Rom. 6. 23. The wages of Sin is Death Rom. 5. 12. Death passed on alâ— for that all have sinned Rom. 2. 12. As many as have sinned withâ—â—â— Law shall perish without Law And we must pray for the pardon of aâ—â— Sin And unpardoned Sin will damn men These are the reasons â—â— this side They of the other Opinion say That the Gospel-Covenant sheweâ—â— Gods Nature as well as the first Law That God had not been unjust iâ—deed if he had permitted him to fall into great Sin and so to periâ—â— who committed the least for he so permitted Adam to commit the first that was before innocent But the Justice of God bound him not so it do nor would have damned a Lover of God for a small Sin no more than now That we must not feign a Law which we cannot prove That God changeth not his holy Nature and therefore not that Law which is the expression of it That Christ died for all Sin and all needs pardon but that proveth not that the least deserved death much less Hell but that by Christ's Death the deserved punishment must be remitted that all even Infants are guilty of mortal Sin in Adam The Death is the wages of that Sin which brought it but not of the least That Adam's Law was not severer than that by Moses which saith Dâ— this and live and yet condemned not men for smaller sins That God proclaimeth pardon of some Sin in the very Law of Nature as from his Nature Exod. 34. and the Second Commandment That Nature teacheth all the World to believe it That God said not to Adam â—â— the day that thou thinkest a vain thought but That thou eatest c. That mortal Sin is pardonable by Christ which else could not by the first Law but God could otherwise have pardoned a vain thought if he would That no Text of Scripture saith that every Sin deserveth Hell nor is threatned with Death And as the condition of the Penalty so the condition of the Promise to Adam is here also controverted by Divines 1. Some say that the condition of Life was personal perfect perpetual Obedience till â—â—â— change which God would make as he did by Henoch when it pleased him which seemeth to me the probablest Opinion 2. Others think that Adam was to have continued in Eden for ever under that same conditional Law which is less probable 3. Others think that had he over-come the first temptation but so far as to adhere and vanquish that is to continue the love of God and not to eat that Fruit or commit any other mortal Sin which of its nature killeth Love he had been confirmed as the promised Reward 4. I have lately met with an exceeding ingenious M. S. written partly against my self after others which asserteth 1. That the Glory of Justice is the end of Gods Government 2. That Do this perfectly and live or Sin at all and die are the constant terms of Justice under every Covenant 3. That if Adam had performed but one â—â— of Obedience by that Law he should have been rewarded with confirmation or the Holy Ghost as the Angels and with everlasting life 4. That now all our Reward is only the Act of Gods Justice giving â—â— life as merited by us in Christ on the terms of the Law that saith Do this and live Sin and die in whom we are perfectly innocent and rewardable and we have no rewardable Righteousness nor any to justifie us but perfect Innocency imputed because as not to be a Sinner is no merit of a Reward so pardon of Sin is no Title to a Reward c. It is not my present task to clear up all these Difficulties having done more towards it in my Methodus Theologiae but only so much as our present conciliatory work requireth But yet because I and the matter in hand are nearly concerned in the M. S. I shall briefly animadvert on all the substance of it having first said of the condition of the penalty but a few words I. I am loth to confound the certainties with the uncertainties in this matter 1. It is certain that Gods Law of Nature was mans first and principal Law to which the supernatural Revelations were added and comparatively few 2. It is certain that Gods Law was perfect and that both as the impress and expression of Gods perfect Wisdom and Holiness and as the Rule of Perfection to Adam And therefore that it obliged him to perfection 3. But this Perfection to which he was obliged was not at first all that his nature would be capable of at last It was not his duty the first hour of his life to Know or Do as much as after the longest time and experience and as much as in heavenly perfection But he was bound to Know and Love and Do at first as much as at that time his nature was capable of supposing necessary Concauses and Objects 4. This is summed up in Loving God with all the Heart Mind and Might But the All in maturity and after full experience and in Glory is more than the All in unexperienced juniority To know love and obey God to the utmost intention of his present natural Power supposing due Objects media and concauses was Adam's duty and all defectiveness herein was culpable or sin 5. All sin of its own nature deserveth punishment Therefore so would the least culpable thought or word in Adam or the least culpable defect in the extent or intention of any holy affection in him 6. It is certain that Adam's eating the forbidden Fruit or any one such sin as consisteth not with the predominancy of his Love to God as God in habit such as is now inconsistent with true Grace and is called mortal was to be punished with death temporal and eternal according to the Justice of that Law 7. They are different questions 1. What God might do 2. What he would do as decreed 3. What he must do as necessary because of Justice or Veracity to the breaker of that Law And it is clear that God might as an Act of Justice punish the least culpable thought or remissness of degree of Love with Annihilation or with any pain-everlasting which to the Sinner were no worse than Annihilation Because 1. Antecedently to his Law he might have done that much as an affliction without sin 2. And after he did no way that I know of oblige himself to the contrary to a Sinner before the Covenant of Grace 3. And having threatned punishment in general he might choose what punishment he saw fit 8. What God would do as decreed the prediction or the event only can tell us 9. That God must by necessity of Justice and Truth punish the least sinful thought or remissness with some degree of punishment according to that Law seemeth to me somewhat clear 1. And yet it is more clear that it is various degrees of punishment which are comprized in the word Death or Filius mortis
still have heard Obey and live or Sin and die And if Adam â—ad obeyed till his translation to Glory or confirmation in the Reward I find not in Scripture any Promise that this should have been imâ—uted to his Posterity as the full performance of the Condition of their Life or confirmed Happiness but that still their own sinning would have been a possible thing and death would have been the wages of their Sin You seem not to set Adam's Merits and imputed Righteousness any â—igher than Christ's And I am too sure that the justified Members of Christ do sin and must ask daily pardon And whether or not they be confirmed against total Apostasie I am sure few if any of them are confirmed against the possibility or existence or futurity of Sin And if you say that Adam's Posterity though confirmed should have sinned too but should have been pardoned as we are It would be another presumptuous addition and contradiction of Scripture to assert Pardon without a Saviour and a pardoning Covenant 3. Adam's Obedience would have justified his next issue from this false Accusation You are born of a sinful Parent or not of a righteous Parent But it would have justified no man against this Accusation You are personally a Sinner or have not personally loved God and obeyed him Therefore it would have justified any man against this Charge You are to be condemned for Adam's sin But it would have justified no man against these Charges You are to be condemned for your own personal Sin or you have no right to Glory by Gods Promise to the adult which maketh their personal Obedience the Condition 4. And though I cannot again here have time to deal with Confounders who think that Imputation or Justification are words which have but one sense I must say that even so Christ's Righteousness is not so imputed to any man as to be to him in stead of his personal Obedience to the Law or Covenant of Grace which he is under But it will justifie any Believer from these Accusations You must be cast into Hell for breaking the Law of Innocency or you must be shut out of Heaven because you deserved it not by perfect Obedience or you have no perfect or sufficient Saviour or you are such as God cannot pardon without wrong to his Truth Wisdom or Justice It will justifie no man from any of these Charges You are Sinners you deserve condemnation by the first Law you are Impenitent or Unbelievers or Hypâ—crites or have not performed the conditions of life in the Law of Grace The two first we must confess and not justifie our selves by a denial And against the last we must be justified by our own Repentance Faith and sincere Obedience He that will say to the Accuser that chargeth him with final Infidelity Impenitency or Unholiness I am justified by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness will but add to his sin 5. There are all these differences between our Justification according to the first Law had we been capable of it and that which we now have 1. One would have been by God as Creator and Legislator to the Innocent The other by Christ as Redeemer and Legislator to the sinful World 2. One would have been for personal perfect persevering Obedience The other for Christ's Merits as purchasing a free Pardon Grace to penitent Believers and upon our own Faith and Repentance as the Conditions of the new Covenant 3. One would have been without pardon and the other chiefly or much by pardon In one if our Publick Root had perfectly obeyed we must also have perfectly obeyed or die In the other because our Publick Root did perfectly obey Faith and sinceere Obedience to the end is all that is required of us to ouâ— Glory 4. In one the personal matter of worthiness or merit must have been all that perfection which God in justice could require of man In the other it is only The acceptance of a free Gift according to its nature and use and after the thankful use and improvement of it with other such differences § 34. M. S. What Christ did as surety is imputed to us but not his Suretiship or being a publick Person Ans