than Justification c. And though it be true that in this case what is inconditione non est in obligatione as to the actual possession yet we cannot think but the holy Just God having received satisfaction from the Mediator in behalfe of such for whom it was laid down is under an obligation as we may conceive and speake unto the Mediator to cause him see of the travel of his soul to give him his seed and those he purchased and in due time to call them effectually work Faith in them then Justifie c. Adopt them c. thus bestow all the benefites purchased upon then in the time methode wisely determined But if Mr. Baxter understand by this jus actuale that is constituted upon the performance of the condition a plaine and simple Right unto the benefite we can acknowledge no such Condition lest we render the death of Christ void for in him alone have we all our Law-title Right to all the blessings of the Covenant to Faith all that follow upon it That we may put an end to this we shall first shew in what sense we cannot admit Faith to be a Condition then shew in what sense we do admit the denomination As to the first we say 1. We cannot admit it to be a Condition in their sense who will have Justification so to depend upon it as on a Procuring Cause some way or other meriting at least ex pacto or ex congruo as Bellarm saith that benefite as a Reward for this destroyeth the Freedome of Grace that shineth forth in our Justification overturneth the whole nature of the Covenant of Grace spoileth Christ of his glory and doth man to come in as a sharer in the glory of that purchase 2. We cannot admit it to be a Condition in their sense who take a new Obedience with it for this taketh away the special Use of Faith and its special End in laying hold on refuging the soul under the wings of the Surety-Righteousness of Jesus Christ This changeth the nature of the Covenant of Grace maketh it a new Covenant of Works giveth ground of boasting of glorying before men yea maketh the reward of Justification and what followeth thereupon to be of debt not of grace And such a Condition in the Covenant of Grace we cannot owne 3. We cannot admit it to be a Condition in their sense who make it strickly a Potestative Condition placeing it in the power free will of man to beleeve or not as he will for as this overturneth the whole Covenant of Grace and exalteth proud man so it parteth at least the glory of Redemption betwixt Christ Man giveth man ground to sing to the praise of his own Lord free will to say he hath made himself to differ he oweth but halfe thanks hardly so much to Jesus Chaist for all that he hath done and suffered in order to the purchasing of Salvation 4. We cannot own it for a Condition in their sense who make it or it our new obedience together our Gospel-Righteoâ—sness that Righteousness which only is properly Imputed to us Reckoned upon our score as the Righteousness upon the account of which we are Justified for thus the nature of the Covenant of Grace is changed God is made to estimate that for a Righteousness which is no fulfilling of the Law Christ is made to have procured that it should be so that his own Surety-Righteousness should no otherwayes be imputed 5. We cannot account Faith a Condition in their sense who ascribe to it or to it with works the same Place Use Efficacie in the new Covenant that Perfect Obedience had in the old Covenant of Works for this maketh the New Covenant nothing but a new Edition of the old and shooteth Christ the Lord our Righteousness far away who is should be our immediat Righteousness that in him we might be found hid secured from the dint of the Law-Curse and with all giveth proud man too palpable ground of boasting contrare to the whole Contrivance of the Gospel-Covenant 6. We cannot owne it for a Condition in their sense who reject it and disowne it for an Instrument or an Instrumental Meane in our Justification because they deny that particular and special Use which it hath in our Justification so pervert its whole Gospel-Nature It s special use work in Justification being to lay hold on the Lord Jesus his side jussorie-Righteousness to carry the Man out of himself as renuncing his own Righteousness every thing that is not Christ his Righteousness that as poor empty naked he may lay hold on rest upon the Surety-Righteousness of the publick person Cautioner Jesus Christ for thus Christ his Righteousness are put by and he getteth not that rent of glory that is only due to him the soul is made to leane upon something beside this Rock of ages 7. We cannot admit it for a Condition in their sense who will have us hereby to have gotten a legal Title or Right unto Justification other benefites according ... following the same seing this puts the crown upon Mans head as having by his deed acquired a jus Law-right unto these blessings which become hereby a reward not of grace but of just debt We acknowledge all our Right Title to all the blessings of the Covenant to be from Christ the only purchaser of him must we hold all that all may be of free grace he even he alone may have all the Glory having redeemed us with his precious bloud purchased the whole Inheritance of grace glory for us 8. We cannot account it a Condition in their sense who plead for Universal Redemption because thereby Christ is only made to have purchased something to all alike that Conditionally no more grace glory for Peter than for Iudas but Peter by his own Paines Industrie by his Faith New Obedience did purchase the whole personal and immediat Right unto the blessings which he enjoyeth and hath received no more from Christ than what Iudas had so hath no more ground of exalting him for Redeemer than those have who perish seing what he purchased was common to all no more for one in particulur than for another for this setteth the crown upon mans head who hath saved himself by his sweating paines labour and spoileth our Lord Redeemer of his glory 9. Nor can we account it a condition in their sense who will have the whole or principal part of what Christ purchased to be the New Covenant the Termes Conditions thereof as if Christ had been a Cautioner for none in particular but had so far redeemed all as to have brought them into such an estate wherein they might now work won for themselves run fight for the prize according to
