received but by degrees and upon certain terms And with pardon a free gift of Life Spiritual and Eternal and so of the Spirit and Communion with God on the said conditions 15. The Promise Gen. 3. 15. is plain as to Mercy and Salvation and darker as to the promised seed and his mediation and dark as to the Condition on man's part But by Sacrifices c. it is like that Adam had it more explained to him than those short words make it to us But this is clear that by this new Covenant God becometh man's Merciful Redeemer and Pardoner and Ruler on terms of Grace in order to recovery and Salvation And that man was to Believe in God as such and accorâ—ingly to devote himself in Covenant to him 16. This Law or Covenant was made with all Mankind in Adam For all were in his loins and God hath given us no more proof that the first Covenant was made with Adam as the Father of Mankind than that the second was so made 17. Gods dealings with Mankind are a certain confirmation of this truth and an exposition and promulgation of this Law and Covenant of Grace as extended to all Mankind For God doth not use them according to the rigor of the violated Law of Innocency but giveth them abundant merâ—ies and means which tend to their Repentance and recovery and obligeth them all to Believe that he is merciful and their case is not desperate and to Repent and use his means and mercies in order to their return to God and their Salvation There are no Nations in the world that even to this day are not under such mercies means and obâ—â—gations and therefore none that are left as the Devils in Despair under the unremedyed Covenant of Innocency alone 18. But though the Law of Grace made to Adam be it which the world was then put under and to be Ruled by and the tenor of it extended to all Mankind yet those that would partake of the Blessingâ— of it were to consent to it as Covenanters with God and to Belieâ—â— in and obey God their Redeemer pardoner and restorer in the thankful sence of all this mercy which because the ungodly did not they and their posterity fell under a double guilt and curse both as violateâ—â—s of the Law of Innocency and of Grace and therefore incurred a specâ—â—â— penalty Cain and his off-spring being first thrust out further from the believing obedient people of God and at last the whole world except eight persons perishing in the deluge 19. Noah with his house being saved to be the Root of all Mankind that should succeed him God renewed with him and Mankind in him the same Law or Covenant of Grace which he had made with us in Adam with some additionals To shew us that though the wicked and their seed had forfeited the benefits yet the Covenant was not altered but stood in its first sence in force to all and would pardon and save all true Consenters 20. C ham for his transgression brought a new Curse on himself and his posterity besides the meer fruit of Adam's Sin So that thougâ— God altered not his Law of Grace yet they became a cursed Generation 21. By multiplyed transgressions the Sons of men did still more degenerate and revolt from God till Nimrod and others by wickedneâ—â— and presumptions brought down the new and grievous penalty of confounded tongues the great hinderance of the propagation of the truth to thâ—â— day And at last the most fell to odious Idolatry not knowing the true God but given up to sensuality and wickedness 22. Abraham being faithful and escaping the Idolatry and wickednest of the world was eminently favoured and beloved of God and beâ—â—â—ving Abraham's Promise and trusting God in his promises and in the great tryal of his Sâ—â— is honoured with the name of the Father of the Faithful And God renewed with him the Covenant of Grace which he had made to all men in Adam and Noah with special application to his comfort and addedâ— special peculiar Promise to him that his Seed should be a holy Nation chosen out of all the world to God and that of him the Messiah should come of both which Promises the common and the special Circumcision was a Seal 23. Yet this was no repealing of the Law of Grace which had been made to all the world nor was it an excommunicating or rejecting of all others or a confining of Gods Grace and Church to him and his posterity alone but only an exalting them above all others in these peculiar dignities and priviledges For at that time holy Sem was living and long after who in all likelyhood was a King and its like that the Posterity of him and Japhet were not all faln away from God and Melcâ—â—zedek was such a King of Righteousness and Peace and Priest of the most high God as was a great type of Christ's own Heavenly Priesthood and therefore it 's like had some Subjects that feared and worshipped God The Scripture giving us the History of the Jewish Nation and affairs â—â— the principal and of the rest of the world but a little on the by we cannot know by it the full state of all other Nations nor what Religion and Worshippers of God were there But the History of Job and his Friends the probability that all the Children of Ismael of Keturah of Esau forsook not God for they were circumcised and therefore were Covenanters with the Case of Nineve after and Abraham's thoughts that even a Sodom had at least had fifty righteous persons in it c. assureth us that the Jews were not God's only Church but a peculiar people and a Nation holy above the rest And as the Covenant of Grace was still the Governing Law to the rest of the world though most rejected it by rebellion so it is not to be thought that none consonted to it and were faithful 24. The special promise to Abraham of the Messiah to be his seed which was more than was made to Adam and Noah as it belonged not to Mankind in general so was it not promulgate or known to them but only to the Jews and the few that conversed with them Therefore the rest of the world were not obliged to know and believe it who never heard of it 25. What Conditions of pardon and life were necessary to all Mankind The terms of the Universal Covenant then in general is most probably gathered out of these Texts of Scripture Exod. 34. 6 7. And the Lord-proclaimed the Name of the Lord The Lord the Lord God Merciful and Gracious long suffering and abundant in Goodness and Truth keeping Mercy for thousands forgiving iniquity transgression and sin and that will by no means clear the guilty visiting the iniquity of the Fathers upon the Children and to the Childrens Children unto the third and to the fourth Generation This is the description of God given by his own mouth as he is to
Slothfulness in Students in seeking truth 3. Hastiness in Judging before digested conceptions and proof II. Nearly Want of 1. Humility and self-acquaintance Pride 2. Knowledge Ignorance and Error 3. Love to others Envy Malice and Bitterness III. Instruments or Engines 1. In General Corrupt departing from Christian Simplicity 2. Particularly 1. From Simplicity of Doctrine by DOGMATISTS Words Notions 2. From Simplicity of Practice by SUPERSTITIOUS additions 3. From Simplicity of Discipline by CHURCH-TYRANNY II. CONSTITUTIVE Causes viz. DISCORD 1. In JUDGMENT of things necessary ALIENATION 2. In WILL and AFFECTION viz. 1. Privative by denying due Communion 2. Positive 1. By Contention 2. Malice 3. Hurtfulness to each other DIVISION 3. In Necessary PRACTICE III. The EFFECTS viz. I. On THINGS viz. on Church 1. Doctrine Preaching and Writing turning it into vain and hurtful wrangling 2. Worship Prayer Sacraments corrupting them by faction partiality and wrath 3. Discipline corrupting it into Secular or factious Tyranny or a dead Image II. On PERSONS viz. I. Particular 1. Themselves 2. Their followers 1. The Guilt and Deceit of false-Religious zeal 2. The Death of true Holiness and Heavenly Conversation 3. The Death of Love and Life of Wrath and injuries 3. Rulers viz. 1. Corrupting them by factious clamours against their Subjects 2. Tempting them unto persecuting Laws and Executions 3. Engaging them in bloody Wars abroad 4. The Innocent viz. Injuries to 1. Private persons 1. By censures slanders backbitings making them hated 2. Denying them due Love Communion and help 3. Persecution silencing and other mischiefs 2. Princes 1. Weakning and grieving them by the Subjects discords 2. Dishonouring them by defaming Excommunications 3. Urging them to be the Clergies Lictors or Executioners 5. Enemies and Strangers scandalizing and hardning them in Infidelity sin II. Societies I. Churches 1. Corrupting them in Doctrine Worship and Order 2. Weakning them by discord and division 3. Shaming them before the World 4. Making them less fit for Gods Love and Communion II. Kingdoms Weakning them dishonouring them and drawing them into the Guilt of Feuds Wars and Persecutions IV. The REMEDIES I. Persons 1. Christ the Prince of Peace and the Churches Head and Center 2. Wise Princes who understand the Interest of 1. Christ 2. Their people 3. Themselves 3. Able Wise Holy and Peaceable Pastors 4. The Mature Experienced Mellow Peaceable sort of the people II. Qualities 1. Diligent Study under wise Teachers 2. Sincere Holiness A dying life 1. Humility 2. Knowledge 3. Love to others as our selves 3. Deliberate Judging upon tryal III. Means 1. Returning to Christian Simplicity 1. In Doctrine The antient Creed c. 2. In Worship 3. In Discipline 2. Magistrates forcing the Clergie to keep the peace and forbear strife 3. Subjects obedience in all lawful things required by Authority V. HEALTH or Cure 1. Rulers Pastors and people of one MIND 2. One HEART in Love 3. One MOUTH and practice in things Necessary in Communion and mutual help And mutual loving forbearance in Infirmities and things unnecessary edified in Love VI. The EFFECTS hereof I. GLORY to God 1. In the Hallowing of his Name and Honour of Religion 2. In the increase of his Kingdom and Conversion of the World 3. In the Doing of his Will on Earth as it is done in Heaven II. Peace on Earth 1. Increase of Holiness Heavenliness and Love 2. Mutual Delight herein The Joy of Health and Concord 3. The Churches Strength and Glory III. Gods WELLPLEASEDNESS in MEN His Church will be meet for his Love Delight and Communion and be liker to Heaven and enjoy its foretastes An Appendix to this Premonition SInce the Printing of this the World hath seen a specimen of such contention as I lament in a contest between a young insulting Assailant and a jocular contemptuous Defendant in my judgment both running into extreams whether verbal or real their own explications must further tell us The extreams of the former are reprehended by many By the later a person of great wit and piety I perceive that some men have such conceptions of the Covenants of God as will give occasion to some Readers to think that by mis-describing them I have erred and misled men through this and many other Writings And men that are not able to conquer the obscuring and tempting notions of their Authors are still calling for Answers to every inconsiderable objection or contradicting word that is suggested to them and little things puzzle and stop such Readers though otherwise pious and worthy persons who have not by long and accurate studies methodized and digested the matter that is disputed of Not therefore to offend any man by opposition or to defend other mens extreams but to prevent the frustration of some of these Writings and the scandal or trouble of my Reader I must take notice I. That some think that the Covenant of Grace must be considered 1. in its Constitution and 2. in its Execution The Constitution of the Covenant is God's firm and unchangeable purpose of saving his Elect to the praise of his glorious Grace For the word signifieth a disposition appointment or ordering of matters whether there be a restipulation or no the English word Covenant seduceth our understandings The fixed purpose and determinate counsel of God in Scripture is called a Covenant Jer. 33. 20. II. The execution of this fixed Constitution is God's wise and gracious managing of all things for the accomplishment of that glorious design which he had in the prospect of his eternal counsel which he steadily and regularly pursueth through all the vicissitudes that his mutable creatures are obnoxious to c. pag. 718 719. 1. On God's part whatever grace and mercy was in his eternal purpose that is given out to us by Christ c. III. 1. Christ cannot be the foundation of the Covenant because Christ himself is promised in the Covenant as the great comprehensive blessing Isa 49. 8 9. 2. Free Grace is given as the true reason of the Covenant Heb. 8. 8. IV. The Constitution of the Covenant in God's purpose and counsel hath no condition at all nor is that the Condition of the Covenant required of us on our part which God promiseth to work in us on his part nor that which God in Covenant bestoweth nor that which presupposeth other Covenant mercies antecedent c. V. A promise of pardon and life on condition of believing and obeying is no Covenant of Grace at all and neither better nor worse than a threatning of condemnation c. It 's no more a Covenant of Grace than a Covenant of Wrath. It 's no great matter where it is founded p. 584 586. VI. God hath not dispensed with one jot or title of the moral Law but Do this and live is as strictly exacted as ever so that unless a Surety be admitted and the righteousness of another owned the case of all the sons of Adam is deplorable and desperate To deny the righteousness wherein
the believing sinner may stand before this righteous and holy God is to affirm the eternal damnation of all the World VII The Covenant mentioned justifieth not but declareth our Justification which is the immediate proper effect of Christ's righteousness VIII Never any man in his wits affirmed that the righteousness of Christ is the formal cause of our Justification Give us but leave to call it the material cause or the meritorious cause immediately and properly of Justification c. Some will think that they are great and heinous errors which either these words or some of mine that seem contrary import But I must crave leave here to follow my usual method in separating the Controversies de re de nomine and then I think that even these strange words prove not him and me at so great a distance as they seem to intimate For I grant him as followeth de re 1. That God hath such a decree of Election or eternal purpose as he describeth and calleth the Constitution of the Covenant 2. That God doth wisely and graciously execute this Decree 3. That all Grace and Mercy is given by Christ And therefore so far as Mercy is common Christ is the common cause of it 4. That Christ himself is a blessing or gift decreed and also freely given by God even from his love to the World Joh. 3. 16. 5. That God's electing Act or Decree as in him hath no condition nor his purpose to give Christ as a Saviour to mankind 6. On our part no condition is required either that God may elect us or that the first promise of a Saviour be made or that Christ come into the World or that he fulfill all righteousness or that he obey or die or rise or be glorified or come to judgment or raise the dead or that he enact it as his Law of Grace that he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned 7. Nor is any condition on our part necessary absolutely necessitate medii that the Gospel or the first Grace yea the first special Grace be given us 8. That Christ by his suffering and merits hath procured to his elect not only pardon and life if they believe and obey him but Grace to cause them effectually and infallibly to believe repent obey and persevere 9. That no man can or will believe and repent but by his Grace 10. That to give men a promise of pardon and life if they will believe repent and obey the Gospel is not the whole of Christ's Grace to any but where-ever he giveth this he giveth also much means and gracious help by which men may do better than they do and so be more prepared for his further Grace 11. That if God only gave men a promise of pardon if they believe and gave them no Grace to enable or help them to believe it would be no saving Covenant 12. God did not repeal his Law of Innocency or as he had rather call it of Perfection nor did properly dispense with or relax the preceptive part of it Nor is it absolutely ceased as to a capable subject And therefore Christ was bound to perfection 13. God would not have his Law to be without the honour of the perfect performance of mans Mediator though it be violated by us all 14. No man is saved or justified but by the proper merit of Christ's perfect obedience yea and his habitual holiness and satisfactory sufferings advanced in dignity by his divine perfection 15. This merit as related to us supposeth that Christ as a Sponsor was the second Adam the Root of the justified the reconciling Mediator who obeyed perfectly with that intent that by his obedience we might be justified and who suffered for our sins in our room and stead and so was in tantum our Vicarius poenae as some phrase it or substitute and was made a curse for us that we might be healed by his stripes as he was obedient that his righteousness might be the reason as a meritorious cause of our Justification which supposeth the relation of an undertaking Redeemer in our nature doing this and in our stead so far forth as that therefore perfect obedience should not be necessary to be performed by our selves And righteousness therefore is imputed to us that is we are truly reputed righteous because we as believing members of Christ have right to impunity and life as merited by his righteousness and freely given to all penitent believers And Christ's own righteousness may be said so far to be imputed to us as to be reckoned or reputed the meritorious cause of our right or justification as aforesaid Thus far we are agreed de re And then de nomine I willingly leave men to their way of speech 1. If he will call God's Decree his Covenant in Constitution 2. If he will call the execution of his Decree his Covenant in execution 3. If he will call nothing else the Covenant of Grace or at least nothing of narrower extent but what comprehendeth God's eternal Decrees and the promise and gift of a Redeemer and so of the rest I cannot help it his language is his own But I shall tell you further my thoughts de re de nomine 1. De re 1. God's eternal decrees purposes or election give no one right to Christ Pardon or Life and so justifie no man 2. The execution of God's Decrees yea of Election hath many Acts besides Justification 3. It must therefore be some transient Act done in time ad extra by which God justifieth men 4. There are divers such acts concurring in several sorts of causality or respect 5. Christ's meritorious righteousness and satisfaction are the sole proper immediate causemeritorious of all the Grace or Mercy procured and given by him there being no other meritorious cause of the same kind either more immediate or at all co-ordinate and copartner with him 6. As Christ giveth us Holiness qualitative and active by the real operation of his Spirit though he merited it immediately himself so doth he give us right to impunity to the further Grace of the Spirit and to Glory by the instrumentality of his Covenant as by a Testament Deed of Gift or Law of Grace Which by signifying God's donative will doth not first declare us justified or to have the foresaid right to Christ and Life but doth first give us instrumentally that right and so immediately justify us And God's will giveth us not right as secret or of it self but by such instrumental signification 7. God hath signified his will to us partly by absolute gifts and promises and partly by conditional that such there are he that denieth must deny much of the Scripture Christ was absolutely given to fallen mankind for a Redeemer and so was the Conditional Law or Covenant of Grace and many other mercies But he hath made and recorded a conditional Gift of Christ as in special Union to be our
Head and of Pardon and Salvation 8. It is Christ's stated Constitution that he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and be that believeth not shall be damned Mar. 16. 16. That if thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved for with the heart man believeth Christ's resurrection unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation Rom 10. That except you repent you shall all perish Luke 13. 3 5. That men must repent and be baptized for the remission of sins Acts 2. 38. And repent and be converted that their sins may be blotted out Acts 3. 19. So Rev. 22. 14. Matt. 6. 14 15. Ezek. 33. 14 16. 1 Tim. 4. 8. Godliness is profitable to all things having the promise of the Life that now is and of that which is to come Call these Laws or Covenants or what you will we are agreed that all this is the word of God 9. These terms of life and death are the rule of our practices and our expectations by which we must live and by which we shall be judged and therefore we may truly say that they are Christ's Law And they are God's signified determination of the conditions of life and death and his donation of our right to Christ Pardon and Life is contained herein and therefore this may truly be called Christ's Testament and Covenant in several respects 10. Though all duties be prescribed by God's Law and so each Precept is a material part yet formally or specifically the Laws to which these material parts belong must be distinguished by the distinct conditions of life and death 11. God hath made more Promises Donations and Covenants than one or two which must not be confounded 1. His Law and Covenant made to and with man in innocency is one 2. And his Law and Covenant made to and with Christ as Mediator is another 3. And his absolute promise of a Saviour to the World with the conditional promise or Law of Grace conjunct was the first edition of another And the Gospel as after the incarnation promulgate was a more perfect edition of it to pass by Abraham's Covenant of Peculiarity and the Mosaical Law as such 12. Though Christ be promised in one of these and be God's antecedent gift he may nevertheless be the Author of another and so far the foundation as well as the meritorious cause 13. That may be of free Grace which is merited by Christ yea and that which is annexed to the Evangelical worthiness of a believer 14. That may be a condition required of us to be done by the help of Grace which yet is the effect of that Grace and given us by God 15. It is a true Covenant between God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and man which is solemnly entred into in Baptism And this is a Covenant of Grace even that proceedeth purely from Grace and of Grace as given by God and by us accepted He that will confound these various Covenants Promises and Laws on pretence of their unity though there is doubtless a wonderful unity of all the parts both of God's moral signal means and his physical works shall confound much of Theology 16. The Law made to Adam never said either thou or another for thee shall obey but it bound man to perfect perpetual personal obedience 17. Therefore that Law as it obliged us is not fulfilled by the obedience of Christ but only as far as it obliged him nor can any man be justified by it as a fulfiller of it by himself or by another nor did Christ fulfil it in any other mans person though in his stead so far as is aforesaid 18. The Law doth not command any man since Adam perfect personal obedience as the means or condition of life nor promise any life on such a condition as is now naturally impossible but though it be not repealed by God is so far ceased by the cessation of the subjects capacity to be so obliged 19. The Laws obligation of us to punishment is dispenced with and dissolved by a pardon purchased by our Mediator 20. Christ's righteousness is nevertheless the meritorious cause of our righteousness or justification though he justify us by the instrumentality of his donative Covenant as giving us right to our Union and Justification and Life and though our Faith and Repentance be the condition of our Title 21. We accept two Concessions as containing that truth which sheweth that we do not much differ de re could we more happily order our organical conceptions 1. That Christ's righteousness is not the formal cause of our Justification 2. p. 596. Seeing the satisfaction was not made IN THE PERSON of the offender but his substitute it was necessary that THE BENEFIT of ANOTHERS satisfaction should be communicated in such a way as might best please that God whose Grace was the only motive to his acceptation of a substitute It is the undoubted priviledge of the Giver to dispose of his own gifts in his own way And it was absolutely and indispensibly necessary that the sinner should be duly qualified to receive such transcendent favours purchased at so dear a rate and fitted to return the glory to a Redeemer which an unhumbled unbelieving unconverted and unsanctified sinner could not possibly be He that writeth this cannot sure much differ from me hereabouts But he is charitably uncharitable when he saith Never any man in his wits affirmed it so that the righteousness of Christ is the formal cause of our Justification It 's too charitable to hide that which cannot be hid of so great a number whom it seems he never read for all his Commission from all the Systematical Divines of Germany c. p. 696. And it 's too uncharitable to judge so many excellent men out of their wits The truth is so many speak so that I have been doubtful I should be smartly censured for saying otherwise Forma qua justificamur est misericordia Patris perfecta Justitia filii saith Ant. Fayus in his Accurate Theses Th. 60. p. 280. And by misericordia Patris being the form you may see how he understood Imputation The number that thus speak are too great here to be recited so that even the most judicious Davenant lest he should go out of the road was fain to make this the Theses to be proved by him Imputatam Christi obedientiam esse causam formalem justificationis nostrae probatur Cap. 28. p. 362. c. de Instit habit But let none turn this to our reproach nor take all these for mad for it is but an unapt name and by him and many others soundly meant for the greater part of these Divines say but that Imputatio Justitiae Christi Remissio peccatorum are the form not of Justification as in us but as it is Actus Justificantis as Altingius Maresius Sharpius Bucanus Spanhemius Nigrinus Sohnius
