proportion betwixt it and the reward 2 But in a larger fence as Promise is an Obligation and the thing promised is called Debt so the performers of the Condition are called Worthy and their performance Merit Though properly it is all of Grace and not of Debt 1 Rom. 4. 4 10. 5. 15 16 17. Hose 14. 4. Mat. 10. 8. Rom. 3. 24. 8 32. 1 Cor. 2. 12. Rev. 21. 6. 22. 18. Rom. 11. 6. Gal. 5. 4. Eph. 2. 5 7 8. Gen. 32. 10. 2 Mat. 10. 11 12 13 37. 22 8. Luk. 20. 35. 21. 36. 2 Thes. 1. 5. 11. Rev. 3. 4 c. EXPLICATION IN the strictest sence he is said to Merit who performeth somewhat of that worth in it self to another which bindeth that other in strict justice to requite him This work must not be due and so the performer not under the absolute soveraignty of another for else he is not in a capacity of thus Meriting It is naturall Justice which here bindeth to Reward All that we can merit at the hands of Gods naturall Justice is but these two things 1. The escape of punishment in that respect or consideration wherein our actions are not sinfull or the not punishing of us in a greater degree then sin deserves Though indeed it is questionable whether we are capable of suffering more 2. Our actions thus deserve the honour of acknowledgment of that good which is in them yea though the evil be more then the good As a merciful Thief that gives a poor man half his mony again when he hath robbed him as he deserveth a less degree of punishment so that good which was in his action deserveth an answerable acknowledgment and praise though he dye for the fact But this is a poor kinde of meriting and little to the honour or benefit of the party And is more properly called a less desert of punishment then a desert of reward 2. The second kind of Merit is that whereby a Governor for the promoting of the ends of Government is obliged to reward the Obedience of the Governed That when Disobedience is grown common the Obedience may be encouraged and a difference made Among men even Justice bindeth to such reward at least to afford the obedience the benefit of protection and freedom though he do no more then his duty But that is because no man hath an absolute soveraignty de jure over his subjects as God hath but is indebted to his subjects as well as they are to him If our obedience were perfect in respect of the Law of Works yet all the Obligation that would lie upon God to reward us any further then the foresaid forbearing to punish us and acknowledging our obedience would be but his own wisdom as he discerneth such a Reward would tend to the well-governing of the World working morally with voluntary agents agreeable to their natures And when we had done all we must say we are unprofitable servants we have done nothing but what was our duty Therefore this Obligation to reward from the wisdom of God as it is in his own brest known to himself alone so is it drawn from himself and not properly from the worth of our Works and therefore this is improperly called Merit 3. The third kinde of Meriting is sufficiently explained in the Position where the Obligation to reward is Gods ordinate Justice and the truth of his Promise and the worthiness lieth in our performance of the Conditions on our part This is improperly called Merit This kinde of Meriting is no diminution to the greatness or freeness of the gift or reward because it was a free and gracious Act of God to make our performance capable of that title and to engage himself in the foresaid promise to us and not for any gain that he expected by us or that our performance can bring him THESIS XXVII 1 AS it was possible for Adam to have fulfilled the Law of Works by that power which he received by nature 2 So is it possible for us to perform the Conditions of the new Covenant by the 3 Power which we receive from the Grace of Christ. EXPLICATION 1 THat it may be possible which is not future A thing is termed possible when there is nothing in the nature of the thing it self which may so hinder its production as to necessitate its non-futurity Though from extrinsecall Reasons the same non-futurity may be certain and in some respect necessary And all things considered the futurity of it may be termed impossible yet the thing it self be possible So it was possible for Adam to have stood And so if you should take the word possible absolutely and abstracted from the consideration of the strength of the Actor even the Commands of the Law are yet possible to be fulfilled But such a use of the word is here improper it being ordinarily spoken with relation to the strength of the Agent 2 But in the relative sence the Conditions of the new Covenant are possible to them that have the assistance of grace I intend not here to enter upon an Explication of the nature of that Grace which is necessary to this performance my purpose being chiefly to open those things wherein the relative change of our estates doth consist rather then the reall Whether then this Grace be Physicall or Morall Whether there be a Morall Suasion of the Spirit distinct from the Suasion of the Word and other outward means Whether that which is commonly called the Work of Conscience be also from such an internall suasory work of the Spirit How far this Grace is resistible Or whether all have sufficient Grace to beleeve either given or internally offered with multitudes of such questions I shall here pass by Referring you to those many Volumes that have already handled them All that I shall say of this shall be when I come to open the Nature of Faith See Parkers Theses before mentioned THESIS XXVIII THe Precepts of the Covenants as meer Precepts must be distinguished from the same Precepts considered as Conditions upon performance whereof we must live or dye for non performance THESIS XXIX AS all Precepts are delivered upon Covenant-terms or as belonging to one of the Covenants and not independently So have the same Precepts various ends and uses according to the tenor and ends of the distinct Covenants to which they do belong EXPLICATION THerefore it is one thing to ask whether the Covenant of Works be abolished and another thing whether the Morall Law be abolished Yet that no one Precept of either Morall or Ceremoniall Law was delivered without reference to one of the Covenants is very evident For if the breach of that Command be a sin and to be punished then either according to the rigorous threatening of the old Covenant or according to the way and justice of the new For the Law as it was delivered by Moses may be reduced in several respects to each of these Covenants and
