sorry for Mr. Williams that he printed his Sheet when mine alone as a Third Person to let the World know how little they had against him how curious the Difference what need of bearing with one another had been enough because he must be forced to agree with me when he should have differ'd and is put upon the Defence of a Denial of that which I take to have been advantageous and the credit of his Books to have owned It is objected against him that he holds the Penal Sanction of the Law of Works to be changed What if he had owned this for his Opinion and said it is no Error but stood to it As Mr. Baxter hath his and I my State of the Point Mr. W. might have his and we never fall out Suppose then the Point stated only with two Distinctions 1. As to the Law between the Law it self and its Sanction 2. As to the Subjects of this Law between the Believer and Unbeliever Let him then say the Law it self is unchangeable but its Sanction is changed and that change to be understood as to Believers for he every where says the Unbeliever is under Condemnation And let me see who he is will be his Opponent I say let me see whether any of our Brethren out of whose Books Mr. Lobb does bring some opposite Sayings to Mr. W. and thereby shifts himself off from being Accuser or Opponent so as it is not he but they are engaged to make them good that will undertake to Oppose and Mr. W. be Respondent I suppose the Question to be Whether the Sanction of the Law be changed and held affirmatively being but thus stated This I take to be the very ordinarily preached Doctrine by our most Judicious Divines for to be more exact in Preaching may but amuse and hurt the People and Mr. Lobb does know and I think Mr. W. too that trite Determination I mentioned in my Letter to him which is co-incident with what is here said The Law is to be considered qua Foedas and qua Regula Qua Regula it binds us to perfect Obedience Qua Foedus it binds us to it as the Condition of Life Qua Regula then it remains Obligatory Qua Foedus it does not Christ hath freed us from it Let us suppose this to be Mr. W's Opinion and then bring Mr. Lobb's Objection There is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law of Works Very well he grants it The Gospel doth not denounce Death for the same Sins and every Sin as the Law doth Very true the one follows undeniably from the other Let us bring then Mr. W's Explanation Comment or Confirmation of this Opinion Though nothing be abated in the Rule of Sin and Duty yet Blessings are promised to lower degrees of Duty and a continuance in a State of Death with a bar to the Blessing are not threatned against every degree of Sin as the Covenant of Works did Can any doubt this to be the Grace of the Gospel-Promise Doth it promise Life to all Men however Vile and Impenitent they be or Doth it threaten Damnation or a continuance of it on any True Penitent Believing Godly Man because he is imperfect This change of the Sanction supposeth the Death of Christ and his honouring the Law by his perfect Obedience wherein God hath provided for his own Glory while he promises Life by Forgiveness to imperfect Man and yet insists on some degree of Obedience to which of his Grace he enableth us What can be spoken more appositely more judiciously more roundly to the purpose and more sufficiently supposing Mr. W. had but held and stood to this Opinion It is all exactly true according to the Point thus stated I cannot blame Mr. Lobb though I had a mind to do it to think that this was indeed Mr. W's Opinion because his Discourse loses its current upon a contrary Supposition Mr. Lobb shews himself a more piercing Man than I thought upon that account I will turn therefore to another place Gospel Truth p. 115. Dr. Crisp oft tells us that the Sanction of the Law of Works is removed and the Curse gone as to the Elect This is true if he mean that sinless Obedience is not now the way of Life and all bellow it shall not bind Death upon us so as to hinder our Relief by the Gospel Here Mr. Lobb shews me in a Letter that Mr. W. grants expresly that the Sanction of the Law is removed It is true that is he confesses it Very good all consonant to himself It is true in this meaning which he sets forth just in the Sense I say the Point is stated By the way let Mr. Lobb note that when Mr. W. says It is true in 〈◊〉 meaning it implies that if it be meant otherwise It is 〈◊〉 true which answers the Quotation By this it appears how well throughly well all would have been if he had maintained not denied the Charge of his Brethren Hear therefore a little more amply Mr. George Lawson with whom neither Mr. W. Mr. Lobb nor I are to be compared for a Conclusion There is one great Change in respect to the Law Perfect Obedience to it was first made the Condition of Life but afterwards that Promise of Life upon those strict Terms and that severe Commination of Death upon Sin were abolished and Faith was made the only Condition of Life So that it may be truly said that the Law of Works is abrogated but not the Moral Law considered by it self I would have