manifest 412. 2. God having made man did give him a Law both Natural and Positive This was next done and therefore decreed to be next done 413. 3. Man having broke this Law God judged him and laid on him some indispensible penalties This was decreed to be done in the third place 414. 4. At the same time God promised Man the victory by the Womans Seed and giving him pardon of the destructive penalty became his Redeemer and put him under a Covenant of Grace first given to mankind in Adam and afterwards in Noah And this was decreed to be so done 415. 5. Though all were thus put under this Covenant and God forsook none that first forsook not him yet did he give more Grace to some than to others to Abel e. g. than to Cain so that those that did actually repent and believe and live to God were justified and adopted and made heirs of life And thus he decreed to do 416. 6. Perseverance also was the effect of his special Grace which accordingly is Decreed to be given 417. 7. The Cainites Canaanites and others that were the wicked Seed of wicked Parents who forsook him and his Grace he accordingly judged punished and forsook And so decreed 418. 8. The Seed of the faithful he eminently blessed especially of Abraham whom he took by reward into a further special Covenant superadded to the common Covenant of Grace taking his Seed into a peculiar political and gracious relation to him promising the multiplication and prosperity of them and that the Saviour should come out of them All which was so decreed to be done 419. 9. The Messiah came in the fulness of time and did and suffered all that is mentioned in the Gospel And gave us a more perfect Edition of the Covenant of Grace and greater grace with it even more of the Spirit with a better Ministry Ordinances and Church-state Which were so decreed to be done 420. 10. To some Nations of the Earth this second Edition of the Covenant of Grace that is the Gospel is freely promulgate or Preached who deserved it no more than others while others for sin are left under the first darker Edition and under desertions and grievous punishments for their fore-fathers and their own violation of it 421. 11. Where the Gospel cometh among many that all deserve rejection for the resisting of grace God giveth to some that grace which infallibly Converteth them and consequently justifieth adopteth and sanctifieth them All which he decreed 422. 12. Giving also Perseverance as aforesaid he finally justifieth all such in Judgement and Glorifieth Christ first and them with Christ singly and conjunctly at the final consummation And he Decreed to do all this accordingly 423. If the Decree of God be called but One for the Reasons before given the Controversie is then at an end But if it must be distinguished and called Many Decrees or parts it must be either from the Effects oâ— from the supposed objects 424. 1. If from the Effects there will be no Controversie about the Decrees but what is first about the Effects themselves And most of them now named are uncontroverted 425. 2. And we cannot well denominate and distinguish the Decrees from any thing else but the Effects even as we do his operations as Creation Redemption c. But the objects then are past doubt such as follow 426. Viz. 1. The object of the Decree of Creation as such distinct from the Effect is Nothing that is There is no object 427. 2. The object of the Decree of Legislation is man considered meerly in his Being and Naturals as such 428. 3. The object of the Decree of the first Judgement was man newly faln 429. 4. The object of the Decree of the giving of the Promise of Christ the New Covenant in the first Edition and pardon and grace by it was faln man first judged 430. 5. The object of the Common grace of that Covenant from first to last is faln judged man brought under that Covenant of grace ut norma officii judicii beneficii 431. 6. The object of the Special grace of God at first viz. for effectual Conversion to men under that Covenant was the same as last mentioned Man brought under the Covenant of grace of whom 1. Some were prepared and disposed by Common grace for Special 2. And it 's like some not but suddenly surpirzed by mercy 432. 7. The object of Abrahams special promise besides the Common Covenant of grace was Abraham eminent in faith and self-denying obedience to God And afterward his Seed for his sake 433. 8. The Object of the actual gift of Christ incarnate and the perfect Edition of the New Covenant by him was the sinful world that had transgressed both the Law of Innocency and the first Edition of the Covenant of grace and the Jews that had broken Moses's Law 434. 9. The object of the gift of the Gospel as promulgate or published is the same adding the world as now Redeemed by the Actual sacrifice Merits and Resurrection of Christ incarnate 435. 10. The object of the Commonest grace of the Gospel Covenant is Redeemed man brought under this Covenant as the Norma officii judicii beneficiorum quoad jus or subditi obligati 436. 11. The object of the grace of this Covenant proper to the Visible Church and common to its members are Visible Christians or Baptized Professours 437. 12. The object of the first effectual grace of saving Conversion saith and repentance is certain persons Redeemed and brought under the obligation of this new Covenant Of whom some are prepared by common grace and it's like some are not 438. 13. The object of the gift pardon justification adoption the spirit of sanctification and right to life and all this in Christ by union is a Penitent Believer and the seed of such dedicated in Covenant to God 439. 14. The object of many acts of auxiliary grace and of higher degrees of grace is ordinarily such as have well used former degrees of special grace But also who God is freely pleased to give it to 440. 15. The object of the grace of Perseverance is the same last mentioned If not all the Justified which I reserve as almost our only real Controversie to handle in its proper place in the next Chapter 441. 16. The object of the Act of Raising the dead is all the world as appeareth in Joh. 5. 22. to 32. 442. 17. The object of the Justification of the soul alone at the first appearance is the soul of a member of Christ or one faithful and persevering August ad Simplic lâ— â— qu. 2. Quia non invâ—â—â—â— Deus opera in hominibus quâ—â—ligâ—t idâ—o manâ—â— propositum justification is ipsâ—us sâ—d quia illâ—d â—â—â—â— ut justifiâ—â—t credâ—ntâ—s idâ—o invâ—nit opera quae jam â—ligat ad râ—gnum câ—lorâ—â— in his Covenant or a Saint 443. 18. The object of the final justification of the whole man is a Saint â—isen from
si tamen Deus solus illâ—â— causaret sicut potest illum causare solus non esset actus neque odiâ—m Deâ— vel mendacium But whatever he thought I have before answered this difficulty of the Entity of the acts of sin I mention Ariminensis judgement the rather because the Learned Calvinists commend him And I remember when I once askt Arch-Bishop Usher which of the Schoolmen he most valued as the soundest he said Greg. Ariminensis 714. Is not all this doctrine from these men cited conformable to the doctrine of the Synod of Dort Who in the conclusion name many positions which they and all the Reformed Churches with them do toto pectâ—re detestari abhorr with all their hearts Among which one is Deum nâ—â—â— puroque Voluntatis arbitrio absque omni peccati ullius respectu vel intuitâ— maximam mundi partem ad aeternam damnationem praedestinasse creasse And another is Eodem modo quo electio fons est causá fidei ac bâ—norum operum reprobationem esse causam infidelitatis impietatu Another is Multos fidelium infantes ab uberibus matrum innoxios abriâ—â— tyrannice in Gehennam praecipitari adeo ut iis nec Baptismus nec Ecclesiae in corum baptismo preces prodesse queant And it is much to be noted that in conclusion they desire all men to judge of the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches not by Calumnies nor by the Private sayings of some Dâ—ctors antâ—ent or later but by the publick Confessions of the Churches â—â—â— and by the Declaration of this Synod Therefore not by the extreams of Beza Piscator Spanhâ—mâ—â—s Twisse and Rutherford but by what the Articles of the Churches subscribed by the Pastors do contain Otherwise we shall be far more foolish than the Papists who will not expose their Church to obioquy or division by standing to the sayings of Alvarez or Molina or any private Doctor whosoever 715. And it is notorious to any impartial-peâ—user that the whole foâ—â— of the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Articles Catechism Liturgie Homilies and all their publick Writings was drawn up by men of Augustines judgement who were for absolute Election and Universal sufficient Redemption and Grace ad posse but for no Reprobation but on foresight of sin 716. And it is greatly to be noted with grief of heart that among Good men it is partly General prejudice but chiefly the Interest of their Reputation with those among whom they live which is the great impediment of the Churches Concord The name of a Calvinist is so hateful among the Papists that even the Predeterminant Dominicans who go higher than ever Calvin did and the Jansenists who go as high in the main cause and higher than the Synod of Dort do yet find it a matter of necessity to rail at Luther Zuinglius Calvin c. lest their party should think that they are turned Hereticks And the Protestants that agree in some points with the Papists are fain to rack the Papists words to a worse sense than is meant lest their fierce opposers should make men believe that they are half Papists or err with them And the moderate Calvinists are fain to stretch hard that they may seem to differ more from the Arminians than they do lest a self-conceited reviler should blot their names with the suspicion of Arminianism O doleful case of all the Churches But where Protestants are few and made odious by the Papists as differing from them further than they do there Reputation is not so great a temptation And there they freely confess their concord where they do not differ And so in Colloquia Torunensi c. 4. de grat depuls Calum sect 5 6. all the Reformed Churches of Poland with Joh. Bergius the Duke of Brandenburgs Chaplain and others did profess Falso accusamur quasi Mortis Meriti Christi prâ— omnibus sufficientiam negemus aut virtutem imminuamus cum potius idem hic quod ipsa Synodus Tridentina ses 6. cap. 3. doceamus viz. Etsi Christus pro omnibus mortuns sit non omnes tamen mortis ejus beneficium recipere sed eos duntaxat quibus meritum passionis ejus communicatur Causam etiam seu culpam cur non omnibus communicetur nequaquam in merito morte Christi sed in ipsis hominibus esse fatemur Here was no partial interest to make them afraid of being suspected to comply with Papists 717. I end with this request to all my Brethren who by their averseness to the Doctrine of Common or Universal Grace do keep open the Churches dangerous wounds 1. That they will give Scripture leave to rule their judgements and try whether it be possible to build special Grace on any other foundation than presupposed common Grace and whether to deny this be not to deny the very tenor of the Gospel and pull up the foundations of our Religion 2. That they will but read over Davenants two dissertations and the second Tome at least of the Learned Dallaeus his Apology against Spaâ—hemius that is The words of an hundred and twenty antient Writers and Councils beginning at Clemens Romanus and ending with Theophylact and sixty three Protestant Divines and Synods to which I think I could add as many more that speak more plainly to the point or near it And if after all this they have so great a zeal to contract the Glory of Gods Mercy and deny his Grace as that they will cast off the judgement of all the antient Churches of Christ and so many later rather than acknowledge it I shall cease disputing with them and seek to quench the fire which they kindle in the Churches of Christ by Prayers and Tears The End of the First Part. THE Second Part OF GODS GOVERNMENT AND MORAL WORKS WHEREIN Of his Laws or Covenants of Redemption of sufficient and effectual Grace of Faith Justification Works Merits Perseverance certainty of Salvation c. so far as the Church-troubling-Controversies do require LONDON Printed for Nevil Simmons at the Princes Arms in St. Pauls Church-Yard 1675. The CONTENTS of these THESES cannot be well given you without reciting too great a part of them But rather than none take this imperfect summary following Sect. I. OF mans first State and the first Law and its penalty Whether Adam had a promise of Life and whether that Promise or Covenant be now ceased as to all men Page 27. Sect. II. Of the first Edition of the Law or Covenant of Grace that it was made with all Mankind in Adam and Noah Of the Promise to Abraham Of the Terms of the first Edition of the Universal Covenant of Grace How far it is a Law of Nature How far those without the Israelitish Church were under it Of the Israelites Covenant pag. 31. Sect. III. Of Christ's Incarnation and our Redemption The Law of Mediation What Christ undertook for us How far he represented usâ— The true nature of his Satisfaction Of his Righteousness and Merits pag.
be Believed in and as they were to be subject and devoted to him And what mouth can surelier reveal him And Heb. 11. 6. Without faith it is impossible to please God for he that cometh to God must believe that God is and that he is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him Act. 10. 34 35. Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons but in every Nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him And John's and Christ's Preaching were Repent And Except ye Repent ye shall all perish And Christ was a Prince and a Saviour to give Repentance to Israel and Remission of Sins 26. The belief of the pardoning Mercy of God to the penitent and the recoverable state of Souls and the duty of Repenting and seeking pardon and mercy of God in order to Salvation in opposition to despair and neglect of all endeavours for recovery is so common to all Mankind that though self-love may make them hope inordinately for that which they would have to be true yet it is most apparent that it proceedeth from some Natural notion of God and is to be numbred with the Notitiae Communes which are past controversie with all Mankind 27. Therefore though the Law of Innocency was the Law of Nature in the first and eminent sence yet this Common notice of Gods pardoning Mercy and man's duty to Repent hope and seek Salvation may well be called The Law of lapsed Nature as the other is the Law of Innocent Nature For the Nature of God and the nature of Man with all circumstant Natures and the course of natural Providence running so much in the way of great restoring mercy do certifie mankind of the foresaid hopes and duties 28. For it is not as some have said an absurdity but a certain Truth that the Law of Nature is as far mutable as Nature it self is mutable For the Law of Nature commonly mis-described is nothing else but the Nature of Man and all other Creatures of God so far as per modum signâ— they notifie to us Gods Will appointing what shall be Due from us and To us as the instrument of Gods Government of Mankind Now this Notification is most by the Resultancy of duty from the Nature of Man compared with God and all the Creatures that he hath to do with And the very variety of circumstances as in the case of Adam's Childrens Marriages and ours c. may alter Nature's signification obligation and Law 29. That which is called the Covenant of Nature or Innocency was in the Main the very Law of Innocent Nature in all the parts of it 1. Nature being perfect revealed Man's Duty perfectly to obey 2. Nature declared Punishment to be due to sin yea to all sin And this punishment to be suitable to the nature of the Offender compared with the God offended and the injury done Especially that if men will undoe themselves by forsaking Life and Love and Joy and casting themselves into darkness diseasedness and misery when it is foreshewn them God is not bound to hinder or recover them 3. Nature telleth man that God who made his Soul a simple Intellectual spirit and Life it self though created and dependant intended not to annihilate it and that its noble faculties fitted to know God and Love him and Live to him perfectly in Immortality were made for this employment in Immortality and not in vain And that he that Naturally maketh it mans duty to hope and seek for Immortal happiness hath not made this hope or duty in vain Nor will fail or frustrate or destroy them that forfeit not their hopes So that the Covenant depends not alone upon supernatural Revelation 30. But that which Nature revealeth about the penalty is 1. Not that God of necessity must punish the loss of Innocency as highly as he may do 2. But that he may justly punish the Sinner in rigour by temporal spiritual and eternal miseries 3. And that the Ends of Government the honour of his Wisdom Goodness Power Truth and Justice and the order of the humane world do require that sin scape not free but some exemplary punishment be a Vindication of God and a warning to Man which our death afflictions and spiritual sufferings manifest in part and the sufferings of Christ more fully So that pardon and dispensing in part with his Right to punish us according to the Law first broken is no falshood in God nor any injustice nor any violation of his Law of Nature 31. The Law which God put all mankind under after the fall and the world without the Church is under still is the Preceptive part of the Law of Innocent Nature as de futuro the promise of it being ceased and the penalty not totally nullifyed but made remedyable by an act of oblivion or Conditional Covenant of Grace q. d. Thou shalt perfectly obey me for the time to come and every sin shall deserve everlasting punishment so far as that I might justly inflict it and will do it if it be not remitted But all thy sin shall be forgiven thee and thou shalt have the free gift of pardon and salvation if thou Believe in me thy merciful Saviour and repent and give up thy self to me to be saved and to be Mine by sincere obedience and Love 32. The deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt by Moses and their imbodying into a new Common-wealth with a Theocratical Government in a peculiar manner and a new body of Divine Laws were all done in performance of Gods Covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob separating their seed as Holy from all the world Not as if no other were Holy in the world but as the Priests and Levites were sanctified to stand nearer to God than the people and so specially Holy even so Israel was a Holy Nation as being nearer God by separation than the rest of the Nations of the world 33. The entire Law of God which the Israelitish Nation was under had all these parts 1. The remaining preceptive and directive part of the Law of Nature 2. The Universal Covenant of Grace made with all mankind in Adam and Noah and personally renewed to Abraham for himself and his posterity 3. The special promise to Abraham and his seed as a peculiar people of whom the Messiah should come 4. The body of the Law of Moses as a Law for that Common-wealth or Politie which was not so given to any other Common-wealth or Nation * * * Lâ—g Suarez de Lâ—g l. 9. who c. 6. distinguisheth of the Law strictly taken and so it hath not saith he promises of eternal felicity and the Law as including the promise to the Fathers and so it had such promises But those promises being the Soul of the Law should not by the Jews have ever been separated from the rest in their conceits of it 1. The first of these undoubtedly is still in force 2. The second is turned into the
instrumentally giving 4. Right to Impunity and Glory by Justification and Adoption conjunct the thing given which Right is our very Righteousness against â—his Accusation that is a relation whence the other relation of just and â—ustifiable resulteth For if you will not here see relations resulting from â—elations pretend not to true accurateness in your search 166. These four Causes now were enough to constitute and so prove â—s righteous against the Charge of being damnandi if we were questionaâ—le no further But the turning point of the day is yet behind 1. Our â—llegation of Justification by Christ and the Covenant may be denied â—t may be said by the Accuser that the Covenant justifieth none but â—enitent Believers and giveth plenary Right to Glory to none but saints â—nd persevering Conquerors and that we are none such Against this Acâ—usation we must be justified or perish else all the rest will be unâ—ffectual And here to say that it is true I died an impeninent Person â—n Insidel Hypocrite or Ungodly but Christ was a penitent Believer for Of our own personal performance or righteousness how far necessary to our Justification â—e or sincere and holy for me or that he died to pardon this all this will â—e false and vain Christ's Merits and Satisfaction is not the Righteousness it self which must justifie us against this Accusation But our own â—ersonal Faith Repentance sincere Holiness and Perseverance purchased â—y Christ and wrought by the Spirit in us but thence our own acts Mr. W. Thomas of Ubley in his Book against Speed the Quaker saith pag. 42. part 2. This is an old Popish trick to make much of the Doctrine of the St. James in a mistaken interpretation and to lay aside the Doctrine of St. Paul Rom. 3. 28. when they should joyn both together and ascribe to Faith the justification of men as sinners and to work their justification as Believers This is sound and needeth but fuller explication â—e that cannot truly say The Accusation is false I am a true Penitent â—anctified persevering Believer must be condemned and perish Thus â—aith and Repentance are our Righteousness by which we must thus far â—e justified 167. But this is but a particular mediate subservient Righteousness â—nd part of our Justification subordinate to Christs Merits 168. Yet this being the Condition on our part for our Participation â—n all the free Gifts of the Covenant Scripture useth to describe Gods â—udgment as enquiring after this The great thing to be glorified in â—udgment is Gods Love Wisdom Justice and Truth and Christ's great Merits and performance in our Redemption But the great thing questioâ—ed accused tried and judged will be our performance of the Covenant of Grace as to our conditions The day is not to try God whether he be â—ust or Christ whether his Merits and Satisfaction were sufficient and whether he have done his part But to try man whether 1. He have â—rue Right to Impunity and Glory 2. Whether he have performed the Condition on which the Covenant giveth that Right and be indeed the â—rue Receiver of it The Devils hope cannot lie at all in proving Christ or the Covenant faulty or defective on their part but in proving â—s to be none of the persons that have Right This therefore is the Righteousness mentioned Matth. 25. and of Faith imputed Rom. 4 c. â—nd else-where 169. But if we will speak of Righteousness and Justification entirely â—s that which containeth all its Causes we must set all the five forementioned together giving each one its proper place and no one the â—lace or office of the rest And give leave to the self-conceited pievish â—gnorant blindly to revile you for saying that you joyn your Faith and Holiness to make one Righteousness with that of Christ as if it were not sufficient And tell him that Christ's Righteousness is not ours absolutely in it self but to and in the proper effects And that it is perfect as to its â—roper ends And that he never intended it to this end to be instead of Faith and Holiness in us nor to make them needless to our Salvation 170. No man must ascribe any thing to his own Faith or Holiness iâ— the least degree which is proper to 1. Gods Mercy or Grace 2. To Christ or his Righteousness or Merits 3. Or to the Covenant not any thing but its proper part And that must be granted it 171. It is a vain Fiction in them that think our Right to Justificatioâ— or Impunity and our Right to Salvation have not the same causes and conditions but that our own Repentance and Obedience is a condition of our Right to Salvation but not to Impunity or forgiveness Whereas ouâ— very Justification is a justifying of our Right to Salvation and the same Covenant giveth them conjunctly on the same conditions 172. But our Right to both as begun hath less for the condition thâ—â— our Right to them as continued and perfected For our believing consent to the baptismal-Baptismal-Covenant putteth us into immediate Right to all the benefits of the Covenant which we are then capable of but not to all that we shall be made further capable of hereafter we are pardoned and should be glorified if we presently died But as we have more Grace to receive so we have more Duty to perform as a means yea a condition of obtaining it 173. This over-lookt by many is much to be considered both as to the case of Infants baptized and the Adult Many wonder that the What right the Covenant giveth to the after-helps and degrees of Grace Children of godly Parents prove oft so bad as if by the Baptismal-Covenant they had received nothing from God But the Synod of Dort Art 1. § 17. well concludeth that godly Parents have no cause to doubt of the Election or Salvation of their Children dying in Infancy they being holy and in the same Covenant with their Parents But the continuance of Gods Grace hath a continued condition and means to be used on our part The condition which the Covenant requireth to an Infants first Justification is that he be the Child of a true Believer by him dedicated to God And as the first Condition is to be found in the Parent or Owner so must the Condition of continued Grace as long as the Child continueth an Infant And that is the continuance of the Parents Faith and his faithful performance of his promise made to educate his Child in the way of God But if the Parents should presently both turn Infidels and so educate their Child and give him up as the Jâ—â—izaries are to an Infidel to educate I know God may nevertheless give him Grace above his Promise if he please for a Benefactor as such is free but I know of no assurance of it by Promise For in Baptism both Parties were obliged for the future and not one only And if when the Child cometh to the use of Reason he wilfully
