imputed righteousness but they are ready to make an ill use of it by taking from thence an occasion to entertain low and disparaging thoughts of an inward real righteousness I have too good reason to suspect this So that to deal freely with you I think it would be well if it were never used except when there is an opportunity of also explaining it Philal. What you say is considerable but is it not a Scripture-phrase And I have heard you say that you could wish that points of Faith were used to be expressed as they are in Scripture Theoph. It would ordinarily be to very good purpose if they were and therefore these Divines preaching the Doctrine of Remission of sins through the bloud of Christ do preach all that is true of the Doctrine of Christs imputed righteousness in Scripture-language For as a Learned Divine saith If you prescind it from remission of sins through the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross this phrase of Imputative righteousness hath no signification at all and that therefore there is no damage done to our Religion if it be not accounted a distinct Article from the remission of sins in the bloud of Christ. For it cannot afford any true and useful sence distinct therefrom nay I may say any that is not very mischievous and dangerous and such as tends to that loathsome and pestilential errour of Antinomianism Thus far he But take notice moreover that this expression Christs imputed righteousness or the imputation of Christs righteousness is not to be found in all the Bible Nor in any of the places where we finde the word imputed relating to righteousness is the righteousness of Christ at all to be understood but onely an effectual Faith which is the very same with inherent righteousness which as I said is that Moral righteousness onely that those Preachers may be justly charged with altogether insisting upon Phil. I wish we had time before we go farther to consider those places Theoph. There are but two Chapters in all the New Testament where we finde the word imputed mentioned as relating to righteousness One is the Fourth to the Romans and the other the Second of S. Iames. In the Fourth to the Romans we have it four or five times and it is most evident that there still it is to be interpreted as I said For the Apostles defigne in that Chapter is to prove against the Jews that the observance of the Mosaical Rites whereof Circumcision was the chief is not necessary to mens justification or acceptance with God and this he proves by the instance of Abraham who was accepted and also very high in the divine favour even while he was in Uncircumcision Now in several verses his Faith which we know was not idle but very operative is said to be imputed unto him for righteousness in his uncircumcised estate i. e. it was of the same account with God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was reckoned as in two verses it is there translated or it was valued by God at as high a rate as if it were complete righteousness And in like manner the Apostle assureth the Romans two or three several times that all that believe in Christ whereby we are to understand such a Faith as Abrahams was their Faith shall also be imputed for righteousness to them without the addition of the works of the Law as his was to him And then we have the phrase again Iames 2. 23. But there is onely a repetition of the same that S. Paul had said concerning Abraham viz. that he believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousness which is a quotation out of Genesis 15. 6. Now this place of S. Iames will farther explicate that of S. Paul S. Iames saith vers 21. that Abraham was justified by works that is as appears by the next verse an obediential Faith or Faith expressing and exerting it self by good works And then it followeth Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousness Nothing can be plainer than that this is the Apostle's meaning This working faith of Abraham was accounted or accepted by God for righteousness For as it was the designe of S. Paul in the forementioned Chapter to prove against the Jews or Judaizing Christians that Justification was to be had without the meer external works of the Mosaical dispensation and that these could have no influence into it so is it S. Iames's in this Chapter to prove it is like against the Gnosticks who were Ranting Antinomians the absolute necessity of new obedience in order to mens being received into Gods favour and that justifying faith must be productive of good works Now as S. Paul proved what he designed by shewing that Abraham was justified by faith without the works of the Law so S. Iames proveth his designe by shewing that the faith Abraham was justified by was such as discovered it self by obedience to Gods commands and instanceth in the highest act of obedience too viz. his offering Isaac upon the Altar Philal. All this is as clear as can be But Theophilus is that place of S. Paul Philippians 3. 