end he denieth Satisfaction 4 Also Chap. 4. pag. 84. col 2. That there is no need of any satisfaction when the offense is not imputed to him that hath offended by the party against whom he hath offended or the debt is by the creditour remitted WOTTON In the paper written in Latine 1 Neither that I speak freely what I truly think can I understand what place is left for pardon if by payment of pains in Christ we be deemed to have satisfied the wrath of God and to have born the punishment due to our sinnes for Pardon and Punishment are contraries 2 Also in his English paper enlarged the same words are rehearsed and the same reason given even Because Pardon and Punishment are contraries Thus have you the evidence by M r Walker then given in for the justifying of that his charge which for the effect and substance of it is in as broad and odious terms in print now again renewed some six and twenty years after the cause according to his own request heard and some fourteen years after M r Wotton's decease May it please you now to heare M r Wotton's answer in his own defense as it was in writing by him then exhibited Mr. Wotton's Defence A. W. in the doctrine of Justification holdeth one and the same opinion in all points with Socinus and therefore is justly charged by G. W. to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy That he doth hold the same in all points is shewed by these seven Errours following The first Errour of Socinus and his followers is That Justification is contained onely in Remission of Sinnes without Imputation of Christs Righteousnesse 1. If you mean without Imputation of Christs Righteousnesse as the meritorious cause of Justification I grant the Proposition to be hereticall and blasphemous And so doth Socinus deny Imputation I. Christ saith he did not satisfie for our sinnes Treatise of Christ the Saviour Part 1. chap. 1. pag. 1. part 2. chap. 17. pag. 245. col 1. part 3. pag. 306. beginning and chap. 1. pag. 307. col 1. II. He could not satisfie Part 2. chap. 24. pag. 288. col 2. part 3. in argum chap. 6 pag. 406. III. He did not pacifie God Part 2. chap. 2. pag. 120. col 1. Part 1. chap. 7. pag. 76. col 2. IV. There was no need of any satisfaction to be made Part 1. chap. 1. pag. 1. V. God would not that any satisfaction should be made Part 3. chap. 2. pag. 317. col 2. and pag. 324. col 1. But I do not so deny Imputation of Christs Righteousnesse for I acknowledge it to be the meritorious cause of our Justification and that for it we are accepted of God as fully as if we had fulfilled the Law perfectly Treatise of the Justification of a Sinner in explication of the definition of Reconciliation and in the definition of Adoption and in the Conclusion 2. If you mean without Imputation of Christs Righteousnesse as the formall cause whereby we are made formally righteous by having fulfilled the Law and satisfied the Justice of God in Christ I say the Proposition is neither hereticall nor blasphemous And that I must be so understood my writings shew For first I professe that I speak of the formall cause of Justification Treat of Justific of a Sinner in the State of the Question in Answer to Argum. for Position 1. and to Arg. 1. for Position 3. and in the Conclusion Secondly I expresse that manner of formally righteous Treat of Justific of a Sinner where I expound what it is to impute to a Sinner Christs Obedience and of Justification where I deliver mine own opinion Sect. 2. which is the very place that M r Walker alledgeth against me out of the English Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this first Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The second Errour is That Faith is a condition appointed by God to be performed on our parts for obtaining Justification 1. Socinus defineth believing on Christ to be nothing else then to yield ones self obedient to God according to the rule and prescript of Christ and by so doing to expect from Christ himself the crown of life eternall Treat of Christ the Saviour Part 3. chap. 2. pag. 321. col 1. 2. He maketh Faith to be indeed as M r Walker saith a confidence in Christ but he addeth immediately which M r Walker leaveth it that is an obedience to Christs precepts with a firm hope of obtaining those things which he hath promised to those that obey him Part 4. chap. 11. pag. 559. col 1. and in the same page he laboureth to prove That Faith doth signifie obedience to Christs Commandments Sect. Hinc factum est 3. He maketh Repentance and Amendment of life the means to obtain that forgivenesse of sinnes which Christ hath brought Part 3. chap. 2. pag. 321. col 1. 4. And whereas Faith is added to Repentance Act. 20.21 It is not saith he because Faith in Christ is required unto the obtaining of remission of sinnes as working somewhat more in us besides repentance it self that doth hereunto appertain but because this Repentance cometh not but by Faith in Christ In the same columne Sect. Manifestum 5. He saith that whereas John sent the people to Christ and warned them to believe in him it was not as if they should find any other thing besides Repentance in Christ that was requisite unto the obtaining of pardon from God but first that they might be exactly taught of Christ what that Repentance ought to be Besides that from Christ they might understand that that was wholly so indeed which he delivered onely as a messenger Lastly that they might not be washed with water onely but have the holy Ghost poured upon them Part 3. pag. 320. col 1. But I never writ spake nor conceived so of Faith to the obtaining of Justification Nay it is evident that I make Faith not a believing of that which Christ taught and an assurance of obtaining that he promised upon our Repentance and Obedience which is Socinus his confidence Part 4. chap. 11 pag. 559. col 1. but a resting and relying upon Christ a trusting to Christ for salvation Serm. 6. upon John pag. 286. and Serm. 8. pag. 386 389 398. yea a means and if you will an instrument to apprehend and receive Christ to our Justification Treat of Justific in explicat of the Definition of Reconcil So that for ought I hold of Faith Christs Righteousnesse may be even the formall cause of our Justification Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this second Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The third Errour is That Faith doth not justifie us as it apprehendeth