finde no where required in order to Justification This is no where called a Condition of Justification We are no where said to be Justified by this Resolution This is inconsistent with the frame of a poor wakened soul seeking Justification This would in part make the gift of Justification not free of free grace but to be of works or of a Resolution for works and so would give ground in part at least of boasting of glorying contrare to the whole frame of the Gospel And so this would lessen the difference betwixt the Old Covenant of works and the New Covenant of Grace Having thus dispatched the second particular we come unto the Third to wit to enquire whether perseverance be a Condition of Justification And of this we need not speak much seing by what is already said it is apparent how false this is Every thing that is required of such as are Beleevers cannot be called a Condition of Justification It is said that a Condition suspendeth the obligation to bestow the benefite promised upon Condition untill it be performed And so it will hence follow that if Perseverance to the end be the Condition of Justification no man can be justified untill he have persevered to the end so no man shall be justified in this life whereby an end is put to all our present debate the subject thereof being taken out of the way If it be said That faith is the Condition of Justification as it endureth to the end I Ans. That that faith which will endure to the end is the Condition I grant But I deny That Faith is the Condition of Justification as it endureth to the end we no where read of Faiths being the Condition under this reduplication as enduring to the end for then it would follow that no lively faith how strong so ever could unite a soul to Christ untill it had endured to the end and so man upon his first Beleeving 〈…〉 be never so livly strong can be said to be justified to have passed from death to life contrare to all the Scriptures And this would too much assimilate the New Covenant unto the Old wherein Adam was to work out his dayes work to the end ere he had Right to his wages Yea hence it would follow that in this life there were none of the fruites of justification to be had such as Peace with God Accesse to God Glorying in tribulations Joy Comfort contrare to experience the Scriptures Rom. 5 1 2 3 4 5 11. 8 35. to the end Luk. 7 50. Mat. 9 2. 2. Thes. 2 16. Heb. 6 18 19. 1. Pet. 1 4. So that in a word from what hath bein said it is evident how little ground M. Br. hath to glory in this way of his and though to an inadvertent person it may appeare Plausible what is adduced for a reason yet when considered it will be found fioath and a florish of words for be it so that justifieing faith receive whole Christ which we doe not deny for Christ is not divided for as there is but one faith so but one Christ. And I will have occasion to speake more fully to this matter afterward Yet what doth Mr. Baxter gain hath he gained his Pepper-corne of Faith or Gospel-obedience to be imputed unto us for Righteousness according to the new law he should say the new edition of the Old Covenant or rather the Old Covenant newly established no by no means for be it grainted That Iustifieing Faith as such respected Christ equally as King and Prophet as it doth him as Priest which yet I deny and shall without divideing Christ make it appeare I aske him how doth it receive Christ Jesus the Lord Surely he cannot but say as he is offerred in the Gospel well then the Lord who knoweth what we are offereth him to us and makes him to us wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and redemption so that God in the offer of his Christ as a King lookes upon the sinner in the same capacitie to obey him as in the offer of him as a Priest he is to pay his debt and that is not onely in no capacitie but as opposit to such a thing of himself Hence it as evident that Faith receives Christ as a King not by promiseing or purposeing to obey him but from a Conviction of its own aversion to purpose to please God that he by his Kingly Power shall kill the enmity Conquer the soul bring it to purpose as well as practise work in it to will as well as to doe cast down imaginations that exalt themselves against the knowledge of God and bring every thought in captivitie to his obedience so when Faith acts on him as a Prophet there is in this act neither purpose nor promise to obey him as a teacher c. But from a Conviction that the mind is not onely void of light but it is prepossessed with corrupt principles so that the man that hath nothing but the soul of a man takes up the whole Gospel Mysterie as foolishness And it is impossible for him to know these things since they must be spiritually discerned I say from this Conviction he receives Christ as his wisdom as he that shall give him an understanding to know him that is true and to make him who is not onely as a beast but so much worse that his light is darkenesse of a quick understanding in the feare of the Lord and wise to salvation Now this exactly answereth the sinners need and hath all his wants made up by Jesus Christ according to his riches in glory and God's end in makeing his Christ to poor sinners wisdom Righteousness c. That so he who glorieth may glory in the Lord. Now if Mr. Baxter will Consider this he will even lay aside his Pepper-Corne as of no Price for here all is without money and without Price to the poor soul c. and he is considered as a receiver of all from Christ. CHAP. XXXI Gospel-obedience is not the Condition of Justification THough as we heard Mr. Baxter himself will not say that Gospel-obedience is the Condition of Justification yet he recommendeth a book to us to peruse to the end we may receive much light in the knowledge of the Gospel I meane the discourse of the two Covenants formerly mentioned wherein this is asserted with great confidence And though this be sufficiently confuted by what is said yet we shall in short take some notice of the grounds of this Mans Confidence give some remarks upon what he saith He tels us pag. 132. That the sense in which the Apostles did assert it i.e. Justification by Faith without the works of the Law was that faith Iustifieth without works antecedent to beleeving This is what Bellarmin other Papist's say without works as the works of a literal observation of Moses law which was opposed by the jewes to faith This is but his fiction and its grounds may come