9. to be understood of inherent righteousness where he saith that he chiefly desires to be found in Christ not having his own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith Theoph. There can be no other there intended by this later righteousness For we learn by the preceding verses that by his own righteousness which is of the Law he meant that which consisted in the observance of the Jewish Law which he calleth his own as being that which before his conversion he gloried in or rather as being that which he could obtain by his own natural power it consisting of meerly external performances And it is as evident by the verse following that by the righteousness which is of God by faith which he opposeth to his own and that which is of the Law he means the righteousness of the new creature wrought in him by Gods holy Spirit and is an effect or fruit of believing Christs Gospel For see how he goes on That I may know him and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his sufferings being made conformable unto his death i. e. That I may experimentally know him and the power of his resurrection in raising me up to newness of life and of his death in killing and mortifying all my corrupt affections Well Philalethes considering what hath been said is it not matter of wonder that any but arrant Hypocrites should desire to have more told them than that God is so pleased with the Active and Passive obedience of his Son Jesus as that for his sake he will reward those that accept of him for their Lord and Saviour though they are very weak and imperfect as if they were altogether spotless and sinless persons And is it not every
Nay how then could he marvail as we read he did at their unbelief Philal. But they will tell you that to assent to the truth of the Scriptures from the forementioned motives is no divine Faith Theoph. But I dare tell them that the believing of Divine things is a divine Faith let the motives inducing thereunto be what they will and that it is no unusual thing for the Act to receive its denomination from its Object But with a divine Faith in their sense also we no less than they believe what is contained in the Scriptures true viz. because God that cannot lye hath reveled it but that he hath indeed reveled it the Miracles as was said whereby this is confirmed and the goodness of the Doctrine to which I may adde also the completion of Prophecies as being of no less consideration than the Miracles do assure us And again that such Miracles as are recorded were really wrought for the confirmation of the Gospel and likewise that the Doctrine contained in our Books is that Gospel that was confirmed by them we may be convinced by as undeniable Arguments as any matters of fact men have not seen with their own eyes can be proved by and so undeniable that he must needs be a most unreasonable person that requires better Nay he must resolve if he will be consistent with himself to believe nothing he hath not himself seen I will adde too that whoever he be that is dissatisfied as to this matter he doth undoubtedly believe hundreds of things and thinks he should be unwise in questioning them that have not the quarter part of the evidence that this hath nay I may say not the twentieth part If they please Philalethes to call it a humane faith to believe matters of fact upon the account of Tradition I will not contend with them but tell them plainly that I like it never a jot the worse for being so nor can I understand how any wise man should But yet take notice too that such a degree of faith concerning these matters of fact also as hath a powerful operation upon our lives and souls is imputed by us no less than by them to the grace of God and his Holy Spirit though not as operating in us in an immediate manner as I said ordinarily but in making the means effectual and I hope they will acknowledge this in the best of senses a Divine faith Philal. But they say that onely a moral certainty can result from the evidence that is in the most uninterrupted and universal Tradition and therefore how closely soever you tell us the Spirit of God applieth that evidence this way of yours tends to make men no better than morally certain of the truth of our Religion Theoph. What a fault that is â— our certainty thereof may be perfectly undoubted as moral as it is And I fear not to declare that I do not desire to be more undoubtedly assured that there were such persons as our Saviour and his Apostles that they performed such works and preached such Doctrines as we have on Record and that the Books we call Canonical were written by those whose names they bear than I have cause to be and am that there were such great Conquerors as Alexander and Iulius Caesar which yet lived before our Saviour or that those which pass for Tully's Orations were really for the substance of them at least his which yet are elder than the Gospel but for all that my certainty of these things can be no more than moral yet I do notwithstanding no more doubt of them than I do of those things that are plainly objected to my Senses for I do not at all doubt of them and I should be laugh'd at as an arrant fool if I did but should I deny them I should be thought a mad-man by all wise people And yet let me tell you that we have from Tradition a greater certainty in some respect of most of those particulars than we have of these for it hath been the interest of many that those should be false but so hath it not been of any that these should be so But the greatest enemies of the Christian Religion have not so much as attempted to disprove those nay have taken all for granted except one or two Miracles Philal. I have but a Moral assurance that there is such a City as Rome or Venice or that there were such persons as Queen Elizabeth and King Iames yet I should be a Brute did I more question whether there are such Cities or were such persons than I do whether there be such a place as London or