in Christ nor any more benefit by his death then reprobates till they did believe and that they are but dreamers who do conceit the contrary I know not what could be spoken more contradictory to many plain Scriptures which shall be mentioned anone more derogatory to the full atonement which Christ hath made by his Death and more disconsolatory to the souls of men in laying the whole weight of their Salvation upon an uncertain condition of their own performing And therefore after the Exercise was fully ended I desired the Minister that Preached that with his leave and the patience of the Congregation I might remonstrate the insufficiency of his Grounds or Reasons to uphold the Doctrine he had delivered three of which I took more especial notice of One was drawn from the parallel between the first and the second Adam As men said he are not guilty of Adams sin till they have a Being so the Elect have no benefit by Christ till they have a Being whereunto he added those old Philosophical Maxims Non entis non sunt accidentia and Accidentis esse est inesse Another was That where there is no union there can be no communion but there is no union between Christ and the Elect before they believe Therefore the Elect have no communion and participation in the benefits of Christs death before they have a Being and do believe in him The proof of the Assumption was managed thus The union between Christ and the Saints is a personal union which cannot be supposed till their persons have a Being A third ground upon which he laid the greatest stress was to this purpose The Elect have no benefit by Christ before they do believe because God hath made a Covenant with his Son That they for whom he died should be admitted to partake of the Benefits of his death by Faith § 6. Whereunto my Replies were to this effect I told him that I conceived his first Allegation made very much against him For if the Righteousness of Christ doth come upon all the Elect unto Justification in the same manner as Adams sin came upon all men to condemnation as the Apostle shews it doth Rom. 5. Then it must follow That the Righteousness of Christ was reckoned or imputed to the Elect before they had a Being and then much more before they do believe in him for it is evident that Adams sin came upon all men to condemnation before they had a Being for by that first transgression sayes the Apostle vers 12. Sin entered into the world And more plainly Death passed upon all men The Reason follows because in him or in his loyns all have sinned Now as in Adam the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is All that shall perish were constituted sinners before they had a Being by reason of the imputation of his disobedience to them so in Christ the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All that shall be saved were constituted righteous his obedience being imputed unto them by God before they had any Being otherwise then in him as their Head and common Person There is a late Writer who tells us that there is not the same Reason for the imputation of Christs Righteousness to all the Elect before they believe as there is for the imputation of Adams sin unto his posterity before they have a Being Because says he the issues of the first Covenant fell upon Adams posterity in a natural and necessary way but the issues of Christs death do come to us in a supernatural way But this Reason seems to me to be of small validity for the issues of Adams disobedience came not upon his posterity by vertue of their natural propagation for then his sin should be imputed unto none until they are actually propagated and the sins of other parents should be imputed to their posterity as much as Adams because they descend as naturally from their immediate Parents as they do from Adam so that the issues of Adams sin may be said to descend to his posterity in a supernatural way i. e. By vertue of Gods Covenant which was made with him as a common person in behalf of all his posterity and in the same manner do the issues of Christs obedience descend unto Gods Elect by vertue of that Covenant which was made with Christ as a common person in their behalf and therefore unless they can shew any Proviso or restriction in the second Covenant more then in the first why life should not flow as immediately to the Elect from Christs obedience as death did from Adams disobedience the Argument will stand in force But to return to my discourse with Mr. Warren I added That those Logical axioms non entis c. have no force at all in the present Controversie It doth not follow that Christs Righteousness cannot be imputed to us before we have an actual created Being because accidents cannot subsist without their Subjects for as much as imputed Righteousness is not an accident inherent in us and consequently doth not necessarily require our existence Christ is the Subject of this Righteousness and the imputation of it is an act of God Now the Apostle hath observed That God in justifying and imputing Righteousness calleth things that are not as if they were Rom. 4.17 As the Righteousness of Christ was actually imputed to the Patriarks before it was wrought and our sins were actually imputed to Christ before they were committed so I see no inconvenience to say That Christs Righteousness is by God imputed to the Elect before they have a Being § 7. As to his second Reason before mentioned I excepted as I conceive but justly 1. Against his calling our union with Christ a personal union which seems to favor that absurd notion That a believer loseth not onely his own proper life but his personality also and is taken up into the Nature and Person of the Son of God Divines do call our union with Christ a Mystical and Spiritual union because it is secret and invisible to be apprehended by Faith and not by Sense or Reason but the Hypostatical or Personal union is proper unto Christ in whom the Divine and Humane Nature do constitute but one Person 2. Against his Assertion proposed Universally That there is no manner of union between Christ and the Elect before they do believe for though there be not that conjugal union between them which consists in the mutual consent of parties yet is there such a true and real union that by means thereof their sins do become Christs and Christs Righteousness is made theirs God from everlasting constituted and ordained Christ and all the Elect to be as it were one Heap or Lump one Vine one Body or Spiritual Corporation wherein Christ is the Head and they the Members Christ the Root and they the Branches Christ the First Fruits and they the residue of the Heap In respect of this union it is That they are said to be given
our Conference If Faith be given us by vertue of the Covenant made with the House of Israel then is it given us by vertue of the Covenant made with us for the House of Israel is the whole company of Gods Elect who are therefore called Spiritual Israel Rom. 9.6 But Faith or the Spirit which works Faith is promised in the Covenant made with the House of Israel Jere. 31.31 Heb. 8.19 § 6. Whereunto Mr. W. answers 1 by way of retortion If Mr. E. saith he will urge the words of this Text rigorously they would prove more then he would have I hope there is no hurt in that though the place doth prove more that doth no whit invalidate its force as to the purpose for which we alledged it but what is that which it proves more It is manifest says he that this Covenant contains a promise of sending Christ into the world to die for our sins as the Apostle proves Heb. 10.14.15 16. So that we may as well infer from hence that we are in Covenant with God before the death of the Mediator as that we are in Covenant before we believe and then his death shall serve not to obtain all or any of the blessings of the Covenant but onely as the Socinians to declare and confirm c. If he please to admit of a Reply we say 1 That he mistakes the inference that was drawn from hence The Proposition to be concluded was not That we are in Covenant before we believe but that Faith or the Spirit which works Faith is given us by vertue of the Covenant made with us which is sufficiently secured by these Texts for if by the House of Israel be meant all the Elect as undoubtedly they are and the Spirit which works Faith is promised in the Covenant which is made with the House of Israel then the Spirit and Faith are given by vertue of the Covenant which is made with us we being in the number of Gods Elect. 2 It is not so manifest as he pretends that these Texts do contain a promise of sending Christ to die for us The promises here mentioned do express onely what benefits do accrew to us by the Death of Christ I grant that this Covenant supposeth the Death of Christ as the onely meritorious procuring means by which these benefits do flow down unto us and therefore it is said In those days or after those days meaning the days of the Son of Man when the Messiah whom God had promised should be exhibited which in Scripture are called The last days the last times and the world to come c. Though the Apostle mentions the Covenant Heb. 10.15 it is not to prove That God would send his Son to die but that being come as these believing Hebrews acknowledged though they saw not the vertues of his death as to the abolishing of other Sacrifices he hath offered up a perfect Sacrifice Verse 10 12 14. and consequently they needed no other Sacrifice to take away sin for otherwise God had not made such ample promises in reference to the times of the Messiah as you finde he hath Jere. 31. That he will remember the sins and iniquities of his people no more c. For says the Apostle when there is such a full remission there needs no more offering for sin Verse 18. § 7. 