therefore Mr. W. methinks here ask the Brethren to give him his hand in again or if he thinks good he may take it If not let us come to the Question waved hitherto Is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Moral Law the same as The Gospel hath another Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law For answering which Question by the Sanction of the Law I understand the Penalty under which the Duty is required and so does Mr. Lobb because when Mr. W. says Sanction he cites Penal Sanction supposing as here spoken nothing else by it but the Penalty Now then when Mr. W. says The Gospel hath another Sanction or a Change of the Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law Mr. Lobb accounts he must be understood to mean That the Precepts of the Law being taken into the Gospel are not required under that Penalty as they were in the Covenant of Works and thereupon does collect this as his Error The Collection is Rational but Mr. W. denies this to be his meaning Every Sin out of doubt does deserve Death even in the Believer and therefore the perfect Duty of the Law is required by the Gospel under the same Penalty though that Penalty is remitted being not remediless as under the Law it was upon the other Terms of it Christ's Law comprehends I have said the Law of Nature and the Remedying Law both When the Law of Nature therefore remaineth it must
PACIFICATION Touching the Doctrinal Dissent Among our United Brethren in LONDON BEING An Answer to Mr. Williams and Mr. Lobb both who have appealed in one Point collected for an Error to this Author for his Determination about it TOGETHER With some other more necessary Points falling in As also that Case of Non-resistance which hath always been a Case of that Grand Concern to the State and now more especially in regard to our Loyalty to King William and Association for him Resolved on the Occasion By Mr. JOHN HUMFREY They were wont to speak in old time saying They will surely ask counsel at Abel and so they ended the matter 2 Sam. 20.18 LONDON Printed for T. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside 1696. PACIFICATION PART I. THERE having been so little Reason for the Interruption of that Union which was made between the Nonconformist Ministers in London without distinguishing Presbyterian and Independent the Government of both over their particular gathered Congregations being as the case stands coincident as to the main And our Expectations of some more general Meeting of both for Reconciliation suffering hitherto Disappointment it does seem even necessary to me for stirring up the Brethren to this Work that the Difference between them which is not healed but sleeps should be awakened and must be awakened and brought again to Agitation till the matter be composed Must I say not in regard to the setting a few righter in their Judgments whom I think out which yet is also intended but in regard to this more general end of composing the Nonconformist Body For which Composure then there must be now either an Agreement of All in the same Points which can never be for the Understanding of diverse Men will be diverse as their Faces are diverse and I cannot approve of any Man 's going about a weak and vain obtaining that Or else an Agreement only in Practise and Love leaving every Brother Free to abound in his own Sense as to these Points wherein we differ so long as they indanger not the Foundation This is that I count is to be done to which end Having printed one Sheet with some Animadversions on certain Exceptions against Mr. Williams's Books Mr. W. thought good to answer these Exceptions himself in another Sheet directed to me and Mr. Lobb hath answered his Sheet in four or five There is one Point as appears there collected for an Error wherein they have both appealed to me and I have said something to it But having not then by me Mr. W's Books I referred the Matter to the Brethren when they meet and to his Books with this Adjustment That if that Error upon Examination was not found in them Mr. Lobb should ask his Pardon if it was then did Mr. W. deserve rebuke not because he erred as all do in some things but because he denies the Error to be there and should very honestly confess it that so all might be made up By this means one of them shall get Love in such an ingenuous Acknowledgment and the other Victory I have since been accommodated with Mr. W's Books and have looked into them and find it harder than I thought to tell unto whose share the Love and Ingenuity must fall In the Preface of Mr. W. to his Book of Gospel-Truth in the third Leaf are these words The Gospel hath another Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law than the Covenant of Works had This change of the Sanction supposeth the Death of Christ and his honouring the Law by his perfect Obedience Upon these words Mr. Lobb collects that Mr. W. holds that there is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law which we count an Error These are Mr. W's words and lye together in the same Page and as to the Construction thereof I being