praises of the man yet this act of his meriteth it not no not from Mr. B. For as far as he transcribes him p. 182. Mr. Ball no further foâ—lowes Grotius then to Gods relaxing of the Law to take satisfaction from Christ in our steed But if he had also asserted that after satisfaction actually taken they which in Christ have satisfied are yet all their life-time under the Curse of the Law to bear it in their own persons would Mr. B. have hidden it Yet this is the thing in question between Mr. B. and the Protestants whether after the giving and receiving of satisfaction for our breaches of the Law the Curs of the Law be either nulled or els onely in part relaxed as to our bearing it Yea if he â—e as Mâ— B. stiles him then have we the testimony of so great learned and holy a Divine as almost England ever bred against Mr. B. himself not being able to deny any one almost that England ever bred which hath written more directly and contrarily to Mr. B. then this man in his Tractate of Faith about Justification If elswhere he contradicts himself I shall oppose Ball against Ball yea Ball in afflictions when he lived by Faith and had nothing else but Christ apprehended by Faith to support his troubled soul to Ball nâ—w raised to a prosperous state in the world and whâ— seeing the Court infected with Popery Socinianism and Arminianism and no other bridge to prefermâ—nt so effectuall as some shew of bending at least to these wayes might possibly as far as Conscience would permit him make use of the language there held most authentick I say of the language for I cannot condemn his doctrine alledged in his three following Testimonies it taken in a good sense But his ambiguities of words seem to speak him out to have had a levell to somewhat els besides the supporting of the truth and yet his Conscience seems to hold him bound from saying any thing manifestly against the truth Mr. B. may possibly tickle himself with his words but his matter duly pondered gives him a sting sufficient to perswade him to forbear laughter Let the unbiassed judicious Reader add consideration to his reading and then judge The rest of the testimonies which he hath here cited and quoted I let passe as altogether besides the questions which Mr. B. hath set in agitation between himself and all the Protestant-Churches And thus at length have his Arguments been examined which he brings to confirm his Justification by works He hath many things tending to the confirmation of some other Paradoxes scattered in his Aphorisms beginning at p. 123. of his Appendix and ending at p. 164. but because those things are handled by way of disputation against others and Mr. B. as a challenger doth call out there by name Mr. Owen and Maccovius to a Duell with himself each after other exposing them to the world as base and silly Animals in what they have said except they come forth into open field to make it good It shall be both impertinent and uncivil in me to meddle in a business to which others and the same far more worthy and able are called as to their peculiar task I should not be excused by any herein from being one that loveth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be busie in another mans office specially seeing I know not what these challenged have done or are doing in the defence of themselves and the doctrine which they have asserted Were it that their reputation alone and not a truth of Christ which they had undertaken to defend were here clouded by Mr. B. I should think it no fault in them to pass it by in contemptuous silence but seeing Mr. B. endeavours upon their ruines to erect his mounts against the City of the living God to destroy it or at least spoyle it of its principall immunities denying the full justification of the Lords redeemed ones in this world holding them under the curs and wrath of God both in their life and death I perceive not how they can be silent without betraying the truth of God which they once undertook to defend Since this was written I understand Mr. Owen hath fully vindicated himself and learnedly defended all that Mr. B. had laid on his score Thus far to his Arguments that he hath brought to prove Justification by works I find no more nor in these have I hidden any thing but set them forth in their fullest strength CHAP. XV. Mr. Baxters Plea to prove his Doctrine free from Popery examined and refuted I Come now to the most accurate finest and chiefest part of Mr. Brs. Art his Alcumistry by which hee turneth the basest metals into gold darkness into light death into life deformity into beauty and hell into heaven it self All this he with strong endeavours labours to accomplish while with strong confidence hee goes about to vindicate his doctrine from all error all infection of Popery Socinianism Pharisaism and to render it the same with the doctrine of Paul and of Christ guiltless of all derogation to the praise of Gods grace Christs merits or the Saints comfort Yea to set it forth in such a splendor that although hee hath hitherto described such a grace of God as by his donation was no more appropriated and peculiarized to Peter then to Judas to the cursed in hell than to the Saints in heaven and such a Christ as reigneth Tyrant-like in the Kingdom of grace chaining up his own all his own subjects and friends under the curse of the Law to bear the horrors and torments of it in soul and body all their life yea after death as long as the world shall continue though he hath taken away from the Saints after their self-denyall repentance building themselves by their most holy Faith upon Christ the Rock after their renovation and sanctification by the Spirit all hope and possibility of attaining any assurance of Gods unchangeable love to them or of their sinns irrevocably pardoned or of their perseverance in the state of Grace or of their indefeazable right to glory or of their exemption from the curse and wrath of God while they live or of the rest and freedom of their souls after death either from the flames of Hell or of Purgatory as long as the world standeth After hee hath taught that no man shall have any part in Christ and his benefits which procureth it not by his own righteousness his own perfect righteousness in suo genere yea by the merits of his righteousness After that he hath proclaimed that his Gospel brings no better tidings of joy than these Yet at length hee comes to varnish over such a Grace such a Christ such a Gospel such a state of believers who are all of his own faigning with such paints and fine colours as by them to enamour all men to embrace these as the only true and appetible Grace Christ Gospel and state of beleevers That this Doctrine
saith nothing Yet because this still leaveth sub judice litem and certain Conclusions cannot be inferred upon premisses left uncertain I should answer secondly That the Curse pronounced and inflicted upon Adam related to him not as a private but publike person For so he fell and so was he sentenced As comprehending the Elect he had the blessing of the seed of the woman but as representing those that perish so he had the Curse But touching those things which he and the other godly do suffer the learned Sadeel Adver sus humanas satisfactiones answereth this Popish Argument here proposed by Mr. Baxter out of Augustine Posset aliquis dicere saith Augustine Si propter peccatum Deus dixerit homini In sudore vultus tui edes panem tuum spinas tribulos proseret tibi terra c. Cur fideles post peccatorum remissionem eosdem dolores patiuntur Respondemus saith Austin Ante remissionem esse supplicia peccatorum post remissionem esse certamina exercitationesque justorum i. e. Some one may say If for sin God said to man In the sweat of thy face thou shalt eat thy bread and the earth shall bring forth to thee bryars and thorns c. Why do the beleevers after the remission of sinns suffer these sorrowes We answer saith Austin Before remission these are punishments of sinns after remission they are tryalls and exercises of the Righteous Whereunto Sadeel addeth Non sequitur si mors vitae praesentis aerumnae per se sunt peccati poenae quippe propter peccatum in mundum ingressae eas esse proptereà peccatorum paenas ipsis etiam fidelibus quibus peccata sunt propter Christum condonata i. e. It followeth not if death and the sorrows of the present life be in themselves the punishments of sinn because they entred into the world for or by means of sinn that they are therefore punishments of sinn to the very faithfull also to whom their sinns are forgiven for Christs sake But to do him a pleasure should we give him his Argument forgiving the unsoundnes of it what doth he conclude Thus much that the suspending of the rigorous execution of the sentence of the Law is the most observable immediate effect of Christs death that the redeemed of the Lord partake of By suspending the rigorous execution of the Law he means that he doth forbear an hour or a day or some short time to destroy their lives and cast their souls into hell But so that every moment they must stand in expectation of it and that to their greater torment at last as their sinns during the time of the suspension is increased Whosoever now of Gods redeemed ones receives comfort by this doctrine will I doubt not give his verdit for Mr. Baxter having so nobly and divinely resolved this question that He is a Divine indeed He tells us there be other effects of Christs death c. But he is not at leisure now to communicate them But if they have no more sweet and marrow than this let him keep them to himself we will not be inquisitive after them P. 68. B. To the second Quâ—stion The Elect before Conversion do stand in the same relation to the Law and Curse as other men though they be differenced in Gods Decree Eph. 2. 3 12. Very short yet not so sweet as short He saith it but he proves it not For the Scripture which he brings for proof doth onely declare what the Elect are by nature before conversion not what they are before God in relation to his Covenant of Grace But Mr. Baxter purposeth to speak more largely hereunto in another place which will give me occasion to enlarge my answer At present he is in travell with his answer to the third question and cannot be at rest untill he be delivered of so beautifull a Monster and thus it comes from him Bax. To the third question I confess we have here a knotty question The common judgment is that Christ hath taken away the whole Curse though not the suffering by bearing it himself and now they are onely Afflictions of Love and not punishments I do not contradict this Doctrine through affectation of singularity the Lord knoweth but through constraint of judgment and that upon these grounds following 1 It is undeniable that Christs taking the Curs upon himself did not wholly prevent the execution upon the offender Ge. 3. 7 8 10 15 16 17 18 19. 2 It is evident from the event seeing we feel part of the Curs fulfilled on us we eat in labor and sweat the earth doth bring forth thorns and brayars women bring forth their children in sorrow our native pravity is the Curs upon our souls we are sick weary full of fears sorrows and shame and at last we dye and turn to dust 3 The Scripture tells us that we all dye in Adam even that death from which we must at the Resurrection be raised by Christ 1 Co. 15. 21 22. And that death is the wages of sin Ro. 6. 23. and that the sickness and weakness and death of the godly is caused by their sins 1 Co. 11. 30 31. And if so then doubtles they are in execution of the Law though not in full rigour 4 It is manifest that our sufferings are in their own nature evils to us and the sanctifying of them to us taketh not away their naturall evil but onely produceth by it as by an occasion a greater good Doubtles so farr as it is an effect of sinn it is evill and the effect of the Law also 5 They are ascribed to Gods anger as the moderating of them is ascribed to his lâ—ve Psa 30. 5. and a thousand places more 6 They are called punishments in scripture and therefore we may call them so Lev. 26 41 43. Lam. 3. 39. 4. 6 22. Ezras 9. 13. Hos 4. 9. 12. 2. Lev. 26. 18 24. 7 The very nature of affliction is to be a loving punishment a naturall evil sanctified and so to be mixt of evil and good as it proceeds from mixt causes Therefore to say that Christ hath taken away the Curs and evill but not the sufferings is a contradiction becaus so farr as it is suffering it is to us evill and the execution of the Curs What Reason can be given why God should not do us all that good without our sufferings which now he doth by them if there were not sin and wrath and law in them Sure he could better us by easier means 8 All those Scriptures and Reasons that are brought to the contrary do prove no more but this that our afflictions are not the Rigorous execution of the Law that they are not wholly or chiefly in wrath but as the common love of God to the wicked is mixt with hatred in their sufferings and the hatred prevaileth above the love so the sufferings of the godly proceed from a mixture of Love and Anger and so have in them a mixture