3. Though we should grant him that this Text Jere. 31. contains a promise of sending Christ what were this to the purpose to weaken our inference That Faith is given by vertue of the Covenant made with us May not God in the same Covenant promise both Christ and Faith But sayes Mr. W. it will follow then that this Covenant was made with us or that we were in Covenant with God not onely before we believe but before the death of Christ. I am so far from looking upon it as an absurdity that I shall readily own and acknowledge it as an undeniable truth That the New Covenant was made with all the Elect in Christ before the foundations of the world were laid it being the fixed and immutable Will of God concerning all those good things which in time are bestowed upon them and therefore it is called an Everlasting Covenant 2 Sam. 23.5 not onely a parte post but a parte ante as it shall have no end nor be changed So it had no beginning God having from all eternity immutably purposed in himself to bestow upon them all those blessings which they do receive in time yet we say there are more especially three moments or periods of time wherein God may be said to make this Covenant with us As 1 immediately upon the fall of Adam when he first published his gracious promise of saving all his Elect by the womans Seed Gen. 3.15 The first Covenant being broken and dissolved the Lord immediately published that other Covenant which cannot be broken and hereunto as hath been shewed do those Scriptures relate Tit. 1.2 2 Tim. 1.9 2 At the death of Christ because thereby all the benefits willed to us by the Everlasting Covenant were merited and procured for us the full price which was paid for them was then exhibited for which cause the New Covenant is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Testament which was confirmed by the death of the Testator Jesus Christ Heb. 9.17 And the Blood which he shed the Blood of the Everlasting Covenant Heb. 13.20 and the Blood of the New Testament Matth. 26.28 So that his charge of Socinianism doth not touch us for though we do not say That Christ procured the Covenant or that God should will to us â—hose mercies which are therein promised yet we say the effects of the Covenant or the mercies themselves were all of them obtained by the Blood of Christ as our deliverance from the curse inherent holiness c. 3 The Covenant is said to be made with men when God doth confer upon men the benefits which are therein promised or at least makes them to know and understand their interest and propriety therein Thus is that to be understood Isai. 55.3 I will make an Everlasting Covenant i. e. I will fulfil my Everlasting Covenant or bestow upon you all those mercies which I have promised and which my Son hath purchased by shedding of his Blood And thus we grant That God makes his Covenant with his people when he gives them Faith when he enables them to lay hold of it and to plead it at the Throne of Grace now though in this sence God may be said to take men into Covenant when they doe beleeve yet will it not follow that the Spirit and Faith are not given by vertue of the Covenant which is made with us so that his retortion is pittifully unsuccessefull it gives not the least wound to the cause which we maintain § 8. The second branch of his Answer is That upon a most serious perusall of these Texts I finde them so contradictory to Mr. Eyres purpose
any reall sweetnesse in Christ and the Gospel but must needs have some evidence of his interest propriety and title to him Now because as Dr. Ames observes by this act of Faith wherewith we rest and rely upon Christ proposed to us in the Gospell we doe immediately attaine to the assurance of this Truth that my sins in particular are pardoned by Jesus Christ therefore some have seemed to speake as if this Proposition I am Justified my sins are forgiven me were the proper object of Justifying Faith I shall not stand to defend this Expression though the Doctor doth highly approve of it Nor will I quarrell with Mr. W. about his Expression though I conceive his terme Axiomatical is somewhat too narrow for Faith may be said to evidence our Justification immediately though it doth it not Axiomatically but Organically to wit as it is the organ or Instrument whereby we doe apprehend and adhere unto Christ by whom we are justified in the sight of God the latter term is more adequate to the nature of Faith which is not only the assent of the Mind but the adhesion of the Will to the object beleeved But I shall yeeld him his term and do say that Faith may be said to evidence our Justification Axiomatically yet not by assenting to that which is not revealed but by assenting to and withall tasting and relishing those indefinite and general Propositions Invitations and Promises that are held forth to us in the Gospell which by a secret and inscrutable worke of the Holy Spirit are applyed and made particular to the soule of a true beleever for otherwise he could never taste any sweetnesse in them So that Mr. Woodbridges exclamation against a carnall presumptuous and soule-damning Faith is altogether impertinent seeing we doe not say that a man is justified by his assent to written and therefore much lesse to unwritten verities If Justifying Faith were no more then an Axiomaticall assent as Mr. W. seems to intimate it is I see no reason why all they that have such a Faith as Devils and Reprobates who beleeve with an historical assent should not be justified this is really the carnall presumptuous damning Faith of the world § 8. His second reason against Faiths evâ—dencing our Justification Axiomatically is nothing to the purpose The Faith saith he by which we are justified is the Faith which the Apostles and Ministers of the Gospel are to preach to the whole world and to presse it upon their consciences Act. 20.21.13.38.39 But we cannot presse upon every man in the world to beleeve that he is Justified c. Seeing we do not presse every man to beleeve that he is justified though according to our commission given us from Christ we do presse all men to beleeve 1. Assensu intellectus to acknowlege that there is a sufficiency of merit in Christ for the Justification of Sinners that they themselves are such and that it is impossible for them to escape the curse by any other means 2. Amplexu vel motu voluntatis to accept embrace and cleave unto Jesus Christ being infinitely better for them then all the world besides By this it will appear what little reason Mr. W. hath to charge us with pressing men to believe a lie seeing we require no mans assent to any thing which is not true We do not press every man to believe That he is justified but to believe that there is a sufficiency in Christ for his Justification and to relie upon him and him alone for this Benefit § 9. So that there will be no need for Mr. Eyre to retract his Sermons as falshoods which he hath formerly preached against Universal Redemption For though the command of believing be to be pressed upon all men in that manner as hath been shewn yet it will not follow that Christ died for all men It seems Mr. W. is offended at those Sermons of mine since he hath had a smack of Mr. B. notions That Christ died conditionally for all men yea for the Reprobates themselves which though it be countenanced with the names of Cameron Testardus and Amyraldus of some others who are of great note amongst our own yet may I have leave to speak my minde I conceive it to be very unsound For 1. To say that Christ died for any upon an impossible condition is to say That he died in vain at least so far or in respect of them which the Apostle looks upon as a gross absurdity Gal. 2.21 2. For whom Christ died he without doubt purchased Faith and all necessary good things This the Apostle accounts unquestionable Rom. 8.32 He that spared not his own Son but gave him to death for us all how shall he not with him also freely give us all things What is Mr. Woodbridges Judgement in this point I cannot tell nor doth it much matter that I should enquire I need not inform him what advantage they that are for Universal Redemption in the grossest sence do make of his Doctrine of a Conditional Justification impetrated by the death of Christ It is the onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they have to shelter their heads withal when they are pressed That if Christ died for all then all shall be saved because it must needs be that Christ must have the purchases of his death John 11.42 Isa. 53.11 No say they it will not follow because some do not perform the condition required on their parts These two Propositions Christ redeemed all men and yet the impenitent unbelieving and reprobate World shall never be saved by him may be easily reconciled because the benefits of Christs death are given upon condition not absolutely and therefore they that do not perform the condition shall never be saved by his death It were easie to shew that this salvability or conditional Salvation is the very Corner Stone in the Remonstrants building § 10. This passage puts me in minde of two absurdities which Mr. J. Woodbridge my Antagonists Brother who a while after came and preached over his Brothers Arguments with some small Additions charged upon our Doctrine The first was That it doth necessarily infer Universal Redemption Will it follow That because the Elect are justified in forâ— Dei before they believe therefore all men are redeemed and justified One may as well reason Some men were elected before they believed Ergo All men were elected Perhaps he will say we cannot press or exhort every man to believe That he is justified unless all men are justified There is no more necessity that we should press every man to believe that he is justified then that he is elected This is pitifully inconsequent The second was That it raseth the Foundation of all actions tending to the gathering and reforming of Churches why should any be excluded from Church Ordinances if they are justified 1 I must tell him That I cannot think him an hearty friend to the gathering and reforming of Churches who