This is true if you understand Imputation in Scripture sense or soundly and not in their sense who presumptuously say That God reputeth us to have done all by Christ which he did for us in his Obedience to the Law § 35. M. S. Christ did not all that he did as Surety but only that which answered the Law An. I suppose you mean that which the Law requireth of us But the word Surety is ambiguous and after here explained and whether you understood it sano sensu I know not He did all that he did as the Mediator and Sponsor for mans Redemption And we are pardoned and justified by the merit of all his own Covenant-keeping with the Father even of such acts as the Law required not of us And some which the Law required of many he did not because it required them not of him § 36. M. S. The Law said not That Christ must be a holy Husband or Father c. The Imputation of one Act of Christ's Obedience is sufficient to our Justification and Merit of life though it need not be curiously set in this or that part of his life § Still more presumption 1. Where saith the Scripture so 2. You must not assert absurdities or presumptions and then think to put off the detection of them by calling it curious If this be true doubtless it was Christs first act of Obedience which merited Glory for us And so it is that first only that must be imputed to us to that end And who ever thought so before you The Fryars have some of them said That minima guttula sanguinis Christi One drop of his blood was enough to redeem all the World And our Divines say Why then was the rest shed So I ask you 1. Why did Christ do all the rest of his Obedience after the first Act Hath none of it the same end and use 2. How shall we be sure that a Sinner must not plead or trust to any of Christ's Righteousness but the first act for his Justification and Reward or must he trust for it to that which was never by Christ intended for it 3. This is contrary to the Scripture which layeth our Justification on his whole Righteousness as meritorious and on his Obedience to the Death and on his rising again and on other parts first Rom. 4. 24. 5. throughout c. 4. Sure they that are so curious as to tell us which physical act of Faith justifieth in specie numero for some say only the first instantaneous act doth justifie will not think it curiosity to enquire which one Act of Christs Obedience justifieth us when according to your Doctrine it is evident that it must be the first And they that say It is Justification by Works to
Which privation is the greatest punishment here 2. They are hereupon left to the power of their own Corruption which desertion is a grievous punishment 3. They have pain and sorrow 4. And they die And if they have all this suffering here it is unlikely that they are wholly free hereafter if not pardoned Because 1. They have immortal Souls that are capable 2. And future as well as temporal death or misery is the wages of sin And that their suffering is for sin is undoubted from Rom. 5 c. And the Pelagians scarce deny but that Adam's sin caused it And if it be proved that they have moral pravity or sin of their own then it is for their own sin And if so it is their own punishment All the doubt then is Whether all Infants are forgiven And for that 1. We see that the temporal punishment is not forgiven them 2. We see as soon as they come to action that to many at least the foresaid penal desertion and privation of the Spirit of Sanctification is not forgiven them And 3. Without holiness none can see God 4. They that affirm it must prove it which they neither do nor can do There is no word of Scripture which telleth it us How then should that be part of our Faith which is no part of Gods Word If you say that Christ being the second Adam saveth the World from all the sin and misery brought on them by the first Adam I answer 1. Conditionally he doth He hath purchased Salvation to be given men on the terms of the Covenant of Grace and all that perform the Conditions shall have Salvation But 2. His bare Sacrifice it self without such application saveth none any further than to bring them under the terms of the said Covenant It is apparent by experience that Christ doth not undo all the hurt that Adam did immediately to all or any one in the world no not till death no nor till the Resurrection Sin and misery is still upon us Infants shew as soon as they come to the use of reason that they were not brought to the Innocency that Adam had before the Fall You your selves distinguish the Impetration from the Application of Salvation as to the adult and the reason is the same as to Infants though the condition be not the same Shew us a promise of the Salvation of all Infants and we will believe it 5. Indeed they are saved conditionally as the adult are and the condition is expressed in Scripture That they be the Children of the Faithful dedicated to God The Parents and their Seed are in the same Covenant And this is all that God revealeth of them * Saith Twisse Cont. Corvin pag. 136. c. 2 De Infantibus infantia sua morientibus falsum est quod nobis obtrudit Neque enim dicimus ullos Infantes credentium foederatorum Dei in infantia decedentes ad exitium destinatos Sanctos enim eos pronunciat Apostolus Et una cum parentibus fidelibus in foedere Dei comprehenduntur But I doubt he befriendeth the Anabaptists more than he was aware of when he addeth Obsignant Sacramenta credentibus remissionem peccatorum vitam aeternam At Infantibus quoties administratur Baptismus non tam credentibus quam credituris obsignat promissiones istas Non credituris autem nihil obsignant If so then to them that die in Infancy or yet are Infants no pardon is delivered and sealed by Baptism which is not sound Of our guilt of nearer Parents Sin Let them that reject me in this hear Augustine in Enchirid. c. 46. Paâ—entum quoque peccatis parvulâ—â— obligari non solum primorum hominum sed etiam suorum de quibus ipsi nati sunt non improbabiliter dicitur Illa quippe divina sententia Râ—ddam peccata patrum in filios tenet hos utique antequam per regenerationem ad testamentum novum incipiant poenitere Reperiuntur plura peccata alia parentum quae etsi non ita possunt mutare naturam reatu tamen obligant filios nisi graâ—uita gratia miserecordia divina subveniat But whether God do also without a Promise save any of the Children of the Heathen World or of wicked Parents and how many and with what Salvation and also what degree of punishment they have in the life to come we take for unrevealed things which we are so far from making Articles of our Faith that we take it to be presumptuous arrogancy to dispute it and meddle with the Secrets of the Almighty The Papists themselves are not agreed whether Infants have only the poenam damni as shut out of Heaven or also poenam sensus Jansenius and many more yea most have written for the first and Petavius and others for the latter But secret things belong to God A. We cannot prove that all Infants are saved nor do we presume to tell you what Salvation it is that they shall have But we hope the best And I am glad to find that you take the Salvation of true Believers dying Infants to be sure by the same Covenant which pardoneth their Parents and that you do not peremptorily condemn all the rest B. You know that the Synod of Dort have said the same that I do of true Believers Children Art 1. Sect. 17. and the rest they meddle not with A. But I pray you tell me your thoughts Whether Infants themselves do perish for Adam's sin alone And what remedy is provided for them B. The whole tenor of the Scripture putteth me past doubt that Divines have strangely erred by over-looking the common Interest and Communion of all Parents and Children and appropriating our Original Guilt to Adam's sin alone But this requireth a larger Disputation by it self At present consider 1. That no Text of Scripture doth so appropriate it or make Adam only the Corrupter of our Natures But only maketh him the Original of our Guilt and Pravity as he was the Original of our Nature And so he only is the Original of our Death and Punishment 2. That the whole scope of Scripture containeth Promises and Penalties to Children with the Parents for and by the Parents sins more plainly than any was antecedently expressed of Adam's Posterity as his Yea the very Moral Law in the Second Commandment and in the Proclamation of Gods Name and Nature to Moses Exod. 34. 6 7. which nothing but prejudice and partiality can deny to be a valid proof of a secondary Birth sin derived to us And he that will read the Sacred History from the Curse on the Seed of Cain and Cham of the Case of Ishmael Esau Moab Amnon Sauls Grand-Children hanged and so on to Matth. 23. 38. On this Generation shall come all the righteous blood c. And His blood be on us and on our Children with all the Promises to the Seed of the Righteous only and Threatning to the Houses and Seed of the Wicked with the reason of Infant-Baptism it self 1