hatred and other punishment God then is reconciled because they are not objects of his hatred And to take away the Reatum poenae and the Reatum culpae non in se sed quoad poenam is all one and all that both sides mean if they understand what they say But to all eternity it will be true that we once sinned which none deny obedience 5. Or as if there were any obedience whose end is not Righteousness and Justification against the change of the contrary disobedience Do not these men obey that they may be so far righteous Or is not every man so far Righteous as he doth Righteousness Is not every man that loveth God justifiable as a Lover of him for so far as he loveth him 6. And is not Gratitude an end and a thing commanded by the Law If we obeyed perfectly in Christ we were perfectly thankful in Christ 7. But if they say that Christ fulfilled only the Law made to Adam for us and not his own Law of Grace and therefore that he obeyed for us only to the ends of that Law I answer 1. If the ends and matter of that Law be fulfilled by us in him our obedience to any other must be needless For he that is supposed never to have sinned need not use any means for pardon or remedy 2. By this rule Christ only fulfilled the Law for Adam and Eve and for us only as we were in them which is only Virtually and not Actually at all but not at all for us according to any obligation that ever fell upon our persons For 1. We were never personally bound to perfect personal perpetual obedience as the Condition of life For that Covenant as to the promise and condition ceased before any man was born 2. And all the duty in the world which â—â— are bound to is to be done for Evangelical ends for recovering Grace and unto Gratitude c. To say therefore that we are perfectly Righteous as having perfectly obeyed all Gods Law in Christ and yet that we are bound to obey all that Law that ever we were under to another end and that Christ obeyed for us only as to that which we were never under personally but virtually in Adam this is to say and unsay 8. Lastly they see not that their own answer implyeth the truth of what we assert and is the same that we give which their cause is uncapable of â—â— We say that Christ did indeed most perfectly obey the Law of Innocency so far for us and in our stead though not in our persons as that he hath vindicated the truth and glory of God and his Law by doing that which we should have done and did not And hath merited for us a better Covenant which obligeth us not at all to obey for the ends of the first Covenant viz. that our perfection might be our Righteousness or the condition of life but only to obey for the ends of the new Covenant for the obtaining and improving of Recovering Grace and Salvation by Christ freely given us which we our selves must do or perish 190. And whereas they tell us that We may as well say that man must not dye because Christ dyed for us as not obey because Christ obeyed for us They strangely use our reason against themselves and know it not For we say that we must dye because we did not perfectly either obey the Law or suffer all its penalty by Christ as our legal person But he suffered only to satisfie Justice in tantumâ— to this end that man himself suffering death and temporal afflictions and obeying the Law of Grace might be saved from all the rest of the punishment But if we had so fulfilled the Law as aforesaid by Doing or suffering we could not have dyed nor suffered the least affliction as a penalty For all punishment in the essence of the â—elation is for sin 191. And when they say that It is no more inconvenient to say that Christ was perfect in our person than that he satisfied in our person and we by him I answer 1. Both are false and subvert the Gospel as aforesaid 2. But yet we may fitly say that Christ suffered in the person of a Sinner but mark the sence 1. Suffering as penal belongeth to a Sinner as such But Satisfaction is an Effect of Christ's suffering which resulteth not from the meer suffering nor from the person of a Sinner but from the Will and Covenant of God made to that excellent person who was God and perfect Man So that it is not so aptly said He satisfyed as it is that he suffered in the person of a Sinner 2. Note that it is not any other man's person that we mean that Christ suffered in but his own And we mean that he took upon him the person of a Sinner himself in as much as he consented to suffer for Sin And so personating here is not meant becoming any other man's person in Law sense so as that other legally suffered what he did But it is only his own persons becoming a sufferer in the stead of Sinners for their Sins As the Apostle saith He was made sin for us so he might as truly have said He was made a sinner for us that is so far by Imputation as that he undertook to suffer as Sinners suffer and for their sins But because wordy controversies seeming real are the great troubleâ—s of the world lest any should think that we differ more than indeed we do I would fain bring the matter as far from under the ambiguity of words as possibly I can To which end I further add 1. That as we hold that Adam was the Natural Root or Parent of Mankind so also that Christ was the Foederal Root of all the saved and in several respects though not all a second Adam 2. Adam was but one single Natural person nor did God by error or arbitrary reputation esteem or account him to be any other than he was None of our persons were distinct persons in Adam nor those persons that now they are Therefore we were not so personally in him at his fall But all our persons are in time and mediately by our Progenitors derived lineally from him yet we deny not all Souls to be from God and all Bodies an accretion of the common Elements not as having been Persons existent in him but being Persons caused remotely by him Our present Persons were seminally or virtually in him which is as much as to say that not the Person but the Semen Personae vel virtus causalis was in him To be only Virtually or Causally or Seminally in Adam is in proper speech for that Person not really to have been in him For Causa non est effectus Virtus generativa non est Persona generata To be only Virtually in Adam is terminius diminuens as to personal inexistence and denyeth it And as Dr. Twisse hath oft well asserted It is our natural relation to Adam
I believe I grant it if 1. This be in it self as evident 2. And as certain to me as Gods Word is otherwise I deny it 236. Obj. A man cannot believe and not know that he believeth Ans But a man may sincerely believe and yet through ignorance either of the Scripture or himself be uncertain that indeed his Faith is sincere and not such as is common to the justified 237. Some Protestants by erring in this point and saying that justifying Faith is a certain perswasion or belief that we are justified and that it is Gods own Word that I or you are actually justified or are sincere Believers and that the believing it is properly fides Divina have greatly scandalized and hardened the Papists to our disgrace 238. And so have those that say that in the Creed the meaning of I believe the Remission of Sin is I believe that my sins are remitted actually And that all must thus believe 239. Some say that the Spirit within them saith that they are sincere Believers and the Word of the Spirit is the Word of God and to believâ— it is to believe God Ans This is the Enthâ—sâ—asts conceit which if true all such have prophetical Inspiration For the Spirit to bring any new word from God is one thing and to give us the Understanding Love and Obedience to such a Word is another thing The Spirit doth indeed assure us of our sincerity but not by a new Word from God to tell us so but 1. By giving us that sincere Faith it self 2. By acting it and increasing it 3. By helping us to know it 4. By giving us the love of God and other Graces 5. By giving us the comfort of all But the reception and perception of these internal Operations is not properly called a Belief of the Word of God Else when we make Gods Word the adequate Object of Faith we shall be still at an uncertainty what that Word is 240. Yet this perswasion that we are sincere and justified is divine where the Spirit causeth it but not a divine Faith Yea it is participatively of divine Faith because Gods Word is one of the premises though the weaker must denominate the conclusion * * * Of this see Albertinus's Disp at large 241. Obj. A Reprobate or Devil may believe all the Articles of Faith without application but justifying Faith applieth Christ and his benefits to our selves Ans It 's true But this application is not a certainty nor a perswasion nor a believing that I am justified no more than that I am glorified no nor that I shall be so neither But it is an accepting of Christ offered that I may be justified and saved So that here are all these applying acts in it 1. I believe that Christ as the Saviour of the World is my Saviour as he is all other mens and is not the Devils that is that he hath done that for me which he hath done for all mankind 2. I believe that he is offered to me personally in the Promise or Covenant of Grace on condition of believing-acceptance and that with and for all his purchased benefits and so for my Justification 3. I believe that if I so accept him I shall be justified 4. By true consent I do accordingly accept him to justifie sanctifie and save me But when all this is done 1. I do not believe that God hath said in his word that I am justified nor that my Faith is sincere 2. And my Faith is so weak that I may long doubt of that sincerity which I have and so of my Justification 3. And when I come to be certain of my Faith it is not by believing God as saying that I do certainly believe but by experience of its sincerity upon just trial by the Spirits help 242. No man can be sure that his Faith is sincere and saving who is not assured that it will help him to love God as God above all yea already doth so and that it mortifieth selfishness and will prevail with him to deny even life it self and all the world for Christ and Salvation So far as a man doubteth of any of this he must needs doubt of his own sincerity 243. So weak is Faith in most that are sincere and so little kept in exercise and so strong is sense and self and flesh and worldly bâ—its and interest and Satan's temptations that in my experience who have conversed with as many that are careful of their Souls as most have done I think it is a very small number that I could ever hear say I am certain of my Justification and Salvation But a great number who have lived in holy confidence hope and peace and some in great joy but most in tollerable fears and doubting and some few oppressed by those doubts So that certainty of Salvation is very rare 244. When Bellarmine saith that our assurance more belongeth to Hope than Faith and that it is but moral certainty by signs that we have of our Justification Sincerity and Salvation he so little differeth from the sense of almost all godly Protestants that were it not through other distances and partiality we had never read in Luther's days that for this one point alone we have cause enough of our alienation from the Romanists 245. They err on one extream who say that all are commanded to believe that they are justified or any as if it were Gods Word And they err on the other hand who command doubting or commend it as if it were a duty or a benefit And they speak the truth who say that our doubting of our own Sincerity and Justification if we are sincere is a sin of Infirmity and a Calamity proceeding from weakness of Faith Hope Love and Self-acquaintance which we should use all possible diligence to overcome But they that are not sincere are bound to know it And first to seek and get sincerity and then discern it 246. It is by the Spirit that all Christians must come to their assurance But not by the Spirit as speaking this in us as a word from God Thou art justified or shalt be saved or art sincere But by the aforesaid Acts The Spirit in us is first Christ's Agent Advocate and Witness to assure us that he is the Saviour of the World And next he is our Witness to assure us that we are Gods adopted Children which he doth by being in us Gods Mark and the Pledge First-Fruits and earnest of our heavenly Inheritance by effectual habituating our Souls to the predominant love of God and Holiness and Heaven Where-ever this Sanctification is there is the Evidence and Witness of our Adoption He that findeth by the Fruits that he hath the Spirit findeth the certain proof of his Justification and earnest of Glory SECT XVII Of Love as the end of Faith 247. This predominant Love of God and Holiness is so proper a Cui non unus idemque vitâ— scopus est hic
the Natural power in it self but by so doing formaliter relativè it maketh it no power ad hoc to the contrary in that instant Of which more anon § 10. Such grace of God as cometh from his Absolute Will or Decree of the due Event is never overcome For Gods decree is not frustrate § 11. Gods gracious operations are never overcome by any contrary Act but what he himself is the Agent Cause of as an Act For in Him we Live and Move and Be. Yet man is the only Cause of the Inordination of that act by which it is set in opposition to Gods other acts For God doth not militate against himself § 12. The case lyeth thus God antecedently to his Laws framed Nature that is the Being and Natural Order of all the World and so he became the Head or Root of Nature the first Cause who by his wise decree was to concurr to the end with that Natural frame and to continue to things their proper forms and motions And man is one of his creatures having a Nature of his own to which God as the God of Name doth Antecedently concurr By this natural concurse of God the fomiâ— cator the murderer the thief c. are naturally able to do those acts But being free agents that can do otherwise God maketh them a Law to restrain and regulate them And when they break this Law they resist that gracious concurse which suitable to the organical cause God conjoyneth with the means But they do this by their Natural power and activity not used as God requireth them but turned against his own Law So that if God would withdraw his sustentation and destroy mâ—ns Nature they could not resist his grace But that he will not do being his antecedent work and so God is resisted by his own-given-power and act disordered and turned against his grace § 13. The Will of God which is thus resisted is only 1. His Preceptive or Legal will de debito 2. And his will of purpose to give man so much help and no more by which he can and ought to believe and Repent is said to be resisted or frustrate so far when by mans fault it doth him not that good which it might have done § 14. Gods Grace and Spirit are said to be resisted when the Word and other Means are * * * That God doth govern inseriora per superiora and work by means not for want of them but from the abundance of his Goodness so as to communicate to his creatures the dignity of causality See Aquin. 1. q. 103. a. 8. q. 104. a. 2. Alexand. 1. p. q. 26. m. 5. a. 2. 3. m. 7. Albert. 1. p. q. 67. m. 4. a. 1. Richard 1. d. 39. a. 2. q. 3. d. 45. a. 2. q. 2. Agid. Rom. 2. d. 1. p. 1. q. 2. a. 6. ibi Gabritl d. 1. q. 2. resisted which call him to his duty For these themselves are gifts and acts of grace § 15. But it is not the barâ— Word or Means alone but the Spirit working in and by those means which is so resisted For though no moâ—tal man can clearly know just how the Spirit concurreth and operateth by the Word and Means yet we may know that God doth limit his own operation to the aptitude of the means ordinarily and that he worketh with and by them not according to his Omnipotency in it self considered but according to the means or organs And as in Nature he operateth nor quantum potest but agreeably to the order and aptitude of Natural Causes so in Grace he operateth non quantum potest but according to the aptitude and order of the sapiential frame of Governing-means of grace § 16. When the preaching of the Word Education Company and other visible Means seem equal God hath innumerable means supernal internal external invisible and unknown to us by which he can make all the difference that he maketh in men So that we cannot prove that ever he worketh on souls without any second cause or means at all though we cannot prove the contrary neither And therefore he that resisteth all means for ought we know in so doing resisteth all Gods gracious operations on his soul § 17. * * * I know not how to find both sense and concord in the words of your Alvarez de Aâ—x l. 7. disp 59. p. 264. Eadâ—m contritio que est ultima dispositio ad gratiam in genere cause materialis antecedit illam In genere tamen causae formalis efficientis est effeclus ejusdem gratiae propterea quamvis non sit meritoria gratiae est tamen meritoria vitae aeternâ— Et p. 265. Contritio qua penitens disponitur ad infusionem gratiae habitualis est meritoria vitae aeternae ut Thom. 1. 2. q. 112. a. 2. ad 1. Ergo est effectus gratiae habitualis Nulla enim operatio hominis est-meritoria vitae aeternae nisâ— procedat à gratiâ— habituali ordine saltem naturae sit ea posterior How can the Act be the ultima dispositio to the infusion of that habit which it floweth from Unless he mean eadem specie and not numerically which yet is false For it is not eadem or else he falsly supposeth that the same Love of God may go before Grace Whereas Dr. Twisse so frequently asketh Whether Gods condional will and so his operation be Volo te velle modo velis or credere modo credas to give us faith if we believe and so maketh non credere or non velle to be the only resistance and the Arminians to be ridiculous in making the effect antecedent to the cause as a condition of the causation and itself This semi-subtilty though it beget voluminous confidence must cry peccavi if a little more subtilty do but detect the defectiveness of it We are not now enquiring of the Rationes fidem habendi but of the Rationes non habendi nor are we enquiring Whether God have made a Covenant or formal Promise of giving faeith upon antecedent conditions But whether he deny or give-not grace for actual faith effectual or sufficient to any but those that resist and wilfully omit the preparatory acts which they were able to perform even preparatory Volitons Or if you will make the question to be de ratisnibus fidem habendi not de causis Actus donandi Whether God do not ordinarily give or produce the act of faith in that soul which doth not wilfully resist and omit such preparatory acts as it could do even Volitions And so I answer 1. It is not I will give thee faith if thou wilt believe or I will make thee willing if thou be willing of the same thing But it is 1. If by resisting common preparing grace thou so harden â—hy heart or increase the privation of receptive aptitude in thy self as that the same degree of grace means help impress will not change thee which otherwise would
Remedying means and duties for himself Lib. No that must not be imagined P. Quest 2. Is not all this commanded by the Law of Grace Lib. Yes If it be a Law P. Quest 3. Was not Christ under a Law which bound him 1. To obey all the precepts of nature perfectly without sin 2. To obey all the Mosaical Law as far as he was capable 3. To do all this a sa Mediator to reconcile God and man And to dye for sinners to work Miracles to send out Apostles to gather a Chruch to intercede for us and to present us Justified and perfect to his father And are we obliged to do so too Lib. No one so imagineth P. Quest 4. Did not Christ as a Covenanter undertake all this And do we do so too And do not we in Baptism our selves consent and promise to take God the Father Son and Holy Ghost for our Father Saviour and Sanctifier and to forsake the flesh the world and the devil Is it Christ only that is Baptized Nay did Christ ever receive such a Baptism as this to wash away his sins and deliver him a pardon Is it Christ or we that at Baptism make these promises to God Is it to Christ or us that Christ himself saith If thou believe and repent thou shalt be saved Doth Christ as King make Laws and Covenants to bind himself only Who seeth not that hath any sense of Scripture matters that The Mediators case office and work is one and ours another that It is one Law that was given him and another to us yea that which seemeth the same was another being not formally but materially only the same and forma denominat For he was to fulfil the Law of Moses and of Innocency to such ends as a Redeemer and with such difference from our case that it was not formally but materially and that but in part the same Law and so his Baptism was formally another thing from any ones Baptism else in the World It was one thing that Christ promised and undertook in his Covenant with the Father and it 's another thing that we undertake and promise It 's one thing that God promiseth to Christ upon his Merits that he shall see of the â—ravail of his soul and be satisfied and another thing that he promiseth us that our persons shall be Justified sanctified and saved In a word by the Law given to Christ Christ himself is Governed as a Subject and Justified and Rewarded by God as his Judge for fulfilling it By the Law given to us we are the subjects and Christ is the Governour Lawgiver and our Judge who will Justifie reward or condemn and punish us I know not how that man can preach the Gospel that knoweth not the difference between the Law and Covenant made to and with Christ as Mediatour and the Law and Covenant made to and with us and in Baptism solemnly prosessed Children should not be ignorant of it Lib. But it is the same thing which is promised to Christ and us viz. that we shall be justified and saved and this is promised first to Christ and therefore the words cited may be justified Christ is the seed of the woman who is first to break the Serpents head Gen. 3. 15. P. 1. The same thing may be promised to different persons in different Covenants To promise to Christ that his elect shall be saved and to promise Believers that they shall be saved are two promises 2. What one word do you find in Gen. 3. of a Covenant or promise made to Christ It 's true that he is the principal Seed there meant though not the only But he is the Promised Seed It 's one thing for a promise to be made to Christ and another thing that Christ as the viâ—torious seed â— be promised to man There is no promise in Gen. 3. to Christ mentioned â—â— and what can be meant by a Promise of God to God himself but a prophecy and promise of a Saviour to man But if there had that would not have proved these two to be one Understand the tenour and difference of these several Laws and Covenants of God or pretend not to understand the Scripture viz. 1. The Law and Covenant of Innocency made to Adam â— The Law and Covenant made to and with the Mediatour for our Redemption 3. The promise Law or Covenant of Grace of the first Edition made to Adam and all in him and renewed with Noe and mankind in him 4. The Law and Covenant both of Common Grace and of Peculiarity at once given to Abraham and perfected in the Law and Covenant of Works made by Moses with the Jews 5. The Law and Covenant of Grace made by the Incarnate Mediatour and the Father by him in the second perfect Edition with eminent peculiarity CHAP. VI. Whether the New Covenant of Grace have any Conditions Lib. V. BY feigning the Covenant of Grace to have Conditions you make it to be a Covenant of works P. Either by works you mean any humane acts And so all Gods Covenants with man and his Laws are of works that is It is some act of man that they require For what else can be commanded Or you mean as Paul doth when he calls the Jews Law a Law of works And if so you falsifie his doctrine or ours Prove if you can that by works he meaneth every humane Act and that Faith it self is either no Act of man or the works meant by him Lib. Faith is a work but it is not put in the Covenant as a work required of us but as a gift to be given to us freely P. Judge whether it be required of us and that formally as a condition by such texts as these yea whether obedience be not required as a Condition of our salvation which is promised thereupon 1 Tim. 4. 8. Godliness hath the promise of the life that now is and of that which is to come Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned Rom. 10. 8 9 10 13. If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead N. B. this is an act distinct from accepting his Righteousness thou shalt be saved For with the heart man believeth unto Righteousness and with the mouth Confession is made unto salvation For whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved Matth. 6. 14 15. For if ye forgive men their trespasses your Heavenly Father will also forgive you But if c. Rev. 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have Right to the tree of life c. See Isa 1. 16 17 18. 55. 6 7. Luk. 13. 3 5. 1 Joh. 1. 9. Act. 3. 19. Heb. 5. 9 c. Lib. God promiseth a Reward to our Actions not as ours but as hâ— own gifts P. 1. Enough is said of Rewards before We shall