Faith in the propitiation and atonement of Jesus Christ whereby their defects and obliquities are done away § 6. 4 Whereas he addes That it was a poor answer which I gave to Mr. Good That God was well pleased with his Elect whilest unregenerate though not with their unregeneracy 1. As far as it concerns my self I shall subscribe to his censure I am poor but he is rich I am empty but he is full But 2. he may be pleased to take notice that a far richer man then himself in all kinde of learning both Humane and Divine hath given the very same answer unto this question Mr. Pemble distinguisheth between Gods love to our persons and Gods love to our qualities and actions A distinction which sayes he parents are well skilled in who put a difference between the vices and persons of their children those they hate these they love even when for their vices they do chastise their persons The case sayes he is the same between God and the Elect his love to their persons is from everlasting the same nor doth their sinfulness lessen it nor their sanctity increase it because God in loving their persons never considered them otherwise then as most perfectly holy and unblameable in Jesus Christ c. It is a strange inference which he draws from my words That because I said God is well pleased with the persons of his Elect whilest unregenerate that afterwards he is well pleased with their unregeneracy also He might as well impose this absurdity upon the Prophet that because he saith Ezek. 16.8 Thy time to wit of unregeneracy was the time of love Surely not of their unregeneracy but of their persons then unregenerate that therefore the Prophet supposeth that after their Conversion God did love their unregeneracy or that corruption of nature which remained in them Such quibbles are unbeseeming serious Christians § 7. I shall adde but a word to clear up the difference between the actions of regenerate and unregenerate persons And first we say that the best actions of unregenerate men are impure and sinful which though they are pardoned unto all the Elect for the sake of Christ yet they are not acceptable to God but in themselves most abominable and loathsome in his sight Prov. 5.8 Tit. 1.15 Isai. 1.13 c. Secondly Though as the Orthodox acknowledge the best works of the best men have not in them that Inherent purity and holiness which can stand before God without the mediation of their High Priest yet they may be said to be acceptable and pleasing unto God not onely comparatively because they are better then the works of unregenerate men or then the sinful works of such as are regenerate but absolutely and that two ways 1. Abstractly and in themselves or as they ought to be done and thus Faith Hope Love c. are acceptable to God for they are that spiritual worship and service which God looks for and delights in Joh. 4.23 Micah 6.8 Gal. 5.5 6. Phil. 3.3 And in this respect a meek and a quiet spirit is said to be of great price in the sight of God 1 Pet. 3.4 2. Concretely as they are acted by us or do pass through our hands and so they are acceptable to God as they are washed and cleansed in the blood of Christ 1 Pet. 2.5 Our spiritual sacrifices are made acceptable to God in Jesus Christ or by his taking away the sin and defilement that adheres unto them Our High Priest doth not procure the acceptance of those works which in their whole abstract nature are sinful such as are all our works before Conversion and the fruits of the flesh after Conversion he obtains forgiveness but not acceptance for them But now those works which come from the Spirit of God and are sinful onely through the mixture of our corruptions as sweet water which passeth through a sink these he makes acceptable to the Father by taking away the imperfections and defilements that adhere unto them § 8. The next Scripture which Mr. W. hath brought in by way of objection against himself is Rom. 5.10 When we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son To which he answers That Christs death was the price of our reconciliation and so it is through the death of Christ that we are reconciled be it when it will be that we are reconciled Against this answer of his I shall offer these Exceptions 1 It offers a manifest violence to the Text to say That we were reconciled is as much as we shall be reconciled when we have performed the terms and conditions required of us 2 If our reconciliation to God did depend upon terms and conditions performed by us then is it not through the death of Christ that we are reconciled unto God we should be more the cause of our reconciliation then Christ is for he that performs a condition to which a benefit is promised doth more to the procuring of it then he that makes or obtains that conditional grant notwithstanding which he is never awhit the near of the benefit unless his own act do concur 3 The Apostle declares That this reconciliation was made when we were enemies Ergo Before our believing or the fulfilling of any condition on our part For Believers are not enemies 4 If his meaning were no more then this that it is through the death of Christ that we are reconciled be it when it will that we are reconciled then this clause when we were enemies would be superfluous and redundant whereas the main emphasis of the Text doth lie therein as is evident from the gradation which the Apostle makes Vers. 6 8 10. 5 The Apostle in 2 Cor. 5.19 affirms That our Saviour did not onely pay the price of our reconciliation but that God did so far accept of or acquiesce therein that upon the payment of it he did not impute our sins unto us i. e. he justified us for the Apostle Rom. 4. defines Justification to be the non-imputation of sin 6 And lastly That which he grants yeelds the matter in question viz. The immediate actual reconciliation of sinners upon the death of Christ for if Christ by shedding of his blood paid the total and full price for our deliverance from the curse of the Law then were we actually set free from the obligation of it for when the debt is paid the debtor is free in Law it is unjust to implead a person for a debt which is paid § 9. Secondly To illustrate and confirm his Answer he makes use of Grotius his distinction of three moments or periods of the Will of God 1 at Enmity 2 Appeasable 3 Appeased 1. Before the consideration of the death of Christ God saith he is at enmity with the sinner though not averse from all ways and means of reconciliation 2. After the consideration of the death of Christ and now is the Lord not onely appeasable but doth also
of sins according to the riches of his grace not according to any condition performed by us he having obtained eternall redemption for us Heb. 9.12 And 2 Cor. 5.18 19. a place which we have often mentioned the Apostle shewes that Christ by his death made such a reconciliation for us as that God thereupon did not impute our sins unto us which was long before any condition could be performed by us Elsewhere That Christ by himselfe purged and expiated our sins Heb. 1.3 and afterwards set downe as having finished that worke chap. 10·12 Now sin that is fully purged and expiated is not imputable to the sinner The same Apostle addes that Christ by his sacrifice hath for ever perfected all them for whom it was offered Heb. 10.14 And in another place that he hath made them compleat as to the forgivenesse of their sins Col. 2.10 13 14. In Rom. 8.33 34. He argues from the death of Christ to the non-imputation of our sins Who can lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect it is God that justifieth it is Christ â—hat dyed whereas notwithstanding sin would have been chargeable upon them and they condemnable if the death of Christ had not procured their discharge without the intervention of any condition performed by them CHAP. XV. Wherein Mr. Woodbridges Replyes to the second Objection as he cals it concerning our being Justified in Christ as a common person are examined THe Argument was proposed by me at the time of our Conference in this manner They that were in Christ as a common person before they beleeved were Justified before they beleeved But many were in Christ as a common person before they beleeved Ergo Mr. W. denyed both Propositions The major I proved in this wise If Christ was justified before many â—hat are in him doe beleeve then they that are in him were â—â—stified before they beleeved But Christ was justified before many that are in Christ do beleeve Ergo. His answer hereunto as I remember was I deny all And therefore the Assumption was confirmed from Isa. 50.8 9. in this manner Christ was justified at his resurrection but that happened before many of them who are in Christ as a common person doe beleeve Ergo That Christ was justified at his resurrection is clear from this Text He is near that justifieth me c. Which words I said were uttered by the Prophet in the person of our Saviour in the time of his greatest humiliation who comforted himselfe with this that the Lord would shortly justifie him which was to be done at his Resurrection when the Lord publickly declared to all the world that he was acquitted and discharged from all those sins which were laid upon him and which he as a Surety undertook to satisfie The sequel of the major was also proved by this Enthymem The acts of a common person doe belong unto them whom he represents whatsoever is done by or to a common person as such is to be attributed to them in whose stead he stands and therefore if Christ were justified all that were in him were justified also For seeing that he was not justified from his own but from the sins of others all they whom he represents were justified in his Justification Whereunto hee replyed That Christ was not justified according to the tenor of the New Covenant which did lead us to that discourse of the New Covenant which is afterwards mentioned of which in its place § 2. We shall now take a view of his Replyes to this Argument which we find in his printed copy And 1. he distinguisheth of a threefold Justification 1 Purposed 2 Purchased and 3 Exemplified all which are before Faith So then by his own confession Justification in a Scripture sense goes before Faith Which is that horrid opinion he hath all this while so eagerly opposed It may be he will say as Arminius doth that neither of these were actuall Justification which were a poor put off for as Dr. Twisse observes Omnis Justificatio simpliciter dicta congruenter exponenda est de Justificatione actuali Analogum per se positum stat pro famosiori significato When we speak of Justification simply there is no man but understands it of actuall Justification And first That which he cals Justification purposed in the Decree of God is reall and actuall Justification for if Justification be Gods will not to punish or to deal with his Elect according to their sins as both the Psalmist and Apostle do define it then when Gods Will was in actual being their Justification was actual It is absurd to say That God did decree or purpose to will any thing whatsoever his Will being his Essence which admits no cause either within or without God 2 We have shewn before that Justification being taken for the effect of Gods Will to wit our discharge from the Obligation of the Law it was actually because solely and absolutely obtained by the death of Christ there being no other cause out of God which concurs to the producing of this effect § 3. The third Branch of his distinction Justification exemplified is terminus redundans a member that may well be spared for 1 there is not the least hint thereof in Holy Writ the Scripture no where calls our Saviour the example or pattern of our Justification For though he is proposed to us as an example in acts of Moral Obedience yet in his works of Mediation he was not so in these he was not an exemplary but a meritorious procuring cause an example is proposed to be imitated and therefore we are frequently exhorted to imitate our Saviour in works of Sanctification but we are no where bid to imitate him in our Justification or in justifying our selves It was needless he should be a pattern of our Justification for this pattern must be of use either unto us or unto God Not to us because we do not justifie our selves not unto God because he needs no pattern or example to guide or direct him 2 He that payes our debts to the utmost farthing and thereupon receives a discharge is more then a pattern of our release Our real discharge is in his as our real debt was upon him And therefore his Grand-father Parker said well That Christs Resurrection was the Actual Justâ—fication both of him and us 3 If Christ were onely a pattern and example of our Justification then was he justified from his own sins and consequently was a sinner which is the most horrid blasphemy that can be uttered The reason of the consequence is evident for if Christ were but a pattern of our Justification then was he justified as we are Now we are justified from our own sins which we our selves have committed and therefore his Justification must be from his own sins or else the example and counterpart do not agree 4 This expression intimates that as Christ was justified by performing the conditions required of him so we
