Me in the Ablative case must always signifie a Church but I in the Nominative case that 's the Christian Doctrine And if any peevish Fellow shall Object that it 's a huge Wonder that such a slight Variation of the Case should alter the Signification Every puisny Shool-Boy will inform him that the varying the Case does wonderfully alter the Case Now had it been Referred to a Hundred Systematical Heavy-headed Divines they would have concluded One and All that if I signifie a Doctrine Me will signifie the same And if Me signifie a Church I will signifie neither better nor worse but a Church too but when a Zaphnath Paaneah a Revealer of Secrets shall take the Matter in hand he will shew you the difference 2. Another Exception I have against this Interpretation is That Christ has often spoke in the first Person He has compared himself to many other things and yet never intended any thing by I but his own Self Iohn 10. 11. I am the good Shepherd And besides that we have had our Authours Suffrage to it the thing it self makes it evident that Christ speakes there neither of Church nor Doctrine The Fold must signifie the Church The Pasture will answer the Doctrine and Christians they are the Sheep but Christ himself is the Shepherd And yet one signification more for this poor I will do the business let it signifie the Pastors and Bishops and that will heal all And I do not doubt when he has need of them he can fiâ—…d a Dozen more significations of that one word that one Letter I. Again Iohn 10. 7. Christ says I am the Door Now the Church is evidently the House or Temple and so I will not do very well for Church in that place And the Doctrine is the Orders and Rules for Government of the House and therefore we had not best make I signifie Doctrine neither in this place Oh! but then and it was well thought on Baptism is a Sacrament of Admission into the Church and then it will run as Glib upon the Tongue as may be I am the Door that is Baptism is the Door But what shall we say to Iohn 6. 48. I am the Bread of Life Oh! that is wondrous easie and the Interpretation natural and without straining that is My Doctrine is the Bread of Life which answers the Manna But then Christ tells us ver 51. That the Bread which he will give is his Flesh which he will give for the Life of the World What shall become of us now Why our Author must take advice with his Pillow about this Difficulty and let it signifie any thing in the World Black or Blew provided it do not signifie the Person of Christ and the Interpretation is authentick and by to Morrow-morning shall shine with it's own Light 3. This Interpretation avows false Doctrine He had told us That by He that abideth in me is meant he that abideth in the Christian Church And our Saviour assures us ver 5. That without Me ye can do nothing Now in just proportion to his Interpretation the sence must run thus Without you be in the Christian Church it 's impossible ye should do any thâ—…ng that is good And how notoriously false this is of a particular Church is evident how many particular Churches have been dissolved The Shepheard smitten and the Sheep scattered and yet the Indiviâ—…uals have
not more though in another way united to the Head and one to another than Christ and Christians are in this which may be called a Mystical union for Christ and Believers are hereupon called One Christ 1 Cor. 12. 12. As the Body is one and hath many Members even so is Christ That is so is the Lord Christ and his Church When therefore he says That Christ is called a Head and the Church his Body a Husband and the Church his Spouse which two Metaphors signifie the same thing and are both of them Names of Power and Authority It is something of the Truth but not the whole Truth nor nothing else but the Truth Something of truth there is in it Christs Headship denotes Authority But then it 's not the entire Truth Christs Headship denotes more than bare Authority And then there 's something more than the Truth Those two Metaphors do not denote the same thing That of the Husband over the Wife denotes Power mixed and sweetly tempered with Love and Pity But that of the Head over the Members denotes a continual Influx of all saving Grace into his Members I wish therefore he would leave Trifling with his Hackney Fallacy That because Christ is a Head of Authority He is not an Head of Influence For he that can assert that the Union and Relation between Christ and Christians has no Spiritual correspondency with a Natural Union which yet is Explicated by it may when he sees his own time deny That the Union between Christ and Christians has any Analogiâ—…with a Political union though he has Pro hâc vice Explicated the Union by it There is one thing more wherein our Author shows himself a great Divine and a mighty Statesman for the very sound of Political Union is enough to Inspire a Man that is prepared for such Impulses Our Union to Christ says he consists in our Belief of his Revelations Obedience to his Laws and Subjection to his Authority As Obedience to our Prince is the strongest Bond of a Political Union which is Dissolved and Broken by Rebellion and Disobedience But this is neither truly Asserted nor wisely Explained 1. Not truly asserted For our Union to Christ does not consist in that Obedience which we give him as our Lord our Shepheard our Husband but in that Act of Obedience whereby at first we take him for our Lord Shepheard and Husband and give up our selves sincerely to him again to be his Sheep Subjects Spouse 2. Nor wisely Explicated For if Relation to a Prince does formally consist in Obedience and that Union be dissolved by Rebellion then whenever a Rebel shakes hands with Actual subjection he absolves himself from the duty to Obey which would save the horrible Charges of the Popes Bull. Our Author has acquainted the World with a very fine way how to live a Traytor Twenty years and yet never commit but one single sin at first but all the after acts will be Regular For if Rebellion dissolve and break in pieces the Union between Prince and Subject then he ceases any longer to be a Subject and by consequence whatever sins he commits must be called by other Names for it can be no Rebellion When the Relation ceases Duty ceases Obedience is a conserving cause of Union but the Union lies not in it He that does not perform his Duty yet is under an Obligation to perform his Duty the Union continues though many acts unsuitable to the Union are committed But should we be so charitable as to grant him all this he will be weary on 't in a while as little Children that make a heavy and piteous moan for a Gewgaw and when they have it throw it away Thus after all his Rodomontade That this Union is a Political union such as is between Prince and Subjects as if his Book could never have been Licensed if he had talk'd of any thing below Crowns and Diadems and the Roman Empire Yet pag. 162. he tells us That God has laid aside in a great Measure that severe Name of a King and calls himself our Father to signifie that Liberty we enjoy under the Gospel in Opposition to the Bondage and Servitude of the Law of Moses Well whatever opinion he has of Monarchy the severity of it's Name the Bondage and Servitude that it brings Men under I know many who if they might choose had rather come under that severe Name of King as to their Religious concerns than feel the more smooth and Debonair Treatment of some Spiritual Fathers It 's very Tiresome to Travel out of the way for the further we go on the further we have to come back and yet thus has our Author seduced his Reader but now we shall come to a vein of Matter for having reduced all the benefit Believers have from Christ as their Head to Political Government there is but one thing more which if he can cleverly compass the day is his own and this is to strip Christ of that little Power and Authority he had left him To this end we must observe further That though Christ be our Lord and Governour he does not Govern us immediately by Himself for he is Ascended into Heaven where he powerfully Intercedes for his Church and by a Vigilent Providence superintends the affairs of it but he has left the Visible and External conduct and Government of it to Bishops and Pastors who preside in his Name and by his Authority To which I answer 1. That Christs committing the External conduct of his Churches to his own Officers may very well consist with his own Internal and Invisible conduct of his Peoples Souls and their Spiritual concerns 2. Whatever Authority Christ has vested his Officers with he has Devested himself of none he continues sole Head of the Church still All Power is committed to him in Heaven and in Earth And though there are some that would ease him of the Trouble yet I have not heard that he has laid down his Commission nor taken any into joynt Commission with himself 3. Christ has given an Authority in the Churches to all his own Officers but he has not given to any of them his Authority And indeed unless he could Communicate to them his Power as well as his Authority it would signifie little But I hope they know their places better than so they are Servants of Jesus Christ tied up to their Instructions as all Ambassadors are though they come in the Name of their Prince and their Commission runs to teach us to Observe whatsoever Christ has Commanded in the Scripture 4. As to the External Conduct of the Church Christ has left it as much to Princes as to Bishops and more for several Reasons that I know of but one is this That every Supreme Magistrate is next and immediately under Christ Supreme Head and Governour of the Church within his own Dominions Well but what Reason does he favour us with Why Christ doth not immediately Govern us