and applieth Christ and his Righteousnesse but by it self in a proper not metonymicall sense This third Errour hath two Propositions which shall be answered to severally The former is That Faith doth not justifie as it apprehendeth and applieth Christ and his Righteousnesse I hold this Proposition to be false acknowledging and confessing that Faith doth not justifie us but onely as it apprehendeth and applieth Christ and his Righteousnesse the very condition of the Gospel being That by Faith we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnesse to be justified thereby Treat of Justifie in explic of the definit of Reconcil The other Proposition is That Faith doth justifie us by it self in a proper not metonymicall sense I never said or thought that Faith doth justifie us by it self This onely I say that in this Proposition Faith is counted for Righteousnesse the word Faith is to be taken properly not tropically the question being in such Propositions not of the meritorious or formall cause of our Justification but of the condition required on our part instead of keeping the Law Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this third Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The fourth Errour is That for Faith properly taken and dignified and made worthy not of it self but in Gods acceptation and of his mercy a man is justified and may lay claim to remission of sinnes Neither Socinus nor Servetus in the words you bring out of them affirm that a man is justified and may lay claim to remission of sinnes for Faith any way dignified c. Nay Socinus avoucheth that Repentance and Amendment of life is that by which that forgivenesse of sinnes which is brought by Christ is obtained Part 3. chap. 2. pag. 322. col 1. How then am I proved to agree with him in that Errour which he is not proved to hold Especially seeing that I never said that we are justified for Faith and do renounce all dignity and worth in Faith and give the whole merit of our Justification to our Saviour Christ and his obedience That which is alledged out of my papers is no more but this That the condition of the Gospel being Faith as the condition of the Law is Keeping of the Law he that believeth in Christ hath done as much that is performed the condition of the Gospel as well as he that keepeth the Law hath fulfilled the condition of the Law so that on his part God requireth no more to his Justification And that this is certainly my meaning the words going before in that English paper and those also that follow in the other English paper and in the Latine do manifestly shew Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this fourth Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemie for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The fifth Errour is That Faith is no firm perswasion by which we apprehend and lay hold upon Christ and his Righteousnesse and apply them to our selves as of right belonging to us by our spirituall union but that it is a trust and confidence in Christ for salvation joyned with obedience to Christs precepts or to speak plainly a confidence that Christ having obtained by his obedience the kingdome and all power will certainly give us salvation if we rely on him and obey his counsels Whether the three Propositions set down in this Errour be rightly gathered from the words alleaged by M r Walker out of Socinus or no I leave to other mens judgement But whatsoever Socinus held I have nothing to do with any of these Propositions Onely of the first I say That the perswasion whereof I speak in the place he bringeth is that particular assurance that every man as some define Faith must have to Justification viz. that his sinnes are forgiven in Christ Whereas Faith being the condition required on our part must go before Justification at least in nature But this perswasion followeth it and is bred in us by the Spirit of God after we believe and are justified For it is given to us being already adopted Sons Gal. 4.5 and Adoption is a Prerogative vouchsafed us upon our believing John 1.12 Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this fifth Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The sixth Errour is That Christs whole obedience and Righteousnesse serve first and immediately for himself to bring him into favour and authority with God and secondly onely for us Not that it might be communicated to us in him to make us truly and formally righteous but onely that it might serve for our use in that it maketh him gracious with God and so both able to obtain that Faith might be accepted for Righteousnesse and we for it and also powerfull to give those blessings which are promised to those that trust in him The words you alledge out of Socinus prove no more at the most but the first point of this Errour That Christs whole Obedience and Righteousnesse serve first and immediately for himself to bring him into favour and authority with God There