to their consciences but not for the benefit which they had in Christ before they were borne And what diminution is it of the grace of Christ if they were justified from the time of Christs death to tell them there is a sufficiency in the death of Christ for Justification when according to you there is an efficiency in the death of Christ forasmuch as they were not virtually only but actually and formally as you affirme p. 63. justified at his death Nor will it help you to say you speak there of the non-elect for we are bound to presse all men to believe as you there acknowledge and it is not known who are Elect neither to the Minister nor to the people therefore in pressing the Elect to believe a sufficiency you extenuate the merit of Christs death if they were actually justified as you affirme And there is the same ground of Faith to all the ability of Christ to save and Gods indefinite offer of salvation to whomsoever the Gospel is preached Fourteenthly He affirmeth Faith if it evidences our Justification is a signe is a dark and unsatisfying evidence as other works of Sanctification are 1 John 3.14 where he contradicteth the Apostle who saith By this we know that we are passed from death to life because we love the Brethren not we hope not we conjecture but we know it is a sure and stedfast signe Little children let no man deceive you 1 John 3.7 saith John he that doth righteousnesse is righteous is thereby viz. by his doing righteousnesse declared to be a righteous person Rom. 8.1 and in Rom. 8.1 he saith There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus and he givesh this as a signe Rom. 8.13 Who are in Christ who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit doth the Holy Ghost by Paul give us a dark unsatisfying evidence of our being in Christ What is more frequent then this he that is in Christ is a new Creature they that mortifie the deeds of the body shall live Gal 5.24 They that are Christs have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts thereof are all these dark and unsatisfying evidences then the Apostle did not well to propound them as satisfying evidences of the persons that are in Christ and shall be saved but we had rather suspect Mr. Eyre's opinion then question the Apostles judgement or unfaithfulness to propound dark and unsatisfying evidences of Justification 2. He saith that nothing that followes Faith is so apt to evidence or prove Justification as Faith because it is the first of all inherent graces but I take this for an errour and that works are every way as declarative of Justification if not more is an apparent truth For first if we speak of evidencing Justification to others it is more for saith the Apostle Thou hast faith shew me thy faith without thy works and I will shew thee my faith by my works James 2.18 And Abraham was in this sense justified by his works If any man shall say he is a justified person Vers 2â— 1 John 1.6 James 2.20 and yet liveth in the practice of any known sin I shall be bold to tell him he is a liar and the truth is not in him and works of Sanctification are no lesse declarative of Justification in evidencing it to the conscience then Faith For how shall I know my saith is a true faith an unfeigned faith and peculiar to the Elect but by the effect of a true Faith the works of Sanctification therefore if the truth of my faith be evidenced by my works then the truth of my justification is no lesse evidenced to my conscience by works then by faith nor is his reason of any worth because it is the first of all inherent graces this may prove it to have an excellency in that respect above other graces but that it hath for this reason an eminency above other graces in evidencing Justification is a lame consequence of which Master Eyre's Book is too full Fifteenthly He affirmerh that we should not be justified freely by grace if any condition were required of us in order to our Justification I take this also for a manifest errour if it be understood aright of an Evangelical condition ordained and wrought by God for the applying of Christs righteousnesse to Justification Indeed if you take a condition in a strict sense for a condition performed by us without the help of grace meriting and obliging God to give us the righteousnesse of Christ in such a sense it is true it is inconsistent with grace but such an Evangelical condition wrought by the grace of Christ without which we are not justified salvation is no lesse of grace though it be by faith as the Apostle speaketh Ye are saved by grace through faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God where the Apostle speaketh of the grace of faith Eph. 2.8 and saith we are saved by it and yet he saith We are saved by grace because it is Gods gift Sixteenthly He saith pag. 99. that all the blessings of the Covenant of Grace are given us freely Pag 99. and not upon conditions performed by us viz. by our own strength yet God hath his order method in the bestowing of them c. If all the blessings of the Covenant be alike absolutely and freely given and alike merited by Christ and yet God may for order and methods sake deferre some blessings of the Covenant without wrong to Christs merits and satisfaction why is it any wrong to Christs death if Justification merited by Christ be suspended untill it be fitly applied by faith that God may not justifie a person under the reigne and power of sinne which is not agreeable to his Holinesse and Justice Seventeenthly In his 103. pag. he is guilty of a double error First â—ag 103. in making God to impute sin to men before there was any Law to offend or any breach of that Law committed by man And secondly in * Sin is apparently the cause onely of condemnation but not of Gods purpose Dr. Twisse Exam. Mr. Cot. p. 54. confounding Gods hatred of Justice with his negative act of non-election or preterition which ought to be distinguished He saith Though men will not impute sin or charge it where there is no Law to convince them of it yet it followes not but God did impute sin to men before there was any Law promulged or before the sin was actually committed for what is Gods hating of a person but his imputing of sin or his will to punish him for his sin Now the Lord hated all that perish before the Law was given To which I answer that Gods preterition or non-election though it be justly called a hatred negatively yet this was an act of Sovereignty and not of Justice nor is this hatred an imputing of their sin nor was their sin foreseen the cause *
doubt not but you your selves have done execution upon his errour And I was glad though not so much in my owne behalfe as in respect of you of that letter which was signed by some of you bearing witnesse to the truth and desiring me not to be discouraged for that uncivill affront And although Mr. Eyre blame me for the like practise and that of all men I had least reason to be offended with it because I had done the same thing in another place I must tell him I tooke that liberty but once and that out of constraint for after I had privately borne witnesse against some Antinomian errours vented by one Mr. Symonds at Rumsey the next time I heard him he was advanced higher into familisticall blasphemie asserting A beleever was as righteous as Christ and that being one with him according to the prayer of Christ in the 17 Chap. of Iohns Gospel Lord make them one as we are one and having the righteousness of Christ imputed which is the righteousnesse of God himselfe he propounded it to the people to consider if a Christian were not a certaine divine person as the sonne of God is And to have been silent in this case had been my sin especially seeing the people were led captive by him into his former errours of Antinomianisme admirers of his person and of a ductile spirit But that I desired the people not to beleeve a word which Mr. Symonds taught hath as much truth in it though Mr. Eyre relate it as that had which was spoken to Christ concerning the Kingdomes of the world All this power will I give thee and the glory of them for that is delivered to me and to whomsoever I will I give it And he himselfe doubted of the truth of it for he addeth how justly I cannot tell yet in his passion to render me odious he relates it though he be commanded not to receive an accusation against an Elder under two or three witnesses But to returne unto you 1 Tim. 5.18 Right worshipfull to whom I have been bold to dedicate this little Tractate I beseech you in the bowels of Christ receive neither it nor me but so far forth as it is agreeable to the word of truth and if God hath not given me darkness for a vision I apprehend a marvellous beauty in the truth here offered unto you nay already imbraced by you which Mr. Eyre striving tanquam pro aris et focis seeketh to undermine I beseech you stand fast in the truth and in the love of it The raine fell as impetuously upon the floods did swell with as great rage against and the winds did storme with as great violence the house built upon the rock as that which was built upon the sands And the truth of Christ that is built upon the scriptures as an immoveable rock is capable of as much opposition from men and especially this of the free justification of a sinner by faith as any brain-sick opinion of men that lie in wait to deceive which hath no affinity nor confederacy with the word of God Having therefore such a sure word of prophesie you shall doe well if you take heed to it 2 Pet. 2 9. as to a light that shineth in a dark place Account it your great honour to honour God and your honourable profession by keeping the doctrine received and as you have hitherto done shew your selves to be men of understanding and not Children tossed up and downe with every winde of doctrine even so stand fast immoveable in the truth of Christ And Copy out that grace and faith in your lives 3 John 1â— which you professe to have and practise that great commandement of loving one another as Christ hath loved you hereby shall it be known that ye are his disciples indeed though the Antinomians judge it a dark signe that cannot give a sufficient evidence to the conscience of justification and herein they contradict Christ and his Apostle who said By this wee know that wee are passed from death to life because we love the brethren 1 Iohn 3.15 Ephes 4.3 Rom. 16.14 study to keep the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace Beware of dividing principles and dividing practises and marke those among you that cause divisions and offences and avoide them be thankfull unto God for the light of his gospel that yet shines amongst you be thankefull to the Lord that although errour walke abroad without a vizard there is so much liberty to professe and defend the truth Pray to the Lord which is all you have to do in things which might be better in the publike and praise God that they are no worse Prize the Churches peace next to the peace of a good conscience and yet buy not peace with the losse of truth And as God hath magnified his word above all his name do you esteeme it above your credit Remember Obed Edom that was blessed for the arks sake and though I know and beleeve some of you doe not count gain to be godlinesse yet you shall finde godlinesse to be great gaine the gospel is not so poore a guest but it is able to recompense those that lodge and entertaine it A Guest seldome bestowes his bounty but at his departure but there is no gaine to be expected by this guest at his departure but a losse that cannot be recovered I commend it to your care to preserve the ark amongst you faile in this and the vitall spirit of your corporation will be lost together with it And I beseech you have not mens persons in admiration affect not the word for the persons sake but the person for the words sake Let not knowledge be layed up for discourse but for practice not so much to inrich the head Luke 12.14 Math. 23.22 as to amend the heart Beware of covetousnesse least the cares of the world choake the good seede of the word Thinke not an hour more prrofitably spent in the Shop then in the church in enquiring into your debts then in searching of your consciences cast up your accounts often with God consider what religion will cost you make sure your evidences for eternall life have not a Christ to seeke when you shall have life to seeke Bee sure to do good or to receive good wheresoever you goe with whomsoever you deale let your publique trust make you men of publique spirits suffer nor your Taverns to be ful when your churches are empty and whilest you complaine of the badnesse of the times let them not be the worse for you what evill you cannot help to redresse bewaile let your sighes be more for your sins then your crosses incourage them that teach the good knowledge of the Lord and hide not your talents in a napkin but trade with them for your Master that at his coming he may say to you Well done good and faithfull servants enter into the joy of your Lord. Which that you may not
description of our conference by introducing interlocutours as if I were ad incitas redactus and that they did interpose to helpe me for it seemeth to me to be his end in that relation hath made me willing to wipe off that obloquie by entring the lists once more with him whereas the true cause of that interruption was his popular appeales his usuall artifice to evade the force of an argument to enthrone himselfe as victor in the hearts of the in-judicious multitude In a word the ensuing reasons were no small motive to inforce me to this work The bridge of justification by which men must passe over from death to life is very narrow and one step awry may be the losse of many pretious soules and all gospel truth is a pretious depositum concredited to us ministers of the gospel and is a part of that * 2 Tim. 1.14 Jude 3. good thing committed to us and we are commanded earnestly to * contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints Aug ad Lauren cap. 64. and this doctrine of justification is articulus stantis vel cadentis Ecclesiae as Luther saith the Church standeth or falleth according as this truth is beleeved or violated and what Augustine saith of remission of sins that I may say of faith by which remission of sins is received per hanc stat Ecclesia quae in terris est per hanc non perit quod perierat et inventum est And therefore there is a necessity of keeping this doctrine pure and every minister is bound to preserve this truth and to keep the Philistins from throwing dirt into this well And if Shamma be recorded in Sacred writ for defending a field of lentills against the Philistins surely it cannot but be acceptable to God and man to defend that doctrine which is the summe of the gospel confirmed with the blood of Christ And if it were Pauls Eulogium to preach that faith which he did once destroy it cannot be Mr. Eyres encomium to destroy that faith he ought to preach And seeing God himself taketh care of the very haires of our head and numbers them all we have much more reason to make a precious esteeme of that truth which is worth all our heads and by which our very soules must be saved And no lesse care ought we to have of the honour of Christ and of his mysticall body For who is he that is a living member of Christ that is not sensible of the dishonour done to Christ our head and what dishonour is done to Christ by this doctrine by making an unbeleever a subject of justification and a member of Christs body let him that is least in the Church judge The Apostle could not without an absit thinke of it that a member of Christ should be joyned to a harlot shall I take the members of Christ and make them the member of a harlot God forbid and is it not an annoynted truth of the same authority 1 Cor. 6.15 that I must not take a harlot so remaining and make it the member of Christ If Mezentius was condemned for a wicked tyrant for tying a dead man to a living person can he be esteemed a good Christian and friend to Christ not to say a good minister that shall joyne an unbeleever dead in sins and trespasses as a member unto Christ the Lord give him the sight of this evill and God forbid I should cease to pray for him and I hereby beg a Collection of praiers for him from all that know him for I beleeve his owne principles will not suffer him to pray for the pardon of sin which in his opinion is pardoned long before it is committed And now that I might not trouble the Reader any further I will but mention a passage or two in his Epistle dedicatory and another in his booke and I will not hold him from the discourse it selfe Mr. Eyre hath in his second page of that Epistle perfumed his brethren opposite to his errours to render them acceptable to the magistrate It is remarkable saith he that they who ascribed unto magistrates a definitive and coercive power in spirituals have when magistrates would not serve their turns denied the power which they have in temporals refusing contrary to the rules of Christ to own them pray for them or to yeeld obedience to their lawfull commands as if none must hold the sword but such as will use it to fight their quarrel and to effect that by force of arms which they themselves cannot doe by strength of argument But is this an irrefragable argument to prove eternall justification or a lively demonstration of a man parboiled in his passion is this the effect of charity or the foame of a passionate man was he sick of a fever or troubled with the scurvy when this passage fell from him I am sure there is neither charity nor verity in it if it be examined by the law of God or the knowne lawes of the land if he be able let him produce any proofe of our disobedience to authority least the world say he hath linguam mentiri doctam But nothing is more usuall then for the nocent to accuse the innocent * 1 K. 18.17 4 Eph. 3. Ahab accused Elijah for troubling of Israel when himselfe was the person that troubled Israel * Athaliah crye's treason treason when her selfe was the traitor 2 K. 11.14 * 4 Act. 5. Tertullus accused Paul that he was a pestilent fellow and a mover of sedition when himselfe was the ring-leader of a notorious faction And were I minded to recriminate and did seeke rather to d sparage his person then to weaken his case I might more justly retort the charge upon himself for his bold attempt in indeavouring to affright the chiefe magistrate of the city of N. Sarum from or for his proclaiming the Lord Protectour fearing it seems that I may use his own words that he would not serve his turne and therefore he would not have him hold the sword because he would not use it to fight his quarrel But in this suggillation of his to make his brethren odious and obnoxious to authority the reader may observe how closely be followeth Lysanders Counsel vbi leonina pellis non sufficit assumenda est vulpina that where the lions skin will not serve he will eeke it out with a fox skin he would stop our mouths or pull out our tongues because he cannot answer our arguments as Herod dealt with Iohn Baptist cutting off his head because he would not hold his peace but reprove him for Herodias so he would silence us by power who he cannot overcome by reason To whom I will say as Hieron in his Apol. 3. ad Ruff talibus institutus es disciplinis ut cui respondere non poteris caput auferas et linguam quae tacere non potest secas In his third page of the same epistle he would have the magistrate punish