Himself 1. He is ascended into Heaven Well Yet he knows how to be present with all and every one of his to the end of the World And Where two or three meet together in his Name he will be in the midst of them He has sent Vicariam vim Spiritus sancti who does Manage for him a Spiritual Government in the Souls of all the Elect And since I have named two such dangerous words as Sanctification and Election I had best bethink my self of good Security and that I have from the Church Catechism Quest. What dost thou learn chiefly in these Articles of thy Belief Answ. I learn to believe in God the Holy Ghost who Sanctifieth me and all the Elect People of God 2. He powerfully Intercedes for his Church Why sure Intercession with the Father is not Inconsistent with immediate Rule and Government over his Saints But 3. By his vigilant Providence he Superintends all the Affairs of it Why then he Governs it Nay Soft a-while He will allow Christ a Transmarine Superintendency but no proper Episcopal Iurisdiction That is he may be a Spectator or a By-stander and look on to see how Squares go but must not meddle with the Immediate Government of us for he has put that out of his Hands and left it to the Bishops and Pastors Which I confess is the worst News that I have heard this Seven years But now for the Conclusion This is says he a plain Demonstration That the Union of particular Christians to Christ is by union with the Christian Church Shortly If our Author does but give a grave Nod it will amount to a Demonstration but if he should please to give a Lusty Hum it will be a plain Demonstration Though others are so perverse they will not own it for a probable Conjecture for the Spiritual subjection of the Soul and Conscience is immediately to Christ As the Emperour once said Non tibi sed Petro so may every Christian Non tibi sed Christo. Whatever Command the Officers of Christ bring us in his Name their Commission is Patent and we must search the Scriptures to see whether it be so or no if it carrys the Signature of Christs Authority we Obey him in hearing them and if they have or pretend to have any private Instructions or Cabala we may fairly demur to them or bring a Quo Warranto against them And now at last he will leave his Imperious Dictates and come to Disputation If our Union to Christ consist in our Subjection to him as our Lord and Master Head and Husband it follows that we cannot be United to Christ that is cannot own his Authority till we Unite our selves to the publick Societies of Christians But the former is true Ergo c. To the Consequence of the former Proposition all I say is It 's Feeble and very Sick Our union to Christ may consist in our subjection to him as King Lord and Husband and yet we may be united to him thus before our Actual union to a particular Society Well he will prove it thus This Authority of Christ is not Exercised immediately by Himself but by the Bishops and Pastours of the Church To which I return 1. If he means that only Christ exercises not a Visible Authority by himself but by the Guides and Pastors of the Church it may be true but then it will prove no more than this That we are visible Professors of Christs Name by our Uniting to a particular Church under the Guides and Officers thereof which is not the thing in Question 2. If he means that Christ exercises not any inward Authority over the Soul immediately by Himself I must return to my former Answer which is a peremptory denial 3. Whether this Authority be exercised immediately by Christ or not Our Union with Christ may be immediate For our acceptation of Christ as Lord King and Husband is the Bond of our Union and the Exercise of all Authority of a Superiour in those Relations must still of necessity presuppose the Union and Relation But as to our Antecedent That our Union to Christ consists in our Subjection to him as our Lord Head and Husband Which is very true of that Act of Subjection whereby at first we accept of him to be all these to us and give up our selves to be all the other to him but very false of those subsequent Acts of Obedience which flow from but do not Constitute the Relation And therefore it was prudently done to Explain Union to Christ by owning his Authority For however it be false yet every one will not spie that who Rides on a Trotting Horse and it will serve to make a Semblance of saying something It 's true we cannot own Christs Authority if we Derogate from his Commands but yet our union with Christ and our relation to him must precede our owning his Authority over us And for this our Author has fitted us with a Similitude which may befriend Us as well as it's owner As no man can be said to submit himself to his Prince who denies Subjection to Subordinate Magistrates who Act by his Commission For the union of Bodies Politick consists in Order and Government when all the Members keep their proper places and are knit together by a faithful Discharge of their Duties I could not hope for more Weakness in an Adversary than I shall be sure to find in this Similitude First None can be said to submit to his Prince who denies Subjection to Subordinate Magistrates And thus none can be said to submit himself to Christ who denies Obedience to his Officers who act in his Name Secondly As Submission to Subordinate Magistrates is not that wherein our Relation to our Prince conâ—…ists but an effect of it so a due subjection to our spiritual Guides is not that wherein our Union to Christ consists but a Consequent of it We first owe a subjection to Christ and from thence to them who Command us in his Name Thus the Apostle 2 Cor. 8. 