is nothing in this sixth Errour that toucheth me All that I say in the former place alledged by M r Walker is no more but this That whatsoever maketh Christ beloved of God is some cause of Gods love to us who are beloved in and for him Ephes 1.3 4 6. Now among other things for which Christ is beloved his holinesse and obedience have no mean place Whereupon it followeth that they may be reckoned in the number of those causes that make us beloved of God in and for his Sonne our Saviour Jesus Christ Treat of Justific of a Sinner in explic of the Definit of Reconcil In the latter I say That we are not accounted to be Formally Righteous by having fulfilled the Law and satisfied the Justice of God in Christ And yet I acknowledge that we are for his obedience accepted of God as righteous no lesse then if we had indeed performed those things And this was determined in the first Errour to be neither heresie nor blasphemy Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this sixth Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The seventh Errour is That Christ did not satisfie the Justice of God for us in such sort that we may be said when we truly believe to have satisfied the Justice of God and his wrath in him And that God of his Mercy without Christs satisfaction made ours doth pardon our sinnes and justifie and redeem us Socinus denieth all satisfaction by Christ
himself He hath put down this in his Parallel for an hereticall and blasphemous assertion That Faith in Christ for so he must needs mean is a condition appointed by God to be performed on our parts for the obtaining of Justification Now should any man hereupon enter an action against M r Walker accusing him as guilty of Judaisme Paganisme and Mahumetanisme would he not think we make grievous complaint yea with open mouth cry out and exclaim of extreme injury done him Yet is it as clear as the light at noon-day that whosoever shall deny Faith in Christ to be a condition appointed by God to be performed on mans part for the obtaining of Justification shall have all Jews Paganes and Mahumetanes concurring therein with him as in a point naturally flowing and necessarily following from what they hold To go yet a step further Suppose a man do concurre with such hereticks as have been spoken of in some point be it a truth or an errour that is held and maintained by them will it thence follow that he consenteth to them and agreeth with them in all things or in such blasphemous opinions as they otherwise hold And here M r Walker's candour may well a little be questioned To prove M r Wotton to hold one and the same opinion with Servetus in all points concerning the doctrine of Justification he produceth onely this one saying of Servetus For one act of Faith was Abraham righteous Whether he have proved M r Wotton to have said the same or no is not now materiall and I leave it to be judged by what himself hath spoken for his own defence in way of answer thereunto But should a man putting in a crosse interrogatorie demand of M r Walker Whether he hold that Christ hath fulfilled the Law for us or no I doubt not but he would answer in the affirmative That he hath And the very same thing in the very same words is found by Calvin related out of Servetus The carnall people saith he might glory in their deeds but we may not but in the crosse of our Lord Jesus Christ We may onely relate the facts of Christ who hath wrought all our works for us by fulfilling the law for us when we could not do it our selves Yet I suppose M r Walker would take it in very ill part and well he might if any should thence conclude That M r Walker therefore doth in all points hold one and the same opinion with Servetus concerning the doctrine of Justification Again for Socinus he maintaineth that To justifie is a term of judicature that it signifieth not to make a man inherently righteous or to infuse righteousnesse into him but to deem him repute him pronounce him righteous that they do amisse that confound justification and sanctification the one with the other that That faith whereby we are justified is not a bare belief or assent unto the truth of Gods word that Neither faith nor works believing in Christ or obeying him are the meritorious causes of justification or do or can in regard of any worthin them merit ought at Gods hands nor doth faith it self justifie by any force of its own And all these points do our writers generally maintain against the Papists yet never that I know was any Papist so shamelesse and yet shamelesse enough are they as to condemn them therefore for Socinian hereticks or to charge them to agree with Socinus and his followers in all points concerning the doctrine of justification Again it is by Socinus held and maintained that justification consists in remission of sinnes which for my part I deem erroneous and suppose that elsewhere I have evidently shewed it so to be howbeit Calvine Beza Olevian Ursine Zanchie Piscator Pareus Musculus Bullinger Fox and divers others of great note and name yea whole Synods of ours are found so to say and yet were these men never yet that I ever heard or read for so saying condemned as hereticks much lesse as blasphemous hereticks but had in high esteem as their worth parts and works well deserved by those that therein dissented from them I will adde but one instance more Socinus in the very entrance into his Treatise of Christ the Saviour affirmeth that God might if he had pleased without breach of his justice have pardoned mans sinne freely without any satisfaction required and the same he after again presseth and prosecuteth in his ensuing discourses Whether this be an errour or no I stand