to be yet I cannot think that he shall approve of this which yet is the maine designe of the book His 8. ground p. 156. That the promise of forgiveness of sins is sometimes made unto Evangelical obedience This he goeth about to prove from 1. Ioh. 1 7. Where the Apostle is shewing the Advantages that such have as have fellowship with God through faith in Jesus Christ evidenced by their walking in the light as is clear from vers 6. and this in particular that as they will be dayly failing so they will have ready accesse to the blood of Christ to get all their sins cleansed away Neither is the Apostle here speaking of the first Pardon granted when persons are translated into a state of justification but he is speaking of such as are already in that State He citeâ—h next to this purpose 1. Pet 1 2. addeth they were not elected to the benefite of being sprinkled with the blood of Christ without obedience Making that a condition of being sprinkled with the blood of Christ which the Apostle mentioneth as a distinct medium to which they were elected in reference to eternal life the supream end as to them And he might as well say they were not elected to the benefiâ—e of obedience without being sprinkled with the blood of Christ and that too agreeth more with truth His 9. ground p. 157. is That to forgive injuries is an act of Evangelical obedience to that precept Mat. 11 25. And yet without this men cannot be pardoned so not justified Mark 11 25. Mat. 6 15. 18 35. Ans. Though men cannot be pardoned without this it will not follow that therefore it is a part of the condition of Justification but only proveth that this must be present as an evidence of their acting Faith on Jesus Christ in truth reality in order to pardon And these passages are explications of the fift petition of the Lord's prayer the sense whereof is well given in our larger Catechisme § 194. in these words which we are the rather emboldened to ask encouraged to expect when we have this testimony in ourselves that we from the heart forgive others their offences His 10. last ground is That Repentance is an act of Evangelical Obedience Act. 17 30. yet pardon of sin which is essential to justification is not to be obtained without it Luk 13 3 5. Ans. Of Repentance we have said enough above Chap. XXV I wonder how he can to this end cite Luk 13 3 5. where no mention is made of Remission of sins but perishing threatned to all that will not repent I shall not here meddle with his mis representation of our doctrine in the following pages nor with the grounds reasons of the preference he giveth unto his way seing by all that he speaks he bewrayeth utter ignorance of the Gospel truth which we owne of its true Tendency to promove Gospel holiness beyond any other way what somever hatched by Papist's Socinians that may be little or nothing beholden to Iesus Christ for Grace here or for Glory hereafter And his Insinuations as if we did not presse Repentance Holiness is little to his credite or to the credite of the cause he maintaineth seing the contrarie is so well known to say no more Nor shall insist on the grounds he layeth down to overturne the whole argueings of the Apostle in this matter seing they are upon the matter the same that others have laid down and have been before spoken to for from a tedious discourse concerning the mistaking apprehensions of the jewes about the Law the works thereof in order to justification to very little purpose he inferreth p. 117. that doubtless Paul's denial of Iustification Salvation to be by the Law is to be understood in the very same sense in which the incredulous jewes against whom he disputed did hold these so be attainable thereby Forgetting with all that what Paul wrote was dictated by the Spirit so that for the use of the Church unto the end of the world But sure if no other works were here understood than this Author will have here understood it could be of little use to the Gospel churches after the subject of the question the Ceremonial Law it self is taken away And had it not been a shorter most effectual way to have confuted the jewes errour here simply to have proven as he doth elsewhere the abolishing of that Law Beside we finde many things spoken of this Law against Justification by obedience to which the Apostle disputeth that cannot agree to the Ceremonial Law as hath been several times touched But let us hear what the true question was We must understand him saith he to deny a freedom from the eternal punishment to be attainable by legal Sacrifices also to deny that the promise of eternal life was made upon Condition of literal Circumcision a literal observation of the Mosaical Law Ans. If this had been all to what purpose I pray did the Apostle laboure so much to prove that not only the jewes but that the Gentiles also were under sin Rom. 1. 2. The Gentiles were not nor yet were to be under the Law of Ceremonies 2 How could the Apostle inferre that by the deeds of the Law there should no flesh be justified from his proving that both jewes Gentiles were guilty of the breach of the Moral Law whereby every mouth was stopped all the world become guilty before God Rom. 3 10-20 3 did only the Law of Ceremonies give the knowledge of sin Himself proveth the contrary pag. 57. 4 did the curse only belong unto the Ceremonial Law or did Christ only become a Curse in reference to the breaches of that Gal. 3 10. He will not so much as yeeld p. 119. that Paul doth on the bye deny Justification by other works And that meerly because it would destroy his fabrick of a Iudaical Socinian justification though he pretend that thereby the Apostles doctrine would be made inconsistent not only with the Faith of the holy men of old but also with his own doctrine But neither did the holy men of old express the Condition of Justification which he confoundeth with the Condition of the Covenant of mercy by loving God keeping his commandements nor doth Paul speak any such thing as we have seen what ever he with Socinians Arminians say He giveth us another character which also we heard from others before of the works by which Paul denied men were justified calling them such works which were apt to occasion boasting Ephes. 2 9. Rom. 4 2. But thus he quite perverreth both the sense of the words scope argueing of the Apostle for the Apostle cleareth that it is by grace we are saved not by works upon this very account that if we were saved or justified upon the account of any of our works man should boast Ephes. 2 9. Not of works why