appealed unto do premise this That the Gospel hath another Sanction than we Covenant of Works is a Truth on Mr. W's side and Mr. Lobb will grant it That there is no Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law is a Truth on Mr. Lobb's side and Mr. W. will grant it But whether the Gospel hath another Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law and There is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law be the same is the Question Unto the Decision hereof thus much I have said in Mr. Lobb's Sheets before I examined Mr. W's Books that a Change of the Sanction and Another Sanction is all one And so far I am right because so much is intended by Mr. W. as appears by the words conjoyn'd and urg'd by Mr. Lobb But whether a Change of the Sanction or Another Sanction being all one to the Preceptive part of the Law as taken into the Gospel in Mr. W's Sense be a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law in Mr. Lobb's Sense is still the Question Before I come to the passing Judgment it will be most to Edification in the first place to understand and state the Point it self Some Worthy Divines says Mr. Baxter say All the Law of Innocency is ceased Precept Promise and Threatning Cessante capacitate subjecti Lex cessat Others say that all are still in force Himself saith the Precept and Threat is but the Promise only through our Incapacity does cease Now let these Worthy Divines that say the whole ceases explain their Tenent and let us see what they draw from it and if there be nothing in the Matter explain'd but what we can approve in ours let them in God's name enjoy their Scheme of Thoughts and we our own God hath abolished the Covenant of Works by substituting a new one in room of it says Dr. Owen as Mr. W. hath quoted him Def. Gosp P. 44. Mr. Lobb does not must not say that none but Socinians are of that Opinion There is something now here accordingly that Mr. W. holds and Mr. Lobb thinks to be an Error But what does Mr. W. say upon it Is there any thing he deduces from thence that is dangerous or of evil Consequence to be reproved Is there any thing delivered in his Explication but what Mr. Lobb approves and does himself and his Brethren deliver and preach if he preach at all or preach the Gospel If the Deductions he makes from his Truth and the Deductions Mr. W. makes from that Error be the same Doctrine and that which is sound and necessary to Salvation what reason is there for all such to be Chid that cannot bear one with another Mr. Lawson that Judicious Divine of whom Mr. Baxter says somewhere that he learned more of him than any one living does say that They who hold that the Law remains the same and that God as Rector by Substitution transferring the Punishment merited by Transgressions upon Christ and in consideration of Satisfaction made by him remits Sin so that here is nothing but a Relaxation or Interpretation of it do Err. In another place he says likewise To think that the
the ends of it by a perfect obeying of it and suffering for Man's Sin against it and thereby Merit to all Mankind it being done in their behalf a Right to Pardon and Salvation or to Impunity and Life which yet is to be given them upon such Terms as should please him and the Redeemer for so long as it was not the Persons themselves that obeyed and suffered but another in their stead and that by way of Satisfaction not strict Payment the Benefit of that Obedience and Suffering might be disposed at their Will Now this Right to Impunity and Life obtained is given or granted in an Act of Grace declared in the Gospel which runs thus that whosoever he be that Believes Repents and lives sincerely according to it shall be pardoned and saved Even as in an Act of Pardon by Parliament a Man hath committed Treason or the like the Treason is still by the Law Death but upon such an Act passing those Persons that are guilty are pardoned if qualified according to the Act In like manner that Man who performs this Gospel-Condition hath this Right by vertue of this Act Law or Covenant of Grace Grant Deed of Gift Will of Christ Testament or Gospel The Righteousness of Christ is the Meritorious Cause of it and this Act of Grace the Instrument of Donation or Law-title Here then we see is a Righteousness Evangelical that we have and must have and here is a Right to Impunity and Life which you may if you will call a Righteousness too that we have also But the Righteousness of Christ we have here only in the Effect As in the common instance I have a Friend made Slave in Algiers I give a 100 l. for his Ransom he never has nor sees the 100 l. but the Money is his in the Liberty he possesseth Note When the former sort of Divines mentioned say that by the Imputation of Christ's Death to us we become recti in Curia and there must be then a Righteousness of his Life imputed farther to entitle us to Heaven they understand still that it is by the Law of Works that we are to be tried and judged But let all understand aright as before that it is by the Law of Grace and supposing then we were thereby recti