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
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
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
promised life by it 〈◊〉 to use the Ordinances and promised grace by them and that in believing him we shall have life everlasting So Faith as the rest is Gods instrument as to appointment anâ— success ours as to the use and practice of it 〈◊〉 only it is not proper to call it a passive instrument as some do or to say it justifies passively whose mistake is rather in the term thaâ— in the sence For Faith is a Moral not 〈◊〉 proper Physical instrument which only can be passive Again a passive instrument is thaâ— which hath no activity at all but is meerly used by the Agent in his action as a Knife Saw or the like but Faith justifieth actively or as a grace whereby the whole Soul understanding the promise of pardon in Christ accepts it trusteth in it expecteth Salvatioâ— only that way now this is a moral reception or acceptation of and dependance upon Christ in the Promise not a Physical passiveness as the term seems to imply We are now to prove That we are thus justified by Faith as hath been laid down because though the Scripture is full and express for it in many places yet other sences are now put upon them Argument 1. Faith is the means of obtaining all particular merits both spiritual and temporal only by trusting in the promise of them hence blessedness is ascribed to trusting in God Ps â—4 13 and many times God delivered men because they trusted in him 2 Chr. 20.20 Obedience qualifies and fits the subject to receive â—ercies but still Faith is supposed as that â—hich giveth right to mercies The Vertues 〈◊〉 Unbelievers have no promise the promise to Faith therefore Justification also comâ—â— by Faith in the Promise of pardon for â—ere is the same reason for all the Promises â—aith as faith obtain other Promises why â—t this also besides the Promise of Justification is the foundation of all the rest and â—â—udes them virtually therefore if Faith enâ—â—le to all other Promises and Mercies much â—â—re to this nay Faith in particular Promiâ—â— obtains mercy chiefly upon this account â—â—cause it hath first obtained reconciliation â—â—h God and the promise of his love in Christ for upon this all promises are founded and true trusting in them doth suppole our trusting in God first for Justification yea is a secondary act of the same Faith 2 Cor. 1.24 Argument 2. As Abraham was so are all men justified Gal. 3.7 8 9. all Believers are his Seed anâ— blessed with him and in the same way buâ— Abraham was justified by Faith as it is a trusting in the promise of God viz. a promisâ—â— that he and all the World should be blesseâ— in Christ Ergò That Abraham was thus justified the Apostle affirms Gal. 3.6 He believed and it was imputed to him for righteousness and this believing is opposed to seeking righteousness by the works of the Law v. 10. Thsy that are of the Law are not blessed with Abraham but under the Curse because thâ—â— keep not the whole Law which comprehenâ—â— the Moral as well as Ceremonial thereforâ— faith as trusting in the promise justified himâ— Moreover Christ redeemed us from the Cuâ—â— of the Law that we might receive the promiâ—â— of the Spirit by Faith v. 13 14. Vnto Abraham and his Seed were the Promises made v. 1â— and the Inheritance is not of the Law but 〈◊〉 Promise v. 18. The Faith then that justifiâ—â— Abraham was a trust in Gods Promises contradistinct to obedience to the Law or Commands If you ask what Promise I answer v. 17. directe us to it The Law was 400 〈◊〉 30 years after the Covenant or Promise whiâ—â— points at the time when Abraham was first â—alled and of the Promise made to him then â—nd to all Nations in him Gen. 12.1 2 3. by believing that promise Abraham was justified â—nd his faith in the promise of a Son mentioned above Chap. 15.6 and Rom. 4. was but a subsequent act of his justifying faith and its â—eing imputed for righteousness Vid. Prest On the Cov. Serm. 11. but an instance or evidence that his faith in the promise of being blessed in Christ did justifie him before God Argument 3. The Just shall live by Faith Habak 2.4 The Prophet spoke it immediately concerning temporal deliverance in publick calamities but these deliverances to the Children of God are tokens and fore-runners of deliverance from the Wrath to come and effects of their reconciliation with God therefore â—s it is usual in the New Testament to apply such promises to spiritual things so the Apostle applieth this of the Prophet to Justification wherefore as to live in the Prophet principally signified preservation from the temporal effects of the wrath of God so with the Apostle it signifieth to be delivered from eternal wrath and eternal death by the special favour of God i. e. to be justifyed now this he ascribes to Faith only Rom. 1.17 where he proveth that the Gospel is the power of God to Salvatian in them that believe because therein is the righteousness of God revealed from Faith to Faith which is further confirmed because the Just shall live bâ— Faith it is believing then that saves meâ— and faith that makes them partakers of thâ— Righteousness of God revealed in the Gospel therefore by that they live i. e. are justified and yet more express Gal. 3.11 The Apostle proves by this Text That a Man cannot be justified by his Works and thinketh it aâ— Argument above exception but that no maâ— is justified by the Law in the sight of God it 〈◊〉 evident for the Just shall live by Faith Argument 4. To be justified by Faith is directly opposed to Justification by Works and by ouâ— own Righteousness therefore Faith justified only by trusting in Gods Mercy through Chrisâ— The Antecedent is the Apostles Rom. 10.5 6. The Righteousness of the Law saith That hâ— that doth them shall live in them but the righteousness of Faith saith If thou believe in thy heart that God raised Christ from the dead thou shalt be saved v. 9. likewise Gal. 3.10 having said the Just shall live by Faith he adds the Law is not of Faith but the Man that doth them shall live by them therefore Man cannot be justified by the Works of the Law iâ— must be by Faith only will they again sayâ— that these places only exclude the works oâ— the Ceremonial Law Surely Moses in the place cited Lev. 18.5 speaketh of the whole Law given to the Jews as the context sheweth and as it is interpreted by the Prophet Ezekiel 20.13 Or will they say that only perfect Works and the Law of innocency are excluded not imperfect sincere Obedience Ans If any works justifie they must be perfect else there must be a conjunction of Gods mercy and Mans own works to justifie him and so a Medium betwixt Justification by Faith and by Works even to be justified by both together and so the Apostle argues imperfectly yea