not now to discusse Vorstius herein concurred with Socinus and is for the same reproved by Tossanus Grotius likewise for affirming the same is taxed by Ravenspergerus defended by Vossius who citeth Divines not a few both old and new saying the same And it is maintained to passe by all others by Calvine Musculus Zanchie Grineus Faius Casman Tilenus Franzius Smiglesius and our reverend D r Twisse yet I am perswaded that no wise or discreet man at least will hence conclude any of these to be therefore Socinian Hereticks And M r Walker might do well to be better advised before he charge his Christian brethren and fellow-labourers in the work of Gods Ministerie with these odious imputations of heresie and blasphemie then which what can be more hainous more hideous being taints of the deepest die upon such weak and unjustifiable grounds as these are To conclude if any shall demand of me why I have undertaken this office which from some I know I shall have small thanks for and why I thrust my finger needlessely into the fire the answer is ready from what already hath been said I am the onely surviver for ought I know for Whether M r Hicks be still living or no I am not certain of those that were on M r Wotton's part entrusted and employed in this businesse and I could not therefore do lesse for so worthy a servant of God and mine ancient acquaintance whom I alwayes reverenced while he lived as a man deserving singular respect for his pietie and learning and zeal for Gods cause which his works left behind him do sufficiently manifest and will testifie to ensuing posteritie and both do and shall still honour deservedly the memorie of him now deceased and at rest I doubt not with the Lord enjoying the reward of his religious pains taken in his Masters work then to testifie what I then heard and saw was a party in and subscribed to with others and to second the pious intents of his sonne who treadeth carefully in his fathers commendable steps desirous to publish what in his fathers papers he found for the vindicating of his postumous name and reputation as dear unto him as his own with this Preface and Postscript adjoyned thereunto I say no more but wish onely Veritatem cum Charitate
wishing him rather to make choise of some other both nearer at hand and of better abilities the City affoording such not a few yet at his instant request the rather pressing it upon me because he had as he said so happily light upon me unexpected and notwithstanding that he knew before my judgement in some particulars to differ from his having both by word of mouth and in writing also sometime at his own request manifested to him as much yet making no reckoning thereof I was at length induced to condescend thereunto The persons nominated by M r Walker were M r Stocke M r Downame M r Gouge and M r Westfield whereof three is yet living M r Stock onely is deceased Those that were nominated by M r Wotton because M r Mason by occasion of an extraordinary employment by his Majestie suddenly enjoyned of surveying a book of D r John Whites ready to be published could not attend the businesse another therefore being substituted in his stead were these M r Balmford M r Randall M r Hicks Chaplain to the Earl of Excester and my self who alone I suppose of all the foure now survive and am the rather induced to affoord this Christian office to so worthy a deceased friend It was thought not so fit to meet in a private house which at first we had done but found therein some inconvenience as in some Church that stood out of the way of ordinary concourse By occasion hereof D r Baylie afterward Bishop of Banghor came in as one of us and made up a ninth because we desired to make use of his Church There accordingly we met and some time being spent or if you will wasted rather in loose invectives then in orderly disputes I made bold to propound a course to the rest of the company because time was precious and my self came farthest for the better expediting of the businesse undertaken by us which was also generally approved of by the rest and by both parties agreed unto The Proposition was this That M r Walker should in a Parallel consisting of two columns set down Socinus his hereticall and blasphemous errours and positions on the one side and M r Wottons assertions wherein he charged him to concurre with Socinus over against them on the other side upon view whereof it might the sooner appear how the one suited with the other M r Walker undertook so to do and M r Wotton required onely to have M r Walker's said writing delivered unto him some two or three dayes before the set time of our next meeting that he might against that day prepare a brief answer thereunto in writing then to be exhibited The motion was on either side deemed equall nor did M r Walker himself mislike it Now by this means God in his providence so disposing it which at the present in likelihood was little dreamed of M r Wotton as Abel though deceased is inabled to speak in his own defence and to plead now his own cause as well as then he did M r Walkers Parallel and therein his Evidence produced for the proof of his charge above mentioned you shall have in his own words as it was then given in those pieces of it onely that were conceived in Latine being faithfully translated word for word as near as could be into English because in English M r Walker's book with the renewed Charge is abroad M r WALKER 's evidence THat it may plainly appear that Socinus Servetus Ostorodius Gittichius Arminius and M r Wotton do in the doctrine of Justification hold one and the same opinion in all points I shew by the parts and heads of their doctrine set down in order and by their own sayings and testimonies paralleled and set one by another The first errour of Socinus and his followers is That Justification is contained onely in Remission of sinnes without imputation of Christ his Righteousnesse SOCINUS His own words 1 For as oft hath been said by us in remission of sinnes which is the same w th not-imputation of sins is our righteousnesse contained and therefore with Paul not to impute sinnes and to impute righteousnesse or to account righteous are the same And with this imputation as we have said the imputation of anothers righteousnesse hath no commerce Treatise of Christ the Saviour Part. 4. chap. 4. pag. 463. column 2. near the end 2 There is no one syllable extant in holy writ of Christs righteousnesse to be imputed unto us Chap. the same pag. 462. 