the Debtor cannot properly be said to be the Author of the payment he paid not the Money 't was not his but the Sureties yet the Money being paid for him in his stead for his benefit by the Surety and accepted for him instead of his payment by the Creditor he is a subject of denomination and may be truly accounted a clear and solvent person and the payment imputed to him placed to his account as really and as fully as if he had paid it with his own hand and with his own money Hence some call the Righteousness of Christ the Formal Cause of our Justification Vid. Whitaker de Ecclesia p. 460 461. Synop. Leidens disput 33. Th. 21 23. and others the Matter or Material Cause both mean the same thing viz. That Christs righteousness is the very thing for which we are accepted and justified before God I will not contend about terms of Art in so great a point whereon Salvation depends yet it seemeth more logical to say In Justification man in the Matter or Subject viz. the Person justified Christs righteousness is the Form that by which he is constituted righteous or just before God Imputation Gods accepting this righteousness for him is as the Union betwixt the Matter and the Form even the Application of Christs righteousness to the person justified God the Father is the Efficient accepting or acquitting him for the sake of Christs righteousness The Promise of the Gospel is the medium whereby this righteousness is conveyed and Faith the instrument or disposition in the subject whereby it is rendred capable of receiving Christs righteousness or having it imputed to him And Justification is the Condition or State of a Man accepted with God to life eternal through the righteousness of Christ imputed to him From â—â—ence I inser that Imputation of Christs righteousness and Justification is all one and but â—â—e real Act and so Arctius defines it Justiâ—atio est imputatio justitiae alienae gratuita Lib. Probl. loc 25. faâ—â—a a Deo respectu meriti Filii Dei ad salutem â—â—ni credenti Some learned men make Justication to consist of 2 Acts. The First whereby Christs righteousness is imputed to a Sinâ—er The Second whereby his sins are forgiven and he accepted for the sake of that righteousness But this makes it more perplext that it is to impute righteousness We are righteous with the righteousness of Christ â—â—t in a Physical sence as if it were inherent or adherent to us but judicially We are accepted as righteous i. e. discharged from punishment and intituled to life for it and this 〈◊〉 to be justified We may indeed make it Formal Acts or formally distinct the one thereby Christs righteousness is placed to our account or reckoned to be done for us the â—ther whereby we are accepted or intituled 〈◊〉 life for that righteousness But it 's really â—â—e same thing to account Christs righteousâ—â— be wrought for us to satisfie and fulfill the â—aw of God and to accept us and give us â—ight to life for that righteousness God in â—s Promise proposeth life to Sinners on the account of Christs satisfaction in which when â—â—ey believe and trust there is by virtue of that Promise a Grant and Title to life made other to them and hereby righteousness is imputed to them or they are justified Thus Rom. 4 2. When the Apostle would prove Abraham was not justified by Works he saith v. 3. Faith was imputed to him for Righteousness Then to justifie or impute Christs righteousness is all one and God accounteth us righteous for this righteousness i. e. God justifieth or giveth us eternal life for Christs righteousness and frees us from condemnation Nor is Christ first given to us and then his right ousness as some speak as if we were actually interessed in Christs Person before we are his righteousness God worketh Faith in the Heart which apprehendeth the promise of liâ—â— through the righteousness of Christ and hereby we are accepted and justified and this righteousness is thus made ours or given to us and no other way Afterwards we are adopted and receive the Spirit of Sons by which Spirit we are united to Christ as to our Hear and the Fountain of Spiritual Life and the Christ is most properly given to us or wâ—â— are actually interessed in his person in whom all the Elect have some interest before on the account of Election but this was not actual and proper These things thus explained the Question betwixt us and our Opposites is plainly thâ—â— Whether God justifieth men and intituled them Life for the Righteousness which Christ wrought in fulfilling and suffering the Penalties of the Law The Affirmative is the Protestant Doctrine and now to be proved Argument 1. 1. I argue from the Parallel of Christ and Adam Christ is called the Second Adam the Second Man 1 Cor. 15.45 47. Adam was the Figure of him who was to come viz. Christ Rom. 5.14 Whence is this but in respect of the general Influence of what they did upon the rest of Markind Hence I argue As Adam's Disobedience condemned men so Christ's Obedience acquitteth and justifieth them But the very Acts of Adam's Disobedience are imputed to men to their Condemnation they are condemned for them therefore they that believe have the very righteousness of Christ imputed to them and by that are justified The Major is largely proved by the Apostle Rom. 5.12 ad finem where he sheweth That Justification and Life come into the World in like manner as Death and Condemnation did each by a common Person and by them derived upon the rest of Mankind As many were made Sinners 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one Mans Obedience so by the Obedience of one many shall be made righteous 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 19. They are constituted righteous and unrighteous in the same manner unrighteous by Adams disobedience righteous by the obedience of Christ But this I suppose will not be denied and he that denieth the Minor viz. That Adams disobedience is imputed to us as the immediate Cause of our Condemnation is a down right Pelagian But because iâ— this Age all the Foundations are destroyed we shall prove it from the fore-cited Text Rom. 5.12 where the Apostle affirms That by one man Sin and death entred into the World and Death passed upon all men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether we translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iâ— whom all have sinned as the the Fathers did against the Palagians meaning Adam 〈◊〉 whom all his Posterity sinned or in quantum for as much as all men have sinned the Sence is all one Sin and Death came upon all men from one man i. e. Adam and therefore they were all made Sinners in him and by him But this is clearer v. 15. where it is said Many are dead by the Offence of this one man viz. Adam And v. 26. The Judgment or Sentence unto Condemnation came by one man 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and v. 17. Death reigned had its full power upon Man kind by means of this one Man And v. 18. By the Offence of one Judgment came upon all to condemnation all are condemned for his Offence And v. 89. The reason is because by that one mans disobedience peccatores instituti sunt they are made constituted Sinners whence the Argument is strong All men be condemned dead sentenced adjudged to death for the Sin of Adam therefore that sin is accounted theirs imputed to them not as if they had personally been the Actors of that Sin or that it did inhere or adhere properly to them but Adams sinning as the Head of Man kind and as it were for all men they are accounted to have sinned in him so as to incur all the punishment of his Sin Now let it be observed that ex adverso in like manner cometh the Gift of Life of Justification and the Gift of Righteousness by Jesus Christ by his Obedience men are made righteous justi constitutisunt are constituted righteous But men were made Sinners by Adams Sin and so fell under the Sentence of death before they sinned in their own persons without their own personal disobedience through being destitute of grace they must needs sin and so add to their punishment Therefore they that believe are made righteous in Christ with his Righteousness before any personal righteousness in them without the condition of their own obedience though being made righteous in Christ they receive grace to be obedient and so to be fit to receive the Inheritance giv'n them in Christ Object It is objected by a learned and grave Person that in this place v. 19. we are not said to be justified with Christs Obedience Hotchkis ut supra p. 43 44. but by it and that by signifieth an efficient or meritorious cause but with a formal cause and that we may be said to be justified by the Obedience of Christ as it merited Justification upon the Terms of the Gospel but not with it as imputed to us Answ Forgetfulness of Grammar is no wonder scarce a fault in his Age but that tells us that the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when construed with a Genitive Case doth signifie cum with as well as per by and gives this example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum gladiis The same also say the Lexicons So then by the favour of the Greek word we may translate it with the Obedience of one many are made Righteous Moreover by signifieth the formal Cause which is causa per quam and with an Instrumental Cause Part 1. p. 229 230. not a Formal as hath been shewed And thus this distinction is grounded upon a mistake both in Grammar and Logick But he farther saith that here is no word of Imputation or imputing Christs Obedience to us and that it is barely said By his Obedience we are made Righteous I answer It is necessarily implied we are made righteous by the Obedience of Christ as we were made Sinners by the Disobedience of Adam but his Disobedience made us Sinners by imputation or being imputed to us ergò the Comparison is expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If this Authors sence be admitted in the latter words it must be affixed also to the former i. e. If we are made righteous by Christs Obedience only because he merited that we should be justified if we obey the Gospel then it must follow we are made Sinners by Adam's Disobedience only because he merited by his Fall that if we sinned we also should perish If Christ only brought in a way of righteousness how we might be justified if we observed it then Adam only brought in a way of Sin how men might be condemned if they trod in his Steps but this is absurd To return that Adam's Sin is properly imputed to us I farther prove from Eph. 2.3 We were by Nature Children of wrath even as others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the rest of men Grotius his gloss upon these words viz. That the Apostle meaneth only the Gentiles who were born out of the Church and out of the Covenant and therefore were by nature Children of Wrath is against the words of the Text. For the Apostle having spoken of the Gentiles in the two former verses putteth himself and the Jews into the same condition in this verse saying Amongst whom we all had our Conversation in times past and we were by nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Children of wrath even as the rest All men therefore are by nature Children of wrath i. e. are born Heirs of wrath under the Sentence of Condemnation For as Children of Life Children of the Kingdom signifie those that are Heirs under the Promise of Life so Children of Wrath are those that are Heirs under the Sentence of Condemnation Now I demand how all men should come under the sentence of condemnation and inherit it as their natural though woful Birth-right unless Adams Fall be sharged upon them and so as soon as they have a Being derived from him in a natural way the Sentence pronounced against him is â—n force against them also Suppose God might justly have deprived all Mankind descending from Adam of his present Favour and of the Gifts and Graces Priviledges and Benefits which Adam enjoyed because Adam had forfeited them and could not therefore leave them to be enjoyed to his Posterity Aâ— a Father spending or forfeiting his own Inheritance and Honours doth deprive his Children of them though they are not therefore made guilty of his Offence yet how will it consist with Justice besides the loss of all Privileges to adjudge sentence men to death before any Trial is made of their Obedience whether they will not do better than Adam did or aâ— least do something that in their forlorn Estate may move some compassion to them and mitigate their misery This is our Case we are born Heirs of Death Judgment and Condemnation is past upon all men taketh hold of them as soon as they are men How can this be without any guilt chargeable upon them and if there be any it must be the guilt of Adams Fall Ezek. 18.20 God declared that the Son should not die for the Fathers Sin it would certainly be high injustice in men to deprive the Posterity of an Offendor for ever not only of their Fathers Inheritance but of all possibility of return and recovery of themselves so that they should ever be dealt with as Malefactors Much more is it consistent with Divine Justice to punish all Mankind not only with the loss of Adams Priviledges but with Eternal Death inevitably for any thing the Law provideth to the contrary meerly because they descended from him without trying or expecting how they would behave themselves There must therefore be a Guilt upon all men by nature viz. the Guilt of Adams Sin and that must be imputed to them and
it must be by Christ To say that some of it was fulfilled and some Honour done to it by the Mediatorial Law is of small moment for this did not fulfill it or satisfie the End of it The Law as a Law and as a Covenant betwixt God and Man was clearly laid aside if Christ fulfill'd it not and all Mankind after the Fall were by him brought under a Covenant of Grace and so the Law is made void by Faith contrary to the Apostle Rom. 3.31 Our Saviour also testified of himself Mat. 5.17 That he came not to destroy but to fulfill the Law This was the End of his coming into the World and his fulfilling was his obeying performing the Law as he had said before Mat. 3.15 It becometh us to fulfill all Righteousness Therefore he was Baptized and therefore much more ought he to observe the Law which was of ancienter Institution This is confirmed by the Reason he giveth for his fulfilling the Law Mat. 5.18 viz. That not one Jota or Tittle of the Law should pass away till all was fulfilled though Heaven and Earth might pass away The Sanction of the Law is more stable than the Ordinances of Heaven and Earth and must attain its End Therefore every Child of Adam must be subject to it Our Saviour adds v. 19 20. That he was so far from relaxing of the Law that on the contrary he affirmed whosoever should break the least Commands and teach others so should be shut out of Heaven Nay that he required a stricter Observation of it than the Scribes and Pharisees for all their pretended severities in some things Now that all this was meant of the Law as given by Moses chiefly of the Moral Law is manifest by his proceeding to expound and vindicate the Commandments in his following Discourse v. 21. to the end from the slight Comments of their present Teachers In like manner when it is said Christ is the End of the Law for Righteousness to all them that believe Rom. 10.4 It is meant of the Law of Moses for it is immediately added v. 5. Moses describeth the Righteousness of the Law that the Man that doth them shall live in them Now Christ is the End of the Law not simply by waving it and disannulling its Obligation for then the Law should not have its End nor be unchangeable as he had told us it was but He is the End of it for righteousness to them that believe by fulfilling it in his own person for them so that their Righteousness or Justification may not depend upon their own Obedience to it Again Christ redeemed us from the Curse of the Law Gal. 3.13 being made a Curse for us How was Christ made a Curse but by bearing the Penalty of the Law for Sin For the Curse is not only the Matter of Punishment the evil inflicted but formal punishment viz. Evil inflicted for Sin for the satisfaction of Justice and the violated Law Now how came this Curse to fall upon Christ Even by the Law it self adjudging him to it For thus the Apostle argueth v. 10. They that are of the Works of the Law under the power of it are under the Curse And v. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the Curse of the Law by being made a Curse for us This is the Argument Men cannot be justified by the Law for that curseth all that are under it but we shall be justified by Faith in Christ v. 12. because he bore the Curse of the Law for us He must therefore be under the Law as we were And it is further proved because it is written i. e. the Law saith Cursed is every one that hangeth on a Tree Deut. 21.23 What is this to the Death of Christ if he were not under the Law And if he were under the Jewish Law which pronounced the Death of the Cross accursed in special manner then by the same reason he was under the Law of Adam which pronounced Death in general as a Curse for Sin Lastly If the Sufferings of Christ were not inflicted by virtue of the Law of Works then they were not Penal nor had they any thing of God's wrath in them for it was that Law only that threatned a Curse They were only Prudential viz. that something should be suffered which that Law threatned that so it might decently be laid aside Now if Christ were subject to the Law as to the Curse he was also subject to the Precept and so his Obedience was in our stead and therefore to be imputed to us for our Justification We were not obliged to the Law of a Mediator Christ fulfilled not that in our stead if then he did and suffered any thing in our stead it was in obedience to our Law and so to be placed to our Account CHAP. III. More Arguments to prove the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us Argument 3. THirdly I argue from those Scriptures which call Christ our Righteousness and say we have Righteousness in him He is not our Righteousness inherently his Righteousness is not implanted in us therefore it is ours by imputation or not at all Isai 45.24 25. Surely shall one say in the Lord have I Righteousness and Strength This is a Prophesie of Christ and Salvation by him which is to be brought about by this means viz. having Righteousness and Strength in him If we translate it as some do In the Lord there is Righteousness and Strength the sence is the same but our Translation agrees best with the following Verse Now how have we strength in Christ Surely he communicates grace and life to us and doth not only procure and grant a Covenant of Grace he must likewise communicate Righteousness to us and that his own not a Righteousness wrought in us or else it is not distinct from grace or strength mentioned in the Text which the next words also confirm In the Lord shall all the Seed of Israel be justified and shall glory It is a justifying Righteousness distinct from Grace or Strength infused into us which we have in Christ and this cannot be ours but by Imputation Jeremiah 23.5 6. This is the Name whereby Israel shall call him The Lord our Righteousness Who this is the former words shew sc the Righteous Branch to be raised up to David i. e. Christ as also the Reason of this Name because in his days his People shall be saved and chiefly with a Spiritual Salvation this is because he is Jehovah our Righteousness Our Salvation springs primarily from hence That we are made righteous or justified before God and this righteousness comes from Christ As God is our Wisdom our Strength c. because he is the Author of it in us and to us as also our Guide and Protector so Christ is our righteousness i e. the Author of righteousness to us and that he will justifie us by it Object Some object against this That in chap. 33. v. 15 16. Jerusalem the Church seems
to be called by the same Name This is the Name whereby she shall be called The Lord our Righteousness Answ But the Context sheweth that it speaketh of the same Person and almost in the same words sc the righteous Branch of David c. And therefore learned men translate it This is the name of him who shall call her viz. The Church The Lord our Righteousness So Junius translates it also the Geneva and the Dutch Annotions and others but if it be meant of the hurch as Mr. Gataker contends it must Gataker in locum it only because the Name of Christ is put upon or as being clothed with his Righteousness the New Jerusalem the Gospel Church named Jehovah Shammah the Lord is there â—â—om his Presence in her and as God himself pleased to take upon himself the Name of â—â—s People Ps 24.6 Ezek. 48.35 This is the Generation 〈◊〉 them that seek thy Face O Jacob i. e. the â—â—â—d of Jacob. Dan. 9.24 Seventy weeks are determined â—â—on thy People and upon thy Holy City to finish the Transgression and to make an end of â—â—ins and to make reconciliation for Iniquity and 〈◊〉 bring in Everlasting Righteousness Daniel â—â—d prayed for the deliverance of the Jews â—â—d the forgiveness of their Sins and that not â—â—r the sake of their own Righteousness but â—â—ods great Mercy v. 18 19. He is answerâ—â—d that the City shall be built again and the â—eople saved by the Messiah v. 25. and that 〈◊〉 his being cut off not for himself v. 26. â—â—plying that it should be for them and that â—â—en should be brought in everlasting Righteousness whereby Israel should be justified and â—â—ved This is the Righteousness of the Mesâ—â—ah for none else is a standing and everlasting â—ighteousness Ours is mutable and subject 〈◊〉 fail Hos 6.4 Neither was our righteousness in special manner to be brought in by â—â—e Death of Christ it had been before in the Sanctified in all Ages of the Church It was a new Righteousness then to be wrought and brought in at the Death of Christ though by the Virtue of it the former Saints were saved yet it was not actually wrought and Justification by it distinctly declared till now Therefore it is all one with finishing transgression making an end of sin making reconciliation for the people which is plainly Justification to be had by this Everlasting Righteousness Rom. 5.18 19. As by the offence of one Judgment came upon all men to condemnation even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life All men were condemned by the offence or sin of Adam So they that believe shall be justified by the righteousness of Christ the free gift oâ— grant of life comes by the righteousness of Jesus Christ as the sentence of death came by Adams unrighteousness The 19 v. makes it clearer As by the disobedience of one many are made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous Adam did not make way by his Sin for mens condemnation he did not only render them liable to death if they should sin as he did and break the same Covenant But he brought them under the Curse and Sentence of death absolutely by and for his Sin so that all that are of his Seed are under the Judgement of Condemnation ipso facto as soon as they have a Being In like manner Christ must not only make way for mens Justification or procure them a Covenant whereby they shall be justified if they perform it as he performed the Covenant of a Mediator but he must also justifie them intitle them to life so soon as they believe in him by and for his own Righteousness and Obedience One Exception against this place hath been answered in the former Chapter Another excepteth Object The Apostle doth not say IN one mans obedience many shall be made righteous Just Evang p. 72. but BY one mans obedience as a consequent and effect of it many shall be made righteous As the effect of one mans disobedience many come to be shapen in iniquity and brought forth in a sinful condemned nature so as the effect of one mans obedience many come to be new born and brought forth in a Righteous and Saving State Answ The vanity of the exception from the word BY hath been manifested before The Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here used signifieth BY or WITH which is the proper sence of the place the term IN would be more obscure And thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated Rom. 14.20 To him that eateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with offence but the Sum of this Exception is as it is largely prosecuted p. 68. c. That Adams personal disobedience is not imputed to his Posterity but he virtually containing all men in his Nature and Sinning before the Act of Propagation he did corrupt his Nature and so begat Children in a sinful mortal State But I have before proved the Imputation of his Actual Sin I now add Do Mankind derive a sinful mortal Nature from Adam by meer necessity of Nature seeing the effect must be like the cause or by virtue of Divine Constitution that his Posterity should inherit the Fruits of his Sin If by necessity of Nature as this Author seems to intimate then the Soul of Man must be ex traduce derived from the Parents else it could not be born sinful by necessity of Nature and then it must be corrupted with the Body and cannot exist without it and at best must be raised with the Body and sleep in the dust till the last day as the Socinians teach Nor would the want of original righteousness no nor positive dispositions to sin in our Nature as derived from Adam be sinful in us they be poena causa peocati the Punishment of Adams Sin and the cause of Sin in us but not peccatum our Sin no more than the natural Diseases of the Body which we derive from our Parents For that which comes by meer natural necessity cannot be a Sin But if it be by Divine Constitution then the meaning must be either that God appointed that if Adam should sin that one Sin then not only he should perish but that he should also propagate a sinful mortal Nature to all his Seed without exception and then the sin and misery of all Mankind is directly and properly the punishment of Adams personal sin only which besides the horrour of the thing that so many millions in all Ages should be made miserable both here and for ever as the punishment of another mans Sin in which they were no way concern'd is also against Gods own Law The Children shall not be put to death for the Fathers nor the Fathers for the Children but â—very man for his own sin Deut. 24.16 Or â—lse this Constitution must mean that God appointed that Adam shall stand or fall for all his â—osterity and then
his Obedience or Disobedience must be imputed to them and be Cause â—f their life or death even the immediate Cause Object Some say this Obedience of Christ is only is Sufferings according as he is said to be obedient to the death Phil. 2.6 and to have â—â—me to do the Will of God in offering up his â—wn Body Heb. 10. v. 6. to the 11th Answ 1. This maketh nothing against our main posiâ—â—on viz. That the Righteousness of Christ is â—â—puted to us and we justified by it For â—hether it be his Death only or his Life and â—eath both for which we are accepted and â—stified it is all one in this Question so long 〈◊〉 imputation of that Righteousness to us be â—e way whereby it justifies us And if they â—ean that his Sufferings are his only obedience here mentioned to make us righteous by â—â—ocuring a Covenant of Grace to be fulfilled â—â— us then they might as well have said His â—â—tive Obedience without his Sufferings doth â—â—ake us righteous For the Text leads to â—â—e no more than the other And Mr. Trueâ—â—an when he had disputed against the Imputation of Christs Active Obedience and for the Passive only and yet that must be only to procure a Law of Grace afterwards fairly grants That in this sence viz. of procuring the Covenant of Grace both Active and Passive may be said to be imputed to us 2ly But the words will not bear this sence Adam's Actual disobedience made us formally Sinners and guilty of death So the Obedience i. e. the Sufferings of Christ procureth right to life for us Thus they must run but when is the Parallel The Sufferings of Christ can not be said to make us righteous formally aâ— this Author tells Sufferings are not righteousness much less suffering the Penaltys oâ— the Law for the breach of it but Christ suffered the Curse of the Law for our sin against it his Sufferings delivered us from the Curse oâ— the Law it having been born by him but could not make us righteous according to thâ— Law that we should obtain the reward 〈◊〉 Life It is true Christ was obedient in his Sufferings and did the Will of his Father in offering himself if they had not been voluntary and obediential they could not have been meritorious but that his Sufferings as suffering of the Penalty of the Law are his only Obedience that justifies us or that he performeâ— no other obedience for us doth not folloâ— at all 1 Cor. 1.30 Christ is made unto us of God Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and Redemption that he that glorieth may glory in the Lord. Here is exprest that God hath made Christ our righteousness sc by giving him to satisfie the Law for us and accepting us for his righteousness And here we may observe that the Apostle purposely proveth against the despisers of Christ the Greeks who boasted of their own Wisdom and the Jews who trusted in their own Works v. 22 23. that Believers have all in Christ v. 24. and that they are in themselves weak foolish nothing v. 25.28 29. all their excellency is in and from Christ and therefore their righteousness and Justification as well as their Sanstification Farther observe that Righteousness here is distinguished from Wisdom and Sanctification and therefore must mean that Christ is our justifying Righteousness or that we are justified by Christ as our righteousness â—f we were to be justified by our habitual and â—ctual holiness as the Condition of the Gospel â—hen righteousness and sanctification are all â—ne Lastly The Apostle saith we have all these â—n Christ that he that glorieth may glory in the Lord We may glory in Christ in that we â—ave all grace from him but how shall we glory in him as to our Justification if we be not justified by his Righteousness but by our own though wrought by the help of his grace even as Adam if he had kept the Law of Works would have been justified by his own righteousness and might have gloried in himself that he had done his duty though it was by the power of the grace and assistance of God 2 Cor. 5.21 Christ was made sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in him Here righteousness by a usual Hebraism is put for righteous we are made the righteous of God i. e. before God or acceptable with him in Christ by or through Christ as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Dative case is often used and how are we made righteous by Christ even by his being made sin for us as he satisfied for our sin so by that satisfaction are we made righteous as he that knew no sin was sacrificed punished for our sins so we that had no righteousness are made righteous by him and this must be by imputation Thus B Vsher out of Claud. and Sedul in locum That this righteousness therefore is not ours nor in us but in Christ in whom we are considered as Members in the Head Non nostra non in nobis sed in Christo quasi Membra in Capite Rel. Just p. 15. Object Against these two Scriptures it is excepted that in the former it is only said that Christ is made our righteousness Hotchkis p. 191. not that his obedience is imputed to us for righteousness Answ Christ cannot be made our Righteousness any other way than by imputing his perfect Obedience to us and therefore the Scripture in saying the one in words sayeth the other also in sence Object To the latter place 't is said That it saith only that we are made righteous by Christ being made a Sin Offering for us not by imputing his Obedience to us Answ If Christ was made a Sacrifice for our Sins then our Sins were so imputed to him as that he was punished for them and if this make us righteous then his bearing the Punishment of Sin is imputed to us and so his Righteousness is imputed Phil. 3.8 9. That I may win Christ and be found in him not having my own Righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith The Apostle in this place exhorteth to rejoyce in the Lord i. e. Christ v. 1. and to beware of Judaising Christians who joyned the Works of the Law with Christ v. 2. saying That true Believers are the true Circumcision the true people of God even they who rejoyce in Christ and have no confidence in the Flesh i. e. their own Works v. 3. And then reckoning up what he had to alledge for himself from the observation of the Ceremonial and Moral Law v. 4 5 6. he saith That he counted all this loss for Christ v. 7. and not only what might be alledged from observing the Law but whatever else might be thought excellent or a ground of self-confidence and rejoycing v. 8. Yea doubtless and I count all things but loss for the