5. They first gave themselves to the Lord and to us by the Will of God Thirdly No man can be said to Submit who Rebels A weighty truth But he may be said to owe submission though he rebells His Prince has not lost his right to Command though he like a Villain wantâ—… Grace to Obey Fourthly It 's very Childish and spoken like a Green headed Statesman That the union of Bodies Politick consists in Order and Government For Order and Government are for the preservation of the Union and not the first union of these Bodies Politick The union of Prince and People consists in their first relation to one another as such and the exercise of Government is to secure that union and the advantages of it If union consists in Order and Government then Disorder and ill Government would dissolve the union and relation and by consequence discharge all Subjects from a Conscience of their Duty which is very dangerous
his body and of his flesh and of his bones And for this cause says the Apostle vers 31. a man shall leave Father and Mother and cleave to his Wife and they two shall be one flesh But now says he that which I have discoursed to you will seem very abstruse and as some will phrase it mystical non-sense and unintelligible Drollery but I speak concerning Christ and his Church For however this be true That the Husband and Wife are but one flesh in the eye and consideration of the Law yet it 's more eminently true concerning Christ and his Church who in the consideration and eye of God are but one Spirit All Metaphors and Similitudes taken from outward things come infinitely short and cannot decypher that mystical Union which is between Christ and all true Believers Your Political Union is but a new-invented Bawble your Natural Union is lean and hungry your Civil Union is low and flat it is a Mystical Union Ay but this Paul was an obscure Author and writes very darkly But yet he may comfort himself the better under this hard Censure since God himself cannot escape the Lash of Virulent Peâ—…s emboldned with an Imprimatur whose Institutions are reproached to be of Obscure Signification to aw the Childish Minds of men into Veneration And then that the internal Ligaments of this Union are the Spirit and Faith as the Scripture is free in affirming so our Author is shy in denying only he throws away a little scornful Drivel upon 't This Mystical is a hard word Let it be so Dr. Iacomb shall explain it on Rom. 8. p. 42. And first says the Doctor There is an Union of three Persons in one Nature 2. There 's the Union of two Natures in one Person 3. There 's an Union of Persons where yet Persons and Natures are distinct Concerning which he observes 1. Here 's an Union but no Transmutation Commixtion or Confusion Here 's an Union of Persons but no Personal Union Say you so Doctor then I promise you here 's one has made bold with some of your names for page 103. he tells his Reader and me amongst the rest That these men place all their hopes of Salvation in a personal Union with Christ. But pray Dr. go on The Person of Christ is united to the Person of a Believer and the Person of a Believer to the Person of Christ But for this our Author has a dry flam As it must needs be where the Person of Christ is united to the Person of a Believer Silly Man the Doctor observes that Christ is united to a Believer by the Spirit and a Believer united to Christ by Faith Though the Terms of the Relation are the same in Christ's Union with a Believer and a Believer's Union with Christ the Bond that unites them is Distinct. A Father is related to his Son and a Son to his Father yet Paternity is one thing and Filiation another and the Foundations of these Relations differ The Foundation of the one is to beget of the other to be begotten But says the Doctor Faith is the uniting Grace and this Faith receiving Christ 1 John 13. it must also unite us to the Person of Christ But of this our Author doubts because men are not united to every thing they receive Alas-a-day yet when a Master receives any one to be his Servant that Reception is the bottom of his Relation If a Woman receives a person to be her Husband that Reception creates an Union But I had rather the Reader would give himself the satisfaction to peruse the Doctors Book where he shall find these things laid down with