case now the non-payment of the pepper corn is a breach of both Leases Of the old because though he had forfeited his title to the benefits of it yet he could not disanull the duty of it which was obedience during his life especially when the penalty was not fully executed on him but he was permitted still to enjoy some of the benefits So that as it is an act of disobedience in generall his non-payment is a further forfeiture of his old Lease But as it is the non-payment of a pepper-corn required of him in stead of his former Rent so it is a breach of his new Lease only Even so is Unbelief a violation of both Covenants THESIS XXXI THe Gospell doth establish and not repeall the Morall Law and so is perfect obedience commanded and every sin forbidden now as exactly as under the Covenant of Works But this is but an adjunct of the new Covenant and not a proper part of it Neither is it on the same terms or to the same ends as in the first Covenant EXPLICATION THat the Morall Law is yet in force I will not stand to prove because so many have written of it already See Mr. Anthony Burgesses Lectures But to what ends and in what sence the Gospell continueth that Law and commandeth perfect obedience thereto is a Question not very easie 1. Whether Christ did first repeall that Law and then re-establish it to other ends So some think 2. Or whether he hath at all made the Morall Law to be the preceptive part of the new Covenant And so whether the new Covenant do at all command us perfect obedience or only sincere 3. Or whether the Morall Law be continued only as the precepts of the old Covenant and so used by the new Covenant meerly for a directive Rule To the first I answer 1. That it is not repealed at all I have proved already even concerning the Covenant of Works it self and others enough have proved at large of the Morall Law 2. Yet that Christ useth it to other ends for the advantage of his Kingdom I grant To the other second Question I answer 1. That the Morall Law as it is the perceptive part of the Covenant of works is but delivered over into the hands of Christ and so continued in the sence before expressed seems plain to me 2. That the same Morall Law doth therefore so continue to command even believers and that the perfect obeying of it is therefore their duty and the not obeying their sin deserving the death threatened in that Covenant 3. That Jesus Christ hath further made use of the same Morall Law for a direction to his Subjects whereby they may know his Will That whereas your sincere subjection and obedience to Christ is part of the condition of the new Covenant that we may know what his Will is which we must endeavour to obey and what Rule our actions must be sincerely fitted to and guided by he hath therefore left us this Morall Law as part of this direction having added a more particular enumeration of some duties in his Gospel That as when the old Covenant said Thou shalt obey perfectly the Morall Law did Partly tell them wherein they should obey So when the new Covenant saith Thou shalt obey sincerely the Morall Law doth tell us wherein or what we must endeavour to do 4. But that the Morall Law without respect to either Covenant should command us perfect obedience or that Christ as the Mediator of the new Covenant should command us not only sincere but also perfect obedience to the Morall Law and so hath made it a proper part of his Gospel not only as a Directory and Instruction but also as a Command I am not yet convinced though I will not contend with any that think otherwise my Reason is because I know not to what end Christ should command us that obedience which he never doth enable any man in this life to perform If it were to convince us of our disability and sin that is the work of the Law and the continuing of it upon the old terms as is before explained is sufficient to that But I judge this Question to be of greater difficult then moment THESIS XXXII IF there be any particular sins against the new Covenant which are not also against the old or if any sins be considerable in any of their respects as against the Gospel only then Christs death was not to satisfie for any such sins so considered For where no death is threatened there none is explicitely due nor should be executed and where it is not so due to the sinner nor should have been executed on him there it could not be required of Christ nor executed on him But the Gospel threateneth not death to any sin but final unbelief and rebellion and for that Christ never dyed as I shall shew anon therefore Christ died not for any sin as against the Gospell nor suffered that which is no where threatened EXPLICATION A Sin may be said to be against the Gospel 1. As Christ and his Gospel are the object of it 2. Or as it breaketh the conditions of the Gospel In the latter sence only I here take it To prove the point in hand there needs no more then the Argument mentioned For to all that unbelief and other sins of the godly which are forgiven the Gospel doth no where threaten death and therefore Christ could not bear it as to satisfie the Gospel-threatening Though I confess I have been long in this point of another judgment while I considered not the Tenor of the Covenants distinctly some further proof you shall have in the next conclusion Read Heb. 9. 15. THESIS XXXIII AS the Active Obedience of Christ was not the Righteousness of the second Covenant or the performing of it Conditions but of the first properly called a Legall Righteousness so also his Passive Obedience and Merit was only to satisfie for the violation of the Covenant of Works but not at all for the violation of the Covenâ—nt of Grace for that there is no satisfaction made and there remaineth no sacrifice EXPLICATION THat Christ did not fulfill the conditions of the new Covenant for us I have proved already That he hath not satisfied for its violation I think to the considerate will need no proof If you think otherwise consider 1. Christ is said to be made under the Law to have born the curse of the Law to have freed us from the curse of it but no where is this affirmed of him in respect of the Gospel 2. There be terms by him propounded upon which men must partake of the benefits of his Satisfaction but these terms are onely conditions of the new Covenant therefore he never satisfied for the non-performance of those conditions 3. If he did upon what conditions is that satisfaction enjoyed by us 4. But the Question is out of doubt because that every man that performeth not the
Law 2. The remote superiour Rule which is the good pleasure and will of the Law-maker 2. The ends which may denominate our righteousnesse more excellent are 1 The glory of Gods justice and mercy 2. The glory of the Mediatours love and the setting up of his kingdom 3 And the good of the creature Or rather all these in one Now these things thus standing I answer thus 1 I acknowledge that the Law made for mankinde doth primarily require obedience and but secondarily suffering and upon supposition of disobedience 2. But you must distinguish betwixt what the law requireth of us and what of the Mediatour the law to the creature and the law to the Mediatour are in severall things different The will of his Father which he came to doe consisted in many things which were never required of us such are all the works proper to the office of Mediatourship Now though the Law required of us meer creatures primarily Obedience active Yet that which was principally imposed upon the Mediatour and undertaken by him was to satisfie for our disobedience And so the principall part of his works was passive obedience and that in him was as excellent or more then Active obedience though in us it would not have been so because the law did not require it of us in the first place as it did of Christ. 