oâ— that he was accounted to have sinned to have been the Author or any way the Cause of our sins or that God lookt upon him as such These things we account blasphemous but we mean that Jesus Christ in all he did and suffered did intend to satisfie the Law of God which Man should have kept and particularly in his Sufferings did intend and actually bare the punishment due to our sins to satisfie the Law thereby and that the Father in imposing this Obedience and in inflicting these Sufferings upon Christ did intend that his Law which man had broken should be satisfied thereby and that Christ should bear the Punishment of our Sins and further that God did accept of these Sufferings of Christ as a satisfaction for our Sins and did look upon his Justice as executed and satisfied in him Thus our sins are said to be imputed to Christ because he was truly and in the Fathers and in his own intentions punished for them He was not reckoned an Offendor but he was reckoned and dealt with as he who had undertaken to bear the Punishment due to Offenders Many labour to make this Position odious by misrepresenting it and putting it into harsh and unscriptural terms But the Question is plainly this Whether the Sufferings of Christ were truly and intentionally the Punishment of the Sins of Man laid upon him whether Christ was properly punished for their Sins And this the Scripture abundantly and expresly affirmeth Isaiah 53.4 He hath born our griefs and carried our sorrows Yet more plainly v. 5. He was wounded for our transgressions he was bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed v. 6. We have gone astray c. and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all v. 8. For the transgression of my people was he stricken v. 10. His Soul was made an offering for sin v. 11. By his knowledge shall my righteous Servant justifie many And the means whereby he cometh to justifie them is because he shall bear their iniquities v. 12. He bore the sin of many Can any thing be more express If Christ was wounded bruised stricken offered as a Sacrifice for sin then he was properly punisht for sin and though the other terms bearing of sin carrying our griefs c. may have a larger interpretation yet being joyned with those other more express and significant words they are to be taken in the same sence Galat. 3.13 He was made a Curse for us c. The Curse is the Punishment of Sin laid upon a person in pursuance of the Sentence of the Law Christ then was punisht the Sentence of the Law executed upon him with intention to satisfie the Law 2 Corinth 5.21 He was made Sin for us Our Authors paraphrase this He was made a Sacrifice for Sin the Sin-offering being sometimes in Hebrew called Sin And the Interpretation is not much amiss but the Sacrifice for sin died for the Sinner and did typically bear the punishment of his Sin Therefore Christ the Antitype did really undergo the punishment of Sin It is to be observed that our Lord was put to death without the City on purpose to answer the Type of the Sin offering in special above the rest of the Sacrifices which was to be carried out and burnt without the Camp Lev. 6.3 Heb. 13.11 12. 1 Peter 2.24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own Body on the Tree by whose stripes ye were healed Here it is exprest that Christ in his own person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bore our sins upon the Cross in his own Body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore his Sufferings upon the Cross were the punishment for our sins Our Opposites interpret this to be spoken figuratively Trueman â— â—rop p. 89. The Sufferings of Christ were not properly an Execution of the Law though they may figuratively be so called but a satisfaction to Justice that the Law-threat might no be executed They mean That Christ's Sufferings were for sin i. e. to take away Sin by bringing in a Covenant of Grace and possibility of Pardon but not that he satisfied offended Justice by bearing the Punishment of Sin in his own person Now this is not to die for sin at all nor to bare sin be wounded for it or stricken for it but only to suffer by occasion of sin as sin was the occasion that Christ suffered to bring in a way of Pardon and so as Christ's Righteousness is not the cause of our Justification but the occasion of it that which made some way for it as we have proved above so also by this Doctrine our sins were not the cause had no proper influence upon the death of Christ but were an accidental occasion of it because if we had not sinned he had not died to bring in a Covenant of Grace and pardon What can be spoken full and clear enough if these plain Scriptures may be so easily waved The same Author saith p. 86. That Christ's death was a Satisfaction to Justice that God might be Just if he should pardon not an Execution of the Law but a satisfaction to Justice that the Law might not be executed I answer The Justice of God is twofold Absolute and Essential which is the infinite Holiness of his Nature whereby he can do nothing but what is becoming himself or limited and ordinate which is a voluntary Obligation which God hath laid upon himself to proceed in his dealing with Creatures according to the Law which he hath prescribed them I demand which of these Christ satisfied not the first any further than as it is included in the second viz. as it is becoming God's infinite and essential Holiness to proceed with his Creatures according to his own Laws when he hath given them Laws to act by For this Author and his Friends do not deny that Essential Justice might have been content to have pardoned and restored Adam and us in him without the death of Christ it must therefore be limited and ordinate Justice which Christ satisfied Now by this Justice God is obliged to proceed according to his own Law to see his Law fulfilled and executed and that it attain the end for which it was made therefore there is no satisfying of this Justice but by having the Law executed To talk of satisfying Justice of which the Law is the Rule without executing the Law yea that the Law might not be executed but taken out of the way is by fair consequence a Contradiction Argument 7. 7ly I argue Either Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us we are justified immediately by believing in it or Christ only purchased a Law of Grace by fulfilling whereof we should be justified There is no medium betwixt these two in the Question about Imputation but the latter is false therefore the former is true This is that our Opposites contend for That Christ only purchased that we should be saved
to his Righteousness being imputed to us The Learned may find every one â—â— these Objections against the Imputation 〈◊〉 Christ's Righteousness with some others â—â— the like kind urged to the same purpose by Bellarmin and answered by B. Davenant for substance as we do de Justi Cap. 24. and B. Downam in many Chapters of his Learned Discourse of Justification Object It is further objected Our own works anâ— said to be accounted to us for Righteousness as that Act of Phincas in slaying Zimri anâ— Cozby Numb 25.7 Psal 106.30 31. And restoring the poor Man's Pledge Deut. 24.13 It shall be righteousness to thee before the Lord And the keeping of all God's Commandments Deut. 6.25 It shall be our Righteousness if 〈◊〉 observe all these Commandments before the Lord Therefore Christ's Righteousness is not immediately imputed to us for our Justification Answ When our own works are said to be ouâ— Righteousness or accounted for Righteousness it is only meant that God doth accept then and reward them Thus he promised Phines the Priest-hood for ever which was yet revoked for the sins of Elies Sons 1 Sam. 2.30 c. And the Reason subjoyned sheweth hoâ— this Righteousness was accounted viz. Thâ—â— that honour me I will honour and those that aâ—â— spise me shall be lightly esteemed It was accounted for Righteousness i. e. honoured and rewarded Thus mercy to the Poor shall be our righteousness before God i.e. he is pleased with it and will reward it with like kindness when we need it Psal 41.1 And our keeping all the Commandments shall be our Righteousness shall be accepted and rewarded as the obedience of Children But all this proveth not that we shall be made the Children of God have our sins forgiven and be intituled to Grace and life for our own obedience We acknowledge obedience to Gods Commands is our Righteousness whereby we are morally and inherently righteous i.e. conformable to God's Law and Will and this while imperfect is our inchoate or imperfect Righteousness and when it shall be consummate it will be our perfect and compleat righteousness as B. Davenant saith well against the Papists Calumnies de Just cap. 22. But the Righteousness for which we are pardoned accepted and made Heirs of Life must be every way a perfect and compleat righteousness even the righteousness of Christ as the same Author saith Apertè affirmamus Deum justissimum neminem justificare h.e. cap. 22. p. 311. ut exposuimus à reatu absolvere justum declarare ad vitam aeternam quae est justitiae praemium acceptare nisi interveniente vera perfecta justitia quae etiam verè fiat ipsius justitia And again Dicimus neminemjustificari nisi qui donetur justitia tam cumulatâ tamque perfectâ Ibid. ut Deus in illum oculos conjiciens non possit eadem donatum pro jnsto non habere It is pleaded that Faith is imputed for Righteousness in the same manner that other Works are and so justifieth but as they do and is our Righteousness as they are and thus they interpret Gen. 15.6 Abraham's Faith was accounted for Righteousness i.e. it was reckoned a noble and excellent Act of Faith with which God was well pleased and would reward it Answ 1. Faith in the Promise of Pardon and Life of meer Grace and Free Gift cannot be counted any part of our Righteousness To trust in the general in the Goodness Power and Promises of God is required by the Moral Law and is a Natural or Moral Duty and so a part of our universal Righteousness or Conformity to that Law But to trust in the Promise of Forgiveness and Mercy which only is the Faith in question is not required by the Moral Law but supposeth us Breakers of it and to be under its Condemnation it only seeks for Mercy proposed in a new supervening Promise and therefore is not our Righteousness as Works are The Apostle taketh occasion from a notable Instance of Abraham's Faith in a particular case 2ly and its obtaining the Promise of Great Blessings to argue That Faith in the general Mercy of God in Christ doth obtain Justification Rom. 4.2 3. and that with the exclusion of all works v. 5. To him that worketh not but believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly Faith is imputed for Righteousness and this Justification is explained by having sins forgiven covered not imputed v. 6 7. Faith therfore is imputed for righteousness only as it doth obtain the forgiveness of sin the acceptance of them that have no works that are ungodly in themselves and this must be by the Righteousness of Christ not by its self being our righteousness Object It is also said If we are justified immediately by the Righteousness of Christ imputed then there is nothing for us to do to obtain Justification we must only believe we are justified and we are justified Answ There is nothing for us to do to purchase Justification this is done by Christ But we must apply this purchase to our selves by believing or trusting in it flying to it for Justification When a Ransom is paid for a Captive there is nothing left for him to do to purchase his liberty yet he must accept and challenge the Fruit of this Purchase to himself before he can enjoy it Though Adam hath procured and intituled to death upon all his Posterity yet that Curse reacheth not us till we receive a Being from and do habitually consent to his Sin In like manner Christ purchased life for all the Elect yet they do not partake of it till they are ingrafted into him and we do at least habitually consent and trust to be saved by him Object Lastly it is argued If Christs Righteousness be properly imputed then we should perfectly be delivered from all sin and misery and immediately brought to Heaven Answ Justification it self obtaineth remission of all sins and an immutable right to life or the Favour of God and an actual entrance into that Favour this every justified person doth obtain upon believing 1 Joh. 5.12 He that hath the Son hath life Rom. 8.1 Justification hath its proper effect in this life viz. it taketh away sin and the Curse or Obligation to Punishment it reconcileth to God and brings us into that Favour which will endure for ever but God having redeemed us by his Son intendeth not only to justifie us from our sins and give us the Life promised by the Law but also to make us his Children to give us glory in Heaven to make us Partakers of his Sons Glory and Kingdom And for this it pleases him to breed us to nurture and sit us for it by conflicting with sin by overcoming the World and the Devil that the Glory of his Son and Grace may appear the more Therefore the imperfect troublesome state of Believers in this life is not because their Justification is not perfect but because God hath a further design
of Christ a ransome satisfaction or propitiation A ransome respecteth persons to be redeemed it is a price given for them not for Laws and Covenants Whoever paid a ransome without agreeing to whom it should extend and that it should take certain effect whereas here is nothing purchased but a Covenant or Promise that all those that believe and obey the Gospel should be saved which perhaps might be none nor was it agreed how long the World should stand and so what number of Men should be made or should need or be capable of this Redemption A satisfaction to God in this case is a satisfaction to his Law whereby the Sinner must immediately be discharged A Propitiation is a Sacrifice appeasing and reconciling God to Man neither of which it done if only a Promise be procured to save Men upon their fulfilling the conditions of a New Law 3ly If Christ only purchased a Covenant of life then his Redemption is much more in-effectual to fave than Adam's Fall was to destroy Man The Apostle Rom. 5.17 18 20. comparing the Death of Christ with Adam's Fall saith As Sin reigned to death so Grace much more reigneth to life as Sin abounded to condemnation Grace much more aboundeth to justification and life but where is this much more the Obedience of Christ falls far short of Adam's Disobedience in its effects if he only purchased conditions of life Adam in a few moments by one transgression procured a sentence of certain death upon every individual person that should naturally descend from him as soon as they should have a Being but Jesus Christ by his transcendent Obedience of thirty four years by induring the Wrath of God the rage of Men and Devils and a most ignominious death purchased life for no one certain Man but only conditions whereupon they that should hear of them not half Mankind should be saved if they did fulfil them which for any thing he purchased or was contained in the Covenant of life was a meer contingency viz. whether any should ever believe and be saved or not 4ly If Christ only purchased a Covenant of life then he purchased no more for the Elect than for others no more for the Sheep than the goats and they that go to Heaven may hereafter say Christ redeemed them no more than he did those in Hell the difference betwixt them proceeded from their applying and performing the Covenant and its conditions which others neglected For the Covenant is equal to all that hear it promising life upon conditions only which every one is equally concerned in alike capable of Salvation and one no more likely to perform the conditions than another The Arminians grant this that Christ died for all alike Syn. Dordr Ibid. Th. 2. Heterodox Christi mortem impetrasse omnibus hominibus restitutionem in statum gratiae salutis 5ly It follows also That for any efficacy there was in the death of Christ there must have been no man saved For the Covenant of Grace which only he purchased would have been as true and as firm a Covenant viz. That they should be saved who would believe and obey the Gospel though no man had fulfilled it and so been saved by it as the Covenant of Works was which according to them was never fulfilled nor ever gave life to any The Covenant required no more then that God should be ready faithfully to give eternal life ro all that fulfilled