Nor is it to the point to tell us that some hold that God if it had pleased him might have pardoned Adam's transgression without the Atonement made by the death of Christ for they speak not of what God may now do having determined to manifest the glory of his justice but what he might have done in signorationis ante decretum And as for that word Heb. 2 11. It became him c. it will as well respect the justice of God as his wisdom seing it became him upon the account of justice which he would have glorified Mr. Baxter in his Confess Chap. IX Sect. 5. pag. 289. thinketh that to say that Christ paid the same thing that the Law required of us not only satisfied for our not payment is to subvert the substance of Religion But this is only in his apprehension as he taketh up their meaning who say so And others possibly may have no lower thoughts of some who hold that Christ only gave such a sacrifice to God as might be a valuable consideration on which he might grant us the benefites on such conditions as are most sutable to his ends honour that he did not suffer the same which the Law threatned The screwing up of differences to such an hight as to make either the one or the other subversive of the substance of Religion had need to be upon clear undeniable grounds and not founded on meer sandy and loose consequences such as those seem to me by which Mr. Baxter maketh out this Charge For he tels us The Idem is the perfect obedience or the full punishment that the Law requires It is supplicium ipsius delinquentis Ans. But now seing such as say that Christ paid the Idem will say as well as he that when Christ suffered that which they call the Idem the person himself that sinned did not suffer And I would enquire at Mr. Baxter whether paid Christ the Idem as to all other respects beside that is whether Christ suffered all that penalty which the Law did threaten to transgressours only this excepted which must be excepted that he did it in another person that he was not the person himself that sinned or not If he say Not then the difference goeth deeper but why doth he not then to make out this heavy charge Instance some particulars threatned in the Law which Christ did not undergo And why doth he insist only on this one that he was not ipse delinquens but another person If he grant that in all other respects Christ paid the Idem no man sure can see such difference here as shall make the one side subvert the Substance of Religion for it is a meer sâ—â—ife about a word it cometh all to this whether when one man layeth down his life to save another condemned to death after all satisfaction in money lands rents service or what else hath been rejected he can be said to pay the Idem which the Law required or not Some Lawyers would possibly say he did pay or suffer the Idem Mr. Baxter would say not because he was not ipsa persona delinquens was not the very person that was condemned but another And yet death unto which the other man was condemned was inflicted upon him and no less would be accepted as satisfaction at his hands which would make some say that all that debate whether it was the same or the equivalent were a meer needless contest about a word And if it be but just so here in our present debate every one will judge it very hard to call that a subversion of Religion which after examination trial is found to be but a strife about a word Now how will Mr. Baxter prove that the suffering of the Idem is only when it is supplicium ipsius delinquentis And not also when the same punishment in all its essential ingredients is undergone suffered by another When the Law imposeth the penalty of death or of such a great summe of money on a person transgressing such a Law common discourse would say I suppose the Law give allowance thereto that when another came payed the same penalty for him without the least abatement he payed the same penalty which he Law impofed and not another and not meerly a valuable consideration It is true the Law threatened only the transgressour obliged him to suffer but notwithstanding another might pay the very same thing which the Law threatned requireth He saith next p. 290. the Law never threatned a Surety nor granteth any liberty of substitution that was an act of God above the Law If therefore the thing due were payed it was we ourselves morally or legally that suffered Ans. Sure some Lawes of men will threaten Sureties grant liberty of substitution too But if he speak here only of the Law of God we grant that it threatned only the transgressour that it was an act of God above the Law dispensing therewith that granted a substitution Yet notwithstanding of this it is not proved that that Substitute did not or could not suffer the same punishment which the Law threatned And if Mr. Baxter think that the lawes not threatning a Surety nor granting liberty of a substitution will prove it it is denied Next His other consequence is as uncleare viz. That if the thing due were payed it was we ourselves that suffered personally all these consequences run upon the first false ground that no man can pay the Idem but the very transgressour What he meaneth by we ourselves morally he would do well to explicate And as for legally we ourselves may be said to do legally what our Surety undertaker doth for us And if this be all he meaneth viz. that if the thing due to wit by Law as threatned there be payed either we in our own persons or our Surety for us in our room Law place payed it it is true but subversive of his hypothesis It must then be some other thing that he meaneth by morally or legally it must be the same with or equivalent to personally or the like but his next words cleare his meaning for he addeth And it would not be ourselves legally because it was not ourselves naturally And what lawyer I pray will yeeld to this reason I suppose they will tell us that we are said to do that legally which our Cautioner or Surety doth for us But if he think otherwayes here also that nothing can be accounted to be done by us legally but what is done by our selves Naturally which is a word of many significations might occasion much discourse that is personally Yet it will not follow that no other can suffer the Idem that was threatned but the delinquent himself At length he tels us That if it had been ourselves legally then the strickest justice could not have denied us a present perfect deliverance ipso facto seing no justice can