every Man his Right and Due is included 338. It is not Gods will without the sign as is said nor the sign without his will but the sign as notifying and his will as notified that is a Law and Jus the Effect Gods will is the principal Cause and quasi Anima Legis and the sign is the instrumental Cause and quasi Corpus 339. The Sign reâ—pecteth these things 1. The matter due 2. The dueness or right 3. The will of God concerning or constituting it 4. The mind and will of man to whom this is signified Or 1. Gods will as the Efficient of Right 2. The matter and form of Right as Constituted 3. The mind and will of man as the terminus 340. These signs of Gods will are 1. Natural called the Law of Nature which is the Natura ordo rerum especially ipsius hominis as before described 2. By extraordinary Revelation The latter have the great advantage of plainness significandi rem praeceptam The former hath the fuller evidence of its Author and Original that it is indeed of God Both are his Laws to man 341. Laâ— Judgement and execution the three parts of Government differ in that 1. Law maketh the Debitum or Jus 2. Judgement determineth It is of great use for a Divine who handleth Gods Laws to understand the nature of Laws in genere as Suarez in praes de Legib. sheweth which Book is one of the best on that Subject that is extant among us of it by decâ—sive application 3. Execution distributeth according to it 342. The Jus vel Debitum instituted by the Law is twofold 1. A Subditis What shall be Due from the Subjects the Debitum Officii 2. Subditis what shall be Due to the Subjects viz. 1. Antecedently to their merits which is 1. The act of our Governing Benefactor 2. Or a Divider such was the Law for dividing the Israelites inheritances 2. Consequently which is by the Retributive part of the Law commonly called the Sanction which is 1. By the Premiant part what Reward shall be due 2. By the Penal what Punishment 343. Accordingly Laws have several parts 1. Precept and Prohibition making Duty 2. Retributive 1. Premiant 2. Penal called Gods Promises and Threats 3. And subservient or accidental 1. Narratives Historical Chronological c. 2. Pure Donations 3. Prophesies 4. Doctrinal 5. Exhortatory 6. Reprehensive c. 344. Though Debitum vel Jus facere be the formal operation of a Law which is to be Fundamentum Relationis yet the Act of the chief parts preceptive or penal is commonly called Obligation And so many say that obligare aut ad obedientiam aut ad poenam is all the action of a Law But Obligare is a Metaphor and therefore in dispute to be laid by or to give place to the proper terms And the Premiant act is not properly called obligation nor the penal act save in a secondary notion as he is â—bligatus ad poenam ferendam if judged who is first Reus poenae or to whom it is made Due by the Law 345. The â—bligation aut ad obedientiam aut ad poenam is not of equality in the disjunctive As if God were indifferent which we chose But it is primarily ad obedientiam and but subserviently ad poenam as a means against future disobedience and a securing the ends of Government in case of sin 346. But the Preceptive and the Premiant parts are each chief or final in several respects God Commandeth us a Course of Duty or Right action to this end that we may be Happy in his Love And he promiseth us first and giveth us after in foretaste this Happiness to draw us to Duty 347. But here is a wonderful inseparable twist and in the main an Identity God Ruleth us as a Father or Regent Benefactor All his Benefits are Free-gifts as to the Thing and Value But given 1. In an Order 2. And the rest as means to the ultimate In which respects they are a Reward or means to it His very Law is a Gift and a great Benefit Duty is the means to keep his first Gifts and to receive more The very doing of the duty is a receiving of the Reward the object of duty being felicitating As if feasting or accepting offered wealth or honour were our work Holiness is happiness in a great part And in our End or state of perfection all will be one To Love God Rejoice in Him and praise him will be both our duty and felicity means and end as it were in one 348. Whereas some say that if there were no Law sin would deserve punishment it is an errour For it is due only by Law But it 's true Of all the following distinctions note these words of Bonavent in 1. d. 4â— a. 1. q. 1. Voluntâ—â—em Dâ—i Antecedentem sâ—â— Conditionalem possiblâ—e â—â—â—â— non impleri at consequentem absolutam nequâ—â—uam Sâ—â—unâ—um Daâ—â—sc Voluntas benâ—pâ—aciti â—t â—apl Antecedens seu Conditionales consequous qua vult quantum in sâ— est omnium salutem alsoluta sive consequens quâ— determinate vult aliquid qâ—â—d noâ—it certitudin 〈…〉 Intelligendum â—â—â— nâ—llam Dei Voluntatem pâ—sse superari aut cassari Aliquam tamen posse non impâ—eri â—t antecedentem Aliqâ—â—m ut consequentem impossibile â—sse noâ— impleri â—â—â— impediâ—i Non â—tiam possibilâ— est Voluntatem Dei cassari Nam cassam diâ—itur aliquid dum priâ—â—tur eâ—â—ectu pâ—â—â—â—io ad quem est Voluntas autâ—â— nullo privatur esseciu ad quâ—m est pâ—â—pâ—ie Nam quod dicitur quod Deus vult omnes homiâ—â—s salvos fieri quantâ—m in sâ— est haec Voluntas non connotat salutem nec proprie est ad effectum salutâ—s sed connotat ordinatioâ—â—m naturae sive naturâ—m ordinabilâ—n ad salutâ—n â—â—â—â— niâ—il plus est diâ—â—re Deus vult istum salâ—â—â— fieri quantum in se est qâ—â—m Deâ— placuit dare isti â—â—â—â—ram per quam posset pâ—â—â—â—â—ire ad saâ—uâ—em quod Deus paraâ—â—â— esset juâ—â—re ita quod salus non deficit propâ—er deseâ—tum à pâ—nte Dei Therefore it connoteth also all the helps which God affordeth men that it 's due by the meer Law of Nature without any superadded Positive Laws 349. Gods will called Legislative or Governing is ever fulfilled in strict sence that is So much as is Gods part and the Laws part to do is ever done e. g. God saith Perfect obedience c. shall be Adams duty and it is done It is his Duty whether he will or not He saith To steal shall be sin and it is sin He saith He that believeth shall have right to Justification and Glory and he that believeth not shall be Filius mortis that is Death and Hell shall be his Due and so it is Thus strictly all Gods Will is done 350. But in the secondary remote sence every sin violateth the Will of God by breaking his Law For when he saith Obedience shall
37. Sect. IV. Of the Law of Grace or New Covenant in the last Edition The Nature Conditions and yet free Donations of it pag. 42. Sect. V. Of the giving of the Holy Ghost His common and special Works The extent of the New Covenant Of the state of those that have not the Gospel And what Law they are under pag. 45. Sect. VI. How far Christ died for all and how far not pag. 51. Sect. VII The antecedent and consequent Will of God explained Of Justification by Faith What faith it is and what it doth pag. 54. Sect. VIII Of Justification by Christ's Righteousness imputed The false sense of Imputation opened and fully confuted The true sense asserted Whether Christ paid our Idem or Tantundem Whether he made his Satisfaction to God only as to a Rector or as Dominus vel pars laesa or how pag. 59. Sect. IX Of the sorts of Justification And first of constitutive Justification Of Righteousness How far it is or is not in our own habits or acts What Right the Covenant giveth the baptized to following helps and degrees of Grace Further what must be in our selves Mans holiness is no dishonour to Gods Grace How far Christ strippeth us of our own Righteousness More against the false sense of Imputation Objections answered pag. 69. Sect. X. Of Merit The case plainly and briefly decided The Gospel-Condition or Merit is but the accepting a free Gift according to its nature Whether we may trust to our own Faith Repentance Holiness The last Argument for the false sense of Imputation answered pag. 79. Sect. XI How Faith justifieth whether as an Instrument pag. 82. Sect. XII How far Repentance is a Condition of the Covenant And what it is Whether Faith or it be first How Faith and Love differ pag. 83. Sect. XIII Of the degrees of Pardon and Justification Whether losable And whether future sins be pardoned pag. 85. Sect. XIV Of Justification by Sentence of the Judge What it is ibid. Sect. XV. Of initial executive Pardon or Justification in Sanctificatiâ— How far necessary yet imperfect pag. 86. Sect. XVI Of assurance of Pardon Of doubting Whether it be Dâ—â—â— Faith to believe ones own Justification or Salvation The Spâ—â— Testimony pag. 88. Sect. XVII Of love to God as the end of Faith and foretast of Heâ—â—â— pag. 91. Sect. XVIII Of Perseverance and its certainty in order to the comfortâ—â— certainty of Salvation Few certain of Justification and â—â—â—â— of Perseverance The words of the Synod of Dort The â—â— ther 's Judgment about certainty of perseverance pag. 93 Sect. XIX Of mortal Sin or such as will not stand with the love of Gâ—â— and a state of Justification pag. 103. Sect. XX. What Repentance for particular sins is necessary to parâ—â— pag. 106. Sect. XXI Some solution of all the former difficulties in twenty Propâ—â—ons 108. Sect. XXII Few certain of Salvation The reconciling consequents of â—â—â— pag. 112. Sect. XXIII The case of Perseverance further opened and applied pag. 113. Sect. XXIV The sum and scope of this Discourse of Certainty pag. 116. Sect. XXV Degrees of falling and danger pag. 118. Sect. XXVI Of final Justification at Judgment More of the Agreemâ—â—â— Paul and James about Justification by Works pag. 119. Sect. XXVII Of the number of the glorified and the damned pag. 123. A PREMONITION MY work at present is but to lay down so much of the Christian Doctrine briefly as is necessary to be understood for the reconciling of the Controversies about Predestination Providence Grace and Free-will And therefore pass over â—any other weighty Points and must not stand largely to prove all â—s I go which carrieth its own evidence The true nature of the first â—aw or Covenant deserveth a more accurate discussion than I can here â—ake and much passeth as certain with some which hath but little â—roof And here I meet with these different Opinions 1. Some say that the â—ondition of the first Covenant was not Innocency but sincerity And â—at Innocency was only a Duty necessary necessitate praecepti but not â—edii or that it was ut medium necessary ad melius esse or to some cerâ—â—in degrees of felicity whereof it was a condition but not to felicity it â—â—lf And that the Covenant of Grace doth herein agree with it both â—f them damning man only for mortal sin and punishing them tempoâ—â—lly only for venial sin And he seemeth to be of this mind who saith â—â—at Do this and live or Innocency or Works was the Condition only â—f Moses Law but that Adhere and Vanquish was the Condition of the â—rst Covenant But these are ambiguous unsatisfactory terms If the â—eaning be Adhere to God and his Law by perfect Innocency and vanâ—uish all temptations to Sin this is the same with that Innocency which â—e say was the Condition But if he mean only Adhere to me sinâ—erely by love as thy Ultimate End and vanquish all temptations which â—ould draw thee from me to another Ultimate End or God this is â—he same with the first opinion which many Papists seem to hold 2. But the more common Opinion is that which I assert That Innoâ—ency was the Condition not only of Life eternal but of all the beâ—efits of Gods Covenant and the least sin the forfeiture of all They that are for the first Opinion think that if Adam had committed â—ut a small or venial sin as a sinful thought or desire after the forbidden â—ruit without the act or full consent it had been against Gods natural Goodness and Justice to have condemned him to Hell for it And conâ—quently that Christ died not to pardon the pains of Hell as due for such â—â—ttle sins but only temporal smaller punishments But God best knoweth his own Nature And nature telleth us That â—ll sin deserveth punishment And he that sinneth so far removeth his â—eart from God and forfeiteth his Spirit or Grace And he that hath â—nce so turned from God in the least degree cannot of himself return â—or heal himself and had no promise of Gods Grace to do it And â—herefore it is not to be supposed that he should sin no more but such a â—inute sin for greater will come in presently at that breach unless God â—ecover him which he was not in Justice bound to do And no one knowâ—th so well as God how much malignity is in the smallest sin And it was as â—asie for sinless Adam to have continued sinless as for carnal men now â—o forbear gross sin And he that sinneth deserveth not Heaven or Life â—nd there are divers degrees of punishment in Hell according to the degrees of Sin And Christ died for all our sins therefore they dâ— every one deserve death which consisted not with a right to Life therefore not with a right to Heaven And an immortal Soul was not naturally to be annihilated therefore to live in some punishment as separated And Rom. 3. 9. all were under Sin yet all had not gross Sâ—â—