Modesty backed with strength of Reason Scripture and the suffrage of Learned Christians And if our Author thinks that a few Squirts and Flashes which he is resolved to call Wit be a sufficient Confutation he shall enjoy the Contentment of admiring his own Excellencies without any Rival Again This Union says the Doctor may be thus described ' T is that Supernatural Spiritual Intimous Oneness and Conjunction between the Person of Christ and the Persons of Believers through the Bonds of the Spirit and Faith upon which there follows mutual and reciprocal Communion each with other I will not conceal from the Reader my thoughts I really expected that our Author should have highly commended the Doctors Modesty who in a subject so Sublime as might well exercise the Tongues of Angels should draw his Description with a Peut estre it may be described And the rather because by that means he has not excluded our Authors greater Abilities from travelling in the subject but left room enough for his Defining Faculty But instead of that I sâ—…e he 's Angry still though impotent This Oneness and Conjunction are hard words So they are indeed It 's hard to say Whether they will prove Arabic or Syriac or Welsh or Wild-Irish But to be sure they came but lately into England and are not yet made Denizons to purchase our Author's favour The great danger is lest we should mistake this Conjunction for one of the Eight parts of Speech Oh Sirs what inextricable perplexities has this one lewd word involved the Nation in since it landed The old Shiboleth was an innocent Chrysom to it Political Union and Machine are sorry Sneaks to it Indeed Tetrachymagogon and Syncategorematical come pretty near But Oh Conjunction This Conjunction is not to be tolerated in a Land professing the Seven Liberal Sciences And yet after all this I dare venture an even Wager That as many understand Conjunction as Opposition and more than know what to make of Antithesis and yet that never choak'd our Author but he could swallow it without making any Bones of it or a Vespasian face at it p. 264. But if some small splinter should stick in his throat the Doctor will be that charitable Crane to pluck it out for he adds Believers are said to be joyned to the Lord 1 Cor. 6. 17. Now if no words will down with him but such as melt in the mouth let him substitute Ioyning for Conjunction and that will serve for a Vehicle with a spoonful of Syrrup of Mulberries to supple the passage Our Author finding that the Doctor has bewildred himself will endeavour to help him out It 's a plain case says he if Christ and Believers are united their Persons are united too for the Person of Christ is Christ himself and the Persons of Believers are Believers themselves and I cannot understand how they should be united without their Persons but then they are united by mutual Relations as the Person of a Prince and his Subjects of a Husband and his Wife are united by mutual affections This I confess a surpassing kindness and therefore that frequent reckonings may make us long Friends I shall call some small Follies to account ere they be forgotten 1. I am more confirm'd in my old Observation That our Author writes only from hand to month He has
justified in the sight of God and methinks it looks like a mere whimsey to fancy a Notion of Iustification in his sight that has neither pardon of sin included in it nor eternal life attending of it It 's strange to me to hear of Iustification before God against Temporal Evils And if Abraham had no other I think he was never perfectly justified 2. The Determination of the Church of England is no light matter with me Artic. 7. They are not to be heard that feign the Fathers looked only for Transitory Promises But it seems that in this one particular the Church was not infallible for they are to be heard and read and licensed and advanced too who dare fâ—…ign and write and preach That the Patriarchs either looked for none or at the best but Transitory Promises 3. When I read that Abraham was so earnest to see Christ's day by Faith and when he got a sight of it he was glad I begin to think with my self what should be the ground of so great a joy at so great a distance Spiritual Promise he is allowed none and was it worth the while to rejoyce in the foresight of some temporal Advantages that should come to the Jews when he should be turn'd to dust and nothing especially seeing the coming of Christ either brought spiritual Mercies 〈◊〉 the Seed of Abraham or none at all So that he had more cause to sit down and lament that he had no promise of Love from or Life with God either for his Person or Posterity Ay! but says he the Promise was not so clear but men might mistake iâ—… That may be I confess And so may the clearest that ever God gave to the sons of men If men will set their wits on work and serue and torture and vex and wrest every letter and syllable and in all this forsake the