Ministers and serious Christians not only for Ceremonies but for holy practices of life Being under these apprehensions when the Wars began though the Cause it self lay in Civil Controversies between King and Parliament yet the thoughts that the Church and Godliness it self was deeply in danger by Persecution and Arminianism did much more to byass me to the Parliaments side than the Civil interest which at the heart I little regarded At last after two years abode in a quiet Garrison upon the Invitation of some Orthodox Commanders in Fairfax's Army and by the Mission of an Assembly of Divines I went after Naseby Fight into that Army as the profest Antagonist of the Sectaries and Innovators who we all then too late saw designed those changes in the Church and State which they after made I there met with some Arminians and more Antinomians These printed and preached as the Doctrine of Free Grace that all men must presently believe that they are Elect and Justified and that Christ Repented and Believed for them as Saltmarsh writeth I had a little before engaged my self as a Disputer against Universal Redemption against two antient Ministers in Coventry Mr. Cradock and Mr. Diamond that were for it But these new notions called me to new thoughts which clearly shewed me the difference between Christs part and Mans the Covenant of Innocency with its required Righteousness and the Covenant of Grace with its required and imputed righteousness I had never read one Socinian nor much of any Arminians but I laid by prejudice and I went to the Scripture where its whole current but especially Matth. 25. did quickly satisfie me in the Doctrine of Justification and I remembred two or three things in Dr. Twisse whom I most esteemed which inclined me to moderation in the five Articles 1. That he every where professeth that Christ so far dyed for all as to purchase them Justification and Salvation conditionally to be given them if they believe 2. That he reduceth all the Decrees to two de fine de mediis as the healing way 3. That he professeth that Arminius and we and all the Schoolmen are agreed that there is no necessity consequentis laid on us by God in Predestination but only necessity consequentiae or Logical but in Election I shall here suspend 4. That the Ratio Reatus in our Original Sin is first founded in our Natural propagation from Adam and but secondarily from the positive Covenant of God 5. That Faith is but Causa dispositiva Justificationis and so is Repentance These and such things more I easilier received from him than I could have done from another But his Doctrine of Permission and Predetermination and Causa Mali quickly frightned me from assent And though Camero's moderation and great clearness took much with me I soon perceived that his Resolving the cause of sin into necessitating objects and temptations laid it as much on God in another way as the Predeterminants do And I found all godly mens Prayers and Sermons run quite in another strain when they chose not the Controversie as pre-engaged In this case I wrote my first Book called Aphorisms of Justification and the Covenants c. And being young and unexercised in writing and my thoughts yet undigested I put into it many uncautelous words as young Writers use to do though I think the main doctrine of it sound I intended it only against the Antinomians But it sounded as new and strange to many Upon whose dissent or doubtings I printed my desire of my friends Animadversions and my suspension of the Book as not owned by me nor any more to be printed till further considered and corrected Hereupon I had the great benefit of Animadversions from many whom I accounted the most judicious and worthy persons that I had heard of First my friend Mr. John Warren began next came Mr. G. Lawson's the most judicious Divine that ever I was acquainted with in my judgement yet living and from whom I learned more than from any man next came Mr. Christopher Cartwright's then of York the Author of the Rabbinical Comment on Gen. chap. 1 2 3. and of the Defence of King Charles against the Marquess of Worcester Answers and Rejoinders to these took me up much time next came a most judicious and friendly MS. from Dr. John Wallis and another from Mr. Tombes and somewhat I extorted from Mr. Burges the answers to which two last are published To all these Learned men I owe very great thanks and I never more owned or published my Aphorisms but the Cambridge Printer stole an Impression without my knowledge And though most of these differed as much from one another at least as from me yet the great Learning of their various Writings and the long Study which I was thereby engaged in in answering and rejoyning to the most was a greater advantage to me to receive accurate and digested conceptions on these subjects than private Students can expect My mind being thus many years immerst in studies of this nature and I having also long wearied my self in searching what Fathers and Schoolmen have said of such things before us and my Genius abhorring Confusion and Equivocals I came by many years longer study to perceive that most of the Doctrinal Controversies among Protestants that I say not in the Christian World are far more about equivocal words than matter and it wounded my soul to perceive what work both Tyrannical and unskilful Disputing Clergie-men had made these thirteen hundred years in the world And experience since the year 1643. till this year 1675. hath loudly called to me to Repent of my own prejudices sidings and censurings of causes and persons not understood and of all the miscarriages of my Ministry and life which have been thereby caused and to make it my chief work to call men that are within my hearing to more peaceable thoughts affections and practices And my endeavours have not been in vain in that the Ministers of the Countrey where I lived were very many of such a peaceable temper though since cast out and a great number more through the Land by Gods Grace rather than any endeavours of mine are so minded But the Sons of the Coal were exasperated the more against me and accounted him to be against every man that called all men to Love and Peace and was for no man as in a contrary way And now looking daily in this posture when God calleth me hence summoned by an incurable Disease to hasten all that ever I will do in this World being uncapable of prevailing with the present Church disturbers I do apply my self to posterity leaving them the sad warning of their Ancestors distractions as a Pillar of Salt and acquainting them what I have found to be the cause of our Calamities and therein they will find the Cure themselves II. I Have oft taken the boldness constrainedly to say that I doubt not but the Contentions of the Clergie have done far more
the dead 444. 19. The object of Glorifying Grace is a member of Christ or a Saint thus finally Justified either in soul first or in soul and body after as is said 445. 20. The object of Gods greatest felicitating complacency is the Glorified Church of all the holy ones And the object of his utmost universal complacency in the Creature is the Glory of his image shining on the whole Universe in perfection As the object as we may call it of his Essential Volition Love or Complacency is Himself And as these are the objects of the grace thus distinguished by the effects so are they of the will or Decree of giving it as denominated according to the order of Execution Besides which Davenant on one account and Twisse on another grant that quoad media there is no other for man to know 446. By this it appeareth that the Corrupted Mass simply considered was the object of no one of all these graces But the Corrupted Mass as Judged first and after as Redeemed and after as under Covenant c. Much less was it any effect of God as corrupt 447. The corrupted Mass iudged was not as such the object of Gods discrimination by Election of some and rejection of others For they were commonly brought all under the Covenant of Grace and had a common sort of grace before the discrimination SECT XVI Of the Order of the Decrees called Reprobation And of Election and Reprobation in themselves 448. ACcordingly in the order of execution we must reckon the objects of that which some call Reprobation answerable to what D'Orbellis in â— d. 40. Distinguuntur Scientia Praescientia Providentia propositum electio dispositio praedestinatio reprobatio Haec differâ—nt secundum rationem licet sint idem realiâ—er in Deo 1. Scientia Dei est certa Cognitio omnium praeteritorum praesentium futurorum fierique possibilium tam bonorum quam malorum 2. Praescientia est futurorum praecognitio Reprobati vero appropriate dicuntur Praesciti Providenâ—â—a est praescientâ—a futurorum in quantum â—â—nt â— praescientâ— in â—inâ—m ordinabilia 3. Proposâ—tâ—â— est actus Voluntatiâ— Divinâ— tam respecâ—â—â—uturorum agâ—ndorum quam permittendorum 4. Electiâ— supra Propositum addit discretionem electi à â—uo contrario sâ—il boni à malo 5. Dispositio est praescientia faciendorum respiciens fiâ—ri rei cognitionem sicut provientia respicit esse rei postquam facta est 6. Praedestinatio est propositum divinae voluntatis conferendi gratiam gloriam praedestinatis 7. Reprobatio est propositum permittendi reprobatos permanere in obduratione finali â—etribuâ—nâ—i eis interminabilem pâ—nam propter corum iniquitatâ—m is before said of Election But order requireth that I first speak of Election and Reprobation as in themselves what they are 449. Election as to the etymologie I need not explain It is taken 1. For a Temporary actual Taking one rather than another by way of Choice Which is 1. By meer Volition or Election of the will 2. Or also by manual Apprehension or Executive Election As a man taketh a woman to wife 2. Or it is taken for An Eternal Electing Decree of God 450. Gods Executive Election in Time is twofold 1. By giving one man converting effectual Grace which he giveth not to another 2. By taking confequently that Converted person to be one of his Adopted and Justified ones as his choice peculiar treasure 451. Gods Mental Election being an Act of his will is either his meer Decree of the Event 2. Or his Decree as efficient 3. Or else his complacency The first is eternal The second is eternal ex parte Dei but not ex parte effectus The third is eternal as it is Gods essence but is denominated Temporary by connotation of the object as also may the second be About these there needs no quarrel 452. All the special grace which God giveth in Time he decreed from Eternity to give And though some decrees have special objects in esse cogniâ—â— supposed none of them have a proper exterior cause 453. It is not possible that any Creature can have any good which is not a pure gift of God however he may require of man Conditions of Reception in the order of Collation Therefore the Decree must neeâ—s be free 454. As to the question whether God elect men upon foresight of any good in them enough is said before to answer it If the question mean whether Gods Knowledge or Volition be first in themselves I answer neither For nothing in him is before or after other But if God might be spoken of as man we must say that his Understanding is the first specifying primiciple and the will the first quoad exercitium actus And therefore that the Divine understanding represented to his will the object iâ— its Eligibility If the question be what is the objects represented eligibility in esse cognito vel Ideali it is answered 1. We must distinguish of the Divine Volitions called Elections by the divers effects 1. To pass by the rest It is one thing to Elect to Glory or Velle Glorificare And here the object of Actual Glorification is a persevering Saint And you must distinguish Gods Volitions by his executions or not at all which you had rather 2. It is another thing to choose one to the first grace of faith or true Conversion And here the object of the execution is as is aforesaid sometime one prepared by common grace though without merit sometime one extraordinarily wicked Look over what I said of the objects and the question of foresight is answered as far as it belongeth to our enquiry 455. Those that deny all special arbitrary Election must deny all special arbitrary effectual differing grace which I shall prove elsewhere by it self And now referr such to Davenants Dissertation de praedest where it is fully proved and defended 456. One thing which deceiveth such men is that they forget that God standeth to man not only in the Relation of a Rector per Leges for so he dealeth equally with all that make not the inequality themselves But also as a Proprietor and a Benefactor in both which Relations he is free to do with his own as he pleaseth And free Lords and Benefactors use not to distribute equally their gifts Nor do they consider that de facto God visibly maketh wonderful inequalities He maketh not men as great or good as Angels nor Stars as glorious as the Sun The whole sheweth us admirable variety arbitrarily made by the great Benefactor who giveth not to us a Reason of his will 457. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reprobus in Scripture is used no where that Jer. 6. 30. I remember but Rom. 1. 28. 1 Cor. 9. 27. 2 Cor. 13. 5 6 7. 2 Tim. 3. 8. Tit. 1. 16. Heb. 6. And the word Reprobation is not used at all as any act of God But predestination and election are oft used on the better
subject de quo of which it is truly said They are without the Gospel 520. 2. Gods not converting effectually some that have the Gospel is no Act and hath no object But the subject of the Privation called the Object is Some part of those men who have forfeited the helps of special Grace by their abuse or neglect of the Gospel and the Commoner grace which was given them 521. 3. Gods not Pardoning Justifying Adopting and Sanctifying men is no Act and hath no object But the subject of the Privation and object of the Laws contrary sentence is Impenitent Unbelievers or the non-performers of the condition of Justification c. in the Covenant 522. 4. Gods not Glorifying men is no Act nor the damnation which consisteth in sin as aforesaid is none of Gods act But the sentence of condemnation is Gods Act and no doubt some other Positive Execution And the object of these is All finally Impenitent Unbelievers and unholy ones that is who performed not the Condition of that Edition of the Covenant of Grace which they were under 523. And it being past all denyal that these are the objects of the Executive Acts we must say that these also are the objects of the Decrees accordingly where a Decree is proved and when we speak of them only juxta ordinem executionis and not Intentionis which I laid by before 524. And lest you recurr to it once more I will recite more of Davenants words de ordine Intentionis De Praed Reprob cap. 1. p. 107. 1. Sciendum tenendum est si Dei naturam perfectionem in se consideremus illum non prius unum videre deinde aliud neque prius hoc decernere aut velle deinde illud sed unico simplicissimo actu c. 2. Ex parte tamen Rerum quae decrevit signa quaedam prioritatis posterioritatis distingui possunt Hic tamen observandum est inter ipsos Scholasticos non admodum certam constantem esse hanc doctrinam de hisce signis seu instantibus prioritatis Scotus qui primarius est ad haec signa fabricanda artifex videtur non-nullis non solum eadem posuisse priora posteriora secundum nostrum intelligendi modum sed etiam statuisse unum esse in ipso Deo prius naturâ alio But from this he vindicateth him Ex adversa parte Occamus noster haec signa quocunque modo considerata negavit in 1. d. 9. q. 3. Et Biel ejus sententiam amplexus haec signa oppugnavit in 3. d. 2. q. 1. dub 3. Prioritates in Divinis non sunt ponendae sicut nec pluralitates actuum ordinatorum Unus est enim Actus in Divinis re ratione indistinctus qui est ipsa essentia Divina ne secundum nostram quidem considerationem talem ordinem Prioritatis posterioritatis concipi posse in decretis Divinis ut talis consideratio non sit falsa speculatio If this hold our Controversie of the order is at an end 525. And he added the words even of a rigid Thomist Domin Bannes quamvis non omnino explodat haec signa cum Biele perpendens tamen discordiam Theologorum in his assignandis Animadvertendum est inquit quam pro libito in negotio praedestinationis reprobationis multiplicentur instantiae à Theologis quam parum illa conferant ad assignandam rationem differentiae inter praedestinatos reprobos Liceat itaque hic paucis monere non esse nimis confidendum aut certo dogmati adhaerendum ulli certo ordini decretorum divinorum sive à Protestantibus sive à Pontificiis assignato cum difficile sit duos reperire sive inter nostros sive inter adversarios qui ad amussim per omnia consentiant in hac serie decretorum divinorum describenda Caveat it aque unâ—squisque ne talem considerationem praedestinationis reprob inducat quae vel Divinae justitiae vel gratiae gratuitae adversetur tâ—m non multum refert quo ordine prioritatis c. SECT XVII Of Gods Causing and Decreeing Sin 526. BUt because it is the avoiding of Gods Causing and Willing sin Of too many such enquirers it may be said with Augustine de Utilit Credâ—ndi cap. 18. Dum nimis quaerunt unde sit malum nihil reperiâ—nt nisi malum Obj. Omnis determinatio diâ—ina est immutabilis Omnia siuâ—t Deo determinante Ergo omnia siunt immutâ—hiliter Respondet Mâ—lanâ—th Ad maj Est immutâ—bilâ—s necessitate conseqâ—entiae Ad minor Dissimilâ—s est determinatio in bonis malis actionibus Mala siunt 1. Deo praesciente non impediâ—nte non autem adjuvante vel impellente Item Deo sustentante naturam suum opus Item Deo eventus certos decernente Strigel in Melancth pag. 296. Carbo Compend Thom. 1. q. 19. a. 9. Malum ut malum nullo appâ—titu potest appeti nisi per aâ—â—idâ—ns Deus â—ullo modo vult malum Culpae Deus neque vult siâ—ri malum â—â—que non vult sed permitti Ruiz de praedesin Tr. 2. disp 13. §. 3 4. would prove a decree to permit mortal sin in the unjust and just ex destitutione circumstantiis And d. 16. §. 3. he tellâ—th us of many wayes by which God maketh sin the occasion of his Grace without causing or willing sin in form or nearest matter which is a great reason of these Controversies I shall say somewhat more particularly of that About which there are various Opinions 1. Some think as Hobbs that no acts of the will are so free as not to be necessitated as the motions in an Engine though unobserved by our selves who see not the Concatenation of Causes 527. 2. Some Dominicans and our Dr. Twisse and Rutherford held that no act natural or free can be done by any creature without the Predetermination of Gods Physical efficient immediate Premotion as the first total Cause of that act But yet that this standeth with Liberty because God causeth contingentia contingenter fieri And that he so causeth every Act of sin in all its circumstances and the totum materiale peccati and all that the sinner causeth But yet that he is not the Author of sin nor causeth the form Because 1. They say that sin hath no efficient cause but a deficient which God is not being not obliged to act And sin is nothing but a privation 2. Because God is under no Law and therefore though he do the same things that man doth it is sin in man but not in him And saith Holkot he is the cause of sin but not the Author because he commandeth it not by his Law 3. At other times they say that sin is formally a Relation of disconformity to the Law of God and God causeth the whole act as circumstanced but not the relation which resulteth from it 4. And God causeth not sin as sin but as a means to his Glory or as a punishment of former sin
and deserved it by sin In a word that mans destruction is of himself but his help of God who resolvedly chooseth some to salvation and helpeth them accordingly with that effectual grace and especial perseverance which he justly giveth not to others though if he would he could SECT XXIII Healing Principles and Concessions of the Synod of Dort c. 666. I Know not how to conclude this discourse more suitably to my ends than by opening to the Reader who is sensible of the Churches sin misery and danger by our contentions and divisions how much the parties whom I endeavour to reconcile are agreed in judgement about these matters and that in their own words Remember still that it is not some few that run further than the rest either Episcopius Curcellâ—â—â— c. on one side or Maccovius Rutherford or Dr. Twisse or Alvarez and other Predeterminants on the other side whose particular opinions I cannot undertake to reconcile But only the generality of the Calvinists who go no further than the Synod of Dort which is my test of the party and the moderate Arminians Lutherans and Jesuits in these points on the other side And let none reproach me for putting in the Jesuites for as I know that very few Calvinists fly near so high for Predetermination as the Dominicans do so I know that though Arminius himself was a sober man and Episcopius is cryed up by some as Volkelius and other Socinians are by others as most clearly rational yet there is none of them all that equal in accurateness of search and clearness of reason either many of the ancient Schoolmen or Suarez Ruiz Vasquez Albertinus and many other latter School Jesuits 667. The first thing that I will desire of the Reader is to peruse those many healing concessions contained in the writings especially Irenicons of many Learned Calvinists already extant Especially Davenants two dissertations Dr. Sam. Wards works the Judgements of Davenant Morton Hall to Dury about this Bishop Robert Abbots and Bishop Carltons works oft on the by Bishop Usher of Redemption c. Mr. Fennâ—r of wilful Impenitency and Hidden Manna Joh. Bergius for Reconcil Iâ—dov Crocii Syntag. Conrad Bergii Praxis Can. Junii Irenicon and of predeterm Paraei Irenicon Amyrald Defens doct Calv. Irenicon Testard de nat Grat. Hotton de toler Theses Salmur but above all Le Blanks Theses Vossii Thess Histor Pelag. Musculi Loc. Commun And the geral Irenicons as all Durie's Hall's Peacemaker and Pax terris Burroughs Iren. Acontii stratagem Satana an excellent book c. 668. Next I will insert some words to this end in the Synod of Dort I. About the first Article of Predestination they open free election but mention no other Reprobation but Gods not-electing or passing by some whom he found in sin and in the misery in quam se suâ culpâ praecipitarunt c. and not giving them effectual grace of Conversion but leaving them in their sin And can any doubt of this or do any Jesuits or Arminians deny it Where also they declare that God is no cause of mens sin but themselves And that the Children of the faithful are by Covenant so holy that their salvation who dye in infancy is not to be doubted of And that those that find not saving grace in themselves but yet use the means have no cause to be cast down at the mention of Reprobation 669. II. About Christs death they say that His satisfaction is of infinite value and price abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of all the world And that the promise is that whoever believeth shall not perish which is to be preached to all And that many yet repent not believe not but perish is not through any defect or insufficiency of Christs sacrifice but by their own fault And that others believe is of undeserved grace 670. III. In the third and fourth Art sect 8 9. they say that the fault is not in Christ or the Gospel that many that are called are not converted and come not nor in God that calleth them and giveth them many gifts but in the called themselves that receive not the word of life c. And that you may see that they hold a conditional will or decree not only of future but of non-future contingents they say that As many as are called by the Gospel are seriously called and God seriously and truly sheweth by his word what would be acceptable to him viz. that the called come to him So that here is a serious declaration of Gods will to those that never will come to him conditionally if they would come These kind of notions please or displease men as the interest of their opinions requireth 671. And the confession of Pet. Molinaeus received by the Synod is worthy observation pag. 290 291. where he saith Sin is the Meritorious Cause of Destination to punishment And Though natural corruption be cause sufficient for Reprobation as we kill new spawned Not only of punishment it self Serpents before they hurt any yet there is no doubt but that for what cause God damneth men for the same he decreed to damn them But he damneth reprobates for sins committed For they suffer in hell not only for original sin but for all actual sins whence is the inequality of punishment Therefore God Decreed to damn them for the same sins For nothing hindereth but that God who considereth men in natural corruption and pravity may consider them also polluted in the actual sins which they will thence commit And among the sins for which any one is Destinated to punishment no doubt is unbelief and rejection of the Gospel No reason suffereth that he should be Reprobated for rejecting of the Gospel to whom the Gospel was never revealed That God destinated any to eternal punishment without consideration of impenitence and unbelief we neither say nor think And though God predestinate the Elect to faith he doth not predestinate the Reprobate to unbelief For we must distinguish the media which God findeth in men from those which he maketh He findeth in men unbelief the means of damnation But faith he findeth not but maketh Therefore he predestinateth to faith but not to unbelief For he predestinateth but to that which he decreed to make Lastly Impenitence in order goeth before Reprobation but faith is after Election as being its effect Is not here enough to reconcile And next of Christs death he saith that It is abundantly sufficient to save all men in the world if they would believe And that all are not saved by it is not through the insufficiency of Christs death but of their pravity and unbelief 672. And pag. 295. he saith that Arminius holdeth irresistible grace and that the Elect are drawn of God by effectual grace whose effect is most certain and infallible by Congruity 673. The Brittish Divines in their Suffrage say that Pag. 11. Th. 1. Expl. God in the decree of Election prepareth Glory