Bristol where I have several times been or whether there are such men as Theophilus and Philalethes Theoph. To be sure so you would Well I wish that those men would shew us a more certain way of conviction concerning this matter of weightiest importance and then see whether we would not with great thanks leave ours for it But I fear me in stead of so doing should we give up our selves to their conduct they would most sadly bewilder us and in stead of setled and unshaken believers make mere Scepticks of us or what is worse Philal. There are others Theophilus that say that the Scripture is sufficiently able to convince men of its Divine authority by the witness it can give to it self or to use their own Metaphorical expression by the resplendency of its own light So that he doth enough in order to his believing it to be Gods Word that doth but acquaint himself with the contents thereof which I think follows from that opinion Theoph. If these understand what they say there is no difference betwixt them and us for the Miracles and Goodness of the Doctrine we prove the Scriptures Authority by we fetch onely out of the Scriptures themselves And therefore supposing we believe the matters of fact therein written we say as they do that we need no Argument to prove them Divine but what is therein included But if their meaning be as by their manner of expressing themselvs one would think it should that there is such a light in Scripture as immediately operates upon mens mindes as proper light doth on the Optick nerves there can be nothing said more inconsiderately For mens understandings cannot discern the truth of things by immediate intuition but onely in a discursive manner that is by such reasons and arguments as perswade to assent And besides if that be true not onely what you concluded from thence is so also viz. that 't is enough in order to our believing it to acquaint our selvs with the contents thereof but likewise that 't is altogether impossible that any man should read the Scriptures and not believe them supposing he be compos mentis and understands what he reads But to convince us that this is not so I fear there are very many sad instances have too good ground for my fears Well Philalethes it
the merciful for they shall obtain mercy To works or sincere obedience Iames 2. 24. A man is justified by works and not by faith onely Where Faith is taken in a more strict sence and Works suppose Faith That is A man is justified by an effectual working faith and not by faith without works And again vers 21. saith he Was not our father Abraham justified by works who yet according to S. Paul was justified by faith But whereas Justification is mostly attributed to faith the reason is because all other graces are vertually therein contained and that is the Principle from whence they are derived Philal. I pray inform me next Theophilus what influence it is that those Preachers tell their people Faith hath upon Justification or how it justifieth Theoph. I should not have forgotten this though you had not minded me in the least of it for it is of as great importance to be spoken to as most of the heads of our past discourse Observe therefore That Faith sometimes signifieth in Scripture the Doctrine of faith or the Gospel so it is to be understood Gal. 3. 23 25. and in several other places But it ordinarily signifieth the vertue or duty of believing and so it is variously expressed as by believing on the Son of God and the record that God gave of his Son 1 Joh. 5. 10. Believing the word or words of Christ Joh. 5. 47. Believing Christ to be the Son of God and the Saviour of the world Joh. 8. 24. Joh. 11. 26 27. Receiving of Christ Joh. 1. 12. All which are to be understood in a practical sence For as the Scriptures scarcely ever call any other the knowledge of God but that which hath the end of knowledge viz. obedience so do they make nothing true believing but that which hath the ends of faith or causeth men to do those things for the sake of which it is required Now as Faith is put for the Doctrine of faith so those Preachers are content it should justifie as an instrument viz. as it containeth the Covenant of grace and holdeth forth pardon to sinners and so it justifieth as the Law condemneth As it signifieth the vertue or duty of faith so it justifieth as it is the condition of the new Covenant wherein forgiveness of sin is offered God the Father is the principally efficient cause of our Justification and so it is said that it is God that justifieth Jesus Christ justifieth as the onely meritorious or procuring cause the Gospel as the instrumental cause and faith therein as the condition without which we cannot be justified and to which that priviledge is assured The new Covenant offereth pardon of sin and eternal life to us upon the condition of believing in Christ So God loved the world that he gave his onely begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life He that believeth shall be saved c. If ye believe not that I am he ye shall die in your sins Philal. This is a very easie account of Faiths justifying Theoph. Nothing seems to me to be more plain as obscure a business as 't is made Philal. But what cannot the wit of men make difficult Theoph. First there is nothing more evident as we said than that the new Covenant is conditional and that God doth not therein promise absolutely pardon of sin and the consequent blessings Philal. The great place that is produced against the conditionality of the Covenant of grace is that which you said you would speak to viz. that quotation out of Ieremiah that we finde in Heb. 10. 