3. If you call that most excellent which is best pleasing to God the Law-maker then certainly the satisfaction of Christ did please him better then Adams perseverance in innocencie would have done This needeth no proof but the consideration of the event 4. And for the ends of righteousnesse let us consider them distinctly and see whether Christs satisfaction do not attain them all more eminently and fully then Adams perseverance would have done 1. The glory of Gods justice would not have been manifested so if Adam had stood as it was by Christs sufferings 2 Nor the glory of his mercy and free grace 3 Nor the Mediatours love 4 Nor would the Kingdom of the Mediatour have been set up nor his honour so advanced 5. Nor the saints advanced to so high a dignity and happinesse as now they are and shall be by Christ. So that in what respect is our righteousnesse lesse excellent or who is the looser Not the Father Not the Mediatour All the question is of our selves But that is onely in point of our honour It is acknowledged that to the creature it would have been more honourable to have kept his innocency then to have his disobedience satisfied for by another But here consider these things 1 Gods honour is to be preferred to ours 2 And the Mediatours advancement before our advancement 3 It was the very design of God in the Gospell way of our salvation to take down our honour that the creature might not glory in it self but all might be acknowledged to free grace And shall we think it a wrong if we have not a righteousnesse as honourable to our selves as that which we lost 4 Our happinesse will be greater though our honour will be lesse For we shall have a far greater glory And that is better then meer honour 5 Yea we shall have more honour then we lost A reall honour of being the sons of God and members of Christ and heirs of glory And this is greater then the honour of our perseverance would have been Onely this being all freely given redoundeth to the giver but still the reall honour and happinesse we enjoy therefore is it the everlasting work of Saints to praise the Lamb who hath redeemed them out of aâ—l nations and made them Kings and Priests to God which implyeth an acknowledgement of their former disobedience and misery and so taking dishonour to themselves and yet the greater glory to Christ and happinesse to them 6. Moreover we have now besides the righteousnesse of Christs satisfaction a personall evangelicall righteousnesse consisting in the fulfilling of the conditions of the law of grace So that our little losse of the honour of self-performance you see is in these 6. respects abundantly recompensed So that to our selves a righteousnesse of tisfaction is better then a righteousnes of personall obedience And as it is found in Christ it is also in it self more excellent Yet further that it is not derogatory to Christ doth thus appear 1 He had in himself both sorts of righteousnesse viz. Of obedience to the Precept and of satisfaction to the threatning Though both could not be ours retaining their forms as such because the law requireth but one sort of righteousnes of one person for himself so that we derogate nothing from Christs righteousnesse or perfection 2. Both these sorts in Christ viz. his active and passive as I conceive doe concurre to make up that one sort of righteousnesse necessary for us viz. Or satisfaction to the threatning and so both conjunct are our righteousnesse though not as two sorts of righteousnesse but as one Yet I know that this is somewhat dark and doubtfull because Obedience is a thing commanded and not threatened But yet seeing Christ payed not the Idem but the Tantundem not the very same debt mentioned in the threatning but the value I think therefore that his obedience as such may goe in to his satisfaction 3. I also freely acknowledge that the additionall happinesse which we have by Christ more then we lost in Adam contained in our Adoption Union with Christ and Glorificacation are procured by Christs active obedience as such as well as by his satisfaction in suffering If yet besides all this any will maintain that we fulfilled the precepts of the law in Christ or that his fulfilling of them as such is our righteousnesse let them shew me solidly what neede we have of Christs sufferings and let them answer what is said to the contrary by the formentioned Authors and I shall quickly yeeld To conclude that God accepteth this righteousnesse of satisfaction as being equivalent to that of obedience though obedience be first in the law and the precept the principall part and so that he is as well pleased with us as if we had obeyed may appear from the end nature of satisfactory punishment For the penalty of a perfect just law is supposed to be such that it will make a perfect compensation or satisfaction for all the wrong we have done to the law-maker or the publique so that being paid or suffered we must needs in point of innocency be in statu quo prius I know some object thus If a theef be burnt in the hand and so the law satisfied yet he hath lost his credit and will not be taken or trusted for an honest man Answ. You must distinguish 1. betwixt his breach of mans law and his breach of Gods law 2. Betwixt his actuall fault and his habituall pravity And then you will see that his burning in the hand was for the breach of mans law but the perpetuall infamy is a part of
APHORISMES OF JUSTIFICATION With their Explication annexed Wherein also is opened the nature of the Covenants Satisfaction Righteousnesse Faith Works c. Published especially for the use of the Church of Kederminster in Worcestershire By their unworthy Teacher RI. BAXTER Hebr. 9. 15. And for this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament that by meanes of death for the Redemption of the transgressions under the first Testament they which are called might receive the promise of eternall inheritance HAGUE Printed by Abraham Brown Anno 1655. To the Learned zealous Faithfull Ministers of Jesus Christ Mr. Richard Vines Master of Pembroke-Hall in Cambridge and Mr. Anthony Burges Pastor of Sutton-Cold-field in Warwickshire Members of the Reverend Assembly of Divines my very much valued Friends and Brethren in the work and Patience of the Gospel Most Dear Brethren I Never well understood their meaning who crave Patronage to their Writings from the meere great ones of the times If they need or desire a borrowed honour methinks they quite mistake their way and go for water to the top of Teneriffe which they should seek in the valleys or stillflowing Springs To give them our Writings to instruct them is agreeable to our Office and duty but to submit them to their censures or crave the protection of their Greatnesses and prefix their names as the Signatures of Worth as if Truth did ever the more dwell within where this gilded sign is hang'd without this seemeth to me to be as needlesse as absur'd The self-idolizing sin of Pride is so naturall to all men especially when furthered by dignities and wordly pomp that they are apt enough without a tempter to take themselves for the summum genus in every Predicament as well as their owne A little help wil mount them above their Teachers and a little more above Ordinances but the top of the ambition is to be above God that on them as the Alpha all may depend and to them as the Omega all may ascribe I think it a more needfull work not for our honour but their own safety to make them understand that Princes and Parliaments are Schollers in that Schoole where Christ is the Master and we his Ushers and that at least in respect of our Nuncupative Declarative power we are their Rulers in spirituals whom they are bound to obey Heb. 13. 7. 17. and that all Ministers are Bishops or Overseers in the language of the holy Ghost Act. 20. 28. Phil. 1. 1. c. and not the servants or pleasers of men Gal. 11. 