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
that course of obedience to which life was promised It is true he was righteous inherently and also in the eye of the Law so far as he had obeyed and so far might be said to be justified viz. Inchoatively But in this Question we take justification for that perfect Act whereby a Sinner is fully acquitted and accepted to life eternal and thus Adam was not justified and therefore in a middle state So then Pardon doth not make a Man righteous or justified but in the precise Notion of it it is a Middle betwixt condemnation and justification viz. Non-condemnation but if you add that a Man is forgiven for Christ's sake then you add something besides Meer Pardon and so desert the Question 3. I argue from the nature of Justification â—s it is discovered in its immediate and most proper Effects the chief whereof is this That â—t giveth a firm and immutable Right to Eternal Life Our Opposites and we differ about â—ustification in this Life They say it is imperfect and mutable we say 't is perfect and immutable but we agree in this That Justification whenever it is perfect and compleat giâ—eth an immutable Right to life such as shall â—ever be lost as Adam's was Hence I argue Meer Pardon or Relaxation â—f punishment doth not give an immutable â—ight to life but only restores a Man to the â—ondition he was in before and leaveth him as subject and liable to lose it by new sins as eâ—er he was But Justification by Christ doth â—ot only restore Man to the Condition he was â—n before subject to change but giveth him â—n unchangeable Right to Life Eternal therefore it is more than Pardon And further that which gives an immutable right to life must suppose the Law to be fulfilled which promised life which being fulfilled there is nothing further to be required nor any further danger of a threatning of death but man is to be â—eclared Righteous and to receive the promised Reward But Justification giveth such a â—ull and immutable right to life therefore it supposeth fulfilling of the Law by our selves â—r another and a Righteousness thence ariâ—ng for which we are declared Righteous â—nd receive the promised Life Object 'T is said Full pardon such as God's Pardon is delivereth from all punishment sensu damni Trum. ut supra from all positive punishment and from the privation of all Priviledges which were or should have been enjoyed before and this is equivalent to a right to life in the nature of the thing For when a Man is exempted from all punishment and restored to his for men Estate or Favour with God he is then in statâ— quo prius in the condition he was in before he sinned Answ By this Argument Pardon should restore man into the Condition of Adam before hiâ— Fall which is apparently false For that iâ— the State from whence he fell by sin and to which Meer Pardon must restore him at leasâ— when it is compleat at the last Judgment but neither then is man restored into Adam's condition but to a new State of Happiness by the Redeemer Besides this Argument makes strongly against themselves for the Condition from which man fell was but a State of Probation wherein he had no immutable right to life therefore Pardon restoring him but to his former Condition putteth him again but into a State of Probation and giveth no certain right to life Nay by this Doctrine Sin is not pardoned in this Life A Man is not acquitted or put out of danger of punishment seeing his Salvation dependeth upon conditions which must be in fulfilling till his lives end So that Pardon with them is no more than a Suspension of punishment together with a promise of life and impunity if man fulfill the Conditions of the Gospel This putteth a Man into a possibility of life but giveth him no actual or certain Title to it and therefore is not Justification 4. The next Effect of Justification is a new Heart or Grace to fit and bring man to life which Justification entitleth to The Spirit of Sons and the Glory of Heav'n are the Fruits of Adoption but Life and Happiness simply and the Spirit of Sanctification are the Effects of Justification Heb. 8.10 11 12 13. The new Heart is promised as an Effect of forgiveness of sin Hence I argue That which gives with the right to life all the means necessary to attain life is more than pardon of sin But Justification by Christ gives a right to all the Means necessary to attain eternal life as well as to life it self Ergò The Reason of the Major is pardon in the common notion of it and with our Opposites doth only put a man into that state or favour he was in before but in that condition there was no certainty of grace to persevere and to come to life When we pardon an Offendor we receive him into our former favour and lay aside all thoughts of enmity but we do not count our selves engaged by all means possible to endeavour to prevent his offending for the future that care resteth on him therefore if Justification give a right to the Grace of God which shall be effectual to bring us to life it is more than pardon or putting us into our former condition wherein we had no such promise Mr. Truman ingeniously confesseth what is the natural consequence of his Opinion That Christ by his Satisfaction did not purchase grace to bring men to life Great Propit p. 203. c. but only a Law of Grace whereby it was possible for all men to be saved iâ— they would and God might justly save them if they performed the Terms of that Law He saith Indeed Christ by the supereminency of his Person and Redemption did deserve that his Death should not be in vain and consequently that some men should have grace given them 〈◊〉 bring them to Heaven but that he did not preperly merit this Grace should be giv'n them So that this is a point of honour to Christ not oâ— Justice or Debt upon the account of his Sufferings that some should have Saving and Persevering Grace Yet he acknowledgeth that thâ— Father of his own good Pleasure giveth this gracâ— to those whom he hath chosen So then the gift oâ— Grace is the immediate Fruit of Election not of Justification But this Doctrine is as fallâ— as new Man's Sin deprived him of Grace as well as of Happiness and therefore if Christ purchased a right to Happiness for him which shall be proved in the next Chapter he purchased Grace also to attain it the Means are included in the end The loss of the denial oâ— Grace is the Effect of Sin therefore the restoring of Grace is the Effect of full Pardon and Justification The Scriptures teach that all sulness of Grace was given to Christ that we might receive of his Fulness Grace for Grace John 1.14 16. He hath power to send the Holy