37. Sect. IV. Of the Law of Grace or New Covenant in the last Edition The Nature Conditions and yet free Donations of it pag. 42. Sect. V. Of the giving of the Holy Ghost His common and special Works The extent of the New Covenant Of the state of those that have not the Gospel And what Law they are under pag. 45. Sect. VI. How far Christ died for all and how far not pag. 51. Sect. VII The antecedent and consequent Will of God explained Of Justification by Faith What faith it is and what it doth pag. 54. Sect. VIII Of Justification by Christ's Righteousness imputed The false sense of Imputation opened and fully confuted The true sense asserted Whether Christ paid our Idem or Tantundem Whether he made his Satisfaction to God only as to a Rector or as Dominus vel pars laesa or how pag. 59. Sect. IX Of the sorts of Justification And first of constitutive Justification Of Righteousness How far it is or is not in our own habits or acts What Right the Covenant giveth the baptized to following helps and degrees of Grace Further what must be in our selves Mans holiness is no dishonour to Gods Grace How far Christ strippeth us of our own Righteousness More against the false sense of Imputation Objections answered pag. 69. Sect. X. Of Merit The case plainly and briefly decided The Gospel-Condition or Merit is but the accepting a free Gift according to its nature Whether we may trust to our own Faith Repentance Holiness The last Argument for the false sense of Imputation answered pag. 79. Sect. XI How Faith justifieth whether as an Instrument pag. 82. Sect. XII How far Repentance is a Condition of the Covenant And what it is Whether Faith or it be first How Faith and Love differ pag. 83. Sect. XIII Of the degrees of Pardon and Justification Whether losable And whether future sins be pardoned pag. 85. Sect. XIV Of Justification by Sentence of the Judge What it is ibid. Sect. XV. Of initial executive Pardon or Justification in Sanctificatiâ— How far necessary yet imperfect pag. 86. Sect. XVI Of assurance of Pardon Of doubting Whether it be Dâ—â—â— Faith to believe ones own Justification or Salvation The Spâ—â— Testimony pag. 88. Sect. XVII Of love to God as the end of Faith and foretast of Heâ—â—â— pag. 91. Sect. XVIII Of Perseverance and its certainty in order to the comfortâ—â— certainty of Salvation Few certain of Justification and â—â—â—â— of Perseverance The words of the Synod of Dort The â—â— ther 's Judgment about certainty of perseverance pag. 93 Sect. XIX Of mortal Sin or such as will not stand with the love of Gâ—â— and a state of Justification pag. 103. Sect. XX. What Repentance for particular sins is necessary to parâ—â— pag. 106. Sect. XXI Some solution of all the former difficulties in twenty Propâ—â—ons 108. Sect. XXII Few certain of Salvation The reconciling consequents of â—â—â— pag. 112. Sect. XXIII The case of Perseverance further opened and applied pag. 113. Sect. XXIV The sum and scope of this Discourse of Certainty pag. 116. Sect. XXV Degrees of falling and danger pag. 118. Sect. XXVI Of final Justification at Judgment More of the Agreemâ—â—â— Paul and James about Justification by Works pag. 119. Sect. XXVII Of the number of the glorified and the damned pag. 123. A PREMONITION MY work at present is but to lay down so much of the Christian Doctrine briefly as is necessary to be understood for the reconciling of the Controversies about Predestination Providence Grace and Free-will And therefore pass over â—any other weighty Points and must not stand largely to prove all â—s I go which carrieth its own evidence The true nature of the first â—aw or Covenant deserveth a more accurate discussion than I can here â—ake and much passeth as certain with some which hath but little â—roof And here I meet with these different Opinions 1. Some say that the â—ondition of the first Covenant was not Innocency but sincerity And â—at Innocency was only a Duty necessary necessitate praecepti but not â—edii or that it was ut medium necessary ad melius esse or to some cerâ—â—in degrees of felicity whereof it was a condition but not to felicity it â—â—lf And that the Covenant of Grace doth herein agree with it both â—f them damning man only for mortal sin and punishing them tempoâ—â—lly only for venial sin And he seemeth to be of this mind who saith â—â—at Do this and live or Innocency or Works was the Condition only â—f Moses Law but that Adhere and Vanquish was the Condition of the â—rst Covenant But these are ambiguous unsatisfactory terms If the â—eaning be Adhere to God and his Law by perfect Innocency and vanâ—uish all temptations to Sin this is the same with that Innocency which â—e say was the Condition But if he mean only Adhere to me sinâ—erely by love as thy Ultimate End and vanquish all temptations which â—ould draw thee from me to another Ultimate End or God this is â—he same with the first opinion which many Papists seem to hold 2. But the more common Opinion is that which I assert That Innoâ—ency was the Condition not only of Life eternal but of all the beâ—efits of Gods Covenant and the least sin the forfeiture of all They that are for the first Opinion think that if Adam had committed â—ut a small or venial sin as a sinful thought or desire after the forbidden â—ruit without the act or full consent it had been against Gods natural Goodness and Justice to have condemned him to Hell for it And conâ—quently that Christ died not to pardon the pains of Hell as due for such â—â—ttle sins but only temporal smaller punishments But God best knoweth his own Nature And nature telleth us That â—ll sin deserveth punishment And he that sinneth so far removeth his â—eart from God and forfeiteth his Spirit or Grace And he that hath â—nce so turned from God in the least degree cannot of himself return â—or heal himself and had no promise of Gods Grace to do it And â—herefore it is not to be supposed that he should sin no more but such a â—inute sin for greater will come in presently at that breach unless God â—ecover him which he was not in Justice bound to do And no one knowâ—th so well as God how much malignity is in the smallest sin And it was as â—asie for sinless Adam to have continued sinless as for carnal men now â—o forbear gross sin And he that sinneth deserveth not Heaven or Life â—nd there are divers degrees of punishment in Hell according to the degrees of Sin And Christ died for all our sins therefore they dâ— every one deserve death which consisted not with a right to Life therefore not with a right to Heaven And an immortal Soul was not naturally to be annihilated therefore to live in some punishment as separated And Rom. 3. 9. all were under Sin yet all had not gross Sâ—â—
Rom. 6. 23. The wages of Sin is Death Rom. 5. 12. Death passed on alâ— for that all have sinned Rom. 2. 12. As many as have sinned withâ—â—â— Law shall perish without Law And we must pray for the pardon of aâ—â— Sin And unpardoned Sin will damn men These are the reasons â—â— this side They of the other Opinion say That the Gospel-Covenant sheweâ—â— Gods Nature as well as the first Law That God had not been unjust iâ—deed if he had permitted him to fall into great Sin and so to periâ—â— who committed the least for he so permitted Adam to commit the first that was before innocent But the Justice of God bound him not so it do nor would have damned a Lover of God for a small Sin no more than now That we must not feign a Law which we cannot prove That God changeth not his holy Nature and therefore not that Law which is the expression of it That Christ died for all Sin and all needs pardon but that proveth not that the least deserved death much less Hell but that by Christ's Death the deserved punishment must be remitted that all even Infants are guilty of mortal Sin in Adam The Death is the wages of that Sin which brought it but not of the least That Adam's Law was not severer than that by Moses which saith Dâ— this and live and yet condemned not men for smaller sins That God proclaimeth pardon of some Sin in the very Law of Nature as from his Nature Exod. 34. and the Second Commandment That Nature teacheth all the World to believe it That God said not to Adam â—â— the day that thou thinkest a vain thought but That thou eatest c. That mortal Sin is pardonable by Christ which else could not by the first Law but God could otherwise have pardoned a vain thought if he would That no Text of Scripture saith that every Sin deserveth Hell nor is threatned with Death And as the condition of the Penalty so the condition of the Promise to Adam is here also controverted by Divines 1. Some say that the condition of Life was personal perfect perpetual Obedience till â—â—â— change which God would make as he did by Henoch when it pleased him which seemeth to me the probablest Opinion 2. Others think that Adam was to have continued in Eden for ever under that same conditional Law which is less probable 3. Others think that had he over-come the first temptation but so far as to adhere and vanquish that is to continue the love of God and not to eat that Fruit or commit any other mortal Sin which of its nature killeth Love he had been confirmed as the promised Reward 4. I have lately met with an exceeding ingenious M. S. written partly against my self after others which asserteth 1. That the Glory of Justice is the end of Gods Government 2. That Do this perfectly and live or Sin at all and die are the constant terms of Justice under every Covenant 3. That if Adam had performed but one â—â— of Obedience by that Law he should have been rewarded with confirmation or the Holy Ghost as the Angels and with everlasting life 4. That now all our Reward is only the Act of Gods Justice giving â—â— life as merited by us in Christ on the terms of the Law that saith Do this and live Sin and die in whom we are perfectly innocent and rewardable and we have no rewardable Righteousness nor any to justifie us but perfect Innocency imputed because as not to be a Sinner is no merit of a Reward so pardon of Sin is no Title to a Reward c. It is not my present task to clear up all these Difficulties having done more towards it in my Methodus Theologiae but only so much as our present conciliatory work requireth But yet because I and the matter in hand are nearly concerned in the M. S. I shall briefly animadvert on all the substance of it having first said of the condition of the penalty but a few words I. I am loth to confound the certainties with the uncertainties in this matter 1. It is certain that Gods Law of Nature was mans first and principal Law to which the supernatural Revelations were added and comparatively few 2. It is certain that Gods Law was perfect and that both as the impress and expression of Gods perfect Wisdom and Holiness and as the Rule of Perfection to Adam And therefore that it obliged him to perfection 3. But this Perfection to which he was obliged was not at first all that his nature would be capable of at last It was not his duty the first hour of his life to Know or Do as much as after the longest time and experience and as much as in heavenly perfection But he was bound to Know and Love and Do at first as much as at that time his nature was capable of supposing necessary Concauses and Objects 4. This is summed up in Loving God with all the Heart Mind and Might But the All in maturity and after full experience and in Glory is more than the All in unexperienced juniority To know love and obey God to the utmost intention of his present natural Power supposing due Objects media and concauses was Adam's duty and all defectiveness herein was culpable or sin 5. All sin of its own nature deserveth punishment Therefore so would the least culpable thought or word in Adam or the least culpable defect in the extent or intention of any holy affection in him 6. It is certain that Adam's eating the forbidden Fruit or any one such sin as consisteth not with the predominancy of his Love to God as God in habit such as is now inconsistent with true Grace and is called mortal was to be punished with death temporal and eternal according to the Justice of that Law 7. They are different questions 1. What God might do 2. What he would do as decreed 3. What he must do as necessary because of Justice or Veracity to the breaker of that Law And it is clear that God might as an Act of Justice punish the least culpable thought or remissness of degree of Love with Annihilation or with any pain-everlasting which to the Sinner were no worse than Annihilation Because 1. Antecedently to his Law he might have done that much as an affliction without sin 2. And after he did no way that I know of oblige himself to the contrary to a Sinner before the Covenant of Grace 3. And having threatned punishment in general he might choose what punishment he saw fit 8. What God would do as decreed the prediction or the event only can tell us 9. That God must by necessity of Justice and Truth punish the least sinful thought or remissness with some degree of punishment according to that Law seemeth to me somewhat clear 1. And yet it is more clear that it is various degrees of punishment which are comprized in the word Death or Filius mortis
not causa consilio But not immutable else he were no Creature An. You set up Free-will and Power more grosly in terms than I dare do though I suppose our meaning is the same Had I said thus what had I heard I only say that man may be a causa prima secundum quid of the moral specification or modification of his own Actions But he is simpliciter no causa prima of the Action in genere actionis else he were God But a causa principalis he may be called though not prima 2. You never proved that God cannot make a Creature naturally immutable dependently on himself that is such as will never change unless God change them nor that Jesus Christ is not such in his Humanity § 16. M. S. This confirmation is not by being in Heaven but by the Holy Ghosts special working on the Soul revealing still Gods Perfections to it An. And doth this Operation of the Holy Ghost make the Soul never the better in nature or disposition but only in Act Though it 's true that no habits immutably fix without the Influct of the Holy Ghost § 17. M. S. Merit is the suitableness of the work to the wages An. Merit is manifold and needs better explication In the Commâ—tative Justice of meer Proprietors merit is indeed the Comparative value of things and in works their suitableness as you say to the wages that is their equal worth But in distributive governing Justice there is no wages but only Reward And merit is the moral aptitude for Reward which is as various as the Law is that one is governed by There are five sorts of Law that by five sorts or ways of Justice require five sorts of merit 1. Gods Law of Innocency to Adam where Justice called nothing but personal perfect Obedience Merit 2. Gods Law to the Mediator who was obliged perfectly to keep 1. The whole Law of Nature 2. The Law of Moses 3. A peculiar Law of Mediation to die rise do Miracles c. The keeping of all this was Christ's Merit 3. There is Christ's Law of Grace to fallen man in the first and in the perfect Editions where our keeping of it is by Gospel-Justice called in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our worthiness or merit that is in tantum secundum quid in relation to that Law That is to repent and believe to love God and obey him sincerely 4. There is the Law of Moses peculiar to the Jews which hath its peculiar required merit 5. And there are the Laws of Men appointed and allowed of God which have their peculiar Justice and Merit All these are not to be confounded much less all denied as if there were no merit but between Proprietors in Commutative Justice In which sense no Creature can merit of God § 18. M. S. According to that Covenant any one Act of Obedience in Adam would have merited confirmation and eternal life that is one act of holy love An. I believe it not because it is not written nor naturally revealed that I know of My reasons against it are 1. It is dangerous to add to Gods Word 2. The words In the day that thou eatest thou shalt die seemeth to look further than to one first act or day and is as much as whensoever thou eatest though he should obey till that time 3. It is utterly improbable that Adam did not perform one Act of Love or Obedience before his Fall For 1. We are uncertain how long he stood However confident some Rabbins and Broughton and some others are that it was the same day in which he was created 2. You confess he was made with powers sanctified and fitted to obey 3. Gods Law of Love was written in his heart and as old as himself and could not but oblige a fit subject to the act And he must sin all that while that he loved not God as God 4. He had many thoughts and affections all that while which were sinful if not animated by holy Love and done in Obedience to God 5. He spent some time which was sinfully spent if not spent in Love and Obedience 6. God spake to him and so had sensible Communion with him which must needs oblige him to some love 7. He had a Law given him to dress and keep the Garden which if he accepted not by consent in Obedience to God he sinned 8. He gave names to all the Creatures upon Gods bringing them to him which must be done obediently or sinfully 9. He had the Law of Marriage given him with the Woman which if he received not in love and obedience he sinned 10. He had all the World before him to shew him Gods Perfections and if yet he had not one act of love to God as God he hainously sinned 11. He had the Law of Love and Obedience given him by way of Covenant that is binding him presently to consent And he could not delay a willing consent one minute or hour without sin And consent is Love and Obedience in the first act 12. He loved himself and his Wife and other Creatures before his Fall But if he loved not God before then he all that while loved himself his Wife and all the Creatures more than God yea without God And then they were his Idols 13. Else he never used one Creature holily before his Fall and therefore sinfully 14. You make Adam to have had less actual good before his Fall than the weakest Christian now If not than many wicked men who have some moral good secundum quid though not simpliciter 4. I do not think that the Reward which Christ was to have for his fulfilling the Law was immutability or confirmation For I think he had that in his very nature by the Unity of the Divine and Humane in one Person But I think that the perfect Glory of his Humanity was part of his Reward Phil. 2. 7 8 9. Heb. 12. 23 c. And therefore that Glory hath much more in it than confirmation in Grace But it 's plain in the Gospel that it was not only one Act of Obedience which was Christs condition in order to his receiving the Fruits or full Reward of his Merits But it was perfect Holiness of Nature and Life to the end of his course on Earth Else you must say that Christ's first Act of Obedience was his performance of his Covenant-Condition and all the rest for some other purpose only which is absurd 5. One act of our Obedience now is not the fulfilling of all the Condition of the Covenant of Grace nor entitleth us alone to Glory unless God cut off our life as soon as that act is done Perseverance to the end is part of our Condition of Glory And we know of no such difference between Adam's Covenant or Case and ours as will prove it otherwise with him 6. Else it would make the Condition of the Covenant of Grace to be much harder and severer than of the Law of Innocency
a Liberty and not Gibieufs Amplitude It is not possible for a Creature to have any thing that 's good but of God nor any good from God but by meer free Gift as to the Good or Value though it be by rewarding Justice quoad ordinem conferendi and comparatively why this man hath it rather than that § 24. M. S. There is no stinting or determining unless you stop here at the first act An. I deny it There are three Opinions more that are all more probable The first which supposeth the Reward of life eternal due upon the over coming of the Devils first temptation which would have drawn from the Love of God And so Love and Conquer once was the Condition The second which supposeth that the Condition was the Conquest of this particular Temptation to eat of the forbidden Fruit and the after eating of the Tree of Life The third which supposeth the only Condition of life eternal to the personal perfect perpetual Obedience or perseverance till God of his own pleasure should translate Adam and end his life of trial I take this last to have far most probability for all the Reasons before given I am sure that the tenor of the Law of Nature made it Adam's Duty still to love God and obey him and resist all that was against it And I find no Promise that his Nature or the Law of Nature should be changed for this or that act or for conquering some one temptation I find that Christ's own Covenant-Condition was more than one act And the Condition of our Glory is overcoming and being faithful to the death and continuing in Christ And I will not add to the Covenant of God § 25. M. S. Arg. 4. From the nature of an obediental act which includeth the approving of the whole Law An. 1. Approving the things that are excellent is made consistent with wickedness Rom. 2. But I will suppose you to mean a full consent to the Covenant of Innocency But 2. How prove you that such consent was the whole condition of life and that it might not be fallen from and that Adam never did consent before his Fall and yet not sin 3. All the godly approve of Gods Law and consent to it and love it and yet merit not as keepers of it for they break it Rom. 7. 4. Yea Covenant-keeping to the last as well as Covenant-consent the first moment is now to us the condition of immutable Glory § 26. M. S. Adam would not obey at first but suspend while he looked about the World to see if there were any good sufficient for him below God Therefore he sinned not then An. This is before confuted He could not in that Integrity and after such divine Revelation be unresolved one hour whether he must first love and obey his Maker without sin § 27. God cannot freely give eternal life to a Creature without Reward for doing because the reasonable Creature was made for the Glory of Justice An. 1. You may say that God will not to man but not that he cannot nor that he doth not to any Angel For man was not made only for the Glory of Justice but of Power and Love or Goodness also 2. It 's certain that God as a free Benefactor giveth many good things freely and â—â— as a Reward for doing As 1. He so freely made all things good in the Creation and gave man all his antecedent good He so gave Adâ—â— his primitive Holiness and Helps and Paradise and all the Creatureâ— 2. He so gave Christ to the World without desert and so far pardoned the first sin as that cometh to 3. He so far gave man the Covenant of Grace 4. He so gave all Christ's Miracles Resurrection Doctrine the Scripture c. 5. He so gave Apostles and Ministry to the World 6. He so sendeth the Gospel to some Nations and Persons above others 7. He so giveth to many the first special Grace as he did to Paul 8. He so giveth to many Kingdoms and Persons Wealth and Health and Strength and such other mercies above others 9. He so giveth greater measures of Grace to some than to others 10. And it seemeth that he so in part giveth the same Glory to some that came in but at the last hour of the day It is certain that all in quantum tale is from God only as a free Benefactor or as the Amor primus And the order of distributing it is two-fold Some antecedent to mans merit or acts and independent on it And this is no Reward though sometime it is an antecedent act of Justice such as is the making of a good Law or Promise And some consequent juxta morman legis And these are Rewards And though God hath assured us now that no man shall have Heaven but by rewarding Justice yet that may be because he thought meet to place man first on Earth in a life of trial and undetermined Liberty But that he hath no Angel that was made Immutable or that Christ was not made immutably holy let them say that can prove it for I cannot § 28. M. S. It 's like that the Angels that stood and they that fell had unequal help for unequal Effects are of an unequal Cause But Adam and the Devils had sufficient Grace and God forsook them not till they forsook him An. 1. This last I accept as true and more than some will grant 2. The first is above our reach only we can say both that God giveth more Grace to some than to others freely 3. And yet he himself is simple and immutable in causing of various and mutable Effects § 29. M. S. By Christs passive Obedience imputed we are pardoned and â—ustified and by his active imputed we deserve the Reward and are under Gods approving Will. An. 1. By the merit of his habitual active and passive that is of his performing all his mediatorial Covenant with the Father we are pardoned and justified and adopted to eternal life principally as a Reward to Christ not to us as meriting by him and subordinately according to Gospel-Justice or Order as a Reward to Believers for their Faith and Obedience by him who will Reward every man according to his Works and will be glorified in his Saints and admired in Believers because they believed 2 Thess 1. 6 to 12. We are under Gods approving Will principally as united to Christ reconciled justified adopted and subordinately as sanctified and obedient For the Father loveth us because we have loved Christ and believed Joh. 16. 27. And it is life eternal to know the Father and the Son Joh. 17. 3. And because we do those things that are pleasing in his sight what-ever we ask we receive 1 Joh. 3. 22. § 30. M. S. By Christs imputed suffering we are but where we were For the Law to have nothing against us will not justifie us unless it have something for us An. This great question needeth distincter handling Adam's Law doth not