Will or Power as if he could do no more But it is his Delight thus to govern the creature according to the nature and rank which he hath made it in and his non-volitions and non-operations of a higher sort are agreeable to his Perfection Wisdom and Liberty Higher action being used on higher creatures 3. Yet hath God placed and kept these free Agents not only under his Moral Government but also under his Dominion and disposal so that he will do with them as his own what he lift and none shall frustrate his disposing Will. 4. It pleased him first to make man perfect under a Law of Perfection making innocency or perfection the only condition of Life and the contrary of Death 5. When Man had sufficient Grace to have kept this Law not sufficient to ascertain the event but sufficient Power to have stood that is as much Grace as was necessary to his standing sine qua non esse potuit cum qua esse potuit he broke it and sinned against that sufficient Grace before God either denyed him any thing necessary or withdrew any from him 6. From whence it is clear that the Nature of Man's Will is such as that it is made to use a Power which doth not necessitate or determine it self or is determined necessarily but freely And that it is no Deifying of the Will nor extolling it above its Nature to say that it can act or determine it self without Gods pre-determinating premotion or by that same measure of help which at another time doth not determine it Though its Nature and its Act as such be of God yet so is its Liberty too and therefore by the Power and Liberty given by God the Will can act or not act or turn it self to this object or to that without more help than the said natural support and Concurse And this Power and Liberty is its Nature and Gods Image 7. From hence also it is evident that there is such a thing or operation of God as Grace Necessary called sufficient which is not effectual For God took no Grace away from Adam before he sinned nor let out any temptation upon him which he was not able to resist nor did he sin for want of necessary Grace but by that same degree of help might have overcome 8. God passing Sentence on faln Man for sin would not forgive him the temporal death nor common calamities of this life but cursed the creatures which he was to use as part of his penalty 9. But the Great evil which sin brought on man was the loss of Gods approbation and complacency and of his Spirits saving Communion and help and of Gods Image on man's Soul and of Communion with God herein and also his right to life eternal All which man 's own sin cast away and man was both the Deserver and Executioner without any change in God 10. Yet was all this privation penal in that God made Man such a creature as that his own sin should become his punishment or ruine if he committed it so that all Punishment is not determinatively of God though Gods Antecedent Will did make that which by man is made a Cause As in argument God saith antecedently If thou sin thy own sin shall be thy torment and misery and man saith I will sin Therefore it is Man that is the determining Cause of the Conclusion My own sâ—â— shall be my torment and misery So it is in Causation God antecedently to man's sin doth resolve I will make Man such a Creature with such a Mind Conscience and Will as that his Holiness shall be his Health and Joy and his immediate Receptive capacity of my favour and of his Communion with me and of his title to my spirit and Glory And that if he forsake me and his Holiness in the very Nature of the thing he shall lose all this Life Light and Love Joy and Communion and title to my Grace and shall feel the torments of his own Conscience telling him of his sin and loss This is Gods Antecedent Law Nay this is Gods Antecedent Creation to make man such a Creature Now if man sin his owâ— sin doth ipso facto become his misery and yet is not caused at all by Gods But yet that his Nature was made such as sin should prove a misery to was Gods Work And from that Antecedent Creation or Constitution the Relative form of a Punishment resulteth to the Sinner Even as God saith If thou Murder it shall be thy sin or Thou shalt not Murder And man doth Murder Here the Act that is sin is of man but that the Relation of sin belongeth to that act resulteth partly from the Law which forbiddeth it and yet God is not the Cause of sin though he Antecedently decreed Murder shall be sin if thou commit it So is it also with this sort of Punishment which is either sin it self or the effect or result oâ— sin immediately By which we see that when sin and punishment are found in one thing God is the Cause Antecedently of the formal Relation of a Punishment without being a Cause of the sin yea antecedently is some cause of the formal relation of the sin by his Law without causing any of the sin it self as the author of it As if God make man of such a temper as that surfetting drunkenness lust will make him sick and hazard his life Here God did no otherwise punish him than by making him such a man which he turned to his own destruction by his sin If a man make a thorn Hedge about his Garden that men may not steal his fruit and those that will shall â—rick themselves it is they that prick and punish themselves If God say He that will leap into the fire shall be burnt or into the water shall be drown'd it is they that do it that cause the evil and yet some formal relation of penalty may result to it from Gods conditional antecedent Law I say not that God executeth no other kind of punishment But these are the most common 11. Man having thus cast away Gods Image and his Innocency could beget a Child no purer holier or better than himself For he could not communicate that which he had lost So that our Nature is vitiated with Original sin and unhappy in the miserable effects Bradwardine hath a shift which serveth them that say man could do no good in Innocency without supernatural Help viz. Making that Help to be Gods Will that it shall be done But is not Gods Will called our natural Help when it is the foundation of Nature working by natural means It 's true that free will without Gods Will could do nothing 12. The promisory part of the Covenant or Law of Innocency became null or ceased with man's first sin cessante subditorum capacitate and so the Condition which is its modus So that no man ever since was under the Obligation of that Law as a Covenant of life
If in any of these points men of less accurateness use not the same words take not therefore the old way of proclaiming them Hereticks till you have tryed how far they erre indeed Most of our lower Divines of all parties would be made Hereticks for want of Skill in the denominations allowable or not allowable by the Communication of idioms if the Schoolmens accurateness must be the test e. g. If the question were whether the Humanity be part of Christ or Christ be compounded of a Divine Nature and Humane c. â—â—â—â— would affirm it that mean well But saith Alliac Camerar 3. q. Neque persona neque natura divina est composita nec â—â—â—â— est compositus ex duabus naâ—â—â—is divina scilicet humana sive ex tribus rebus Corpore scilicet anima divinitate sed â—â—â—â— ex duabus secundum humanitatem scilicet corpore anima essentialiter ex infinitis partibus quantitativis integraliter â—â— non est concedendum quod humanitas sit Pars Christâ— Nam ficut homo non est compositus ex albidine substantia 〈…〉 est Compositus ex humanitate persona divina How many have gone for Hereticks for want of the Language of â—â—â—â— and the Schoolmen his Soul the deep sense of Gods displeasure with Sinners and of his â—â—â—â— of sin though no sence of Gods hatred to himself For it is conceiveable how Christ being the Lover and surety or Sponsor for Sinners and undertaking to suffer as a Sacrifice for their sins and in their stead might have on his own Soul the sorrowful sense of Gods hatred of sin and wrath against Sinners though not properly terminated on himself and so he bore the sorrow of our transgressions and was so far forsaken of God for that time and not further 52. The true Reason of the satisfactoriness of Christ's sufferings was that they were a most apt means for the demonstration of the Governing Justice Holiness Wisdom and Mercy of God by which God could attain the ends of the Law and Government better than by executing the Law on the world in its destruction as in general was before intimated 53. The measure of the satisfaction made by Christ was that it was a full salvo to Gods Justice and demonstration of it that he might give Pardon and Life to Sinners upon the new terms of the Covenant of Grace and give what he after gave 54. The matter of Christ's meritorious Righteousness was his perfect fulfilling the Law given him as Mediator or the performance of the Conditions of his mediatorial Covenant From which resulted the Merit so the Dueness of all the Benefits which God had promised in that Covenant as to Christ though mostly for men This was the Righteousness of Christ for man and hence arose his Merit for us 55. The matter of his Law of Redemption required of him was threefold 1. That he should by habitual and actual perfect Holiness fulfil the first Law of Nature or Innocency which Adam broke not just as it obliged Adam in every point but as it was common to man and belonged to Christ as Man 2. That he should fulfil all the Law of Moses given only to the Jews 3. That he should perform the great things peculiar to himself as Mediator which were to be a Sacrifice for Sin to do his Miracles to teach