8. where God seemeth in his Covenant to promise to do all in order to our eternal happiness and to require nothing of us Theoph. It is in a good hand I pray do you answer that Objection Philal. Were I duller than I am I think I could easily enough apprehend a satisfactory answer to it viz. That a condition is there implied for the meaning of those words I will put my laws into their hearts and write them in their inward parts cannot be I will do all for them they need do nothing at all this would make all the precepts of the Gospel most wretchedly insignificant nor indeed do any assert this but some very monstrously wildebrain'd people nor yet as appears from many other Scriptures can this be the sence I will sanctifie their natures and so cause them to keep my laws without their concurrence in that act but I will afford them my Grace and Spirit whereby they co-operating therewith and not being wilfully wanting to themselvs shall be enabled so to do Or I will do all that reasonable creatures can reasonably expect from Me towards the writing of my laws in their hearts putting them into their inward parts Whatsoever God may do for some persons out of his superabundant grace doubtless this is all that he either here or elsewhere engageth himself to do for any Theoph. This exposition of yours is a very good one most agreeable with the analogie of Faith and fully answers the forementioned Objection But there are very judicious Expositors that are led by the consideration of the verse following thus to interpret this place viz. This is the Covenant that I will make in the times of the Gospel I will in stead of those external and carnal ordinances which the house of Israel hath for a long time been obliged to the observance of give them onely such precepts as are most agreeable to their reason and understandings and such as wherein they may discern essential goodness and by this great expression of my grace to them as also that which is expressed in the 12 verse namely assurance of pardon to all reforming sinners of all past wickednesses whatsoever and all present frailties and weaknesses I shall not onely convince them of their duty but also strongly encline them to the chearful performance of it And then it follows very pertinently to this sence in vers 11. And they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother saying Know the Lord for all shall know me from the least to the greatest i. e. There shall be no need of such pains in teaching men how they must obey the Lord and what they are to do as there was under the Law of Moses which consisted in observations that were onely good because commanded and had no internal goodness in them to commend them to the reason of men and which might cause it to prompt them to them but the precepts now given shall be found written by every man in his own heart so that none need be ignorant of what is enjoyned for the substance of it that will but consult the dictates of their own natures For a confirmation of this sense see Deut. 30. 11 12 13 14 vers Moses having in the later part of vers 10. put the people upon turning to the Lord their
so the Law of perfect obedience now cannot by reason of ours 3. We may sometimes understand any works of what nature soever considered as meritorious causes Could we obey perfectly we cannot merit thereby the pardon of past sins nay had we never sinned we could deserve no reward at our Creators hands our righteousness being not at all profitable to him much less then can the imperfect works of sinners be meritorious 4. Meer external works performed by our own power in our unsanctified state that is such as proceed not from an inward principle of life may in other places be understood But we have no ground ever to understand by works when opposed to Grace or Faith inherent holiness or new obedience to the Gospel-precepts I dare promise an unprejudiced person that reading the several Scriptures where works are so opposed he will be satisfied that they are not any where to be otherwise understood than of one of these four sorts So that as works signifie sincere obedience to Christs Gospel neither I nor those Preachers can account it any scandal to have it said of us that we hold Justification by works nor can we deserve to have it thought that we have one bit the more of a Pope in our bellies upon that account And why any man should be more shie of acknowledging this than S. Iames was who saith in plain terms A man is justified by works and not by faith onely and that Abraham was justified by works I cannot understand Nor need we so mince it as to say that faith justifieth our persons and works our faith for understanding works I say for a working faith our persons if ever they be must be justified by them I would not that Protestants should give such advantage to the sottish Papists as to be shie of using any Scripture-language and by being so to give them occasion to think that we are in the other extreme from them and have a slight opinion of good works And I think it desirable that we would cease to prefer S. Paul's language before S. Iames his and not more interpret S. Iames by S. Paul than S. Paul by S. Iames they being both alike Apostles and their Epistles alike Scripture but that we would be content to interpret them by each