disallowed and rejected of God and though he call them not reprobates as opposed to the Elect because as * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rejectanci sic eos vocat Apostolus hoc loco non qui sunt divinitus ad vitam aeternam electis oppositi nec enim censendi sunt statim irae vasa quicunque vel in suis peccatis adhuc manent nondum efficaciter vocati Bez. in locum Beza observes they are not presently to be judged vessels of wrath that yet abide in their sins yet as to their present estate they are such as God approves not of nor are they in a capacity of salvation Rom. 8.1 There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Now in Scripture-sense it is all one to be in Christ or Christ to be in us and there is nothing but condemnation to them that are out of Christ So the m John 15.5 15th of John If any man abide not in me he is cast forth as a branch and withereth that is if any man be in Christ only by external profession and outward Baptisme and is not truly united to him and abide in him by faith so as to partake of spiritual life from Christ As the living branch liveth in the Vine you shall be cut off as a dead branch and cast into the fire So in n Joh. 6.56 57. John 6.56 57. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him As the living Father hath sent me I live by the Father So he that eateth me shall live by me that is as the body is preserved by meat and drink and our meat and drink turne into the substance of the body and become one with it So he that spiritually feeds upon my flesh and blood upon my death and suffering by faith he shall be inseparably united to me and I will become one with him And by this he shall live as I who am Mediatour am sent by the Father to this end to bring men to life so that I might be able to give life I have received life from the Father and live by his Spirit communicated to me And so as sure as God lives and as I live by influence of the life and Spirit of God so he that eateth me and so becometh one with me by faith as the meat with the body he shall live by me Ver. 53. And in Ver. 53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you that is unlesse you become one with Christ by faith you have no life in you So the o 1 John 3.24 Rom. 8.9 1 John 3.24 and compared with Rom. 8.9 Hereby we know that he abideth in us because of his Spirit which he hath given us Where observe 1. That Christ dwelleth in his people Hereby we know that he abideth in us This is not a fancy or a conjecturall ungrounded hope but it is an infallible truth of eternal verity Hereby we know he abideth in us 2. Observe the means by which he dwelleth in us and how this may be known It is by his Spirit and this is a sure evidence of Christ dwelling in us because he hath given us his Spirit Now compare this with Rom. 8 ◠If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he it none of Christs He that hath not the Spirit of Christ dwelling in him he hath no Christ dwelling in him and so is none of Christs none of his members and so can never be saved so long as he lives without Christ so that you see the truth cleared That to be without Christ is to be without Hope Now the reasons why a Christlesse estate is a Hopelesse estate are Reason 1 Reason 1. Because there is no p Act. 4.12 name given under heaven whereby we may be saved God hath taken up an immutable purpose never to be reconciled unto man but in and through Christ so that there is not the least sounding of the bowels of God towards a sinner but in Christ Hence Christ is called our q 1 Tim. 1.1 Hope that is he is the object of our Hope in whom alone we are begotten unto a lively hope of eternal life Such is the distance and difference between God and the souls of men that none is found worthy or able in heaven or earth to umpire this difference but Christ and were he not a person of infinit worth he could never make any satisfaction nor work a reconciliation We are dead in sins and trespasses and none but Christ that is the Lord of Life can quicken us we are spiritually blinde and were not Christ God he could not cure our blindnesse for it was never r John 9.32 known from the beginning of the world that any but God could open the eyes of the blinde None but Christ who is the ſ Heb. 1.3 brightnesse of his Fathers Glory and the expresse Character of his Image is able to restore Gods Image in us without which we shall never see the face of God nor can God take us for his children nor delight in us unlesse this were restored such is the opposition made against our salvation by Satan and all the powers of darknesse that none but Christ is able to deliver us from this strong man So great is the mystery of godlinesse that none but Christ who hath lien in the bosome of the Father and knowes all things could reveal the Father to us whom to t John 1. 18. John 17.3 know in Christ is eternal life nor could he give us the Spirit u Eph. 1.17 of wisdome and revelation to know God and the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the Saints nor translate us out of darkness into marvellous light Such is that perfect righteousnesse God requires to cloath us that we may be presented without x Eph. 5.26 spot or wrinkle in Gods sight that none but God in our nature is able to furnish us with such a righteousnesse Reason 2. As none but Christ can save so none but such as Reason 2 are united to Christ can have any communion with Christ for union is the ground of communion Now this will appear by induction if you consider all the unions in the world there is no communion between those where there is not an antecedent union In the marriage-union there is no communion as man and wife till the marriage-union be made in the naturall communion between the soul and body the head and the members the graft and the stock dissolve the union and the communion is destroyed In the Politick communion between a people unlesse united under one government So in all others and why not in the mystical union between Christ and us Hence saith Paul z 2 Cor. 6.15 What concord hath Christ with Belial Thus in the a Eph. 1.3 Ephesians 1.3 God is said to have blessed us with all spiritual blessings
in heavenly places but how in Christ thus the believing Râ—manes were first b Rom. 11.24 cut off from their old stock the wilde Olive they grew upon and were graffed into the new Olive-tree before they could be partakers of the root and fatness of the Olâ—ve-tree and their being graffed in did precede their being partakers of the root and fatnesse of the Olive-tree And he that hath but the first-fruits of reason must acknowledge this and take one place for all to shew that all the benefits that come by Christ follow upon our union to Christ In the c 1 Cor. 1.30 1 Cor. 1.30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus who of God is made unto us wisdome and righteousnesse sanctification and redemption So that first we are in him before he is made of God unto us wisdome righteousnesse c. Now I come to the third particular and that is to shew you that before actual faith there is no actual union to Christ and so no spiritual communion with him in his death not actuall hope of eternal life Now for the fuller vindicating of this Proposition and what I have hereafter laid down in the defence of it against Mr. Eyre's Exceptions or Cavils rather I referre the Reader to the following discourse where I will purposely undertake this taske because I intend here only to give the world a sight of that naked truth as it was delivered without any variation from it that the world may see what reason Mr. Eyre had to condemne it as Heterodox To return then to the Proposition delivered That before actual faith there can be no actual union with Christ That which some imagine of an union with Christ from eternity and an union with Christ upon the Crosse when he stood as a common person if they understand it of an actual union and implantation into Christ and not of a relative respect and virtual union which yet is an union improperly so called that which they affirme is very irrational for that union which is the mystical union between Christ and a Believer by which we have spiritual communion with Christ in his death is the formall effect of faith by meanes of which Christ and we are made one d Eph. 5.23 1 Cor. â—0 7 body and this union necessarily requireth the consistence of the persons united for that union whereby Christ and we are united is such an union whereby the person of a Believer is united to the person of Christ I called it not a personall union though it be an union of persons and although I explained my self so in my conference with him after the Sermon yet he is not ashamed to tell the world I hold our union with Christ to be a personall union but of this hereafter Now this actual union whereby the person of a Beleever is united to the person of Christ necessarily requires the pre-existence of his person and the antecedency of his faith And therefore when it is said that God e Eph. 1.4 chose us in Christ that is not to be understood as if we were then existentes in Christo or actually united but it sheweth us Gods order how he purposes to bring us unto holinesse that is through Christ or for Christs sake this being an immanent and eternall action it could not leave any present effect upon us who had no actuall but a mentall existence only in Gods minde and therefore we could not be actually united for neither Christ as yet had assumed our nature into the unity of his Person which was to lay the foundation of the union of our persons unto Christ although I deny not but the Patriarchs before Christ were really united by faith before the assumption of the humane nature Besides union to Christ is a thing accidental as to the nature of man now an accident is not nor cannot be without its subject where let the Reader observe the forgery of Mr. Eyre that which I spake of union with Christ he applies to imputation of righteousnesse For * Where I take inesse or esse in alio quatenus opponitur substantiae quae per se subsistit latè non strictè sed pro omni accidentali informatione in ordine al substantiam sive sit per modum inhâ—rentiae adjacentiae sive essendi c. Accidentis esse est inesse now the Believer being the person united and so a subject of this union how can union which is an accident subsist without man that is the subject exist And besides it is a known rule Non entis nulla sunt accidentia nullae sunt affectiones how can any thing be truly predicated of that which is not Besides it is against another Principle in reason and unlesse we will betray our reason to become beasts we cannot submit to this new Creed Omnis actio fit per contactum All action is by some contact which holds good in this supernatural action for by faith we touch Christ not by any local contiguity but by a spirituall contact and apprehension whereby Christ is said to dwell in our hearts Now having proved à priori that the Elect before faith are not united to Christ let us à posteriori see if the same truth will not be concluded from the proper effect of union with Christ which is communion with him in his death unto justification that the Elect are not united before faith Such then as are actually united to Christ are actually justified But a man is not justified actually before faith Therefore neither united to Christ As for Infants their case is of a peculiar consideration God by his Spirit supplying what is wanting through the imbecillity of their age and hence the Spirit working semen fidei and apprehending them though they cannot apprehend Christ I question not their union to Christ and the imputation of his righteousnesse to their justification but we speak now de adultis that none that are of years sufficient are justified without actual faith Now that we are not justified by an immanent act of God from eternity nor immediately from the time of Christs death without some act of ours intervening for the application of Christs righteousnesse to justification will appear 1. From such Scriptures which require an act of faith to go before our justification and the remission of sins Acts 16.31 f Acts 16.31 Believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved the Jaylors question was not What shall I do to be quieted in conscience and assured that I am justified and in a state of salvation but What shall I doe to be saved I see my lost damnable estate how shall I doe to be saved With the heart g Rom. 10.10 man believeth unto righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made to salvation where you see righteousnesse is obtained by faith and made the end h 1 Pet 1.9 of believing as the Apostle expressely elsewhere calleth salvation the end of our faith
justified without the intervention of faith nay the Scriptures expressely threatning unbelievers with damnation and limiting salvation to Believers do evidently declare the contrary Neither let any reject this argument drawn from the Scripture negatively for although this argument be infirme in matters of lesse consequence yet in fundamentals it is of great force such as this is by what means this righteousnesse of Christ shall be applied to justification therefore in such truths as concerne our salvation this is of maine importance it is not written therefore it is not to be believed Indeed if Christ had merited this absolutely that we should be justified whether we believe or not believe the matter had been otherwise And when we make faith the condition necessary to justification we do not with Arminians make it a potestative uncertain condition depending upon the liberty of mans free will but though it be contingent in respect of us yet it comes to passe necessarily in respect of God who hath ordained unto faith such as he hath chosen in Christ unto salvation And it is an effâ—ct of the death of Christ which shall be given in Gods appointed time to such for whom Christ died Nor do we make faith a condition of Christs acquiring pardon nor an instrument to make his merits satisfactory nor an organical instrument of Gods acception of it Christs merits have their worth whether we believe or not and Gods will cannot be moved by any externall cause but it is a prerequisite condition by Gods appointment which is to be fulfilled by us through his grace working it whereby Christs righteousnesse shall be applied to us for justification And as for those Scriptures that speak of Gods being reconciled by the death of Christ they are to be restrained to actual Believers to whom Paul wrote his Epistles or if they be indefinitely understood of all the Elect they hold forrh no more then that Christ hath by a sufficient price paid removed the cause of enmity meritoriously but not by any formal application of it unto any until faith And whereas they speak of Gods reconciling us while enemies from whence our Adversaries inferre that we are reconciled while enemies antecedently to faith this only shewes what we were when Christ died for us enemies to God as well as others but that we are while we remain so reconciled is atheologon and not worthy of him that savours of the Spirit of grace nor can any sober man that keeps his wits company imagine any such thing in God who is of purer eyes then to behold iniquity 5. Besides in the fifth place it is considerable among what sort of causes the death of Christ is to be ranked it is a meritorious cause which is to be numbred amongst moral causes Christ in his death is not to be looked upon as a natural agent that the effect of his sufferings should work immediately but as a voluntary agent and hence the effect doth not necessarily follow but at the will of the agent moved thereby yea the effect of a moral cause or voluntary agent may sometimes precede the cause as in this of the death of Christ by which all that believed in Christ to come were justified as well as we though Christ had not as yet made an actuall satisfaction by his death for in this case the effect is wholly at the will of the Agent moved thereby who together with Christ hath suspended the effect untill faith I adde in the 6th place Bonum est ex integris causis and therefore where many causes concurre to the producing of one effect the effect is not accomplished till every cause hath contributed his proper influence Now there are three causes of mans justification which may therefore be called sociall causes but not co-ordinate but the two last subordinate to the first The first is the efficient cause that is God of his free mercy The second is the meritorious cause the death and obedience of Christ The third is the instumentall cause and that is saith Now as the efficient justifies not without the meritorious so neither doth the meritorious without the instrumental and much lesse the instrumental without the other but all three conjoyned constitute a person actually justified in the sight of God And whereas they argue that those Scriptures that speak of justification by faith are to be understood in foro conscientiae that they do but justifie us declaratively and serve to evidence justification but not to conferre justification upon us neither are we justified by faith say they in the sight of God I will therefore propound three arguments against this which is a chief corner-stone in the Antinomians building 1. That that doth change and alter the state of a sinner and put him into a new condition in refrence to God that doth more then evidentially justifie But faith doth thus alter the state of a sinner and the Major is above contradiction the Minor is no lesse true which I prove thus If before faith a mna is in the state of damnation and upon believing he be put into a state of salvation and that before God then faith doth really alter and change a mans estate before God But before faith a man is under condemnation and upon faith delivered from it Ergo. Mr. Eyre his answer to this was that the Law did condemne him but God dâ—d not To which I replyed If the Law be the Law of God and receive all its power and authority from God then when the Law condemneth then God condemneth But the Law is the Law of God and hath all its force and efficacy from the will of God Now look what answer he hath given to Mr. Woodbridge which you may see Mr. Eyre p. 112. Num 6. Vindiciae Justifica p. 112. Sect. 6. the same he gave to me which I shall answer in its proper place 2. What the Aposle denies to Works he attributes to faith therefore faith hath an influence into justification which works have not From whence I argue If faith do only declaratively justifie the sinner then faith doth no more towards the justification of a sinner then works because works may evidence my justification as well as faith but according to the Apostle faith contributes more to justification then works Ergo. The proof of the consequence that works may evidence justification will appear from p Rom. 8.1 Rom. 8.1 There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit By this we q 1 John 3.14 know that we are passed from death to life because we love the Brethren 3. Besides the controversie between the Apostle and the Justiciaries of his time was not whether faith or works do evidence our justication but by what we are justified in the sight of God From whence I argue That that makes the Apostle to assert an untruth that interpretation cannot be true But if the meaning of the