10. They leave us the bare name of their Teachers so that we will teach them nothing but what they have taught us first and leave out the hard sayings which they cannot beare For my part though I have found as much respect from such as most yet have I known very few of the most Religious great ones but if I would deal but half as plainly as my commission and patterns doe require I should quickly turne their respect into indignation If the old round dealing Prophets and Apostles were among us I doubt some pious Gentlemen would take them for sawcy proud pragmatical fellowes and would think their tongues though not their revenues did need a reformation All this is no blemish to Magistracie the Ordinance of God but to humane nature that for the most part can as ill beare a high estate as a mans brains can endure to stand on the pinacle of a steeple Nor is this to blame any due honor to such but to excuse my selfe that I employ not my breath to fill any empty bladder For you who are low and full I suppose the acknowledgement of your worth is lesse dangerous As I am more beholden to Reason and Religion then to Greatnesse so doe I feel them command my esteem and affections most powerfully Your names therefore have I chosen to prefix to this paper 1. As acknowledging you indeed fit censors of my Doctrine having alwayes valued the judgement of Aristotle in Philosophy before Alexanders and thinking your approbation more considerable then all the Lords or Commanders in the Land If you approve I shall be the more confirmed and so will my people for whom I write it who know and honour you If you disallow for I cannot conceit that there is nothing to be disallowed I shall suspect and search againe 2. I desire also hereby to acquaint the world with the reverend esteem I have of you and to shew the contemners of the ministry some examples for their confutation That they who think that England hath not as learned holy experimentall judicious humble heart-piercing Preachers as any other Nation whatsoever may look upon you and confesse their errour That for all the dissentions that have so wasted both Church and State it may appeare in you wee had some that were lovers of peace and if all had been so minded our wounds had bin heal'd That our ignorant yonglings that rush upon the Ministry who may see themselves in that glasse 1. Tim. 3. 6. may consider their distance from such as you and be humbled That those who wonder at the spreading of errors in our people may see in you we had some that taught them better And Alexander did unjustly hang Ephestions Physitian because hee dyed And that our Authors or defenders of Ieroboams worship whose fingers itch to be doing with the Prophets that gain say them may see what manner of men they have to deale with whose worth is sufficient to disgrace the proudest persecutors and make their names hatefull to all generations To whom I commend Sir Walter Rawleighs true observation Hist. of the world par 1. l. 4. c. 3. â— 6. If Antipater upon his conquest had carried all other actions never so mildly yet for killing Demosthenes all that read his eloquent Orations doe condemn him for a bloody Tyrant to this day Such grace and reputation doe the learned Arts finde in all civill Nations that the evill done to a man famous in one of them is able to blemish any action how good soever otherwise it be or honorably carryed To such ends as these have I here prefixed your names and not to interesse you in the dishonour of the imperfections of this slender Tractate Farewell Reverend Brethren and go on to be exemplary in all spirituall excellencies And that the Lord of the Harvest would send forth more such and lengthen and succeed your labours to his Church is the hearty prayer of Your unworthy fellow-servant RI. BAXTER Apr. 7. 1649. To the Reader THe slow progresse of knowledge and the small addition that each age doth make to the foregoing both in common Sciences and Divinity doth seem a wonder to many Among many others these foure are no small impediments to this desirable increase 1. Every ignorant empty braine which usually hath the highest esteem of it selfe hath the liberty of the Presse whereby through the common itch that pride exciteth in men to seeme
or melancholly maketh you not know your own minde or else you do but dissemble in pretending trouble and sad complaints If you be indeed unwilling I have no comfort for you till you are willing but must turn to perswasions to make you willing I should answer The Condition of the Covenant is not the Perfection but the sincerity of Faith or Consent which way goes the prevailing bent or choyce of your will If Christ were before you would you accept him or reject him If you would heartily accept him for your only Lord and Saviour I dare say you are a true Beleever Thus you see the comfortable use of right understanding what justifying faith is and the great danger and inconvenience that followeth the common mistakes in this point THESIS LXX FAith in the largest sence as it comprehendeth all the Condition of the new Covenant may be thus defined It is when a sinner by the Word and Spirit of Christ being throughly convinced of the Righteousness of the Law the truth of its threatening the evill of his own sin and the greatness of his misery hereupon and with all of the Nature and Offices Sufficiency and Excellency of Iesus Christ the Satisfaction he hath made his willingness to save and his free offer to all that will accept him for their Lord and Saviour doth hereupon believe the truth of this Gospell and accept of Christ as his only Lord and Saviour to bring them to God their chiefest good and to present them pardoned and just before him and to bestow upon them a more glorious inheritance and do accordingly rest on him as their Saviour and sincerely though imperfectly obey him as their Lord forgiving others loving his people bearing what sufferings are imposed diligently using his means and Ordinances and confessing and bewailing their sins against him and praying for pardon and all this sincerely and to the end EXPLICATION THis is the Condition of the new Covevenant at large That all this is sometime called Faith as taking its name from the primary principall vitall part is plain hence 1. In that Faith is oft called the Obeying of the Gospell but the Gospell commandeth all this Rom. 10. 16. 1 Pet. 1. 22. 4. 17. 2 Thes. 1. 8. Gal. 3. 1. 5 7. Heb. 5. 9. 2. The fulfilling of the Conditions of the new Covenant is oft called by the name of Faith so opposed to the fulfilling the Conditions of the old Covenant called works But these forementioned are parts of the Condition of the new Covenant and therefore implyed or included in Faith Gal. 3. 12 23 25. Not that Faith is properly taken for its fruits or confounded with them but as I told you before it is named in the stead of the whole Condition all the rest being implyed as reducible to it in some of the respects mentioned under the 62 Position It may be here demanded 1. Why I do make affiance or recombency an immediate product of Faith when it is commonly taken to be the very justifying Act I answer 1. I have proved already that Consent or acceptance is the principall Act and Affiance doth necessarily follow that 2. For the most of my Reasons that Affiance is a following Act and not the principall they are the same with those of Dr Downame against Mr Pemble and in his Treatise of Justification whither therefore I refer you for Satisfaction 2. Quest. Why do I make sincerity and perseverance to be so near kin to Faith as to be in some sence the same and not rather distinct Graces Answ. It is apparent that they are not reall distinct things but the Modi of Faith 1. Sincerity is the verity of it which is convertible with its Being as it is Metaphysicall Verity and with its Vertuous or Gracious Being as it is Morall or Theologicall Sincerity 2. Perseverance or duration of a Being is nothing really distinct from the Being it self Suarez thinks not so much as a Modus THESIS LXXI 1 THe sincere Performance of the summary great Command of the Law To have the Lord only for our God and so to love obey believe and trust him above all is still naturally implyed in the Conditions of the Gospell as of absolute indispensible necessity 2 and in order of nature and of excellency before Faith it self 3 But it is not commanded in the sence and upon the terms as under the first Covenant EXPLICATION 1 THis Command need not be expressed in the Gospell Conditions it is so naturally necessary implied in all As the ultimate End need not be expressed in directions precepts so as â—he meanes because it is still supposed consultatio est tantum de mediis 2 Love to God and taking him for our God and chiefe Good is both in excellency and order of nature before Faith in Christ the Mediator 1. Because the End is thus before the meanes in excellency and intention But God is the ultimate End and Christ as Mediator is but the meanes Ioh. 14. 