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 〈◊〉
if that be imputed then Christs Righteousness is imputed also to them that believe Moreover if Adams Sin be not imputed to us then are we not guilty of the breach of the First Covenant â—en we were never obliged to yield perfect obedience nor is the want of it properly a â—â— in us and so men are born in such a forworn and lost state as the Scripture prescribes â—â—em to be The reason of the consequence is â—e were never under the first Covenant in â—r own persons it was made with Adam â—t with us and if his breach of it be not impted to us it must follow that the Covenant is intended for him only not for his Posteriâ—â— his Obedience should not have profited them to Justification as well as his Disobedience not hurt them to condemnation and â—â—s the Covenant of Works is wholly made and by Adams Fall nor was it ever renewed a Covenant of Life Moreover Mr. Baxter's Preface to the Treat of the 2 Covenants p. 2 3. our Opposites teach that the Covenant of Grace was â—â—de with all Mankind immediately after 〈◊〉 Fall they had all new Terms of Life given â—â—m in Christ If then Adams Sin be not imâ—â—ed to his Posterity they have indeed lost â—â—se blessed Priviledges which Adam sinned â—â—ay and so could not convey to them but â—â—y were not at all oblig'd to the Covenant of â—â—fect obedience but were all immediately in under the Covenant of Grace and are â—â—y to answer for their neglect of and disobedience to that Thus much for the first argument from the Imputation of Adam's Argument 2. Christ was made subject to Bradshaw de Just c. 18. and fulfilled the Law to which Man was subject and the which Man had broken Ergò his Obedience of Righteousness is imputed to us For he was not made subject to that Law for his own saâ—â— but for ours nor did he fulfill it for himself but for us he fulfilled it not simply as a general Law of Obedience but as the Law give to Man and broken by him therefore what he did in this case was done in Mans stead aâ—â— to be imputed to him for his Righteousness that the Curse of the Law might be remove and the Blessing of the Law might descend up on Mankind Sermon of the Salvation of Mankind Vid. Homilies of the Church of England Christ is the Righteousness of all them that 〈◊〉 truely believe in him He for them paid the Ransom by his Death He for them fulfilled 〈◊〉 Law in his Life So that now in him and 〈◊〉 him every true Christian Man may be called Fulfiller of the Law forasmuch as that which their Infirmities lacked Christs Justice has supplied But this consequence will not 〈◊〉 denied it is the Antecedent that must be proved viz. That Christ fulfill'd the Law whâ—â— was given to and broken by Man and that was made Subject to that Law For to avâ—â— this Argument our Authors have devised new Notion That Christ fulfilled not the Law as given to Man knowing that then his Righteousness must be imputed to Man but the teach that Christ fulfilled only a particular Law given to himself which they call the Law of a Mediator which consisteth so much of the Law given to Mankind in general and of so much of the Jewish Law as the Father thought fit to appoint him to perform and also of some particular precepts peculiar to Christ alone wherein Men were not concern'd which Law if Christ would fulfill Men should have a New Covenant of Life given them But they could not be justified by his fulfilling this Law because it contained not all things to which they were obliged and moreover did contain some things peculiar to Christ in which Men were not concerned It must therefore be proved That Christ was oblig'd to and did fulfill the Law of perfect Obedience given to Men and the Jewish Law which concerned that Nation It is sometimes said by our Opposites That Christ is our Legal Righteousness that Righteousness which the Law of Works required of us If so then he must have fulfill'd and satisfied that Law but this hath been touched before I argue therefore Christ was subject to the Law of Mankind else he needed not to have been Man The only reason why Christ was made Man is that the same Nature that sinned might also satisfie for Sin it must therefore be by fulfilling that Law which concerned Humane Nature For if any other way of satisfaction might be admitted why might it not be accepted from a Person of another Nature that was not Man If there was no necessity that the Law broken by Man should be fulfilled but that it was sufficient that something should be done to repair God's Honour some other way though his Law was not properly satisfied Why might it not have been enough if Christ as God only without assuming any created Nature would have undertaken to conquer the Devils to bring all Mankind to Repentance to accept once of Pardon and to restore them to perfect Obedience again This would have repaired the Honour of God and of the Law as much or more than the procuring a New Covenant of Salvation for Sinners which for any thing Christ did merit might have never took effect in any Why might not this have served without his taking Mans Nature upon him Moreover the Angels are obliged by the same general Law of Love to God and their Fellow creatures that Men are though the particular Wages of exercising it be different If then it were enough that Christ fulfill'd some Generals of the Law without being obliged to all the Particulars that concerned Men why might it not have sufficed him to have taken the Nature of Angels and not to have come down into this miserable World for in that he might have performed the Law of a Mediator However à fortiori he needed not to have been the Son of Adam born of a Woman and in the same condition with other men or to have taken upon him the Form of a Servant Phil. 2.7 He might have been immediately created as Adam was and not have derived his Nature from him if it were not that he must be subject to the same Law which Adam had broken It is said Gal. 4.4 That God sent forth his Son made of a Woman made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the Adoption of Sons If Christ could not redeem the Jews without being born a Jew subject to their Law then neither could he redeem the Sons of Adam in general without being himself the Son of Adam subject to the same Law that he was I argue also from the Nature of the Law The End of the Law was Obedience and for failure that the Penalty of it should be suffered and this was the absolute establisht Decree or Sanction of God It must therefore be fulfilled by some one it was not done by Men therefore
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
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