in curia that Righteousness required farther unto this Title must be the Righteousness of that Law we are judged by to wit our Evangelical Righteousness only which is accepted unto Life or made the Condition instead of that of the Law upon the account of this Righteousness of Christ Jesus We must distinguish here to avoid Prejudice and least the tender be offended There is the Duty and the Condition of this Law the Law of Grace the Law of Christ or the Gospel by which we are to be judged God hath constituted the Duty the Condition the Reward the Penalty of it There are few of our Ministers and much less of our People are sensible of the Advantage this Doctrine brings us and the Soundness of it No Man we must know does perform the Duty but every Man must perform the Condition or he cannot be saved This Condition as obtained for the World is the grand Benefit of Christ's Purchase or main Fruit of his Death and is accepted when performed only through him It is not for my Works or Merits sayest thou that my Person is accepted but for Christ's Righteousness and in this alone is my Comfort And I say it is not for the Works sake or Merit of any thing or all we do but for Christ's sake that the Condition is accepted and it is in this is my Comfort In this it is that we have or can have any grounded Sustentation To say thou art Justified by Christ's Righteousness when yet thou must acknowledge his Righteousness is none of thine unless thou hast performed the Condition What empty Comfort is that But to say that through Christ's Merits and Righteousness this it self that I do is the Condition here is Comfort indeed That what we are enabled by his Grace I say to do how little soever if sincerely done if it be but the Grain of Mustard-seed in a hungring and thirsting after Righteousness shall be accepted unto Life that is be that Condition upon account of what Christ hath done for us this I say is solid Consolation Thou saist when I look on my Works my Heart sinks I am not sure I am Sincere but in the Righteousness of Christ I am safe I say this is certain If thou art not Sincere thou art not Safe And when I doubt whether I am or not I can have no Support but in this that I hope I am I trust I am and that it is upon the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ that Faith that Hope does depend For that there is any Condition at all that the Condition is such that what I do shall be accepted as the Condition performed it must all be put upon the account of Christ's Performance or Merit in our behalf and his Merit is sufficient however imperfect be our Duty for its Acceptance with God When then upon a Sense of my Deficiency instead of sinking I grow bolder in my reliance on Christ's Merits and God's Mercy I do not presume on my self but I magnifie his Grace and the higher I raise my Faith thereupon provided I live not willingly in any Conscience-wasting Sin the more Glory am I humbly perswaded do I give my gracious Saviour and good God Thou Man hast the Comfort to apply to thy self Christ's Merits if thou hast performed the Condition But I have the Comfort to apply Christ's Merits to the Condition which makes his Yoke easie and burden light as to the Performance and my very Desires and weakest Endeavours to find Acceptance When I read such Prayers of David that God would not enter into Judgment with him that he would not be extream to mark what he had done amiss for then he could not abide it and that yet he will have God to search him and try his Reins and Heart and the like I cannot but be convinced that in the Acceptance of such an imperfect Righteousness as he accounted his was through God's meer gracious Condescention Mercy and Forgiveness to him he placed his * That there is a Righteousness set forth in the Gospel as another Righteousness than that of the Law by which we are to be justified is signally affirmed Rom. 1.17 Rom. 3.21 23. Now is the Righteousness of God revealed The doing what the Law requires and nothing less is Righteousness the Righteousness of Man I will call it If any one did that it would and must justifie him The Doers of the Law before God are justified Rom. 2.13 The Apostle still so accounts which we must know and tells us thereupon that no Man Jew or Gentile does it but that all fall short thereof in his three first Chapters to the Romans and consequently by their Works cannot be justified Upon