it being in terminis in the Text. I dare say no man that is called a Christian did ever deny it and therefore he might have spared his pains in transcribing any more places of Scripture for confirmation of it But I do much marvel That so learned a man as Mr. W. who pretends to be more then ordinarily accurate should take in hand a controverted Text and never open the Terms nor state the Question which he meant to handle for though it be a sinful curiosity for men by Dicotomies and Tricotomies Divisions and Subdivisions to mince and crumble the Scriptures till it hath lost the sense yet surely a workman that needs not to be ashamed ought rightly to divide the Word of Truth explain things that are obscure and dubious and where divers senses are given as he knows there are of this Text to disprove the false and confirm that which he conceives is true § 3. There is a vaste distance between the Apostles Proposition a man is justified by Faith and Mr. Woodbridges Inference Ergo Justification doth in no sence precede Faith Justification by Faith and Justification before Faith are not opposita but diversa though they differ yet they are not contradictory to each other The Scriptures which prove the former intend no strife or quarrel against the latter in a word The proof of the one doth not disprove the other The Scripture which he made his theam Rom. 5.1 Therefore being justified by Faith we have peace with God c concludes nothing at all against Justification before Faith For 1 we may without any violence to the Text place the Comma after justified as thus Being justified by Faith we have peace with God This reading is agreeable both to the Apostles scope and to the Context His scope here was not to shew the efficacy of Faith in our Justification but what benefits we have by the death of Christ the first of which is Justification and the consequent thereof is peace with God Again the Illative Particle Therefore shews that this place is a Corollary or Deduction from the words immediately foregoing which ascribed our Justification wholly to the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ Chap. 4 ult The Apostle thence infers Being justified q. d. Seeing we are justified freely without works by the death of Christ by Faith we have peace with God the Lord powerfully drawing our hearts to believe this we have boldness and confidence towards God the cause of fear being taken away or as the Syriack and vulgar Latin read it Let us have peace with God let us by Faith improve this Grace for the establishing of our hearts in perfect peace Now according to this reading his own Text will give in evidence against him That Faith is not the cause or antecedent but an effect and consequent of our Justification procured and obtained by the death of Christ. But 2 if we take the words as commonly they are read the sence comes all to one scil That being justified by Christ who is the sole object of our Faith we have peace with God who by the Faith which he creates in us causeth us to enjoy this reconciliation by vertue whereof our Conscience is so firmly grounded that we are not moved by any temptation or beaten down by any terror The Work of Faith is not to procure our Justification but to beget peace in our Consciences So then the words being rightly understood they neither deny Justification before Faith nor assert Justification by the act or habit of Faith which Mr. W. would conclude from thence § 4. The next Scripture whose suffrage is desired against us is Gal. 2.16 We have believed in Christ that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ. Where sayes Mr. W. Justification is expresly made a Consequent of Faith To which I Answer 1 That this doth no more infer That we are not justified before we believe then that of our Saviour Matth. 5.44 45. Love your enemies c. that ye may be the children of your Father in Heaven infers That works do go before adoption contrary to Eph. 1.5 6. 1 Joh. 3.3 the phrase that ye may be there is as much as that ye may be manifested and declared that ye may shew your selves or that all men may know that ye are the children of God by practising a duty so much above the reach of Nature and Morality A like place we have Rom. 3.26 God set forth his Son to declare his Righteousness that he might be just Now shall we hence infer That God was not just before or that Gods justice was a consequent of his sending Christ Now if we can understand that clause that he might be just That he might be known and acknowledged to be just Why may we not as well take this of the Apostle that we might be justified in the same construction that we might know that we are justified and live in the comfort and enjoyment of it So that not the Being of our Justification but the Knowledge and Feeling of it is a consequent of Faith Things in Scripture are then said to be when they are known to be so John 15.8 our Saviour tells the Disciples That if they did bear much fruit they should be his Disciples i. e. They should be known and manifested to be his Disciples as Chap. 13.35 Our Saviour is said at his Resurrection to have become the Son of God Acts 13.33 Because then as the Apostle speaks he was powerfully declared to be the Son of God Rom. 1.3 Again things are saâ—d not to be which do not appear as Melchisedec is said to be without Father and Mother c. Heb. 7.3 Because his Linage and Pedigree is not known so we are said to be justified or not justified according as this Grace is revealed to us But 2 in the Text it is We have believed that we might be justified by Faith so that from hence it can be inferred onely That we are not justified by Faith before believing and that the sentence of Justification is not terminated in our Consciences before we do believe § 5. His next Proof is grounded upon the order of the words Rom. 8.30 As glory saith he follows Justification so doth Justification follow Vocation unto Faith Whereunto I answer 〈◊〉 That the order of words in Scripture do not shew the order and dependance of the things themselves The Jews have a Proverb Non esse prius aut posterius in Scriptura The first and last must not be strictly urged in Scripture for that is not always set first which is first in Nature If we should reason from the order of words in Scripture we should make many absurdities as 1 Sam. 6.14 It is said that they clave the Wood of the Cart and offered the Kine for a burnt offering unto the Lord And then in the next Verse it follows That the Levites took down the Ark out of the Cart as
Justification then God who made onely a conditional grant notwithstanding which he might have perished but he by performing the condition makes the grant to be absolute And truly sayes the same Author whosoever makes Faith the condition of the New Covenant in such a sense as perfect Obedience was the condition of the Old cannot avoid it but that man is justified chiefly by himself and his own acts not so much by Gods Grace in imputing Christs Righteousness but more by his own Faith which is his own act though of Gods work God by making his supposed gracious conditional promise doth not justifie any man for that makes no difference at all amongst persons It remains therefore that man must be said to justifie himself for where there is a promise of a Reward made to all upon condition of performing such a service he that obtains the reward gets it by his own service without which the promise would have brought him never a whit the nearer to the Reward Thus a man justifies himself by believing more a great deal then God justifies him by his promulgation of the conditional promise which would have left him in his old condition had not he better provided for himself by believing then God by promising as in the old Covenant it was not Gods threat that brought death upon the world just so in the new if it be a conditional promise it is not the promise that justifies a believer but the believer himself § 7. Mr. W. may as well call the Blood of Christ a Passive condition in our Justification because it did not make the Law nor pronounce the sentence of Absolution let the indifferent Reader consider whether this be not I will not say a childish but an impertinent answer which draws his former Concession quite aside from the matter now under debate for the question is not whether man did concur in making the Law and Rule of his Justification but whether he hath any causal influx in producing the effect or whether before Justification he can or doth perform any condition to which God hath infallibly promised this Grace Which if granted will conclude That he is not Passive but Active in his Justification when our Protestant Divines say That a man is Passive in his first Conversion Their meaning is That he can perform no condition at all to which God hath inseparably annexed the Grace of Conversion So Cameron expresseth their sense and meaning Vocatio nullam poscit in objecto conditionem For though a man before conversion do perform many natural acts which have a remote tendency to this effect as Hearing Reading Meditating c. yet for all we say He is Passive therein because these are not such conditions to which God hath promised saving Grace So though a man doth never so many natural acts or duties whereunto God hath not immediately promised this priviledge he is but Passive for all in his Justification but if he do perform any condition to which Justification is promised then he is active and consequently may be said to justifie himself § 8. But says Mr. W. We do no more justifie our selves then we do glorifie our selves it is God alone doth both and we are Passive in both Pag 8. And again It is God that glorifies us and not we our selves