3 It is the same with Paul to have sinnes covered to have iniquities remitted to have sinne not imputed that it is to have righteousnesse imputed without works And this manifestly declareth that there is no cause why we should suspect mention to be made of anothers righteousnesse since we reade that Faith was imputed unto Abraham for righteousnesse or unto righteousnesse pag. the same col 2. 4 God delivered the Lord Jesus unto death that by him rising from the dead we might hope to obtain justification that is absolution from our sins Pag. 463. col 2. 5 That is first to be considered that this imputation can in no wise be upheld In the same place WOTTON 1 Albeit with Piscator I willingly acknowledge that the justification of a sinner is wholly comprehended in the alone pardon of sins yet I find no where in Holy writ that there is need of the Imputation of Christs passive obedience unto the attaining of it Theses in Latine 2. That Christs obedience is imputed by God to the justification of a sinner doth not appear by any testimonie of Scripture or by any argument or by any type or ceremonie in the Law or by any signification in the Sacraments of the Gospel In the same arg 1. 3 No necessary use or end can be assigned of the imputation of the obedience of Christ to the justification of a sinner In the same arg 4. 4 I renounce the Law both in whole and in part performed by our selves or any other in our stead to the justifying of us in the sight of God 5 I assent to Piscator that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinnes For so doth the Apostle Rom. 3. 4. propound and dispute the question without any mention or inckling of Christs righteousnesse These are his words in a little English Pamphlet first published briefly and secondly by him enlarged The second point or errour is That Faith is a condition appointed by God to be performed on our parts for obtaining of Justification SOCINUS 1 The promise was made to Abraham not without a secret condition to wit that he should walk before God and be perfect that is he should not refuse to obey him Now to walk before God and to obey him are included in faith and cannot be without it yea they flow from it alone as he himself teacheth after in the same chapter 2 The confidence saith he which he had before affirmed to be faith is the cause of
our obedience Therefore a man believeth because he trusteth And it is perfected by obedience because no man is truly said to have trusted before he do indeed obey Part. 4. chap. 11. pag. 555 556. And a little after 3 Whereby that appeareth to be most true which we even now strove to prove that that faith which of it self so far as concerneth what is in us doth justifie us is confidence in Christ 559. WOTTON 1 The condition to be performed on our part to justification is to believe Sermon 8. upon John pag. 352. 2 The act of faith or believing bringeth justification and adoption onely and merely by the place and office which the Lord of his own mercie hath assigned it to be the condition required on our parts for the atchieving of these favours and honours Serm. 9. pag. 452. The third errour is That Faith doth not justifie us as it apprehendeth Christ and his righteousnesse but by it self in a proper not metonymicall sense SOCINUS 1 We are justified by faith in Christ so farre forth as we trust in Christ Part. 4. chap. 11 pag. 558. col 2. 2 The faith of Christ doth justifie us by it self or to speak more rightly God doth justifie us by himself pag. 559. col 1. WOTTON 1 Faith in that place to wit Rom. 4.5 is to be taken properly unlesse peradventure it be used for to believe or to trust For that which is by some alledged of a trope whereby they suppose that Christs obedience apprehended by faith is signified I doubt how I may grant And a little after 2 What trope should there lie hid I see not 3 Also Serm. 9. on John Abraham believed God and it that is his believing was counted to him for righteousnesse pag. 453. 4 Also in his Purgation I think that faith in Christ without a trope in proper speech is imputed to all believers for righteousnesse The fourth errour is That for faith properly taken and dignified and made worthy not of it self but in Gods acceptation and of his mercie a man is justified and may lay claim as it were to remission of sinnes SOCINUS 1 For faith we are deemed perfectly just And a little after 2 Abraham believed God and for that cause he was accounted of him for righteous Part. 4. chap. 4. pag. 462. col 2. 