6. Christ is the way by which men must come to the Father 2. The Son as God-man or Mediator is lesse then the Father and therefore the duties that respect him as their Object must needs be the lesse excellent duties Ioh 14. 13. The glory of the Son is but a means for the glory of the Father Ioh. 14. 28. My Father is greater then I therefore the Love of the Father is greater then the Love to the Son c. So also in point of necessity it hath the naturall precedency as the End hath before the means for the denying of the End doth immediately cashiere and evacuate all means as such He that maketh not God his chief Good can never desire or Accept of Christ as the way and meanes to recover that chief Good The Apostle therefore knew more reason then meerely for its perpetuity why the chiefest Grace is Love 1. Cor. 13. 13. Though yet the work of Justification is laid chiefely upon faith 3 That this Love of God is not commanded in the sence and on the termes as under the Law is evident For 1. The old Covenant would have condemned us for the very imperfection of the due degree of Love But the Gospell accepteth of Sincerity which lyeth in loving God above all or as the chiefe Good 2. The old Covenant would have destroyed us for one omission of a due Act of Love But the Covenant of Grace accepteth of it if a man that never knew God all his life time doe come in at last Yet the sincere performance of it is as necessary now as then THESIS LXXII AS the accepting of Christ for Lord which is the hearts subjection is as Essentiall a part of Iustifying Faith as the Accepting of him for our Saviour So consequently sincere obedience which is the effect of the former hath as much to doe in justifying us before God as Affiance which is the fruit of the later EXPLICATION I Know this will hardly down with
Blessed inherit the Kingdom c. For I was hungry c. So 1 Pet. 1. 17. Who without respect of persons judgeth according to every mans work So 2 Cor. 5. 10. We must all appear before the Iudgment seat of Christ that every one may receive the things done in his body according to that he hath done whether good or bad So Rev. 20. 12. 13. They were judged every man according to his Works Heb. 13. 17. Phil. 4. 17. Mat. 12. 36. c. But this is evident already 2. As it is beyond doubt that Christ will then justifie men according to their Works So that this is not onely to discover the sincerity of their Faith is as evident but that it is also as they are parts of that Evangelicall Righteousness which is the Condition of their Justification 1. The very phrases of the Text import as much Mat. 25. 21 23. Well done good faithfull servant c. Mat. 25. 34 35. For I was hungry c. And in the rest According to their Works Can any more be said of Faith then that we are justified or judged to Life both for it and according to it 2. If Works be not then considered as part of the Condition how then 1. Not as the Righteousness which the Law requireth For so shall no man living be justified in the sight of God Rom. 3. 20. Psa. 143. 2. 2. Not as a meer sign whereby God doth discern mens faith For he seeth it immediately and needeth no sign 3. Not as a meer sign to satisfie the justified person himself For 1. There is no such intimation in the Text. 2. Then it should be no further usefull then men remain doubtfull of their sincerity 3. The godly then know the sincerity of their Faith 4. Neither is the business of that Day to satisfie the doubting about the sincerity of their Faith by Arguments drawn from their former works But to judg and justifie them and so put them out of doubt by the Sentence and by their Glory 4. But the common opinion is That it is to satisfie the condemned World of the sincerity of the Faith of the godly But this cannot stand with the Truth For 1. It is clearly expressed a ground or reason of the Sentence 2. And to the Consolation Justification of the justified and not to the satisfaction or conviction of others onely or chiefly 3. The poor world will have somewhat else to take up their thoughts as the Text sheweth to wit the excusing of the sin for which they are condemned themselves Mat 25. 44 4. It seemeth that Christ doth in the Text call them Righteous in reference to this personall Evangelicall Righteousness mentioned in their Justifying Sentence vers 46. The Righteous into life Eternall 5. If Gods Justice engage him not to forget their work and labour of Love Heb. 6. 10 11 12. If the dead in Christ are blessed because their Works follow them Rev. 14. 13. If in every Nation he that feareth God and worketh Righteousnes be Accepted of him Act. 10. 35. If men shall reap the fruit of well-doing in due time Gal. 6. 7 8 9. If Ministers save themselves in taking heed to themselves and to doctrine 1 Tim. 4. 16. If he that doth Righteousness is righteous 1 Ioh. 3. 7. If whatsoever good thing any man doth the same he shall receive of the Lord Ephes. 6. 8. If hearing and doing be building on a Rock Mat. 7. 24. If the doers of Gods Will be the mothers sisters and brothers of Christ Mat. 12. 50 c. Then the mention of these works at judgment is more then to signifie their sincerity to the condemned world 6. If Christ mentioned these works to convince the world 1. Either it must be his own Testimony of these works that they are sincere evidences of a sincere Faith 2. Or else by the discovery which the works doe make themselves But 1. Christ may testifie of their faith immediately as well 2. Works are no certain signes of Faith to any stander-by who knoweth not whether Works themselves are sincere or not See more under the 76. Position If any say that it is to silence the Accusacion of Satan that these works are mentioned at judgement The same Answer will serve as to the last Besides Scripture giveth us no intimation of any such accusation but onely the managing the Laws Accusation But if he should Accuse us falsely of Hypocrisie as he did Iob It must be onely Gods heart-searthing knowledg of our sincerity that can cleare us Yet do I not deny in all this but that Works are effects of Faith and to the person himself who knoweth their sincerity they may be some Argument of the sincerity of Faith and God will vindicate his peoples Righteousness before all and be admired in them But his Justification primarily respecteth the Law and his own Justice and the Righteousness and Salvation of the Justified and but remotely the beholders Let me conclude with two or three cautionary Quaeries concerning the inconvenience of the contrary doctrine 1 Qu. Doth it not needlesly constrain men to wrest most plain and frequent expressions of Scripture 2 Qu. Doth it not uphold that dangerous pillar of the Antinomian Doctrine that we must not work or perform our duties for Life and Salvation but only from Life and Salvation That we must not make the attaining of Justification or Salvation an end of our Endeavours but obey in thankfulness only because we are saved and justified A doctrine which I have elsewhere confuted and if it were reduced to practise by all that hold it as I hope it is not would undoubtedly damn them For he that seeks not and that striveth not to enter shall never enter Now if good Works or sincere Obedience to Christ our Lord be no part of the Condition of our full Justification and Salvation Who will use them to that end For how it can procure Justification as a means and not by way of Condition I cannot conceive 3 Qu. Whether this doctrine doth not tend to drive Obedience out of the world For if men do once beleeve that it is not so much as a part of the Condition of their Justification will it not much tend to relax their diligence I know meer love and thankfulness should be enough And so it will when all our ends are attained in our Ultimate End then we shall act for these ends no more we shall have nothing to do but to love and joy and praise and be thankfull but that it is not yet Sure as God hath given us the affections of Fear and Desire and Hope and so Care so he would have us use them for the attainment of our great Ends. Therefore he that taketh down but one of all our Motives to Obedience he helps to destroy Obedience it self seeing we have need of every Motive that God hath left us 4 Qu. Doth it not much confirm the world in their soul-cozening Faith