because the New Covenant threatens no death to such sinnes therefore no need if Christs mediating death here for us For where no death is threatned there is none explicitely due saith he But will he say none is either explicitely or implicitely due Or when Mr. Baxter tels us pag. 15. that in the Old Covenant the promise of life is not expressed but plainly implyed in the threatning of death Will it not follow by the same reasons that when Mr. Baxter in the after part of this his Tractate alleageth such multitudes of Scriptures that promise life to the performance of such and such acts of Gospel righteousnesse that there is implyed the threat of death against the non-performance of the same Or if it should have been printed as it is most probable because he so speaketh elswhere in reference to the covenants that where death is not explicitely threatned there it is not due and Christ hath not suffered it in our behalfe What shall we think then of all the fathers from Adam to Moses where was this death explicitely threatned to any actual sinne untill the Law was given by Moses The Scripture mentions it not and Mr. Baxter hath told us though I doubt somewhat rashly and Magisterially that to Adam himself in his perfection the form of the Covenant was not known as written in his heart but by superadded revelation pag. 14. Yea what shall we say of all the Nations of the world Israel alone excepted that even untill Christ had no revealed Covenant with God much lesse death threatned explicitely by such a Covenant Will Mr. Baxter deny death to have been due to them for their sinnes because not explicitely threatned Doth not the Apostle Rom. 1. 32. alibi affirm the contrary Thus if it were but it is not proved that the New Testament doth not so threaten death 3. When he tels us that Christ is said to have been made under the Law and to have born the curse of the Law and to have freed us from it but no where is this affirmed of him in respect of the Gospel pag. 161. This is an Argument of the same nature with that before from Heb. 9. 15. The Apostle to dash the crest of their self-confidence in seeking to be in part justified as Mr. Baxter also doth by their own personall righteousnesse done in conformity to the Law tels them that even the Israel of God that were priviledged above all other people with a Law of Righteousness were under the curse of the Law and could not be saved but by a Redeemer much less they that had not the help of such a Law It bears the same sense with that of Gal. 2. 15 16. We that are Jews by nature and not sinneâ—s of the Gentiles Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the Faith of Jesus Christ even we have beleeved in Jesus Christ that we may be justified c. What a monstrous delusion were it then for us to teach the sinners of the Gentiles to seek after Justification by their personal righteousness according to the Law And though it be no where totidem verbis said or affirmed of him in respect of the Gospel yet is it said in the words equivalent Heb 9. 15. That he is the Mediator of the New Testament whence Pareus on the place concludeth That if he hath satisfied for the sins against the Old much more for the sinnes against the New Testament seeing he is the Mediator of this not of that And the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sinne 1 Joh. 1. 7. Ergo from sins also against the Gospel I cannot say from sinns which are onely against the Gospel for there are none such Or if Mr. Baxter will take the words so strictly as hee seems to take them that Christ hath redeemed onely from sins against the Law hee must exclude himself with all the Churches and Saints of the Gentiles that are or have been from the redemption which is by Christ for so then must that passage in Gal. 4. 4 5. be read Christ was made under the Law to redeem them onely that were under the Law i. e. Only the Jews for they onely were under the Law of Moses and of this Law Mr. Baxter must needs confess the Apostle here to speak So that this argument of his if it please not a Jew it will please no body 4. The last Argument which he brings in the same 161 pag. to hit the white and cleave the pin and resolve the question so unanswerably that no tongue which cannot speak may ever more utter or mutter against it is as streight with his purpose as a rams horn with a line 4. But the question is out of doubt saith he because that every man that performeth not the Gospel-conditions doth bear the punishment himself in eternall fire and therefore Christ did not bear it True for Christ did bear the punishment of none of his sins neither of his lying swearing lust murther drunkennesse and other sins against the Law but he shall bear all himself shall we therefore conclude that Christ dyed not to make satisfaction for those sinnes in reference to them that have part in his death This were to pronounce Christ to have satisfied for no sin at all either against Law or Gospel and so no flesh shall be saved but ll suffer in eternal fire 5. What is in this Argument as also in the two next and immediately put before this in the same 161 pag. of his Saint-conditions which he worshipeth as his Mediators to bring him into communion with Christ no less then he doth Christ himself to bring him into communion with God I have partly spoken to before and shall have large and frequent occasions to speak more fully and largely upon other parts of this Tractate of Mr. Baxter here he doth but name conditions in general and what he saith is not worthy of any particular Animadversions in relation to it He confesseth himself pag. 160. To have been long of another judgement in this point while he considered not the tenor of the Covenants distinctly That is as long as he derived his guidance therein from the Scripture it self and from the truly Evangelical and Orthodox Commentators thereon But since hee hath met with Apocryphal Doctors the Jesuits and other nimble braines among the Papists and with Grotius and Vossius and others of that hair which hâ—â—e divided their consciences between the Papists and Socinians little prizing the Word where some quaint wit and invention of man haâ—h not descanted upon it to make it shine in the paint and varnish of humane speculations and art Now having found a Câ—ckows egge in a Finches nest the man is so taken with the pretty conveyance that hee doth as it were nest himselfe by it and accounts all other contemplations base in comparison of this defies Eagles Swans Turtles yea the whole generation of other birds cares not
adoption Or lastly is his meaning that our union with Christ is the foundation not only of remission justification and reconciliation which do restore the offender into the same state of freedome and favor which we had lost and faln from but also of Adoption and of a far higher advancement then that from which he fell herein I shall not dissent from him But why then doth he so transpose his words as to make the stream of Gods operations to run backward if not to make mans qualifications the ground of his union with Christ his faith and good works by which he is justifyed to be if not the cause yet the antecedent of this union and not this union to be the cause or antecedent of his both justification and holinesse So much I thought fit to interpose here that this Thesis of Mr. Baxter might not serve as a bridge to carry over the reader captive unto some fallacious untruths in the after-part of this his Tractate contained Hence now let us passe to the 55 Thesis which hath not a totall disagreement with the former that have been examined in this Chapter but a dependence upon them B. Thesis 55. p. 211. Before it be committed it is no sin and where there is no sin the penalty is not due and where it is not due it cannot properly be forgiven therefore sin is not forgiven before it be committed though the grounds of certain remission be laid before The strength and evidence of this reasoning will the better appear if we lay by it another to the same tune and upon the same terms It cannot be denyed to be as good an argumentation as this if I should thus argue Before it be committed it is no sin and where there is no sin there is no penalty due and where it is not due it cannot properly be required therefore the sins that have been committed since the death of Christ had not their penalty born by Christ before they were committed and consequently Gods justice remains unsatisfyed for the sins of all that have been committed since the death of Christ and every offender is to bear the condemnation of them in his own bosome though the grounds of certain remission were laid before in God except another Christ be sent from heaven to bear or the same Christ again to bear the penalty of the sins after they are committed Whether this argumentation doth not carry in it as great if not greater likelihood of reason then Mr. Baxters I leave to every rationall man to judge And thus when a proud lust possesseth us to reason from our own brain and not from Gods word we easily reason our selves into hell Neither do I see how Mr. Baxter according to this reasoning can ever look to be justifyed or saved except by one of these two wayes either by asserting his own righteousnesse which hitherto with his fellowes he hath made but a collaterall with the righteousnesse of Christ to justifie and save to be at a pinch all-sufficient and effectuall to perfect the work without Christ as it is with partners in a Trade and buying and selling of wares what one doth both do and what bargain one makes both must stand to it Or else by canonizing the Popish masse to offer therein Christ often unto God as a sacrifice for the expiation and forgivenesse of his sins when he hath committed them sith Christs offering himself was in no wise the bearing of the penalty or satisfying of Gods justice for his or our sins because not then committed But let us see whether in any sense the reasoning of Mr. Baxter here may be made good or taken up as tolerable Not to mention here Gods forgiving of sins as an act immanent in God from eternity For this would but make Mr. Baxter startle he is no more patient to hear this voice then was Caligula at the voice of Thunder his bloud riseth at it as do theirs at the sight of a Cat whose natures have an antipathy to that poor creature that never meant them hurt Let us consider forgivenesse and pardon in tearms and wayes as himself granteth a possibility of giving and receiving it And First in foro conscientiae at the bar of God in the conscience of man to which he most limiteth and contracteth remission and justification May not the offender apprehend and apply to himself the pardon of his future as well as of his past and present sins through the Lord Christ in some sense 1. In respect of the seed of all the sins which he shall through infirmity commit in the time to come of his life I mean his corrupt nature or originall defilement and sin from which as from their naturall source all their acts of sin spring every true beleever is and may apprehend himself pardoned this the very Papists acknowledge denying originall sin and defectivenesse to have any mortality of sin in it because the guilt thereof is purged from the soul by the bloud of Christ at his very first admission and entrance into Christ as they say In this respect I doubt not but Mr. Baxter will confesse that all their after acts of sin are remitted in their seed and womb to beleevers before they be committed 2. In respect of Gods not imputing them to the person that shall offend so the sins not yet committed are forgiven to every elect person God hath laid on Christs score all the sins of the elect committed or to be committed and satisfyed his justice for them upon Christ who in their names hath paid the penalty of all therefore their consciences are discharged neither sins past nor sins to come shall be any more imputed to them There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. There is dayly new sinning why not also subjection to condemnation because the person being in Christ though subject to a necessity of sinning yet through the justification of his person is exempted from the further imputation of sin so committed unto condemnation He that beleeveth hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation Joh. 5. 24. He comes dayly into the acting of new sins how is it that he comes not into a subjection and obligation to condemnation by those sins but because they were forgiven to the offender before therefore not imputed to him when committed It is one chief priviledge of the new Covenant Their sins and iniquities will I remember no more Now where remission of these is there is no more offering for sin Jer. 31. 38. c. Heb. 10. 17 18. speaks the holy Ghost here only of sin past and not of those to come that they which are within the new Covenant have remission of them then 1. The same person hath some sins forgiven and some not forgiven by Christ that which is past is remitted that which is to come is retained 2. Then the priviledge is no priviledge if only sins past are not remembred but sins to come are