the Church as its Head to Rule it and to appoint Orders and Officers for it to rise again to conquer Satan Death and Sin c. 56. That Christ did not fulfil all the Law in our persons so as that we did it in and by himself and are thereby justified is further evident in that he did not all the Duties which the Law bound us to perform and for not doing of which we are truly Sinners He did not do any of the proper Offices of a Husband to a Wife or of a Wife to a Husband of a Father to Children of a Servant or a hired day-labourer to a Master of a Magistrate King Judge c. to Subjects of a Captain to Souldiers or Souldiers to their Captain of a Landlord to Tenants of such as have great riches towards the poor of the sick the imprisoned and abundance such like Besides the personal Laws given to Adam in the Garden to Noah to Abraham to David â—â—â—â—â—olomon the Prophets and such others Christ did not these same â—â—â—â— for us nor we fulfilled not these particular Laws in him 57. The Disputes whether it be Christ's Divine his habitual his active or his passive Righteousness that is made ours to our Justification seemeth to be but the Off-spring of the error of the undue sense of Christ's personating or representing us in his Righteousness And the parcelling out the uses and effects that one is imputed to us instead of habitual Righteousness another instead of actual and the third pardoneth our Sins is from the same false supposition It 's well that they suppose not that his Divine Righteousness is imputed to our deification But the case is plain 1. That Christ's whole Humane Righteousness habitual active and passive are meritorious for us not as being the very same things all which we should have done and suffered and had as if we had did and suffered them our selves by one that had did and suffered them in our persons in a Law-sense But as being the parts of that one Righteousness of Christ as Mediator which consisteth in the full performance of the Law of Redemption or of his own Covenant with his Father undertaken for our sakes Having been and done and suffered what he promised he is Righteous 2. And his Divine Righteousness by virtue of the hypostatical Union dignifieth his Humane to its meritorious value 58. By his Satisfaction or Sacrifice and this Merit Christ did procure all that Pardon Life and Benefits whatsoever that consequently are given us of God And so is the true meritorious cause of all 59. That Sacrifice and Obedience Righteousness and Merit which was directly given to God for man by performance of Christ's undertaking may yet be consequently said to be given unto man In that it was given to God for man and in that the Benefits merited are given to man and so relatively as to those Benefits the Sacrifice Obedience Righteousness and Merit may be said to be given us As the Ransom is given to the Captive which is given for him because the liberty purchased by it is given him Of which more after SECT IV. Of the New Covenant or the Law of Grace in the Second Edition 60. The New Covenant is Christs Law of Grace his Instrument by which he giveth Title or Right to the Benefits promised and conveyeth Right to the Fruits of his Sacrifice and Merits And his Law by which he governeth the Church as a Saviour in order to Recovery and Salvation It hath greatly scandalized the Papists against us to find some old Prâ—testants deny Christ to be a Law-Giver and
committed And the obligation to duty goeth before the obligation to punishment for that same action because the action cometh between and the first is an act of Gods antecedent Will and the second of his consequent Will that is of the Retributive and not the Preceptive part of the Law And they note not that the question is not what obedience a man is bound to but what he performeth or must be reputed to have performed If they will speak so unaptly as to say that the Law commandeth Lapsed man not to have sin or imperfect man to have been perfect that is that the Command to day bindeth Adam ad praeteritum not to have sinned yesterday or bindeth to Impossibility in nature that existent sin should not be existent in all which I leave them to their â—iberty of words yet it is certain that no man hath perfectly obeyed for one year or day And therefore if Christ's perfect obedience and â—oliness be imputed to them from their first being then they are reâ—uted not-lapsed nor-sinners from the beginning and so not pardonaâ—le But if it be only for the time after sin that Christ's perfection is â—theirs after what sin must it be If after Adam's then we need no pardon of any but Adam's sin If after conversion then we need no pardon for sins after Conversion If after our last sin then Christ's perâ—ection is not imputed to us till after death 126. Others would come nearer the matter and say that we are â—eputed Righteous as fulfillers of the Law and yet reputed Sinners as Breakers of the Law and that though there be no medium in naturals between light and darkness life and death yet there is between a â—reaker of the Law and a fulfiller of it viz. a non-fulfiller and beâ—ween just and unjust that is not-just But this is a meer darkness There â—s a medium negative in a person as not obliged but none between Posiâ—ive and Privative in one obliged as such A stone is neither just nor â—rivatively unjust Nor a man about a thing never commanded or forâ—idden him But what 's this to the matter God's Law is pre-supposed we talk of nothing but Moral acts The Law forbiddeth Omissions and Commissions both are sin Do these men think that he is not reputed Positively just and not only not-unjust who is reputed never to have committed a sin nor left undone a duty in his life Can â—he Law be fulfilled more than so What is Righteousness if that be not Obj. Adam was neither just nor unjust in his first moment no nor till he sinned say some because till then he was not obliged to obey or at least to any meritorious act that is to love God Ans 1. Adam was in his first instant but Habitually just and not by Act because not obliged to impossibilities any more than an Infant or a stone But we speak only of obliged persons 2. It is not true that Adam was not obliged to obey and Love God before he sinned or that he never Loved God as God Obj. At least Adam merited not the Reward though he sinned not till then Ans 1. He merited what Reward he had viz. the continuance o his blessings first freely given but not an immutable state 2. It is yet unresolved what that was by which Adam must merit Immutability and Glory whether 1. Once obeying or consent to his full Covenant 2. Or once loving God 3. Or conquering once 4. Or eating of the tree of Life 5. Or presevering in perfect obedience to the end that is till God should translate him which is most likely His not Meriting Immutability before the time was no sin we confess 3. And we maintain as well as you that Christ hath not only satisfied for sin and merited pardon but also Merited Immâ—table Glory But consider 1. That Adam's not doing that which was to merit Glory was his sin of omission and to pardon that omission is to take him as a meriter of Glory 2. Therefore it must be somewhat more than he forfeited by that omission and his commission which cometh in by Christ's merit above forgiveness 3. That Christ merited all this both by his active passive and habitual Righteousness by which he merited pardon 4. That it was not we that merited it in him but he to give it us only on the terms of a Law of Grace 127. Yet some come nearer and say that To punish and not-Reward are not all one And so the respect that Sin hath to the deserved punishment needed pardon and satisfaction But our deserving the Reward needed Christ's perfect Obedience to be imputed In this there is somewhat of truth But you must avoid the errors that lie in the way and aâ—â— by most supposed truths 1. Remember that man can have nothing from God but what is a meer Gift as to the matter though it be a Reward as to the order and ends of collation And in this case punishment is damni as well as sensus And so the loss of the Reward is the principal part of Hell or Punishment So that if Christ's death hath pardonâ— our sins of Omission we are reputed to have done all our duty And if so we are reputed to have merited the Reward And if he pardon our â—â—â—â— as to all punishment of sense and loss he pardoneth them as to thâ—â— forfeiture of Heaven as a Gift if not as a Reward 128. But say they remission of sin is but part of Justification because a man may be forgiven and yet not reputed never to have broken the Law To put away guilt and to make one righteous are two thing Ans Still confusion Guilt is either of the fault as such or of the punishment and of the fault only as the cause of punishment If all gâ—â— both culpae poenae were done away that person were reputed poâ—â— righteous that is never to have omitted a Duty or committed a â—â— But indeed when only the Reatus poenae culpae quoad poenam is doâ— away the Reatus culpae in se remaineth And this Christ himself never taketh away no not in Heaven where for ever we shall be judged once to have sinned and not to be such as never sinned 129. And this seemeth the very core of their error that they thâ—â— Of this see wotton de Reconcil at large we must be justified in Christ by the Law of Innocency which justified Christ himself and that we are quit or washed simply from all guilt of fault as well as obligation to punishment which is a great untruth contrary to all the scope of the Gospel which assureth us that we are justified by the Law of Grace or Faith and not by the Law of Works That Christ freeth us from the curse and penalty of the Law which he could not do if we were reputed never to have deserved it as never being Sinners If we are reputed such as fulfilled the Law of Innocency by another in our civil