other And then I dare say this Controversie would quickly be at an end among us and we should have no adversary to contend with about this point but the Papist onely Philal. I am of your minde Theoph. But Philalethes don't you remember that you set me a method and desired me first to discourse of those our Friends Practices and next of their Opinions Philal. Yes very well Theoph. And you see how well I have observ'd it But the best of it is I told you then that I would not promise you never to confound those two together nor indeed could I have been as good as my word if I had for I could not as I ought discourse of their Preaching and not take in some of their Doctrine Par. II But I will now in a more distinct manner give you an account of their Opinions They may be referred to matters of Doctrine and Discipline As to the former they profess to dissent from none that have been held to be Fundamentals of the Christian Faith either by the Primitive or best Reformed Modern Churches And heartily to subscribe to the 39 Articles of our Church taking that liberty in the interpretation of them that is allowed by the Church her self Though it is most reasonable to presume that she requires Subscription to them as to an Instrument of Peace onely Philal. So the late most Reverend and Learned Archbishop of Armagh several times expresseth the sence of the Church of England as to her requiring Subscription to those Articles The Church of England saith he in his Schism Guarded p. 396. doth not define any of these Questions as necessary to be believed either necessitate medii or necessitate praecepti which is much less but onely bindeth her sons for peace sake not to oppose them And pag. 150. he doth farther thus express himself We do not suffer any man to reject the 39 Articles of the Church of England at his pleasure yet neither do we look upon them as essentials of Saving Faith or Legacies of Christ and his Apostles but in a mean as pious opinions fitted for the preservation of unity neither do we oblige any man to believe them but onely not contradict them Theoph. I thank you Philalethes for these citations out of so excellent an Author which are no small confirmation of the truth of that assertion of mine which did occasion them But to go on Those opinions in Doctrinals that those Divines look upon themselvs as most obliged to manifest their disapprobation of and to confute are such as either directly or in their evident consequences tend to beget in mens mindes unworthy thoughts of God and unlovely notions of his nature or to encourage profaneness or discourage from diligence and industry in the ways of holiness as by what hath been said you have in part understood Philal. 'T is strange to me Theophilus that any that understandingly believe the being of God should entertain an unlovely notion of his nature for not to have the most lovely is to deprive him of his very Godhead He must needs be as good as good can be and have all perfections attracting love concentred in him in the highest degree possible He must be infinitely merciful of perfectly unspotted righteousness purity and holiness which I esteem as no less lovely qualifications than that of mercy or he cannot be God Nay no man I should think that is not a very Atheist can doubt but that all the amiable qualities that we see in good men are but so many effluviums if I may so call them or emanations from those that are in God and therefore must needs be in an unconceivably greater measure in him where they are originally than in them where they are but derivatively We learn from very Heathens that such qualities are irradiations sliding into mens souls from God and that they proceed from a divine afflatus who also tell us that God is not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the best as well as chiefest and most supreme being And they give a most lovely description of Gods essence and make him you know to be no less just and gracious than wise and powerful as I need not tell you may be shewn in a world of instances But that any Christian should be able to form to himself an unlovely idaea and conception of God is to me matter of the greatest astonishment he being so excellently represented in the New and also in the Old Testament In the New we finde his definition to be Love it self and that the way to be his lively images and like to him is not
you so I must confess I can never think of this Mischief but I am apt to be much moved and to say the truth I give my self leave to be angry upon such accounts I wish that no much slighter occasions could ever make me so and then of all my sins I should least bewail that of Passion Well Philalethes I am sure that our doctrine is a mighty incentive to holiness and the other a no less obstacle as many as there are whose true goodness doth antidote them against the poison of it And this is the great Test and Standard whereby I examine points of Controversie I consider which of the opposites tends most to the advancement of real holiness which I have more than once had occasion to tell you is the great designe of the Christian Religion and that I think my self bound to prefer which I finde doth this but that which apparently tends to make men careless in their prosecutions of it I account my self obliged to reject as false as great shews as it may have of probability Nor is it any thing in the world but the clear sense I have that this doctrine doth so as also that it