not onely caring for thy credit that thy life be unblameable but that God may be honoured do'st thou abound in the fruits of righteousnesse art thou full of love peace long-suffering gentlenesse goodnesse meeknesse faith humility patience temperance He that is not thus fruitful is not ingraffed into Christ if thy faith be a dead faith that doth not manifest it self by good works if thou beest barren and unfruitful in the knowledge of Christ and hast nothing but the outward leaves of profession thou wert never truly ingraffed into Christ A 2d note is this he that is united to Christ lives the life of Christ for it is not he but Christ that liveth in him neverthelesse saith Paul I live yet not I but Christ liveth in me As a branch in the tree if it be a living branch partakes of the same life it doth not only cleave by adherence and continuation to the body of the tree but it is in the tree by a real participation of life partaking of the sap and influences of the root thus it is between Christ and a Christian united to him by a true faith Acts 3.15 he partakes of spiritual life from Christ hence Christ is called the Prince of Life 1 Cor. 15.45 and a quickening Spirit 1 Cor. 15.45 Now Christ is the Root Author and fruition of all spiritual life in us and thus he lives in us by his Spirit which is called the Spirit of life which is in Christ and by this he freeth us from the law of sin and death Rom. 8.2 The same Spirit that dwells in Christ dwells in a Beleever and quickens him as it raised Christ from the dead so it doth raise up us to newnesse of life and so to live a life in conformity to the life of Christ which appears in two things because it makes a Christian live by the same rule and to the same end 1. By the same rule Christ as Mediatour lived according to the written Word of God Pâ—al 40.8 The Law of God was written in his heart look what the Law did require there was a disposition in his heart suitable to that Law and hence Christ professed He came not to do his own will but the will of him that sent him It was his meat and drink to do the will of his Father John 4.34 And in the most difficult case wherein he could be tried though nature started and stood amazed at the greatnesse of the sufferings and therefore as man could not but fear the wrath of God and in this sense he feared and declined the bitternesse of the cup and desired it might passe away and unlesse he had put off the nature and affections of man he could do no otherwise yet knowing that immutable purpose of God and for that end he came to this home in that sense he voluntarily submitted and so though here were a diversity of wills yet not a contrariety of wills in Christ and truly his will was wholly agreeable to the will of God so in such as Christ lives by his Spirit he makes them so live as to make the will of God the rule of their life and to this end he writes the Law in their heart that they may both know and have an inward suitablenesse of Spirit to yield obedience to the will of God And hence he that hath had communion with Christ in his death is said to cease to sin for this end that he should no longer live to the lusts of men but to the will of God 2. Christ made the honour of God his end thus Christ saith He did honour the Father and sought not his own glory John 8.49 50. Thus also a Christian that is united to Christ seeks that glory of God and makes that his last end as Paul injoynes Whatsoever ye do 1 Cor. 10.31 do all to the glory of God Now if thou art one that doest make the will of God the rule of thy life and obey it from thy heart making God thy last end in all thou doest surely this is an infallible signe of a man in Christ 3. That man that is united to Christ cannot live to sin any longer as a graft cut off the old stock lives not in the stock any longer but wholly lives in another so that man that is united to Christ being cut off from the old stock lives not to corrupt nature any longer Nay there is nothing now so contrary to the life of a Christian as sin nothing so hateful nothing was more hateful to Christ he came into the world to destroy the works of the devil to destroy sin 1 John 3.8 Rom. 6.6 1 Pet. 4.1 2. and they that are in Christ their old man was crucified with him and thus he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin i. e. he that hath been crucified with Christ sin reignes no more in his heart so then they that are Christs have crucified the flesh Gal. 5.24 with the affections and lusts thereof they cannot cleave in their affections unto sin nay they cannot but hate it as being that that drew tears and blood from Christs heart who is now dearer to them then their own lives Therefore such as can give up themselves to the love of any one sin and suffer their affection to be insnared with the love of it were never united truly to Christ for separation from sin and union to Christ are inseparable companions Thus you see how we may know our union to Christ The last Use shall be to perswade every man to labour after this union seeing life and death stands in it Christ himself will profit us nothing without this union Wealth in the Mine doth not inrich any man till it be severed from its drosse and appropriated to a particular use water in the Fountain profits not a man till it be conveighed by some pipe into his cisterne light in the Sun doth me no good unlesse I have an eye to behold it Christ is a rich Mine in which are hid unsearchable treasures but what am I the better if he be not mine Tolle meum tolle Deum saith Luther Take away my propriety in Christ and the knowledge of a Christ will torment and not comfort my heart He is a Fountain of living water but unlesse faith be the conduit-pipe and cock to conveigh this water I may perish for all that he is a Sun of righteousnesse yet if he do not enlighten me I may be cast into utter darknesse therefore till Christ by some bond or union become mine and I his I may be as miserable as if this Mine had not been discovered as if this Fountain had not been opened as if this Sun had never risen Now this union and communion with Christ on our part is by faith Oh let us labour for faith Consider how freely God hath given Christ for us and how willing God is to give Christ to us consider how
of their estate by faith they were justified by Christ of which change in the judgement of charity he concludes by their sanctification Now what can be spoken more fully to clear this matter in controversie that before faith and effectuall vocation they are no more freed from condemnation then others 2. He saith It is wide from the Orthodox Faith To which I answer first by retortion that then he himself is wide from the Orthodox faith because pag. 66. he saith the same thing in different termes Mr. Eyre vindic pag. 66. Num. 2. Though the state of the loved and hated are different in the minde of God yet not in the persons themselves till the different effects of love and hatred are put forth Now an immanent act of Gods minde puts no present difference for Praedestinatio nihil ponit in praedestinato is a known rule Secondly It hath hitherto been the unanimous consent of the Orthodox that there is no difference between the Elect and reprobate as to present enjoyment untill actual faith indeed they hold in this respect a difference which I never questioned that although they be equally in a state of sin and wrath yet God hath a purpose to bring the Elect infallibly out of that misery and to leave the reprobate Rom. 9.13 in which respect God is said to love Jacob and to hate Esau and in this respect Acts 13.48 all that God hath ordained to life shall believe and whosoever the Father giveth unto Christ they shall come for 2 Tim. 2.19 The foundation of God standeth sure the Lord knoweth who are his but on the other hand for the present there is no difference both are children of wrath both are without Christ both aliens to the Covenant of Grace having no promise of the pardon of sin both without hope in the world only Gods purpose will in time make an actuall difference between them so Mr. Burgesse of Justifica p. 188. Burgess of Justific p. 188. but you are prejudicated against him I will propound three others of unquestionable authority Holy and Learned Mr. Baines in his Commentary upon Eph. 2.3 drawes this observation from it First then saith he we have to consider how that the chosen of God before their conversion have nothing in them dâ—ffering from other sinners the Election of God standeth sure Vide Calv. Institut Lib. 3. Sect. 10. but before he call effectually it doth put nothing in the party Elected so where you may see more to this purpose And he gives two reasons why God will have it so 1. That the mercy of God may be magnified and made manifest in the free grace of Justification 2. That love may be engendred in us being justified Mary who had many sins forgiven loved much so that eminent servant of Christ Dr. Tayl. in his Commen upon Titus ch 3. v. 3. Dr. Tayl. Tit. c. 3. v. 3. p. 591. pag. 591. Whosoever are called unto the faith have experience of a double estate in themselves once in time past and another for the present the one of nature the other of grace And a little after And good reason there is that he that is now beloved should see that once he was not beloved and that he who now is in the state of grace should see that he was once in the state of wrath as well as others which will cause him to love much And indeed the Elect could not be Elect nor justified nor washed if they were alwayes the children of God and were it not for this once and time past wherein there was no difference between them and the reprobate but only in Gods counsel and possibility of calling Learned Camero setteth to his seal to this truth Ad Petrum in peccatis mortuum non magis pertinet Christi mors quà m ad alium quemvis sed postquam Petro datum est credere est discrimen sanè magnum Camero opusc misc p. 534. And that he was no Arminian is evident by what he saith in another place Rectiùs faciunt qui Christum pro impiis sufficienter ut loquntur satisfecisse docent efficaciter autem pro solis piis Cam. opusc misc p. 534. Sect. 6. Thirdly he objecteth that it is derogatory to the full atonement made by Christs death If this could be proved there needed no further argument to silence me yea it were better my tongue should cleave to the roof of my mouth then that I should affirme any thing to abase the worth or diminish the reputation of Christs sufferings he deserves not to open his mouth to God for mercy that willingly opens his mouth to undervalue the merits and satisfaction made by the death of Christ I therefore answer that if Christ had died to purchase forgivenesse of sins whether we believe or not this argument would have some strength in it then to suspend the benefit of Christs death untill faith were to wrong the satisfaction of Christ but Christ did not so die for the Elect that whether they believe or not believe they should be saved therefore to suspend the benefit of Christs death till actual faith is no wrong to the atonement and satisfaction made by Christs death Now because this is the maine argument to which Mr. Eyre trusts and is the onely pillar and support of his opinion That it was the will of God that the death of Christ should be the payment of our debt Mr. EYRE p. 138 139. and a full satisfaction for all our iniquities and therefore it was his will that our discharge procured hereby should be immediate because he saith it's contrary to justice and equity that a debt when it is paid should be charged either upon the surety or principal I will here lay down sundry conclusions which may serve to vindicate our doctrine that the benefit of Christs death is suspended untill faith as to a formall justification of the sinner and shew the insufficiency and weaknesse of his argument from hence to conclude an immediate discharge of all the Elect from the time of Christs death antecedent to their faith First therefore I willingly acknowlege that Christ in his death was a common person and a surety for the Elect taking upon himself by Gods eternal appointment this work of redemption and reconciliation That the act of Gods Ordination together with a particular command from the Father to lay down his life John 10.18 and his voluntary consent and submission to become a surety for the Elect Heb. 10.7 9. for it was not imposed upon him by constraint therefore when he is said to come to do his Fathers will his own will is included John 10.18 And no man took away his life from him but he did lay it down of himself this act of Ordination in God and submission in Christ together with his free dominion over his own life which dominion he had both by vertue of the hypostatical union and the command of the
required as he sheweth for * Lex non requirebat ut Deus moreretur neque ut sine peccato proprio quis moreretur neque requirebat mortâ—m talem tantae efficaciae quae esset ut non mortem abolereâ— solùm sed etiam vitam introduceret eà mque illâ quam Adamus terresti perdedirat multis nominibus praecellentiorem the Law did not require that God should die nor that any should die that had not sinned nor such a death of such efficacy as not only to abolish death but to bring in life and that by many degrees more excellent then that which Adam had lost so then Christ hath fully satisfied the justice of God for the sins of the Elect so as that God neither will nor can in justice require any thing more at the hand of the surety nor of the sinner for whom he died by way of satisfaction Sixthly It will not be denied that God may be said to be reconciled in some sense by the death of Christ as a meritorious cause by death removing the cause of enmity and meriting the favour of God for us for although God loved us from eternity yet this was amor ordinativus not collativus God did bear them good will in time to make them heires of grace and gloâ—y by Jesus Christ Bâ—ll on the Covenant of Grace p. 292. and this excludes not but includes the necessity of Christs satisfaction but such as God did Elect he did not love them as already made heires of Grace by the influence of his love For the full understanding of this you must know that although God dâ—d so love the Elect as to fore-ordaine them unto eternal salvation yet it was never the will of God that his Elect should for no space of time be children of wrath that is subject unto death and eternall damnation for their sins but he did decree to permit them to fall in Adam and to be equally guilty of and liable to eternal death with others for which cause the Apostle calls them children of wrath as well as others Man being created after Gods own Image free from sin before the fall was intimately conjoyned to God God loving and delighting in man and man loving and delighting in his God but man lapsed by voluntary Apostasie from God there is an avulsion of the creature from God and an aversion of God from the creature and by this sin the Covenant of friendship between God and man is dissolved so that God who loved man created by him as his childe and from eternity willing him good for I speak only of the Elect in justice cannot but hate him now as corrupted by sin as a rebell against him not by any change of affection but of his outward dispensation and having included him under guilt as a son of Adam he is equally involved in the wrath due to that sin which God hath threatened with eternal death and resolved by an immutable decree never to pardon it to any without a satisfaction to his offended justice for the breach of his Law that the truth of his threatning may be fulfilled and the authority of his Law preserved and the evil of sin discovered and Gods exceeding love and mercy in a way mixt with mercy and justice may be manifested in the salvation of his Elect So that although there be a new relation in the Elect upon their fall in Adam unto God yet the change is in the creature and not in God for as the Schoolmen well observe these relations which are attributed unto God in time as a Creatour Father or Lord put not any new thing in God but there is an extrinsecal denomination added to him so that when the world is created God who was not a Creatour before is now a Creatour thus when sin took hold of the Elect he that once was a childe of love is now a childe of wrath not by any new accident in God but by a new effect in the creature so that in this estate God cannot bestow upon him the good intended in election For the better understanding of this that of Aquinas is of great use God may velle mutationem where he cannot mutare voluntatem God may will a change though he doth not change his will Thus in Adam while he continued a man after Gods Image free from sin God willed him to be the object of his love and delight and when he was fallen to be the subject of his displeasure and anger in the effects of it being liable unto his wrath and eternall death yet is not here a change in God but in Adam Thus God with the same will decreed from eternity to make such a one a vessel of mercy and yet to permit him to sin and fall in Adam and so to remaine a childe of wrath deserving condemnation wherein God cannot actually save him considering his decree without a satisfaction by Christ applied by faith Here is a change and a very great one in man but not in God a new relation yet no new immanent act in God Thus we may understand that of venerable Beda in the 5. Beda in Rom. 5. ad Rom. Deus miro modo quando nos oderat diligebat odit in unoquoque nostrûm quod feceramus amavit quod fecerat When God did hate us he wonderfully loved us he hated that in all of us that we had done he loved what he had made that is as the Schoolmen say Dilexit humanum genus quantum ad naturam quam ipse fecit odit quantum ad culpam quam homines contraxerunt He loved mankinde in respect to the nature he had made or as his creature and hated him as a sinner But now through the satisfaction of Christ God is so farre reconciled that the cause of enmity is removed although it was agreed upon between the Father and Christ as I shall shew without any wrong to Christs satisfaction that the benefit shall not be enjoyed till faith yet the cause of enmity is causally taken away by the death of Christ as Aquinas speaks well in this case Aquin. p. 3 qu. 49. Artic. 4. Non dicimur reconciliati quasi Deus de novo nos amare inciperet nam aeterno amore nos dilexit sed quia per hanc reconciliationem sublata est omnis odi causa tum per ablationem peccati tum per recompensationem acceptabilioris boni Aug. in Joh. Tract 110. And before him Augustine Quòd reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem Christi non sic audiatur non sic accipiatur quasi ideò nos reconciliaverit illi Filius ut jam amare inceperit quos oderat sed jam nos Deo diligenti reconciliati sumus cum quo propter peccatum inimicitias habebamus Lombard l. 3. distin 19 pag. 596. Lombard also gives in his suffrage in the like manner Reconciliati sumus Deo ut dit Apostolus quod non sic intelligendum est quasi nos ei