cause of the formal objective cause which some call the Formal others the Material cause and the Inferiour Meane or Instrumental cause Here also these two are confounded made one viz. We are justified by faith faith is Imputed unto Righteousness That these are far different shall be cleared hereafter But what answereth he He saith 1. If their meaning be simply so that we are justified by that which faith apprehendeth they speak more truth than they are aware of But that whatsoever faith apprehendeth should justify is not true Ans. Who speaketh thus I know not yet I see little danger in it their meaning being only this in that expression we are justified by that which faith apprendeth that Christ His Righteousness which justifying faith in the act of justifying laith hold on is the formal objective cause or that upon the account of which we are justified this no way saith that our faith is that Righteousness for which we are justified Next he saith If men ascribe justification in every respect to that which faith apprehendeth they destroy the Instrumental Iustification of faith Ans. No man that I know doth or will ascribe Justification in every respect unto that which faith apprehendeth so they need not destroy the Instrumental use of faith in Justification for as to the Instrumental justification of faith I understand it not it seemeth to be a very catachrestick expression In end he addeth If faith justifieth any way it must of necessity be by Imputation or account from God for righteousness because it is all that God requires of men to their justification in stead of the righteousness of the law Therefore if God shall not impute or account it to them for this righteousness it would stand them in no stead at all to their justification because there is nothing useful or available to any holy or saving purpose but only to that whereunto God hath assigned it If God in the New Covenant requires faith in Christ for our justification in stead of the righteousness of the law in the old this faith will not passe in account with him for such righteousness but his command and Covenant for beleeving and the obedience it self of beleeving will both become void of none effect the intire benefite of them being suspended upon the gracious pleasure purpose of God in the designation of them to their end Ans. Whatever interest or place Faith hath in the New Cov. in the matter of justification it hath it from Gods sole appointment designation it is all that which is now required of us in order to our justification entering into Covenant with God yet unless we change alter its true nature and assigne another place power to it that God hath the Crown is keeped on the head of the Mediator His Righteousness is only owned received produced by the sinner as it were in face of Court rested upon by faith in order to justification But when faith is said to be imputed for Righteousness that is when our act of beleeving is made our Righteousness said to be so accounted esteemed by God all this to shoot out the Righteousness of Christ and to take away the Imputation thereof to us as the only ground of our justification not only are the native kindly actings of justifying faith destroyed but the very nature gentus of the New Covenant is altered it is made to be the same in kinde with the first Covenant with this gradual difference that the first Covenant required full perfect obedience the second one act of obedience only viz. Faith as a Peppercorn as some speak in stead of a great rent our whole Righteousness for no other Righteousness will our adversaries grant to be really imputed to us save what they grant of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness only as to Effects and thus they make the Lord to repute for that is the meaning of imputing with them that to be a Righteousness which at best is but imperfect not every way conforme to the command of God enjoining it Whereby thus one imperfect act of obedience viz. Faith is made that whereupon the wakened sinner is to rest and lay his whole weight wherein he is to refuge himself from the wrath of God which he is to hold up as his legal defence against all accusations coming in against him and all this use is to be made of faith immediatly in stead of Christ His Surety-righteousness Whence we see that it is false to say 1 That if faith justifieth any way it must of necessity be by Imputation for righteousness For it justifieth as the mean appointed of God to lay hold on an Imputed Righteousness and to carry the soul forth thereunto The reason added is vaine for though it be all that God requires of men to their justification it is not that Rightheousness which is imputed unto Justification or the ground thereof but the Mean or Instrument of a soul 's partaking of that Righteousness of Christ which is the only ground or formal objective reason 2 It is false to say That if God shall not account it to them for righteousness it shall stand them in no stead to justification For it is required as the meane whereby the Sinner is married unto Christ partaketh of His Righteousness in order to justification and is as the legal production of the righteousness of the Surety in face of court as the ground of absolution to be pleaded stood unto The reason he here addeth is of no force because faith is assigned of God to this end purpose as the Gospel cleareth only to this end that so the Mediator alone may weare the Crown beare the weight of sinners nothing in us or from us may share with Him in that glory It is false 3 to say or suppose as his following words intimate That faith in the New Covenant hath the same place force efficacy which the righteousness of the law had in the old Covenant For then Faith should be Meritorious ex pacto should give ground of glorying before men It is 4 false to say That if faith hath not this place force efficacy in the New Covenant the command for beleeving beleeving it self shall be vaine Seing it hath another use designed to it of God and it is required for another end as is said according to the gracious pleasure purpose of God Lastly Chap. 8. pag. 93. c. he argueth from Gal. 3 12. thus If the Scriptures do not only no where establish but in any place absolutely deny a possibility of the translation or removing of the Righteousness of Christ from one person to another then there is no Imputation of Christ's Righteousness But the former is emphatically true from this place Ergo c. Ans. This upon the matter is but what Socinus said lib. 3. cap. 3. viz.