in it for his Glory and their good CHAP. V. The adverse Opinion propounded and examined Pelagius and Arminius the Authors of it OF all that ever troubled the Church with their Errours the Pelagians and their â—ate Off-spring the Arminians have most perplext it with their Opinions partly by their importunity reviving them and urging them â—afresh from time to time so that the Church hath had little quiet from them for the last twelve hundred years though their Opinions have been most frequently and most fairly examined and unanimously refuted above any Errours whatsoever and that both by particular Writers of all Ages and also many Syâ—ods greater and smaller But principally by their dishonest Art of misrepresenting the Orthodox Doctrine to perswade the Simple that they oppose particular mens Sentiments not the Doctrine of the Church and by covering their own Opinions propounding them plausibly and ambiguously that the Falshood may â—ot be easily discern'd that at once they may â—nsinuate with the Simple and have retreats â—o avoid the Arguments of the Learned wherein they do like those that sculk in Woods and Thickets whom it is as hard to find out as it â—s to conquer It was a sit Epithite that Hieâ—om gave Pelagius Coluber ille Britannus that British Snake For he had his many windings and foldings and for his advantage could cast his Skin to When he was taxed to deny Grace ascribing all to mans free Will he protested to ascribe all to Grace and yet meant thereby nothing but Nature or Free Will which he called Grace because it was the Gift of God Vossius Hist Pelag lib. 1. pars 1. Joh. Latius Hist Pelag lib. 1. par 1. and when all his Opinions were summed up and objected to him in the Synod of Diospolis or Lydda he openly and severally renounct them all with Anathemas and all by equivocal words keeping the same meaning The like did his Scholar Caelestius when called to an account before the Bishops of Rome and Africa Fostus and Cassianus the Semipelagian Leaders trod in their steps as the same Authors out of Augustin and Prosper have shewed Arminius and his Followers have not come behind them in this Art The Preface to the Synod of Dort and Lubertus sufficiently insorm us how Arminius strove to cover his Opinions contra Bersium till he might by secret insinuations gain a party to stand on his defence When he was suspected of novelty by the Presbytery of Amsterdam Sancté protestatusest c. he solemnly profest that he knew no man in the Low-Countries that had a mind to bring in Innovations in Religion His Disciples were of the same temper which they shewed both in the Synod and in their own Writing By the same Art their Followers amongst us at this day create us much trouble especially in this point of Justification by Christ's Righteousness imputed about which they had their Doctrine from Arminius Popular Insinuations is the best of their Rhetorick Generals Equivocation and Tergiversation is the greatest part of their Logick which we shall make now to appear by enquiring what is their Opinion concerning the Effect of Christs death and obedience who deny us to be properly justified by it or it to be imputed to us They do agree to retain the Term of Imputing Christ's Righteousness Just Evang p. 51. The notion of Imputation in general saith one of them is no way to be opposed it being impossible that we should receive benefit by and the effects of what another doth without some kind of Imputation But thus Socinus will say What Christ did was imputed to us i. e. it was nostro bono for our good and benefit Mr. Baxter chargeth Dr. Tully with the breach of all that is Sacred Answ to Dr. Tully p. 18 172. for saying that he denyeth all Imputation of Christs Righteousness and telleth us that he doth not only hold it in some sence but in a larger sence than many do viz. That not only his Passive Obedience is imputed to us but his Active also yea his Habitual and Divine Righteousness so far as influential to give merit to his Obedience and yet all this is but words For whosoever asserteth the infinite value of the death of Christ must and doth acknowledge the concurrence of his Active Habitual Papaeus and Divine Righteousness to make his death an infinite Prize which it could not be unless the person dying were God of a perfect holy Nature and of perfect holy Life till the time of his death But he that useth a common word as this of Imputation is and in that Question and Matter to which it belongeth properly and useth it in a sence quite different from the common acception and state of the Question doth but equivocate in retaining that Term. Though Protestants have differed about the Righteousness of Christ imputed whether it be the Passive only or the Active also yet till of late there hath been no question among them about the meaning of the term Imputation all understanding thereby that we were justified and accepted to Life Eternal for the Righteousness of Christ intended and wrought for us But it is more strange that he who is so earnest to be accounted a maintainer of Imputation should no better defend himself from the accusation of denying it For when a few lines would have expressed any mans meaning in this point who was willing to be understood he gives us many distinctions divisions chap. 2. p. 48 c. and sub-divisions and fifty Propositions to explain in what sence he holdeth Christ's Righteousness imputed and in what not and yet confesseth after all these that he doubteth he hath not made his meaning plain enough to those who are not exercised in the Controversie who had most need of his Explication and therefore addeth more distinctions and propositions to make his meaning plainer chap. 3. p. 79. which is as well performed as if a man endeavouring to wash an Aethiopian white should first plunge him into a River of Water and afterwards into a Vessel of Ink He goes â—n with the same Art and Chap. 4. p. â—9 instead of opposing the Drs. sence of Imputation and deâ—ending his own he thrusts together all the â—ences of Imputation which he denieth both â—he sound and the unsound and then disputes against Imputation with 43 Reasons but against what or in what sence he would not have â—he People but only his Friends to understand 〈◊〉 this be reconciling to devize new terms and â—ew questions if confounding things be clearing of them if hiding ones meaning with mulâ—itudes of words be to explain onesself then â—his Author hath acquitted himself well I will â—dd another instance of his Explications I did assert that Christ's Righteousness even habiâ—ual Appeal to the Light p. 1. active and passive exalted by his Divine â—ighteousness being the fulfilling of his Law and Covenant of Mediation hath perfectly meâ—ited Reconciliation Pardon Adoption