it and all that Christ purchased was a Promise that he would so be which would have been true though all men had perished by their unbelief and so Christ might have had the empty Title of a Redeemer without any person being redeemed by him And this Arminius Gravirch and others are not ashamed to confess Arnoldus contra Molin Omnino credo futurum fuisse ut finis mortis Christi constaret etiamsi nemo credidisset Some of ours fay That God had his Elect whom he purposed to bring to Christ and save by him But the Scriptures are as express that Christ died for the Elect as that God elected them And if Christ purchased no more for them then for others they might have perished as well as others for any thing his Redemption or Purchase could do for them or had done 6ly If Christ intended his death for certain particular persons then he purchased more than a meer covenant or conditions of Life The consequence is evident If he purchased life to be given to certain men certainly infallibly then he purchased more than offer of life to them upon conditions which they might or might not perform The Minor That Christ in his death intended the redemption of certain particular persons the Scriptures assirm He laid down his Life for the Sheep Joh. 10.15 16. even for those of the Gentiles that were not of the Jewish Fold and so yet knew him not And the effects of this laying down his life for them was on purpose to call them in due time v. 16. to teach and make them follow him v. 27. and to keep them safe to life eternal by his own and the Fathers power v. 28 29. and from these Sheep are distinguished those who are not of his Sheep and therefore all means are ineffectual to make them believe v. 25 26. He died to gather together in one all the Children of God Joh. 11.52 that were scattered abroad i. e. all the Elect of God dispersed throughout all Nations And the Apostle Paul saith of himself He loved me and gave himself for me Gal. 2.30 Therefore Christ redeemed particular persons and did not only purchase Grants and Covenants 7ly Christ purchased the Spirit and Grace to make his Death effectual to those he died for therefore he purchased more than a Covenant of Grace A meer Covenant of Grace only promiseth Life upon conditions of Faith and Obedience leaving it to men whether they will perform them or not as the Covenant of Works promised life to perfect obedience and then left it to Adam whether he would obey or not A meer Covenant makes no provision of grace and strength to enable men to perform it If then Christ purchased grace to believe and to obey for the Elect he purchased more than a Covenant of Grace and that he did so hath been partly proved and may be further evidenced by this That when Christ saith he laid down his life for the Sheep Joh. 10.16 c. he presently adds he must bring home all the Sheep and make one Fold under one Shepheard himself and that he will make them follow him and will preserve and lead them to Eternal Life and no Wolves shall pluck them out of his hand v. 27 28 29. Also that he died to gather into one all the Children of God This must be done by his Spirit and Grace purchased by his Redemption and that power which is given to him not only to purchase but also to apply the blessed Fruits of Redemption to them Thus our
Lutherus Redivivus OR The Protestant Doctrine of JUSTIFICATION By Christ's Righteousness Imputed to BELIEVERS Explained and Vindicated PART II. By John Troughton Minister of the Gospel sometimes Fellow of S. John's Coll. in Oxon. Augustin Epist 105. Ad Sixtum Presbyterum Romanum Nullane ergò sunt merita Justorum Sunt planè quia justi sunt sed ut justi fierent merita non fecerunt Justi enim facti sunt cum justificati sunt sed sicut dicit Apostolus Justificati gratis per gratiam ipsius LONDON Printed for Sam. Lee near Popes-Head-Alley in Lumbard-Street 1678. THE PREFACE TO THE READER Courteous Reader IN the former Part of this Work I endeavoured to open and refute the Novel Opinion of Justification upon condition of Obedience to the Gospel Which however plausibly worded and vented is in substance no other than the Old Popish Doctrine of Merits and Justification by Works And wherein it is refin'd from the old School-Notions it cometh but so much the nearer to Socinianism from whence the whole Platform of this Doctrine was taken and differs from it very little In this present Treatise my work is to explain and confirm the Protestant Doctrine of Justification by the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us by God and received by us by Faith which is denied by the Assertors of Conditional Justification They are indeed almost as loath the People should know that they deny us to be justified by the Merits or Righteousness of Christ as once Steph. Gardner was That the Doctrine of Justification by Free Grace should be preached to them And for the same Reason viz. The saving of their own Credit And hence they tell us That the Term of Imputation of Righteousness is still to be retained That Christ meriteth our Justification That he is our Legal or Pro-legal Righteousness c. They speak as like our Orthodox Divines as they can that it may not commonly appear wherein they differ Yet in all this they mean no more but that Christ by his Obedience or Death or both obtained a New Covenant for us i. e. the Evangelical Law which if we fulfill and continue in it to the end of our Lives we shall have our Sins pardoned shall be accepted and saved So that the Righteousness for which we shall be accepted and made Heirs of Eternal Life is our Obedience to the Gospel not the Obedience or Righteousness of Jesus Christ and with them the Imputing of Christ's Righteousness to us for Justification is our being justified by our own Obedience to the Gospel-Covenant which Christ procured by his Righteousness not our being justified or accepted to life for the Righteousness of Christ intended and performed immediately and only for us as all Protestants have hitherto taught except the Dutch Arminians and their Followers They do endeavour to obscure and perplex the Question what they can partly by the Rhetorical and sometimes Imprudent Expressions of Popular Preachers and Writers which ought rather to be interpreted and qualified than exagitated to the prejudice of Truth and partly by the Philosophical Notions and School-Terms accommodated to this Doctrine as well as others and too much transferred from the Schools of the Learned to the Pulpit and popular Congregations From both these they pick matters of quarrel against this received and fundamental Truth And always propose the Question in such terms that it may seem they dispute only against the Antinomians or some that have spoke too like them or else some Logical Notions and Formalities of School-Divines Amongst all that I have read with some care to know the true state of the Question and what the New Doctrine of those men is I have not met with one that doth fairly and ingenuously state the Question according to the Sence which they intend and dispute for But they always thrust in some terms lyable to exception which belong not to the substance of the Question it self e. g. They usually propound the Question thus Whether Christ's Righteousness be imputed to us so that we are accounted by God to have done and suffered all that Christ did and suffered for us whether we fulfill the Law in him and suffered the Penalty of it in him And then they infer from the Doctrine of Imputation in general what followeth only from their misrepresenting it That we satisfied for our selves obeyed and suffered for our selves were our own Mediatours and Saviours c. Which Consequences seem not only uncooth but absurd I and are readily received by the unlearned and precipitant Wits who had rather seem ingenious in finding fault with old received Doctrines than take pains to understand them throughly I have endeavoured to divest the Doctrine of Justification by Christ's Righteousness Imputed of the Additions both of School-Notions and popular Rhetorick and to present it in the plain Scriptural dress to prove it by plain Scripture and Arguments deduced thence in the three first Chapters and then to examine their Obâ—ections against it which when they are levelled against the Question as it is plainly stated are so inconsiderable that I cannot but wonder that Learned and Pious men should lay so great a stress upon them as to innovate and alter the Doctrine which all the Protestants have profest writ and died for this is done in the fourth Chapter In the fifth and sixth I examine the original and true meaning of the opposite Opinion and refute it In the rest of the Book I explain and defend the Instrumental Office of Faith in justifying us and answer the Objections against it The Question betwixt us is plainly this Whether God doth justifie Believing Sinners i. e. acquit them from Guilt and Punishment and give them a Right to Eternal Life for their own Obedience to the Gospel Or immediately for the Righteousness of Christ wrought for them and trusted in by them as it is declared in the Promises of the Gospel The former they affirm and we have disproved in the other Part The latter they deny and we affirm and â—â—ove viz. That God doth accept believing Sinners and gives them a certain grant of Eternal Life directly and immediately for the Obedience of Christ â—â—ought for them and proposed to them 〈◊〉 the Promises We say further As to impute Sin 〈◊〉 to account a man a Sinner and juâ—â—ciously to charge his Sin upon him to â—â—s Condemnation when a person hath â—â—thority to do it So to impute Righteousness is to account a man Righteous and judicially to discharge him â—â—om accusation and to grant him the â—â—ivileges and Benefits belonging to 〈◊〉 Righteous Man And therefore when righteousness is said to be imputed 〈◊〉 us without Works the meaning is â—â—at God accepteth us as Righteous â—schargeth us from all the Accusations 〈◊〉 the Law and grants us Right to all â—â—iritual Blessings without any respect 〈◊〉 our Obedience But immediately â—â—d properly for the Righteousness of â—â—rist wrought for us which is thereâ—â—re said to be imputed to us because
justified or pardoned and so restored to favour for the sake of Christs Satisfaction Doth it not then follow that the Death of Christ is the Cause of Pardon then it is not meer pardon but pardon procured or merited and if Christs Death be the meritorious cause of pardon to every Believer then it is imputed or applyed to every pardoned sinner For no cause can produce its effects without Application to the Subject in whom the effect is wrought and the Application of a meritorious cause to the Subject for whom it meriteth is Imputation or accounting that what was done by that Cause was done for that Person And thus we see this Doctrine maketh more against themselves than against us But that Justification includeth more than Pardon of Sin even a positive Righteousness whereby Man is accepted to Life Eternal I shall thus evince 1. From the Notation of the Words To Pardon is only to release from the Penalty of the Law but to Justifie is to Acquit in Judgment to discharge from guilt and accusation Rom. 8.33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect it is God that Justifieth It is confessed that to justifie an innocent person is to acquit but to justifie a Sinner they say is only to forgive him But in what Language doth the word so signifie When the King pardoneth an Offender doth any man say doth the Law ever say the King justifies him A Brother is commanded to forgive his Brother from the Heart and so Job did no doubt forgive his Friends and yet he saith God forbid I should Justifie you Job 27. v. 4. Is any Man said to justfie him whom he pardoneth Why should the Scripture besides the familiar words of Pardoning and Forgiving use another term viz. to Justifie which in its Etymology and common use signifieth to declare Righteous and yet mean no more by Justification than bare Forgiveness 'T is said A full Pardon makes a Man righteous forasmuch as he that is discharged from all Sin is accounted not to have broke the Law and not to have broke it is all one as to have fulfill'd it But this is a mistake He that forgives an Offender does not therefore account or make him Righteous though he will not exact the Penalty of him Pardon doth suppose a Man to have been a Sinner and so it leaves him as one that hath deserv'd punishment though by favour he is exempted from it the Law still chargeth him with sin and sentenceth him to punishment though the Judge supersedeth his Sentence and will not execute the Law But it is said Great Prop. p. 121. Pardon is dissolutio obligationis ad poenam dissolveth the Obligation to punishment and when there is no obligation to punishment a man is innocent and hath right to impunity I Answer The Antecedent is untrue The Obligation to punishment ariseth from the intrinsecal Nature of the Law which being broken exacteth punishment as a due Debt The Wages of Sin is death Rom. 6.23 So that if pardon take away the obligation to punishment it maketh sin to be no sin But sin is sin though forgiven and the Sinner deserves to die although he shall not die Pardon taketh away the Ordination or Destination of a Man to Punishment that he is not appointed to die but not the Obligation that he doth not deserve to die I conclude Pardon doth not render a Man as innocent as no Transgressor and therefore 't is not all one with justifying or declaring righteous 2. From those Phrases whereby Justification is expressed Eph. 1.4 It is paraphrased thus As he hath chosen us in him that we should be holy and without blame before him in love He who is only forgiven his Sins is not accounted as holy and blameless Pardon supposeth guilt and that which some call reatum culpae the guilt of the fault remaineth after pardon viz. That such a Man hath broken the Law and by such habits or actions he hath been disobedient to the Commands Pardon only takes away reatum penoe the appointment of a Man to punishment therefore there must be something more to render men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 holy and blameless before God and Objects of his Love Rom 4.3 4 5. Justification is called Imputing of Righteousness And Rom. 10.5 6. Justification by Works and by Faith are opposed by the Names of the Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith To justifie therefore is to reckon or to declare in judgment that a Man is righteous and as if Man had been justified by the Law of Works he had then been pronounced righteous So now he is to be justified by Faith he is to be declared righteous by the Righteousness of Faith though not of Works Therefore Justification is more than Forgiveness Object 'T is said Pardon maketh a Man Righteous as if he had not brok'n the Law Answ Ans w. This hath been answer'd before I am sure we should take it very ill if one that hath greatly offended us and received his life and all from our Mercy should plead that he is as good as an innocent or righteous person because he is exempted from the Punishment he deserved Object A person of quality argues thus If pardon be not a Sinners Righteousness and maketh him not righteous then a man may be pardoned and be unrighteous still in the eye of the Law which he thinketh absurd Justific Evangelical p. 18. or else there must be a medium betwixt being righteous and unrighteous which he thinketh impossible Answ Both parts of the disjunction are untrue the first that he that is pardoned is not unrighteous still for if by favour punishment be remitted and no satisfaction be made to the Law then the Law remains broken still and he is a Sinner still though forgiven For it is not the Law that pardoneth if that might take effect it would condemn but the Law-Giver by his own Prerogative which pardon is not therefore looked upon as the fulfilling or the Righteousness of the Law But if as in our case the Law was satisfied and by reason of that satisfaction man is pardoned as this worthy Author acknowledgeth a little before then that satisfaction of the Law repaireth the Breach of it and so there is the real righteousness of the Law first imputed to a Man and then by reason thereof he is pardoned i.e. acquitted from punishment to which he was obnoxious before And thus here is a fair Contradiction that a Man is justified by a righteousness satisfactory to the Law yet barely pardoned The second part of the Disjunction That there is no medium betwixt being righteous and unrighteous is also untrue we speak of a declarative Righteousness Now it is apparent that there is a Middle betwixt being justified and being condemned viz. Medium negationis or rather privationis Adam before he fell was not condemned having not yet sinned nor was he justified having not finished