3 For one act of faith was Abraham righteous Servetus Book 2. of Law and Gospel as Calvine reciteth in his refutation of Servetus pag. 903. WOTTON 1 He that believeth is accounted by God to all purposes concerning eternall life to have done as much according to the covenant of the Gospel as he should have been accounted to have done according to the covenant of the Law if he had perfectly fulfilled it In his first English paper The fifth errour is That faith is no firm perswasion by which men apprehend and lay hold upon Christ and his righteousnesse and apply them to themselves as of right belonging to us by our spirituall union but that it is a trust and confidence in Christ for salvation joyned with obedience to Christs precepts or to speak plainly a confidence that Christ having obtained by his obedience the Kingdome and all power will certainly give us salvation if we relie on him and obey his counsels SOCINUS 1 Faith in Christ which maketh us righteous before God is nothing else but to trust in Christ Part. 4. chap. 11. in the beginning and in the same page 560. col 2. 2 To believe in Christ is nothing else but to trust in Christ to cleave to Christ and from the heart to embrace his doctrine as heavenly and healthsome And a little before 3 This your apprehension of Christ is a mere humane device and a most empty dream And towards the end of the chapter 4 He calleth our perswasion of righteousnesse already obtained and gotten by Christ vain WOTTON 1 As for that perswasion wherein some would have faith to consist it followeth him that is justified not goeth before as faith must needs do Ser. on John p. 392. also p. 338. and 448. 2 To believe in Christ is to trust in Christ and to rest on him to have his heart settled and to relie wholly and onely on him And what this trust is he describeth more particularly pag. 390. where he saith 3 It is such a Faith as maketh us rest upon God for the performance of his promise The sixth errour is That Christs whole obedience and righteousnesse serve first and immediately for himself to bring him into favour and autoritie with God and secondly onely for us Not that it might be communicated to us in him to make us truly and formally righteous but onely that it might serve for our use in that it maketh him gracious with God and so both able to obtain that faith might be accepted for righteousnesse and we for it and also powerfull to give those blessings which are promised to those that trust in him SOCINUS 1 As Adams offense made him and all mankind procreated by him guiltie of death so Christs righteousnesse and obedience procured life eternall to Christ himself Whereby it cometh to passe that so many as shall by procreated by him become partakers of the same life Part. 4. chap. 6. and 2. part 2. Chap. 8. p. 178. col 2. and 3. part 3. chap. 3. in the end WOTTON In a paper written in Latine 1 All the good will wherewith God embraceth us proceedeth from that grace that Christ is in with God Now that is in these things for the most part contained that he is by nature the Son of God that he is perfectly holy that he hath performed obedience exact in all respects both in fulfilling the Law in performing all things belonging to the office of a Mediatour from whence it followeth that those that believe are for Christs righteousnes gracious with God And in the same paper 2 If question be concerning the formall cause of justification I exclude from it either obedience of Christ If of the efficient by way of merit I maintain it to depend upon both The seventh errour is That Christ did not satisfie the justice of God for us in such sort that we may be said when we truly believe to have satisfied the justice of God and his wrath in him and that God of his mercie without Christs satisfaction made ours doth pardon our sinnes and justifie and redeem us SOCINUS 1 Reade over all the places of the New Testament in which mention is made of redemption and you shall find none in which there is evident mention of the paiment of any true price or of satisfaction Part. 2. chap. 1. pag. 109. col 2. And a little after 2 As we are said to be sold under sinne that is enslaved to it without any true price intervening so are we said to be redeemed from the same by Christ that is freed though no price hath truly and properly intervened 3 Likewise Part. 1. chap. 7. in the
not onely with limitation as you propound it in this seventh Errour but absolutely as appeared in mine answer to the first Errour and accordingly he maintaineth that we are pardoned justified and redeemed without any satisfaction made by a true price paid to God the Father by our Saviour Christ for us But I acknowledge and professe that Christ hath made satisfaction for us by paying a true price to God his Father for us and that God doth not pardon us but for and in respect of that payment made for us In the places alledged out of my writings I say no more but that we cannot be held to have satisfied the wrath of God in Christ and withall to be truly and properly pardoned If we have been punished how are we pardoned If we be pardoned we have not been punished Christ hath been punished for us we are pardoned for his punishment Esa 53.5 Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this seventh Errour and having cleared my self of agreeing with him in any of the seven am unjustly charged by M r Walker to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with Socinus in all points in the doctrine of Justification The Issue THus have you both M r Walker's charge and evidence and M r Wotton's Answer in his own Defence thereunto You exspect now I suppose in the next place to heare what the Issue of it was Upon the delivery in therefore and view of both compared together there was by word of mouth further debating of the severall points at large as well between M r Walker and M r Wotton as by the parties nominated on either side among themselves Who albeit they agreed not with M r Wotton in all particulars and in some things then debated were not all of one mind as in that question