with its unavoidable consequents shamefully misrepresents our blessed Creator and Redeemer that makes me oppose it as I sometimes do and conclude it to be erroneous Philal. But you likewise reject it because it contradicts as was said such an innumerable company of Scriptures Theoph. The forementioned considerations make me interpret those few Scriptures that seem to make for it by these many and not these many by those few Philal. I believe this doctrine would quickly be exploded by all good men if they could once be perswaded to think that the Ninth to the Romans is capable of another Exposition than that which is commonly given to it For I know no other Scriptures urged for it but may be answered with ease enough Theoph. Though I will not say that it is easie to give the true sense of every verse in that Chapter any more than it is in many others of S. Paul's Epistles whose style is often the most obscure I ever read the connexions in many places being not to be found without extreme difficulty which is occasioned I think chiefly by his many tacite Answers to Objections and Questions made to him by those to whom he wrote which we are unacquainted with as also having a very curt and short way of expressing himself observing very much in the Greek Tongue the Hebrew way of speaking and besides making so many excursions as he doth and very long Parentheses upon which accounts if not more no Apostle hath been so misunderstood as he and if you observe it you shall finde that they are S. Paul's Epistles out of which almost all our wilde opinions have principally had their original through the ignorance of men or what is worse The Apostle S. Peter observeth that even in his days when they were much more easily intelligible than now they are there were some things in them hard to be understood which those that were unlearned and unstable wrested as they did the other Scriptures also to their own destruction I say therefore though it may not be easie to give the true sence of every verse in that Ninth to the Romans yet I count it far less difficult to vindicate it from patronizing Absolute Reprobation than to prove it doth so Philal. If it be not too great a trouble I could wish that you would run it over with a brief Paraphrase Theoph. That I need not do nor above half that Chapter there being but about so much of it that signifieth any thing towards the countenancing of that opinion And so far I will comply with your desire The Apostle having in the five first verses expressed his great sorrow for his Country-men the Jews in that by their killing the Messiah and most obstinate persisting in unbelief they had provoked God to resolve upon the casting off and rejecting their Nation in general that is to put them into the same circumstances with the rest of the world and in some respects into worse viz to deprive them of their good land and even to cause them to cease to be a Nation or Body Politick but to be dispersed here and there up and down the world and therefore necessarily deprived of the extraordinary advantages for their souls they had an enjoyment of which are there summed up together with not a few temporal ones they having been a people owned by God above all other and his most special Favourites I say having done this in the five first verses it followeth In the 6. Not as though the Word of God had taken none effect for they are not all Israel that are of Israel In which words he answers an Objection they might make against the possibility of Gods rejecting them viz. If this be so how can the promise of God to Abraham concerning his seed be performed And he replieth They are not all Israel that are of Israel i. e. God hath reserved to himself a liberty of determining at several times according to his pleasure who shall be esteemed that seed of Abraham to whom the promise belongeth and therefore he may restrain it to those that were never the seed of his loyns but of his faith onely And he sheweth next that this liberty God did use immediately after the promise for saith he in V. 7. Neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all children but in Isaac shall thy seed be called i. e. Those which came from Abrahams loyns were not all accounted those sons of Abraham that should have a share in the promise but those onely which he should have by Isaac And he saith in V. 8. That is they which are the children of the flesh these are not the children of God but the children of the promise are accounted for the seed i. e. They that descended from Abraham by carnal generation were not all heirs of the promised Blessing but onely those children he had by vertue of the promise were accounted for the seed that should so be Then it followeth V. 9. For this is the word of promise At this time will I come and Sarah shall have a son i. e. The birth of Isaac was a special effect of Gods promise he being miraculously born of a naturally-barren woman and according to the ordinary course of nature past childbearing had she been never so fruitful and his father being a very old man Then saith he V. 10 11 12. And not onely this but when Rebecca also had conceived by one even by our father Isaac for the children being yet unborn nor having done good or evil that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of works but of him that calleth it was said unto her The elder shall serve the younger i. e. Neither did God at one time onely declare that he reserved to himself