Law of Works in our stead so that his Righteousness is accepted for our fulfilling it then must we be justified by his righteousness without any further righteousness or conditions For the Law being fulfilled for us must acquit us and give us life this we defend but he means not so Christ is our legal righteousness with him not by proper fulfilling the Law of Works for us but by taking it out of the way so that no such perfect innocent righteousness should be required of us to Salvation and this he mean by pro-legal instead of our legal righteousness This is still hiding his sence with ambiguous words It remains then that by imputing Christ's Righteousness they intend nothing else but that Christ procured a Covenant of Grace by fulfilling whereof we shall be justified and saved though sinful and imperfect which Justification and Salvation we must originally yet remotely ascribe to Jesus Christ because he procured this mild Covenant for us but the righteousness which constituteth us Just in Law and for which we shall be pronounc'd righteous and Heirs of the Kingdom at Judgment is our own sincere Obedience not Christ's Obedience as appears at large from this Author It is pretended that Luther in the heat of his Spirit and Zeal against Popish Superstitions Object let fall some words which sounded as if he thought Christ's Personal Righteousness was every Believers righteousness Answer to Dr. Tully p. 15. § 11. and their Sins were made his which afterwards he qualified shewing that Christ's Righteousness is â—urs and our Sins his only in the Effects Answ But that Luther maintained the same Imputation as we do in opposition to all works his Sermons and Comments on the Gal sufficiently shew and all both Papists and Protestants do acknowledge And if by imputing Christ's Righteousness in the Effects be meant its Immediate Effects viz. that we should be justified immediately by that righteousness trusted in immedietate formae without the interposition of any other righteousness to be wrought by us it is the Doctrine we contend for but â—f this be meant as the drift seems to be that â—t is imputed so as to merit a New Covenant by performing of which we shall be justified and so it be imputed only in its remote Effects it is manifestly untrue Object It is said again That most of our Reformers rightly asserted that Christ's Righteousness was ours by the way of meriting our righteousness Ibid. p. 16. § 13. though some of them followed Luther's Expressions of the Imputation of Christ's Personal Righteousness Answ Calvin and Melancthon who do not much follow Luther's Expressions affirm That our Justification consisteth in remission of sins for the Merit of Christ received by Faith only and it is most untrue that any of our Reformers talked That Christ only merited that we should be justified by our own Righteousness according to the Gospel Covenant as is here meant Problem loc de Just 6.25 Aretius Melancthon's Scholar defineth Justification by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness and doth charge Thammerus once his fellow Pupil under the same Master with deserting his Masters and the Doctrine of all Reformers for teaching That Faith in the business of Justification includeth Obedience to the Gospel and that we are justified by it as the Fulfilling of the Gospel and that the Works which St. Paul excludeth from justifying are the Works of the Law not the Works of the Gospel also that gratis per gratiam being justified freely by his Grace was meant only that for Christ's Sake our imperfect obedience is accepted to Justification and sinless obedience not insisted on where the Reader may find Thammerus his Arguments and interpretation of Scripture there cited at large for substance the same produced by our Authors and sharply taxed as a deserting from the Reformation Object It is farther said The Papists fastning upon those Divines who held Imputation of Christ's Personal Righteousness in its self Ibid. § 16. in the rigid sence did hereupon greatly insult against the â—rotestants as if it had been their common â—octrine and it greatly stopt the Reformation Answ Thus Bellarmin pretended that amongst the â—rotestants there were several Opinions about â—â—e Imputation of Christ's Righteousness one 〈◊〉 Luther another of Calvin a third of some â—â—hers besides that of Osiander de Just. cap. 22. p. 312. to which B. â—avenant answers Secundam sententiam illoâ—â—m commemorat qui Christi obedientiam juâ—tiam nobis imputatam statuunt esse formalem â—â—usam justificationis at haec communis est nostroâ—â—m omnium sententia neque quod ad ipsam rem â—â—tinet quicquam é nostris aliter aut censit aut â—â—ipsit He reckoneth this a second Opinion our Writers That they say Christ's Righteousness is the formal cause of our Justification i. e. its self is our Righteousness but â—â—is is the common opinion of all of us nor did â—â—er any of us write or speak otherways as to â—â—e substance of the thing He also affirms â—â—at all the difference betwixt our Reformers â—â—as only in the manner of expressing themslves and that Calvin who placeth Justification in Remission of sin did yet mean that Reâ—â—ssion to be granted for the Imputed Righteousness of Christ and that to be the Immediate Cause of it and therefore adds as the â—â—mmon Protestant Doctrine p. 313. Absque imputaâ—â—ne obedientiae Christi nulla remissio peccatorum â—â—inetur haec causa est remissionis haec cauâ—â— acceptationis haec causa translationis à statis â—â—rtis ad statum vitae i. e. without the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness there is no forgiveness this is the cause of Pardon this is the cause of our acceptance with God and of our translation from the state of death to the state of life It is suggested that this offence of the Papists occasioned the German Divines to deseâ—â— the Question of Imputation Object So Dr. Tully § 17. q. 17 18 and to dispute what Righteousness of Christ it is by which we are justified and many Learned Men maintained that it was the Passive only Answ This Question arose and was agitated among themselves as Paraeus informs us in his Miscellanies nor did it at all concern the Papisâ—â— who are Enemies to the proper Imputation of Christ's Righteousness passive as well as active against his bearing our sins as well as performing the Law for us And these Divines who maintain the Imputation of Passive Obedience only yet maintain that to be our Formal Righteousness by and for which we are justified and not that it procured a Covenant of Grace only Th. Theol. de Justif Thus Vrsin Justitia Evangelica est poena peccatorum nostrorum quam Constus pro nobis sustinuit credentibus à Deo grâ—tis imputata So Paraeus in the Treatise alledged and Windeline also in his Theologia capde Justif Thes 6. he saith That the instrumental cause of Justification is