life of Christ sacrificed for us to be the Ransom Mat. 20. 28. 1 Tim. 2. 6. The Price by which we are purchased and redeemed from thraldome 1 Cor. 6. 20. 7. 23. The propitiation for our sins through faith in his bloud Rom. 3. 25. 1 Joh. 4. 10. i. e. that one and only act of Christ by which our sinnes are expiated the justice of God satisfyed and his wrath appeased so that we finde him now a God propitious and gratious to us But if we will hear the Scriptures speaking at large and articulately confirming this position that the satisfaction made by Christ is begun continued and perfected meerly and wholly in and by Christs sufferings in steed of many Testimonies which the Scripture affordeth I shall pitch upon two disputes only of the Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews The former in cap 9. beginning at the 11 and 12 verses That Christ being become an high Priest c. by his own bloud entred once into the Holy place having obtained for us eternall Redemption I need not explain the words for the edification of any that hath but read the Scriptures and taken but overly into his consideration how that which was yearly under the Law figured in the act of the high Priest the type was at length effectually accomplished by Christ the Antitype Again ver 13 14. If the bloud of Buls c. sanctifyed to the purifying of the Flesh how much more shall the bloud of Christ which by the eternall Spirit offered himselfe to God without spot purge your conscience from dead works c. An undeniable vertue and efficacy in the bloud of Christ alone without any further acts of Christ himself to purge the conscience e. i. to absolve and justifie is here affirmed And further ver 15. He is the Mâ—diatour of the new Covenant that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions under the first Testament they which are called may receive the promise of the eternall inheritance i. e. the eternall inheritance promised by means of Christs death and not by his Legislative righteousnesse And ver 26 Christ now once at the end of the world hath appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself What sin All sin according to that of John The bloud of Christ purgeth from all sin 1 Joh. 1. 7. And if from all sin what sin is there left for Christs giving of Lawes to put away or what of justification left out for it to perfect or of full satisfaction not made for it to compleat Lastly ver 28. Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many How did he bear them but as the Apostle saith He hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law being made a curse for us Gal. 3. 13. and in bearing them on our behalfe he satisfyed justice on our behalf And this is affirmed to be by offering himself for us not by giving Laws to us or injoyning duties upon us His second dispute is chap. 10. where the Apostle having mentioned the feeblenesse of the sacrifices offered by the Law to take away sin brings in Christ offering himself to accomplish what these could not and declaring his ready obedience to fulfill that will of God written in the volume of Gods book to offer himself a sacrifice for sin with a Lo I come by this will of God saith he we are sanctifyed by the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all ver 5 10. He saith not we have our consecration to be holy by the commands of Christ c. but by the offering of his body And that by sanctification is to be here understood purification and justification I think it will not be denyed However ver 12. it is added that he having once offered sacrifice for sins for ever sat down at the right hand of God his sitting down and resting argues his work the work of our redemption and justification perfected in every degree and number His rest is as Gods rest was from the beginning then the work of Creation now of Redemption being made absolutely perfect the rest followed and where had this work its beginning progresse and perfection In his once offering of sacrifice for sins for ever Nothing here of Christs Law-giving and rule from the bottom to the top of the work of Redemption or Justification The sacrifice alone satisfyed so far all things of man are here excluded as that nothing else of Christ is required As it is more fully yet expressed ver 14. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctifyed His perfecting Mr. Baxter will not deny to be his making of perfect satisfaction for them and this is done by one offering of Christ Will Mr. Baxter be so audacious as to oppose the holy Ghost with his Nay telling that there must be somewhat else besides this offering viz. Christs Law-giving as part of the satisfaction made for us Lastly to put all out of doubt and besides the bounds of cavilling what the Apostle should mean here by sanctifying and perfecting this also is unfolded in plain words ver 17 18. viz. The taking away of their sinnes and iniquities And where the remission of these is there is no more offering c. satisfaction is made to the full and no need of any addition for the perfecting thereof I acknowledg there are many things required to condition Christ that he might be an effectuall offerer and offering else could not the redemption and justification which are by him have been completed or the satisfaction made for us been perfect Yea that after the work of satisfaction as formerly of Creation finished and a totall resting from any further addition to it yet the Father worketh and the Son worketh hitherto in the businesse of governing and preserving of what is so created and repayred yet this doth not at all hinder but that full satisfaction is made by the alone offering of Christ And here once more I call upon Mr. Baxter and all his adherents to bring forth any one testimony of Scripture to prove that either Christs Law-giving or any other act of Christ besides this one of offering himself a sacrifice for sin is by the Scripture in whole or in part affirmed satisfactory to God for our justification Let them not as Mr. Baxter before doth from pa. 54. to pa. 61. bring their peradventures and may bees and possibles and verisimilies for are the conjectures and results of a working and self-conceited brain to be laid as a foundation whereon to build an Article of our faith But let them bring the oracle of the Word testifying either that Christ hath done or God hath required of him or accepted from him such and such works in part of satisfaction Else our ears will be deaf to hear mans prattle being attentive in such matters only to the voice of the holy Ghost This shall suffice for the opening and confirming of ouâ— Tenet untill it shall
that time shall never be wholly done nor bee known to all whose works were vitall and whose dead works 3. That the very Saints as compared one with another shall be judged according to their works i. e. shall be adjudged to glory in severall measures above according to the severall measures of their services and sufferings heere is the opinion of many eminent for learning and godliness neither doe their Reasons yet wholly sway me who dissent from them and will have neither right hand nor left hand nor sun nor stars nor great nor small but all equall in one degree of glory It is no proper place heer to dispute it but I see no reason to conclude that hee which distributeth his gifts of grace heer in different measures may not so also there distribute the degrees of glory Seeing both are by the purchase of his death and whether by the former he puts us in a greater or lesser capableness of the later is in question But in any other sense how as he sayth the sentence of justification shall passe according to works and that as hee infers from 2. Co. 5. 10. according to works whether good or evill I cannot conjecture 1. Not according to works as they are a condition which is the next thing hee undertakes to prove for evill works cannot be the condition of our justification either negatively that if we have done evill we neyther are nor shal be justified then all must bee damned nor positively that whosoever hath done evill shall be justified then all shall be saved Nor 2. shall it passe so as that according to our good works we shall be justified and according to our evill works we shall be condemned then every man at least every true Christian should be both saved and damned 3 Nor that we shal be much justified if we have all good works little justified if we have done some evil works also for that is the last judgment where every man shall have a full discharge or no discharge I must leave this as one of Mr. Baxters Mysteries it must die with him as to my understanding unless hee vouchsafe his interpretation As for the thing it selfe I utterly deny that they which are in Christ shall be so judged or justified according to their works as other men that they shall stand as prisoners with the world at the bar of Christ to bee judged for life and death as the other according to their works What that the Lord Christ should then discover the nakedness and lay open in the sight of men and divels all the sin and shame of his beloved members That he should cast in their faces all the filth of all their originall and actuall pollution even when they are upon the threshold of heaven Let it be Mr. Baxters doctrine my eares are abhorrent from the sound thereof It is against the stream of Gospel doctrine which tells us that Christ hath born their sin and curs and done their law therfore they are not to be called to such a reckoning That their iniquities are forgiven and sins covered Ro. 4. 7. That the Lord will no more remember them Heb. 10. 17. That they are not under the Law but under Grace Ro. 6. 14. Therfore exempted from the accusations of the Law at the Bar of Justice where the world is to be tried and to receive no other judgement but what flowes from the throne of grace That there is no condemnation to them that the law of the spirit of life which is in Christ Jesus hath freed them from the law of â—in and death Ro. 8. 1. 2. So that the Law hath no mâ—re power of judgmeÌ„t over theÌ„ than the lawes of our Land to try an Angel of Heaven for life and death That none can lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect because God justifieth them and who is hee that is the judge and condemner even Christ which is their Saviour Ro. 8. 33. 34. That they are the sheep that shal be first separated and set at the right hand of Christ before he enters upon the judging of the world and so freed from judgement by the mercy of God in separating them as Augustine well observeth Aug. de Consens Evang. lib. 2. cap. 30. That they shall not come into condemnation but are passed from death to life Jo. 5. 24. That what to the world is the day of judgement to these is the day of Redemption Lu. 21. 28. They shall not come into judgement to answer for any one of their sins as is well observed by Reverend Mr. Fox the author of that which we call the De Christo gratis Justif p. 336. Book of Martyrs for saith he Sublatâ offensâ tollitur simul Judicii obligatio i. e. The sin being taken away viz. by the Lamb of God as appears Io. 1. 29. all obligation of judgement is taken away with it As for the works and righteousness which these Scriptures declare shal be mentioned to beleevers in that their Jubilizing day this speaks out the infinit freeness and riches of Gods grace in covering their nakedness and setting forth only the beauty and ornaments which he hath put upon them but in no wise any sufficient ground or reason upon which they might expect so great a salvation Suppose a noble and indulgent Father hath a prodigall and rebellious son that for many yeers hath grieved the spirit of his Father with his impure cariage and exorbitant outrages to whom notwithstanding his Fathers heart is no less indeared than was Davids to Absolom therfore never hath a thought of disinheriting him but reserves his whole heritage together with a boundles treasâ—re entire for him in the mean while wooing and even melting him with loving kindness into love and duty â— at length the son repenteth becomes ashamed of his base carriage toward so good a Father returns to him waits on him ministreth to him in his weakness and sickness and his Father by his last Will and Testament gives him all naming him therin his good and beloved son that hath done him great service ministred to him much comfort in the time of his necessity Will any hence gather that the attendance of such a son on such a Father at last is a sufficient ground and reason for the Fathers setling on him so vast an estate Could not the Father have hired a stranger for a few Crowns to have done him as much service Doth not the mentioning of the sons good deeds which he would seem to reward with so rich munificence speak out only the remarkable goodness of the Father that hath buried in oblivion all the disobedience and mischiefs which his son hath committed and will have his good parts alone to be mentioned or if another that was not his son had done a thousand times more in his service should he have been entitled for it to the inheritance So also in this case to attribute to the works of beleevers the
pious and not unlearned men that have taken some infection of the Epidemicall disease of our times too easily to drink down errors differing herein only from the vulgar that error is more appetible to them from a learned and sophisticall than truth from a plainer though faithfull hand Let a man once have the name of a learnnd Scholar and strict-walking Pharisee all his Doctrines by such men are concluded to be of rare use and excellency before they be seen whether they be white or black from Heaven or from Hell Not a few of these men having in my hearing stood firm and up moved in the defence of the doctrines of this book of Mr. Brs. not being able to speak any thing to refell the objections made against it but this that the Author thereof is an eminently learned and pious man As if Satan had not the wit to make choyse of his instruments that have the most compleat aptitude and power to deceive or that the Jews had not so much to say for their Pharisees the Papists for their Bellarmine and the Remoâ—strants for their Arminius or the Devill had forgotten his ancient subtlety when he will seduce from the verity of Christs Gospel to change himself into an Angell of Light or that no damning errour could proceed from a self-saving or rather self-deceiving Pharisee To cleer up the truth to such at lest to give their occasion to search the Scriptures by which they may cleer it to themselves I shall lay and compare together Paul and Mr. Br. in that which Mr. Br. saith was the question about which Paul disputed that it may be made evident whether they agree or contradict either the other To this purpose by the way there is to be taken out of the way a fallacy that lurketh in Mr. Brs. words where he saith The dispute of St. Paul is upon this Question It is not enough to say this was A Question excâ—pt he say also it was the Question yea the Onely Question upon which the Apostle disputed in those places where he excludeth works and inferreth Faith alone to be ordeined as effectuall to justification He disputed in some of his Epistles upon many questions To reduce what hee disputed severally to the severall questions all to one were to make non-sense of the whole The same may be said of all mens yea of the most Scholastick disputes of Mr. Br. himself who is a greater Philosopher and more studied in Logick and Metaphysicks than ever the Apostle was But I deny it to be the onely or the chief question about which St. Paâ—l so disputeth what is the Righteousnesse which wee must plead against the Accusation of the Law or by which wee are justified as the proper Righteousness of the Law I grant it to be one but a less principall question upon which he disputes But the more principall question is in generall by what means we may be interessed into Christ or obtain the righteousness of Christ to become ours and so still retâ—in it to justification More particularly whether the Native Faederall holiness of the Jewes and the priviledges of the Covenant in part mentioned Rom. 9. 