and redundancy of merit yet was it not altogether the same in the Obligation For first the Law in the rigour of it doth not admit of a surety but the delinquent himself is bound to suffer the penalty that acknowledgeth no commutation of the person or substitution of one for another and therefore God by an act of Sovereignty did dispense though not with the substance of the Laws demands for then we had had forgivenesse without a satisfaction and considering his decree he could not do it but with the manner of execution which in respect of the Law is called a relaxation so then God relaxed his Law to put in the name of a surety therefore the satisfaction is not altogether the payment of the same debt for Dum alius solvit necessariò aliud solvitur and therefore an act of grace must come in by the will and consent of the Lord to whom belonged the infliction of the punishment that another persons sufferings may be valid to procure a discharge to the guilty person and that the satisfaction was made by another and not by the party to whom remission is granted no Protestant will deny 2. Christ did not bear the same punishment due to us in all accidents 1. In respect of place he did not locally discend into the place of the damned Nor 2. In respect of time and duration his sufferings had an end though they were infinite intensivè yet not extensivè in respect of duration nor did he suffer the losse of Gods Image nor was he deprived of any measure of grace nor was he really but as to present sense and feeling forsaken nor did he lose his right to the creatures nor did his body see corruption all which are effects of mans sin and penal effects of it as I apprehend Therefore Christ did not suffer altogether the same though the sufferings of Christ so farre as were consistent with his Godhead and holinesse were of the same kinde and by the dignity of his person raised to a more then equipollency with ours so as to merit for us eternal life Quid enim Majestas tanta par ipsi Patri poenis suis non commeribitur Cyrillus Alex. de fide ad Regin Cyrillus Alexandrinus and it conduced to a compensation in those sufferings which were unworthy the dignity of his person 3. Though Christ were obliged to the same punishment yet not altogether with the same obligation for his Obligation was arbitrary and voluntary not arising from the guilt of inherent sin but by way of vadimony and sucâ—ption our guilt or obligation was intrinsecally from the desert of inherent sin Christ's was only an obnoxiousnesse unto punishment from the imputation of sin ours from a desert of sin called reatus culpae which guilt is inseparable from sinne which draweth reatus poetus along with it Christ was reatus poenae not culpae 4. Christs sufferings was to be a valuable compensation not only for our breach of the Law but for our non-suffering and therefore is not altogether the same The second thing to be cleared is this that it being not the same therefore it requires some act of grace in the Creditour to accept it for a discharge unto the guilty person and herein undoubtedly the sinner hath no wrong for it is mercy in God to accept it the Law requires his personal sufferings and there is no promise made to any that they shall have benefit by Christs death but only to Believers And this cannot be denied with any shew of reason for such a payment is refusable which is not altogether the same and therefore unlesse the will and consent of him to whom the infliction of the punishment belongeth it cannot procure a discharge to the guilty person for the offending sinner is the proper subject of suffering and the Law threatneth the offender and the surety is not the offender and none but he that had power to make the Law can dispense with any thing in the Law therefore that the Law may be dispensed with in respect of the manner of execution by transferring the punishment upon another and that this may be accepted as a full satisfaction for the offender as if he had in person suffered this must be an act of grace in the Law-giver receding from his own right and therefore might constitute and ordain how and in what manner it shall be accepted and none that I know will deny it an act of speciall grace in God to accept of the sufferings of Christ for us to free us from our personal sufferings and therefore I passe from that unto the third thing 3dly That it was the will of Christ in making satisfaction and of God in admitting of this satisfaction that it should not procure pardon of sin presently from the time of Christs passion but when man is turned unto God by faith seeking and humbly intreating for pardon Now to manifest this we must premise 1. That it was an act of special grace not only to us but to Christ himself that should be constituted a Mediatour of a New Covenant between God and us by vertue of whose mediation and sufferings we should be forgiven and made heirs of eternall life Christ as he is the second person in the Trinity in respect of his Godhead is equall with the Father and so not subject to any preordination or predestination as an act of grace but Christ considered as God-man in respect of his Mediatorship is a servant of God and so subject to Predestination and Gods singular grace in his Election to this office is as much seen as in our Election unto life for the manhood could never deserve to be united personally to the Sonne of God and thus it was a great honour put upon Christ Heb. 5 5. when he was put into the Priestly Office to make atonement for us 2. It was at the commandment of grace he made satisfaction it was an act of free grace to us and Christ as Mediator was a servant of God Isa 42.1 John 10.18 and wholly at the will of the Lord in this work at his commandment he laid down his life and at his will and pleasure the benefit of his death is extended to particular persons and denied to others therefore Christ saith Power is given him over all flesh John 17.2 to give eternal life but it is with restriction only to as many as the Father had given him Now the sufferings of Christ were of sufficient value to redeem the whole world but yet it is available by Gods eternal will only for the Elect and if it be no wrong to the sufferings of Christ to be limited by the will of God to the Elect only and Christ submitteth to it why should it be thought any injury to Christs sufferings that at the will and pleasure of God the very Elect should not partake of it untill faith in that order that he hath appointed 3. It is an act of grace
agnoscat Caeterùm quando praecipuus satisfactionis finis hic est ut debitor agnitâ sponsoris munificentiâ in illius amorem rapiatur aio debitum quidem solutum esse debitoris nomine sed solutionem tum demum ratam fore quum debitor beneficium agnoverit And accordingly we finde in Scripture how God hath limited the benefit of Christs death unto Believers John 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish And in Rom. 3.25 Rom. 3.25 John 6.40 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood And This is the will of him that sent me that every one which seeth the Sonne and believeth on him may have everlasting life And Mark 16.16 Whosoever believeth not shall be damned nay is condemned already John 3.18 36. and the wrath of God abideth upon him Now that is a superficiall and senselesse Cavil that Mr. Eyre maketh against this Pag. 135. that such places as these are do shew only who have th◠fruition and enjoyment of the benefits of Christ to wit they that believe but the true scope of these places is to shew not only who shall be saved and have the benefit of Christs death to whom this priviledge belongs but to shew when and how Christs death became effectual namely upon and by believing so that Christs death it self is not available unto salvation without faith to apply it And out of his own Concessions I argue against him If only Believers have the fruition and benefits of Christs death then while they remain unbelievers they have no fruition or enjoyment of them or else Believers are not the only subjects of these priviledges But they are communicable both to such as believe and such as believe not Mr. Eyre ch 9. pag. 90. which is contradictory to Mr Eyre's answer to the letter of the Scripture and against this glosse of Mr. Eyres I may retort his own argument against Mr. Woodbridge Chap. 9. That interpretation of Scripture which giveth no more to faith then to other works of sanctification is not true and the reason he addeth is because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our justification unto faith and in a way of opposition to other works of sanctification But Mr. Eyre's interpretation of those Scriptures that require faith as necessary to salvation that they do not declare the persons that shall be saved and have the fruition and enjoyment of the benefits of Christ attributes no more to fairh then to other works of sanctification for works of sanctification declare this Thus the Apostle makes it an evidence of a person in Christ to whom there is no condemnation that He walkes not after the Flesh but after the Spirit and in the same Chap. If ye by the help of the Spirit shall mortifie the deeds of the body Rom. 8.1 13. 1 John 3.14 ye shall live By this we know that we are passed from death to life because we love the Brethren Mr. Eyre Vind. p. 135. And in the same place he objecteth that the Apostle doth not say Without faith Christ shall profit us nothing But I answer Though this is no where expressely spoken yet it is evidently implied and is the intendment of the Holy Ghost For when Christ saith That unlesse they believe that they shall die in their sins and he that believeth not shall be damned is not this equivalent to this Proposition That without faith Christ shall profit you nothing 2 Cor. 13.5 And doth he not bid the Corinthians Examine themselves whether they be in the faith Prove your own selves know ye not that Christ is in you except ye be reprobates where though I think the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doeth not signifie reprobates as opposed to the Elect yet at the least it implies as much as unjustified And whereas he saith that if we can shew this agreement between the Father and the Son that none should have actual reconciliation by the death of Christ till they do believe he will yield the cause let him but stand to his word and the Controversie will soon be at an end For the making good of this over and above what is written I premise 1. That I suppose Mr. Eyre denieth not that there was a Covenant passed between the Father and the Son about reconciling the Elect believers by the death of Christ for that is evident from many Scriptures Isa 42.6 Gal. 3.16 And by those places wherein the things promised to Christ our Head and Mediatour are expressely mentioned Heb. 1.5 6. Acts 10.38 Eph. 1.22 Isa 11.12 Isa 49.18 Isa 53.10 11. Acts 2.27 and all the types prefiguring Christs death declare it but the question is not whether there were an agreement between the Father and the Son but whether they agreed that none should have actual reconciliation till they believe 2. I suppose Mr. Eyre doth not mean that we should shew him where the Scripture doth syllabically repeat these words and I judge him so rational that what can be proved by undeniable consequence from the Scriptures he will acknowledge it as authentick as a literal expression 3. I take it as a truth that will not be denied by Mr. Eyre that the Father and the Son had both one and the same will and that they fully and mutually agreed between themselves concerning the time and manner of our reconciliation with God so that what the Father willed the Son willed and vice versâ And so I joyne with him and argue 1. If God the Father in his promise to Christ or his Covenant with him about his death and the effects of it did mention faith as the means by which the effects of his death should be applied then there was such an agreement that Christs death should not purchase actuall reconciliation without faith But the Father in his Covenant with Christ about the effects of his death made mention of faith for the application of it Ergo. The consequence of the major cannot runne the hazard of suspicion for what God would do upon Christs death he promised and more then he promised Christ could not nor did expect for in all this work of dying he was a servant of God subject to his good pleasure Now God promised to Christ what he did intend to do and Christ could expect no more And the assumption I prove from Isa 53.10 11. which Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth a Covenant made with Christ pag. 138. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin he shall see his seed he shall prolong his dayes and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hands He shall see of the travel of his soul and be satisfied By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justifie many These words are delivered as in the Person of God the Father with whose words the Prophet began as we may see from Chap. 52. v. 3. Vide our English
Annotations and they clearly hold forth the effect and fruit of Christs passion where observe a plain promise to Christ or Covenant with him about dying and making his soul an offering for sin When thou shalt make his soul an offering or as the Hebrew if his soul or when his soul shall make it selfe an offering for the second Person Masculine and the third Foeminine are in letters and sound the same so I take it the speach of the Father introduced by the Prophet speaking unto Christ that when his soul shall make it self an offering for sin then he promiseth he shall see his seed that is his issue and posterity that should be borne to him as an effect of this which words do not import that all his issue and posterity should be an immediate effect of it but he should see it he should live and survive to see it after his resurrection he should die no more but live for ever and see the fruit of his death The will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand that is he shall daily see souls brought to salvation as a fruit of his death He shall see of the travel of his soul and be satisfied As a woman when her travel is past is filled with joy to behold the fruit of her wombe so Christ should be satisfied to see a numerous issue of faithful soules begotten to God by his death And what that satisfaction is in particular he tells him it shall be the justification of many for whom he died and then he tells him how they shall be justified He saith it shall be by * Notitiâ sui his knowledge or the knowledge of him not his own knowledge taken subjectively the knowledge that he hath of God Vide English Annot. or of them but his knowledge taken objectively that is the knowledge whereby they know him and this is not a bare knowledge of Christ whereby we are justified for the devils themselves both know and acknowledge him but by knowledge is meant faith the antecedent put for the consequent because the knowledge of him is the ground of trust I shall not need to prove that knowledge is put for faith * John 17.3 John 4.42 And the words that follow are a reason for he shall bear their iniquities though in the Hebrew the word is copulative yet it is often used as a cause And if this be granted it renders a reason why he should justifie them because he did bear their sins where the persons are described whom he should justifie not all promiscuously but Believers whose sins he undertook to discharge for he did bear the sinnes of none but Believers Now let Mr. Eyre tell us why God speaking to Christ of our justification by him should say that Christ should justifie us by his knowledge or by faith in him 1. His death alone antecedently to faith did justifie those whose iniquities he did bear unlesse it were to declare his will that his death should be effectually applied only by faith and that none should have immediate benefit but expect it by faith 2. That that was Gods intention in giving Christ was the intention of Christ in dying But God in giving Christ intended not the benefits of Christs death unto any untill faith Therefore Christ died not to purchase immediate forgivenesse unto any untill faith and by consequence there was a mutual agreement The Major is beyond all contradict on because of the unity of heart and will between Christ and God therefore he intended not his death for any nor in any other way then God intended it The Minor is written as with a Sun-beam in Scripture John 3.14 15 16. John 3.14 15 16. As Moses lifted up the Serpent in the wildernesse Even so must the Son of man be lifted up That whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternall life For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life In which words you have a threefold cause of mans salvation 1. The principal Gods love ver 16. 2. The meritorious Christ death 3. The instrumental our faith Secondly You have a comparison between Christ and his Type in two things 1. That as the Serpent must be lifted up for a meanes of healing or else it could not heal and none would look to it so there was a necessity of Christs being lifted up upon the Crosse God must deliver him up to death and he must be considered as dying or else there is no salvation by him 2. The end that such as did look to it might be healed of the stingings of the fiery Serpent so this was the end of Christ dying that whosoever believe should not perish Now as the Scripture sheweth those stingings were deadly and none were healed but such as looked to the brazen Serpent so are the stingings of sin deadly and none are healed by Christ but such as believe Now as Mr. Woodbridge observes they were not first healed and then did look up to see what healed them but they did first look and then were healed so we have nor first everlasting life given us and then we believe but first we believe and then we have everlasting life Now to this Mr. Eyre answers nothing but denies it was the intent of the Holy Ghost to shew in what order we are justified in the sight of God but in so doing he doth not only senselessely beg the question but doth overthrow that wherein the truth and verity of the type consisted for as the brazen Serpent though endued with a healing vertue yet it healed none till he did look so though Christ as dying be sufficiently able to save yet saveth not any till he look to him by faith and in so doing doth destroy that that was the main end of God in giving Christ and of Christ in dying that upon believing we should be saved And therefore I come to the third thing considerable and that is Gods end in giving Christ and Christs end in dying both these are expressed in the same words the Son was lifted up that whosoever believeth c. and Gods end was that whosoever believeth c. where the verity of the major is confirmed that they had the same end Now the Minor is no lesse evident for if Gods end in giving Christ to die for us and Christs in dying were to limit the benefit only to Believers then it followes by undeniable consequence that untill faith none are actually justified by Christs death otherwise the benefit of Christs death is equally extended to Believers and unbelievers and if he saith faith is only a consequent condition and not antecedent then he must corrupt the Text and alter the sense of the Holy Ghost and say that God gave Christ to give eternall life and Christ was lifted up to purchase eternall life that they for whom he was so given and so died
sons antecedently to faith as Mr. Eyre would have it for though we are so called this is to be understood consequenter and not antecedenter because they shall be made such and whereas the Scripture saith he died for enemies and the ungodly therefore in these places where they are called his sheep children his brethren before faith this is to limit and restrain the death of Christ to such as shall be so made not that they are so de facto already but are so called in respect of certainty and what they shall be But to returne to that of Master Eyre that God hath chosen us in Christ as if we then existed in him Let the Reader observe how unhappily he joyneth with Arminius who seemeth such an enemy to him Arminius * Exam. p. 3â— saith Apostolus ait nos in Christo electos esse The Apostle saith we are elected in Christ And as something is put out of the Text by Arminius so something is put in God chose us before the world in Christ our Head this Arminius plainly asserts Exam. p. 158. and accordingly Mr. Eyre saith God constituted from everlasting Christ a Head and saith he in this respect we are chosen in Christ that is as in a Head the Text saith no such matter and as Arminius leaves out those words that we should be holy by which meanes the sense of our being in Christ is made obscure which if added would make it plain in what sense these words in Christ should be taken that is these words shew to what we were chosen to wit to obtaine holinesse and how to wit in Christ that is for Christs sake like as it is said vers 3. God hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly things in Christ Jesus that is for Christs sake So Dr. Twisse in his answer to Mr. Cotton upon these words of his that he saith God chose us before the world in Christ our Head p. 9. where because it 's very material to this passage I shall recite what he further saith Mark I pray you saith he speaking to Master Cotton of Arminius how he works upon each to be elect in Christ is with him to be elect being in Christ for nos in Christo with him is nos existentes in Christo and seeing we are not in Christ but by faith where let the Reader observe the Doctors judgement that we are not in Christ but by faith which is contradictory to Mr. Eyre Hereupon he maketh the object of Election to be fideles the faithful or in Christum credentes such as believe in Christ We answer first we may take as great liberty to interpret it for explication sake by supplying a participle of the future tense thus Elegit nos futuros in Christo He chose us hereafter to be in Christ like as it followes who hath predestinated us to be adopted Now we are adopted by faith Gal. 3.26 as he takes liberty to supplie a participle of the present tense especially considering that when we were Elect to wit before the foundation of the world we were not at all and consequently not fideles Believers Secondly we answer that the compleat sentence considered at full doth manifest in what sense this phrase in Christ is taken He chose us in Christ that we should be holy this shewes to what we were chosen to wit to obtain holinesse and how to wit in Christ that is for Christs sake like as ver 3. 't is laid God hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly things in Christ Jesus that is for Christ his sake and like as 1 Thes 5.9 't is said God hath ordained us to obtain salvation through Jesus Christ so here in conformable exposition 1 Thess 5 9 when it is said God hath chosen us in Christ that we should be holy a fair meaning may be this God hath ordained us to obtaine holinesse through Christ Jesus To this I will super-adde the testimony of Dr. Twisse and the rather because you alledge him for your defence in the Doctrine of eternal Justification Christus fateor caput est Electorum praedestinatorum sed non formaliter consideratorum Neque enim praedestinati quà praedestinati sunt membra corporis Christi sed potius futuri sunt membra ejus nam quod est membrum Christi procul dubio existit Neque enim membrum Christi est terminus diminuens existentiam at praedestinati quà praedestinati non existunt nam predestinatio fuit ab aeterno sed praedestinati non extiterunt simpliciter ab eterno hodie multi sunt Electi qui procul dubio adhuc non nascuntur Rursus unio illa per quam fimus ejus membra fit per fidem Ergo quotquot Christi membra sunt oportet esse fideles at non omnes praedestinati ex qùo primùm praedestinati sunt èvestigio fideles evadunt Adhaec cùm caput non potiùs fiat aliquorum quà m illi aliqui fiant membra corporis ejus sequitur Christum non ab aeterno fuisse caput cùm non ab aeterno corpus habuerit mysticum aut membra cujus ratione propriè dicitur caput Ecclesiae suae Membra verò corporis cùm fiant per vocationem unde dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ãdque per vocationem efficacem consequenter per fidem apparet Christum non priùs dici posse caput quà m sint aliqui qui credant in ipsum loquor de Christo Mediatore Redemptore Dr. Twisse Vind. li. b 2. digress 10. page 74. Col. 2. I confesse Christ is the Head of the Elect and predestinate but not formally considered For neither the predestinate as predestinate are members of Christs body but rather shall be members of it for what is a member of Christ without all doubt existeth For neither is a member of Christ a term diminishing existence But the predestinate as predestinate do not exist for predestination was from eternity but the predestinate do not simply exist from eternity This day there are many that are Elect which undoubtedly are not yet borne Again that union by which we are made his members is made by faith therefore it is needful that all that are his members should be Believers but all the predestinate do not prove Beli vers as soon as they are predestinate Moreover seeing a Head cannot sooner be a Head of any then they can be members of his body it followeth that Christ was not a Head from eternity because he was not a mysticall body from eternity or members in which respect he may properly be called the Head of his Church But seeing they are made members of his body by calling from whence it is called the Chu ch and that by effectual vocation and consequently by faith it appeareth that Christ cannot first be called a Head before there are some who believe in him I speak of Christ the Mediatour and Redeemer Now 1. That we were not united unto Christ