yet surely God doth not glorifie us before we believe Pag. 10. First I shall readily grant him that we do neither justifie nor glorifie our selves seeing that we obtain neither of these benefits by our own works From the very beginning to the end of our Salvation nothing is primarily or causally Active but Free-grace all that we receive from God is gift and not debt Glory it self is not wages but Grace For though it be called The recompence of Reward Heb. 11.27 yet that is not to be understood in a proper sense as when the Reward is for the Work which may be two ways First When the work is proportionable to the wages as when a Laborer receives a shilling for a days work here the work doth deserve the wages because the work doth him that payes the wages as much good as the wages doth the worker Now surely no reward can come from the Creator to the Creature in this way bâ—cause no man can do any work that is profitable unto God Psal. 16.2 Job 22.3 35.8 Rom. 11 35. The very Papists will not say that Glory is a reward in this sense Works saith Bishop Gardner do not deserve Salvation as a Workman deserveth his wages for his labor Secondly When the work is not answerable to the wages but yet the wages is due by promise upon the performance of it as when a poor man hath twenty shillings for an hours labor though the work be not worth it yet is it a due debt and he may challenge it as such because it was promised him In this sense neither is Glory a Reward for under the New Covenant Blessedness is not to him that worketh but to him that worketh not Rom. 4.5 We are saved by grace and not by works Tit. 3.5 Eph. 2.5 8. And saith the Apostle If by grace then it is no more of works Rom. â—1 6 But when Glory is called a Reward we are to understand it improperly as when a thing is called a Reward onely by way of Analogy and Resemblance because it comes after and in the place of the work as the nights rest may be called the Reward of the days labor because it succeeds it Thus is that of the Apostle to be taken 2 Thes. 1.7 And thus the Heir inheriting his Fathers Lands hath a Recompence or Reward of all the labor and service he hath done for his Father although he did not his service to that end neither doth the enjoyment of that inheritance hang upon that condition In this sense Eternal Lâ—fe and Glory may be called the Reward of our Works because it is a consequent of them not that our works have any influence either Physical or Moral to obtain it All things being given us in and for Christ alone Rom. 8.32 Eph. 1.3 And therefore it is called by the Apostle A reward of Inheritance Col. 3.24 Which comes to us not by working but by inheritance as we are the heirs of God and joynt heirs with Christ. If Glory were a Reward in a proper sense we might properly be said to save and glorifie our selves because we concurred to the Production of this effect but Mr. W. sayes well It is God that glorifies us Eternal Life is called his gift in opposition to wages Rom. 6.23 2 Tim. 4.8 It is solely the effect of Gods grace and Christs purchase though God doth glorifie us after working yâ—t not for any of those works which we have wrought though by the help and assistance of his own Spirit § 9. But yet secondly Though God doth not glorifie us before we believe yet it will not follow that he doth not justifie
with the second Adam He performing the terms of agreement between the Father and himself made the Law of Condemnation to be of no force against us Gal. 3.13 4.5 Which New Covenant and not the Conditional Promise as Mr. W. would have it is called The Law of Faith Rom. 3.27 And the Law of Righteousness Ch. 9.31 It is called a Law because it is the fixed and unalterable Sanction of the Great God or else by way of Antithesis or opposition to the Covenant of Works The Law of Righteousness it being the onely means whereby men do attain to Righteousness and are justified in the sight of God and the Law of Faith because it strips men of their own righteousness to cloath them with Christs and thereby takes from men all occasion of boasting in themselves whereas if men did attain to Righteousness by vertue of this Conditional Promise He that believes shall be saved they would have as much cause of boasting in themselves as if they had performed the Law of Works That saying of his with which he closeth this Argument is wide from truth That every man is then condemned or stands condemned in foro Dei when the Law condemns him for then all men living are condemned seeing the Law condemns or curseth every one that sins and there is none that lives without sin Either he must say Believers do not sin and then Saint John will give him the lie 1 Joh. 1.8 or else That Believers are not justified which is contrary to the Scripture last cited by himself Joh 5.24 with a thousand more In what sence the Elect Ephesians were called Children of wrath will more fitly be explained in the next Chapter § 4. In the mean time we will adde a few Reasons against the main support of this Argument That Justification is the discharge of a sinner by a declared published act to wit by that Signal Conditional Promise He that believes shall be saved Which when a man hath performed the condition he may plead for his discharge Against this Notion I shall offer to the Readers serious consideration these following Arguments First If Justification be not by works then it is not by this or any other Conditional Promise which is a declared discharge onely to him that performs the condition i. e. That worketh But Justification is not by works which we have wrought but an act of the freest grace and bounty Col. 2.13 where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Apostle useth to express the forgiveness of sin ascribes it solely to the Grace of God without Works or Conditions performed by us § 5. Secondly If Justification be by that Signal Promise He that believes shall be saved then none were justified before that gracious sentence was published which was not till our Saviours Ministery in the flesh nor was there any sentence of Divine Revelation like it which the people of God could plead for their discharge from the Law from the fall of Adam until the publication of that subservient Covenant in Mount Sinai which is the tenor of the Law of Works the Lord never made any Conditional Promise which they could plead for their discharge and absolution from sin the promises to Adam Noah Abraham were not conditional but absolute Now if there were no Justification till God had made some conditional promise which men upon performing the condition might plead as their legal discharge I marvel into what Limbus Mr. W. will thrust the Fathers of the Old Testament For they that were not justified were not saved But the Scripture gives us more hope shewing that they were saved by the same grace as we are Acts 15.11 God accepting them as righteous in Jesus Christ who in respect of the vertue and efficacy of his death is called The Lamb slain from the foundations of the world Revel 13.8 For though this rich Grace were not revealed to them so clearly as unto us Eph. 3.5 1 Pet. 1.12 Yet the Effects and Benefits thereof descended upon them unto Justification of life no less then to the Faithful in the New Testament The Argument in short is this If the Fathers of the Old Testament were justified who yet had not any such declared discharge then Justification is not by a declared discharge but the Fathers of the Old Testament were justified c. Ergo. § 6. Thirdly If Justification be onely by a declared discharge then Elect Infants insensible of this Declaration and unable to plead their discharge from any such promise have no Justification I hope Mr. W. is not such a durus pater infantum as to exclude all those from Justification that die in their infancy which he must necessarily do if he makes Justification to consist in that which they are utterly uncapable of § 7. Fourthly The making Justification a declared discharge detracts from the Majesty and Soveraignty of God For as much as it ascribes to him but the office of a Notary or subordinate Minister whose work it is to declare and publish the sentence of the Court rather then of a Judge or Supream Magistrate whose Will is a Law And by this means Justification shall be opposed not to condemnation but to concealing or keeping secret § 8. Fifthly If Justification were by a Conditional Promise as a declared discharge then it would not be Gods act but our own God should not be our Justifier but we must be said to justifie our selves For a Conditional Promise doth not declare one man justified more then another but the performance of the condition So that a man should be more beholding to himself then to God for his Justification § 9. Sixthly We may argue a pari Forgiveness amongst men is not necessarily by a declared discharge Ergo Gods is not for there is the same reason for both and therefore we are bid to forgive one another as God for Christs sake hath forgiven us Eph. 4. ult i. e. heartily or from the heart as the Apostle elsewhere explains it Col. 3.17 Not in word or in tongue but in deed and in true affection Mans forgiveness is principally an act of the Heart and Minde A man forgives an injury when he layes aside all thoughts of revenge and really intends his welfare that did the same his heart is as much towards him as if he had not done it And therefore Gods forgiving of a sinner is not necessarily a declared absolution God may justifie or acquit a person though he doth not declare his reconciliation with him § 10. Mr. Woodbridge foresaw the force of this Reason and therefore hath wisely laid in this Exception against it Indeed to our private forgiveness one of another being meerly an act of Charity there is no more required then a resolution within our selves to lay aside our thoughts of revenge c. But the forgiveness of a Magistrate being an act of Authority must be by some formal act of Oblivion c. A Vote in the