4 5. Phil. 3. 5. Gal. 2. 15. Or their actuall and personall righteousnesse and sincere obedience to the Law mentioned Phil. 3. 6. Mat. 20. 12. and the 19 20. together with all the Typicall purgings mentioned in the 9. 10. Chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews On the other side whether all the Naturall and Morall righteousness of the Gentiles which they performed by the instinct of the Law of Nature written in their Consciences without the help or knowledg of Gods written law or their exemption from the Covenant of God made with the Jews For some of the believing Gentiles reading the promises made of calling unto the grace of Christ them that were not Gods people or beloved before weakly concluded that their former uncircumcision and uncovenant-ship was a speciall furtherance to their admission unto Christ as may be probably gathered from Rom. 11. 19. Gal. 5. 6. whether any of these kinds of holinesse and works of righteousness either with Faith or without Faith or whether Faith alone without all or any of these be required as instrumentall subservient and effectuall to inright us to the Justification which is by Christ This was the more principall question upon which Paul disputeth in the places before mentioned Somewhat he saith to the former but lesse principally and seldom but in subserviency to this So the question upon which Paul disputes in his Epistles and Mr. Br. in his Aphorisms is one and the same but their Conclusions absolutely contradictory either to other The one concludeth that Faith alone without mans works and righteousness The other that not faith alone but Faith as a work together with all other works of righteousnesse do justifie and all morall duties collaterally with Faith are required to make the Righteousness of Christ ours to justification No greater or more palpable Contradiction can be devised Whosoever shall preach another Gospell of Justification otherwise than by Faith in Christ without works let him be accursed saith Paul Whosoever shall be practically a solifidian trust to a bare Faith and not work for Justification shall be Damned saith Mr. Br. If one of these be granted to be an Apostle of Christ the other must needs be proclaimed to be the Apostle of Antichrist But whether this which I have expressed be indeed the principal question on which the Apostle so disputeth adhuc sub judice lis est We are left uncertain on both hands may some say True and if I onely say and not shew it I shall be guilty of the fault which I blame in Mr. Br. And so we may deserve both to be laught at as Triflers This therefore is the next thing to be added First then if we do but consider to whom and against whom the Apostle handleth these disputes for Mr. Br. reduceth them all to his Epistles it will be more than probable to every rationall man that his most principall question is By what means we possesse and continue in the possession of the righteousnesse which is by Christ to Justification And but secondarily less principally and in subserviency to this question What the righteousnesse is by which we are to be justified The persons to whom he writeth were all Christians the purest and most eminent Churches of Christ that had received the pure doctrine of Christ by the preaching of the Apostles viz. that whereas sinn and death and the Curse by sinn reigned over all men in all the world so that all wete Children of wrath and every soul guilty before God Christ was given of the Father to be the Author of Righteousness and life by the Mediation of his death that in him and in no other name under heaven was salvation attainable that whosoever would beleeve in him should have everlasting life should be Justified freely by Grace
hast he leaves not his wits behind him but craftily delivers to us Papisticall Doctrine yet not in the Papists words lest he should be espyed and shunned Thus run his words B. Thes 9. It was not the intent either of the Father or Son that by this satisfaction the offenders should be immediately delivered from the whole curse of the Law and freed from the evil which they had brought upon themselves but some part must be executed upon the soul and body and the creatures themselves and remain upon them at the pleasure of Christ Rev. 1. 18. 1 Cor. 15. 26. The phrase and words of this Position are not a little ambiguous lest I should seem to wrest them to an evill when a good sense may be given them I will not so much as descant upon any thing therein with the least paraphrase but take all in his own Explication which thus followeth Explication B. The Questions that are here to be handled for the explication of this Position are these 1 Quest Whether the Redeemed are immediately upon the price paid delivered from any of the Curse of the Law if not from all Quest 2. Whether the sufferings of the Elect before Conversion are in execution of any part of the Curse of the Law 3 Whether the sufferings of Believers are from the Curse of the Law or onely afflictions of love the Curse being taken off by Christ 4 Whether it be not a wrong to the Redeemer that the people whom he hath ransomed are not immediately delivered 5 Whether it be any wrong to the Redeemed themselves 6 How long it will be till all the curse be taken off the beleevers and redemption have attained its full effect I have oft heard that one fool may put more Questions in an hour then a whole University of Divines can answer in an age If it be true what are we to conclude of the Questions of Mr Baxter the mirror of his age for wit and profoundness in learning who sitteth in the Chair alone passing his censure upon all the Divines that are or have been such are ignorant and unstudied such judicious and learned c. his Questions surely will try the braines of men and oh that he were so dexterous in Answering as in Questioning Then to use his own words we would take him for a Divine indeed yea for a Teacher sent from Heaven for no mortal weight upon Earth can answer many things which he questioneth Let us therefore hear himself answering himself B. To the first Question I answer In this case the undertaking of satisfaction had the same immediate effect upon Adam as the satisfaction it selfe upon us or for us To determine what these are were an excellent work it being one of the greatâ—st and noblest Questions in our How proâ—eâ— he that Adam and Eve were then existent when Christ undertook controverted Divinity what are the immediate effects of Christs death He that can rightly answer this is a Divine indeed and by the help of this may expedite most other controversies about Redemption and Justification In a word the effects of Redemption undertaken could not be upon a subject nor yet existent and so no subject though it might be for them None but Adam and Eve were then existâ—nt yet assoon as we do exist we do receive benefit from it The suspending of the rigorous execution of the sentence of the Law is the most observable immediate effect of Christs death which suspension is some kinde of deliverance from it Of the other effects elswhere A compleat and profound answer who so stupid or way-ward that he resteth not satisfied with it The Question was Whether the redeemed are immediately upon the price paid delivered from any of the curse of the Law if not from all He answers in this case the undertaking of satisfaction had the same immediate effects upon Adam as the satisfaction it self upon us or for us But what were those immediate effects upon Adam He answereth a riddle unriddle what this is what these effects are eris mihi magnus Apollo such a one shall have a Temple built unto him from which to give answer and resolution to all other questions and doubts in Divinity Oracularly And who more deserving of this honour then Mr. Baxter Who more able to unriddle his own Question than himself That he therefore may be taken for the Divine indeed he so resolveth the Question as his own words above declare The benefit which Adam and Eve forthwith received upon Christs undertaking to make satisfaction for them is the most remarkable immediate effect of Christs death whereof the redeemed partake But the suspension of the rigorous execution of the sentence of the Law was the benefit that Adam and Eve upon such undertaking of Christ for them forthwith received Ergo The suspending of the rigorous execution of the sentence of the Law is the most observable immediate effect of Christs death whereof the redeemed partake The Proposition he proveth thus becaus there were none els existent besides Adam and Eve when Christ so undertook therefore the effects of his satisfaction must be upon them or upon none The assumption he takes to be clear by its own light onely he addeth that this suspending was a kind of deliverance If this be not the sum and force of his answer to the Question Capiat qui capere potis est I must plead my self not guilty of understanding him But it is enough evident that this is his meaning Now if I listed to answer his Argument I should tell him that both premisses labour of one and the same fallacy which is in Schools termed Petitio principij an assuming of that as granted which is in Question The validity of both Propositions depending upon these begg'd Principles that Christ first undertook to make satisfaction to God for the sin of Adam and Eve when they were existent and that they were in the number of the redeemed ones as soon as they had sinned for so was the Question whether the redeemed c. are freed from any of the Curse of the Law Now what Mr. Baxter goes about to prove he doth it by the example of Adam and Eve which is in no wise a competent proof unless they be proved first to have been existent when Christ undertook to satisfie and secondly to have been then redeemed For the most observable effects of Christs death pertain to the redeemed not to the world Both propositions then being faulty the Conclusion is not worth a button In charity indeed we do not in any wise question the redemption and salvation of our first parents though the time of their conversion be disputable whether before the curse inflicted But not the judgment of charity but the undeceiving word of God must be made the ground of our Faith Untill therfore he bring some proof of Scripture that Adam and Eve were existent when Christ undertook then also and redeemed in all that he saith he
of avoyding tediousnes to leave the most precious truths hidden in corners and onely to leave a paint of plausibility and probability upon the Embryons and errors of his own brain in stead of bringing them openly to the tryall And this occasioned me to be the more in length to bring forth cleerly into the light the truth that he hath hidden and to take off the outside paint from his fancies that they might appear in their own nature and colors Partly also to discover the pernicious danger which lurketh in the doctrine which he hath here delivered against which too much cannot be spoken to prevent the taking of inconsiderate and over credulous Christians in his snares I shall shew my reasons why I call it pernicious doctrine and so leave the question 1 It is anti-scripturall and diametrically opposite to the word as is enough manifested by that which hath been already said in the examination thereof 2. It is Antichristian hath sundry Popish errors some more apertly others more hiddenly included in it So that when immediately before his arguments he professeth that it is not affectation of singularity that divides him in judgement from the reformed Churches we doubt not but he speaks truth herein For it is to follow the stream and Clowd of Popish Doctors whose sophistry hath more force upon his judgment than ever I could perceive the Word to have Those Popish errors then that are more openly conteined in his doctrine here are principally about Christs and mans satisfactions made to God for mans sinns in which as the Papists so Mr. Baxter will have man to bear a share with Christ that the glory may not be wholly the Lords And here in sundry points Mr. Baxter speaketh the very same things though not altogether in the same words with the Papists I shall in these severall points lay down briefly the doctrine of the Papists first and then compare Mr. Baxters with it that the Coherence betwixt them may be cleerly seen The Papists opinions I shall truly set forth to you though briefly as they themselves express themselves in the Councell of Trent Sess 6. Cap. 14. 