have another Interest in the death of Christ than all others it being done in their stead must needs be accepted in their behalfe as it was undergone for them in their stead place if it be accepted in their behalfe they must necessarily be freed from Suffering after God's Methode that upon the account of Christ's Suffering in their stead and if so must not that Suffering of Christ in a Law-sense be accounted theirs and imputed unto them they as really effectually freed from what they were under and obnoxious to made partakers of was purchased thereby as if they had suffered all that in their own persons If it be in stead of all then all must upon the account of it be delivered from Suffering which cannot be said or not one shall be delivered from Suffering meerly upon the account of it but upon the account of some other thing Interveening which he calleth in the following words the New Covenant the performance of the Conditions thereof And if so all Christ's Sufferings in our stead will be but a Suffering for our good as say the Socinians 2. When he saith That we might not suffer is that meaned eventually viz. That none of us should ever be put to suffer the penalty or is it only meaned potentially that is that it might be possible that we should not suffer If the former be said then either all of us shall be saved or the us must be restricked to the Elect. If the Latter be said then this dying in our stead is really but a dying for our good which the Socinians grant 3. When he saith obeyed in our Nature this in our Nature must either be the some with in our stead which he mentioned before or some thing different if the same then it seemes when he said Christ suffered in our stead his meaning only was that Christ suffered in our Nature And will not all Socinians grant that Christ Suffered thus in our stead that is in our Nature If different I would know why he putteth such a difference betwixt Christ's Suffering and His obeying seing both belonged to that Law as he speaketh in the foregoing words which was His Covenant Conditions and both were Satisfactory and Meritorious though the one more primarily Satisfactory the other more primarily meritorious 4. When he saith That Christ obeyed in our Nature that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification I would ask if this end did or could flow from or follow upon Christ's Obedience meerly because it was performed in our Nature Had we no other Interest or ground of Interest in it or in Him but that it was performed in our Nature or did all the Benefite Advantage that we received or are to receive thereby flow from it meerly upon this account that it was performed in our Nature 5. As to this end of Christ's obeying viz. that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification I suppose his meaning is that this perfection of obedience might not be required of us in order to justification but yet he doth not say as he should that this was our debt and that Christ paid this perfect obedience as our debt in order to life for if he shall say this then it will follow that this payment must in Law-sense be imputed to those for whom it was paid How ever these words do plainely insinuat that howbeit Christ obeyed in our Nature that perfection of obedience might not be necessary to our justification yet notwithstanding an Imperfect Obedience might be accounted necessary to our justification and thus the New Covenant be supposed to be of the same kind and Spece with the old and Christ be supposed to have obeyed only that the termes of the Old Covenant might be abated as to the rigour of perfection of obedience required 6. That Christ Obeyed and Suffered in the person of a Mediator Sponsor as he saith that is that person God-Man who was Mediator and Sponsor did obey suffer is very true but notwithstanding hereof yea so much the rather he obeyed and suffered as a Publick Person that is for others and not for Himself personally considered And therefore those for whom He thus Obeyed and Suffered must in a just and consequent sense be accounted as Obeying Suffering in Him that is there was such a Relation betwixt this Mediator or Surety and those for whom He was a Mediator and Surety in the purpose designe of God appointing Christ hereunto in the purpose designe of Christ undertaking and actually performing what He undertook as gave them fundamentally another Interest in His Obedience Suffering then others had or could have to for whom He was no Mediator Sponsor 7. Whence Christ may be said to have Obeyed and Suffered legally in the person of and as representing others that is in the construction of the Law Law-giver not for Himself but for others in whose Law-place He did substitute Himself undertaking their debt in order to their Redemption And though Beleevers who now come to have an actual Interest in Christ cannot be said to have done all this in and by Him that is as by their delegat and Servant as Mr. Baxter else where expresseth it yet they may be said to have done it in and by Him Civilly juridically or legally as the debtor is by Law said to have Satisfied the Creditor in and by the Surety who yet physically paid the debt by himself only but legally in the person of the debtor the debtor and Surety being in Law-consideration but as one person in so far as they concurre in and are both obliged by one and the same Obligation just as the heir succeding in jus defuncti is eatenus repute said to be una eadem persona with him whence it is evident that one payment made by either must be accounted as made by both and doth in effect dissolve the whole obligation and the consequently the debtor is as effectually justly absolved from all charge or danger of Law upon the account of that debt as if he had paid the money out of his own purse But whether the terme of Morally or Civilly or Legally or the like be most apposite is of no great weight to occasione a debate especially seing the thing it self is so well known to all who know what it is to have a friend paying their debt or Satisfying the Creditor for them and in their behalfe and thereupon bringing them out of prison Though I know the case of pecuniary debts doth not in all things quadrate with our case yet it is sufficient to explicat what we are now upon 8. We grant That God reputeth the thing to be as it is and therefore it is very true that God reputeth Christ to have obeyed and suffered as being in the Law-place of others and as making Satisfaction for them and them for whom He satisfied