when Noah offered up his burnt-offerings to God The Lord smelled a sweet savor c. Gen. 8.21 So when Christ offered up himself a sacrifice of atonement the Lord smelled a savor of rest and was fully satisfied for the sins of his people 3 There is no reason can be given why those words should be terminated to the person of Christ seeing that God was never displeased with him nor had our Saviour any doubt or suspition of it and therefore it was altogether needless that God should declare his well-pleasedness to him in his own person 4 The well-pleasedness of God is to be extended unto them for whom Christ offered up his sacrifice but Christ did not offer up his sacrifice for himself but onely for sinners Ergo. § 3. Well haec non successit alia aggrediamur via his next Exception therefore is That if we should extend it unto men the exception 2 words prove no more then that it is through Christ that God is well pleased with men whensoever it be that he is well pleased So that in his sense I am well pleased is as much as I will be well pleased with them when they have performed the terms and conditions required on their part A gloss which I dare say was never dreamed of by any Expositor before himself Here 1 let the Reader observe how bold he makes with the Holy Ghost for when God tells us he is well pleased to say no he is not now but he will hereafter is not to interpret but contradict the Scripture 2 His gloss contradicts it self for if our reconciliation with God doth depend upon terms and conditions performed by us then it is not through Christ alone that God is well pleased with men whensoever it is and Christ is at most but a partial cause of our reconciliation § 4. But to render his Paraphrase more probable he hath cited divers other places where as he pretends Verbs and Participles of the Present tense have the signification of the future Though says he the Verb in this place be not the Present tense but the first Aorist though it be the Aorist what is that to the purpose seeing as every School-boy knows the Aorists have the signification of the Preterperfect tense and not of the Future and if that enunciation will hold in the Preterperfect tense as Beza grants then is it much more true in the Present tense But to his Allegations I answer 1 That in most of his instances there is no necessity to feign a change of Tenses as John 4.25 Messiah cometh i. e. The promise of the Messiah draws nigh to be fulfilled So Chap. 5.25 The hour is coming and now is c. The dead did then hear the voice of the Son of man both in his own and in his Disciples Ministery So 2 Cor. 3.16 the Verbs are most properly rendred in the Present tense When Israel shall or doth turn unto the Lord the vail is taken away for as Cameron notes their Conversion to God doth not precede the taking away of the vail but both are at the same time Rom. 8.24 By hope we are saved The enunciation is true and emphatical in the Present tense for in many other places the Saints are said to be saved and to have eternal life whilest they are in the body John 3.36 5.24 6.54 56. Col. 2.10 Eph. 2.5 8. Tit. 3.5 1 John 5.11 12. They have here the beginnings or first-fruits of that Salvation the complement and perfection whereof they as yet do wait for they have now the joy and comfort of their Salvation thorough Faith and Hope because Hope looks upon the promises of God not as doubtful but as sure and certain Heb. 11.1 2. They are now sayed by Hope or they shall never be saved by Hope for Hope that is seen is not Hope in the world to come they are saved by sight and not by Faith or Hope So that Text 1 Cor. 15.57 is most properly rendered Thanks be unto God that giveth or hath given us the victory through Jesus Christ. For the Saints have already obtained victory over death and the grave in Christ their Head Rom. 8.37 In all things we are more then conquerors And John 16.33 Be of good cheer I have overcome the world So Heb. 10.35 Your confidence hath a great recompence of reward to wit In the present effects which it did produce as inward peace joy c. according to that of the Psalmist Psal. 19.11 In keeping thy statutes there is great reward But 2 if I should grant what he desires that in all these places there were an Heterosis of Tenses for I acknowledge this trope is frequent in Scripture yet this great flourish will amount to nothing unless he had shewn by the circumstances of the Text or the nature of the thing that it must be so expounded here for if men had liberty to feign Enalloges of Numbers Cases and Tenses at their pleasure it were easie to elude the meaning of the plainest Texts § 5. 3 Those words Heb. 11.6 Without Faith it is impossible to please God do not conclude what he would have them to wit That God is not wel-pleased with his Elect in Christ before they do believe for the Apostle speaks there of mens works and actions and not of their persons No man can please God without Faith no not Believers themselves their Religious Services are not pleasing to God unless they are done in Faith for bonum est ex causa integra Now Faith is a principal ingredient in the Saints obedience for if it be not done in Faith it is not done in love Gal. 5 6. And consequently it is not fruit unto God Rom 7.4 Gods wel-pleasedness with his Elect is the immediate effect of the death of Christ for that which raised a partition wall between God and them was the breach of the Law now when the Law was satisfied for their sins this partition was broken down his favor had as free a current as if they had not sinned And therefore the blotting out of our sin and our reconciliation with God is ascribed solely and immediately to the death of Christ as in many other Scriptures so particularly Ephes. 1.6 7. 2.13 14. Col. 1.20 21. 2.13 14. 2 Cor. 5.19 God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself he did not onely act towards it as Mr. W. glossed those words in his Sermon but saith the Text he did not impute their sins unto them for whom Christ died The actual blotting out of sin sayes Mr. Perkins doth inseparably depend upon satisfaction for sins and satisfaction with God doth necessarily imply the very real and general abolishment of the guilt and punishment of sin That which makes our persons acceptable to God is the Righteousnes of Jesus Christ but now our actions are not pleasing unless they are conformable to the rule and all necessary circumstances do concur the cheif whereof is
it and declared himself well pleased and satisfied therewith Matth. 3.17 Isa. 42.1 Insomuch that God hath thereupon covenanted and sworn that he will never remember their sins nor be wrath with them any more Isa. 43.25 54.9 10. Fourthly That by this Ransom of his they are freed and delivered from the curse of the Law Gal. 4.4 3.13 Our Adversaries say That he paid the price for their Redemption but with no intent that they should be immediately and absolutely freed which is often boldly affirmed and as slenderly proved But why not immediately and absolutely There is saith Mr. W. a compact and agreement between the Father and the Son when he undertook to be our Surety that his death should not be available for the actual reconciliation of sinners till they have performed the terms and conditions required on their part Sed hoc restat probandum and I am perswaded will till the worlds end Let them shew us this Covenant and Agreement and we are satisfied till this be done we shall think our proofs sufficient and that the force of those Allegations is no whit invalidated by this Crude Assertion I confess I have heard much talk of this Suspensive Covenant but hitherto I have not had the hap to meet with that Author that hath attempted to make it forth though I might justly be excused from the labor of proving the Negative seeing that it lies upon our Adversaries to clear it up That there was such a compact and agreement made between the Father and the Son that his death should not be available to the immediate reconciliation of sinners but onely upon conditions performed by them Yet because I intend not any other Reply and that Mr. W. may see I do not dissent because he hath said and not proved it which in controverted points were ground enough I shall offer him the Reasons which as yet do sway my Judgement to believe the contrary CHAP. XIV Of the Covenant between the Father and the Son concerning the immediate effects of Christs death THe Reasons which perswade me to believe That there was not any Covenant passed between God and Christ to hinder the immediate and actual reconciliation of Gods Elect by his death and to suspend this effect thereof upon terms and conditions to be performed by them but contrariwise that it was the will both of God and of Christ that his death should be available to their immediate and actual Reconciliation and Justification without any condition performed on their part Are as followeth First There is no such Covenant doth appear Ergo there is none Non est Scriptum Ergo There is no such thing hath hitherto been counted a good Argument amongst Christians It is not possible says Damascene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. To speak ought of God beside the things which are divinely manifested in the Old and New Testament If there be any such Covenant let our Adversaries shew it and until they do we shall rest securely in the Negative they must pardon us if we yeeld not up our Faith to unwritten Verities Secondly The Covenant made between God and Christ was That upon giving up of himself to death he should purchase a Seed like the Stars of Heaven i. e. All the Elect of God Isa. 53.10 And our Saviour Christ after that he had tasted death to bring many sons unto glory boasts and glories in this atchievement Heb. 2.13 Behold I and the children whom God hath given me Ergo It was the Will of God that his death should be available for their immediate reconciliation for they could not be the children of Christ and the children of wrath at the same time § 2. Thirdly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should be the payment of our debt and a full satisfaction for all our iniquities then was it his Will that our discharge procured thereby should be immediate but it was the Will of God that the death of Christ should be the payment of our debts and a full satisfaction for our iniquities Ergo. I suppose the Assumption will not be questioned for though the word satisfaction be not used in Scripture yet the thing it self is plainly signified in those phrases of Redemption Atonement Reconciliation and in like manner all those places which declare that Christ died for us and for our sins and offences do imply the same scil That the death of Christ was the payment of our debts and the punishment of our sins that thereby he satisfied the Law for all those wrongs injuries we have done unto it Now the Sequel is evident If God willed that the death of Christ should be a full and satisfactory payment of our demerits then he willed that the discharge procured thereby should be immediate and present for it is contrary to Justice and Equity that a debt when it is payed should be charged either upon the Surety or Principal and therefore though God did will that the other effects of Christs death as it is the meritorious price of Faith Holiness Glory c. should be sub termino or in Diem not Present but Future yet he willed that this effect of it to wit our discharge from sin and the curse should be present and immediate because it implies a contradiction that the same debt should be paid and not paid that it should be discharged and yet justly chargable As when a man that is a Trespasser or any one for him payes a sum of money which is sufficient both for discharge of his trespass as also for the purchase of a peece of Land From the trespass his discharge must be present if the satisfaction be full though the enjoyment of the Land may be in Diem as the Vendee and Purchaser can agree the Case before us is the very same The death of Christ was both a price and a ransom it served both to pay our debts and to procure our happiness he did thereby purchase both our deliverance from sin and death and all those Spiritual Blessings present and future which we stand in need of The discharge of our debts and deliverance from punishment must needs be present and immediate upon the payment of the price though those Spiritual Blessings be not received till a long time after as God and Christ shall see it fit to bestow them on us To this I shall adde a fourth § 3. Fourthly If nothing hindered the reconciliation of the Elect with God but the breach of the Law then the Law being satisfied it was the Will of God that they should be immediately reconciled but nothing hindred their reconciliation with God but the breach of the Law Ergo. It was sin alone that made a distance or separation between God and them Isa. 59.2 For which cause it is compared to a cloud or mist Isa. 44.22 to a partition wall Ephes. 