16. Sess 14. Cap. 8 9. and Bellar in his two books de Purgatorio lib. 4. de Poenitentia and by sundry other of their own Writers 1 They hold that although Christ hath by his death and merits satisfied the Law and Justice of God for the fault of our sinns in offending Gods Justice and violating his holy Law so that God is no more at enmity with but reconciled to them which truly repent and beleeve hath fully pardoned their sinn and forgiven their offences for Christs sake yet hath neither Christ given nor God taken full satisfaction for the punishment but that after the fault is pardoned God may and will inflâ—ct punishment upon the offender In this and the rest points of satisfaction they give this generall rule that Christ hath undertaken for us onely that which we could not do for our selves and satisfied for us so far onely as it was unpossible for us to make satisfaction for our selves As for that which by doing or suffering was in our power to accomplish for our selves that he hath left to be without his preventing us accomplished by us But in this Case say they It was unpossible for man to undertake any work any suffering so noble worthy as might stand in equipoise with the offending of so infinite a Majestie and so to satisfie Gods Justice for the fault This therfore Christ hath done and God hath accepted from Christ in our behalf But it was possible for man to satisfie at least in part for the punishment which the justice and law of God exact for the offence committed This therefore is in part left to us to satisfie and after he hath forgiven the fault doth notwithstanding inflict upon us the punishment for the satisfying of his law and justice This they go about to prove by the example of Gods dealing with Moses and Aaron when they had sinned against him he forgave freely their fault and offence nevertheless called them exactly to a reckoning about the punishment was in perfect friendship with them again yet would not abate them an ace of the punishment which he had threatened to them they must dye in the Wildernes and never enter into the land that flowed with milk and hony The like they instance in David about his sin in reference to Bathsheba and Vriah The Lord forgave the offence The Lord hath put away thy sin saith the Prophet thou shalt not surely dye 2 Sam. 12 13. Nevertheles in reference to the punishment David shall smoke for it The child shall dye the sword shall never depart from his house c. so that David shall rue it to his very dying day Other Scriptures and reasons they bring which would be over tedious to insert Compare we now Mr. Baxters doctrine with theirs Thes 7. he tells us That Christ Jesus being fully furnished for this work of Mediation by his Fathers and his own will first undertook and afterward discharged mans debt by suffering what the Law did threaten and the offender was unable to bear And Thes 8. That the Father so fully accepted the satisfaction that by way of reward to Christ that gave it he hath delivered all things into his hands and given him all power in heaven and in earth and made him Lord both of the dead and living Yet Thes 9th addeth that It was not the intent of either the Father or the Son that by this satisfaction the offenders should be immediately delivered from the whole Curse of the Law and freed from the evill which they had brought upon themselves but some part must be executed upon soul and body c. And this he goes about by his ten Arguments which we have examined to prove of the beleevers themselves that they are liable to the punishment and Curse of the Law to bear it in part even to death it self and that though there be no unpardoned sin for which the curse as the curse Pag. 71. Arg. 8 is inflicted upon them Let any discreet man here judge if there be the least haires breadth betwixt Mr Baxter and a Papist according to the Councell of Trent i. e. the worst Papist The rule of both about satisfaction is the same Christ hath done and suffered for us what we could not do and suffer for our selves say the Papists Christ hath suffered for us what the Law did threaten and we were unable to bear saith Mr. Baxter implying that whatsoever we can bear must yet be inflicted upon us For this satisfaction the fault is forgiven saith Bellarmine By means of this satisfaction there remains no unpardoned Sin saith Mr. Baxter viz. upon beleevers Yet say both when the sin is forgiven the punishment curse and penalty of the Law must be suffered Here is noble mercy and forgivenes to pardon a man his fault and to pronounce with
them worse than himself Matt. 23. 15. And what should that be but that God takes satisfaction to his justice by his judgments upon them here that they may not have or may have the less to satisfie for in hell or in Purgatory In this therefore as in the two former points I take him expressing himself an adopted sonne of the ghostly Fathers of Trent 4. The Papists hold that there is a Purgatory which they describe to be a prison as hot and full of the same materiall fire and flames as hell it self into which the souls of Christians after this life are cast to satisfie Gods justice for all their veniall sins that they have not made satisfaction for in this life by suffering or doing and being once cast into this prison they cannot come forth out of the torment untill they have paid the utmost farthing of their debt i. e. untill they have suffered so much as may counterpoise to a very grain the sinns whereof they dye unpardoned This they prove by many undeniable Arguments specially by the testimony of many good souls that have obteined a dispensation to come thence with their bosoms so full of fire as of flesh and bones to tell them so Doth Mr. Baxter joyn with them in this opinion also Soft and fair There is skill in daubing first he will try how this Tractate will take if according to his minde probably we shall have a second part and therein he may tell us plainly his judgment in this and many other of his mysteries that here he leaves obscure and ambiguous In the interim it pleaseth him not to deliver his minde herein in words at length but in dark and uncertain figures Yet joyn we together what he saith here and there in parcells and somwhat may be made or at least conjectured of it First then he telleth us that some part of the Curse must be executed upon beleevers i. e. upon the whole man the soul as well as the body Thes 9. 2 That untill the day of Resurrection and of Judgement all the effects of sin and law and wrath will not be removed from them pag. 74. Pag. 71 Arg. 8. Therefore thirdly what he will not doth not at least say of any of their former sufferings he saith of death That there is no unpardoned sin in it which shall procure further judgment and so no hatred in it though there be anger A glorious privilege no doubt such as according to our usuall proverb a man may find at Billingsgate for a box on the ear from the worst of men that he meets with When a man hath in revengefull fury persecuted his hated nighbour with all the strokes and stormes of wrath and mischief and after many years persecution hath at last slaughtered him and trampled his dead Corps into the mire and dust now at last he ceaseth from hatred is but angry with his poor reliques forgives him all the rest when he can do no more to him and forgivenes can do him no good Such tender mercies of Cruelty as the wise man terms them Pro. 12. 10. doth Mr. Baxter here ascribe unto God in his gracious dealings with beleevers for Christs sake viz. to persecute them with all the strokes of his wrath and all the Curses of the law all their life time sparing neither their body nor soul and at last with great indignation to destroy them and trample their bodies into the earth dust and rottennes yea and their souls whither he list and under what torment he list and after this so remarkeable is his love he will hate them no more but be angry with them still When they are dead and can offend no more and God hath inflicted upon them all his judgments that he can inflict no more now their sins shall be so pardoned that they shall suffer no more no more than all which they already suffer Who denies this to be the very quintessence of mercy and spirits of love when Mr. Baxter hath so defined it and held it forth to us as the most Celestiall comfort that we shall finde in death There is saith he no unpardoned sin in the death of beleevers that shall procure further judgement Where note 1 that he saith not simply and absolutely that there is no unpardoned sin upon the Saints now dead and buryed but no sin so unpardoned that it should bring further judgement than that which is already upon them And 2 That when he denyeth that their sin shall bring any further judgement upon them he doth not deny but rather imply their sins to be yet still unpardoned as to the holding those judgements upon them that are already inflicted A comfort that the Devills and reprobates in hell shall not want after the very day of judgment in the midst of their flames That there is none of their sinns so unpardoned as that it should bring any further judgment upon them But put we all together 1 That the beleever must bear the Curse even the whole man in body and soule also 2 That he shall not be delivered from this curse in soul and body untill the resurrection 3 That although death puts him into a freedom from further judgments yet it doth not at all deliver him from those that at death are inflicted upon soul and body How shall we now make up the matter If the whole man both soul and body must suffer and not be wholly freed untill the resurrection this is not fulfilled in the suffering of the body alone If the soul also untill then must suffer then is it not forthwith upon its seperation from the body exalted to Heaven for there is no suffering no affliction Neither doth it suffer in hell for Mr. Baxter exempteth thence all that persevere in the Faith according to his definition of faith untill death Where and whence then shall it suffer but in and from the fire of Purgatory And so there is no unpardoned sin upon beleevers after death that can procure to them any further judgment beyond this If Mr. Baxter meaneth not so it is his fault to write with so much ambiguity and so little plainnes and perspicuity as to toll us on to a strong Conjecture that he meaneth so and is in this as in the rest apostatized to the Papists 5 I might add also here that he seemes to joyn with the Papists in holding beleevers in an uncertainty of their salvation all their life long It is considerable that neither in his Aphorism nor in the whole explication therof nor in all his arguments by which he goeth about to prove beleevers under the Curse doth he once name any pardon of sin or freedom from further judgment which they attain untill after death and then when they have persevered to the end and dyed in Christ now he mentions and affirms it What doth Arg. 8 p. 71. this argue but that he would with the Papists have men to hope well but to be still
the Moral Law For Adam received it while he was yet innocent and without sinne and in that state of his the Law could not convince him was not appointed to convince him of sinne having not all sinned 3. That it makes the Law upon its old terms i. e. according to Master Baxter as a Covenant of workes sufficient by it selfe to conviction without any need of Gospel convictions to bee used When contrariwise all the convictions of the Law so considered can worke but desperation and death in the convinced They are the convictions of the Gospel and Spirit of Grace working by the Gospel that are effectual to conversion and life For conclusion he saith B. But I judge the question to be of more difficulty than moment And I answer that the difficulty of the question is not from the Word of God but from him and his fellowes which fill with knots hard to be loosed the leading thread which Christ hath given us all displayed As for the Moment of the question let him crack at his pleasure among fooles yet the wise must needs see and acknowledge it such as if he lose it he loseth one of his chiefe pillars though it be but a paper pillar to bear up mans personal righteousnesse to justification For if it be proved that Christ requireth perfect obedience under the Gospel down falls all the perfection meritoriousnesse and efficacy of mans righteteousnesse to Justification And so he must begin all again and fit himselfe with better pillars next if any where from Rome or Jury they are to be had this proving rotten and unusefull That obedience which in relation to both Covenants to Law and Gospel too is sinfully unperfect cannot bee of any power to Justifie CHAP. XIX Arg. Whether Christ hath satisfied for sinnes against the Old Covenant and not for sinnes against the New also Thes 32 33 34 35. UNto this I may ad the quodlibetarie quidlibetarie doctrines of Mr Baxter his Niceties quiddities and nimble nothings whereof he disputes profoundly in the four next Theses viz. the 32 c. and in his Appendix in answer to the third question pag. 12. of the appendix and thence to pag. 27. in which many notable and rare speculations are unfolded viz. 1. Whether the rope wherewith Judas hanged himselfe were made of hair or hemp 2. Whether it were Simon alias called Peter or Peter alias called Simon that denyed Christ and whether it were Pontius or else Pilate that condemned him 3. Whether it were Christs Crosse or else the Crosse of Christ that Simon of Cyrene was compelled to bear Item whether hee carried it on his right or his left shoulder and which end of the Crosse was before and whether the contrary end were behind in carriage 4. Whether when Joab was put to death for killing two men Abner and Amasa for which of these two murthers he suffered for the former or the latter or for neither The same or like to these are the disputes of Master Baxter in these Theses and their explications and in the forementioned part of the Appendix viz. 1. Whether when himselfe hath laid it down for a position no lesse firm and unrepealable than the Lawes of the Medes and Persians which alter not that there is no sinne prohibited in the Gospel which is not a breach of some precept of the Decalogue and a sinne against the Old Covenant c. Yet neverthelesse there be any sinnes against the New Covenant which are not also against the Old Item whether there be any sinnes considerable in any of their respects against the Gospel onely and not against the Moral Law and then consequently whether Christ hath satisfied by his death for such sinnes as himself affirmes never have been never shall be or can be committed Thes 30. pag. 148. that is for imaginary sins which never were sins nor shall be Thes 32. 