Conduct of God's Spirit and scorn the Catholick Judgment of the Church in all Ages to gratifie their Airy Crotchets I do not remember a Promise of God to secure them against mistaking his Promises Ay! but says he we know that the whole Iewish Church did so for many Ages If he knows it he knows more than I do but that is no great wonder and than any man alive besides his own Knowing self And yet they had more particular Promises concerning Christ than that was and yet expected only a temporal Prince I will deal openly with him I do not believe that the whole Iewish Church for any Age much less for many Ages no not for any one day in any Age did expect a Messiah to deliver them only from temporal evils That there was great degeneracy in that Church in some Ages I deny not there is so amongst Christians especially towards the latter times of their Church-state But that ever the whole Church so far degenerated as to lose the expectation of a Redeemer to deliver them from sin and its consequents and to endow them with spiritual Blessings I demand better proofs than Confidence before I subscribe And 1. For Abraham it 's evident he sought a heavenly Country and therefore I conclude That the believing Jews who had says our Author more particular Promises concerning Christ sought a heavenly one too or their more express Promises were ill bestowed on them Heb. 11. 9. By Faith he Abraham dwelt in the promised Land as in a strange Country The promised Land was a strange Country to him that sought a heavenly one whereof that was but the figure the rind and bark for that Promise had greater excellencies underneath to his discerning Faith ver 10. For he looked for a City that had foundations whose builder and maker is God Vers. 13. All these died in the Faith Confessing that they were Strangers and Pilgrims for they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a Country Vers. 16. But now they desire a better that it a heavenly Country therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God 2. It 's evident that the Messiah was promised Isa. 53. 4. To bear their sins and carry their sorrows Vers. 5. To be wounded for their transgressions and bruised for their iniquities Ver. 6. To have all their iniquities laid upon him Ver. 8. To be stricken for the transgression of God's people Ver. 10. To have his Soul made an Offering for sin And now to assert That the whole Iewish Church expected only a temporal Monarch is to throw such dirt in the face of God's people as is very scandalous 3. If any of them at any time expected temporal Deliverances temporal Honours Revenues c. from the Messiah it was not inconsistent utterly with an expectation of better things from him for the Disciples themselves had been hammering some such conceit in their heads Acts 1. 6. perhaps mistaking in the Chronology and Antedating that Mercy which in its season they might have reason to expect and yet by our Author 's good leave I will be so charitable as to presume they looked for pardon of sin and eternal life from Christ Nay I could name instances nearer home of those that expect from the Gospel large in-comes and yet we may reasonably believe have nobler things in their eye and would scorn his Atheistical spirit who would not forgo his part in Paris for his share in Paradise 2. He must know that Christ was to die for our sins without which according to our Doctor it 's impossible God should forgive sins considering the Naturalness of his Vindictive Iustice to him Now to untie this knot in the Bulrush 1. I question not that Abraham understood clearly That God was essentially holy and that his Rectoral or Governing Iustice was founded therein Gen. 18. 25. Shall not the Iudg of all the Earth do right That it should be with the righteous as with the wicked or with the wicked as with the righteous were far from God Which Consideration might stagger his Faith about the pardon of his own sin and his only relief could be from the Faith of the Messiah's undertaking with God In which he had this satisfaction that however he found difficulties in the way of believing yet still he gave credit to God and his Testimony concerning a Redeemer leaving the Modes and Circumstances of the Mediatory Office as a secret in God's bosom 2. I am confident our Author cannot prove that Abraham knew nothing of Christ's death This I know he had Sacrifices which might sufficiently instruct him in the demerit of sin and what the sinner had deserved and in the necessity of Compensation to be made to God's Justice for his violated Law and reproached Government And whether Abraham might not once open his mouth to God to be instructed in their noblest signification and design I cannot tell 3. I do not know of any absolute necessity that Abraham should understand the Circumstances that should lead towards the fulfilling of the Mediator's work or in what particular way God would justifie a sinner