2.14 It lay as a block in the way that God could not salva
justitia bestow upon them those good things intended towards them in his Eternal Election The onely cause of Christs death was to satisfie the Law he did not die to procure a new Will or Affection in the heart of God towards his Elect nor yet to adde any new thing in God which doth perfect and compleat the act of Election as Wallaeus seems to intimate But that God might save us in a way agreeable to his own Justice that he might confer upon us all those Blessings he intended without wrong and violation to his holy Law for God having made a Law that the soul which sinneth should die the Justice and Truth of God required that satisfaction should be made for the sins of the Elect no less then of other men which they being unable to perform the Son of God became their Surety to bear the Curse and fulfil the Law in their stead God might will unto us sundry benefits which he cannot actually bestow upon us without wrong to his Justice As a King may will and purpose the deliverance of his Favorite who is imprisoned for debt yet he cannot actually free him till he hath paid and satisfied his Creditor So though God had an irrevocable peremptory Will to save his Elect yet he could not actually save them till satisfaction was made unto his Justice which being made there is no let or impediment to stop the current of his Blessings As when the Cloud is dissolved the Sun shines forth when the partition wall is broken down they that were separated are again united So the cloud of our sins being blotted out the beams of Gods love have as free a passage towards us as if we had not sinned Now that Christ by his death removed this let and hinderance the Scripture is as express as can be desired as that he made an end of sin Dan. 9.24 Blotted it out c. Col. 2.14 Took it quite away as the Scape-goat Levit. 16.22 John 1.29 And slew the enmity between God and us Ephes. 2.16 See Verses 13 14 15. § 4. Fifthly If it were the Will of God that the sin of Adam should immediately over-spread his posterity then it was his Will that the Satisfaction and Righteousness of Christ should immediately redound to the benefit of Gods Elect for there is the same reason for the immediate transmission of both to their respective subjects for as the Apostle shews Rom. 5.14 both of them were heads and roots of mankinde Now the sin of Adam did immediately over-spread his posterity All men sinned in him before ever they committed any actual sin Rom. 5.12 14. And therefore the Righteousness of Christ descended immediately upon all the Elect for their Justification Rom. 5.17 18. Sixthly If the Sacrifices of the Law were immediately available for the Typical cleansing of sins under that administration then the Sacrifice which Christ hath offered was immediately available to make a real atonement for all those sins for which he suffered The reason of the consequence is because the Real Sacrifice is not less efficacious then the Typical Heb. 9.14 But those Legal Sacrifices did immediately make atonement without any condition performed on the sinners part Levit. 16.30 § 5. Seventhly If it be the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without any condition performed by them then it was his Will that it should be so for all of them the reason is because the Scripture makes no difference between persons in the communication of this Grace The free gift saith the Apostle came upon all men i. e. In omnes praedestinatos to Justification of life to wit by the gracious imputation of God But it is the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without conditions performed by them viz. To Elect Infants or else they are not reconciled and consequently they cannot be saved Now if any shall say That God hath a peculiar way of reconciling and justifying Infants or of communicating unto them the Benefits of Christs death let them clear it up from Scripture let them shew us the Text that saith God gives Salvation unto Infants in one manner and to men in another to the one freely and to the others upon conditions If they say Infants have the Seed or Habit of Faith the Scripture will contradict them which affirmeth 1 That they have no knowledge at all either of good or evil Deut. 1.39 And that they cannot so much as discern between the right and the left hand And if so how can they who conceive not of things Natural understand those things that are Heavenly and Spiritual And therefore sayes Augustine If we should go about to prove that Infants know the things of God who as yet know not the things of men our own senses would confute us And can there be Faith without knowledge 2 That Faith cometh by hearing of the Word Preached Rom. 10. Now Infants either hear not or if they do they understand not what they hear We have sufficient experience that no Children give any testimony of Faith until they have been taught and instructed Elect Children which are afterwards manifested to be such are as obstinate and unteachable as any others As for the instance of the Baptist that he believed in his Mothers belly because it is said Luke 1.41 That he was filled with the Holy Ghost c. it doth not prove it for as one observes it is not said Credidit in utero but onely exultavit which exultation or springing Divinitùs facta est in Infante non humanitùs ab Infante And therefore it is not to be drawn into an example or urged as a rule to us what to think of other Infants But if any shall say that Infants do perform the conditions of Reconciliation and Salvation by their Parents then it will follow That all the Children of believing Parents are reconciled and justified because they perform the conditions as much for all as they do for one But I suppose no man will say That all the Children of believing Parents are justified we may as well assert works of supererogation as that one is justified by anothers Faith That any Infants are saved it is meerly from the Grace of Election and the free imputation of Christs Righteousness of which all that are elected are made partakers in the same manner § 6. Eighthly If it were the Will of God that Christ should have the whole glory of our reconciliation it was his will that it should not in the least depend upon our works or conditions because that condition or conditions will share with him in the glory of this effect and our Justification would be partly of Grace and partly of Works partly from Christ and partly from our selves Nay it would bee more from our selves then from Jesus Christ seeing that
notwithstanding all that he hath done for us we had been eternally miserable unlesse we had also contributed our owne endeavours How derogatory this is to Christ and contrary to the Scriptures is sufficienâ—ly manâ—fest Ninthly If it were the Will of God that his people should have strong consolations and that their joy should be full then it was his Will that their peace and reconciliation should not depend upon termes and conditions performed by themselves For as was noted before out of Calvin it is impossible that any soule should injoy a firme and settled peace whose confidence towards God is grounded upon conditionall promises and sayes the Apostle our Salvation is by grace to the end that the promise might be sure unto all the seed implying that if it depended never so little upon our works wee could not bee sure thereof and consequently wee must walke in darknesse and see no light § 7. Tenthly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the reconciliation of his Elect whilst they live in this world then it was his Will that it should procure for them immediate and actuall reconciliation without the intervention of those conditions supposed to be required of them and the reason of this consequence is because they cannot performe all the conditions required of them till their last breath this being one that they must persevere to the end and the nature of conditionall grants is such that the benefit cannot be had and injoyed till all the conditions are performed So that if the reconciliation of the Elect did depend upon the conditions pretended they should not only not have reconciliation before Faith but not before death which is contrary to innumerable Scriptures which doe declare that the Saints are perfectly justified and so immutably reconciled unto God that nothing shall be able to separate them from his love though their Sanctification be imperfect yet their Justification is as full and perfect as ever it shall be it doth not grow and increase as the other doth but is perfect at first And therefore baptisme which seals unto us the forgivenesse and washing away of all our sins not originall only but actuall also is administred but once in all our life time to shew that our Justification is done all at once at the very first instant wherein the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed to us Ezek. 16.8 9. Act. 13.39 1 Joh. 1.7 Col. 2.13 14. § 8. Eleventhly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should certainly and infallibly procure the reconciliation of his Elect then surely it was not the Will of God that