Head the spirit of every mans own faith is very necessary to all even to Infants For the just shall live by his own faith and not by anothers as neither any man is learned by anothers learning but by that learning which is in himself So also I will adde one Testimony more from Zanchy because Mr. Eyre shelters his opinion of justification from the time of Christs death under Zanchies authority John 6.56 Zanch. De tribus Elo. l. 40. cap. 3. p. 106. Tom. 1. Qui edit meam carnem bibit meum sanguinem in me manet ego in eo Alludit ad illam incorporationem quae fit inter edentem bibentem inter cibos comestos cibus extra nos manens minimè nos nutrit cibus sumptus dum in nobis manet nutrit vivificat c. Idem contingit nobis cum Christo extra nos positus non alit à nobis sumptus nutrit vitam adfert atque conservat He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleeh in me and I in him Up-which words Zanchy saith He alludeth to that incorporation which is made between the eater and the drinker and between the meat eaten meat without us doth not nourish us but inwardly taken while it abideth in us it nourisheth and quickeneth us The same happeneth to us with Christ Christ without us that is not united doth not nourish us but taken by us it nourisheth and bringeth and preserveth life Where you see Zanchy maketh Christ not to justifie and save us while we are disunited but when applied and united by faith then he saveth us I will end all with CAMERO Si quis ergo propriè loqui velit dicet Christum pro solis credentibus satisfecisse Johan Camero in opusâ— Mise p. 531. col 1. ii enim soli membra illius sunt Sicuti ergò Adam suos tantum peccato infecit ita Christus peccatum in suis tantùm abolevit Christi verò membrum non est ullus qui in Christum non credit Audi quid dicam fides te facit Christi membrum at fides illa te non servà sset nisi Christus pro te satisfecisset If any man therefore will speak properly he will say that Christ satisfied only for Believers for they only are his members Therefore even as Adam infected only his own with sin so Christ hath abolished sin only in his but no man is a member of Christ but he that beleiveth Hear thou what I shall say faith maketh thee a member of Christ but that faith would not save thee unlesse Christ had satisfied for thee To what hath been spoken I shall superadde some considerations about this union to Christ taken from the several similitudes under which this union is set forth in Scripture First It is compared to the Marriage-union Now as before marriage the wife hath no right nor title to the name body goods of the husband so before faith the soul hath nor that right to Christ his Body Name Goods Purchases Therefore this union is not made till faith and in this Mr Eyre yields the cause that the conjugal union is not till faith Secondly It is expressed by a body consisting of divers members Now Rom. 12.4 5. as no member is a true and living member of the body but that which by nearnesse and vital ligatures is united to the head from whence every member receives strength and sensation 1 Cor. 12.12 13. Eph. 1.22 23. so no man is a living member of Christs body untill by faith on his part and by the Spirit as by vital ligatures he is bound and united to Christ whereby he receives the life of justification and santificaction and lives by a life derived from Christ as the Head but no man but a Believer is thus united as an integral part of this body Thirdly It 's compared to a building or house whose stones are closely cemented together and do all lie directly and perpendicularly upon the foundation Eph. 2 2â— 21. Now as a stone in the quarry is not united in the building till it be hewen and squared and then by the hand of some Architect laid directly and evenly upon the foundation so a man in his natural estate till he be drawn out of this condition by the Spirit of God 1 Tim. 3.15 and hewed and squared out of the Spirit of bondage and by the same hand of the Spirit as the chief Master-builder brought to faith 1 Peâ— 2.5 and built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone he is not a lively stone in this building this is done by the work of the Spirit an unbeliever hath not the Spirit dwelling in him Fourthly it is compared to an ingrafture of a branch in a tree Now a branch may be in a stock two wayes 1. By contiguity or continuity or corporal adherency to the stock and so every branch that is dead may be in the tree but these partake not of the juyce and nourishmnt of the stock and such branches the husbandman will cut off and cast into the fire 2. A branch is in the tree by a reall participation of the sap and influences of the root Thus a man may be in Christ two wayes 1. By external profession of faith for that which maketh us to be in Christ any kinde of way is faith now if our faith be a dead faith such as makes us come to Christ to shelter us from the fire only and it derive not spiritual life and sanctification from Christ this man is a dead branch which the Father will cut off and cast into the fire if it so abide and untill a true faith such as is peculiar to the Elect all are but dead branches yea the very Elect themselves untill effectual vocation and were never truly in him But 2. There is a living operative precious unfeigned faith which so unites the soul to Christ that now it partaketh of the power of his death it is crucified with him and dies to sinne and yet also it lives and is partaker of the quickening Spirit and power of Christs Resurrection whereby it lives and the life it lives in the flesh it lives by the faith of the Son of God Gal. 2. â—0 and it lives unto God as its end as well as from God as the principle of its life this is the true branch that partaketh of the sap and influence of the Root Christ Jesus unto a heavenly life and none are such branches but such as are truly cut off from the stock of Nature and ingraffed by faith into Christ That which Mr. Eyre addeth in the Margin by way of Comment upon Heb. 2.11 He that sanctifieth Mr. Eyre vind pag. 8. and they that are sanctified are all of one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereunto saith he some do make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the substantive and
referres his Reader to Junius his Parallels lib. 3. This is brought to prove our union before faith and therefore he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the substantive made so by some but I believe none can be produced as for Junius he saith no such matter but saith it must be taken either in the Masculine gender and relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the substantive they are of one father or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Neuter and so it signifies they are of one common Lump or Masse agreeing in the community of nature and indeed this is most agreeable to the Scope of the place for as he had shewed ver 10. that it was convenient for Gods justice that our Mediatour should by his death satisfie Gods justice in the 11th ver he sheweth how he could die and how it could be accepted in our stead he answereth because he was one indued with the same nature for He that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are of one that is all of one common Father as Adam or are of one and the same nature and substance and what is this to prove a mystical union before faith and it is observable that he maketh those that are the sons to be brought to glory such as are sanctified and Christ is not ashamed to call these Brethren but as for unbelievers that are not sanctified Christ will never call them Brethren and such as he calleth sons he doth not intend to call them so antecedently to their faith but only to shew who shall be brought to glory by his death and that is only sonnes And by Mr. Eyre's leave it is wholly excentrical to this place to compare Christ to the first-fruits and those for whom he died to the residue of the heap as he doth in quoting that place Mr. Eyre p. 8. That which he presupposeth likewise that by vertue of this eternal union the sins of the Elect do become Christs and Christs righteousnesse becomes theirs will seem not only a Paradox but little better then blasphemy if throughly examined for the humane nature of Christ was not existent from eternity and to what end should their sins be imputed to the Divine Nature who can bear the thought of it without trembling And surely at our union with Christ our sins become Christs as well as his righteousnesse becomes ours yea before when he was actually a surety for us but not from eternity He addeth that by vertue of this union that they are said to be given to Christ and Christ to them Page 8. I answer that when the Elect are said to be given to Christ that is that he should die in particular for them this includes not any actuall Donation of them to Christ by mystical implantantation but it signifies Gods ordination and constitution whereby he did ordaine that the benefits of Christs death should be for them though not to be applied to them from the time of this ordination and this may very well stand and yet they not united untill faith In the next place I shall take notice of Mr. Eyre's slight answer to the Reverend Mr. Conant since deceased who as Moderator in our first Conference proposed the Objection drawn from Rom. 16.7 Rom. 16.7 where Paul speaking of Andronicus and Junia saith they were in Christ before me but if this union be eternal or antecedent to our birth and faith one cannot be in Christ before another He saith he returned no answer and the truth is he can returne no solid answer And though he now insult since the decease of this Reverend Servant of Christ and saith he passed it over because there was little difficulty in it yet when he was living he was no more able to stand against him in an Argument then Dagon before the Arke then Stephens adversaries who could not resist the Spirit by which he spake But let us consider the force of his Answer It is evident saith he the Apostle speaketh not there of their spiritual union with Christ which is invisible to man for God onely knoweth who are hi◠but of such a being in Christ as is by external profession and Church-communion in respect of which the whole visible Church is called Christ 1 Cor. 12.12 And hypocrites as well as the Elect are said to be in Christ and to be branches in him And thus it is acknowledged that one is in Christ before another according as they are called and converted whether really or in appearance It doth not follow that union to Christ is successive or that it is an act done in time depending upon conditions performed by men His first Answer is This is not meant of spiritual union with Christ his reason is because that is invisible to man First This is over-boldly asserted that he saith it is evident that this is not meant of spiritual union with Christ when there is nothing said but what may rather evidence the contrary 1. Either this was a true union or they were but hypocrites but it is too much rashnesse to say they were hypocrites 2. They were such as were of note among the Apostles chief Evangelists I think at least in the judgement of charity they should be such as were truly in Christ 3. The Apostle indued with a great Spirit of discerning judged them so he saith they were in Christ therefore we should judge it really 4. 'T is such an union and in-being in Christ as Paul himself afterward had but his union was real he meant and understood a real union in respect of himself and what he affirmes of himself he saith the same of them and that they had this priviledge to be in Christ before him 5. This was no such great priviledge for the pen of an Apostle to commend them far above himself if he thought only it was an union in profession in shew only and not in truth Secondly That which leads him to judge it was not a real spiritual union with Christ is because this was invisible to man because saith he God onely knowes who are his But 1. Might he not here well exempt the Apostles who were by an extraordinary gift indued with a Spirit of discerning and especially were they guided in their Epistles written for a rule of life whereof this is a part 2. Let it be granted for a truth that no man can know infallibly the Election or regeneration of another but by special Revelation then no man can absolutely say of such who live holily in respect of conversation whose actions are materially good and nothing appearing to the contrary but that they are in Christ really none can say they are not in him really therefore an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or suspense of judgement had been better then for him to say rashly it is evident the Apostle speakes not of spirituall union with Christ when he saith these that were of chief note among the Apostles were in Christ and nothing appearing to the
charge of Gods Elect it is God that justifieth Prov. 17.35 He that justifieth the wicked and condemneth the just they both are an abomination to the Lord. And so it is opposed to accusation or condemnation and thus it is an act of God judicially declaring a Believer to be innocent or righteous and acquitting him from all blame and punishment I need not spend time to open this it is sufficiently done already by our * Justificatio est sententia Dei gratiosa quaÌ„ propter Christum fide apprehensum absolvit fidelem à peccato morte justum reputat ad vitam Ames Medul ch 27. sect 6. Divines against the Papists Justification therefore is a gracious sentence of God the Father wherby for Christs sake apprehended by faith he doth absolve a sinner from sin and death and doth esteem him righteous unto eternal life It is a sentence pronounced as the use of the word declares which makes not a natural but a moral change in the person justified for it is not as Aquinas and his followers imagine a physicall motion by a real transmutation from a state of unrighteousnesse to a state of righteousnesse so as that the terme from which this motion is should be sin the terme unto which it tends and ends in should be inherent righteousnesse as if it stood partly in remission and partly in infusion of righteousnesse What act this is I will declare by and by or let me describe it thus with Mr. Hooker It is an act of God the Father upon the Believer whereby the debt and sins of a Believer are charged upon the Lord Jesus and by the merits and satisfaction of Christ imputed he is accounted just and so is acquitted before God as righteous First It is an act of God the Father a judicial act acquitting and absolving the sinner and an act of God the Father not to exclude the Son and Holy Ghost for Opera Trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisa The works of the Trinity terminated upon the creature are communicable to all three persons For the Son and Holy Ghost were offended by mans sin as well as the Father being one and the same God with the Father but it is called an act of the Father and rightly applied to him because of that old and known rule among Divines Wheresoever we finde the Name of God put in opposition to Jesus Christ it must not be understood essentially but personally Hence when it 's said God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself not imputing their sins and that God sent forth him to wit Christ a propitiation through faith in his blood it must be understood of God the Father and so John 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish c. And plainly Christ saith Father forgive them c. And Christ is an Advocate with the Father 1 John 1.2 Now it is applied to the Father because the sin of Adam was directly against the Fathers work for Vt res se habent ad esse ita ad operari every thing doth work according to its being Now the Father being the first person in the Trinity he works in order first and hence Creation is attributed to the Father and Redemption attributed to the Son and Sanctification to the Holy Spirit Now Adams sinne was directly against the Fathers work for his work appeared in Adams Creation after the Image of God therefore the Father being principally offended forgives Secondly It is an act of God the Father upon the Believer therefore it was not an immanent but is a transient act done in time for a man is not a man much lesse a Believer from eternity and what this act is I shall here a little explain It is some act of God done upon believing and never till then for although we acknowledge no new immâ—nent act in God which cannot be admitted without a change in God with whom there can be no variablenesse nor the least shadow of turning yet a transient act may be safely acknowledged which leaves a change upon the creature and not in God And here I willingly acknowledge we are all much in the dark not being able to understand how God doth act or work and therefore would not over-confidently assert how he doth it or what that transient act is but when God worketh faith I am sure there is a morall change wrought in the sinner there is not only a new relation put upon the sinner but a reall righteousnesse is imputed yea a physical change is wrought at the same time for all grace habitually is infused together with faith And I willingly acknowledge this transient act of God doth presuppose an immanent act in God for he worketh nothing upon the creature but what he first purposed in himself to act and God doth upon believing actually remit sins and accept as righteous the person that believeth which termes of remitting sin not imputing it or imputing righteousnesse though they sound as immanent acts yet are to be sensed as transient because done in time and leaving a reall change upon the creature and it is utterly impossible that any new act of understanding or will should be in God unlesse therefore with Vorstius we assert the mutability of God which is horrible blasphemy to imagine we cannot acknowledge any new immanent act in him And the truth is we must with sobriety sit down and count it knowledge enough to know what is written and be contented that an infinite God should do something which our finite understandings cannot comprehend for if he shall act or do nothing but we must know how it is done and why this is to make God finite and not infinite And to give in the utmost of my thoughts in this I conceive the case is in this transient act of forgivenesse as in the creation of the world God did do that which he did not do before but he did not then begin to have a will to create but he willed from eternity that the world should exist in time as an effect of that will it was made whether by an executive power distinct from that will I dare not determine but made it was and was not from eternity and here is a new relation unto God he is a Creatour that before was not this is but a relative respect and an extrinsecal denomination and there is no intrinsecall mutation in God but a great change is wrought for that that was not now is So when God forgiveth a sinner upon believing God doth do that which he did not do before he doth not begin upon believ ng to have a will to pardon him but he willed from eternity to give him faith and forgivenesse of sins upon believing now in time the sinner elected is brought to faith and the sinner is actually and formally discharged according to the tenor of the New Covenant for the righteousnesse of