in this Life 2. And Iustification in sentence of the Iudge which is at the last Iudgement 24. Betwixt justifying us against a true Accusation as of breaking the Law Thus Christ justifieth us and here it is that we must plead his Safaction 2. And justifying us against a false Accusation as of not performing the Conditions of the Gospell Here we must plead not guilty and not plead the Satisfaction of Christ. 25. Betwixt the Accusation of the Law from Christ doth justifie believers 2. And the Accusation of the Gospell or new Covenant for not per forming its Conditions at all from which no man can be justified and for which there is no sacrifice 26. Betwixt those Acts which recover us to the state of Relation which we fell from that is Pardon Reconciliation and Iustification 2. And those which advance us to a far higher state that is Adoption and Vnion with Christ. 27. Betwixt our first Possession of Iustification which is upon our contract with Christ or meer Faith 2. And the Confirmation Continuation and Accomplishment of it whose Condition is also sincere Obedience and Perseverance 28. Betwixt the great summary duty of the Gospell to which the rest are reducible which is Faith 2. And the Condition fully expressed in all its parts where of Faith is the Epitome 29. Betwixt the word Faith as it is taken Physically and for some one single Act 2. And as it is taken Morally Politically and Theologically here for the receiving of Christ with the whole soul. 30. Betwixt the accepting of Christ as a Saviour only which is no true Faith nor can justifie 2. And Accepting him for Lord also which is true Iustifying Faith 31. Betwixt the foresaid Receiving of Christ himself in his offices which is the Act that Iustifieth 2. And Receiving his Promises and Benefits a consequent of the former Or betwixt accepting him for Iustification 2. And beleeving that we are justified 32. Betwixt the Metaphysicall Truth of our Faith 2. And the Morall Truth 33. Betwixt the Nature of the Act of Faith which justifieth or its Aptitude for its office which is its receiving Christ 2. And the proper formall Reason of its Iustifying power which is because it is the Condition upon which God will give us Christs Righteousness 34. Betwixt Works of the Law which is perfect Obedience 2. And Works of the Gospell Covenant which is Faith and sincere Obedience to Christ that bought us 35. Betwixt Works of the Gospell used as Works of the Gospell i.e. in subordination to Christ as Conditions of our full Iustification and Salvation by him 2. And Works commanded in the Gospell used a-Works of the Law or to legall ends viz. to make up in whole or in part our proper legall Righteousness and so in opposition to Christs Righteousness or in co-ordination with it In the first sence they are necessary to Salvation In the second Damnable 36. Betwixt receiving Christ and loving him as Redeemer which is the Condition it self 2. And taking the Lord for our God and chief Good and loving him accordingly Which is still implyed in the Covenant as its End and Perfection And so as more excellent then the proper Conditions of the Covenant Glory to God in the highest and on Earth Peace Good-will towards men Luk. 2. 14. Postscript WHereas there is in this Book an intimation of something which I have written of Vniversall Redemption Understand that I am writing indeed a few pages on that subject onely by way of Explication as an Essay for the Reconciling of the great differences in the Church thereabouts But being hindered by continuall sickness and also observing how many lately are set a work on the same subject as Whitfield Stalham Howe Owen and some men of note that I hear are now upon it I shall a while forbear to see if something may come forth which may make my endeavour in this kinde useless and save me the labour Which if it come not to pass you shall shortly have it if God will enable me Farewell AN APPENDIX to the fore-going TREATISE BEING An Answer to the Objections of a Friend concerning some Points therein contained And at his own Desire annexed for the sake of others that may have the same thoughts Zanchius in Philip. 3. 13. What can be more pernicious to a Student yea to a Teacher then to think that he knoweth all things and no knowledge can be wanting in him For being once puft up vvith this false opinion he vvill profit no more The same is much truer in Christian Religion and in the Knovvledge of Christ. Rom. 3. 25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through Faith in his blood for Remission of sins that are past through the forbearance of God READER THe disorder of the Interrogations and Objections which extorted from me this whole Tractate by pieces one after another hath caused me an unfeigned lover of method to give thee such a disorderly immethodicall Miscellany Also the quality of these Objections hath occasioned me to answer many things triviall whilest I know more difficult and weighty points are overlooked these things need no excuse but this information That I was to follow and not to lead and that I write only for those who know less than my self if thou know more thank God and joyn with me for the instruction of the ignorant whose information reformation and salvation and thereby Gods glory is the top of my ambition R. B. AN ANSWER to some Objections and Questions OF One that perused this small TRACTATE before it went to the Press The sum of the Objections is as followeth 1. IT seemeth strange to me that you make the death which the first Covenant did threaten to be only in the everlasting suffering of soul seperated from the body and that the body should de turned to earth and suffer no more but the pains of death and consequently not whole man but only part of him should de damned 2. Though you seem to take in the Active Righteousness of Christ with the Passive into the work of Justification yet it is on such grounds as that you do in the main agree with them who are for the Passive Righteousness alone against the stream of Orthodox Divines 3. I pray you clear to me a little more fully in what sence you mean that no sin but finall unbelief is a breach or violation of the new Covenant and how you can make it good that temporary unbelief and gross sin is no violation of it seeing We Covenant against these 4. Whether it will not follow from this doctrine of yours that the new covenant is never violated by any for the regenerate do never finally and totally renounce Christ and so they violate it not the unregenerate were never truly in covenant and therefore cannot be said to violate the Covenant which they never made 5. How you will make it appear that the new Covenant is not made with Christ only 6.