it should depend upon terms and conditions on their part because that which depends upon future conditions is as to the event altogether uncertain it is possible it may never be by the non-performance of the condition But this hath been alleadged before Twelfthly If God willed this blessing to his Elect by the death of Christ but conditionally then he willed their Reconciliation and Justification no more then their non-Reconciliation and Condemnation and stood as it were indifferent to either event but doubtlesse his heart was more set upon it then so see John 6.38 39. John 17.21 22 24. The consequence is cleare for if he willed their Justification onely in case they should beleeve and repent then he willed their Damnation in case they doe not beleeve and repent and then it will follow that he willed their Justification no more then their Damnation nay most probably he willed it lesse because we are more prone to Infidelity then we are to Faith and to hardnesse of heart then we are to repentance I adde to this § 9. Thirteenthly If God willed unto men the benefits of Christs death upon any condition to be performed by them it will follow that God foresaw in them an ability to performe some good which Christ hath not merited Conditionall reconciliation necessarily supposeth Free-will For either God willed it unto men upon a possible or impossible condition not upon an impossible condition for that is inconsistent with the Wisdome of God if upon a possible condition the possibility thereof ariseth either from Gods Will or from Mans it is possible either because God will bestow it or because man can performe it Our adversaries cannot mean it in the former sence for God will bestow upon us nothing but what Christ hath purchased and Christ hath purchased nothing save what God hath promised in his Covenant Now Mr. W. denyes that the promise of Faith is any part of the Covenant or any effect of it p. 32. and others that are for this conditional reconciliation look upon it as a ridiculous conceit that God should promise men Salvation upon a condition and that he should work this condition in them and for them so that in the upshot we shall be beholding cheifly to Free Will an opinion so absurd that in all ages it hath been exploded by humble and sober minded Christians it being palpably contrary to the Scriptures which shew that every man by nature is without strength dead in treaspasses and sins that we cannot so much as think a good thought that it is God who worketh in us both to will and to do of his own good pleasure If any shal say that God did will that by Christ wee should have Faith and after that reconciliation Though this be granted them it will follow notwithstanding that our reconciliation is an immediate effect of the death of Christ as Mr. Owen hath invincibly proved in his answer to Baxter p. 34. and then all the controversie will be about Gods order and method in conferring on us the effects of Christs death and whether God doth enable a man to perform good works before his person is reconciled to God Some Reasons for the Negative have been given before § 10. Fourteenthly If God did will that our sins should be accounted unto Christ without any condition on our part then it was his Will that they should be discounted unto us without any condition and the Reason thereof is because the charging and accounting of them unto him necessarily includes our discharge the imputing of our sins to Christ was formally the non-imputing of them unto us Gods accounting of them unto him as hath been shown was a reall discounting of them from us for they could not be accounted or charged upon both without a manifest contradiction in the thing it selfe and in the Justice of God But God willed that our sins should be accounted to and charged upon Christ without any condition performed by us for he actually suffered for them before we were Ergo. § 11. To these Arguments from Scripture I mighr adde many plaine Texts which doe declare that our reconciliation is the actual and immediate effect of Christs death as Col. 1.14 Eph. 1.7 We have redemption not we shall have the forgivenesse or non-imputation
which the adversaries of the Gospel doe make of this expression were most of the ancient Fathers now alive to see what use the Papists and others doe make of their unwary sayings to patronize their Errors I am perswaded they would fill the world with their retractations and apologies Have we not cause then to be careful in this matter when we see so many profligated Errors as Free-Will and Universall Redemption sheltering themselves under this expression But 3 That which moves me most is compassion to our vulgar hearers who when they hear men say that Faith Repentance c. are conditions of the Covenant understand it no otherwise then in the most common acception and as the term Condition is used in reference to mens Contracts and as Obedience was the condition of the first Covenant whereby as Luther hath observed they live stil in bondage not daring to take hold of the Promise because they doubt whether they have the condition All their endeavors after Faith and Holinesse are but mercinary and selfish they would not do the work but to get the wages § 5. But this is not the matter that is now in question Our difference is not about words but things The Reader I suppose is sufficiently informed in what sence we deny that the New Covenant is conditional to wit in that manner as the first Covenant was which was properly conditional and this perswasion I cannot but adhere to notwithstanding al that I have seen or heard to the contrary That in the New Covenant wherein God hath promised Life and Salvation unto sinners for whom Christ hath shed his blood and by vertue whereof they do obtain all good things present and future there is no condition required of them to obtain or procure the blessings that are therein promised For though God doth bestow upon us one blessing before another yet he gives not any one for the sake of another but all of them even to our finall sitting down in Glory are given us freely for the sake of Christ Glory it selfe is not only not for but not according to our works as the principle or rule by which God proportions his reward but according to his owne Mercy and Grace My Reasons for the Thesis are § 6. 1. Because in all those places wherein the nature or tenor of the New-Covenant is declared there is not as Dr. Twisse hath observed any mention at all of the least condition as Jer. 31.33 Ezek. 36.25 c. Hos. 2.18 19 20. in all which places with the like God promiseth to doe all in them and for them upon the last of those Texts Zanchius observes Non ait si non resipueris recipiam te in gratiam desponsabo sed absolute ego te desponsabo est igitur absolutissima promissio qua sine ulla conditione promittit Deus sâ— sâ—um populum in gratiam recepturum servaturum c. i. e. He doth not say if thou wilt repent I will receive thee into favor and betroth thee but absolutely I will betroth thee c. It is therefore a most absolute Covenant wherein God without any condition doth promise that he will receive his people into favor and save them The same Author in another place speaking of the Covenant which God made with Abraham Gen. 17.7 It is to be noted saith he that this Promise is altogether free absolute and without any condition which he proves by two Arguments one of which is Quoniam nullam plane in verbis foederis conditionem legimus i. e. Because in the words of the Covenant we finde no condition And long before him that noble Champion of Grace against the Pelagians Prosper of Aquitan who lived about the year 445. Manet prorsus quotidie impletur quod Abrahae dominus sine conditione promisit sine lege donavit The Covenant saith he is still in force and is daily fulfilled which the Lord promised unto Abraham without any condition and established without a restipulation Now if any shall say that these and such like Texts do not comprize the whole but onely a part of the New Covenant because God doth not say it is the whole Covenant I Answer 1 That it is a meer shift like that of the Papists against Justification by Faith alone because the word Alone is not found in those Scriptures which the Protestants doe bring to prove it Our Divines answer it is there virtually and by necessary consequence though not formally or litterally So say I when the Lord saith expressely This is my Covenant It is all one as if he had said This is my whole Covenant Let our Adversaries shew us one place where any conditional Promise is called the New Covenant either in whole or in part 2 That which they would make the Condition of the Covenant on our part is expressely promised to us no lesse then any other blessing and their saying that it is promised in the Covenant but not as a part of the Covenant hath been sufficiently disproved before § 7. 2. Because all those Covenants which God made to prefigure this Covenant were free and absolute without any Condition therefore the Covenant it selfe which was figured by them is much more so It is not to be questioned but the substance hath as much Grace as the shadow Now I say in those tipicall Covenants which God made with Noah Abraham Phineas David c. there are no Restipulations The Covenant with Noah doth not run like that with Adam Do this and live but I will not destroy the earth c. Gen. 9.11 I confesse Rivet saith the condition on Noahs part was ut justè intigrè ambularet But 1 God doth not say so the Lord doth not say I will make this Covenant with thee if thou wilt walke uprightly 2 This Covenant was made not onely with Noah but with every living creature Vers. 12. Now sensitive creatures could not performe any such Condition 3 If the benefit of that Covenant had depended upon Noahs upright walking then upon Noahs fall V. 21. the World should have been drowned again as death entred into the world upon the non-performance of Adams condition The Covenant with Phinehas Num. 25. is not like that which God made with Eli which was but a conditional and uncertain Covenant 1 Sam. 2.30 So the Covenant which God made with David concerning the Kingdom is not like the Covenant which he made with Saul which was quickly voide because it depended upon his obedience 1 Sam. 13.13 14. which Davids did not and therefore the Covenant which God made with David is called The sure mercies of David Isa. 54.3 God promised mercies unto Saul as well as unto David but they were not sure mercies because they were conditional they were promised upon conditions to be performed by him but the Covenant with David was sure and stedfast Psal. 89.28 because it depended not upon conditions on his part and therefore