2. When he hath asserted and peremptorily concluded Thes 32. That Christ was not to satisfie for any sin committed against the New Covenant which was not is not also a sin against the Old Yet whether it be not very needfull to be questioned in the 33. Thes Whether Christ hath done what he was not to doe whether he hath satisfied for sins that violated the New Covenant as well as for those that violate the Old Covenant And consequently if he should have so done whether this were to have been reckoned as a work of supererogation above and beyond his duty to have merited superexcedently for us or an act of sin against his duty putting him into an incapacity to merit at all for us yea whereas Mr. Baxter concludeth absolutely as an undeniable truth Thes 32. Therefore Christ dyed not for any sin against the Gospel or Covenant of Grace whether that be not a sufficient argument to prove in Thes 33. that Christ hath not by his passive obedience satisfied for the sinnes that violate the Covenant of Grace who can evade the force of such an argument Christ hath not satisfied ergo he hath not satisfied specially when it hath been before proved in words at length that there is no sin against the New Covenant but is a sin against the Old also and it is satisfied for as to the Old Covenant what reason is there then that it should bee satisfied as to the New Covenant too When the Creditor is payd his full debt in the hall and hath yeelded up the bond will he expect to have the same debt payd to him in the parlor also 3. Whether when both Law and Gospel Old and New Covenant command the same thing that Christ then satisfyeth for the breach of that duty as to the Law but not as to the Gospel The Gospel then damneth men for that fault that in reference to the Law is satisfied for and consequently many poor wretches are damned by the Gospel and New Covenant which by the Law and Old Covenant should be saved Or if it be not so whether then it be not the Law that damneth even finall unbelief it self taking advantage from the violating of the grace of the New Covenant to aggravate their condemnation that under the means of Grace have lived and dyed contemners thereof 4. Whether all other sinnes which the Gospel precepts do prohibit be against Christ and his Gospel as the object of those sins onely the breaking of the conditions of the Gospel be not a sin against Christ and his Gospel as the object of that sin for so Mr. Baxter pag. 159. distinguisheth between those sinnes that have Christ and the Gospel for their object and those breaches of the conditions of the New Covenant as if these had not Christ and his Gospel for their object What then is the object of these sins or have they no object or how many thousand conditions of the New Covenant are there the breach whereof is by no sacrifice to be purged Hee tells us indeed Thes 32. pag. 159. that the Gospel threatneth death to no
head-peece whosoever thinks the contrary For it were a mad contradictive proposition to say whosoever doth or shall beleeve shall be justified in himselfe before he had a self or being But this is no nearer to the matter in question than the North is to the South pole As for that barr of God in heaven that hee concludes with where his Angelical and Seraphical Doctors that better know the way thence than thither saw at their last coming thence God fitting and transacting these things before his Angels we are bidden to wait untill he shall have the leisure after he hath spoken once more with Lucians Icaro-Menippus and enquired of him the certainty thereof and then we shall hear the dream interpreted This is the summe of his noble dispute against justification as an act immanent in God from Eternity And now I appeal to the reader comparing together his bigg and swelling promises with his curt and insubstantial performance after his challenge of all the Antinomians his promise to shew that there is no such thing his charging the doctrine with the scandalous terms of errour and pillar of Antinomianism his undertaking to prove it such upon due examination to judge Quid tanto dignum tulit hic Promissor hiatu CHAP. XXII Arg. VVhat the reall Antinomians have been and are and that Master Baxter casteth this reproachfull name upon all the Churches of Christ charging the innocent with the fault whereof himself is guilty THE second thing which I promised to take into examination in his explication of this Thesis is his vellication of the Antinomians which here and elsewhere throughout this Book he defieth with unquenchable hatred charging and discharging so hotly against them as ever Iupiter did against the Giants that made a battery against the Heavens And what are they that Goliah like he should come harnessed from the head to the foot brandishing his weavers beam against them he tells us They are Ignorant animals pa. 169. Fitter to learn the grounds of Religion in a Catechism than to manage those disputes wherewith they trouble the world pa. 115. If so who can abstain from laughter to see so great a Nimrod as Mr. Baxter hunting with no lesse weapon then Hercules his Club a nest of wrens to death and with the great Monarch of the World Domitian to set himself in battel array against the gnats and flies that dared to peep into his chamber But his aim is to shew his Craft more than his power as I before in part have manifested in the preface to this examination and there promised more fully afterward to evidence The performance whereof I have reserved for this place That we may the better discern Master Baxters either singlenesse or doublenesse in this Case it shall be somewhat expedient to enquire after first the originall secondly the growth of the Antinomians properly so taken and denominated in the severall reformed Churches untill our late divisions within this land have made such a medly and confusion of all or at least many errors together that we know not punctually what error is predominant in most of the willfully erroneous that having seene them both in their birth and their full height also wee may compare Master Baxters Antinomians with the Antinomians indeed and so judge how far he goes about to confute the innocent and how far to defame and deceive the innocent The first rise of them was in Germany Anno. Dom. 1538. as Sleidan in the 12 Book of his Commentaries tells us Their principall ringleader was Ioannes Islebius Agricola I have not met with any of their Books neither know I whether there be any of them extant from which we may certainly gather their opinions Wee are forced therefore to take them at the second hand from the foresaid Author who in the forequoted place thus speaks of them Hoc Anno secta prodijt eoruÌ„ qui dicuntur Antinomi Hi poenitentiam ex Decalogo non esse docendam dicunt illos impugnant qui docent non esse praedicandum Evangelium nisi primum quassatis animis at que fractis per pradicationem legis Ipsi verò statuunt quaecunque tandem sit hominis vita quamtumvis impura justificari tamen eum si modò promissionibus Evangelij credat i. e. This year sprung forth the sect of them which are called Antinomians Their Tenents he reduceth to three generall heads telling us that first They say that Repentance is not to be taught out of the Decalogue 2 They impugn them that teach the Gospell ought not to be preached to men untill their hearts be first shaken and broken by the preaching of the Law 3 They assert that whatsoever the life of a man be and how impure soever yet is he justified if he onely beleeveth the promises of the Gospel He addeth further that Luther wrote against this Islebius who thereupon submitted and in a sort recanted and so it seemes the Sect ceased and their assertions for a while slept Such were they at their first rise In these after times they discovered themselves in more plain terms than Sleidan here discovered them About twenty years since I had acquaintance and upon that acquaintance much reasoning and many disputes with some of them in Summer set shire who much honoured and professed themselves to have received their light from that Master Wâ—otton whom Master Baxter doth seem much to applaud in some parts of this Treatise Their opinions that partly were and partly weretaken by the most tâ— be points of Antinomianism were these as in discourse with them I found them to maintain 1. That the Law is totally abrogated now under the Gospel and that not onely as a Covenant of Works but also from being any more the rule of righteousnesse That wee have but one Master Christ that since his coming into the world he is our Teacher sent from heaven the Prophet raised up like to Moses that we should hear him alone That since the time he began to speak Moses hath been silent and we are bound now to attend to the voice of God as in these latter times he speaketh to us by his Son only 2. That the whole Old Testament is as it were uncanonized though it were the Word of God the Rule and Canon of Faith and practice to them that lived under it yet to us that are under the Gospel it remains not in its former power Because the Last Will and Testament onely stands in force and when a latter Testament is made the former is thereby to all uses and purposes made voyd We may read the Old Testament as other Apocryphal and Ecclesiasticall Writings but must no more subject our judgements or consciences to it then to these For Moses and the Prophets prophecied onely untill John the Baptist were in force untill he began to preach the Gospel and ever since the Kingdom of heaven hath suffered violence the doctrine of the Gospel hath succeeded in its place 3. That we
not of great moment but the supercilious haughtinesse of the man puft with the opinion of his secular learning so high as to puf and pif at so many excellent Divines for learning and holinesse to many of which he is not worthy to be an Amanuensis is unsufferable I shall therefore as briefly as I can expresse upon what grounds our Divines and how far they make the righteousnesse of Christ the matter of our justification as near as I may upon good probabilities conjecture The Doctrine of justification by Christ is no where in the four Evangelists held forth under the name of justification or justifying Many both Parables and clear doctrines that proceeded from the lips of Christ do indeed in other words fully display it specially John the Evangelist who made it more his task to record the doctrine then the acts of Christ because he saw those historifyed somewhat largely by the other three Evangelists which had written before him Eagle-like mounting on high to the contemplation of his Celestiall and Divine nature and doctrines very exactly sets it forth but under other words naming it Life eternall Life everlasting Life He that beleeveth in the Son hath everlasting life Joh. 3. 36. Is passed from death to life Joh. 5. 24. Hath eternall life Joh. 6. 54. My flesh which I give for the life of the world Joh. 6. 51. And ye will not come to me that ye may have life Joh. 5. 40. Except ye eat my flesh and drink my bloud ye have no life in you he that eateth me shall live by me Joh. 6. 57. In all which and many other texts of this Evangelist none can deny but by life is to be understood chiefly if not only life in law the life of justification not that of glory which is to be received above but that of grace here For so those Scriptures point out a life here in this present world enduring everlastingly to all eternity and not a life here only to be hoped for and hereafter to come into our fruition Neither do I find the word justifie used but once by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles Nor yet at all in any one of the Epistles of the Apostles St. James only excepted in one Chapter but by the Apostle Paul alone Yet the substance of justification was the chief doctrine in all their Epistles handled but the same set forth under the name of Salvation saving life and other phrases which our Saviour himself used And these phrases also doth St. Paul use as equipollent with the word Justifying in all his Epistles Now the reason why this Apostle more then the rest treats of this doctrine under the name of justification I conceive to be this Because he was forced to handle it by way of controversie against the false Apostles some professing some rejecting Christ that taught justification and salvation by the works of the Law in part and not by faith only whom therefore he must needs in his disputes treat with in their own tearms and words Their Argumentation against the Apostle as may be gathered from the Apostles answers ran in this tenour and to this effect That righteousnesse alone which justifyeth or maketh a man perfectly righteous saveth But the righteousnesse of the Law is that righteousnesse alone which justifyeth or maketh man perfectly righteous at least by procuring proper righteousnesse to him therefore that alone saveth The Apostle here granteth the proposition that no other righteousnesse but that which justifyeth or maketh a man perfectly righteous saveth But denyeth the assumption that the righteousnesse of the Law only or at all justifyeth or maketh a man perfectly righteous Because only the perfect doers of the law are perfectly righteous not the hearers But no man can perfectly do it And contrariwise proveth that the righteousness of the Gospel which he cals the Righteousnesse of God the Righteousnesse of faith the Righteousnesse of God by faith which consisteth in Christs satisfaction imputed to us is the Righteousnesse which justifyeth and maketh perfectly righteous because it cleanseth from the guilt and freeth from the imputation of all sin and unrighteousnesse Rom. 1. 17. 3. 5 21 22 25 26. 4. 3 5 6 11. 5. 17 18 21. 9. 30. 10. 3 4 6. 2 Cor. 5. 21. Phil. 3. 9. In all which places and in many other the Apostle having rejected the righteousnesse of works from being asserteth the righteousnesse of God in Christ by faith to be the righteousnesse the matter and substance of the righteousnesse by which we are justifyed This he illustrateth Rom. 5. 19. by a comparison between Adam and Christ Adams disobedience and Christs obedience As by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made roghteous the ones disobedience was not only the merit but also the matter of our sin as far as sin is capable of matter the very sin it self which being imputed to us as being in him without any personall and actuall sin of our own makes us sinners So the obedience of Christ in offering himself a sacrifice for sin and giving satisfaction to Gods justice in obedience to that positive command of the Father which required it was and is not only the merit but also the matter of that righteousnesse which being imputed to us as being in Christ without any personall obedience of ours added to it constituteth us righteous and justifyed in Gods acceptance or is that for by and in which the Lord pronounceth us just and justifyed to our own consciences Such is the frequent dispute of the Apostle about the substance and matter of that righteousnesse by which we are justify ad which he concludes not to be a righteousnesse inherent in us but this Righteousnesse inherent in Christ but imputed to us and apprehended by faith to justification whom God hath set forth as a propitiation for our sinnes through faith in his blood Rom. 3. 25. And this is all that I finde our Divines to mean in saying the righteousnesse or satisfaction of Christ is the materiall cause of our justification defending against the Papists as the Apostle did againsts the Pharisees that the matter of the righteousnesse which God accepteth and imputeth to us in justifying us or unto righteousnesse and justification is this righteousnesse of Christ only not the righteousnesse of works Mr. Baxter in rejecting the phrase 1. As rude and not Logicall 2. As at the best unproper doth first accuse the Apostle and secondarily them that follow his Apostolicall doctrine and phrase of this rudenesse and impropriety of language One of them speaks out the minde of the rest Deus justitiam i. e. Obedientiam satisfactionem Sevarpius â—rs Th eol â— justif â— 925. Christi nostram facit ac pro nostra ducit c. atque ita nos antequam justos pronunciet justos facit God makes the righteousnesse i. e. the obedience and satisfaction of Christ ours