justifie us but condemn us nor Moses's neither nor any but the Law of Grace Your foundation is unsound 2. The imputing of Christ's Suffering is not Gods Language but your own and may be well or ill understood 3. If the Law have nothing against us it hath no Sin of Omission against us Therefore not our omission of Love and Obedience And then we are reputed such as had perfect Love and Obedience 4. But indeed it is not so By the deeds of the Law no Flesh can be justified The Law still hath this against us that we have sinned which he that denieth is called a Lyar 1 Joh. 1. The Reatus Culpae in se or the Reality of this that we have sinned is impossible to be done away But the Reatus poenae culpae ut ad poenam is done away But not by the Law but by the Redeemer and new Covenant The Law doth not say We are sinless or deservers of life But the Gospel saith We are pardoned and adopted and sanctified through Christ's perfect meritorious Righteousness § 31. M. S. Else Sin and Punishment should be the cause of life for Sin is the cause of Suffering and that of Pardon An. This is the grossest passage in this Book A palpable fallacy You may as well say that Lazarus's dying and being buried were the causes of his reviving because antecedent evils from which he was revived Or that the Jews killing Christ were the causes of his Resurrection Or that Peter's cutting off Malchus Ear was the cause that Christ cured him Or that Peter's denying Christ was the cause that Christ pardoned him Sin deserveth Punishment but Punishment as such deserveth not Pardon or Life They in Hell deserve not Heaven If God had threatened but a temporal Punishment As a years sickness c. this had not deserved the following impunity or peace but only interrupted peace the Sin deserving this and no more A Malefactor's scourging deserveth not his after peace And Christ's Suffering merited not our Pardon as reputed our suffering nor meerly as suffering For had we suffered we had not been pardoned But the voluntary Suffering of so glorious and innocent a Person to demonstrate Justice deserved our impunity and more because God would have it so and it was a means most apt for this excellent end to save lost man and to vindicate and glorifie the Wisdom Truth and Justice of the Universal King and to demonstrate the Goodness and Love of our great Benefactor But sufferings as such do merâ—â— nothing even Christs own Sufferings merit but as they are the fruits of Obedience and voluntary consent on the foresaid accounts much less do the sufferings of the Sinner merit For he is supposed involuntary in them and it is God the Judge that is the Author of them as such § 32. M. S. Else the Law should be laid by and life given without it An. The root of all your Error is That God giveth us life by the Law of Innocency or Works and that we are justified by that Lawâ— which is not true God laid none of it by but man by sin made the promissory part which gave life on condition of perfect Obedience and Innocency to be impossible or null It ceased cessante capacitate subditorum by mans mutation and not by Gods But the preceptive part remaineth still as far as it reacheth materially the state of Sinners But man having made it impossible to be justified by the deeds of the Law God made us a new Law or Covenant according to which he judgeth Sinners and by which he first giveth Righteousness and then according to it sentenceth men as Righteous § 33. M. S. Justification of the Posterity of Adam should have been the same for substance as of Believers by Christ Adam's one Act should have confirmed all his Posterity in him as a publick Person The Covenant of Works and of Grace agree in justifying by imputed Righteousness but out of a Head by Generation the other by a divine Person An. This is presumptuous adding to Gods Word in the very substance of the Covenants yea and a flat contradiction of it 1. What Scripture telleth us That all Adam's Posterity should have been confirmed in immutable Holiness if he had obeyed 2. What Scripture saith That one Act should have done this 3. What Scripture saith That his Righteousness should have been imputed to all his Posterity and they all accounted to have fulfilled the Law in him The Scripture tells us nothing of Gods purpose to make so suddain a change of his Law as if he made it but for one man yea for oâ—â— Act and then would make another to Rule the World by ever after The Law said in sense Obey perfectly and live Sin and die Now if the Condition had been performed by one Act or one man for all the World that ever should come of him to the last and they all be born in the fixed possession of the Reward then the Law which giveth that Reward still but conditionally hath no more place As in Hell God doth not say to the damned Obey and live so neither doth he say to them in immutable Glory I give you immutable Glory if you will obey The means cease so far as the end is either attained or desperately lost He that saith Run well and you shall have the prize Fight well and you shall be crowned Overcome and I will give you a Kingdom will not say the same to them when after running fighting overcoming they have received the Prize the Crown the Kingdom though possibly they may have the continuance on condition still if that continuance was not also promised on the first condition alone So that you feign Gods Law to be incredibly mutable if God said by it to Adam Obey in one Act oâ— obey thy self and thou and all thy Posterity for that shall have the Reward For then he can never be supposed to say the same again to Adam or to any man And yet you think you stand so much for the â—mmutability of that Law as that we must all be justified by it to the â—nd Nay it seemeth that after one Act of Obedience all the World should have been under no Covenant any more or no promissory conditional Law but only fixed by necessitating Light and Love as those in Glory â—re For when this Condition was fully performed this Law or Covenant as conditional must needs cease And you imagine not I suppose at least mention not any other conditional Covenant that should â—ucceed it And necessitation is not a Moral Law suited to such as you call cause consilio in this life You would make all the World after one â—ct to be if not lawless yet Comprehensors and not Viators Professors of life eternal and not seekers in a life of trial But I find not but that all Adam's Posterity should have been born and â—ived under the same Law that he was made under And all of them â—hould
still have heard Obey and live or Sin and die And if Adam â—ad obeyed till his translation to Glory or confirmation in the Reward I find not in Scripture any Promise that this should have been imâ—uted to his Posterity as the full performance of the Condition of their Life or confirmed Happiness but that still their own sinning would have been a possible thing and death would have been the wages of their Sin You seem not to set Adam's Merits and imputed Righteousness any â—igher than Christ's And I am too sure that the justified Members of Christ do sin and must ask daily pardon And whether or not they be confirmed against total Apostasie I am sure few if any of them are confirmed against the possibility or existence or futurity of Sin And if you say that Adam's Posterity though confirmed should have sinned too but should have been pardoned as we are It would be another presumptuous addition and contradiction of Scripture to assert Pardon without a Saviour and a pardoning Covenant 3. Adam's Obedience would have justified his next issue from this false Accusation You are born of a sinful Parent or not of a righteous Parent But it would have justified no man against this Accusation You are personally a Sinner or have not personally loved God and obeyed him Therefore it would have justified any man against this Charge You are to be condemned for Adam's sin But it would have justified no man against these Charges You are to be condemned for your own personal Sin or you have no right to Glory by Gods Promise to the adult which maketh their personal Obedience the Condition 4. And though I cannot again here have time to deal with Confounders who think that Imputation or Justification are words which have but one sense I must say that even so Christ's Righteousness is not so imputed to any man as to be to him in stead of his personal Obedience to the Law or Covenant of Grace which he is under But it will justifie any Believer from these Accusations You must be cast into Hell for breaking the Law of Innocency or you must be shut out of Heaven because you deserved it not by perfect Obedience or you have no perfect or sufficient Saviour or you are such as God cannot pardon without wrong to his Truth Wisdom or Justice It will justifie no man from any of these Charges You are Sinners you deserve condemnation by the first Law you are Impenitent or Unbelievers or Hypâ—crites or have not performed the conditions of life in the Law of Grace The two first we must confess and not justifie our selves by a denial And against the last we must be justified by our own Repentance Faith and sincere Obedience He that will say to the Accuser that chargeth him with final Infidelity Impenitency or Unholiness I am justified by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness will but add to his sin 5. There are all these differences between our Justification according to the first Law had we been capable of it and that which we now have 1. One would have been by God as Creator and Legislator to the Innocent The other by Christ as Redeemer and Legislator to the sinful World 2. One would have been for personal perfect persevering Obedience The other for Christ's Merits as purchasing a free Pardon Grace to penitent Believers and upon our own Faith and Repentance as the Conditions of the new Covenant 3. One would have been without pardon and the other chiefly or much by pardon In one if our Publick Root had perfectly obeyed we must also have perfectly obeyed or die In the other because our Publick Root did perfectly obey Faith and sinceere Obedience to the end is all that is required of us to ouâ— Glory 4. In one the personal matter of worthiness or merit must have been all that perfection which God in justice could require of man In the other it is only The acceptance of a free Gift according to its nature and use and after the thankful use and improvement of it with other such differences § 34. M. S. What Christ did as surety is imputed to us but not his Suretiship or being a publick Person Ans This is true if you understand Imputation in Scripture sense or soundly and not in their sense who presumptuously say That God reputeth us to have done all by Christ which he did for us in his Obedience to the Law § 35. M. S. Christ did not all that he did as Surety but only that which answered the Law An. I suppose you mean that which the Law requireth of us But the word Surety is ambiguous and after here explained and whether you understood it sano sensu I know not He did all that he did as the Mediator and Sponsor for mans Redemption And we are pardoned and justified by the merit of all his own Covenant-keeping with the Father even of such acts as the Law required not of us And some which the Law required of many he did not because it required them not of him § 36. M. S. The Law said not That Christ must be a holy Husband or Father c. The Imputation of one Act of Christ's Obedience is sufficient to our Justification and Merit of life though it need not be curiously set in this or that part of his life § Still more presumption 1. Where saith the Scripture so 2. You must not assert absurdities or presumptions and then think to put off the detection of them by calling it curious If this be true doubtless it was Christs first act of Obedience which merited Glory for us And so it is that first only that must be imputed to us to that end And who ever thought so before you The Fryars have some of them said That minima guttula sanguinis Christi One drop of his blood was enough to redeem all the World And our Divines say Why then was the rest shed So I ask you 1. Why did Christ do all the rest of his Obedience after the first Act Hath none of it the same end and use 2. How shall we be sure that a Sinner must not plead or trust to any of Christ's Righteousness but the first act for his Justification and Reward or must he trust for it to that which was never by Christ intended for it 3. This is contrary to the Scripture which layeth our Justification on his whole Righteousness as meritorious and on his Obedience to the Death and on his rising again and on other parts first Rom. 4. 24. 5. throughout c. 4. Sure they that are so curious as to tell us which physical act of Faith justifieth in specie numero for some say only the first instantaneous act doth justifie will not think it curiosity to enquire which one Act of Christs Obedience justifieth us when according to your Doctrine it is evident that it must be the first And they that say It is Justification by Works to
be justified by any act of Faith in specie besides the recumbency on his Righteousness to be imputed to us or by any numero besides the first will likely say that it is Justification by another Righteousness than that which the Scripture saith is imputed to us to be justified by the Imputation of any but the first Act of Christ's Obedience Or else that if all be imputed we have a redundancy of Righteousness and deserve many Heavens or one oftener than needs But when men have received some unsound Principles all things must be forced to comply with them § 37. M. S. Towards the end the M. S. summeth up my Assertions and setteth down some as contrary to them In reckoning up mine he sheweth candor and ingenuity and a good memory having not the Book at hand But I must advertise his Readers 1. That he taketh all from my Aphorisms the first Book I wrote in my youth when my Conceptions of these things were less digested wherefore I have above twenty years ago retracted that Book till I had leisure to correct it and have since more fully opened my judgment in my Confession and in my Disput of Justification and other Writings and most fully in my Methodus Theologiae unpublished 2. That he over-looketh my asserting our Adoption to be by the Merits of Christ's Active Obedience yea and our Justification too as well as by his Passive 3. That reciting my words that it is by Gods Will in the form of his Donation or Covenant that Faith hath that use to Justification which is nearest it viz. the formal Reason of a Condition he leaveth out my other assertion that Faith 's material disposition or aptitude to this form or office is the very nature of it as fitted to that use about its Object Christ which Gods design and our case required His Assertions as against me are as followeth § 28. M. S. 1. There is no way to Life but by Doing It is not enough that the Law be not dishonoured but it must be glorified An. Doing is a word of doubtful sense It 's one thing to Do all that the Law of Innocency required and another thing to do all that the Law of Grace maketh necessary to life It 's one thing to Do all our selves and another thing for a Mediator to merit Pardon and Life to be given conditionally by a new Covenant by Doing all in kind and much more than all that we should have done for us though not in our persons The way to Life now hath many parts 1. Christ's perfect habitual active and passive Righteousness fulfilling the Law of Innocency and the Law of Moses and the peculiar Law of the Mediator to merit Pardon Spirit Adoption and Glory to be given by the New Covenant on its terms 2. The said New Covenant as the donative Instrument and Law of Life and Pardon and Adoption by it 3. Our doing or performing the Conditions of the New Covenant by Grace But our personal Doing all according to the Law of Innocency really or reputatively to be justified by that Law is none of the way of Life which you think the only way And I hope we shall both meet there § 39. M. S. It 's clear as the light of the Sun that their fundamental distinction is absurd to make sinning and suffering equivalent to doing because he that hath born the utmost penalty hath done no more towards living than he that never sinned or suffered else Adam in Innocency should have been sentenced worthy of life If a Servant instead of his Service steal and restore it he meriteth not his wages c. An. 1. It 's certain that you mistake and wrong us I never put sinning among the things that are equivalent to doing or meriting Of this before 2. I doubt you noted not sufficiently that no Creature can merit commutatively as a Proprietor of God as a Servant doth his wages nor can have any thing of God but what in respect of such merit and the value of the thing is an absolute free Gift free as to commutation And that all Gods Laws of Life are but a prescription of the wise Order in which he will give his free benefits As a Father will give Lands to the Son that will behave himself decently and thankfully and not to the contemptuous Rebel So that as to commutation no Man or Angel hath other merit than not to commerit the contrary perdition God is never the better for our Doing If you dream of meriting commutatively from a Proprietor by work for wages I can soon tell you what we set up instead of such merit I hope you had no such thoughts but want of due distinguishing But as to Doing and Merit in respect to Paternal Justice that which I set instead of fulfilling the first Law is a◠aforesaid not sinning and suffering but 1. Christ's Satisfaction and the Merit of his compleat Righteousness 2. The Gift of Pardon and Life by a new conditional Covenant merited and made by him 3. Actual Pardon of all sin thereby 4. Actual Adoption 5. Our fulfilling the Condition of that Covenant that these may be ours And thus the Law was dishonoured by our Sin but is glorified by Christs Obedience and Satisfaction And Gospel-Justice but specially Mercy glorified in our personal Obedience to the Gospel without such Doing indeed Christ's as Principal in fulfilling the Law in the Person of a Mediator and ours as subordinate in obeying the Gospel there is no Glorification And I think this is plain truth But in your instance of a Servant deserving his wages you seem to look at Commutative Justice when we have to do only with governing Paternal Justice And you should have remembred that if the Servant do not his Work in order of governing Justice it is his crime And if he have no fault he hath no fault of Omission And he that hath no Sin of Omission hath done all his Duty and so deserved the Reward As for Adam 1. In the first instant of his life he was bound to no present Duty before he could do a moral Act. 2. But afterward I think he merited in tantum pro tempore and had not the Condition of the Promise been of further extent than one act he had merited life But a Reward for a years Duty is not merited by an hours § 40. M. S. There is a medium between just and unjust He was non-justus He was not actually just though habitually He had done nothing for which the Law could justifie him else why did he not live for ever An. 1. Habitual holiness fits a Soul for Glory where no more is due as if one die immediately And so it would have done Adam had God translated him instantly and made him no Law of actual Duty 2. But afterward that Adam in Innocency did that for which the Law would justifie him in tantum for that time He fulfilled all the Law for so long else he had
sinned by Omission 3. But that Law giving life eternal only to Obedience to the end of his time of trial he merited not that life by initial Obedience This was initial imperfect Righteousness wanting perseverance but not a medium between Just and Unjust except as Just signifieth the merit of Life by persevering Righteousness to the last And so I never denied but in a disobliged Subject there is a medium Adam was not bound to do a years work the first hour and so was neither just nor privatively unjust as to the future years work but as to what he was presently obliged to he was either Righteous or a Sinner Here you come short of necessary accurateness Perseverance is a part of our Condition of Glorification Yet he that is not dead is just if he be a Believer and obedient And if God now call him by death he shall be glorified But he hath not now done all that is to be done till his death if he live longer So that his Right to the present possession of Glory before death is not justifiable but his Right in case he now die is § 41. M. S. Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere cannot be put in exchange for fac hoc and therefore justified only as it relateth to him who hath suffered and done for all that will receive him An. 1. Exchange is an ambiguous word Here is no proper exchange Faith is not a fulfilling of the Law of Innocency nor so reputed by God Christ did both satisfie for our not-fulfilling it and also by that and by fulfilling it himself not in our persons but his own did merit the free Gift of Life to us to be ours upon new Covenant terms and Faith and Repentance are the Conditions of that New Covenant and so are that Duty which is laid on our selves to do instead of perfect Obedience supposing Christ's Satisfaction and Merits which are instead of it quoad precium or principally as our said acts are instead of it as to what is necessary in our selves And the Apostle who so oft saith Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness doth neither by Faith mean Christ nor mean that Faith is imputed as a fulfilling the Law of Works But that having no such merit of our own or Righteousness our believing in him that hath satisfied and merited for us is reckoned to us instead of a Righteousness or Merit as being all that now is necessary to our Justification in our selves our persevering Obedience being afterward necessary to our Glory 2. No doubt Faith relateth to Christ and here connoteth him as its Object It were not Christian Faith else But it is also related to the New Covenant as its Condition and in that form hath its place to our Justification which cannot be denied Therefore you untruly say Only as relating to Christ and your words confute your self You say Who hath suffered and done for all that will receive him You speak either of secret Decree and that giveth no Right or of Covenant Donation And to say He and his benefits are given in Covenant to all that will receive him is all one as to say The Covenant giveth them on condition that we receive him which is true § 42. M. S. 5. It is impossible that the terms of the Covenant of Grace can be any other than they are because nothing but receiving him can make him mine An. 1. That proveth not that Faith is not the Condition but that it needs must be so 2. It is impossible now the Covenant is so made viz. ex necessitate existentiae But that God could have made it no otherwise is not a thing for man to say 3. Confound not passive Reception with active moral Reception Justificari is passively to receive Justification and to be first related to Christ as mine or to be one that he is given to is passively to receive Christ Active moral receiving is the Wills consenting thus to have him on all his terms and is the means of the other It is this and not the other that is Faith And could not God possibly have made Christ ours by any alteration of the terms sure they that confine Faith to the receiving of Christs imputable Righteousness will grant that God could possibly have put one act more of Faith into the Condition or onâ— act of Gratitude Desire Love or Repentance And Dr. Twisse thinks he could have given a man a Right to Life without Christ's Satisfaction and to Christ without Faith and that so he doth to Infants § 43. M. S. There is no Righteousness in point of Justification but only in conformity to the Rule Do this that only brings a man under the approving Will of God An. 1. But what is the Do this that you mean Adam's Law said Do this and live Moses Law said Do this and live The Law given to Christ said Do and suffer this and I will give thee Power over all Flesh to give eternal life to as many as I give thee and believe The Law of Christ to Sinners saith Do this and live This is the work of God that ye believe c. But all these Doings are different for all that It 's an unknown Faith or Repentance which is no Act or Duty 2. There is no Righteousness but the conformity to the Rule of Righteousness if you speak only of that Righteousness which is of that species But there is another sort He that is justifiable is just so far If Satan say Thou art condeâ—nandus to be damned to Hell and shut out of Heaven for breaking the Law of Works I must deny it not by saying I did not break it but keep it by another or I did not deserve damnation but by alledging He that is pardoned is not to suffer any pain of sense or loss I am pardoned by the New covenant through the Merit of the Satisfaction and perfect Righteousness of Christ Adam's Law will not justifie you nor Moses's Law neither The Law requireth personal perfect Obedience It never said Thou or another for thee shalt obey It knoweth no Surety To give a Surety and to accept his suretiship is the act of the Law Giver as above his Law not fulfilling that Law but securing the ends of Government and of it by another way To pardon a Sin and Penalty is not to fulfil the Law that threatened it but to dispense with it which Justice can do upon a valuable consideration securing the ends of Government And Veracity is not impeached by it For 1. The sense of silius mortis is Death shall be thy due and so it was 2. And death was actually inflicted on man himself though not all that which he deserved If the Law of Innocency justifie you you need no Redeemer you need no Pardon you need no New Covenant to justifie you nor can it do it 3. We are justified by Doing though not by our fulfilling the Law of Works by our selves or another We are justified