this ground is it that he opposes Grace and Works so often as he does in the business of Justification By Grace are ye saved not of Works Eph. 2.8 9. Who hath saved us not according to our Works but his Grace 1 Tim. 1.9 If by Grace then not of Works Rom. 11.6 Not by Works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his Mercy he saved us and yet by Regeneration it follows and renewing of the Holy Ghost Tit. 3.5 How is that Are we saved by at least not without Works wrought in us by the Spirit or Grace which regenerates us and yet Not of Works Again Not of Works least any Man should boast Eph. 2.9 10. yet it follows we are created in Christ Jesus to good Works To answer this St. Austine and from him the Schools distinguish of Opera Naturae and Opera Gratiae We are not saved by Works or according to Works done in our own strength but by Works done by Grace But is this the Apostles meaning No I have shewn in my Book of Justification that one thing of three wherein Austine was out and hath mislead the Schools is this Notion of Grace By grace he understands still this inherent Grace or Operation of God's Spirit in us when Paul understands it of that without us his Favour or Condescention to us Not of Works but of Grace is all one as not of Desert but of Favour only Grace is Mercy without or contrary to Merit Now when the Papist receives the Solution mentioned the Protestant generally will have all Works though of the Regneerate to be but Rags and Christ's Righteousness alone to save us But they are both out for Paul's meaning is plainer than they think Not by Works of Righteousness we have done The Righteousness which the Jew hath done is living according to the Law of Moses The Righteousness which the Gentile hath done is his living according to the Law of Nature There is neither one or the other that fulfil that Righteousness as answers God's Law so as it should be able to save him and therefore it is of Grace or Mercy that any are saved By this Key must that hard Text also be opened Rom. 9.16 So then it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth Mercy What Is there any that find Mercy or are saved but they that will and run I answer No but there is none of them that will and run do will and run so as would save them if God did not pardon their Failings and accept their Endeavours through the Merits of Christ The meaning is that seeing no Man hath those Works the Law requires to Salvation it is of Grace or of Mercy that we are accepted to Life on Another Condition Well now it being of Grace that we are Saved or Justified in opposition to Work 's and it being necessary that those Works be understood of such as the Law requires to Justifie us that is Perfect Works Meritorious Works which if we had we might boast and expect the Reward as of Debt and the reason why we are not justified by Works being because we have them not it follows that there is another Righteousness which is to be had short of that the Law requires to Justification not Perfect not Meritorious not such as would make the Reward due of Justice but such as needs Grace for the Acceptance Therefore it is of Faith that it might be of Grace and that I say which we must have for God cannot account a Man Righteous which is to justifie him that is not Righteous his Judgment being according to Truth And what Righteousness then is that a Man must have and be found in but that we call our Evangelical Righteousness the Righteousness of Faith The Just shall live by Faith Note it he is Just Righteous that lives or is Justified But how Righteous Not according to the Law but the Gospel Hence is the Gospel called the Ministration of Righteousness Hence do we read of a Righteousness brought in by the Messiah slain in Daniel Hence that we are chosen in Christ to be Holy That he hath redeemed us from Iniquity That the end or one end of his Death or Redemption is to make us Righteous as our Divines still say but I never found any satisfactory account of it by them The matter in short is you may see it fuller in my mentioned Book p. 43. that by Christ's Death a Law of Grace is obtained upon which our Faith and Repentance is accepted to Life or imputed for Righteousness or we made Righteous so when by the Law of Works there is none no not one Righteous or ever could be in the World Hence is this Righteousness called the Righteousness of God as being ordained and accepted by him instead of that I even now called the Righteousness of Man And which is of God by Faith instead of such Works which the Law required to Justification Hence lastly are we said to be Justified by Faith the most single and plain reason whereof is because that Faith to a true Believer is imputed for Righteousness Rom. 4.22 23 24. And Faith is said to be imputed to him for Righteousness because God does account such a one Righteous and deals with him as such in freeing him from Punishment and accepting him to Salvation through the Death and Obedience of our Redeemer Justification in which sense also he calls him the God of his Righteousness When as for any acceptance of him through the Righteousness of the Messiah to come a Righteousness without him made his by Faith which could abide God's district Justice I find not the Footstep of one such Thought To rely therefore I will say on Christ's Righteousness as ours without regard to any thing within or without regard to the Condition is self-deceiving But to rely on God's Mercy and on Christ's Merits for acceptance of what we do and Pardon for the Failings is Substantial Religion and of Justification by Faith in Christ's Blood a good Exposition I have now something more to be farther pondered on this Point The chief is That what I have said before about the Commutation of Persons that it is to be held in regard to the Impetration not Application of our Redemption I would offer over again likewise in regard to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness I have said and say it over that this Phrase is not found in Scripture but I will acknowledge the thing in the true sense of it which is this Christ Jesus did really obey the Law and suffer its Penalty for us which is in our place or stead To do a thing now in my stead is for another to do it so as to save me the doing it Christ's Suffering and Obeying was to save us that Suffering and Obeying No says Mr. W. somewhere Christ suffered indeed in our stead that we might not suffer but not obeyed that we might not obey But if Christ