these two distinguishing Attributes here the thing in question requires them not But his rotten Cause will receive no appearance of support by this Argument without them Againe as to the rest of his Argument why doth hee assume and conclude otherwise than he proposed The Proposition speaks of a Full Iustification and an Everlasting Salvation but the assumption of a Salvation only and the conclusion of a Iustification only without their Attributes of Everlastingnesse and Fullnesse Doth he not know the falaciousnesse of such Arguings why then doth he use it Is it because he is wholly made of it and cannot shun it or because his Cause is such that it cannot stand without it that to use plaine dealing will discover the deformity of it or for the congruity which such a kind of Argumentation hath with the cause fallaciousnesse with falshood Let him either propose what he assumeth and concludeth or else assume and conclude as he proposeth And then he must argue one of the two wayes either first thus Our Full Justification and our Everlasting Salvation have the same Conditions on our part But sincere obedience is without all doubt a condition of our Everlasting Salvation Therefore also of our full Justification Here the arguing is regular but it is about immaginary things such as neither the word nor the Churches of Christ are acquainted with Wee deny that in Mr. Baxters sence there is any Full Justification as opposite to a maimed true Iustification or any Everlasting Salvation in his sence as opposite to a true spirituall salvation that is temporary and transitory So that his Arguing is the same as if he should argue from Jupiters thunder to Jupiters lightning or from Bellerophons horse to Bellerophons saddle when all these were Fictions had their being only in immagination not in reality Or secondly thus Our Justification and our salvation have the same conditions on our part But sincere obedience is without doubt a condition of our salvation Therefore also of our justification Heere I distinguish the word salvation that it is taken in Scriptures when by it is meant the everlasting salvation of the whole man by Christ sometimes for the state of grace which wee attaine here sometimes for the state of glory above In the former sense we finde it 2. Cor. 6. 2. Now is the day of salvation Luk. 19. 9. This day salvation is come to this house So Acts 28. 28. Rom. 11. 11. Heb. 6 9. and in other places In which sense we are said to be saved when we effectually receive the word of Christ and Christ Jesus to whom that word directeth for Salvation 1 Cor. 1 18. To us that are saved Ephes 2. 5 8. By Grace ye are saved So 1 Cor. 15. 2. 2 Cor. 2. 15. 2 Tim. 1. 9 Tit. 3. 5. and elsewhere In all which iâ— is said wee are not that we shal be saved that Christ hath not that he will save us And the same is further confirmed in the word life where Believers are said to have life 1 Io. 5 12. Everlasting eternall life Io. 3. 36 and 5. 24. and 6. 6 47 54. to bee passed from death to life Jo. 5. 24. All which proveth a life eternall life and everlasting salvation in this world that cannot be lost but shall have its coronation in glory above In this sense wee grant the Proposition so far as we have before granted any condition of justification But we utterly deny the assumption And what Mr. Br. saith sincere obedience is without all doubt a condition of Salvation we affirme to be all the doubt the whole thing in question If it be granted of salvation in this sense it must be granted of justification also Because justification and salvation in this sense are not 2 things but one the same It being cal'd justification as we are freed delivered from the state of misery considered as a state of sin and salvation as we are delivered from the same misery considered as a state of wrath and condemnation To say therfore that our justification and salvation have the same condition is all one as to say our justification and our justification or our salvation and our salvation have the same conditions and wee might as well assume and conclude hence Obedience is a condition of our salvation Ergo of our salvation also as of our salvation Ergo of our justification also In the latter sense if Mr. Baxter take salvation for our future glorification then we utterly deny the consequent of the proposition It is false that he saith justification and salvation have the same conditions For what is a consequent of justification is an antecedent of salvation And obedience in Mr. Baxters sence cannot be a condition without the position whereof God doth not justifie because it followes justification and goeth not before it And in this sense I have oft spoken before to the minor and shal have occasion to speak again But let us see how he goeth about to prove his major proposition B. Explic. p. 311. The Antecedent is manifest in that Scripture maketh faith a condition of both Justification and Salvation and so it doth obedience also as is before explained How far any thing of this is true there hath been given an Examination before to his Explanations before B Therefore are we justified that we may be saved Wee grant more in aright sense viz that in being Justified we are saved But what of this B. It would be as derogatory to Christs righteousnesse if we be saved by works as if we be justified by works Therefore we reject both And let Mr. Baxter look to himselfe for maintaining both B. Neither is there any way to the former but by the latter The greater is his sin that teacheth such a way to justification as bars up the way to salvation making it impervious and unpassable to Gods people B. That which a man is justified by he is saved by This is Christs mediation or Christ the mediator for there is salvation in no other nor any other name given us under Heaven by which we may be saved Act. 4. 12. By the righteousness of this One Grace came upon all to justification of life So we are saved by Christ and not by Condititions B. Though Glorification bee an adding of a greater happinesse then we lost and so justification is not enough thereto yet on our part they have the same Conditions This must be because hee will have it to bee the result of all his dispute But he only saith it but proves it not All that he layeth as the foundation of this Conclusion excepting that which in other words is the conclusion it selfe doth not infer it For it being granted what he saith but sheweth not that the Scripture saith it that we are therefore justified that we may be saved that there is no other way to Salvation but by justification and that it be as derogatory to Christs righteousness to be saved as to be
animosity as the ingenuity of Scaliger which caused him when he heard that one had busied himselfe about the correcting of the errors in his writings to cry out Ego meos corrigam errores I my selfe will be the corrector of my owne errors The same taske may this Author justly challenge to himselfe if living to be himselfe the defender of his owne writings Perhaps he is doing it perhaps he hath done it I shall therefore in my uncertainty what is done onely with such brevity seeke to disabuse the doubting readers of both that I shall in no wise prevent the Authors fuller vindicating of his owne or rather Gods cause in his hand Let us then attend to Mr Baxters accusations particularized Append. pag. 100. and so onward It was questioned as may be seen pag. 99. why he excepted against the Book called the Marrow of Modern Divinity he answers there because it is guilty of this hainous doctrine This he begins now pag. 100 to shew in particulars alleaging first the words of that booke thus B M. M. pag. 174. he meanes 179 Qu. Would you not have beleevers to eschew evill and do good for feare of Hell or for hope of Heaven Answ No indeed I would not have any beleever to doe the one or the other for so farr as they doe so their obedience is but slavish c. To which end he alleageth Lu. 1. 74. 75. Having thus alleaged the Author he thus endeavours to accuse and confute him B But that speaks of freedom from feare of our enemies such as Christ forbids Lu. 12. 5. where yet he commandeth the fearing of God and consequently even that feare of enemies is forbidden as they stand in opposition to God and not as his instruments in subordination Or if it be even a feare of God that is there meant yet it cannot be all feare of him and his displeasure So farr as we are in danger of sin and suffering we must fear it and so far as our assurance is still unperfect a jealousie of our owne hearts and a dreadfull Reverence of God also are necessary But not the legall terrors of the former bondage such as arise from the apprebension of sin unpardoned and of God as being our enemy Who ever heard any doctrine more unanswerably proved to bee hainous If any man question by what Arguments he can easily answer himselfe by this â—hat Mr. Baxter trying and finding himselfe unable to do it at length grants it to be sound and good Thus are they driven oft-times to wound themselves who draw the Sword against the Truth The Author of that booke proveth that beleevers or the redeemed of Christ are no longer to serve for feare of Hâ—ll by the testimony of the H. G. Lu. 1. 74. 75. That we being delivered out of the hands of our enemies might serve him without fear in holinesse and righteousnesse c. Mr. Baxter to evade the force of this Scripture first contendeth that by enemies are here to be understood not spirituall but mortall enemies wicked men and their persecutions Now may not a blind man perceive this to bee a shifting not an answer of this Scripture 1. The grouÌ„d of this not fearing is here layd to be our deliveraÌ„ce cut of their hands whom else we should feare And will Mr Baxter say that Christ came to deliver his elect from the persecutions of men and not from sin death hell which were our most formidable enemies This were to make Christs kingdome to be of this world and to joyn with the carnall Iewes that expected such a carnall Christ and câ—rnall kingdome that might be eminent in the world 2. Or hath he actually purchased to us such a deliverance doth not experience declare the contrary 3. Or must we so long suspend our serving of God in Righteousnesse and Holiness untill we be actually delivered from all feare and danger of mens persecutions For so runs the Text as well in the originall as in our translation that the deliverance is layd as the ground of the service and that put in our possession before this can be put in execution at least without feare 4. Is not deliverance heere the same thing with the salvation mentioned ver 77 which Iohn was to preach but that was salvation and so is this deliverance by the remission of sins and consequently we must serve who are in Christ without feare of vengeance and Hell He sees that with this evasion he cannot decline the edge of this Scripture therefore takes up the right interpretation of it at last thus Or if it be even a feare of God that is there meant c. Why had he not spoken full to the point in question and said the feare of Hell This minsing will nothing help him All that he saith against it in this sense is but such as is wont to proceed from the extravagancy of an astonished and self confounded man For who ever said that a beleever must cast off all feare of God and not be possessed still with a filiall feare to displease him Or that as farr as he is in danger of sin and suffering he must not feare it to shun it Or that so farr as our assurance is still unperfect or perfect a jealousy of our own harts and a dreadfull Reverence of God are not necessary But what is all this to the serving of God for feare of Hell How doth he daub with untempered morter At length he determines the question But not the legall terrors of our former bondage such as arise from the apprehension of sin unpardoned and of Gods beeing our enemy I need to say no more but where then is the feare of Hell in a beleever doeth it arise from the apprehension of the pardon of his sin and of God reconciled to him in Christ what can be said more weakly to confute or more strongly to confirme that which he cals a hainous doctrine Is Mr. Baxter an adversary or an accessary to him whom he pronouâ—ceth the Author of this wicked intolerable damnable doctrine Himself speaks more to confirm it than the person whom he opposeth But how according to his principles the terrors of our former bondage as he describes it are in this life removed neyther can I see nor he make out without contradicting himselfe B. In the 180. page Hee denieth the plaine sense of the Text Mat. 10. 28. Enough Magisterially if it were true what he objecteth to say only and not to demonstrate the truth of what hee objecteth But if false who perceiveth not the censorious spirit of the Objector That it is false appeareth evidently for how doth hee deny the plain sense which denieth no sense at all of the Text but onely declares what he thinks to bee the more principall scope of Christ in that Text than other And in this the context will evince that hee speaketh the truth B. In the 155. page He maketh this the difference betweene the two Covenants One sayth Doe this and