by two sort◠of Doing Principally by the Merit of Christ's perfect Righteousness and subordinately by our fulfilling the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace which Baptism celebrateth 4. Gods Will approveth of all that is good so far as it is good It approveth of habitual Holiness in Adam and would have done in his Infants had he stood and doth so in all Christians now And I will believe that Christ before he actually obeyed was under Gods approving Will. But not as one that had merited by Obedience For God doth not suppose any to do that which they do not nor oblige them to do to-morrows work to-day § 44. M. S. The issue in a word is 1. Suffering for Sin is not doing nor equivalent in point of Justification 2. Nor can God having satisfaction for what was done cross to his Law lay aside that in order to the conveying of Life and substitute believing instead of it Therefore Faith justifieth ratione objecti only Now we Do in another Christ instead of doing in our own persons An. I doubt this is another Gospel than the Apostles delivered us though I hope that practically we meet in one 1. To the first I answer It 's true but you do ill to intimate that we think otherwise Suffering by the Sinner never satisfieth because it must be everlasting Suffering by Christ satisfieth not meerly as suffering but as the voluntary suffering of God-Man aptly glorifying Justice and Love and securing the ends of Government This Satisfaction is not equivalent to doing in Justification For Doing all required would have justified us against this Charge Thou art a Sinner by Omission and Commission and thou hast deserved Death and hast not deserved Life according to the Law of Works Against this Charge I look for no Justification but confess it is all true But Christ's Satisfaction justifieth us against this Charge God must damn thee by paine of loss and sense or else he is not just because thou hast deserved it And Christ's perfect Righteousness also justifieth us against this Charge God must damn thee and deny thee life because thou didst not merit it by perfect Obedience The Justifier says No because Christ's Merit in Doing and Suffering hath glorified the Law and Justice of God instead of my Merit and hath procured us Pardon and Life given by the New Covenant 2. To the second I answer 1. God did not lay aside his first Covenant but man by sin did lay it aside by making the Condition impossible 2. You overturn the Gospel too much by thinking that the Law is not laid aside as a Covenant or Promise though I grant that the Precept as a Rule of Life continues To say that the sense of Adam's Law was Thou or another Christ for thee shalt obey And that we are justified by that Law is to confound Law and Gospel and make a Gospel of that Law and make the Covenant of Works not to condemn us or both to condemn and justifie and to feign man to live and be judged by the Covenant that is ceased God saith now to no man living Be innocent and so merit life that thou maist live And God doth not repute us innocent at all 3. To the third I answer It is notoriously untrue that Faith justifieth only ratione objecti unless you mean that efficiently it justifieth not at all which is true For we are justified by it also ratione foederis because that which is materially Faith in Christ a justifying Saviour and so connoteth its Object as the meritorious Cause of the free Gift and Pardon is by reason of this aptitude made the Condition of that New Covenant or Gift which is its nearest interest or reason of our being justified by it And it is the Law of Grace by which we must be judged and justified And at that Bar the question which Life or Death dependeth on will be supposing Christ's Merits whether we are penitent Believers or impenitent Unbelievers and so have part in Christ or not And if Satan accuse us as being impenitent Unbelievers and the question be whether we have true Faith or not my Opinion is that we cannot be herein justified by pleading the Object when the Act is questioned and saying That Christ fulfilled that Law unless you could prove that he justifieth impenitent Infidels and as Saltmarsh said repented and believed for us But the grand Case remaineth Whether we are justified by the Law of Innocency by fulfilling it and meriting in another without any sort of doing of our own by our selves Mr. Wotton Mr. Gataker and abundance more have long ago said much to confute your Error besides Mr. Bradshaw whom you name But I add I. I have before proved that by the deeds or sentence of the Law of Adam or Moses no man can be justified 1. He that hath sinned against it cannot be justified as not having sinned For factum infectum fieri is impossible to God himself 2. The Law that condemneth us doth not justifie us 3. What Paul Rom. 3. 4. frequently saith against Justification by the Law of Moses will hold here a fortiori And Christ keeping Moses Law as far as he was capable of Obligation that also would else have been imputed and so we should have been justified by that Law also which the Scripture copiously denieth He that saith He hath no sin deceiveth himself and is a lyar and the truth is not in him And the Law of Adam justifieth no man that hath sin II. We did not fulfil it and merit in Christ But Christ did in the Person of a Mediator voluntarily undertaking it on his Fathers terms and not as our Instrument or in our Persons I have else-where given abundance of Arguments against that which I must not here repeat This Author took notice of my Objection that he that is reputed perfectly Innocent and Obedient is uncapable of Pardon and needeth no satisfaction or remitting or rewarding Covenant besides that which he kept but answereth it not This subverteth the Gospel and Religion Quer. If there be no Reward nor Life but of Justice and no Reward but for Christ's Merits and all Believers equally merited in Christ as fulfilling all the Law 1. Whence cometh the inequality of Grace and Glory 2. How come any Believers to be left long under sins and weakness of Grace and temporal punishments III. The Merits of Christ have procured us the New Covenant sealed in Baptism by which we have a new Rule offiicii judicii for such is every Law Christ is not the only Subject of God He made us not lawless or Rebels God still ruleth the Church by a Law or Covenant This is the Law or Covenant of Grace Deny this Covenant and you deny the Gospel This Covenant or Law obligeth us to Duty And it promiseth and giveth Pardon and Life in and with Christ This Covenant hath Conditions various conditions of various Benefits Our first true consent which Baptism celebrateth that is
our first believing and repenting is the condition of our first Union with Christ and our Pardon and Adoption and the Spirit Our sincere Love and Obedience to the end and over-coming is the further condition of our final Justification at Judgment and our Glory This Covenant we are now under and by this we must be finally judged justified or condemned No man shall be saved unless if at age he personally perform the conditions of this Covenant And every one shall be saved that doth Faith Repentance Love to our Redeemer Gratitude Prayer sincere Obedience are all such Doing as by this Covenant are made the necessary means of Glory But not such Doing as Paul opposeth to the Jews as maketh the Reward not of Grace but of Debt The Author of this Law is just His Justice will give to the performers of the Condition all that he hath promised The Scripture oft useth all these Titles 1. That of Reward as being the state of the benefits retributed 2. That of Justice as being the principle of Reward 3. That of Works as being the matter rewarded even our personal Works wrought by Grace and not only those which Christ did 4. That of worthiness or merit as being the relation of the Work and Person to the Reward 5. That of Righteousness as being the state of the Person performing these Works as pronounced by the New Covenant If I prove not all these by express Scripture believe your new Gospel I. It is Reward Heb. 11. 6. He that cometh to God must believe that God is and that he is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him It 's he second Article of Faith Prov. 13. 13. Mat. 6. 4. Himself shall Reward thee openly and vers 6. 18. Prov. 25. 22. Mat. 16. 27. Then shall â—e reward every man according to his Works even Christ when he cometh â—n Glory with his Angels If you say He meaneth his Works done by Christ read Mat. 25. and believe it if you can So Rev. 22. 12. 2 Joh. 8. Heb. 11. 26. Col. 3. 24. Ye shall receive the Reward of the Inheâ—itance Col. 2. 18. 1 Cor. 9. 17 18. 1 Cor. 3. 8 14. Luke 6. 35. Mat. â— 12 46. 10. 41 42. Prov. 11. 18. Psal 19. 11. 58. 11. Heb. 10. â—5 II. Gospel paternal Justice rewardeth men supposing Christ's Merits â— Tim. 4. 8. A Crown of Righteousness which the Lord the righteous Judge shall give me and not to me only but to all them that love his appearing Rom. 2. 5. The righteous Judgment of God who shall give to every man according to his Works To them that by patient continuance in well-doing c. 2 Thess 1. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. Psal 67. 4. 46. 10. Psal 11. 7. Gen. 18. 23 24 c. And multitudes of other places Heb. 6. 10. God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love 1 Joh. 1. 9. If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive our sins c. Isa 45. 22. III. The thing rewarded is called Works done by man not legally â—ustifiable but evangelically Mat. 16. 27. Rev. 2. 26. Rev. 14. 13. 20. 12 13. Jam. 2. 21 24 25 26. Rev. 2. 2 9 13 19. 3. 1 2 8 15. Heb. 6. 10. Rev. 22. 12. 1 Cor. 15. last And it 's called Doing 2 Thess 3. 13. and Gal. 6. 9. Rom. 2. 7. 2 Cor. 5. 10. Heb. 10. 36. Mat. 25. 21 â—3 12. 50. 7. 22 23. 6. 1 2. Luke 8. 21. Joh. 13. 17. Col. 3. 23 24. Heb. 13. 21. Rev. 22. 14. And keeping his Word or Commandments 1 Joh. 3. 22. and 1 Joh. 2. 3. and Joh. 15. 10. 14 15 16. Dan. 9. 4. Eccles 12. 13. Prov. 4. 4. Exod. 20. 6. Deut. 5. 29. Ezez 18. 21 c. And Obeying Heb. 5. 9. He is the Author of eternal Salvation to all them that obey him Acts 5. 22. Rom. 6. 16. Obedience unto Righteousness c. IV. The Relative aptitude of the Work for the Reward is called Worâ—hiness or Merit and the performer Worthy evangelically not legally And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 primarily signifieth that which preponderateth in the ballance but cannot note here any worth or merit by commutation but that aptitude which resulteth from the goodness of the action as related to the Promise Rev. 3. 4. A few which have not defiled their Garments and they shall walk with me in white for they are worthy 2 Thess 1. 5 6. The righteous Judgment of God that ye may be counted worthy of the Kingdom of God for which you suffer Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense to you that are troubled rest with us 11. That God would count you worthy of this calling Luke 20. 35. They which be counted worthy to obtain that World 21 36. That ye may be accounted worthy to escape and stand before the Son of Man So Eph. 4. 1. Col. 1. 10. 1 Thess 2. 12. Mat. 10. 37 38. V. The title of Relation given to the Works and Persons evangelically is Righteousness or Justice 1 Joh. 3. 7. He that doth Righteousness is righteous Matth. 25. 46. The righteous into life eternal 21. Well done good and faithful Servant v. 35. For I was hungred and ye c. Mat. 13. 43. Mat. 10. 41. Ezek. 18. 20 24. 33. 12 13 18. Rom. 6. 16. 8. 10. 1 Cor. 15. 21. Eph. 5. 9. 6. 14. 2 Tim. 4. 8. Heb. 11. 33. 2 Cor. 9. 9. And the godly are called Righteous in relation to their Hearts and Doings near an hundred times if not much more in Scripture though but in subordination to Christ's meritorious Righteousness and but secundâ—â— quid and not simpliciter See the Texts further recited in my Confession of Faith And now he that considering all this believes 1. That Christ is no King 2. Or we no Subjects 3. Or that he hath no Law of Grace or Covenant which we are under 4. Or that this Law or Covenant will not justifie them that perform that Condition from legal-executive damnation by giving them Pardon and Right to Life for the Merits of Christ 5. And that Faith Repentance and persevering holy Obedience will not materially justifie any man that hath theâ— from the charge of having no part in Christ because of Infidelity Impenitency Unholiness or Apostacy 6. Or that he that performeth the Gospel-Conditions shall not be judged rewardable or evangelically worthy of the promised Reward 7. Or that the same thing which as Good and a Benefit is a Gift absolutely free against commutative Merit is not yet quoad ordinem conferendi recipiâ—ndi a true Reward 8. And so that we have no Reward for any Works but what Christ did in his own Person 9. And that the Judgment-Day will be to try whether Christ did his part or not and so to judge him and not to try whether we have part in him and did our parts or not by repenting believing
perfect edition of the Covenant of Grace to those that have the Gospel And it continueth to the rest of the world unrepealed as to the substance of the mercies of it further than men deprive themselves of them by forfeitures as wicked men here do as to the mercies of the Gospel But as it is a promise of Christ's future incarnation it ceased by his coming 3. The third is ceased by performance and by the Jews apostacy Though some think still that it is in force and that a national conversion shall perform that promise to the full But Mr. Calvert a Learned young man hath lately written to prove that no such national conversion is to be expected but only such additions of particular mens conversion to the Catholick Christian Church as are of that kind which hath been more fully done on the Jews already 4. As to the rest it hath troubled Divines how far Moses's Law is abrogated or ceased partly as to the Judicials and chiefly as to the Decalogue And that we may not be too forward to call one another Legatists or Antinomians for this difference those now called Antinomians being rather Libertine denyers of the Law of Christ I will notifie to those that know it not that it is as much a difference among the Papists greatest Doctors who yet bear with one another in it and the Pope decideth it not Some say that the Decalogue now obligeth not as the Law of Moses but only as the Law of Nature and of Christ So Soto de Instit li. 2. q. 5. ar 4. concl 2. Medina 1. 2. q. 103. ar 3. quem aliqui moderni sequntur saith Suarez de Leg. l. 9. c. 11. p. 761. and Tolet. in Rom. 3. Anot. 15. Salmer ad Rom. 7. disp 6. Victor Relict de Matrim 2. p. n. 3. Barrad To. 1. li. 2. c. 21. Valent. To. 2. disp 7. q. 7. punc 7. To whom Suarez joyneth himself confessing pag. 764 765. that if as some hold Moses Law had been only a Declaration of the Law of Nature and not de novo preceptive it could not be said to cease But he truly holdeth it to be constitutive or preceptive also to those that it was by Moses delivered to And of this opinion I profess my self notwithstanding all that on other points I have written against the Antinomians Believing that Christ now is the Universal Law-giver and that the very Law of nature as Nature it self is now His Law and that he hath taken it in to his Gospel administration and so the Decalogue is materially in force but not formally as part of the proper Mosaical Law save only that as Declarative and ex paritate rationis we may collect that God who for such reasons so bound them doth bind us to the same things by the same natural Reasons But there are other Papist Doctors that hold that as to the Morals Moses Law as preceptive is still in force even as then by him delivered and that to all Christians so Bellarm. de Justif li. 4. c. 6. Lorin in Act. 15. Vasquez who with Durandus Paludan Paul Burgens And Suarez saith that Alph. a Castro and most so speak And Vasquez denyeth the Law of Nature as such to have properly a Divine Obligation saith Suarez which he confuteth de Leg. l. 9. c. 11. p. 764 765. But this controversie when examined containeth not much more than verbal disagreement and so their mutual forbearance doth confess 34. The Jews instead of excelling in Holiness proportionably to their priviledges did grow carnal and proud and 1. Much neglected the Law of Nature 2. Much over-looked the spiritual Covenant of Grace made with them and all the world 3. And misunderstood the chief part of the special Promise made to Abraham not understanding commonly the high spiritual or universal Office and Kingdom of the Messiah but dreaming that he was but to be their Monarch to make them great and to subject the world to them 4. And they misunderstood the Law of Moses or Covenant on Mount Sinai as if the design of it had been but by its special holy excellency to justifie the doers of it by and for the doing and to pardon all the spiritual and perpetual punishment of Sin upon those terms which it appointed for a Political pardon and to give life spiritual and eternal upon those bare conditions on which their Law gave them Political benefits Over-looking the great causes of Justification and life in the Messiah and the common Covenant of Grace and Promise of the Messiah made to Abraham And this is the error which Christ and his Apostles found them in Yet proudly boasting of their Law and Political priviledges and despising all the rest of the world as out-casts in comparison of them 35. Though the behaviour of all the rest of the world till Christ's coming be little notifyed to us yet this much is sure that they were commonly more Ignorant and Idolatrous than the Jews that yet they retained the common notices of nature that they remembred by Tradition those intimations of the necessity of propitiatory Sacrifice so as to keep up the custom of Sacrificing among them That many of them with exceeding diligence sought to find God or know him in the works of Nature and Providence and attained to great and excellent understanding especially in Greece and Rome And many of them lived very strict austere and laborious lives in great Justice and Love and in the practice of many excellent Precepts towards God For the Heavens declared the Glory of God and the firmament shewed his handy-work Day unto day uttered speech and night unto night shewed knowledge There was no speech or language where their voice was not heard Their liâ—e went through the earth and their words to the worlds end Psal 19. 1 2 3 4. For all Gods works do praise him and the Lord is good to all his tender mercies are over all his works Psal 145. 9 10 17. He is King in all the earth He was not the God of the Jews only but of the Gentiles also Rom. 3. 29. Because that which may be known of God was manifest in or to them for God had shewed it to them For the invisible things of him from the Creation of the world are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made his Eternal power and Godhead so that they are without excuse because that when they knew God they glorified him not as God neither were thankful Rom. 1. 19 20 21. God left not himself without witness in that he did good and gave men rain from heaven and fruitful seasons filling their hearts with food and gladness Act. 14. 15 16. Seeing he giveth to all life and breath and all things and hath made of one blood all Nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth and hath determined the times before appointed and the bounds of their habitation that they should seek the Lord if happily they might feel
after him and find him though he be not far from every one of us For in him we live and move and have our being For we are also his off-spring Act. 17. 25 26 27 28 29. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek For the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him For whoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved But have they not heard Yes verily their sound went into all the earth and their words unto the ends of the world Rom. 10. 12 13 18. Despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long suffering not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to Repentance Who will render to every man according to his deeds To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for Glory and Honour and Immortality Eternal life Glory honour and peace and to every man that worketh Good to the Jew first and also to the Greek For there is no respect of persons with God For not the hearers of the Law are just before God but the doers of the Law shall be justified For when the Gentiles which have not the Law do by Nature the things contained in the Law these having not the Law are a Law unto themselves which shew the work of the Law written in their hearts their Consciences also bearing witness and their thoughts in the mean while accusing or else excusing one another In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my Gospel If the uncircumcision keeps the righteousness of the Law shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision He is a Jew which is one inwardly and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit and not in the letter whose praise is not of men but of God Rom. 2. SECT III. Of Christ's Incarnation and our Redemption 36. In the fulness of time God sent his Son made of a Woman made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law Rom. 4. 4. But not them only for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life Joh. 3. 16. He was made sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him He redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us For he is the Saviour of the world and the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world He is the Propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but for the sins of the whole world 1 Joh. 2. 2. For he tasted Death for every man Heb. 2. being the Saviour of all men but especially of those that believe 1 Tim. 4. 10. For if one dyed for all then were all dead And he dyed for all that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves but unto him that dyed for them and rose again 2 Cor. 5. 14 15. 37. As the eternal Word and Wisdom of the Father in his Divine nature only was the interposing Redeemer by undertaking before his Incarnation and governed the faln world by the fore-described Law of Grace so upon his Incarnation initially and upon his performance plenarily all things are delivered into his hands even all the world so far as it was defiled and cursed by Man's sin Man as the Redeemed the Creatures as his utensils and goods and Devils as his and our Enemies All Power in Heaven and Earth was given him Matth. 26. 19. Joh. 13. 1 3. and 17. 2 3. All judgment was committed to him and the Father judgeth no man but by him But hath given him to have life in himself and to raise the dead Joh. 5. 22 23 24 25. For he hath made him Head over all things to his Church Eph. 1. 22 23. And for this end he dyed rose and revived that he might be the Lord of the dead and the living Rom. 14. 9 10. For God hath exalted him and given him a name above every name that in the name of Jesus every knee should â—ow Phil. 2. 7 8. And as in Adam all die even so in Christ shall all be made alive 1 Cor. 15. 22. 38. Christ upon his Incarnation performed but what God had Decreed before the foundations of the world and had obscurely and generally promised after the fall at the first making of the Covenant of Grace Which Decree of God is after the manner of men called by some a Covenant between the Father and the Son especially because the Prophets have sometimes as Isa 53. described it by way of prediction as a Covenant between the Father and Christ incarnate If we conceive of it properly under the notion of a Decree first and a Promise after unto the world so the Will and Mercy of God the Father and Son with the Holy Spirit are the cause of mans Redemption Pardon and Salvation even the fundamental Principal total Cause And the Promise was man's security and Christ as promised was the primary great meanâ— which was to procure us the rest by doing that upon the fore-sight and fore-decree whereof God did before-hand pardon and save Sinners But if you had rather mention it as in the form of a Covenant which before the Incarnation must be improperly taken being only of God to himself or a promise of and to Christ as to be incarnate then the undertaking of the Father and the Son herein must be carefully distinguished and described The Father giveth up to Christ as Redeemer the whole lapsed cursed reparable world the several parts to several uses and especially his chosen to be eventually and infallibly saved and promiseth to accept his Sacrifice and performance and to make him Head over all things to his Church and by him to establish the Law of Grace in its perfect Edition and to give him the Government respectively of the Church and world and to Glorifie him for this work with himself for ever And the second person undertaketh to assume man's Nature to do and suffer all that he did in perfect obedience to his Fathers Will and Law of Redemption to fulfill all Righteousness conquer Satan and the world to suffer in the flesh and be a Sacrifice for sin and to conquer Death and teach and rule and purifie and raise and justifie and glorifie all true believers 39. Before the Incarnation Christ's future death and obedience being * * * Eadem suit sides in antiquis patribus modernis qui alio modo credebant in specialia alia credibilia quam nos Immo aliquid eredebant quod nunc est salsum Alliaco in 3. q. 1. not existent were no real existent Causes in themselves of men's Justification But that Wisdom which foresaw them and that Will of God which Decreed them as such and not they without that fore-sight and Decree as existent were the cause 40. Nor were they either before