such as the Law will accept perfect or imperfect it is all one if the Law doth require a positive righteousness then a man cannot be justified without it And do not they themselves teach that the Gospel requireth obedience to it as our Evangelical Righteousness therefore that cannot justifie us without a righteousness conformed to it self 'T is said further Legal Justification Ibidem i. e. according to the Law of Works requireth a fulfilling of that Law but not Evangelical Justification A fallacy in words Legal and Evangelical Justification differ not specie sed modo applicationis not in the righteousness which justifieth but in the manner of its application to us Had we fulfilled the Law of Works we had been legally justified by our own righteousness but now Christ hath fulfilled that Law for us we are still legally justified to wit by the righteousness of that Law yet in an Evangelical or Gracious manner that righteousness being not our own but Christ's imputed to us a◠shall be proved in the next Chapter and I beseech you when men are justified i. e. pardoned say you what Law is it that accuseth them for the violation whereof they are pardoned Is it not the Law of Works for i◠they break the Gospel Covenant there is n◠more sacrifice for sin There must then be a legal Justification by that Law of Works unless it be wholly waved and made void by the Gospel Object But the Law of Works is satisfied by the suffering of Christ and so pardon of all sins i◠a sufficient Justification from it Great Prop. p. 116. There needeth not Obedience and suffering too Answ The Law doth not directly and immediately require both obedience and suffering the penalty but obedience only is the end of the Law suffering the penalty is no fulfilling of or proper satisfaction to the Law but a recompence to Justice for the breach of the Law that so contempt may not lie upon it so that if the Law be broken it doth accidentally require both obedience and suffering of punishment the latter for the recompence of injured Justice that the Law may not be despised or broken impunè and the former as that which is the proper and natural end of the Law When a man suffereth the penalty of any Law the Law is so far satisfied that it can exact no farther punishment but doth he therefore deserve the rewards of the Law as if he had obeyed it He is indeed restored to his former State i. e. punishment ceaseth and he is admitted to the priviledge of other men to live in obedience to the Law for the future but he hath not the reward of obedience nor is accounted for his suffering to be upon the same terms with the obedient In like manner our Lord Christ by suffering the penalties of the Law did recompence the injured Honour and Justice of God and of the Law so that it could require no more punishment of him or of those that believe in him but he did not therefore deserve the rewards of the Law they were procured by his obedience to it It is not true of the Law of God that it requireth either to be obeyed or that the penalty should be endured for so men should obey and fulfill the Law in a sort by going to hell for breaking it The Law promised life only to obedience not to the suffering of death therefore Christ by suffering of death did fulfill what the Law required but accidentally and secondarily by reason of sin but by obeying the Law he fulfilled the primary and immediate end of the Law and so merited the promised reward There must therefore be a righteousness of conformity to the Law whereby must be procured a right to life as well as a suffering of the penalty whereby a stop is put to further punishment which is all that meer pardon of sin amounteth to Upon these grounds I take leave to describe Justification an Act whereby God doth acquit and accept a Sinner as righteous unto life eternal for the righteousness of Christ whereby he hath fulfilled the precept and suffered the penalty of the Law Justification actively taken is Gods Act acquitting or declaring a man righteous passively taken it is a mans state or relation to that Act of God being declared and accepted as righteous of which as it supposeth a change from a former state of guilt and condemnation the terminus a quo or state from which he is tranflated is a state of Sin and wrath the terminus ad quem is a state of absolution or being righteous before God pardon of sin or stop of punishment is included in it or doth immediately result from it so that Justification is one single Act and not several concurring to make it up though divers things are given or granted by it either immediately or consequentially as flowing from the immediate effect or benefit of it The main Argument against this Doctrine is That the Scripture doth frequently describe Justification by pardon and forgiveness as if they were aequipollent terms But the reason of this is First Because men being sensible of sin and misery do first look after pardon and therefore pardon is promised as that which will be most welcome and comfortable to them and also because men should be fensible of their own guilt and in capacity of making satisfaction to God and therefore that the righteousness by which they must be justified is not their own but Christs nor contrived or provided by them but by God himself for them What then Justification is called pardon of sin ergò it is nothing else but Pardon This is no consequence Object But the Apostle Rom. 4. fully describeth Justification the nature of it and he saith v. 6 7. That Blessedness cometh by forgiving Justif Evang p. 27. covering not imputing sin Answ But he saith also Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness Now in the place here quoted Gen. 15.6 and the context there is a promise of positive Blessing made to Abraham and he believed that promise and this was accounted to him for righteousness Shall we say Abraham believed and this was accounted for pardon of sin There is a positive righteousness intimated as well as a positive act whereby it was procur'd and appli'd and positive promises granted thereupon David indeed under great horrors for his sin comforts himself most with apprehensions of forgiveness as most suitable to his case but what good will the fullest pardon imaginable do a man without a certain right to eternal life and a promise of effectual Grace to bring him to it will he not sin again and so lose the benefit of his former pardon Object But a Sinner is capable of no other righteousness but that of forgiveness Answ What then must become of the Evangelical Righteousness of Faith and Works which they contend for A Sinner can have no other righteousness but
meer pardon if it must rest upon him to satisfie or to provide satisfaction for the Law But doth this hinder God's providing and bestowing on him the righteousness of his Son As a Bankrupt is capable of nothing but to have his debt freely forgiven him for ought that he can do towards satisfaction yet this hindreth not but his Friend may pay the Debt for him and so render him solvent in Law 'T is once more said Object Iustâ—â— Evang p. 35 36. If a Sinner be not made Righteous by pardon but may be counted a Sinner still then by the same reason when Christ his Righteousness is imputed that being not his own Obedience he may be counted a Sinner still and so be Righteous and a Sinner at the same time which implieth a loud Contradiction Answ It is no Contradiction being not eodem respectu not in the same respect or in the same sence A man is a Sinner in himself and righteous in Christ the Law pronounceth him a Sinner and sentenceth him to death but the Law-giver who is above the Law accepteth Christs fulfilling the Law for him and thus being admitted upon Christs account the Law it self must acknowledg him Righteous CHAP. II. The Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to Believers explained and proved HAving proved that to Justifie is to accept as Just or Righteous and likewise that our own Obedience is not cannot be the Righteousness wherein we must appear before God it remaineth that it must be the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us for and by which we must be justified and this is now to be proved But before we come to the Proof we shall briefly inquire What we mean by Christs Righteousness and what by the Imputation of it The Righteousness of Christ which we say is imputed to a Sinner for his Justification is that Righteousness which he fulfilled or wrought in conformity to the Law of God whereby the Law violated by us was fulfilled and satisfied for us and in our stead Rom. 10.4 Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness to every one that believeth Therefore it is not the Righteousness of his Divine Person which is imputed to us for that is Infinite such as men are uncapable of and 't was never required from them Yet the Perfections of his God-head do add the meritorious Dignity to his Satisfaction Nor is it the connate habitual Righteousness of his Man-hood For this is presuppos'd to enable to the performance of the Law but not properly required by the Law yet the Law requireth the preservation and exercise of perfect inherent righteousness Adam was created perfect to make him capable of receiving a Law of perfect obedience therefore that Law supposed a Holy Nature and only required continuance in that perfection of Nature which he had received In like manner it was necessary that Christ should be born with a perfect holy Nature that he might undertake the fulfilling of the Law for us and the preserving and exercise of that Holiness once received was a part of his obedience to the Law but that Holiness as natural and habitual was antecedent to the obedience of the Law and therefore no prober part of it Christ's Righteousness then which is imputed to us is his Holy Life in obedience to the Law of God and his voluntary obediential suffering the Penalties of the Law unto death it self for us and in our stead By the latter he made satisfaction for our sins and breach of the Law and by the former he fulfill'd the Law in the proper and principal design of it and thereby purchased eternal life which was promised by the Law to them that fulfill it By obeying the substance of the Moral Law as given to Man-kind and suffering death the Penalty thereof he satisfied the Law and wrought Righteousness for men in general and by obeving the Jewish Law and suffering the penalties and that kind of death threatned and accursed particularly by â—t he wrought righteousness for the Jews Gal. 4.4 5. Now when we say This Righteousness of Christ is imputed to Believes reckoned or accounted theirs Rom. 4.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we do not mean that they are accounted to have done and suffered those Actions and Penalties which Christ was Author of and endured Christ and Believers are still distinct natural persons and so the actions and passions of one person cannot be reckoned properly the actions and passions of the other Nor do we teach by imputing Christs Righteousness to Believers that God looketh upon them as if they had done and suffered in their own persons what Christ did in his in any proper sence For Christ only is accounted the Author of his own Righteousness and though Believers be justified by it yet the honour of working that righteousness and of being the proper subject of its Inherence belongeth to Christ alone But by Imputation we mean that God accounteth the Righteousness of Christ to have been wrought by him for every one that believeth and doth justifie or accept them to life eternal for that very righteousness believed or trusted in according to the promise of the Gospel and so Christs Righteousness is reckoned theirs or reckoned to them put to their account as if it were theirs not efficienter but effectivè not as if they had wrought it but that they may have the full benefit of it and be justified by it as effectually as if they had obeyed the Law perfectly in their own persons This is that which our Divines mean by saying Christ righteousness is ours in law that Christ and Believer are one in Law viz. that the Law â—f God is as truly and sully satisfied for us by â—he righteousness of Christ as if we had fulfilled it our selves and that God being pleased â—o admit of the fulfilling of the Law by Christ â—or us the Law doth pronounce us righteous â—nd Heirs of life for that righteousness which Christ wrought in obedience to it In this â—ence also they say That the very formal righteousness of Christ is a Believers righteousness or imputed to him viz. not that a Believer is reckoned to have wrought that righteousness as an efficient cause of it nor that Christs righteousness is transfused into him implanted in him as the subject of inherence â—ut that the very righteousness which Christ wrought was intended and wrought for him by the Son and is accepted for him by the Father that he is justified for it and intituled to life eternal Christ is the efficient the subject of Inherence of his own active passive obedience but the immediate benefit of it as satisfactory to the Law is a Believers and he is the subject of it a subject of external denomination he is denominated righteous from that righteousness wrought for him and accepted in his behalf Thus it is not forma inhaerens but denominans not an internal but an external Form When a Debtor is discharged his Surety paying the Debt
we are accounted to have done personally what he did then our being justified by his Works is all one as if we were justified by our own For we do not maintain that Believers are accounted to have wrought what Christ did but only that it was accounted to have been wrought for them and yet it is not true that upon supposition that they are accounted to have wrought in Christ that it is all one as if they had wrought it themselves For still they did not obey the Law but another for them nor did the Law account it self to have been fulfilled by them but the Law-maker accepted anothers Obedience for them and so discharged and rewardeth them in the right of that Obedient Person But this manner of expression holdeth only when the Law alloweth a Delegate or Substitute and the persons concern'd do chuse and give him his Authority and Instructions to act in their name which is not in our case Object It is further objected If our Sins be imputed to Christ so that his Righteousness should be properly imputed to us then would they corrupt his person and he must be accounted a Sinner guilty of all that we have done Answ Our Sins are imputed to Christ not as if he should be accounted the Subject of our evil Nature and Habits or the Author of our Commissions or Omissions but that he should bear the Punishment of them and so satisfie the Law which was broken by us This doth not corrupt his Person or make him morally a Sinner If a Surety pay a Debt for another it maketh him not guilty of the imprudence dishonesty or ill-husbandry whereby the debt was contracted but he having undertaken to satisfie for the Debt the Law requireth payment of him as if he were the Debtor and so imputeth the Debt to him If an innocent person be accepted by the Law-giver to die for an Offender it maketh not him an Offender though he be punished in the Offenders room and the offence as to the Punishment be imputed to him Yet we may say That legally Christ was made a Sinner and his Person corrupted in that he having undertaken to satisfie the Law for Sin who had not broken it in his own person nor was obliged to such satisfaction before doth now become a Debtor to the Law to suffer the Penalty of it having interposed himself betwixt the Law and the Persons that had offended And thus saith Dr. Twiss â— vind Grot. lib. 1. sect 26. p. 211. Col. 1. Look on what manner Christ bore our sins on the Cross in the same manner may our Sins be said to have been in him or upon him and we Sinners to have been in him as he bore our person or suffered the punishment of our Sins Negari non potest Christum tulisse sive gestasse peccata nostra in ligno ergò qua ratione gestavit peccata nostra eadem ratione peccata nostra illi inerant aut saltem incumbebant atque eadem ratione nos peccatores illi incubuimus idque nondum