the integrity and purity of its celestiall endowments Without spot if this be but half Christ which is the other half 2 Or because he understands by whole Christ Christ in the fruits of all his offices as is most probable whether he will deny them to receive whole Christ which apply not all the severall Acts and Fruits of his severall offices to one and the same end but to severall ends to which his wisedom hath appropriated them Suppose a son of some Luke that is a Physician a Minister of the Gospel and a Father in his Family If the sayd son shall make use of the Acts and Fruits of all these Offices of his Father not at all to one end but to the severall ends to which they are proper of his Art and Physick to cure his diseased body of his Gospel-doctrine to illuminate his understanding and heal his wounded soul and of his provision of victuals to preserve his life and nourish his body and not of physick word and bread together for one and the same the nutriment of his body shall this man therefore be said not to own and receive his whole Father but half of him Even so the Offices of Christ are various and his actings in them tend to various ends some to our quickning som to our enlightning some to our justification some to our sanctification c. Do I take but half Christ because I apply not all the Actings and Fruits of all his Offices to my Justification only and none of them to the other honourable ends to which he hath appointed them who can bear the absurdity 3 Whether it be possible for any man according to the rule and tenor of the Gospel by a lively faith to apply to himself the satisfaction of Christs death and yet to remain unpardoned and unjustified or for such a one to abide unspiritualliz'd and unsanctfied If not then the reason why the multitude which profes they trust Christ for the saving of their souls as Mr B. is pleasd to phrase it do remain unjustified is because they profess but have not a lively faith in his death and not as Mr. Br. saith for want of I know not what Moral Theological decompounded phantastical sincerity consisting in laying hold on the half of Christ i. e. either his wounded and not his whole parts or Christ the Mediator not the Mediator Christ I can no better distinguish his meaning sith himself hath refused to do it Of the same nature is that which he hath pag. 328. B. Though some thinke nothing is preaching Christ but preaching him as a pardoning justifying Saviour Indeed among the Turks and Indians that entertain not the Gospell it is necessary to preach his pardoning office yea and the verity of his Natures and Commission Therefore when the Apostles preached to Jews and Pagans they did first and chiefly teach them the person and offices of Christ and the great benefits which they might receive by him But when they preach as James to be professors of the Christian Faith they chiefly urge them to strive to enter to fight that they may conquer to run that they may obtain to lay violent hands upon the Kingdom c. Either all this relates to Justification or it is meer babble in the Ayr sound without sense or substance as much to his purpose as was his that trudged about all the Town from shop to shop to buy two penny-worth of Circumstance for the cure of his tooth-ach For his quere is whether our Doctrine which teacheth Justification by faith without works do not confirm men in their soul-cozening Faith If all doth relate to justification then let him that can find help me without help I cannot find as much as a grain of reason in all or any part of it such reason at least as befits Mr. Br. who grounds all his Religion upon reason To the first Clause I stand stupified not knowing how to preach Christ to justification but as Christ the Justifier to pardon but as Christ the pardoner or to salvation but as Christ the Saviour Should I preach him as a condemner to justification as an unpardoning Judg to salvation As to his justifying me as he is a Law-giver either there hath been wanting something in Mr. B. dexteriry of teaching or in my docility to apprehend I am yet to be taught this lesson All that he hath said hitherto hath made it but odious and absurd and here hee saith no more to perfect it To that which follows the absurdity of it doth enough confute it self Who can endure to hear that the Apostles when they preached to Jewes and Pagans did and we if we should be sent to preach to the Turks and Indians must first preach Christ alone to justification and so generate in them a soul-ct zening faith But when once they become professors of the Christian Faith then the Apostles did and we must teach them better urging them no longer to cozen their souls with faith in Christ the Saviour but by their own works to justifie and save themselves He that delights in such a Gospel let him be Mr. B. disciple It seems he is angry with James for not helping him erewhile in his great exigency that he singles out him from all the Apostles to father him with this intolerable doctrine But whether James give him herein any relief hath been before examined As for the rest of the Apostles let Paul give the Testimony for himself and them There is one Lord and Mediator Christ Jesus one Faith one Baptisme one Lord and Father of all Ephe. 4. 5. 1 Tim 2. 5. Not two Christs and two Faiths one to cozen at first and the other to save the soul afterward If Paul or an Angell from heaven should preach any other Gospell then what you have heard from me at first while Pagans let him be accursed Gal. 1. 8. Therefore many years after the Romans and Galathians had been professors of the Christian faith he seeks to root them fast by faith alone in Christ and not to start from their first principles reducing such as went a whoring after works to help faith in justifying them pronouncing them accursed and Apostates from Christ that should so fall off from their first liberty in Christ That all obedience yea faith in Christ to all obedience vertue and good works is to be preached and urged upon them that profess the Christian faith is so true that he is but a maimed preacher of Christ that doth it not but all to sanctification not to justification This is the true Preacher of Christ that preacheth Christ to good works not works to win Christ that seeks to bring us into Marriage-union with Christ that we may bring forth fruit to God Rom. 7. 4. Not that we should bring forth bastard-fruit from another that we may be married to Christ But this is not Mr. Brs. business he speaks of fruit to justification To conclude what I have to say to this
of Justification by Christ doth not give them any part of the work of Christs righteousness For it belongeth to Christs righteousness by it self alone and to Christ by his Mediatory righteousness alone to perfect for ever the Justification and salvation of his redeemed ones Heb. 10. 14. And that without any accessary help of their own righteousness John 13. 10. But Mr. Br. so parteth justification between Christs righteousness and our righteousnesse as that he makes them equally concurrent to our salvation and justifying That Christs Righteousness without ours can no more profit us than ours without Christs yea makes Christs righteousness wholly unprofitable to every man till by the serving and deserving of each man it be purchased and made usefull to benefit him And so by making the efficacy of it the fruit of our Merit he dis-robes it of its honour and ornament derogating from it its all-sufficiency by it self to perfect us that he may arrogate to our righteousness what is stoln from his But how farr this doctrine of his derogates both from the grace of God and merits of Christ hath been oft discussed After all that hee hath said to the defacing of both here he wipes his mouth and saith it was never foul and will have his Reader conclude that when his face of Christ is spittled yet if it be from Mr. Brs. lips touched with a Cole from Bellarmine and Arminius it is a blessing of him This one truth I acknowledg implyed though not expressed in this Argument of Mr. Br. that he acknowledgeth himself to be the man that hath made obedience or works condition of the New Covenant or of justification by Christ In this I contradict him not It is of mans not of Gods making it 's a creature of his own not created by God at least not by God assigned to this use and end It being therefore not formed to his hand but a graven image the work of his own hand we leave him sith he will do it alone without us to persist in worshipping it CHAP. XXIII Whether the Reasons which hee bringeth prove him not to be a Legallist and Anti-gospeller HIS fifth endeavour is to vindicate his doctrine from being legall and Anti-Evangelicall That although it hold Beleevers not only under the bondage but also under the Curse of the Law in life and death till the day of Judgment Thes 9. pa. 65. p. 73. and else-where oft Though it makes works the condition of the New as well as of the Old Covenant though he maintains that Doe and Live is the voyce of the Gospel as well as of the Law Append. p. 81. Yet is he not a Pharisee or Legallist nor his doctrine ungospel-like It is purely Christian and full of sweet and ravishing Consolation to a Beleever not the least tangue of the Covenant of works but the odour and very marrow of the Covenant of grace in it It would be too long to set forth in his own words all the reasons that scatteringly throughout this Book of his hee bringeth to prove a probability and likelihood of truth in this his Paradox The sum of it is this B. 1. As to the bondage and Curse of the Law though they that are in Christ are under it in part yet they are not under it in the whole as all sinners under the Law wholly out of Christ For they are conditionally pardoned and justified as he frequently expresseth himself and so there is some ground of hope to take off the extreamity of despair And it is not the whole but some part of the Curse of the Law that lyeth upon them p. 65. Thes 9. Christs death hath suspended the RIGOROVS execution of the sentence of the Law that it doth not immediately fall upon his Redeemed ones p. 67. though they suffer after they are in Christ much of the Curse in execution of the threatning of the Law and that not without rigour yet is it not in its full rigour p. 69. And Christ which hath suspended the rigour of the Curse manageth that which lyeth on them to their good and advantage pag. 72. And is not this cordiall Gospel the balm of Gilead and the healing of Christs wings to a wounded soul The force of all this hath been examined already as else-where so most copiously in the Examination of his ninth Thesis and the explication thereof to which for the prevention of Tautologizing here I refer the Reader Only let him by the way consider with me how fitly these glosses of Mr. Br. do agree with many plain and evident Sriptures Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law being made a curse for us Gal. 3. 13. i. e. saith M. Br. from the rigour of the Curse not from the Curse it self for it lyeth upon us still or from the Curse that it shall not follow us to heaven after the world is ended not but that untill the worlds end it shall torment us both dead and living There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walke not after the Flesh but after the Spirit Rom. 8. 1. i. e. No condemnation in its full rigour but condemnation unto and the execution of the Curse they must bear untill the day of judgment and after that he knoweth not what will become of them Blessed is the man whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sinns are covered Rom. 4. 7. i. e. in part blessed and in part cursed The blood of Christ purgeth from all sin 1 Joh. 1. 7. i. e. from all sin not from all the curse and vengeance due to any one of our sins are we delivered God for Christs sake hath forgiven you all your sins and trespasses Eph. 4. 32. Col. 2. 13. i. e. hath forgiven you the fault but not the curse and punishment By one offering Christ hath perfected for ever them that are sanctifird i. e. hath laid a ground to perfect them if he will in the next world not that he hath perfected them in point of Justification here The time past is put for a time to come and a certain for an uncertain time Heb. 10. 14. They that are once purged by sacrifice have no more conscience of sinn i. e. when they are wholly purged in heaven not while they are but in part purged upon earth Heb. 10. 2. Their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more Heb. 10. 17. i. e. no more as forgiven to spare them But as long as the Sun and Moon endure I will remember to pour out the Curse and vengeance for them Wee are justified by the blood and reconciled to the Father by the death of the Son Rom. 5. 9 10. That is we have right and title so to be reconciled and justified in another world if we lose it not by the way He was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities and with his stripes we are healed Isa 53. 5. i. e. So healed with his stripes that he shall wound us