that Justification is a transient not an immanent action For though I deny not that God did from eternity with an absolute fixed and immutable will purpose in time to justifie his people through faith in Christ which faith he will also give and Christ did merit and if this will satisfie Mr. Eyre as he saith it will if he be not a Reuben as unstable as water and fall from his word the controversie is at an end Yet this is not Justification no more then Gods purpose to sanctifie is Sanctification as shall be made to appear in its place Justification leaveth a positive change upon the person justified He is thereby passed from death to life from a state of hatred into a state of love and friendship but an immanent act leaveth no such change nor do I mean with Aquinas and the Papists a physicall change as when the Lord makes a wicked man a holy man an unclean man a chaste man a passionate man a meek man this is a naturall change and is the work of Sanctification but it is a relative and morall change Take a man that is in prison for some capitall offence and also exceeding sick a double change may be wrought upon this man First let his offence be forgiven and he set at liberty he is now a free man acquitted and set at liberty that before was in bond a dead man here is a relative change but he may be as sick still as he was when in prison let the Physician come and heal his distemper here is a cure wrought his health restored this is a natural physical change so it is here upon Justification there is a relative change wrought We that were debtors to the Law and liable to death and condemnation our sin through faith in Christ is pardoned now we are acquitted and set free from condemnation here is a change of our estate but then also by Sanctification the Lord heales our natures Now Justification is a transient act of God in time upon the Believer acquitting him for Christs sake from the guilt of sin and through his righteousnesse imputed he is accepted unto life eternall The second Question is Whether all the Elect for whom Christ died be actually reconciled and justified from the time of Christs death antecedently not only to their faith but their birth also 1. It is not denied upon neither hand that the Elect are the persons and the only persons for whom Christ intentionally and effectually died 2. It is not denied that the death of Christ is the meritorious cause of salvation and that a full satisfaction was made thereby to the justice of God for the sins of the Elect. 3. It is acknowledged that Christ in his death was a common person making satisfaction for the Elect and such as shall believe and by vertue of Christs death they shall infallibly be brought to faith and that God hath thus farre accepted of this satisfaction as that he neither will nor can require any thing more at the hand of the sinner by way of satisfaction nor at the hands of Christ and that in regard of the price paid we are redeemed 4. It will not be denied but that by the death of Christ God may now freely give us the pardon of sins which without the satisfaction of Christ supposing his eternal decree not to pardon us without a satisfaction he could not do 5. We deny not but Christs Resurrection from the dead was a manifest signe that the full price of redemption was paid and that God gave him a publick discharge from the guilt of our sins and that he rose again as a publick person for our justification that we may be said virtually to die and suffer and rise with him and virtually to be justified in his justification But it is denied by us and affirmed by Mr. Eyre that we stand actually justified and reconciled to God from the time of Christs death antecedently to our faith and birth and that it was the will of the Lord to give us a present discharge from the time of Christs death but God hath limited the benefit of this untill faith So that no person in the state of unbelief and unregeneracy is a subject of Justification this we affirme and Mr. Eyre denies who will have all the Elect though Infidels and in their unregenerate estate under the power and dominion of sin to be actually justified The third question is Whether a believer be justified by faith instrumentally and when the Scripture saith we are justified by faith whether this be understood tropically by taking faith for the object Christ excluding the act or whether it be taken properly for the act with connotation of the Object Now here first it is agreed upon all hands by Pretestants and PÃ pists Orthodox and Socinians Antinomians Remonstrants and Contraremonstrants that it is plainly assâ—rted in Scripture that we are justified by faith It cannot be denied because it is syllabically written the only contention is about the sense I would there were more contending for the Grace then for the right understanding of the Word 1. Then to believe signifies an act of the understanding yielding assent unto Divine Testimony but because the will * Ames Med. cap. 3. Num. 2â— consequently is moved by that assent to embrace the good assented unto and offered in the Gospel therfore faith that is truly saving and justifying consisteth in both faculties therefore we reject their opinion that will have it to be onely an act of the understanding yielding a true * Wotton De reconci lib. 1. par 1. c. 13. n. 1. p. 78. assent to Divine Testimony upon the authority of the Revealer though this be necessary to salvation this comprehendeth not the whole nature of justifying faith which is seated in the heart for with the heart man believeth unto salvation Nor 2. Can we rest in their opinion who define it by assurance and say it is an assurance grounded upon Divine Promises that Christ died for us in particular and that our sins are forgiven For this assurance is a consequent of faith and Justfication and an * Proprium objectum fidei justificantis est Christus vel miscricordia Deâ— in Christo non propositio sive Axioma Ames Bell. Ener Tom. 4. Lib. 5. Cap. 2. Sect. 22. Axiome or Proposition is not the object of faith but Christ and it is a relying upon Christ for pardon not a believing that I am already pardoned it is therefore a * Fider est acquiescentia cordis in Deo tanquam in authore vitae vel salutis aeternae ut per illum ab omni malo liberemur omne bonum consequamur Ames Medul c. 3. num 1. fiducial act or recumbency upon God in Christ for pardon 3. It is questioned Ames Medull c 27. de justificat n. 15 16. whether Faith in the point of Justification of a sinner be to be taken tropically or properly Master Eyre will have
pray tell me now what reall difference you make between the duties of an Elect unregenerate person and of a Regenerate person Let not the ignorant Reader mistake me here I affirme not that any duties of an unregenerate person are acceptable to God or that the want of faith hope and love maketh but a failing only in the manner and circumstances of the dutie but I have only presented the Reader with a glasse to let him see that Mr. Eyre for all the seeming difference he maketh between the actions of the Elect Regenerate and unregenerate yet indeed maketh none and according to him it cannot be found Pag. 18. Thus the Reader may see that one truth of Mr. Eyre verified where he saith We may no more judge of Books by their Title then of strumpets by their foreheads and although his Tittle-Page hold forth the Gospel-language of free Justification yet if thou read the Book thou shalt finde Esaus hands though thou sometimes hearest Jacobs voice And therefore the Reader that is judicious will not be like a silly fish taken with the bait though it swallow the hook I have given thee a few Animadversions but a judicious Reader will observe more This is enough to give the Reader warning to preserve him from the infection of this aire And I hope sufficient to reduce them that are led captive by him into the same Errour CHAP. VI. Proving that we are not justified from Eternity HERE I shall premise these few things First That as we hold Justification to be a transient act done in time so there is no transient act but it presupposeth necessarily an immanent act in God And therefore secondly I acknowledge there was an eternal and an immutable act of Gods will decreeing to justifie his Elect in time through faith in Christ Thirdly As for that conditionate decree which Arminians make in God making the condition antecedent to the act of Gods will I no way acknowledge and judge it absolutely inconsistent with Gods Nature and Essence but such a conditional decree as is so called subsequently not in respect of God willing but in respect of the thing willed sive objecti voliti is not repugnant to him especially in such contingent effects as come to passe by vertue of his decree ordaining them Thus God willeth salvation to the Elect which salvation they shall be brought unto by faith in Christ not that faith is the cause of the act of Election or God willing their salvation yet it may be the cause of the thing willed a subsequent condition wrought by God for the execution of his decree And therefore when the Orthodox acknowledge Election to be absolute they understand it not exclusively to the means which God hath ordained for the obtaining of salvation for God in the same eternall act did ordain the end and the meanes hence Paul telleth the Thessalonians that God hath from the beginning chosen them to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit 2 Thess 2.13 1 Pet. 1.2 and belief of the truth and Peter saith The strangers he wrote unto according to the foreknowledge of God the Father through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ And as I acknowledge this to be an eternall decree Because he chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy so I willingly grant it to be immutable for he that changeth his purpose doth it for want of wisdome in deliberating or for want of power to execute it neither of which can be ascribed to God without blasphemy And hence the Scripture saith The foundation of God standeth sure having this seal The Lord knoweth who are his Fourthly I grant that Christ was elected and constituted to be a Head and all the Elect were predestinated to be his members and in this sense we were chosen in him not existing but only we were pre-ordained unto salvation by him And that this act was one in God in respect of whole Christ mystical although I deny that the Elect were by this act of God mystically united unto Christ which is done upon believing yet I grant a certain relative respect and mutual relation between them In which sense the Elect are called his people before he saved them from their sins and while they were not yet converted and his sheep for which he laid down his life although not yet brought home to him yet was not Christ the meritorious cause of their Election much lesse their foreseen faith or good works although he be the cause of the effects of their Election as therefore this salvation unto which we are predestinated is the act of God so Christ is the effect of Gods love of Election and the means of salvation and our salvation is the end in respect of us but as this salvation is our good so Christ is the cause of it Fifthly Though Christ were thus predestinated to be a Head and the Elect his Members yet was not he a Head actually from eternity nor the Elect actual members because he had not a mystical body from eternity and although God decreed from eternity to justifie the Elect through faith in Christ yet were not they actually justified For * Praedestinatio enim anâ—e applicationemgratiae nihil ponit in praedestinatis sed latet solùm in praedestinante Ames Medul Theol. cap. 25. sect 2. Predestination maketh no internall difference between the Elect and Reprobate untill actuall grace be given for applying the things intended in Election nor doth Predestination necessarily presuppose the existence of its terme * Praedestinatio enim nec terminum nec objectum suum necessariò praesupponit ut existens sed ponit ut existat ità ut vi praedestinationis ordinetur ut sit Amesii Medul c. 25. s 8. nor object but the futurity of both Having premised these things which I have the rather more fully done because he representeth me and such as differ from him as Arminians and Papists I shall now prove that we were not justified from eternity 1. Gods decree to justifie is terminus diminuens is a terme of diminution and therefore is not actuall Justification 't is amor ordinativus but it is not amor collativus it is a love ordaining and preparing good things for us but not an actuall bestowing them Justification is an actual bestowing of some special mercy a discharge from the guilt of sin and death a passing us from an estate of death into an estate of life this may be intended but is not actually performed by Predestination for it 's a known rule Praedestinatio nihil ponit in Praedestinato but I will not strangle the question so by the prejudice of a word or two therefore I argue 2. The Scripture no where speaketh of an eternal Justification Therefore we were not justified from eternity The Antecedent is acknowledged and made use of by Mr. Eyre and a negative argument in matters of great
In respect to their exclusion or admittance to the Covenant in the Gospel and thus the Elect Gentiles were once not a people and then made a people to the Covenant of Grace And in this sense I adde all unregenerate though Elect are not Gods people untill faith And hence Zanchy saith thus that whereas the words should have run thus that in the place where it is said ye are not my people there it shall be said ye are my people instead thereof he saith it is said ye are the Sonnes of God and he assigneth three reasons the third is Vt meliùs hâc locutione indicaret rationem quâ justificamur salvamur nempe per fidem verbum Dei apprehensantem si enim filii Dei sumus ergò nati ex Deo si nati ex Deo ergò per semen Dei in nos illapsum à nobis apprehensum in nobis retentum semen Dei est verbum Evangelii in nos illabitur per virtutem Spiritûs sancti à nobis verò fide quae it idem opus est Spiritûs sancti solâ recipitur ergò solâ fide fimus filii Dei He speaketh thus that he may the better declare the manner of our Justification or Salvation ta wit by faith apprehending the Word of God where he taketh faith not objectively but subjectively with connotation to the object for if we be the sons of God we are therefore borne of God if borne of God therefore by the seed of God falling into us and received and retained by us The seed of God is the Word of the Gospel it falleth into us by the power of the Holy Ghost but of us it is only received by faith which again is the work of the Holy Ghost therfore by faith alone we are made the sons of God where you see that Zanchy maketh this great change to be by faith and that such a change is made is evident for before faith they are * Eph. 2.1 2 3. 2 Tim. 2.26 Acts 26 18. Ezek. 44.7 Heb. 2.15 Mark 16.16 dead in sins and trespasses are children of disobedience in whom Satan acts and rules by whom they are led captive at his will and pleasure they are under his power they are unrenewed uncircumcised slaves in bondage to death subject to damnation children of wrath but upon believing are new * 2 Cor. 5 17 2 Pet. 1.4 John 1.12 Eph. 1.5 1 Pet. 1.3 23. creatures partakers of the Divine Nature they are actually instated into the number of children to which they were predestinated are begotten again to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus from the dead are borne again not of corruptible seed but incorruptible the Word of God which liveth and abideth for ever But could this be affirmed of them ever since Christs death surely no thâ—refore here is a change and that before God wrought in their estate by effectual vocation and therefore they were not justiâ—â—ed before Fifthly If we are exhorted to believe in God for pardon and remission of sins then were not we pardoned from the time of Christs death before faith But we are thus exhorted to believe in God for the pardon of sins Believe and thou shalt be saved Acts 16.31 and the Scripture was written for this end that we might believe and that believing we might have life through his Name John 20.21 The consequence is confirmed because if we were justified already before faith it were a needlesse exhortation to call upon us to believe for pardon when we are pardoned already and therefore we might be called upon to believe to get assurance of our pardon but not to obtain pardon it self it were an exhorting us to seek for that by faith which according to Mr. Eyre is to be evidenced not to be obtained through faith and so were a needlesse and a groundlesse exhortation Sixthly Such as were not mystically united to Christ at his death could not be justified actually by his death But Believets that now live were not then mystically united Therefore The Major Proposition will need no shield and buckler to defend it for Christ justifieth none but such as are in him as the first Adam brings condemnation to none but such as are in him so the second Adam gives life and salvation to none but such as are in him The Minor is proved because that that is not cannot be united Believers were not then existing Besides 2. This union is made by faith They that were not existing were not then believers 3. Christs being a common person is not sufficient to make the mystical union 4. Christ as a publick person is a surety but Christ as united to us is a Head which are different considerations in the one he is a meritorious moral cause of salvation in the other a physical cause or efficient natural cause 5. The mystical union is by a work of the Spirit 1 Cor. 6.17 He that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit but if the mystical union be made by Christs being a publick person that needeth not any new work of the Spirit to joyn Christ and Believers together 6. Those places where it is said Ephes 2.5 6.13 Ephes 2.5.6.13 Col. 2.13 14. Col. 2.13 14. That we were quickened with Christ and are made to sit together in heavenly places And in Christ Jesus we who were sometimes afarre off are now made nigh and that the handwriting of Ordinances was blotted out signifie no more then that in and through him as a meritorious cause we obtain such mercies but they hold not forth Believers to be existing in him before they had a being and our sitting in heavenly places is spoken only in regard of the certain right we have thereunto jus ad rem though not jus in re and in a qualified sense in Christ our Head who is already ascended Seventhly Christ in his death was not mystically but personally considered For though he were a publick person and Mediatour yet as so he was personally not mystically considered in his death and resurrection and the Justification that he received from God Therefore we were not justified actually from the time of Christs death The Antecedent is thus made good because it was not Christ mystical that was crucified but Christ the Son of God and He trod the * Isay 63.3 Wine-presse of his Fathers wrath alone Christ mysticall is not the Saviout of the world then the work of Redemption is to be attributed to every Believer and they are as truly Saviours of the world as Christ but this is blasphemy to imagine and therefore if he were not mystically considered in his death then not in his Resurrection nor in that Justification he received and so by consequence we were not justified by his death nor were in him antecedently to faith Eightly If we were pardoned from the time of Christs death then as Bellarmine objecteth against our Divines that make faith an assurance then it is