Conscience of it also is hereby so resolved that under King James we would not be Papists under those that succeed We will not be Slaves * Having said this for the People I must say one thing also for the King out of the same Principle There is the Positive and Negative Power of Rulers According to our English Government it is true and to be held that the King can Positively do nothing but according to Law But it being true also and to be considered that the Supreme Law in all Polities is the Common Good if a Prince in the use of his Power only which is Negative should upon occasion do something otherwise than Law for the Benefit of the Subject Bona fide and not his private Ends I do believe both Politically and as a Divine that he may have a good Conscience in it and when he has that he is not to account he acts then against the Law but according to it seeing he does Govern in such a Case by the Supreme Law unto which all others are Subordinate Not long before King Charles's Death the Justices were sending Mr. Baxter to Prison for Conventicling but he hearing of it and being told it might kill the ill good Man out of his kind Nature sends word immediately he would have him forborne To have controul'd the Law to a Man's hurt it had been Tyranny but when it was only for Good without detriment to any who could open his Mouth against it It is to be supposed no Law-givers can foresee all Cases that may happen and when Equity and a good Conscience is against the Letter of the Law thus much I think Justifiable by the Old Covenant Oath where the King Sware to execute the Laws Cum Justitia Miserecordia If not it will be by that Power our Kings have of granting a Nolle Profequi in some cases to Offenders and much more by that of Pardoning All ad libitum which a Majore ad Minus cannot but warrant more than this It is fit that Kings before they Swear do understand their Oath to have this Construction and to know that which is much more to the purpose that any Law which is against God or Nature that is which is against the Law of Nature or Word of God or the Common Good is really in foro Conscientiae No Law so that in the Non-Prosecution thereof they are not to be condemned Nay if a Prince by Malversation even Positive or Privative shall render himself Obnoxious to God and the People it is good yet for the Subject to bear with him as we do with Storms so long as we can but if the Case comes to that once as the Nation is in danger of Ruin by it the Doctrine of Non-resistance any longer than we can help our selves is perfect Ignorance of our State or raving Obstinacy Salus Populi Suprema lex esto Habetüs Sententiam meam in Causa hac gravissima J. H. The Postscript to the Reader THERE are several Pieces that at several Times upon several Subjects I have written called The Middle Way One is the Middle Way of Justification which I printed in the year 71 or 72 and reprinted lately 95 upon the account of our Brethrens Difference about that Point In that second Edition I have gathered up all Passages that concern that Subject out of the rest of those Papers to put them to it and took advantage from certain Exceptions against Mr. Williams to add something that I thought wanting in a single Sheet and have here supplied what was yet in my Mind to say farther upon this Occasion Now if the Reader shall bid the Bookseller stitch these six Sheets that one Sheet so called and those eight or nine together and then shall take time to read them and notice of what he reads unless he thinks this Point of Justification be such as is not worthy his Time or Thoughts which was an Article of so great Concern to our first Reformers and does not meet with something or other in them and that as an Original which may serve at least Vice cotis to whet his own Understanding upon them then is it not I my self only but two of our most eminent Brethren while alive as appears by their hands put to one of my Papers are deceived I will add that if Mr. W. therefore shall not now set himself to peruse them and finding any such Matter which he can improve or make out better for me than I have done if he does it not then am I farther disappointed in one End of this present Work as also of my believed Estimation of Mr. Williams For according to what a Man's Mind is most upon in such Disputes as these the Investigation of Truth or the Defence of