all his Benefits are ever free Gifts â—â— to the matter and value first and then the relation of a Reward is bâ— secondary as to the Order of collation and the reason comparative whâ— one man hath them rather than another as a thankful Child hath the Gift which the Contemner goeth without 2. And that here Not to have this Gift forfeited by our sin is to be punished And so hâ—â—â— non-donari is puniri materially though the relations differ 3. And that it is the same Righteousness of Christ which meriteth our Impunity quoad damnum sensum and which meriteth our Right to the Gift of Life both sub ratione doni as a Gift and sub ratione condonationis as a forgiveness of the forfeiture and of the poena damni So that here â—â— no room for the conceit that Christ's death was only to purchase Pardon and his Righteousness to merit Life That which confoundeth men here is their taking the divers Respects and Connotations and Coâ—ceptions of one and the same thing to be divers separable things Thâ— same Law hath the Preceptive part to do and not do and the Retributing part penal and rewarding The same Obedience of Adam was â—â— doing what was commanded and a deserving what was promised â—â—â—â— more was promised to persevering Perfection than to the first act of Obedience One Sin deserved death but one act of Obedience desernâ—â— not immutable Glory And as the same Act is formally Obedience related to the Command and formally meritorious or praemiandus â—â— related to the Promise And the same Act is sin and punishable as related to the Precept or Prohibition and Threatening so the same Glory is a free Gift in one respect as related ut bonum to God as Benefactor and a Reward in another as related quoad ordinem conferendi to God â—â— Rector And the same loss of Glory is poena related to the Threatening and it is the loss of a Reward as related to the Promise And so the sâ—â—â— Merits of Christ's active and passive and habitual Righteousness because our Glory both by giving us pardon of our forfeiture and by Covenant-Donation and as a Reward to Christ and to us when â—â— perform the conditions of his Gift 133. And it is certain that Christ's Sufferings are first satisfactory and then meritorious being a part of his Active that is voluntary Oâ—dience And Christ's Holiness and Obedience are meritorious of pardon â—â— Sin as well as of Salvation 134. If there be as there is any thing which is given us througâ—â— Christ more than our own Innocency or Obedience would have mâ—â—â—ted the Gift of that is more than remission of Sin And is to be ascribeâ— accordingly to the Purchase of Christ's Merits But yet both his Holiness and Sufferings though not as sufferings did merit it And that was not a fulfilling of the Law in our stead 135. This superadded Gift what-ever it is seemeth in Scripture to be included in Adoption and not in Justification But yet it may in this sense be called Justification in that when our Right to that Gift is questioned that Right must be justified by the Covenant-Donation and by Christ's meritorious Purchase of it But this is only de nomine We are agreed of the thing 136. It is greatly to be noted that as a Reward is in the formal notion more than not punishing where materially they are the same so Christ hath not at all merited that eternal Life should be ours by way of Reward for our fulfilling the Law in him but that it should ours by his free Gift as a Reward to Christ for his own Merits So that the Relation of a Reward for Perfection belongeth only formally to Christ who taketh it as his benefit that we are saved through his love to Souls but not at all to us And to say as too many hold that Heaven is our Reward for our perfection of Holiness and Obedience in and by Christ is a Humane Invention subverting Christ's Gospel or unfit speech if better meant 137. Yet a Reward it is to us to be glorified but that is not for our fulfilling the Law of Innocency by Christ but for our believing in Christ and performing the conditions of the Covenant of Grace which giveth us Life as a free Gift but yet in the order of the condition it hath the relation and name of a Reward to us in the Scripture 138. So that here are three rewarding Covenants before us 1. The Covenant or Law of Innocency rewarding man for perfection to the end And this rewarded none but Christ And it is false that we are rewarded by that Covenant or justified by it for Christ's fulfilling it But it All the stir of the Papists is to prove that we have inherent Righteousness as well as pardon which Protestants are as much for as they The rest is de nomine justificationis Malder 1. 2. q. 113. a. 2. p. 572. Apostolus 2 Cor. 5. non aliud vult quam Christum cui nullum debebatur supplicium factum fuisse hostiam pro nostro peccato ut nos qui apud Deum nihil merebamur praeter supplicium justitia Dei fieremus in ipso id est gratis sine nostris operibus consequeremur per ipsius merita justitiam coram Deo What doth this differ from the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches Idem ibid Quando Apostolus dicit multos constitui justos per unius obedientiâ—â— significatur causa meritoria non autem formalis And so say we But some call Christ's Righteousness the causa materialâ—s meaning no more but that it is the matter of that Merit for which we are justified As if Adam had perfectly fulfilled the Law his fulfilling it had been meritorious of his sentential Justification and yet the matter of his constitutive Justification that is of his Righteousness And some uâ—â—ptly call it the formal cause But an unapt logical notion is not an error in Faith or Theology Idem ib. p. 573. Quamvis â—x omnino rigida justitia solus Christus Dominus satisfactat de condigno tamen ita ut merces operi â—ono debeatur post Dei promissionem meretur justus coronam justisiâ— quam reddet in illa die justus judex Est nostra justitia tota totum meritum tota satisfactio dependens a meâ—ito satisfactione Christi Still here is a wordy Controversie justified Christ 2. The Law or Covenant made only to and with Christ the Mediator And this Covenant further rewarded Christ as Mediator giving him all that it promised to himself and us for his performing the mediatorial conditions And so our Life is Christ's Reward 3. The Covenant or Law of Grace for it is the same thing in several respects that 's called the Law and the Covenant which giving Life on the condition of Faith doth justifie and reward Believers And we are justified and rewarded by no other Law 139. When Rom. 4. oft saith and other Texts that we are
pâ—â—supponit opus miserecordiâ— in ea â—undatur tanquam iâ— prima radice quia ne procedatur in infinitum deveniendum est ad aliquid quod ex sola bonitate divinae voluntatis dâ—pendeat B. I hope you have no malignant desire to extenuate Gods Grace but are willing to acknowledge it to be as great and large as indeed it is if you can discern the proof C. God best knoweth how to honour himself B. Quest. 1. Do you think that all the World or all that shall perish yea or any part of the World is under the meer Curse of the Law of Innocency as violated by Adam without any remedy or mercy C. I think they are without real Remedy though not without all Mercy for a delay of punishment is mercy B. Quest 2. Do you think that they are only under the Curse of that Law as the Devils are without any possibility or offers of a remedy or that they are also still under the Covenant-Offers of Life upon condition of Innocency C. I cannot suppose God now to offer a man Life on condition he be no Sinner whom he knoweth to be a Sinner For such an Offer is equivalent to a sentence of Death or denial of Life Nor can I say that they are as desperate as the Devils because they know not the desperateness of their case B. Quest. 3. Do you think all the difference between them and Devils lieth in delay and ignorance of their misery Then the most ignorant and presumptuous of them is the least miserable though the most sinful which cannot be Quest 4. But do you think that no Meâ—cy is to be offered â—o such C. Yes because we know not who are Elect and who not B. Quest. 5. Are we to offer men mercy only as Elect or rather as Sinners and miserable under a Law of Grace and as Subjects of God obliged by that Law to accept it C. We offer it to all Sinners that the Elect may receive it B. Quest. 6. Are none but the Elect under a Law of Grace as the rule of their Duty their expectation and of Judgment C. Others may be under the Obligations of it but not under the Gâ—aâ—e of it B. Remember then 1. That they are not lawless 2. That they are not under that meer violated Law of Innocency Be innocent and live 3. That they are under the Obligations of the Law of Grace Quest 7. Is there any of them that are not bound to use certain means appointed of God in order towards their own Salvation C. They are bound to intend their own Salvation and with that intention to use some means But God intends it not B. Quest. 8. Doth God command men on pain of damnation to any vain endeavours or use of means C. He commandeth it not in vain for it shall make them unexcuseable 2. They are not to judge their endeavours vain because they know it not 3. But in the issue all will be in vain to them B. Quest 9. Would it be in vain to them if they really did the utmost that common Grace enableth any men to do C. It is not properly Grace to them and so not common 2. It would be in vain to them B. Quest 10. Is that vain which bringeth a man into the nearest preparation for special Grace and nearest to the Kingdom of God C. To the Elect it is not vain Nor to others for their sakes Nor to others as to the lessening of their pains in Hell But as to their Salvation it is B. Quest 11. Who would it be long of or be reputed the Cause if it be in vain C. Of themselves who are born in sin from Adam and are Unbelievers B. You suppose it impossible for them to believe and impossible for them not to be the Children of Adam They made not themselves and you suppose that for want of Grace they cannot believe Quest 12. When Death shall acquaint them with the impossibility that they were under do you think 1. That it will be the way of glorifying the Justice of God in Judgment to have the World know that he condemneth Sinners meerly because he will condemn them for that which they never had any more true power to avoid than to make a World 2. Or will their Consciences in Hell accuse them or torment them for that which they then know was naturally impossible and caused by God C. We know not how God will glorifie his Justice or how their Consciences will torment them It may be they shall then be as ignorant of the necessitating cause as now B. 1. Do you know it now and shall not they know it then 2. God telleth us the contrary That all hidden things shall be brought to light and that God will justifie his own proceedings by proving that mens destruction is of themselves that every mouth may be stopped and all the World be guilty before God And he calleth it his Righteousness in judging to give to every man according to his Works and that mens Consciences shall then excuse them or accuse them when God shall judge the secrets of their hearâ—s and not when he shall torment them by deceiving them Rom. 2. 