loath to advise trye whether thereby more of their weight is laid on Christ or on their own faith And on the other hand let any serious exercised Christian be enquired see if their practice agree with this doctrine If it be said That there is no such hazard so long as Faith is not considered here as abstracted from its Object Christ but is considered with a respect thereunto I Ans. 1 We have seen what a poor general respect faith by some of our Adversaries is said to have to Christ whereby it is made nothing but a meer historical faith the Author of the Discourse of the two Covenants p. 31. saith that even that faith that had not the Messias in the promise is imputed for Righteousness 2 As for such as confesse that justifying faith hath a special respect to Christ his Righteousness we would know whether it hath this respect that it peculiarly refugeth the soul there from the storme of wrath and bringeth in thence Christ's Righteousness or cartieth the man out to it that he may lean upon it plead the same as the only ground of his Absolution from the sentence of the Law And if this be granted then it is manifest that the beleever hath no Righteousness but Christ's Surety-righteousness where withall he desireth to appeare before God this is it alone to which he leaneth through which alone he hopeth for Pardon Acceptance without the least reflecting act of soul upon his own Faith 3 But againe if so faith must stand alone as acting thus in a peculiar manner on Christ which no work else is fitted to do therefore Faith Works must not be joyned together nor must Faith be considered in this affaire as comprehending all Obedience in it as we see they say 4 But when Faith is made our Gospel-Righteousness in whole or in part howbeit they say they consider Faith as acting on its object Christ yet it is manifest that it is then considered with relation to its object in a Physical or metaphysical manner as all acts specified from their objects may must be considered but not in a theological sense as required in the Gospel to bring-in the Surety Righteousness of Christ to leane the soul thereupon as its only Righteousness for when it is said to be our whole Gospel Righteousness it is considered as a moral vertâ—e as an act of Obedience in us constituting us Righteous in a formal sense according to the new Law which is hereby fully in all points performed obeyed much more when works are joyned with it doth it with works put on a far other respect than to be the hand receiving the Atonement the gift of Righteousness But saith Mr. Baxter against Mr. Cartwright p. 179. In regaiâ—d of that justification which is from the accusation of the Law of works I say faith is but a condition no otherwise justifieth but because it is made that condition by a New-Law per legem remediantem we must be judged by that Law therefore when the case is whether we have performed the conditions of that new law or not then faith is materially that Righteousness by which we must be justified against all accusations of Non-performance Ans. 1 I doubt if such as never heard a report of Christ shall be judged by the New-Law far lesse by it alone 2 God will not call in question a Beleevers faith nor accuse him of Non-performance Nor will the Gospel or New-Law do it so that the Beleever needs not plead his performance in reference to a Justification at the tribunal of God 3 When Faith is made a Condition by a New-Law thereby become the beleevers Righteousness this Righteousness is the Condition and is therefore a Righteousness because made a condition by that new Law yea elsewhere ibid. pag. 106. this Righteousness is said to be compleet perfect as all Righteousness must be we see what weight is laid upon it And when there is no other Righteousness properly imputed to us for as for that Imputation of Christ's Righteousness which he would yeeld to as the only sound sense it is but what Iesuites Socinians Arminians yeeld to we cannot be satisfied with who seeth not how this matter is framed so as all the weight of the soul must be laid upon this personal Righteousness especially when it is made another Sort of Condition than we can acknowledge it to be as shall be seen afterward and when it is the immediat ground of our Right to Pardon Justification Adoption c. for Christ's purchase was to him general common and no more for one than for another and to all conditionally If it be said What hazard is there so long as Christ's Righteousness is held to be that which satisfieth for the breach of the Covenant of Works is full Satisfaction to justice and which hath purchased the New-Covenant and the new easie termes our Righteousness in performing the new easie termes whereby we come to have Right to life all the benefites purchased by Christ is no way prejudicial unto that nor robbeth not Christ's Satisfaction of the least of the glory due to it I Ans. The hazard still continueth for hereby 〈◊〉 Gospel Righteousness be it Faith alone or Faith Works together is made the immediate sole ground of our Right to the benefites for what Christ did was general common and He by what he did made no particular purchase of any good unto any but procured the New-Covenant and the new grant of life upon the easie termes alike unto all the satisfaction which he made unto the Law giver for the breach of the old Covenant was not as a peculiar Cautioner for any in particular but was equally for all as much for the damned as for the saved So that our Right to the benefites cometh purely wholly from our performance of the New-Termes which Christ is said to have purchased Therefore though our personal Righteousness hath no interest in purchasing the New Covenant or in making satisfaction to Justice unto that end yet Justice being now satisfied equally for all and the New Covenant being purchased alike for all our personal Righteousness is that which must bear the glory of our interest in the benefits the Obligation where in we stand to Christ upon that account is the same that others are under who reap none of the benefites which we reape by our New Righteousness And here it is also manifest that Faith if that should be made the Gospel-Righteousness alone without works in order to the justification of a sinner is not conceived to act upon Christ as the Lord our Righteousness that the soul may put on his Surety-righteousness thereby answere all challenges of the broken Law but is conceived as our Work and as our Performance of the New Conditions and as such is rested upon leaned to Whereby man