occasioned by M r Wotton's answer to one branch of the last Article to wit Whether in the work of redemption the faithfull be considered as one with Christ or no or in plainer terms Whether our insition into Christ in the order of Nature be deemed to precede the work of our redemption or the work of our redemption in the order of nature to go before it concerning which being somewhat a nice subtiltie they were divided some holding the one part and some the other yet so farre were they from condemning M r Wotton as guilty of heresie and blasphemie in the points above mentioned as that they professed divers of them and that some of M r Walker's own choice no one denying or opposing the rest therein to have oft taught some of them namely the second to wit That faith is a condition appointed by God to be performed on our part for obtaining justification which yet M r Walker affirmed to be a most dangerous errour In conclusion it was without further question or contradiction of any of the whole eight then present as well the nominated by the one as those assigned by the other with unanimous consent generally resolved and pronounced that there appeared not to them either heresie or blasphemy in ought that M r Wotton was by M r Walker convinced to have delivered or maintained Which M r Wotton requiring further to be testified under their hands albeit M r Walker perceiving it to be deemed equall and meet began to storm and flie out and demanded of them whether they would take upon them to determine heresie whereunto such answer was returned as was fit yet it was accordingly as of right it ought yielded unto The writing by all the eight then present subscribed being committed to the custodie of D r Bayly upon promise by him made to deliver it to M r Wotton when it should by two of the parties one of either side nominated be demanded of him in his behalf Now howsoever the Doctour afterward upon some pretences refused to deliver it as he had promised to do whether pressed by M r Walker to detain it or no I wot not himself best knoweth yet for the truth of this issue as it hath here been related in the behalf of M r Wotton it will plainly appear by the attestation of two of those of M r Walkers party yet surviving for a third is deceased and the fourth was absent at the meeting that concluded all in the very terms ensuing written with one of their hands and subscribed by them both We whose names are under-written do testifie that the eight Ministers at the hearing of the foresaid points in controversie betwixt M r Wotton and M r Walker and continuing till the end of that meeting though in every part they assented not to every of those Positions under their hands witnessed that they found neither heresie nor blasphemie in any of them or to the like purpose JOHN DOWNAME WILLIAM GOUGH Thus have you faithfully related upon ground of proof undeniable the carriage of the businesse between M r Walker and M r Wotton and the issue of the same You have M r Walker's charge and challenge together with the evidence produced and given in by him to make his charge good you have M r Wotton's defence in way of answer thereunto and you have the verdict and sentence of select parties appealed to by joynt consent delivered upon diligent view and due hearing both of the one and the other who all say in effect that M r Wotton did sufficiently clear himself from those foul imputations of heresie and blasphemie that M r Walker then charged him with and that M r Walker failed in making good that his charge then which with so much vehemency and virulency he reneweth now against him yoking him with Peter Abeilard and with Servetus and Socinus as agreeing with them in such damnable and detestable dotages as they held and maintained and for which they were condemned as blasphemous hereticks The iniquitie whereof though it may sufficiently appear by what hath already been related yet that the Reader may the better judge how equally these persons are here yoked together it will not be amisse though the matter be but unsavoury to acquaint him with some generall and principall heads of those points that Abeilardus Servetus and Socinus stand charged with Peter Abeilard or Balard for of his name they agree not whom some affirm to have been one of the first Fathers of the School-men and first founders of School-divinitie for Peter Lombard say they took from him is by Bernard charged to have savoured of Arius in the doctrine of the Trinitie of Pelagius in the doctrine of Grace of Nestorius concerning the person of Christ to have held Christ to be no true Redeemer of us nor to have reconciled us to God by his death but to have been an exemplary Saviour that is such an one as by his life and death pietie and charitie obedience and patience chalketh us out the way to heaven and to have broached in his books a number of sacrilegious errours