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
Divines at Dort Rationes omnes Act. Syn. Art 2. Ibid. à scripturis fideique analogia petitae quibus Christi incarnatio humiliatio vel exaltatio probatur vel confirmatur eò spectant ut demonstretur divina expressa intentio de fructuoso hujus tanti mysterii effectu non conditionaliter producendo nempe si homines cùm aeque nolle possint velint ut hic fructus in de enascatur sed infrustrabiliter efficiendo potentiâ divinâ id operante i. e. All those Arguments that prove the Incarnation Humiliation and Exaltation of Christ tend to this to shew that it was God's express intention to produce the certain effects of that great Mystery infallibly by his own power and not to leave them to be conditional depending upon Man's Will who might as well neglect and refuse as accept of them I conclude the Sum of this Doctrine comes to this That God took occasion by the Incarnation Obedience and Death of our Lord Jesus Christ to grant men terms of Salvation viz. if they should believe and obey the Gospel not as any satisfaction to his Justice or Law which man had broke but as some kind of salvo to his Honour at least as he was pleased to interpret it And what need Christ have been God to do no more than this How easie is the slip from hence into the dead Sea of Socinianism To lay that Christ came by his Life and Death to declare and confirm only this Covenant of Life on condition of Faith and Repentance and to intercede for the Penitents Indeed the whole platform of this Doctrine was borrowed from Socinus by the Arminians from whom most of our modern Writers have it and some immediately from the Socinian from whom also came that common but illogical Evasion of works being not the meritorious but the causa sine qua non of our Justification Opera ea sunt ex quibus justificamur sunt autem opera ista nostra Soc. de Justif apud Pelt i. e. ut dictum fuit obedientia quam Christo praestamus licet nec essiciens nec meritoria tamen causa ut vocant sine qua non justificationis coram Deo at que aeterne salut is nostrae I do not desire this should be believed on my credit much less do I write to reproach any who do in heart abhor that blasphemous heresie however their words and notions may agree too much with it I only beg that Scholars and Divines would take the pains to examin and compare them before they imbibe this new Doctrine CHAP. VII Of the Nature of Faith that it justifieth as an Instrument applying the Promises of life in Christ and not as a Condition or Part of Obedience T The Apostle Paul was sent to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles Act. 26. v. 17 18. to this end that they might receive the forgiveness of sins and an inheritance amongst thom which are sanctified by Faith which is in Christ therefore forgiveness and a right to the heavenly Inheritance comes by Faith But what this Faith is and how it gives right to Life is now to be inquired into In explaining the nature of Faith I shall wave all that is usually drawn from Philosophy to this Argument from the nature and difference of Man's Soul and his Faculties and the difference of the Faculties from each other also from the nature of Habits intellectual or moral which things are fit Exercises for Scholars but not fit to build the Doctrine of Justification and Eternal life upon and if the best Philosophers can give us no certain account how men see and hear and how the external Senses which yet are more material in their operations than the understanding do exercise their functions there is much less certainty to be had concerning the Faculties Operations and Habits of the rational part and the Scripture speaks of believing as a work of the whole Soul With the heart man believeth unto righteousness Rom. 10.9 The like may be said of every Grace and of every Sin that hath the consent of the Heart that they carry the whole Soul with them What then is this Faith The Socinians affirm Faith and Obedience to be really the same thing Peltius Artic. Parag. 21. distinct only formally or docendi causâ Soc. resp ad Epist Joan. Opera Fides nullo modo distinguuntur à Paulo nec ab ea seperari queant imò animo seu forma fidei sunt The Arminians agree with them in this and our late Authors with them both and make believing and obeying the Gospel all one and to be justified by Faith with them is to be justified by obedience to the Gospel Aphor. Th. 70. Hence it is that they describe Faith to be so to believe God as to love him fear him trust him and obey him in every particular command or more briefly to be an accepting of Christ for our Lord and Saviour i. e. to promise obedience to him Ibid. 69 67. and to desire and expect to be saved by him Now we grant as the Gospel is sometime taken for the whole Doctrine or Mind of Christ containing both Promises Precepts and Threatnings though properly it be nothing but a Promise of Life through Christ in contradistinction to all Law and Precepts so also the Faith of Christ and of the Gospel doth sometimes comprehend the whole Christian Profession whereby we promise both a belief of the doctrine and obedience to the Command of Christ Yet Faith taken properly is to be distinguished from all obediential Graces viz. those that are the immediate cause of obedience as much as those graces are distinct from each from other as Love from Fear both from Patience c. That we may wave that Philosophical question also whether Graces be several distinct habits or one universal habit distinguished by several acts and objects it is sufficient if Faith be distinct by its acts and proper object from all other graces as much as they are distinguished each from other And that it is so is evident because it is an assent of the mind to divinely revealed truth Its acts are to believe or assent its formal object is the revealed truth of God as such we speak of Divine Faith only The immediate End of it is the satisfaction of the mind in the certainty of a true proposition and the like All these are distinct from love fear desire which are the immediate principles of all obedience or practice in doing good or avoiding evil Moreover Faith is the root of obedience not as the immediate principle of the elicite acts of obedience but as a more remote principle which doth excite and direct all the immediate principles of it Thus Faith is prerequired to seeking and serving of God Heb. 11.2 to the End and yet the immediate principles of them were fear v. 7. self-denial v. 25. holy courage contempt of the World and the like Faith worketh by love Gal. 5.6 purifieth the