habita à nobis posthumis in ipsum fidei decimus omnes redimendos fuisse in Christo non quidem â—er fidem insitos sed quatenus dari dicuntur ipsi à patre quatenus ipsorum personam sustinuit Bellarmin to add strength to this Objection de Just. lib. 2. ch 7. saith If our sins be imputed to Christ then must be not only be counted a Blasphemer Murderer c. but also a Child of the Devil seeing those for whom he died were Children of the Devil Answ This is but in terrorem to affright us with hard words A Child of the Devil is taken two ways First by Imitation for one that is like him and doth imitate his Nature and his Actions So the Jews are said to be of their father the Devil because they do his Works John 8.44 And Elymas a Child of the Deâ—il as being very subtile and obstinate in perâ—erting the right ways of God Acts 13. Thus all men by nature are the Children of the Devil but Christ was not nor doth it follow That because our sins were laid upon him â—â— bear the punishment of them he was theâ— fore the Child of the Devil i.e. like him â—â— Nature and Disposition The Imputation â—â— our Sins did not alter Christ's Nature though it did alter the State and Relation of his Person for a time making him obnoxious to the Law as if he had been an Offender Secondly A Child of the Devil may meaâ—â— one that is delivered to the Power of Sataâ—â— as the Executioner of God's Wrath he hâ—â—ving the power of Death Heb. 2.14 〈◊〉 Children of wrath are those that are born oâ—â— noxious to wrath and thus though the teâ—â—â— is hard and irreverent we grant the thing viâ— That Christ suffering for sin was also made oâ—â— noxious and subject to the Power of the Devil both in his Temptations and in his last Sufferings of which he said to the Jews This â—â— your hour and the power of darkness Luke 2â—â— 53. of the Prince of darkness And again The Prince of this World cometh and findâ—â— nothing in me John 14.30 This is so far froâ—â— making against us that it confirmeth our Doctrine The Devil is God's Executioner 〈◊〉 inflict punishment for sin but Christ the innocent and perfect Son of God was delivered inâ—â— the Power of the Devil for a time to be vered and troubled by him therefore it was 〈◊〉 the Punishment of our Sin Object These Authors unanimously complain that â—he Scripture no where saith in express words That Christ's Righteousness is imputed to â—s Answ All Scholars know that this is the first Caâ—il of Innovators to weaken the Faith of the â—nwary For themselves grant this concludeth â—ot It is not read expresly in Scripture thereâ—â—re it is not the Doctrine of the Scriptures say themselves grant it as in express terms 〈◊〉 other Questions so by their Practice in the â—resent Controversie They having new mouled Divinity in this last Age and put it into â—â—ew terms and unknown both to Scripture â—â—d Antiquity They that complain of us for â—sisting upon the term of Imputation of Christs â—ighteousness as not contained expresly in â—cripture ought in all justice and prudence to â—â—ve shewed us first the Chapters and Verses â—here their Terms of condition causa sine qua â—â—n first and second Justification remediaing Law a Law of Grace and the like are 〈◊〉 be found Moreover they know that Imâ—â—tation of Righteousness is a Scripture Term â—â—n times used in the 4th to the Romans and â—â—at Righteousness is said to be imputed without Works to him that worketh not but beâ—â—eveth on him that justifieth the ungodly v. 4. â—herefore this Righteousness cannot be a man's â—wn Obedience and also that Christ is said Scripture to be our Righteousness made of â—â—od Righteousness to us and we made the Righteousness of God in him which are equivalent
it self doth justifie us or make us accepted and that the righteousness which is imputed to us whereby we are justified is not Obedience to the Law but something else which God for Christ's sake graciously accepteth to our Justification Declar. sentent oper p. 102. What this is he expresseth having said that Christ's Righteousness is the onely meritorious cause of Pardon Statuo hoc censeo benè propriè dici fidem homini credenti in justitiam ex gratia imputari quatenùs Deus Jesum Christum filium suum proposuit tribunal gratiae sive propitiationem per fidem in sanguine ipsius h. e. Faith is imputed to us for righteousness in as much as God hath made Christ the Tribunal of Grace which is all one as to say with ours Christ as a King and Judge doth justifie us by and for believing in him And again in answer to the 26th Article objected to him he contendeth That though Faith may be said to concur as an Instrument to Justification yet the Act of Faith doth justifie as it is graciously accepted for our Righteousness Apprehensio Christi est proprior quam instrumentum apprehendens vel quo objectum apprehenditur Apprehensio autem est actio itaque fides non quà instrumentum sed quà actio imputatur in justitiam quanquam propter illum quem apprehendit Bertius in his Epistles explaineth this that Faith is required by the Gospel instead of perfect Obedience to the Law of Works contra Lubbert and so justifyeth us that should have done as the fulfilling of the Command of God with this difference That perfect Obedience needed no Pardon and Grace but Faith per gratiosam accepti lationem of God's Gracious condescension is accepted as a Man's Righteousness he being pleas'd to require no more of him because of his inability to keep the Law so then Christ's Righteousness hath purchased that we should be justified by our Faith but it self doth not justifie us But do the Arminians by Faith mean only the apprehending or trusting in Christ's Righteousness in opposition to or contradistinction from all other Graces and Works in the matter of Justification Nothing less By Faith they mean Obedience to the whole Gospel and all good Works they say are intended in Faith that Faith and Repentance are all one though sometimes they are separated and spoken of apart for clearness sake Thus Hornbeck proposeth their Opinion Sum. Contro lib. 8. Quest 20. Num coram Deo justificemur non fide apprehendendo Christi justitiam quae sola nobis imputetur in peccatorum remissionem â—sed fide ut est actus opus nostrum includens in se obedientiam operum Evangelicorum propter quam quamvis non ex ejus dignitate merito justificemur i. e. That we are not justified by Faith as it apprehendeth the Righteousness of Christ but as it is an Act or Work of ours including Obedience to all the Commands of the Gospel Harm Remonstr Socin Art 12 17. Joh. Peltius hath largely shewed That by Faith the Remonstrants mean Obedience to the whole Gospel and that this is it by which they would have us justified Take 2 or 3 citations Art 12. Parag. 6. p. 157. ex Remonstr confes cap. 10. Hac ratione considerata fides totam hominis conversionem Evangelio praescriptam ambitu suo continet Faith comprehends man's whole Conversion Episcop disput 22. Fides illa quae credenti imputari dicitur in justitiam bona opera non tantum non tollat sed ea ipsa aut eorum saltem faciendorum propositum natura sua in se contineat comprehendat i.e. Faith which is imputed for righteousness doth not exclude Works but containeth them or at least a purpose of doing them Joannes Geister Confess Bona opera gratia non pugnant inter sese sub fide etiam bona opera comprehenduntur i.e. Grace and Works are not opposite and Faith comprehends Works Yea this Man was so ingenuous as to tell us that we do not contend with the Papists whether we be at all justified by Works in this the Remonstrants and Papists are agreed the question only is By what Works we must be justified Quando cum Papistis disputatur non est inquirendum an per bona opera justificemur sed per quae opera He would only exclude Popish superstitious Works as our Authors would have The Apostle Paul only excludes Jewish Works or Ceremonial Observations from our Justification Would you have the matter yet plainer Adolph Venator will put it out of question Justificamúrne etiam ex operibus Certè ita i.e. Are we justified by works also Yes verily And the Remonstrants in their Apology boldly affirm ex operibus hominem justificari istud non tantum non est absurdum sed verissimum esse totidem verbis pronuntiat Apostolus Jacob. 2. Nec evadent hunc ictum censores cùm hunc locum pro suo more de declaratione justificationis intelligendum esse dicunt i.e. It is so far from being absurd that a man is justified by works that it is most true and the express words of the Apostle James which cannot be evaded by interpreting them of declarative Justification Thus we see that the Arminians meant the same thing when they said the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere the Act and Work of Faith it self doth justifie us that our late Authors do when they ascribe Justification to Faith and Obedience both agree that Faith in its usual acceptation and full latitude comprehendeth assent and obedience to the whole Gospel and that thus it justifies and no other way and in this how the Remonstrants do conspire with the Socinians Peltius doth clearly demonstrate ut supra which also the Arminians do not deny as in their Apology Si quis dicat hanc sententiam Quod Fides quà tenus viva est justificat esse ipsissimam Socini sententiam is dato quod id verum sit necesse est ut fateatur tandem Socinum hac in parte conspirare cum reformatis Ecclesiis quoad substantiam ipsam i.e. If any man say that this is Socinus's Doctrine he must confess that Socinus doth so far agree with the Reformed Churches in substance And this also seemeth to have been the true sence of Pelagius vid. Vos Hist Pelag lib. 3. par 1. viz. That men are justified and saved by their acknowledging and obeying the Gospel for as much as he taught that under the Gospel men were saved by obeying it as the Jews were by observing the Law of Moses and those before Moses by observing the Law of Nature He also ascribeth to the Death of Christ nothing but the pardon of sins acceptance with God must depend upon mens own obedience Christ helping them in it by the instructions and encouragements of the Gospel and by his own Example and this doth not much differ from the Doctrine in hand Thus we see that the First Authors of these
Opinions were the Pelagians and Arminians and that herein the Socinians differ little from them Let us now inquire seeing we must not be justified by the very Righteousness of Christ's Obedience and Death to what End Christ died according to those men CHAP. VI. This Doctrine overthroweth Christ's Merit and Satisfaction THE Apostle Rom. 4.25 saith That Christ was delivered i. e. to death for our Offences and raised again for our Justification Whence our Protestants have taught that the proper and immediate Effect of the Death of Christ was the procuring or grant of Pardon Justification Life Eternal to all the Elect in the Purposes of God and that accordingly God in due time publisheth to them the Promises of the Gospel by which through the effectual operation of the Holy Ghost they are perswaded and drawn to Christ to believe and trust in him for Life and so they are made actual partakers of his Death and justified But these Authors denying us to be justified immediately and properly by the Righteousness of Christ must and do deny Justification to be the immediate and proper Effect of it and assign some other immediate End of Christ's Death What this is we shall shew and how it doth make void the Merit and Satisfaction of Christ I meet with two Opinions in this matter The First saith That the immediate and proper End of the Death of Christ was not to procure Reconciliation Justification c. for all or any man but to render God placable or reconcileable to man i. e. not that God upon the Death of Christ doth grant purpose or covenant the Justification and salvation of any man but that he may now justifie forgive and save men in what way and upon what terms he pleaseth Thus Mr. Trueman as before Gr. Prop. p. 86. The immediate Effect of Christ's Satisfaction is that God might be Just though he should pardon Sinners that he might pardon salvâ justitiâ not that he must pardon them come what will of it or be unjust And again The Justice of God as a flaming Sword obstructeth all treating with us upon any terms of Reconciliation whatsoever and this would have been an eternal Bar to all Influences and Effluxes of Favour and now this Justice being satisfied and this Bar and Obstacle removed Divine Grace and Benignity is left at liberty freely to act how it pleases and in what way and upon what terms and conditions it thinketh meet This he had from Arminius who having said That Justification Pardon or Reconciliation of any man is not immediately purchased by the Death of Christ He tells us The proper Effect of it is Reconciliatio Dei remissionis justificationis redemptionis apud Peum impetratio contra Perkins fol. 76. apud Twiss qua factum est ut Deus jam possit utpote justitiâ cui satisfactum est non obstante hominibus peccatoribus peccata remittere spiritum gratiae largiri i. e. the Reconciliation of God the obtaining of remission and redemption viz. That God may forgive and sanctifie men if he please without breach of Justice which is now satisfied Hereupon they go so far as to tell us That when Christ had done and suffered all which was appointed him God was free to save or not to save men or to save upon what terms or whom he pleased Thus Grevinch contra Ames fol. 8. Peltius p. 126. Postquam impetratio praestita ac peracta esset Deo jus suum integrum mansit pro arbitratu suo eam applicare vel non applicare nec applicatio finis impetrationis propria fuit sed jus potestas applicandi pro liberrimo suo placito quibus qualibus vellet i. e. After Christ's Purchase was made and finished God was perfectly free to apply â—t or not to apply it as he should please nor was the Application of it the proper End of Christ's Purchase but that God might have power to apply it to whom and how he should think fit Episcopius goes a step further and saith There could not be a deliberate purpose in God of saving men and opening a way of â—ise to them till Christ was sacrificed Disp 5. Ibid. Deliâ—eratum mortale salvandi salutisque ostium apetiendi propositum in Deo esse requirit priusquam sacrificium oblatum esset Now if this be the only proper Effect of the Obedience and Death of Christ that God who was before bound to condemn Sinners by the Law of Works violated by them might now think of a way to save them if he pleased and withal might chuse whether he would save them or propound terms of Life to them or not It followeth â—ence 1. That the Obedience of Christ was not meritorious nor did merit any thing of the father It is true there was an intrinsecal infinite value in Christ's Obedience by reason of the Divine Excellency of his Person and so there was an equality or proportion betwixt his Obedience and the Happiness which was to be procured for men But this is the Foundation of Merit not Actual Merit To merit is to deserve a Reward to do something whereupon a Reward is due so that Merit in its proper notion doth imply an actual Right or Obligation to a reward which Obligation ariseth from some Law Promise or Compact betwixt the Parties and he which doth not give that Reward according to Merit offendeth against some Law either of strict Justice or at least of Gratitude Generosity Kindness c. If then God was not bound by Covenant Promise or so much as deliberate Purpose to save men or to give them any terms of Life for all that Christ did or suffered then his Obedience merited nothing there was nothing due no reward proposed to him which he would challenge for God was still free to do what he pleased with men God they say would not have been unjust if he had not saved men though Christ died he was not then bound by the Law of Justice and he could not be bound by any other Law to remunerate the Death and Sufferings of his Son with such an happy Effect as man's Salvation Christ's Death say they was a refuseable payment for sin even when it was presented to the Father God might then have refused it and yet have been Just But it would not have been just to have denyed Jesus Christ that which he merited that would be due debt to him They say indeed Christ was the meritorious cause of our Justification But what did he merit Justification Then God was not free to deny it he must justifie those for whom Christ merited Justification or be unjust unless there can be a cause without an effect or causality The effect of merit is some reward deserved given for the sake of the merit the causality of merit is some compact Law or Promise whereby one is bound to reward that merit If then God was bound to nothing upon the Obedience of Christ but still had jus