ones self such is his value more or less Having yet room the fear of the want whereof made me put those two Paragraphs p. 29. into a Marginal Note that should else have been part of the Book I will use it to supply one thing lacking in the single Sheet mentioned The Sacrifice and Righteousness of Christ's Death and Life is that which hath procured Pardon and Salvation to every Believing Sinner upon the account of that Satisfaction God as Rector hath received by it so that being Legislator also and above Law he might with Demonstration too of his Righteousness relax and hath relaxed or dispensed with his Law of Works requiring another Condition to those Benefits in a new one the Law of Grace or the Gospel This Pardon now and Life or Grant thereof upon Condition being the Grand Fruits of our Redemption it is a Question between Mr. W. and I whether the Condition it self also be a Fruit of Christ's Purchase which if it be not derives not yet from our Free Will but the Grace of Election It is not agreeable to my Genius to make Christ's Redemption which I would have One thing and Universal to be differently insluxive on the Elect and others I have opened this Apprehension of mine in that single Sheet mentioned and there are two Considerations moreover offered against the received Opinion which I desire Mr. W. to weigh Honestly and if he can to solve me the Difficulty or if he cannot to come with me to this Composition The Lord Christ by Redeeming the World and consequently by his Death hath obtained a Right of Dominion over it and by that Right does give that Condition to whom he will Acts 5.31 But though Faith therefore and Repentance in this remote way about may be said to be obtained by Christ's Death as he hath obtained thereby a Power or Right of giving it I deny it to be the immediate Purchase or direct Fruit of it I deny that Faith is a Fruit of Christ's Death in the same manner as Pardon and Life is upon Condition of Faith I deny that it proceeds from Satisfaction given to God's Justice which Christ's Death was though it may from his Merit or Redundancy of it as all other Good does seeing in his Name it is or through his Merits that we ask all things at the Hands of God as Health and Wealth and the like Blessings which we cannot say yet Christ died that we should have Again Christ came and died to Save Man by restoring him to Righteousness from whence he is fallen Now the Righteousness of Nature we never can be in this Life restored to and there is therefore a Righteousness of Grace which God hath ordained in room of that to Save us revealed in the Gospel and it is called the Righteousness of God because of this his Ordination By the Obedience of Christ we are said to be made Righteous and the Righteousness of God in him or by the Means of him as one has it But how by the Means of him Why by his Death but this way about still Christ died to procure for us a Covenant with another Condition than that of the Old which performing we become Righteous that never could be so else but mark it when the Condition is purchased the Performance comes not from thence but from the Free Gift of God In the mean time this Mercy that God hath ordained and doth accept of such a Condition as we do or can perform must not pass without Resentment Blessed be the God of Heaven for some Sense and Knowledge of this in these Sheets Blessed be God that it is not a Righteousness of the Law required of us but a Righteousness of the Gospel Blessed be God it is not by a Righteousness of Works that we are Saved but a Righteousness the Failings whereof are pardoned and the little Done accepted through the alone Merits of Christ Jesus Which when they had read they rejoyced for the Consolation Deo Gloria mihi Condonatio J. H. FINIS
Effects only I conclude either then there is nothing at all in this or if there be something so as he may come off in his saying that Besides the Effects the very Righteousness of Christ is imputed it is a coming off but with a Fallacy fallacia dictionis For he understands that Righteousness of Christ which is so called in relation to the Sanction and we speak altogether of his Righteousness in relation to the Precept of the Law of Redemption I must yet add If Mr. W. will stand to it that the very Righteousness of Christ without equivocating is imputed to us besides or any more than in regard to the Effects then let him say that Christ obeyed and suffered not only for us or in our stead but also in our Persons taking it too in their own sense and so make a full end with his Brethren But I argue If Christ obeyed and suffered so in our Persons as well as for us and in our stead Then should not we obey at all Then should not we suffer at all for he that hath perfectly obeyed can be punished for nothing Then should we need no Forgiveness Then would Christ's Sufferings for us having obeyed be needless Then must he be lookt on by God as the Sinner Then must the Culpa as well as the Poena be imputed to him Then could not Christ be our Mediator because he is the Offending Party and a Mediator is a third