writings yet extant and in the hands of too many by means whereof it is to be feared that they do the more hurt The principall of his tenets though not so prodigious as those of Servetus yet blasphemous and vile enough are these He denieth not Christs deity and eternity onely with Arrius but his existence at all also before he was conceived by the Virgin Mary with Photinus and so maketh him a mere man He denieth Christ to have been a redeemer or to have wrought any redemption or to have paid any price or ransome unto God for us truly and properly so termed or that by his sufferings any satisfaction at all was made unto God for our sinnes or that God is thereby reconciled unto us or that thereby he merited ought from God either for himself or for us That he is therefore onely called a Saviour and is said to save partly because he teacheth us by his doctrine and sheweth us by his practice the way to life eternall and confirmeth the same to us by the miracles that he wrought and by his dying and rising again from the dead and partly because he hath power given him by God to make the same good unto all that believe in him That to believe in him is nothing else but to obey him or to keep his precepts under hope of eternall life thereby to be obtained and that this is the very form and essence of justifying faith and that for so doing a man is justified and accepted to life eternall and that it is therefore in our power by our good works to attain thereunto This is the summe of his doctrine concerning mans justification and salvation wherein also I am the briefer because much of it hath been laid down before Now whether M r Wotton or M r Godwin do conspire and concurre with Peter Abeilard Servetus and Socinus in these their blasphemous dotages and are therefore justly yoked with them by M r Walker or no it concerneth not me let others try and determine But for M r Wotton his own defence of himself herein and the censure of others by M r Walker himself appealed to which he cannot therefore in equity go from I have faithfully delivered being confirmed by the attestation of those whom he cannot except against being men of his own choise and of sufficient credit and good esteem otherwise And as for M r Godwin to me a mere stranger in regard of any acquaintance one whom I never heard or saw to my knowledge save once of late occasionally at the funerall of a friend nor know certainly what he holdeth or hath taught I say no more but as they sometime of their sonne Aetatem habet he is old enough and for ought I know able enough to answer for himself and he surviveth yet so to do if he see good But whether Peter Abeilard ever moved this Question which M r Walker saith he was the first mover of to wit Whether faith or the righteousnesse of Christ be imputed in the act of justification is to me a great question And M r Walker's reading herein as I confesse it may well be is better then mine if he can shew where either he did ever handle it or is reported so to have done Nor do I find in all M r Calvines large relation and refutation of Servetus his blasphemies where ever he propounded or maintained any question in such terms as this by M r Walker is here conceived in For Socinus it is true that in prosecution of his discourses wherein he laboureth to prove Christ to be such a Saviour onely as was out of him before described he is inforced to acknowledge that Faith such as he meaneth that is Obedience to Christs commandments doth justifie without relation to ought done or suffered by Christ any satisfaction made by him or merit of his neither of which he acknowledgeth And the like may be deduced from what Servetus held though his assertions as Calvine also well observeth are found oft to enterfere and to crosse one another and from that also that Abeilard is by Bernard charged to have held But if M r Walker will father this upon him concerning the deniall of the Imputation of Christs righteousnesse because from his positions it may be deduced he might have risen a great deal higher and have fetched in Simon Magus Ebion Cerinthus Marcion Manes and a whole rabble of old hereticks and out of the ancient stories of the Church made a list as large almost as his book is long from whose pestilent positions the same might as well be deduced as from those things that Abeilardus and Servetus maintained Again neither is this sufficient to prove a point to be hereticall and blasphemous because it may be deduced from assertions of that nature for if we shall condemn as hereticall and blasphemous whatsoever by necessary consequence may be extracted from those dotages that some blasphemous hereticks have held the like censure may then yea must then be passed upon many orthodox tenets in the negative especially maintained by us against the Church of Rome since that they follow necessarily from those grounds that by such hereticks have been held For example That Christs body is not really present in the Sacrament nor is sacrificed and offered up to God in the Masse doth necessarily follow from the opinion of Eutyches and others who maintained the humane nature of Christ to be swallowed up into his Godhead from the dotages of Simon Saturn Basilides and many more who held that he never suffered at all of Apelles who held that his body was dissolved into the foure elements of Seleucus Manes and Hermes that held it fastened to the starres or lodged in the sunne That there is no purgatory nor use of invocation of Saints or of singing masses for souls deceased followeth necessarily from the opinion of the Sadduces that held no spirits and from the Psychopannychites dream of the souls sleeping till the last day which in effect therefore the sequestration of them at least from the divine presence till then that Chamaelion Spalatensis pretended the rather to maintain because by it those Popish errours would be easily and evidently overthrown For who is so meanly versed in the art of reasoning as not to know That the clearest truths may be deduced from the grossest falshoods that may be As grant a stone to have life and a man to be a stone and it will thence follow that a man hath life And yet were it absurd from hence to conclude that whosoever holdeth the latter must needs either concurre in judgement with those that should maintain the former or hold any falshood much lesse any absurdity though those positions that inferre it be both false and absurd And let M r Walker consider this calmly and seriously with