2 Thess 1. 6 7 8 9 10. Matth 25. 7. 23 24. 2 Tim. 4. 8 9. Rom. 14. 10. Gen. 18. 24 25. Quest 13. Do you believe that none but the Elect have now any real mercy besides a delay of their future misery and hopes of its abatement C. I do For all things are to be judged of by the end And that is really no mercy which is not intended to a mans happiness but his misery As Afflictions are no evils to the Elect because they are intended and work together for their good B. Is the offer of Christ and Life no mercy Is all Gods patience and forbearance as a means to lead them to repentance no mercy Is all the teaching perswading intreating condescension of Christ no mercy See what error here you run into and how contrary to Scripture and to nature it self 1. You contradict Gods Word which frequently calleth them mercies Psal 145. 9. 106. 7. 45. Neh. 9. 19 27 28 31. Jon. 4. 2. Rom. 2. 4. Matth. 18. 33. Isa 63. 9. Ezek. 16. 2. You deny the chiefest part of mens duty even to accept of mercy to improve mercy to be thankful for mercy to be led by Gods good-ness to Repentance to use mercies as Gods Talents to his Glory c. If you say They know not but they are mercies you feign God to bind men to duty but by deceit It is as mercies and not as that which for ought they know may be mercies that they are to be valued used c. 3. You excuse men from the greatest aggravation of their sin even sinning against Mercies How can they sin against them that have none 4. You feign Gods Justice to be stragely glorified by damning men in Hell for ever for sinning against mercy who never had any
which is not likely To perform one act of Love and Obedience is not so hard as to do it to the death though we lose our lives in the expressions of it Object But our first Faith giveth us Right to the Spirit of Confirmation and Immutability though more must be done for Perfection Answ 1. It appeareth then that Perfection and Glory is more than Confirmation 2. It is certain that the Regenerate are mutable as to the degrees of Grace and are far from Perfection at the first 3. The generality of the Fathers and ancient Churches thought that true Justification and Right to Heaven and true Love to God was lost by many And Austin himself and his Followers so thought 4. And they that think otherwise yet know that Glory is still given us quoad jus in the Promise on condition of our perseverance And we should hardly find so many Threatnings against them that fall away if all might so easily know that the first act of Obedience doth so fix us and give us in justice a Right to Immutability § 19. M. S. The Arguments to prove that any one Act had the pròmise of Immutability and Glory are these Argument 1. If God were to declare his rewarding Justice then he must reward one act Thus Bradwardiâ—â— also chideth his Master Lombard as inclining to Pelagius for holding that Adam could have forborn Sin by his Free-will without Gods spâ—dâ—l Grace that is his Will that so it should be which he saith was necessâ—ry before the Fall as well as since and that else Adam by once not sâ—â—ning when tempted had merited Confirmation as he saith the Angels did being tempted by Leviathan lib. 2. c. 10. An. 1. God was not obliged to any Reward but according to the tenor of his Law Prove that his Law promised Glory or Immutability for one act 2. Bonum est ex causis integris one act is but a small paâ—â— of a mans life The Promise was to the whole course only 3. God did reward every act His acceptance and the continuance of all â—he blessings of that Paradise and the comfort of his Love was a greâ—â— Reward § 20. M. S. If one act of Obedience deserved unchangeable Happinesâ— then God must bestow it But c. An. I deny the minor One act deserved it not No act deserved in Commutative Justice And no act deserved it of governing Justice but such as the Law antecedently made it due to § 21. M. S. Merit it is a fuitableness of the work to the wages â—â—â— that please God are under his good pleasure the fruit of which must be â—â—â— enjoying of his Spirits infinite assistance This Adam might have claimed â—â— Justice and gloried for one act deserveth a Reward An. This is sufficiently answered 1. Wages strictly taken is Mâ—â—â—â— given by a Proprietary commutatively It 's blasphemy to say that God can owe any Creature such for he can receive nothing but his own The word when used to us is improperly taken But praemium a Reward we have but no work deserveth that but by the ordinate Justice of the Law Some few Papists talk of a dignity ex proportione operâ—â— but the Scotists and the wisest of them deny any but 1. Ex congruitate 2. Ex pacto Your suitableness may signifie either 1. A congruity ad fines regiminis or else ad praemium qua promissum And thus it 's true But it 's not proved that any one act was such 2. Or it may â—ignifie a suitableness in proportion ex simplici dignitate operis obliging the Governor antecedently to his Law 2. Or obliging God as Proprietor to compensation And so it is untrue that Merit is a suitableness of the work to the wages here 2. It 's unproved that Gods pleasedness must ever be shewed by the Spirits infinite assistance or that one act deserved this It 's unlike that the Angels that kept not their first state did never one act of Obedience nor were never under Gods approbation Prov. 16. 7. When a mans ways please the Lord he maketh his Enemies to be at peace with him God saith This â—is a Reward You say less than eternal life is none 1 King 3. 10. The speech of Solomon pleased the Lord And yet one would think by his filthiness and Idolatry and forsaking God that he was not glorified nor made immutable With the Sacrifice of Alms God is well pleased Heb. 13. 16. Phil. 4. 18. and with Relation-Duties Col. 3. 20. And yet all that did them even sincerely were not glorified then nor absolutely immutable § 22. M. S. Arg. 2. Unchangeable misery would have been the reward of one sin Ergo c. An. I deny the consequenâ—e Misery was threatned to one sin Glory was not promised to one act of Obedience Obedience during life is certainly due from Man to God He that denieth it him in one act denieth him his due But he that giveth it him in one act giveth him but little of his due Your Argument is like these The Souldier that is a Traytor in one act deserveth death Therefore he that watcheth or fighteth but once deserveth all his wages and honour The Son that curseth his Father once deserveth punishment Therefore he that obeyeth him once deserveth the Inheritance He that is bound to pay an hundred pound forfeiteth his Bond if he leave a penny unpaid Therefore he forfeits it not if he pay but a penny The Servant that is hired for a day or year doth forfeit his wages if he be idle or rebel an hour or a day Therefore he deserveth his wages if he do Service but an hour or a day The disease of one part may kill a man Therefore the health of one part only will keep a man alive He that is hired to build a House or a Ship well forfeits his wages for one hole or gross defect Therefore he deserveth his wages if he lay but one Brick or Board But bonum est ex causts integris § 23. M. S. His Sin is more his own than his Obedience Ans The assistance of the Spirit could not take place in the first act because not deserved And his Obedience would have been as much his own as his Sin An. This is quite beyond the Jesuites 1. It 's true that the rewarding gift or help of the Spirit for confirmation was not given Adam to his first act But it 's not true that he had no help of the Spirit If you will not call Gods necessary Grace which you said did sanctifie all his powers by the name of the Spirits help you must say It was the help of God the Father Son and Holy Spirit without which he could have done nothing 2. But can you think that God did as much to his Sin as to his Sanctification and caused it as much as he was ready to cause his first Obedience Should he have been no more beholden to God for his Holiness than for his Sin This is too indifferent
saying Be Perfect or Innocent and Live nor obliged to perfect personal perpetual obedience as the condition of Life for it was become naturally impossible And God maketh not Promises and Covenants upon Natural impossibilities whatever we say of Moral ones If the Devils before their fall were under this Covenant Be Perfect and Live Yet now they are not under it Here some worthy Divines go into both extreams Some say that all the Law of Innocency is ceased Precept Promise and Threatning Others say that all still are in force or being The Truth I think is between them as followeth 1. God still commandeth perfect obedience so far as that the least violation of his Law is sin 2. This Law bindeth us as the Creator's Law but not as meer Creator But as put with Nature into the hand and power of the Redeemer to whom all Power or Government is committed and so all Laws are now both the Creators and Redeemers 3. These Precepts bind us not now in so full a sort as they did Adam even to obedience Though the Law be as perfect Because there is some Dispositio Recipientis necessary to the effecting an Obligation upon us And where any Natural Impossibility hath befaln us though by sin it will make some alteration in the obligation 4. The Commination of the said Law is so far still in force as to make Punishment even perpetual to be our desert for every sin and so far to oblige us to Punishment that if we are not pardoned we shall not escape for it is natural for sin to deserve Punishment 5. This obligation is not only Remediable or pardonable but conditionally as well as by the Fundamental Merit of Christ Remedyed and pardoned to all men immediately and actually pardoned to penitent Believers 6. The Promissory Covenanting part was not properly Abrogatedly God For he was not the Changer 7. The Promissory part is now really ceased and is No Promise noâ—â—â— Covenant of God And this was done by Man's ceasing to be a capable subject which because some few worthy Divines deny I prove 1. If it be yet a Promise it is Absolute which none saith or Conditional And if so either the Condition is quid praeteritum quid praesenâ— vel quid futurum But none of these 1. A Past and Present Condition are not proper Conditions of the thing but forms of speech And either that Condition already is or is not If it be the Promise is absolute in sence If it be not the Promise is No Promise iâ— sence but equivalent to a Negation as common reason as well as the civil Law confesseth If it be