Party between the Offender and the Offended in which Person he obeyed and suffered for us Then lastly should Impunity and Life be due to us immediately by a meer Resultancy from his Obedience and Sufferings and not be given by the Interposition of a new Law or Covenant upon terms as they are according to the Gospel which is subverted therefore by that Opinion Once more If Christ suffered in our Persons then should he have borne the same Sufferings and if they were the same they could not be instead of Ours You may say the Righteousness of Christ in it self is imputed to us though it be not Ours only in the Effects But Mr. W. must not come off so for I say To be imputed in it self is to be Ours by Imputation that is Judicially Ours which draws the same Consequences as Ours in it self But I pray let us consider a little in good earnest what is in this Conception of Mr. W. that besides the Effects being made Ours the very Righteousness of Christ is imputed Is there any thing in it or nothing in it Is it of any or no Signification Certainly if his meaning comes not to thus much that besides the Effects Christ's Righteousness it self is ours also by Imputation it is an idle impertinent vile Trifling with us which in regard to Mr. Baxter is not to be spoken without some Resentment in so exquisite a matter If he will grant his meaning to be thus much that though Christ's Righteousness cannot be inherently Ours yet it is indeed Ours by Imputation then is he come quite home to his Brethren who never said or intended any other After this I argue If Christ's Righteousness be imputed to us in it self Then were it pleadable by us as if we our selves had done and suffered what Christ did which Mr. W. does in effect allow or without Tergiversation must Gospel Truth p. 39 40. And also Then must God have dealt with us as if we had which he does more positively allow P. 42. To impute to one says he what is suffered by another is to deal with him as if he himself had suffered But God hath not dealt thus with us and we cannot plead so with him which appear by the said Consequences It is not all one as if we had done and suffered in Christ what he did and suffered for us for Satisfaction is another thing than this It is not all one in other respects it is as good for us only in the obtained when attained Effects PART IV. THERE remains now one thing and a chief thing yet to be done which is to offer something that may serve to reconcile such Brethren at least as agree in the main though it cannot such as quite differ in the Point I shall first dilate a little more for lights sake and so be lead thereto by the matter it self Christ in Scripture is said to dye for us and to dye for our Sins For our Sins he may be said to dye or suffer in these two senses For our Sins To expiate them to deliver us from them the Guilt and Condemnation due to us for them For our Sins As the Meritorious Cause of his Death and Sufferings upon his voluntary undertaking that Expiation Both these Senses are good and to be retained For us may have a double Sense also Loco nostro or Bono nostro In our stead or in regard to our Benefit The Socinians will have Christ to dye for us only bono nostro which they fetch about too so as makes his dying for us of no more concern than a Martyr's Christ by his Death confirmed his Doctrine This makes us believe it His Doctrine teaches a Holy Life By a Holy Life we leave Sin Christ therefore dyed for our Sins But we hold Christ dyed loco nostro in our stead in our room Now In our stead or loco nostro may have again a double Interpretation In our stead As representing our Persons so that God looks on us as having done and suffered what Christ did and suffered for us As what my Attorney or Delegate does for me I am accounted to have done He is the Agent Naturally but Civilly or Legally it is I In this Interpretation we are not to hold Christ dyed in our stead for that draws all those mentioned Consequences after it which must carefully be avoided There is another Interpretation then of Suffering in our stead In our stead that is To save us from Suffering our selves and this is the Sense we are first to know to be the right and then stand by it To do any thing or suffer it in the room of another I have said is to do or suffer that thing that the other may escape it and in this right sense it is that Grotius understands Christ's dying for us and speaks of a Commutation or Subrogation of Christ's Person in the room of ours in his Sufferings for us as the Beast was subrogated in the place of him that Sacrificed it If any stretch such words of his farther than so they abuse both their Understanding and him Now when this In our stead in usual speaking is Suffering or doing in our Person I am brought at last to a pause as to the words we use That Christ suffered and obeyed in our Persons is said by our Divines without scruple and Dr. Bates does but handsomly express what they speak ordinarily Nay Mr. Baxter does acknowledge that these words may be used if we put a right Sense on them And what is that Sense The Sense