integrum intire freedom to do what he pleased then Christ did as freely offer his Obedience to the Father to do what he pleased with it or upon it and certainly this is not to merit Thus Slatius declar apert Jesus Christus per passionem mortem suam nihil meritus est nec solvit pro nostris peccatis veluti vas pro debitore qui non est solvendo If they say that he took away the Covenant of Works and the necessity which God was under to condemn men and this might be the Effect of his Merit this is not true By this Opinion Christ did not take away the Covenant of Works nor the Sentence of it For then man must have been discharged without any further Covenant or Terms which is the thing they oppose They must say Christ offered himself to his Father in such manner that he might take occasion from it if he thought it justly to lay aside his Obligation to Punish by the Law of Works and proceed to terms of Grace but not that he must do either and so Christ merited nothing at all of his Father 2ly It followeth from this Doctrine That Christ's Obedience and Death were not properly satisfactory to Divine Justice The say That by Christ's Death God's Justice wâ— satisfied the obstacle of Justice was removed But how God's Justice in this case is nothing else but his Will or voluntary Obligation of himself to deal with men according to his Law To satisfie God's Justice is to satisfied his Law and to satisfie the Law is to fulfill 〈◊〉 by obedience to it or suffering the penalty 〈◊〉 it or both But they will not allow That Christ properly satisfied the Law of God Mr. Trueman saith Ibid. p. 89. His death was not proper Payment at all And if Christ did properly satisfie the Law then those for whom be did it must be hereupon discharged without any further conditions to be required or 〈◊〉 be performed of them But if Christ satisfied not the Law how could he satisfie Divine Justice which hath the Law for its Rule 〈◊〉 is tied to it It was of Divine prerogative or infinite Soveraignty that God did accept of Christ to fulfill the Law for man to whâ—â— it was given and who only was obliged by 〈◊〉 But when the Law-makers Prerogative 〈◊〉 accepted of the Surety and of his underâ—â—king for the Sinner then he himself was mâ—â—â— under the Law and satisfied Justice by satisfying the Law but if he satisfied not the Law then his Obedience was not performed as Obedience to the preceptive part of the Law or his sufferings indured as subjection to the unitive part of it and so neither of them â—ere exacted in a way of Justice or performed as submission to Justice either preceptive or punitive and so Justice could no â—ay be satisfied by his Obedience Moreover 〈◊〉 after all the Obedience of Christ God was â—ree to save or not to save men then he was â—ree either to give them new conditions of Life â—r to proceed to destroy them according to â—he sentence and curse of the Law of Works and is it possible that Gods Justice should have received real satisfaction from an infinite Price and Person and yet the Persons for whom satisfaction was made not be discharged but Justice still be left in full force to take vengeance if the Judge pleased Surely among men if Justice be satisfied either by the guilty person or by his Surety by the Judge's consent even Justice it self must acquit and discharge the party concerned The truth is By this Doctrine there was no satisfaction made to Divine Justice by Christ's Obedience and therefore the Sinner hath no discharge procured but the whole transaction of the business of Man's Redemption betwixt the Father and the Son was but a point of honour or a kind of generosity if we may so speak As if a young generous Prince should perform some noble and difficult exploits for the honour of his Father and the Father again should pardon some condemned Rebels and restore them to his Favour hereupon not as being any way obliged to it but as an act of a Noble and generous mind and to express some honour and requital to his Son Thus Slatiâ—â— Epist ad N. Martin An Christus pro nobâ— satisfecit Respondeo Nos negare i. e. Did Christ satisfie for sin We deny it And he gives five reasons the last whereof is The God could neither punish for sin nor require Faith as a condition in order to Salvation 3ly It followeth also that Christ's Death was no Ransom Redemption or Price for Sinners For if God after the death of Christ was still free to save or not to save Sinners then this death had properly bought or purchased nothing of him A ransom or price is not a valuable consideration only for a thing worth it or equal in value to it but it must also be paid with the Compact or Agreement that the thing bought or ransomed shall for that price become the Buyers and the property be transferred to him and no longer remain in the Seller If then Christ propetly bought us ransomed us c. then our Salvation became his de jure he had a right to it upon his death and it could no longer remain in the free power of God to grant or not to grant it But if there were no compact that life should be granted to Sinners if Christ would die for them if to give Life was still in God's absolute disposal then his obedience is no ransom nor was he a Redeemer he did not purchase his Church with his own Bloud nor was that Bloud a Price of their Redemption 4ly It followeth that Christ did not at all die for sin The Prophet saith He was wounded and bruised for our iniquities yea his Soul â—us made an Offering for Sin Isa 53.5 10. But if Christ did not take away sin and procure pardon but left God still free to pardon or â—ot then he did not die for sin sin was not â—he meritorious cause of his Death nor was â—he pardon of sin the immediate end of his Death but only to free the Father from the necessity of condemning Sinners Sin could be â—t the most but a remote occasion or causa â—ne qua non of the death of Christ if that had not been God would not have been bound up from the exercise of his natural goodness and â—o there would have been no occasion of Christ â—o die to remove that obstacle out of the way And yet it is not easie to imagine what these â—en mean by the obstacle of God's Justice which hindred his Mercy to Sinners which was removed by Christ's Obedience For â—oth they and their Friends the Arminians â—eem generally to grant That God of his infinite Sovereignty might have pardoned sin without satisfaction so that his absolute Justice 〈◊〉 as not an obstacle to his Mercy and for his Law and that Justice which respecteth it
Christ say they did in no proper sence satisfie 〈◊〉 and therefore his Obedience could have â—o proper respect to Divine Justice much less â—o sin that had offended Justice 5ly Nor was Christ's Death a Propitiation â—r Atonement for our sins The Apostle 1 Joh. 2.1 saith That Christ was a Propitiation for our Sins that he loved us and washed us from our sins with his own Bloud Apâ—â— 1.5 But this is true only accidentally and eventually if the immediate effect of Christ's death was only that God might pardon not that he must and it was not the prime and principal intention of his death Since God hath pleased to grant terms of Salvation upon the death of Christ his death may improperly be said to have made atonement or reconciliation for them because it occasioned it 〈◊〉 made some way for it but that which left God still intirely free to pardon or not that did not appease his Anger remove his displeasure reconcile him or obtain his good Will as is the nature of a Propitiation or propitiatory Sacrifice nor was it immediately 〈◊〉 directly intended for that end 6ly Nor can it properly be ascribed to God's Love to the World that he gave his Son to die or to the Son's Love to Mankind that he gave himself For if love to men were the Motive of Christ s Obedience and Death both to the Father and the Son men's Salvation would have been immediately designed and intended in it it would have been medium ordinatum a proper means design'd to bring about their Salvation But they tell us it was designed only to save God's Honour in case he should forgive Sinners but not that he had obliged himself any way to do it no nor that he had resolved with himself or deliberately purposed to grant terms of Salvation when he sent his Son into the World or when he laid his wrath a curse upon him it seems God did not yet know what use he would make of the Death of his Son neither could the Son know when the Father was not resolved Thus we see this Opinion overthroweth the whole Nature and Intendment of Redemption and Christ's Merit Satisfaction Ransom Sacrifice and all that belong to it are but improper Metaphors and the greatest Mystery of Godliness must fly for refuge to a poor Trope to save it from being an untruth and Christ himself must be at most but an honorary Mediator and Redeemer The Second Opinion concerning the End of Christ's death is That he died to purchase the Covenant of Grace or Conditions and Terms of Salvation by the fulfilling whereof men might be saved Thus the Arminians used to speak That Christ died viam salutis pandere to open a way for Mens Salvation to purchase conditions whereupon they might be saved whereas before their Salvation was impossible by reason of the Curse or Sentence of the Law of Works Act. Syn. Dort Art 2. Remon Christus merito mortis suae Deum Patrem universo generi humano hactenus reconciliavit ut Pater propter ipsius meritum salva justitia veritate sua novum gratiae foedus cum peccatoribus damnationi obnoxiis hominibus inire sancire potuerit voluerit Thus Mr. Baxter faith That Christ purchased Justification and life to be given by his New Covenant not that he purchased these absolutely to be certainly given to any persons but that he purchased a Covenant or Law of Grace whereby these are promised upon condition of Faith and Obedience And this must be the sence if any of those that assert Christ dying for all men to make them salvabiles salvable and to render their Salvation possible being impossible before while the Law of Works stood in such sorce For before Christ's death Mens Salvation was possible to God no new power was acquired to him and possible in its self Men being subjects naturally capable of Salvation this possibility then must be a possibility in Law as we say id possumus quod jure possumus that Christ purchased a Law and grant of Salvation upon certain Terms whereby it now became possible for all Men to be saved if they should have sufficient notice of it This Opinion is a little more plausible but no more true than the former which I thus prove 1. It cannot be conceived how Christ did purchase this Covenant according to the rest of their Notions The occasion or ground of this Purchase was That God was bound by his own Law of Works violated by Men to condemn them without Mercy Now then could this Obligation be dissolved without satisfaction to and fulfilling that Law which yet they will not allow Christ to have done unless per accidens as part of it is comprised in that special Law of Mediator which was given to him If it was the Law which hindered God from shewing mercy and made mans Salvation impossible then that Law doth oblige God to see it fulfilled or else to grant no life to Sinners and if Christ did not fulfil it nor was made properly subject to it as they teach then he could not properly purchase a Covenant of life if he did fulfil it for sinners then they must be discharged by his satisfaction without further conditions imposed on them as hath been often said They say the Law of Works was neither abolished nor fulfille by Christ but relaxed I suppose they mean That God did not insist upon the absolute performance of the Law but was pleased to admit of an aequivalent reparation of his Honour by the Obedience of Christ to that Law which he should impose on him wherein should be comprehended a great part of the Moral Law I reply If God did relax the Law so as not to require the proper fulfilling of it then he did lose the obligation which was laid upon him to see it fulfilled The ordinate or relative Justice of God obliged him to proceed according to that Law and if he admitted of another way of reparation to his Honour he did not proceed in a way of Justice in all that he laid upon Jesus Christ and he might as well have saved Man without the Obedience of Christ as with it his Justice or Law allowing that relaxation no more than a total superseding or laying aside the Law by this purchase therefore they can mean no more but that Jesus Christ did so honour the Father by his Obedience and Sufferings that he might with Decorum to his Majesty give to Sinners terms of Salvation and would do it but this is no purchase which transferreth a legal right to the Purchaser if the Purchase be accepted but dependeth meerly upon Promise or Terms of Honour It is also great presumption for Men to judge what is becomming Divine Majesty and what will salve his Honour other then what is according to his Law or Promise wherers here they make him to wave his own declared Law founded in the highest reason and equity 2ly Nor in this sence is the death
curses and natural evils may be inflicted without sin Even Arminius Episcopius and others of their chief Friends grant That God may without injustice lay temporal evils upon men without respect to sin of his own meer pleasure If Afflictions be part of the Curse to the godly it must be by some Law 2ly It cannot be by the Law of Grace for that is a remediating Law threatning no curse to them that obey it If by the Law of Works then Believers are in part still under the Law whereas the Apostle makes these inconsistent to be under the Law and under Grace Rom. 6.14 Moreover Afflictions if they be punishments must be satisfactory to Divine Justice For the Law requires nothing but in order to satisfie Divine Justice by obedience or punishment for failure and then Christ hath not redeemed us from the Curse of the Law part of it remaining for us to bare and so Christ's Redemption must be diminished he having onely purchased that the Law should not have its full force viz. to condemn us for ever but that we should have terms of grace or life eternal nevertheless that we should be left in the hands of the Law for this life that God may lay what curses upon us he pleaseth so that he save our Souls The same is to be said concerning sin and spiritual evils some sins are proper chastisements when men are suffered to run into some sins to correct them for former sins As David's Murder was a correction for his Adultery but these chastisements proceed really from the love of God though mixed with fatherly displeasure but for the general that God hath left sin in the hearts and lives of the Godly is not to satisfie his Law or the Curse but to magnifie his Grace and Wisdome in over-ruling sin and death to his own Glory and to further man's Salvation by those things which the Devil designed to undermine and overthrow both Object 6 If Faith only justifie and give right to life then is there no use of the Law to Believers nor any thing for them to do in way of obedience but only to expect that God should bring them to Heaven by his Grace to which Faith gives right as well as to life it self Answ As Faith it self is commanded though it be the work of God so is the use of all means whereby Grace is to be improved and exercised and in the use of them in dependance on God's Grace lies a Christian's Obedience The Promises of Grace and Perseverance do encourage to obedience but alter not the nature of obedience Phil. 2.12 13. As you have always obeyed c. work out your Salvation with fear and trembling For it is God that worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure Our Saviour came not to dissolve the Moral Law nor gave he commission to any man to do it but requireth better obedience to it than that of the Pharisees though they expected to be justified by it Mat. 5.18 19 20. and upon all occasions he directs men to the Law as the rule of Life Mat. 19.17 Chap. 22. v. 37. c. Though Faith encourage and Love incline to good works yet these works are properly obedience because done upon the Command of God It is true the Law is not a Covenant of Works or a Law of Life to Believers promising Life to Obedience perfect or imperfect and threatning death to the