did not intend a direct Series and order of the causes of salvation in this place from whence then it may be concluded those that are uncalled are unjustified so are the Elect Jewes Therefore A third reason is because they who are alienated from God they are not reconciled and by consequence not justified So are the Elect Jewes yet uncalled Therefore c. As concerning the Gospel they are enemies for your sakes but as touching the Election they are beloved for the Fathers sake that is as * De Judaeorum gente in genere disserit qui quòd Evangelium idest quatenus Evangelium non admittunc nempe in praesenti conditiâ—ne sunt Deâ— exosi c. Beza saith upon the place Quatenus Evangelium non admittunt sunt Deo exosi quod ad Electionem attinet c. That is as they refuse the Gospel they are enemies or hateful to God in the present condition for your sakes which is to be understood that God so ordered it for the Gentiles good that upon their rejection they might be called but as concerning the Election they are beloved for the promises God made to their forefathers but as to their present condition they are hatefull to God therefore unjustified Eleventhly That that maketh the witnesse of the Spirit to be false cannot be true But to make unbelievers though Elect persons the subjects of Justification doth this Therefore c. The assumption only needeth proof Rom. 8.15 yet it is evident because the Spirit doth witnesse to the Elect unregenerate that they are in a state of bondage whence that Spirit is called the Spirit of bondage but in this witnesse the Spirit is a Spirit of truth therefore the Elect unregenerated are not justified CHAP. VIII Shewing that we are justified by faith and that when the Scriptures speak of Justification by Faith it doth not understand it only declaratively but really in the sight of God nor objectively excluding the act and the instrumentality of Faith is proved HEre also for a right understanding of the matter in hand I shall premise First That we are not justified by faith in the sense of the Papists as if it did justifie us per modum causae efficientâ—â— morâ—â—oriae as a proper efficient and meritoriour câ—â—â—e which by its own worth or dignity deserves to obtaine Justification so Bellarmine saith Bellar De Justific l. 1. c. 17. it doth justifie impetrando promorendo inchoando justificationem Nor Secondly Do we say that faith justifies in an Arminian sense as if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere the act of believing were imputed to us for righteousnesse or that Faith in the Covenant of Grace standeth instead of that obedience we owe to the Moral Law so as that our imperfect faith is for Christs sake accepted for perfect â—ighteousnesse Thirdly Faith doth not justifie us as the matter of our righteousnesse as a grace or a work or an act or a habit but the matter of our Justification is Christs righteousnesse and obedience Fourthly Faith is not to be taken objectively only that is for Christ as Mr. Eyre interprets it though it be willingly acknowledged that we are justified by no other righteousnesse then the righteousnese of Christ But Fifthly I take Faith subjectively and properly for the grace of Faith and that act of it whereby as a hand it layeth hold upon Christ for Justification and so it is to be taken with connotation to its object That if you ask for what I am justified I say the only righteousnesse of Christ imputed if you ask by what I am justified I answer by Faith as an hand to put on Christ as an instrument appointed by God to apply Christ so that Faith is not the matter of my righteousnesse but answereth in my participation of the righteousnesse in Christ to that which is the ground of my being partaker in Adams sin Sixthly This grace of Faith is the free gift of God not the birth or spawn of free will but the effect of Election and a fruit of Christs death Seventhly When the Scripture saith We are justified by faith it is to be taken for this grace of Faith relatively considered as to its object and by applying Christs righteousnesse a Believer is justified really in the sight of God by a change of his estate from death to life so that it doth not only declaratively evidence Justification to the conscience but instrumentally it justifieth us so as that I must be justified by it though I am not justified for it These things premised I shall now prove it It were needlesse to mention the Scriptures that expressely say we are justified by faith it being acknowledged that the Scripture clearly speaketh so but only the difference is how this is to be taken whether properly metonymically or both to which last I incline in the sense explained So that neither Christ alone nor Faith alone do justifie but that they are social causes though not co-ordinate and ejusdem generis of the same kinde or worth but Christ is a morall meritorious cause Faith the instrumental working only virtute agentis principalis by the power order constitution of the principal agent to the production of an effect far above its own native-worth or power Argument the first against declarative Justification The matter in controversie between Paul and the Justiciaries in his time was not by what we come to the knowledge of our Justification but by what means we are justified it is of farre greater concernment to be justified then to know his Justification he said we were justified by faith they by the Law whence I reason If faith taken subjectively for the grace of faith do only evidence Justification then we are no more justified by faith then by works But the Apostle ascribeth more to faith then to works Therefore faith doth more then evidence Justification The consequence is evident because works may evidence Justification nay works are of a more declarative evidencing nature then faith Hence the truth of faith is evidenced by works not only to others but to our selves and that works evidence this Justification of a sinner is apparent Rom. 8.1 Rom. 8.1 There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit By this we know that we are passed c. 1 John 3.14 Now the Assumption I confirme thus that the Apostle attributes more to faith then to works because the Scripture no where saith we are justified by works in his blood but it saith we are justified by faith in his blood And when the Apostle speaketh of Justification by faith he meaneth of a Justification before God as in that third to the Romanes he concludeth by a sound argument that we are justified in the sight of God and not before conscience Thus if all have sinned and are come short of the glory of God and so are inherently wicked then we are
Calvin is in expresse termes for us against you and I will manifest in a few passages Calvin ad Concil Triden Sess 6. ad Can. 9 Calvin Insti l. 3. c. 11. N. 7. Hominem solâ fide justificari quum dicimus fidem non fingimus charitate vacuam sed ipsam solam justificationis causam esse intelligimus and so he saith We gather we do not take from Christ the power of justifying when we teach that he is first received by faith but yet I doe not admit of the crooked figures of this Sophistor meaning Osiander when he saith that Faith is Christ where let the Reader observe that Mr. Eyre agreeth with Osiander in interpreting faith to be Christ and it is the high way to Familisme and to think with Osiander that the essential righteousnesse of Christ is ours and withall how Calvin disliketh this interpretation As if saith he an earthen pot were a treasure because Gold is hidden in it For the reason is not unlike but that faith although it be by it self of no worthinesse or price may justifie us in bringing in Christ as a pot full of money maketh a man rich therefore I say that faith which is only the instrument to receive righteousnesse is unfitly mingled with Christ which is the material cause and both Author and Minister of so great a benefit And again Quo enim modo vera fides justificat Calvins Inst l. 3. c. 17. N. 11. nisi dum nos Christo conglutinat ut unum cum illo facti participatione ejus fruamur So again However we be redeemed of Christ yet till we be by the calling of the Father graffed into the communion of him we are both heires of darknesse and death and the enemies of God 1 Cor. 6.11 for Paul teacheth that we are not cleansed by the blood of Christ untill the Holy Ghost worketh that cleansing in us 1 Pet. 1.2 which same thing Peter minding to teach declareth that the sanctifying of the Spirit availeth unto obedience and be sprinkling of the blood of Christ if we be by the Spirit sprinkled unto cleansing by the blood of Christ let us not think that before such watering we be any other then a sinner is without Christ Let this therefore remain certain that the beginning of our salvation is as it were a certain resurrection from death te life because when for Christs sake it is given to us to believe in him then we first begin to passe from death to life Vnder this sort are comprehended they which have in the division above been noted for the second and third sort of men for the uncleannesse of conscience proveth that both of them are not yet regenerate by the Spirit of God And again where there is no regeneration in them Calvins â— Inst 3. Book 14. c. N. 6 7. this proveth the want of Faith whereby appeareth that they are not yet reconciled to God nor yet justified in his sight for as much as these things are not attained to but by faith The length of the Testimony hath made me omit the Latine it is endlesse to repeat more I conceive Calvine sufficiently vindicated by what is already cited Your next Author is * Zanchy lib. 50. de Natura Dei c. 2. p. 539 Zanchy who though in the words cited something favoureth your opinion yet he meaneth only that we were virtually justified in Christ and in other places is most expressely against you And to avoid prolixity I will give his Testimony only in English The fourth benefit saith he is Justification that is the forgivenesse of our sins and the imputation of Christs righteousness for this followeth faith So also he saith in a twofold sense it may be said and understood that a man is justified by faith instrumentally and formally and in both senses we are justified by faith alone in the first sense because by this as an instrument fitted for this matter we receive the grace of God and righteousnesse of Christ in the latter sense as by the only obedience and righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith we are formally justified as the faith apprehending is taken for the thing apprehended So again * Zanch. Loc. Com. Theol. Epist ad Eph. Loc. 2. p. 83. there are three things required to this that we be partakers of salvation and without which we cannot be saved First As the fountain of all benefits the grace of God his eternal favour love and mercy to us Secondly The other is the complement or fulfilling of the promises and figures of the Old Testament concerning our redemption by blood and the offering up of a Lamb without spot whereby sins might be expiated The third benefit necessary to salvation and sine * Zanch. de tribus Elâ— lib. 5. pag. 195 196. quo reliqua duo nobis inania inutilia sunt est vera Dei cognitio sive fides nam sine fide est impossibile placere Deo Without which the other two are vaine and unprofitable is the true knowledge of God or faith without which it is impossible to please God * Zanch. Tom. 8. de justisi fidei loc undecim p. 781. Once more the wrath of God saith he resteth upon all sinners so long as they continue to be sinners that is unsanctified persons that is his meaning therefore sin is a division between God and man it is a turning of the face of God from the sinner nor can it otherwise be seeing it is repugnant to his righteousnesse to have any fellowship with sin whence the Apostle teacheth that a man is an enemy to God untill he returne into favour through Christ whom therefore the Lord receiveth into conjunction He is said to justifie because he cannot receive into favour nor unite any man to himself but of a sinner he maketh him righteous The next Author is Chamier and it cannot be denied but he hath the words you have cited but it is no hard matter to prove that he contradicteth you and himself in other places I will instance in one Itaque semel habeto nos Legis Evangeliâ— discrimen cùm quaerimus * Itaque semel habeto nos Legis Evangelii discrimen cùm quaerimus utrumquâ— nominare câ—ntractâ illâ significatione secundùm quam Paulus opponit legâ—â—â—perum legi fidei Dâ—inde proprium verum certum discrimen conditionem operum fidei hoc â—st legem operam proponere salutem sub conditione legis perficiendae at legem fidei eâ—â—dem proponere sub conditione tantùm credendi in â—hristum nimirum ut utrinque sumatur conâ—ttio eodem sensu Cham. Panstrat Tom. 3. Lib. 15. Cap 3. Sect. 26. c. Therefore take it for once that we when we seek a difference between the Law and the Gospel do name both in that short signification according to which Paul opposeth the Law of Works to the Law of Faith therefore the condition of Works and Faith do constitute a
our sin was imputed to Christ that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him and he will have Christs being made sin and our being made the righteousnesse of God in him formally the same act in God For he saith this phrase that we might be madâ— doth not alwayes imply the final cause but sometimes the formal And so his meaning is that Christ was at the same time made sin for us and by that act of God we were made the righteousnesse of God in him To this I answer First it offers violence to the Text for that doth not say that we were then made but that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him it laid the foundation for this Secondly Let him assigne any other end that God had in this act in respect to us if this were not his end surely had it not been for this God would not have imputed our sinnes to Christ Thirdly That which he saith is manifestly false for this phrase that we might be alwayes doth expresse the finall cause his instance doth not prove the thing in hand He saith That when light is let in that darknesse might be expelled the immission of light is formally the expulsion of darknesse I answer if it be granted this hindereth not but that it might be the end why the light is let in as in a roome that hath shuts to keep out the light the room is dark now let a man that desires light open these shuts at the same time the light doth physically expell the darknesse and yet it was the end of the man in letting in the light to expel the darknesse Fourthly The imputation of sin to Christ and righteousnesse to us are two different acts and have two different effects and therefore are not formally the same for by imputing sin to Christ he is charged with the guilt of it and is obnoxious to death and the imputing righteousnesse to us is a discharge from the guilt and we are made capable of life Now if this were formally our discharge then we are discharged and so made righteous before Christ had made satisfaction even so soon as our sin was imputed but this is a manifest contradiction for it is not Christs being charged with our guilt but his making satisfaction that procures our discharge but this is but one drop of that river of contradiction that flows from him as from a fountaine with which his Book swells like the river of Jordan till it is foardable by no reason nor any humane understanding 4. I deny that the imputation of sin to Christ and the non-imputation of it to us If you speak of a formal non-imputation and discharge or else you say nothing to the purpose is but one and the same act in God they are two distinct acts terminated upon two distinct subjects The first upon Christ the second upon us Imputation of sin to Christ is a transient act done in time for God did not charge Christ with our sin from eternity and every transient act requireth the existence of the subject upon which it is terminated or produceth it as did Creation And therefore we that had no existence could not be the subjects of a formal non-imputation which is an actuall discharge from it and therefore that which you answer to this objection we were nor then and therefore righteousnesse could not be imputed by propounding another objection Our sins were not then therefore they could not be imputed I answer the reason is not alike for the non-existence of a subject to whom any thing should be impated is of greater efficacy to hinder the imputation then the non-existence of a sinne for the terme or subject of a transient act is of absolute necessity to be or to be produced by the act but there is no such necessity of the thing that is imputed the act may be without that but not without the other Besides a sin is a moral cause of punishment and therefore the effect which is punishment which is that that is meant by imputation of sin is at the will of him that is moved thereby and therefore sometimes goeth before the cause as in the death of Christ for which the Patriarchs were justified before Christ had given satisfaction and sometimes after it therefore the punishment might be inflicted on Christ before the sin was committed I shall now addresse my self to give an answer to such Scriptures as he hath alledged in defence of his own opinion The first is Matth. 3.17 This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased From whence he argueth that if the well pleasednesse of God which is here declared is terminated upon Christ mystical and not to Christ personal then God was well pleased with all his Elect who are Christ mystical when this voice came from heaven and consequently before many of them do believe To which I answer that I take it to be and have proved it an errâ—r to say that the Elect as Elâ—ct are myst cally uni ed to Christ for union necessarily pre-requireth existence and Christ had not a mystical body from eternity 2. I deny as then I did the assumption and say the well-pleasednesse of God was terminated upon Christ personal and not Christ mystical And the meaning is This is my beloved Son in whose person I am well pleased and with whose work and office as a Mediator I am well pleased but it was not the intent of God there to say for his sake I am actually well pleased with all the Elect antecedently to their faith Now I prove it was spoken of Christ personal and not Christ mystical 1. If Christ considered as Mediatour be personally considered then this is understood of Christ personal and not Christ mysticall The antecedent is true Therefore the consequence The reason of the consequence is because this is spoken of Christ as Mediator But Christ mystical is not the Mediaâ—our of the world for then we have so many Redeemers and Saviours of the world as are united to Christ and then Christ alone did not tread the winepresse of his Fathers wrath 2. Christ mystically considered was not baptized by John But this beloved Son in whom God was well pleased was baptized by John Ergo. 3. This was terminated on him to whom the Heavens were then opened and upon whom the Spirit descended like a Dove But this is true only of Christ personally not mystically considered 4. This voice was terminated on him for whose sake God is well pleased with such as believe But God is not well pleased with believers for the sake of Christ mystically considered but personally Ergo. 5. This voice is terminated upon him who is by a peculiar generation and Sonship so a Son that it is incommunicable unto others But this belongs only to Christ personal Therefore this voice was not terminated upon Christ mystical 6. Now to all this I adde this that the consideration of Christ as a pubâ—ick