bring it into subjection lest when he had preached to others himself should be a cast-away 1 Cor. 9. 27. what can be plainer Did not Abraham obey because he looked for a Citie which had foundations Heb. 11. 10. And Moses because he had respect to the recompence of Reward 26. And all that cloud of witnesses obey and suffer that they might attain a better Resurrection 35. and did they not seek a better Countrey that is an heavenlie and therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God for he hath prepared for them a City ver 16. Do not all that confesse themselves strangers on earth plainlie declare that they seek another Countrie ver 13 14. Whosoever therefore shall hereafter tell you that you must not do good to attain salvation or escape damnation as being too mercenarie and slavish for a Sonne of God abhorre his Doctrine though he were an Angel from heaven And if this satisfie you not look to Jesus the Authour and Finisher of your Faith who for the joy that was set before him endured the Crosse despising the shame and is set down at the right hand of God Heb. 12. 12. Rom. 14 9. And as Adam fell to be liker the Devil when he needs would be as God so take heed whither you are falling when you will be better then Jesus Christ. And do I after all this need to answer the Common objections that it is mercenarie and slavish to labour for salvation Must I be put to prove that the Apostles and Christ himself were not mercenarie slaves or that Gods Word hath not prescribed us a slavish task Indeed if we did all for a reward distant from God and for that alone without any conjunction of Filiall love and expected this Reward for the worth of our work then it might be well called Mercenary and slavish But who among us plead for such a working FRom all this you may gather part of the Answer to your next Question why I except against the book called The Marrow of Modern Divinity Because it is guiltie of this hainous Doctrine Yet further let me tell you that I much value the greatest part of that Book and commend the industrie of the Authour and judge him a man of godlinesse and Moderation by his writing And had I thought as meanlie of it as I do of Colyer Sprigs Hobsons and manie such abominable Pamphlets that now fly abroad I should not have thought it worthy the taking so much notice of But because it is otherwise usefull I thought meet to give you warning that you drink not in the evill with the good And especially because the names that so applaud it may be a probable snare to entangle you herein And I conjecture the Authours ingenuity to be such that he will be glad to know his own mistakes and to correct them Otherwise I am unfeignedly tender of depraving or carping at any mans labours Some of these mistaking passages I will shew you briefly As page 174. Quest. Would you not have believers to escâ—ew evill and do good for fear of Hell or for hope of Heaven Ans. No indeed I would not have any beleiver doe the one or the other for so farre as they do so their obedience is but slavish c. To which end he alledgeth Luke 1. 74. 75. But that speaks of Freedome from fear of our Enemies such as Christ forbids in Luke 12. 5. where yet he commandeth the fearing of God And consequently even that fear of enemies is forbidden as they stand in opposition to God and not as his instrnments in subordination Or if it be even a fear of God that is there meant yet it cannot be all fear of him or his displeasure so far as we are in danger of sin or suffering we must fear it and so farre as our assurance is still imperfect a jealousie of our own hearts and a dreadfull reverence of God also are necessary But not the Legall terrours of our former bondage such as arise from the apprehension of sin unpardoned and of God as being our Enemy In the 180 Page he denieth the plain sence of the Text. Mat. 10. 28. In the 155 page he makes this the difference between the two Covenants One saith Do this and Live the other saith Live and do this The one saith Do this for life The other saith Do this from life But I have proved fully that the Gospel also saith Do this for life So in his second part page 190. His great note to know the voice of the Law by is this that when in Scripture there is any morall work commanded to be done either for the eschuing of punishment or upon promise of any reward temporall or eternall or else when any promise is made with the condition of any work to be done which is commanded in the Law there is to be understood the voice of the Law A notorious and dangerous mistake which would make almost all the New Testament and the very Sermons of Christ himself to be nothing but the Law of works I have fully proved before that morall duties as part of our sincere obedience to Christ are part of the condition of our Salvation and for it to be performed And even Faith is a morall duty It is pitty that any Christian should no better know the Law from the Gospel especially one that pretendeth to discover it to others So in the next page 191 he intolerably abuseth the Scripture in affirming that of 2 Thes. 2. 12. 10. to be the voice of the Law and so making Paul a Legall Preacher And as shamefully doth he abuse 1 Cor. 6. 9 10. As if the Apostle when he biddeth them not to be decived were deceiving them himself in telling them that no unrighteous person fornicators adulterers c. shall inherit the Kingdom of God Is this Law Then let me be a Preacher of the Law If Paul be a Legalist I will be one too But these men know not that the Apostle speaketh of those that die such and that these sinnes exclude men the Kingdom as they are Rebellion against Christ their Lord and so a violation of the New Covenant So in part first page 189. He mentioneth a Preacher that said he durst not exhort nor perswade sinners to believe their sinnes were pardoned before he saw their lives reformed for fear they should take more liberty to sin And he censureth that Preacher to be ignorant in the Mystery of faith I confesse I am such an ignorant Preacher my self and therefore shall desire this knowing man to resolve me in a few doubts 1. Where he learned or how he can prove that Justifying Faith is a believing that our sinnes are pardoned when Scripture so often telleth us that we are justified by Faith and sure the Object must go before the Act and therefore that which followeth the Act is not the Object If we must believe that we are pardoned that so we may be pardoned then we must