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
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
Rom. 4.14 If they that are of the Law be Heirs faith is made void and be Promise of none effect The Apostle here proveth from v. 9. That Justification was â—ot restrained to the Jews because the Promise was made to Abraham's Faith which justifyed him and made him the Father of all Believers while he was yet uncircumcised therefore the Law here spoken of was the Law of Moses which was given after Abraham and the Promise is of his being Heir of the World or Head of the Faithful viz. That God would raise up a Church in and from him which should be saved by Faith as he was and Faith here is Abraham's Faith in that Promise by which he was justifyed before he was circumcised and by which all â—is Seed shall be justifyed directing their saith more expresly to Christ v. 14. Now saith the Apostle if they that are of the Law the Jews are Heirs of the Promise i. e. by the Law for by Faith they were Heirs as well as the Gentiles then the Promise and Faith were made void i. e. Abraham and his Seed by Faith without that Law could not be justifyed because men at that time were to be justifyed only by that Law and further he saith ver 11 12 13. That Abraham was justifyed by Faith before he was circumcised and received circumcision as the Seal of the righteousness which he had being uncircumcised to shew that the Gentiles shall be justifyed by Faith though they were not circumcised nor obliged to the Law of Moses and that the Jews though circumcised and observing the Law of which circumcision was a Badge should be justifyed by Faith as he was and not by that circumcision v. 11 12. He received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the righteousness of the Faith which he had yeâ— being uncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them to believe though they be noâ— circumcised that righteousness may be imputed unto them also and the Father of circumcision to them that are not of the circumcision only buâ— also walk in the steps of that Faith of our Father Abraham which he had yet being uncircumcised The Father of circumcision to them that are not of the circumcision only i. e. not because they were circumcised and had thâ—â— Law of Moses but because they walked in the steps of his Faith of the acceptance where of Circumcision was a Seal He adds another reason v. 15. why the Law could not make them heirs of the Promise for by the Law is the knowledge of Sin and where there is no Law there is no transgression i. e. thâ— Law as given to the Jews did but shew theâ— their duty and so convince them of sin because they could not keep it and therefore that could not make them heirs of the promise but on the contrary if they must stand and be tried by that Law then the Promise was to no purpose and Faith in it had no force ergò the Jews were not justifyed by the Law of Moses they were brought into Canaan for the Promise Deut. 9.5 not for their keeping the Law and that was a Type of their attaining eternal life Argument 4. Rom. 5.1 c. the Apostle having proved that we are justified by Faith lays down the Effects of this Justification where first he speaketh of Justification as a thing done and transacted already to Believers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being therefore justifyed by Faith or when we are justifyed by Faith and then he descendeth to the Effects 1st Peace or reconciliation with God v. 1. which he amplifyeth v. 10 11. When we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son and being reconciled we shall be saved by his Life i. e. brought to glory and through him we have received the atonement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and glory in God on that account which is proved by the comparison of our fall in Adam v. 12. ad sinem viz. as by being born of Adam we are enemies to God under his wrath and condemnation so by believing in Christ we are reconciled to God and have peace with him A second Effect of Justification here mentioned is access into that grace or favour wherein we now stand v. 2. i. e. present favour with God and freedom of access to him A third rejoycing in hope of glory v. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we boast the highest kind of rejoyceing A fourth rejoycing in tribulation v. 3 4. in confidence of spiritual benefit by them and deliverance out of them A fifth a pouring of the Love of God into the heart v. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All these flow from Justification in this Life as natural fruits in Believers but if we are justifyed by obedience none of these can stand 1st There is no justification in this life it is no past or present certain thing but a future and uncertain If obedience to the Gospel be that whereby we must be justifyed then we are not justifyed till our obedience be fulfilled and that is not till the Soul be out of the Body We are told that there is a sententiall Justification when the Judge shall pronounce us acquitted which is not till Judgement but there is a constitutive Justification by the Judgement of the Law in this Life when the Law pronounceth us Righteous according to it and to be such as the Judge will justify but neither will this hold the Gospel cannot judge a man to have fulfill'd it before he hath fulfill'd it which it must do if it judge or pronounce us righteous for the obeying the Gospel to our lives end before we be dead The compleat condition of Justification they acknowledge is obedience to the end of our lives and Justification is an acquitting us and accepting us to life for that obedience therefore till that obedience be performed the Gospel doth not acquit us nor pronounce us Heirs of Life therefore there is no constitutive Justification in this life by obedience Imperfect or inchoate Justification which they sometimes speak of when a man begins to obey the Gospel is nothing but a probability of being justifyed For if a man fall from his Integrity he shall never be justifyed though he obeyed for a time no not in part nor his condemnation lessned All that can be said is That such a man is in that way wherein if he continue to the end he shall be justifyed but if he continue not to the end he shall no more be justifyed than he that never entred into that way Nor can these Effects of Justification stand upon the foundation of obedience 1st Not peace and reconciliation with God For if we are to be justifyed by obeying the Gospel to our lives end then God is not at peace with us nor reconciled to us till then There is a suspension of the execution of the Curse of the Law and there is a Law of Life given by which when we have fulfilled it we shall