had in Christ but only the way and means by which we obtain the things purposed in Election to wit in Christ or for Christs sake And therefore as it is not said that we were sanctified from eternity though he chose us in Christ that we should be holy so neither are we justified from eternity for there is no difference because a man cannot be the subject of a moral change to passe from a state of death and life till he do exist though he may be predestinated to be the subject of such a change in time any more then he can be the subject of a physical or natural change Nor doth that passage in the 6th Verse confirme it where it is said He hath made us accepted in the Beloved for that is to be understood of the Elect Ephesians as they were now regenerate and not to be referred to Gods eternall purpose And all this is made more manifest in that those that were Elect and chosen in Christ are said to be children of wrath without God without Christ and without hope in the world which as we have shewed is inconsistent with the state of Justification The second place in Timothy where it is said 2 Tim. 1.9 10. That grace was given us in Christ before the world began but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ holds forth no such thing as eternal Justification but grace is said to be given in respect of the firmnesse and immutability of Gods purpose Therefore in this place Gods giving is not an actual collation but an eternal preparation of grace to be given infallibly to the Elect. And thus Augustinus Apostolus datam dixit gratiam August de Doct. Christ l. 3. c. 34. quando nec erant adhuc quibus daretur quoniam in dispositione ac praedestinatione Dei jam sactum erat quod suo tempore futurum erat The Apostle saith Grace was given when they were not as yet to whom it should be given because in the appointment and predestination of God that was done which in its time should be done Vide Junius Calvin and to this Junius and Calvin give in their suffrage with him The other Scriptures alledged by hâ—m are in pag. 128. which relate to the death of Christ from whence he would prove because it is said that we were then reconciled and had redemption in his blood therefore we were justified before faith from the time of Christs death But observe how the places brought for our Justification from Christs death do utterly overthrow the eternity of Justification For if we were then enemies and then reconciled then was he not reconciled from eternity That in Ephes 1.7 In whom we have redemption through his blood the forgivenesse of sins signifieth nothing but that the price of redemption was paid by him and we have forgivenesse of sins because it is purchased for us but it is not actually given For although Christs death be the meritorious cause of Justification yet is it not the only cause and therefore we are not actually justified till all those causes be actually which have an influence into it Col. 1.20 21. and that in Col. 1.20 21. signifies no more but that peace is thus farre made by the blood of his Crosse that now the cause of enmity is removed by a satisfaction made by the death of Christ and God is now willing to forgive such as believe whence he addeth these mercies named shall be enjoyed if they continue in the faith grounded Ver. 23. and setled and be not moved from the hope of the Gospel Eph. 2.13 14. And the like I affirme of that place Ephes 2.13 14. and of that in 2 Cor. 5.19 2 Cor. 5.19 20. we are causally and meritoriously reconciled Thâ—s was Gods designe in Christ in giving him to die but God and they were not actually reconciled that believe not Hence the Apostle exhorteth in the same place the Corinthians to be reconciled to God and when God justifies and is actually reconciled the reconciliation is mutual there is a change in Gods dispâ—nsation though not a change in his affection and when it is saâ—d that we are said to sit with him in heavenly places this is spoken in regard of a right purchased Eph. 2.6 and the certainty of the thing to be obtained though we do not yet personally sit with him and all such places as speak of our being enemies to God and that while we were enemies we were reconciled signifie nothing but this that we were translated out of a state of enmity into a state of actual reconciliation by Christ as soon as we believe Rom. 5.10 as that Rom. 5.10 for in the first verse he speaketh of them that were already justified by faith and in the 11th We have now received the atonement so that there he speaketh of actual believers not that they received this while they remained unbelievers and enemies to God and if you understand it of what was done for us before we had faith and were regenerated it signifieth nothing but the reconciliation meritoriously made by removing the guilt of sin by a sufficient price paid even while we were actually in the state of enmity but the paying of the price is not the whole nor the formalis ratio justificationis For this price paid is part of the matter of our righteousnesse but the formal nature of Justification stands in the imputation of this righteousnesse which is an actual bestowing of it and in our receiving of it by faith then Mr. Eyre pag. 132. and not till then are we formally justified Here Mr. Eyre objecteth two things First That Christ did not only pay the price of our reconciliation Object 1 but that God did so farre accept it for us that upon the payment he did not impute our sins to us for the Apostle define Justification to be a non-imputation of sin 1. This is petitio principii a begging the question to say God did accept it so as he did not impute sin to us that is at the same time when our sins were imputed to Christ 2. I adde that Gods imputing sin to Christ is virtually a non-imputing it to us but not formally and therefore not a formall Justification 3. I adde that the non-imputation of sin containeth not the whole nature of Justification unlesse under it be comprized the imputation of righteousnesse Secondly He objecteth that the paiment of the full price for our Object 2 deliverance from the curse of the Law is a yielding the question that we are actually set free from the obligation of it for when the debt is paid the debtor is free in Law it is unjust to implead a person for a debt which is paid To this objection I have already given sufficient answer but because it is the maine Argument to which he and all of his judgement trust I will here also give a solution to it I
answer then by denying the consequence For in the first place payment of a debt is refusable when it is not the same in the obligation but now if there were nothing else to say but this this were enough to prove it not the same dum alius solâ—it necessariò aliud solvitur while another payeth the debt another thing is paid But secondly if a surety of our own appointment pay the debt then it may also be available but the surety is provided by God and not by us And thirdly he paid not the same but the value Fourthly besides Christs death was meritorious for the discharge of another not only by the intrinsecal value but by the constitution of God for if God had ordained it it might have been efficaciously sufficient even for the Reprobate Therefore as Scotus * Scotus lib. 3. distin 19. qu. vin p 74. saith well Christi meritum tantum bonum est nobis pro quanto acceptabatur à Deo Therefore if it wholly depend upon the will of God to accept it and how farre he will accept it it is not injustice for God not to give a present discharge for though he did accept it for them yet not for an immediate discharge and why is it any more wrong to Christs death to suspend the application of it untill faith then to deny the efficacy of it to a farre greater number if God had so accepted it Seeing Christs death shall be as effectuall to all intents and purposes and as certainly applied as if presently the benefit were obtained for faith also is merited and shall be given And God did suspend it till faith as that which in his wisdome he saw most convenient Because 1. Faith answers to that which is the ground of our being partakers in Adams sin it unites us to Christ 2. Hereby God doth not justifie an ungodly wretch so remaining which is contrary to the purity and holinesse of his Nature 3. Hereby Christ is not made a Patron of wicked men remaining so under the reigning power of sin 4. Hereby the Doctrine of the Gospel is freed from scandal it is no Doctrine of licentiousnesse 5. Hereby God will have Christ to be acknowledged as a Redeemer the soul to see his need of Christ and to prize his love and he will have him to acknowledge and take him for his Lord that will have benefit by him and therefore untill then it is the will of the Father and the Son that the benefit of this satisfaction shall not be injoyed untill faith And Volenti non fit injuria If the Reader desire further satisfaction let him peruse the Vindication of my Sermon upon this subject CHAP. XI Containing an answer to those Arguments Master Eyre hath brought to prove the antecedency of Justification to faith that we are actually reconciled from the time of Christs death and that faith is not an antecedent condition of Justification FIrst he saith that the Essence and Quiddity of Justification consisteth in the will of God not to punish and that he endeavoureth to prove by two Arguments 1. Because the definition which the Holy Ghost gives of Justification is most properly applied to this act and saith he it is a certain rule Cui convenit definitio convenit definitum that is Justification to which the definition of Justification doth agree Now saith he the definition which the Psalmist and the Apostle gives of Justification is Gods not imputing sin and his imputing of righteousnesse To this I answer by acknowledging the Argument but I deny that the non-imputing of sin and the imputation of righteousnesse is the whole definition of Justification but it is a non-imputing of sin and imputing of righteousnesse according to the tenour of the Gospel by vertue of that signal promise He that believes shall be saved And this is intended by the Psalmist and Apostle if it be a full definition for Justification is a forensical judicial act now according to the tenour of the first Covenant which requireth personal and perfect obedience we cannot be saved Now God hath made a new Covenant with us by Christ revealed in the Gospel wherein he hath promised whosoever believe shall be saved Now when God as a fruit and effect of this Covenant doth not impute sin and impute righteousnesse to a person this is truly Justification but thus God dealeth with none untill actual faith Secondly I answer Gods eternal purpose is not formally a non-imputing of sin but a purpose of not imputing it Therefore till this purpose be brought into act we are not pardoned and justified for although his will be actuall yet his non-imputation is not actual but to be done in time for neither is the sin in actual being which how it can be remitted before it be committed let him shew for it is not actually but potentially a sin And therefore in what sense it is a sin in that sense it is remitted onely and neither is the sinner to be pardoned in actuall being but Justification is a change of the state and condition of the person justified passing him from death to life and that for Christs sake but how can the state of the sinner be changed who is yet unborne and never was yet actually a childe of wrath and Christs death is not the cause of Gods eternal will and purpose and consequently if that be Justification we are justified without the merits of Christ and then Socinian doctrine takes place but the Scripture expressely mentions Christs death as the cause of our Justification for which God justifieth us In whom we have redemption through his blood the forgivenesse of sins and God hath set him forth a propitiation through faith in his blood and for Christs sake God is said to forgive the Ephesians Thirdly Whereas you say the words both in the Old and New Testament whereby imputation is signified which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do both of them signifie an act of the minde and will an immanent act I answer that sometimes when they are related to men they so signifie Gen. 15.6 Gen. 38.15 Numb 18.17 Psal 32.1 Psal 106.31 Rom. 4.6 8. yet that they are so taken when attributed to God I absolutely deny but do alwayes hold forth a transient act and not an immanent act as Gen. 15.6 Gen. 38.15 Numb 18.27 Psal 32.1 Ps 106.31 Rom. 4.6 8. 3 Cor. 5.19 nor can any place be produced relating to God as his act where it is so taken for it will ascribe a fallible judgement unto God to say that he imputeth not sin to a justified person that is to say he judgeth and esteemeth them not to have sinned for Gods judgement is according to truth and therefore such as have sinned he looketh upon them as such as have sinned and he cannot esteem them such as never did sin though he may if he will pardon them deal with them as with such as have not sinned and in this
many not that Faith is the cause of Gods acceptation of the merits of Christ but of applying it to us Secondly That which Mr. Eyre addeth that our Saviour after he had tasted death to bring many sons to glory boasts and glories in this atchievement Behold I and the children which thou hast given me Heb. 2.13 Therefore it was the will of God that his death should be immediately available for their reconciliation for they could not be the children of wrath and of Christ at the same time I answer Mr. Eyre hath dealt fraudulently in citing this Scripture for he hath left out the 11th Vers which is the true Key to unlock this and to shew us who are there called his children for these that are called children are called brethren in the 11th Verse and the same persons are understood without all question and who were his brethren why they that were sanctified for both he that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are all of one wherefore he is not ashamed to call them brethren Now a man is not sanctified before Faith therefore not a brother before Faith therefore not a childe 1. The scope of the place is this the Apostle is comforting the believing Hebrews against the scandall of the Crosse to which the Apostle answereth in v. 9. 1. That he was subjected unto death for our sakes not for his own therefore his Crosse should not offend us 2. That he did but taste of death he was but a little while under it 3. It is was by the special grace of God that his death for a short time should stand for our eternal death deserved Therefore we should rather gloriously esteem of his suffering then be offended 2. He giveth a second reason in the 10th Verse it made for Gods glory as well as for our salvation for it behoved him for whom are all things and by whom in bringing many sonnes to glory to make the Captaine of our salvation perfect through suffering In v. 11. he gives an account how Christ could die and how this could be accepted in our stead He answereth Because that he is one of our kin and nature Now least it should therefore be thought that all are redeemed because all partake in the community of nature with Christ as man He sheweth who indeed are his kindred brethren for whom he died they are sanctified ones They that are sanctified and he that sanctifieth are all of one as if he should say Christ died for them that are one with him Now none are one with him but such they are not only all of one common lump but of the same body and have the same God for their Father Hence if none be united but sanctified ones and if Christ will claime kindred with none but sanctified ones then none but Believers are his brethren and children Now as to your Argument that they could not be the children of wrath and of Christ at the same time I retort it upon you and say therefore it is evident they were not Christs children immediately from the time of his death for then they could not be children of wrath which yet the Apostle expressely affirmeth of the Elect Ephesians before regeneration Thus the Captain of the Life-guard of his opinion lieth bleeding at the feet of the truth that he doth oppose Secondly If it were the will of God that the death of Christ should be the payment of our debt and a full satisfaction for all our iniquities then was it his will that our discharge procured thereby should be immediate But it was the will of God that the death of Christ should be the paiment of our debt and a full satisfaction for our iniquities Ergo. I deny the consequence of the Major Proposition which he endeavoureth to prove because saith he it is unjust that a debt when it is paid should be charged upon the Surety or Principal I answer if it had been the intention of God and of Christ that the payment should have procured an immediat discharge it were unjust But that rests to be proved and will while the world stands We deny not the value of the price or satisfaction but that God or Christ intended it for a present discharge 1. Because Christs death though it be the meritorious cause yet it is not the only cause of Justification 2. Christs was Gods servant in the work of Redemption and if it were the will of God to limit this benefit till faith it behoved Christ as Mediatour to obey 3. The merit of Christs death is not to be valued only by the intrinsecal value of it but by the constitution and acceptation of God it is said that by grace he tasted death for every man It was an act of grace to Christ that he should be Mediatour that the sufferings of his humane nature united to the divine person of the Son of God should be accepted as a ransome for us from eternal death Hence Christs death was not an act of pure justice but of justice mixed with grace and is so farre accepted as the divine will of the Father pleaseth as we see in denying the fruit of it to Reprobates and limiting it to the Elect which might have ransomed all And why is it any more injustice to have it limited for a time by the will of God for application to the Elect when it shall certainly be done then to have it by the will of God absolutely limited to them alone Hence Christs death is so far meritorious as the will of God is to accept it hence Gods will must not be regulated by the death of Christ for the time maner of application or else it must be injustice in God which is a harsh expression in you but Christs death must be regulated by Gods will in accepting it and I have else where given sufficient reason why God did limit the benefit of it untill faith And from what goeth before it followeth Christs death was not solutio ejusdem but tantidem for then it would have produced an immediate discharge This is the great Argument upon which his cause depends and you see how invincibly it is overmatcht by opposing the Doctrine of Justification by Faith 3ly If nothing hindered the reconciliation of the Elect with God but the breach of the Law then the Law being satisfied it was the will of God that they should be immediatly reconciled But nothing hindered their reconciliation with God but the breach of the Law I shall here distinguish in answer to this Argument upon the hinderâ—ng of reconciliation 1. Reconciliation may be hindered by that which is the cause of separation which at first made the breach or reconciliation may be hindered for want of a fit means to apply the benefit of reconciliation And thus I apply it to the Minor And deny it though nothing do hinder by way of guilt as a cause of separation for want of satisfaction yet something did hinder by way of application