quid Ignotum the notice may be Conditional still but not the proper Donation But here it is quid notissimuâ— and God is feigned to say If Adam and his Posterity have no sin I will justifie and bless them which is equivalent to I will not If the Condition be supposed Future e. g. If Adam and his seed sin no more they are just it is false because they are already guilty 2. The essence of a Condition is to suspend the effect till performed But here the effect is not suspended Ergo there is no conditional promise Total loss is no suspension 3. When the Condition is once totally violated and become impossible all sence and civil Law saith Res transit in judicatum Lex in Sententiam and the Promise ceaseth Cessante capacitate Promissarit And so it is here 4. That which is a Promise is also a Law and is essentially the Expression of Gods Will for the Government of his Subjects and for a conditional Rule of Right to the thing promised This is its very definition But it is unworthy of God to say that he doth ever since the fall tell the world If you are not faln or Sinners you shall be justified or on condition that you be such as never did sin you shall live This were to threaten or condemn us ironically or with derision under the name of a Promise or Covenant or Law Yet the change as I said is made by man who hath made himself uncapable to be the object of such a Promise or subject to such a Law And I know that it is a Question of no small Difficulty whether any proper promise of life was made to Adam himself and so whether this was properly a Promising Covenant But I can presume to say no more than I can prove which is 1. That as Natural there seemed to be in it an intimation of the Will of God to give Adam perpetual felicity if he obeyed 1. In that God made his Soul Immortal Not such as could â—â—t cease to be but such as in its Nature was fitted to perpetuity And a perpetual Soul must be perpetually happy or unhappy And God would not subvert the Nature of Spirits nor make Souls unhappy for nothing 2. Because Holiness it self would be and infer Happiness to a perpetuated Soul To love God perfectly is to be perfectly happy And God would not have taken away man's holiness from him 3. Because God having voluntarily become man's Rector that Justice which consisteth in doing as a Rector ob fines regiminis secundum mores subditorum seemeth to be a virtual Promise that it shall go well with the obedient 4. Because God put into man's Soul a natural inclination to its own perpetual felicity 5. And also a holy Inclination perpetually to Love his God and to know him 6. And God commanded Man in the very Law of Nature and positively certain means to be used no doubt in order to such felicity as the end which man by nature was obliged to intend And doubtless God would not do all this in vain His command to seek Life is a kind of Promise that faithful seekers shall obtain it 7. And as Nature made Punishment due to the sinner so it seemeth implyed in that very threatning of Nature that the obedient shall speed better Whoever is angry with me for it I must say that these Natural Evidences are no inconsiderable perswaders of my judgment and directors of it about the certainty and nature of the Promise to Adam 2. But besides these though the Scripture be very silent here yet the same seemeth implyed 1. In the threatning of death to Adam 2. In the titles of Redemption Reconciliation Remission c. given in the Gospel to the acts of our Salvation by Jesus Christ which seem to import that they restore us into that state of Heavenly hope which we fell from in Adam when we all sinned and came short of the Glory of God Rom. 3. SECT II. The first Edition of the Law of Grace 13. When God judged man for sin at once he promised him a Saviour and through him as promised made a new Law of Grace with man 14. This Law giveth pardon of the Spiritual and Eternal Punishment and of all save what was excepted in the Sentence foregoing But pardon not to be absolutely and immediately
justifie us but condemn us nor Moses's neither nor any but the Law of Grace Your foundation is unsound 2. The imputing of Christ's Suffering is not Gods Language but your own and may be well or ill understood 3. If the Law have nothing against us it hath no Sin of Omission against us Therefore not our omission of Love and Obedience And then we are reputed such as had perfect Love and Obedience 4. But indeed it is not so By the deeds of the Law no Flesh can be justified The Law still hath this against us that we have sinned which he that denieth is called a Lyar 1 Joh. 1. The Reatus Culpae in se or the Reality of this that we have sinned is impossible to be done away But the Reatus poenae culpae ut ad poenam is done away But not by the Law but by the Redeemer and new Covenant The Law doth not say We are sinless or deservers of life But the Gospel saith We are pardoned and adopted and sanctified through Christ's perfect meritorious Righteousness § 31. M. S. Else Sin and Punishment should be the cause of life for Sin is the cause of Suffering and that of Pardon An. This is the grossest passage in this Book A palpable fallacy You may as well say that Lazarus's dying and being buried were the causes of his reviving because antecedent evils from which he was revived Or that the Jews killing Christ were the causes of his Resurrection Or that Peter's cutting off Malchus Ear was the cause that Christ cured him Or that Peter's denying Christ was the cause that Christ pardoned him Sin deserveth Punishment but Punishment as such deserveth not Pardon or Life They in Hell deserve not Heaven If God had threatened but a temporal Punishment As a years sickness c. this had not deserved the following impunity or peace but only interrupted peace the Sin deserving this and no more A Malefactor's scourging deserveth not his after peace And Christ's Suffering merited not our Pardon as reputed our suffering nor meerly as suffering For had we suffered we had not been pardoned But the voluntary Suffering of so glorious and innocent a Person to demonstrate Justice deserved our impunity and more because God would have it so and it was a means most apt for this excellent end to save lost man and to vindicate and glorifie the Wisdom Truth and Justice of the Universal King and to demonstrate the Goodness and Love of our great Benefactor But sufferings as such do merâ—â— nothing even Christs own Sufferings merit but as they are the fruits of Obedience and voluntary consent on the foresaid accounts much less do the sufferings of the Sinner merit For he is supposed involuntary in them and it is God the Judge that is the Author of them as such § 32. M. S. Else the Law should be laid by and life given without it An. The root of all your Error is That God giveth us life by the Law of Innocency or Works and that we are justified by that Lawâ— which is not true God laid none of it by but man by sin made the promissory part which gave life on condition of perfect Obedience and Innocency to be impossible or null It ceased cessante capacitate subditorum by mans mutation and not by Gods But the preceptive part remaineth still as far as it reacheth materially the state of Sinners But man having made it impossible to be justified by the deeds of the Law God made us a new Law or Covenant according to which he judgeth Sinners and by which he first giveth Righteousness and then according to it sentenceth men as Righteous § 33. M. S. Justification of the Posterity of Adam should have been the same for substance as of Believers by Christ Adam's one Act should have confirmed all his Posterity in him as a publick Person The Covenant of Works and of Grace agree in justifying by imputed Righteousness but out of a Head by Generation the other by a divine Person An. This is presumptuous adding to Gods Word in the very substance of the Covenants yea and a flat contradiction of it 1. What Scripture telleth us That all Adam's Posterity should have been confirmed in immutable Holiness if he had obeyed 2. What Scripture saith That one Act should have done this 3. What Scripture saith That his Righteousness should have been imputed to all his Posterity and they all accounted to have fulfilled the Law in him The Scripture tells us nothing of Gods purpose to make so suddain a change of his Law as if he made it but for one man yea for oâ—â— Act and then would make another to Rule the World by ever after The Law said in sense Obey perfectly and live Sin and die Now if the Condition had been performed by one Act or one man for all the World that ever should come of him to the last and they all be born in the fixed possession of the Reward then the Law which giveth that Reward still but conditionally hath no more place As in Hell God doth not say to the damned Obey and live so neither doth he say to them in immutable Glory I give you immutable Glory if you will obey The means cease so far as the end is either attained or desperately lost He that saith Run well and you shall have the prize Fight well and you shall be crowned Overcome and I will give you a Kingdom will not say the same to them when after running fighting overcoming they have received the Prize the Crown the Kingdom though possibly they may have the continuance on condition still if that continuance was not also promised on the first condition alone So that you feign Gods Law to be incredibly mutable if God said by it to Adam Obey in one Act oâ— obey thy self and thou and all thy Posterity for that shall have the Reward For then he can never be supposed to say the same again to Adam or to any man And yet you think you stand so much for the â—mmutability of that Law as that we must all be justified by it to the â—nd Nay it seemeth that after one Act of Obedience all the World should have been under no Covenant any more or no promissory conditional Law but only fixed by necessitating Light and Love as those in Glory â—re For when this Condition was fully performed this Law or Covenant as conditional must needs cease And you imagine not I suppose at least mention not any other conditional Covenant that should â—ucceed it And necessitation is not a Moral Law suited to such as you call cause consilio in this life You would make all the World after one â—ct to be if not lawless yet Comprehensors and not Viators Professors of life eternal and not seekers in a life of trial But I find not but that all Adam's Posterity should have been born and â—ived under the same Law that he was made under And all of them â—hould