all the immediate proper causes of Justification both internal and external and wanting only the remote preparatory causes If obedience to the Gospel as the Law of Christ be that alone to which Justification is promised then unbelief of his Merit when a man is not convinced of the truth of it can no more damn him than the unbelief of any other History concerning Christ suppose his being born at Bethlem or living at Nazareth c. when a man is not sufficiently perswaded of them For these were necessary ex Hypothesi because God would have it so and Christ's Merit was no more by their confession nor was it impossible according to their Principles but Christ might have been a King and enacted this Law of Grace though he had not been a Priest and satisfied for Sin And thus we have the bottom of this Mystery Next it is proved that Christ justifyeth as a Prophet p. 25. because the Gospel is a Law that must be promulgated and expounded and a Doctrine that must be taught and pressed on Sinners till they receive it and believe that they may be justified and this Christ doth as a Teacher and Faith must accordingly respect him Answ Faith must believe and trust in the Promise of Life made in Christ and preached by Christ and revealed to the heart by his Spirit But what is this to prove that a professed subjection to the teaching of Christ must justify us as well as Faith and yet methinks he that teacheth That the Covenant of Grace is written in all men's hearts and is a Secondary Law of Nature teaching men that God will forgive them that serve him sincerely though they know not that it was to be brought about by the Mediatour should not make it necessary to Justification to believe That Christ in Person preached the Gospel We have here Scriptures multiplied to prove that Christ hath power to forgive sins which is an Act of a King Mat. 9.6 ch 11. v. 27 28. ch 28. v. 19 20 c. which we grant he hath Ministerially viz. To declare the Promise of Forgiveness and to pronounce Pardon For he received this Power of the Father It followeth therefore that we must trust in him to declare and pronounce us forgiven but it is for his own Righteousness not for our Obedience Argument 5. It is a necessary condition of our being baptized for the Remission of Sins p. 27. that we profess a Belief in more than Christ's Humiliation and Merits Ergò More is a necessary condition of our actual Remission Mat. 28.19 20. 1 Pet. 3.21 Act. 8.37 1st Answ Here is continually ignoratio Elenchi We do not say that Christ's Humiliation and Merits are the only object of justifying Faith excluding his Person or any of his Offices but that Faith as justifying doth trust only in the promise of Reconciliation through the Merit of Christ but that it doth also in subsequent distinct Acts trust in the Promises of Illumination and Sanctification and in Christ himself to work these in us as a Prophet and King and to obtain them for us by his Priestly Intercession but all by virtue of his Merit and satisfaction which as it is the foundation of the other Offices of Christ so Faith always respects it as the foundation of all other Blessings to be hoped for 2ly 2ly I deny that any thing is necessary to Baptism for remission of sins more than a trust in Christ or the promise of Reconciliaon through his Bloud Baptism is as Circumcision was a Seal of the righteousness of Faith Rom. 4.11 i. e. that we shall be forgiven through believing It is God's Seal to his Covenant or Promise which men are supposed to have a right to before they are baptized and so before they can promise obedience Believing in the whole Trinity and then believing Christ to be the Son of God proveth nothing but that the remission which Baptism sealeth is to be expected from the true God in opposition to the Heathen and Jewish false Gods or false Notions of God viz. That we are to trust in the Father to justify us through the Bloud of his Son who will bring us to eternal life by the Operation of his Spirit and that Jesus of Nazareth is this Son of God so to be trusted in Mat. 28.20 Men are first to be baptised being instructed in the Doctrine of Christ afterwards taught all his Commandments and thus the Apostles practised preaching through Christ the remission of sins and then baptising them that believe Acts 10. Acts 13. If a Promise of Obedience be the condition of Baptism then Infants are not to be baptised 1 Pet. 3.21 only sheweth that Baptism as an outward Sign will not profit without reallity in the heart in believing or trusting in Christ which will produce obedience The Covenants of Obedience which the Church annexed to Baptism are not annexed to it as conditions of obtaining Remission of Sins but as conditions of men's Admission into the Fellowship of the Church and those as evidences of the reality of their Faith in Christ Argument 6. The Apostles of Christ themselves before his death p. 28. were justifyed by believing in him as the Son of God and the Teacher and King of the Church yea perhaps without believing at all in his Death and Ransom thereby Ergò Answ If believing here mean as it ought the Apostles acknowledging Christ to be the Son of God King and Teacher of his Church and their giving themselves to obey him then I deny the Antecedent they were not hereby justifyed but by their trust in the Promises of Pardon and Reconciliation through the Messias whom they now knew to be Jesus Christ though they knew not the particular way how he was to reconcile them to God They were justifyed as Abraham and David and all the former Saints were and their Love and Obedience to Christ so far as they understood him was an effect of their Faith All the Proof is The Apostles were justified and they acknowledged loved obeyed Christ as King and Prophet and understood not that he was to die for them therefore this justifyed them Which is no Consequent Argument 7. The Satisfaction and Merits of Christ are not the only objects of the Sanctifying and Saving Acts of Faith p. 30. therefore not of Justifying 1st Answ Faith looketh only to the Satisfaction of Christ or rather to the Promise founded on that merit as the procuring cause for Sanctification and Perseverance viz. That as perfect Justification so perfect Sanctification is purchased for us by Christ But the Sanctifying Act must respect Christ's following applicatory Acts p. 31. and not the purchase of Sanctification only so the justifying act must respect Christ's following collation or application and not only his purchase of Justification Answ 1 This still changeth the Question which is Whether Faith in Christ as Prophet Priest and King i. e. Obedience as well as trust