to the Efficient for neither do all Philosophers agree to this some holding Instruments to be a fift kinde of Cause nor are we obliged to stand to their prescriptions rules especially in these things that are no natural causes or effects no man saith that faith hath the same kind measure of Efficiency in towards the effect justification that all Instrumental causes or Instrumental causes so called have in the Effects which they concurre to the producing of what efficiency hath an examplary cause which some Philosophers reduce to the efficient viz. Keckerman But that Faith hath some Influence is manifest from the Scripture not of it self it is true but by the gracious appointment of God and that this Influence cannot be better more saifly expressed than by the name of an Instrument appeareth to us clear hereby nothing of the glory due to God or unto Jesus Christ and to his Righteousness is ascribed unto man nor is any more hereby granted unto Man than to a beggar as to the enriching of himself when it is said his hand made him rich by receiving the Purse of gold that was given unto him yea hereby is Christ his Righteousness more fixedly established in their due place because faith is considered not as a Righteousness of it self nor as a part of Righteousness but purely and simply as an Instrument of the soul laying hold on the Righteousness of Christ and pleading the same as the only Formal ground of his justification before God If it be said that it were saifer to call it a causa sine qua non We must first know what is properly signified thereby whether it will help us more to understand the just true import of the Scripture expressions about Faith in Justification for no termes ought to be used that attaine not this end or have not a direct tendency thereunto such termes however we may please our selves in the invention of their application unto the business in hand and think we are in case to defend the same against opponents yet if they do not contribute manifestly to the clearing and explaining of the matter according to the Scriptures can only darken the matter And no reason can enforce us to embrace them with the arbitrary explications limitations of the Authors and to reject or lay aside such as do more obviously explaine the matter unto all such as have orthodox apprehensions of the matter and have given offence to none nor have been excepted against by any but such as were not orthodox in the point of justification whose erroneous Principles led them to deny or except against the same And what for a cause shall we take that causa sine qua non to be which cannot be so explained in our language as that every one that heareth it shall be in case to understand what it meaneth Such as speak of it call it causa fatua and referre to it external occasions time place and such like things without which the action cannot proceed as the place wherein we stand the time wherein we do any thing which have no more interest in or relation to one action than another for all must be done by us in some time and in some place And shall we say that faith hath no other interest or influence in justification than the hour of the day when or the place wherein a minister preacheth hath into his preaching Shall we have so meane low an account of the ordinances appointments of God in reference to spiritual ends Seing the Lord hath appointed Faith in order to Justification we must not look upon it as a causa fatua or as a meer circumstance but as having some kindly influence in the effect by vertue of the appointment of God such a connexion therewith that it no sooner existeth but as soon justification followeth Faith then can not be called a meer causa sine qua non Historical faith several other antecedents may be a conditio or causa sine qua non for no man of age can be justified without it yet we may not say that we justified by it as by saving faith the same may be said of Conviction Sense of sin of some measure at least of legal Repentance and of desire of Pardon of Peace which yet may be and oft are without justification And it may also seem strange how this causa sine qua non can be called a potestative condition or how that which is said to be a proper Potestative Condition ex cujus praestatione constituitur jus actuale ad beneficium can be called a meer conditio or causa sine qua non seing it hath such a considerable moral influence in the effect But saith Mr. Baxter against Mr. Blake § 27 faith cannot justifie both as a Condition as an Instrument of Iustification for either of them importeth the proximam causalem rationem of faith as to the effect it is utterly inconsistent with its nature to have two such different neerest causal interests Ans. When we speak of Faiths justifying as an Instrument we consider the physical or quasi physical way of its operation and denote only its kindly acting on Jesus Christ and on his Righteousness which it layeth hold on applyeth apprehendeth putteth on And when we say it justifieth as a condition we consider it as appointed of God unto that end as placed by Him in that state relation unto justification which now it hath And either of these can be called the proxima ratio causalis of Faith according to its different consideration if justification meaning not God's act only but the complex relative change be considered in genere Physico or quasi physico then the neerest causal interest of faith is its instrumentality but if it be considered in genere morali or legali then its neerest causal interest is that it is a condition As when a rich man bestoweth a purse of gold on a beggar requireth that he in order to the possessing of it streatch forth his hand take it considering this act of enriching him in genere physico his hand acteth herein as an Instrument apprehending the purse taking it to himself considering this in genere legali or morali the streatching forth of his hand and apprehending the purse is a condition for so the donor hath determined to give the riches after such a manner methode for his own ends according to his good pleasure Thus we see how faith can in its way produce one the same effect of justification both as an Instrument and as a Condition taking these termes in a large sense according to the matter in hand Mr. Baxter saith Confess p. 89. he denieth that Faith is an Instrument of Iustification because he dar not give so much of Christ's honour to man or any act of mans as to be an efficient cause of pardoning himself Ans. And he