want of it Nor is this essential to a Law that life and death must depend thereon though they do so upon some Laws nor is it essential to obedience that it must proceed from hope of life and fear of death For there is no such thing with Saints in Heaven where yet is perfect obedience yet is it a Rule of Obedience a Declaration of God's Will how his Children ought to walk and to please him which is the very nature of a Law But it is not necessary to the Sanction of every Law Quest that there should be Promises to obedience and Threatnings to disobedience Answ Not from the nature of a Law but because of man's infirmities it is needful Gal. 3.19 So the Gospel hath promises of Blessings in this Life peace of Conscience increase of Grace and the Fatherly Love and Presence of God to obedience and diligence and the threatning of the contrary to negligence and disobedience yea the knowledge of the Covenant of Works as it restrains the ungodly so it is of use to the godly in this life to curb the flesh and to make them more afraid of sin and to quicken them to diligence But life and death eternal are not the Sanctions of the Law as properly given to Believers But do not the sins of Believers deserve Hell and put them into a damned state Quest Answ No. They interrupt their peace with God and the Work of Grace but make them not Children of wrath their sins in their own nature tend to death as they are an aversion from God but he will recover them out of them by repentance at death if not before and they deserve death according to the Law of Works by which they must judge of the â—inousness of them and be humbled accordingly But as the Law is tempered by the Gospel they shall not bring death And deâ—â—rt of sin being obligatio ad poenam ex lege the Laws binding a man over to punishment 〈◊〉 may be truly said they do not deserve death according to the Gospel because that doth not threaten death eternal to them yet they 〈◊〉 deserve other corrections threatned thereâ—y which are more effectual to restrain the godly than the threatning of Hell is to the â—icked But doth not this open a way to Sin and Sloth Quest. â—hen men that think they are Believers shall â—hen conclude their sins shall not damn them Answ No. For it is not the promise of great Retards nor threatning of great Punishment that 〈◊〉 keep men from sin else the Angels and Adam would never have sinned but it is the certain assistance of effectual grace which can 〈◊〉 will make men obedient without such â—â—nctions by other Reasons and Motives If Christians were left to their free will as much is Adam was then would there be a necessity 〈◊〉 the like Promises and Threats to keep them 〈◊〉 their Duty but because God hath undertaken to work all our Works in us it is enough â—â—at God declare his Will to them and will make them obedient Promises and Threaâ— of another nature are added because of the infirmity of the Flesh but they could not keeâ— them in obedience if there were not a certainty of prevailing grace and when these infirmities shall be taken away then the Declaration of God's Will without any Promise 〈◊〉 Threat will be a sufficient Obligation to Obedience for ever by the perfect and full concurrence of the Grace of God For it is the Spirit of Grace that holdeth
themselves with that yet they that be throughly woundeâ— and humbled can never build their peace upon purposes or promises of obedience but upon the free Mercy of God in Christ from whence also they must have their power to obey or their purposes are in vain and also the acceptance and forgiveness of their poor imperfect obedience Whatever are the disputes of curious Wits or of rational Parts who would sain bring the Methods of Sovereign Grace to the Rules of Humane Reason yet I never met with any serious man nor I believe never shall who would soberly say That he expected to be saved or justified for and by his Obedience to the Gospel CHAP. X. An Answer to the Arguments for Obedience being the Condition of Justification WE come now for a close of this Work to consider the Principle Arguments that are brought to prove That Obedience to the Gospel or Faith as comprehending all Obedience is the Condition by fulfilling whereof we must be justified and it is alledged 1st That this way of Justification seemeth most rational obvious and agreeable to the whole Tenour of Scripture which maketh the Promises both of this Life and that which is to come to Obedience 1 Tim. 4.8 And that the way of Justification by trusting in the Promise of Mercy putteth some force both upon Reason and many Texts of Scripture Thus Mr. Trueman often 1st It was Melancthon's Observation Answ Lex com de isustif judic in Rom. That man's Reason which he call'd humana Philosophia doth always cherish a notion of being justified by Works and therefore Justification by Faith ever hath been and ever shall be opposed both by curious Wits and by grave Moral Men not only among Heathens but in the Church also which cometh partly from the Pride of Man who would fain be something but chiefly from the impression of the Law of Nature or Works which taught and allowed no other way of Justification and therefore men's Consciences though they hear the Letter of the Gospel do not cannot believe that they can be justifyed by Free Grace without any respect to their Works till they are inwardly persuaded by the Spirit of Christ Christ crucifyed was a stumbling Block to the Jews who trusted to the Works of the Law and Foolishness to the Greeks who thought themselves wise and rational men 1 Cor. 1.23 It is therefore no inconvenience that Justification by obedience is most agreeable to carnal and unsanctified reason and Justification by Faith not suitable to it But I suppose this Author by rational meant That the several parts and consequences of the Dostrine of Justification by Obedience did better cohere and agree together than if it were affirmed to be by Faith only Of this let the â—ious Reader that hath been sensible of sin â—â—d guilt and feelingly understands the grounds of a Christian's Hope and Peace â—â—dge They say That man being under â—rath for breaking the Law of Works destiâ—te of the Image or Grace of God did yet receive a New Law purchased by the Death â—f Christ to repent believe and obey the â—recepts of it and for so doing he should be â—â—aved his former sins forgiven yet all this â—hile he is not able to repent believe or oâ—â—y nor is there any promise that he shall be â—ade able and if he receive Grace to do this â—any measure yet it is not insured to him he may and many do lose it yea he may recover and and lose it again and if death should seise him in any of these sad intervals all his obedience profiteth nothing but he perisheth for ever if this will comfort or settle an afflicted unsettled conscience or be agreeable to the tasts any have had of the Grace oâ— God let such judge On the other side we teach That man being utterly lost by guilâ— and inability to obedience God sent his Soâ— fully and absolutely to satisfie his Justice and to purchase eternal life for as many as he had chosen This purchase he declared in the Gospel promising pardon and eternal life to alâ— that humbly fly to and trust in him for it that when his promise is published God sendetâ— forth his Spirit and perswadeth the hearts oâ— his Elect to trust in it that hereupon he giveth them pardon of all their sins and a right to eternal life for the sake of his Son's satisfaction and purchase that being thus reconciled to them he doth further make them hâ—â— Children and heirs of Glory for his Son sake and because they are his Children hâ— giveth them the Spirit of his Son to reneâ— them after his Image to continue and perseâ— grace in them and forgiveth all their infirmâ—ties and blesseth them with all temporal anâ— spiritual blessings in Christ and ordereth aâ— his providences for their good to purge oâ—â— sin and to perfect grace till at last of his Fatherly Goodness he crowns them with eternâ— life after their hard service on Earth to eâ—â— courage them in which Heaven was proposed as a Reward to them wherein is this irrational or inconsistent with it self The Scripture for the most part speaketh to the Conscience and Affections 2dly more than the Judgement and therefore handleth not things distinctly and didactically but putteth many things together saith and obedience in general or in particular duties as is most suited to practice and therefore it is no good Argument Faith and Obedience are joyned together often times as the means of Salvation without distinguishing the several Offices of each and what influence each have upon the several parts of our Salvation ergò both together and alike do justify us before God Yet it is evident from the whole Tenour of the Scripture That forgiveness of sin reconciliation peace with God hope of Heaven all come by our flying to and hope in Mercy and Grace alone This was renew'd to Adam by promise of the Seed of the Woman Gen. 3.17 And by Sacrifices in like manner renewed to Abraham by promise with the Seal of Circumcision and a more particular promise of Christ The Psalms practically exemplify That our only refuge is Free Mercy The Prophets are full of promises of Pardon of healing Backslidings Jer. 3.12 of loving freely Hos 14.4 of forgiving beyond man's thoughts Isa 54.6 7 8. and the like Our Saviour and the Apostles preached this Doctrine to convinced and humbled Sinners though they insist much upon Obedience to convince and reclaim the hypocritical backsliding Jews To the Heathens who had no excuse for sin they preached nothing but pardon at first and besides this when the Doctrine of Justification is distinctly propounded and proved it is wholly ascribed to Faith in the Promise in two most argumentative Epistles to the Romans and Galatians upon which they that would bring in obedience are fain to make a manifest force whereas we force no Scripture but explain those that speak generally by shewing the several Acts of Faith and ascribing to it and to
sinful infirmities of the Saints should be pardoned by this Opinion For as the Author tells us Christ did not properly fulfil thâ—â— Old Law so they also say and with moâ—â— truth he fulfilled not the conditions of the Gospel for us nor give he any satisfaction to God for them how then should they be forgiven Thus this Opinion excludes all use of Pardon and teacheth that man is justifind by fulfilling what is required in the Gospel the demands of the Law being waved i. e. he is justified by a Gospel-innocency of his own though not by the Innocency of Adam or the Law of Works Answ 2 We grant as is well used by the Author forenamed if the Covenant of Works had run thus that Man should obey and live and die if he disobeyed either he or his Surety we grant in this case there had been no proper pardon but God in Justice would have been bound to discharge the sinner when the Surety had satisfied the Law for him because it was his own agreement that either the principle or the Surety should satisfy disjunctively and when there is such an agreement it is all one to the Creditor would have been all one to God which pays the debt or fulfils the Law But this is to state the question for us and then to dispute against it We say not that the first Covenant did allow of a Surety much less joyned him in the Covenant with Man Man himself was to obey or die but God as the infinite Sovereign and Law-Mater was pleased to substitute a Surety to fulfil thee Law for him who as he was not induded in the Law so was not there any particular Covenant in the Law against a Surety and this supposed we further answer Answ 3 Though Christ fulfilled the Law in Mans stead and so life for man was a debt to him yet to man it is conveyed by true and proper pardon of sin for the Surety was not provided by Man but by God who was offended yea he was the Son of God and God himself and that when no such thing was conditioned and promised God himself revealed this Surety to Man and gives him that Faith whereby we should have interest in him and benefit by him now in all this here is a voluntary remission of the punishment due to sin a voluntary providing a mean of reconciliation and at last an actual reconciliation discharging Man from guilt and taking him into favour by Faith in Christ and to believe he there daily is a pardon of sinful infirmities upon the account of the fame Righteousness of Christ believed in 1 John ult 2.1 If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive them and the bloud of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous and he is a Propitiation for our sins 〈◊〉 The bloud and his being a Propitiation are herâ— joyned with forgiveness of Sin Yet we grant further That the Justification of a Sinner is an act of Justice as welâ— as of Mercy Mercy and Forgiveness as to him but Justice as to Christ who by God's appointment and consent had satisfied the Law in Man's stead and therefore it was just and due that they who should be interested in it viz. Believers should be discharged and justified by his Obedience They also must grant if Man be justified by his Obedience his Justification is an act of Justice according to the New Covenant Object 5 It is objected that Afflictions both temporal and spiritual fall on Believers in this life as Chastisements for and therefore punishments of sin therefore they are not fully justified by believing Answ Afflictions may be distributed into three ranks 1. Such as arise from the common condition of Mankind since the Fall as crosses in Children in Worldly Affairs c. in these the Saints must have their share while they live here though they were perfect in grace and perfectly justifyed because these calamities are annexed to this present State and therefore these cannot be reckoned punishments or do argue a defect in their Justification who live here below seeing they befal them upon the account of others more than themselves and they would come were they never so perfect 2ly A Second sort are such as though they were occasioned by sin yet they come not upon the godly for any particular sin but are means of quickning and encreasing grace such were David's in his younger days and Job's and many others dayly who are afflicted from their youth upward That these are not punishments or argue any defects in their Justification is manifest from hence because they usually fall in the greatest measure upon the best Christians where there is most grace to bare them well to the Honour of God If afflictions be properly the punishment of sin then in equity they that are most sinful and least sanctifyed should have most afflictions but it is often otherwise 3ly A Third kind are those which are sent upon occasion of particular sins as the calamities that befel David for his great sin 2 Sam. 12. and these are most properly chastisements the other are means of improving and sometimes of working grace being joyn'd with the Word suited to Man's sinful and dull temper in this life which the godly are not to take as signs of hatred nor to faint under them but these chastisements for special sins are effects of Gods Fatherly displeasure and may be called Paternal punishments yet are they not judicial or legal punishments or any parts of the curse Isa 27.9 By this shall the iniquity of Jacob be purged and this is all the fruit to take away his sin If that be all the fruit then that is all that God intendeth by affliction and not to execute the Curse of the Law or to satisfie his Justice Heb. 12.5 6 7. Whom the Lord loveth he chastneth and scourgeth every Son whom he receiveth If you endure chastning God dealeth with you as with Sons but if you be without chastning whereof all are Partakers their are you Bastards and not Sons c. If chastisements be signs that we are Sons of God how are they signs that we are not perfectly justified If they are certain effects of God's Love how are they proper punishments and fruits of the Curse It is rather a fruit of the Curse to want them when we need them a sign we are Bastards and not Sons therefore to have them cannot be a part of the Curse But to make this more clear I shall add these two Reasons The Curse was the Sentence of death pronounced against man 1st of death at last and all miseries tending to that issue Gen. 3.17 18 19. If then the afflictions of this life are parts of the Curse to the godly then are they intended for their death and ruine but if they are intended only for their good then they are natural evils but not