participation of that and whereby we must escape the condemnation of the Gospell which is Faith as I have opened before 5. If the Apostle should meane otherwise it were as much against your Doctrine as mine For is not Faith a work or act of ours But you will say That though Faith which is a work do justifie yet not as a work but as an instrument I answer 1. To be an actuall apprehension of Christ which you call its instrumentality is to bee a work Therefore if it justifie as it is such an apprehension it justifieth as a work 2. So also say I that subjection and obedience justifie 1. Not as works simply considered 2. Nor as legall works 3. Nor as meritorious works 4. Nor as Good works which God is pleased with 5. But as the conditions to which the free Law-giver hath promised justification and life Nay your Doctrine ascribeth farre more of the work to man then mine for you make justification an effect of your own Faith and your Faith the instrumentall cause of it and so make your selfe your owne justifier And you say your Faith justifieth as it apprehendeth Christ which is the most intrinsecall essentiall consideration of Faith and so Faith hath much of the honour But while I affirm that it justifieth onely as a condition which is an extrinsecall consideration and aliene from its essence or nature I give the glory to him that freely giveth me life and that made so sweet a condition to his Covenant and that enableth me to performe the said condition And thus I have according to my measure of understanding answered your Objections as fully as necessitated brevity would permit And for that question which you propounded about Relaxation Abrogation c. of the Law which you confesse you doe not well understand I refer you to Vossius Defens Grotii de Satisf cap. 27. where among other things hee telleth you that Apud Romanos seu ferenda esset Lex populus rogabatur an ferrivellet seu tollendae rogabatur an tolli eam placeret Hinc rogari lex dicebatur quae ferrebatur ut dicit Vlp. Tit. 1. Regal Eâdemque de causâ abrogari dicebatur cum antiquaretur c. And then he explaineth all those phrases to you out of Vlpian Lex rogatur id est fertur vel abrogatur idest prior lex tollitur vel Derogatur id est pars primae tollitur aut subrogatur id est adjicitur aliquid primae legi aut Obrogatur id est mutatur aliquid ex primâlege And so concludeth that the first Law was not abrogated but relaxed dispensed with and obrogate How farre it was executed I have shewed you in the Treatise But the last task you set me is of all the rest most ungratefull endlesse and in my judgement unnecessary viz. To answer what other men have written against some doctrines which I have here asserted 1. It is a work ungratefull to search into other mens weaknesse and mistakes to handle the truth in a way of contention or to speak in way of derogation of the labours of the learned and godly 2. And should I fall upon a confutation of every man that hath written contrary to any thing in my Book the task would be endlesse and I might stuffe a great deale of paper with words against words and perhaps adde little matter to what is already written which is a work unfit me for to undertake who have so much better work to doe and am like to have so short a time to doe it in 3. And it seemes to me a needlesse task partly because from the cleering and confirmation of the positive truth you may be enabled to answer opposers your selfe 2. The Authors which you mention doe so easily and effectually assault the doctrines mentioned that I should think no judicious man can thereby be staggered But at your request I will briefly consider them particularly The Authors which you refer me to are two D. Maccovius and Mr. Owen The points which they contradict are three 1. That our legall Righteousnesse which we have in Christ consisteth not formally in obedience to the Precept of the first Covenant but onely in satisfaction for our Disobedience This Maccovius opposeth in Colleg. Theol. par 1 Disp. 10. par 4. Disp. 9. 2. That Christ payed not the same debt which was in the first obligation but the value and so the Law was not properly and fully executed but relaxed This you say Mr. Owen confuteth in Grotius in his late Treatise of Vniversall Redemption lib. 3 cap. 7. p. 140. 3. That no man is actually and absolutely justified no not so much as in point of Right either from eternity or upon the meere payment of the bebt by Christ till themselves doe beleeve This you say is confuted by both of them Maccov par 3. Disp. 16. par 1. Disp. 17. Et owen ubi supra If mens names did not more take with you then their Arguments you might have spared me this labour But briefly to the first of these I answer 1. Most passages in Maccovius doe affirm but that Christ obeyed for us as well as suffered for us and who denyeth that 2. Of those passages which yet goe further there is few of them that say any more then this that Christs active Righteousnesse did merit for us that life and glory which is given by the New Covenant more then we lost by breaking the Old But this is nothing to our Question which is onely about justification For I have cleared to you before that Justification is properly and strictly taken one of those acts whereby we are recovered from the condemnation of the Law and set in statu quo prius and not one of those acts which give us that additionall glory which is Adoption Union Glorification 3. Those few Arguments which yet doe drive higher then this are so fully answered already by Mr. Gataker against Lucius Gomarrus c. and Mr. Goodwin notwithstanding Mr. Roboroughs Answer and divers others that I am resolved not to lose so much time and labour as to doe that which is better done already then can be expected from me 4. Onely one argument more then usuall I finde in part 1 Disput. 10. And which I confesse deserveth a speciall consideration And that is this If Christ onely suffered for us then the righteousnesse of Adam had hee continued in innocency would have been more excellent then the righteousnesse of Christ For the law requireth obedience principally and suffering but per accidens But the consequence is false because else Christ hath not set us in as good a state as we fell from To this I answer 1. This righteousnesse may be termed excellent in severall respects 1 In reference to its Rule 2. Or in reference to its Ends. The 1. denominateth it Good in it self The second denominateth it good to us Now the Rules to measure it by are two 1. The neerest inferiour Rule which is the