If in any of these points men of less accurateness use not the same words take not therefore the old way of proclaiming them Hereticks till you have tryed how far they erre indeed Most of our lower Divines of all parties would be made Hereticks for want of Skill in the denominations allowable or not allowable by the Communication of idioms if the Schoolmens accurateness must be the test e. g. If the question were whether the Humanity be part of Christ or Christ be compounded of a Divine Nature and Humane c. â—â—â—â— would affirm it that mean well But saith Alliac Camerar 3. q. Neque persona neque natura divina est composita nec â—â—â—â— est compositus ex duabus naâ—â—â—is divina scilicet humana sive ex tribus rebus Corpore scilicet anima divinitate sed â—â—â—â— ex duabus secundum humanitatem scilicet corpore anima essentialiter ex infinitis partibus quantitativis integraliter â—â— non est concedendum quod humanitas sit Pars Christâ— Nam ficut homo non est compositus ex albidine substantia 〈…〉 est Compositus ex humanitate persona divina How many have gone for Hereticks for want of the Language of â—â—â—â— and the Schoolmen his Soul the deep sense of Gods displeasure with Sinners and of his â—â—â—â— of sin though no sence of Gods hatred to himself For it is conceiveable how Christ being the Lover and surety or Sponsor for Sinners and undertaking to suffer as a Sacrifice for their sins and in their stead might have on his own Soul the sorrowful sense of Gods hatred of sin and wrath against Sinners though not properly terminated on himself and so he bore the sorrow of our transgressions and was so far forsaken of God for that time and not further 52. The true Reason of the satisfactoriness of Christ's sufferings was that they were a most apt means for the demonstration of the Governing Justice Holiness Wisdom and Mercy of God by which God could attain the ends of the Law and Government better than by executing the Law on the world in its destruction as in general was before intimated 53. The measure of the satisfaction made by Christ was that it was a full salvo to Gods Justice and demonstration of it that he might give Pardon and Life to Sinners upon the new terms of the Covenant of Grace and give what he after gave 54. The matter of Christ's meritorious Righteousness was his perfect fulfilling the Law given him as Mediator or the performance of the Conditions of his mediatorial Covenant From which resulted the Merit so the Dueness of all the Benefits which God had promised in that Covenant as to Christ though mostly for men This was the Righteousness of Christ for man and hence arose his Merit for us 55. The matter of his Law of Redemption required of him was threefold 1. That he should by habitual and actual perfect Holiness fulfil the first Law of Nature or Innocency which Adam broke not just as it obliged Adam in every point but as it was common to man and belonged to Christ as Man 2. That he should fulfil all the Law of Moses given only to the Jews 3. That he should perform the great things peculiar to himself as Mediator which were to be a Sacrifice for Sin to do his Miracles to teach the Church as its Head to Rule it and to appoint Orders and Officers for it to rise again to conquer Satan Death and Sin c. 56. That Christ did not fulfil all the Law in our persons so as that we did it in and by himself and are thereby justified is further evident in that he did not all the Duties which the Law bound us to perform and for not doing of which we are truly Sinners He did not do any of the proper Offices of a Husband to a Wife or of a Wife to a Husband of a Father to Children of a Servant or a hired day-labourer to a Master of a Magistrate King Judge c. to Subjects of a Captain to Souldiers or Souldiers to their Captain of a Landlord to Tenants of such as have great riches towards the poor of the sick the imprisoned and abundance such like Besides the personal Laws given to Adam in the Garden to Noah to Abraham to David â—â—â—â—â—olomon the Prophets and such others Christ did not these same â—â—â—â— for us nor we fulfilled not these particular Laws in him 57. The Disputes whether it be Christ's Divine his habitual his active or his passive Righteousness that is made ours to our Justification seemeth to be but the Off-spring of the error of the undue sense of Christ's personating or representing us in his Righteousness And the parcelling out the uses and effects that one is imputed to us instead of habitual Righteousness another instead of actual and the third pardoneth our Sins is from the same false supposition It 's well that they suppose not that his Divine Righteousness is imputed to our deification But the case is plain 1. That Christ's whole Humane Righteousness habitual active and passive are meritorious for us not as being the very same things all which we should have done and suffered and had as if we had did and suffered them our selves by one that had did and suffered them in our persons in a Law-sense But as being the parts of that one Righteousness of Christ as Mediator which consisteth in the full performance of the Law of Redemption or of his own Covenant with his Father undertaken for our sakes Having been and done and suffered what he promised he is Righteous 2. And his Divine Righteousness by virtue of the hypostatical Union dignifieth his Humane to its meritorious value 58. By his Satisfaction or Sacrifice and this Merit Christ did procure all that Pardon Life and Benefits whatsoever that consequently are given us of God And so is the true meritorious cause of all 59. That Sacrifice and Obedience Righteousness and Merit which was directly given to God for man by performance of Christ's undertaking may yet be consequently said to be given unto man In that it was given to God for man and in that the Benefits merited are given to man and so relatively as to those Benefits the Sacrifice Obedience Righteousness and Merit may be said to be given us As the Ransom is given to the Captive which is given for him because the liberty purchased by it is given him Of which more after SECT IV. Of the New Covenant or the Law of Grace in the Second Edition 60. The New Covenant is Christs Law of Grace his Instrument by which he giveth Title or Right to the Benefits promised and conveyeth Right to the Fruits of his Sacrifice and Merits And his Law by which he governeth the Church as a Saviour in order to Recovery and Salvation It hath greatly scandalized the Papists against us to find some old Prâ—testants deny Christ to be a Law-Giver and
whether he be a true Christian and must judge of his sincerity and right to Christ Justification and Salvation as he is or is not a sincere consenter to it truly understood in the essential parts SECT V. Of the Gift and Works of the Holy Ghost 72. There are three sorts of Operations of the Holy Ghost one common and two proper to them that shall have or already have Justification 1. The first is preparing common Grace which maketh men fitter for special Grace which yet they may have that perish 2. The second is that Grace of the Spirit by which we perform the The Thomists make the act of contrition and chariâ—y to be the ultiâ—ate disposition to Justification which is with them the habit And yet they say that it floweth from that habit And if the distinction of Alvaâ—ez Disp de Aux 59. p. 264. possim be not contradiction I understand it not Eadem contritio quae est ultima dispositio ad gratiam in genere causae materialis antecedit illam in genere tamen causae formalis efficientis est effectus ejusdem gratiae Though that which is the effect of one act of Gods Love be the Object of another act first Act of special Faith and Repentance called commonly by Divineâ— Vocation which goeth before any special habit but not before any holy seed Because the very influx of the Spirit on the Soul is as a seed which exciteth the first act before a habit though not ordinarily before some preparations This Faith is commanded us as our duty first and made necessary to us as the Condition of the Covenant And when we know it to be thus required of us and hear in the Gospel the Reasons which should perfwade us then the Holy Spirit moveth us by his Influx to believe and consent where God and man are conjunct Agents but man subordinate to God 3. The third sort is the Spirits Operation of the habit of Divine Love and all other Graces in the Soul which is called his In-dwelling and Sanctification This is that Gift of the Spirit besides Miracles of old which is promised to Believers To this Faith is the Condition To this upon believing it is that we have Right given us by Gods Covenant and thus it is that by Baptism our right to the Spirit as an in-dwelling Sanctifier and Comforter is given us 73. This third Gift or Work of the Spirit eminently so called is in the same instant of time given us as the second but not of nature or at least immediately thereupon when we believe But yet they are not to be confounded on many accounts 74. But yet though some degree of the Spirit be presently given to every Believer it is usually but a spark at first And there are further means and conditions appointed us for the increase and actual helps from day to day And he that will not wait on the Spirit in the use of those means doth forfeit his help according to his neglect 75. Hence it is that most if not all Christians have lower measures of the Spirit than otherwise they might have and that judicially as a punishment for Sin However God is free herein and if he please may give more even to them that forfeit it 76. This Covenant of Grace being a conditional pardon of all the world The extent of the New Covenant is universal in the tenor or sense of it It is of all Mankind without exception that Christ saith If thou confess with thy mouth and believe iâ— thy heart thou shalt be saved No person antecedently is excluded in the world 77. And as to the promulgation of it Christ hath commissioned his Ministers to preach this Gospel to all the world and to every Creature So Matth. 28. 19 20. Mark 16. 15 16. that to the utmost of their power they are to offer and publish it to the whole world And Princes and people are all bound in their several places to assist them and to help to propagate the Gospel throughout all the Earth So that the restraint of it is not by the tenor of the Law 78. Those Nations which despise and refuse the Gospel are justly deprived of it penally for that rejection 79. Those Nations that live inhumaâ—ely and wickedly against the means and mercies which they have do forfeit their hopes of more 80. As God in all Ages hath visited the sins of the Fathers on the Children as the instances of Cain Cham Nimrod and others commonly shew and hath proclaimed it as his Name Exod. 34. and put it in Tables of Stone in the Second Commandment and not only of Adam's sin so may he justly deal by the Posterity of the Despisers of the Gosâ—el in denying it them Though he may freely give it the unworthy when he pleaseth 81. All the rest of the world who have not the Gospel and the Covenant The state of those that have not the Gospel of Grace in the last Edition are left by Christ in as good a state â—at least if not better than he found them at his Incarnation He took â—way no mercy from them which they had 82. Therefore as it is before proved that before Christ's time none Of Zuingliu's Opinion of the Salvation of Heathens by name Hercules Theseus Socrates Aristides Antigonus Numa Camilli Catonâ—s Scipiones c. Vid. Montaâ—ut exercit Eccles 1. Sect. 4. Twissum contra Corvinum pag. 371. col 1. Omnium temporum una est fides Deum esse eundemque Justum Bonum Remuneratorem sperantium in se omnium plene meritis respondentem ante legem sub lege sub gratia Nemini rectum sapienti venit istud in dubium sine ista nemo unquam ingressus est ad salutem Rob. Sarisberiens Polycrat de nugis curial Pol. Peucer Hist Carcerum against the Lutherans Concord saith p. 715. Etsi nec ad Ethnicos ante natum Christum nec ad Judaeos post natum Christum misit singulares ministros sonuit tamen vâ—x doctrinae de Deo patefactae utroque tempore Hoc modo adhuc sonat ut exaudiatur nunc etiam a Turcis Judaeis Nec fuerunt unquam exclusi prorsus a gratia miserecordia Dei ante Christum Ethnici E quibus innumeri ex omnibus gentibus fuerunt ad Deum conversi Post Christum natum Judaei Panciores ex his tamen of the world were left desperate under the meer violated Covenant of â—nnocency but that the tenor of that New Covenant as made to Adam â—nd Noah extended to them all so are they still under all the Grace of â—hat Edition of the Covenant further than they are penally deprived of â—â— for violating it The Law of Grace in that first Edition is still in force â—nd the Law by which the world shall be governed and judged They â—re all Possessors of Mercy which leadeth to Repentance and bound to use â—he means afforded them in order
to Repentance and Salvation and it is â—heir sin that they do not For which it is ultimately that they are conâ—emned Though wickedness harden men against the Law of Grace â—hat changeth not Gods Law to them but brings them under the penalty Not that any are bound to expect a Christ to come but to perform the â—ommon Conditions of that Covenant before described 83. Therefore no man is now condemned for Original Sin alone Though it is pardoned to no man till he perform the condition of it in â—he pardoning Covenant For God having brought all men under terms â—f mercy tending to recovery they shall be judged as they use that recoâ—ering mercy according to that Law of Grace which they are under â—hether of the first or last Edition 84. The exception which some make of Infants is vain Because as â—ar as God hath revealed his mind about them to us he esteemeth them â—nd useth them as parts of their Parents and Owners and if he condemn â—hem it is not for Adam's sin only but also ultimately for their Parents â—ejection of recovering Grace and not devoting them to God in his Coveâ—ant And though God will not condemn the Children for the Parents â—in that is when they themselves repent and turn to God But the Scripâ—ure is most plain and frequent in expressing our guilt of our nearer Paâ—ents sins against Grace which is a part of our Original Sin and ought â—ot to be so slighted as usually it is However 1. It is an incredible â—pinion That God should rule and judge all the rest of the world by a â—aw of Grace and leave only poor Infants without any mercy under the â—eer Law of Innocency and judge them only by another Law than he â—oth all the world 2. And it is the trick of a Deceiver to argue ab â—gnotiore and carry his Cause into the dark And Infants Case is left to â—s in Scripture much darker than that of the adult 85. Therefore it seemeth plain to me that though Christ's Church be â—ow incomparably happier than the Jewish Church was in magnitude â—ight and grace and excellency of priviledges far above all the rest of the world and so excelleth the state of Heathens far more than the Jewish Church excelled them Yet the rest of the world stand now in much like relation to God and the Christian Church as before Christ's â—ncarnation they did to God and the Jewish Church who were his pecuâ—iar but not his only people the foedus peculiaritatis was theirs only but not foedus gratiae So are we much more as a holy Nation a royal Priestâ—ood to stand nearer God than the rest of the world But whether the Jews were all Gods people on Earth I have before discussed and proved â—he negative 85. But certainly in no Nation under Heaven there is no coming â—â— God or pleasing him without Faith nor seeing him without Holiness nor any Name given under Heaven by which men can be saved but by Christ Heb. 11. 5 6. Heb. 12. 14. Act. 4. 1â— Rom. 8. 9. Joh. 14. 6. 1 Joh. 5. 10 11 12. nor any Sanctification but by Christ's Spirit nor any coming to the Fathâ—â— but by the Son nor any Pardon and Life but by a Covenant of Grace â—â—â— by the Merits and Purchase of Christ. But how far he giveth this Sâ—â—â— and Grace where he is not known himself as Incarnate is all the difficulty As to Infants and Adult 86. Though God hath said less to us of their case that hear not the Gospel than of Believers and Unbelievers privative * * * I desire the Reader to peruse Gaâ—aker's Preface to Antoninus of the Stoicks that hear it because it less concerneth us to know it and to be busie in judging the Servants of another yet in this point are mens confideâ—â—â— and opposition most vehement On one side some say Before I would believe that God hath shut all the millions of the Earth froâ— Adam's days till now save a few Jews and Christians out of all possibility of Salvation so that they are left as the Devils without heâ—â— hope or means and perish Infants and all meerly because God wiâ—â— have it so and that in everlasting fire I will easilier believe that the Gospel is not true as having less of Natures light to condemn me thâ—â— for receiving such thoughts of the infinitely Good and merciâ—â—â— God On the other side if I do but open the undeniable Mercies of God to all which all the world hath experience that they possess and that Covenant of Grace which the whole current of Scripture proveth theâ— under some men that are so very wise in their own eyes as hardly to suspect any thing to be an error which they have long held and that build much of their Religion and Theological Reputation in adhering to the Opinions of those whose communion they think most honoureth them and out of a blind zeal for that which they account Orthodoâ— will presently without impartial consideration or friendly debate â—â—gisterially pass their judgment among those that reverence them and backbite those that they cannot confute and say Such a man holdeth dangerous Opinions that Infidels may be saved and it 's like falsly represent my words When yet the same men perhaps will maintain that all the Elect are justified before they believe and so that Infidels even privative are justified so they be but elect And this seemeth to them no injury to Christ so powerful is prejudice and pride aâ—â— partiality 87. The question whether any besides Christians are put into a possibâ—lity of Salvation is easily and certainly resolved in the affirmative from Subit me certe subinde ita ista dum lego affectum me sentio ingenue agnosco non stupor duntaxat sed horror etiam cum arcani Divini admiratione vâ—hementissima conjunctus serio apud me reputantem quam longe in multis ab â—o absim quod de se vir iste veri ad salutem perducâ—ntis tramitis ignarus de se profitetur nec quin vere ingenuem ambigi posse videtur ut proinde Marco Epictâ—â—â—â— tinâ— assurgens Hymnum illius vel maxiâ—o majorem prastantiorem decantare jugiter debeam Gataker Proloq â— Antoninum Read the multitude of Testimonies of the Virtues of Antonine collected by Gataker post opera Fuit Marcus Antoninus vir omnium â—irtutum sanctitate vitae praecipuus coelestisque ingenii Sâ— bast Munster Cosmogr li â— Bonitatis ac sapientiae numine ab omnibus dum viveret in ea aestimatione bonoreque habitus qua nemo unquam vel aâ—te ipsâ—â— â—â— quod nâ—viâ—us post iâ—sum fuerit Nunquam ita conspirarunt scriptores in tribuendo cuiquam quaecunque pâ—terant boâ—itatis inteâ—â—â—â— t is innocentiae cujusvis denâ—que tituli apud â—thnicos speciosissâ—mi testimonia Celebrant illum non tantum ut principeâ— optiâ—â—â— â—â— simpliciter absolute ut â—ominem optimum philosophum
he will have all condemned whom he doth condemn But then it must be understood that this distinction iâ— not applyed to the Will of God as he is meerly an Absolute Proprietary or Benefactor but as he is the King or Rector of the world and so his Legislation is his Antecedent Will and his Judgment is his Consequent Will And no man of Religion can deny either that Gods Law is the signification of his Will or his Will signifyed or that his Judgment and â—â—cution is his Will declared or that Gods Law of Grace doth conditionally give pardon and salvation to all antecedently to man's performance or rejection of the condition or that God condemneth Infidels consequently to their Infidelity The Law Antecedently to Mans part acted saith He that believeth shall be saved and the Sentence consequently to his fact saith Judas an unbeliever or impenitent shall perish And thus the distinction hath no doubt or difficulty 103. God by commanding faith and repentance and making theâ— necessary conditions of Justification and by commanding perseverance and threatning the Justified and Sanctified with damnation if they fâ—â— away and making perseverance a condition of Salvation doth thereby provide a convenient means for the performance of his own Decree of giving Faith and Repentance and perseverance to his Elect For he effecteth his ends by suitable moral means and such is this Law and Covenant to provoke man to due fear and care and obedience that he may be wrought on as a man 104. To be justifyed by Faith in general agreeth to the ages before Of Justification by Faith c. Christ's Incarnation and those since But so doth not the special kind of faith by which they are justifyed For much more is Essential to that faith which we must be justifyed by to them that are under the last edition of the Covenant of Grace than was or is to them that were under the first alone Abraham believed not all our essential Articles of faith 105. To be justified by faith in Paul's sence is all one as to be justified What that Faith is by becoming Christians To be a Believer a Disciple and a Christian are all one in the Gospel sence 106. The faith by which we are justified as is aforesaid is best understood The Controversie between the Papists and us about Justification is agitated iâ— vain till we agree of the sence of the words Justification and Remission As I said elsewhere they take not only Justification for a qualitative change such as we call Sanctification but Remission of Sin for they know not what themselves most of them talk as if it were a putting away the Sin in its essence which can be meant of nothing but the Habit for the fact cannot be infectum Others seem to take it for remitting the punishment also with that change Malderus most plainly in 1. 2. q. 113. a. 1. and p. 567. saith that Remission of Sin is Ablatio Reatus culpae At esse longe aliud quam Nolle illud punire non enim tantum facit Hominem non puniri sed etiam non esse Poena dignum Minus tamen est quam in amicitiam recipi though yet no man is in a middle state neque Dâ—i amicus neque inimicus yet cogitations possunt seterari Peccata Remittere idem est quod non imputare si hoc non accipias pro dissimulare sed pro desinere esse offensum cum per Remissionem Deo non imputante est quasi non fuerit By this you may see that these Papists hold the same with those Protestants whom they seem most to resist and cannot hide it But 1. It will be true to eternity that Peter sinned 2. To say so is to blame him 3 His sin deserv'd death 4. The Law and the nature of sin past are the same after pardon as before 5. God doth not change his mind of sin 6. Gods offence or displeasure is not a passion or mutable but his essence as denomina ed from the object to be his Velle punire and Justice that must punish 7. For God to be appeased and no more offended is but his Nolle punire peccatorem and not to be obliged in Justice to punish him but by his Covenant related to him as one that will not punish 8. This change is in the sinner becoming not punishable 9. That is not worthy of it in the Gospel-sence though worthy by the Law of Innocency 10. All this is but that the Reatus pâ—na culpae quantum ad poenam is remitted but not the Reatus culpae simpliciter in se And thus we are all agreed by the Baptismal Covenant and is essentially a Believing Fiducial consent to our Covenant relation to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost as our Reconciled Creator and Father our Saviour and our Sanctifyer connoting the forsaking of all inconsistents For it must needs be the same faith by which we have right to the benefits of that Covenant and by which we are justified because we have our remission and justification by the Instrumental donation of the Covenant it being one of the benefits given by it But Practical Faith or Believing-consent is our condition of receiving our Covenant right to all the benefits in general therefore to Justification in particular 107. The Phrases of Justifying faith and Faith justifying us are humane and not Scriptural at all And though they may be well used with explicatory caution as being well meant yet they are more lyable to mislead men than the Scripture phrase that we are justified by Faith Because the former phrases are apter to insinuate an Efficiency than the other whereas faith is no efficient cause of our Justification nor any other act of Man And the Scripture that speaketh of Justification by Faith sometime useth the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which no more signifyeth any Instrumental efficiency of Justification than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex operibus And though sometime 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be used it is to signifie no more than that God hath appointed it to be the Medium of our Justification as a condition but not as any efficient cause 108. The Faith by which we are justified as I touched before hath God the Father for its object as essentially as Christ the Saviour as the said Baptismal Covenant sheweth and that not only secondarily as Christ being the Mediator and way to the Father our faith in Christ connoteth the final object but also directly and primarily as the Father is the first in Trinity and as Creator first related to us and as the end is first in our intention Joh. 17. 3. This is life eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou bast sent Joh. 13. 1. Let not your hearts be troubled you believe in God believe also in me 109. And as essential is it to this Faith to believe in Christ as the Purchaser of Holiness and Heaven as to
deceive themselves We hold it neither de facto nor de possibili and they hold it de possibili and not de facto viz that bare pardon and non imputation may put away the very being of sin and may save men Of which more afterwards But many others deny that sin can be remitted by extrinsick condonation See Cacer's Sum. The. 22. c. 2. They ordinarily take Remission for destroying the sin it self or passive as it 's called is not given us or made ours truly and properly in the thing it self but in the effects as was aforesaid for neither the same matter nor the same form is strictly ours 1. That neither of them is ours in a physical sence is undeniable If the Divine Righteousness were so ours we were Gods And a Habit an Act and a Passion materially cannot be removed from one subject to another nor the same be in divers subjects These are as palpable contradictions as Transubstantiation is And the Relative form is founded in the matter or subject and can no more be removed The paternity of a Generator and the paternity of an Adopter are not the same but two And a Relation is an accident also which perisheth when removed from the subject and in another is another 2. If it be said that both are ours Morally or Imputatively I answer It is true But that phrase is of large and doubtful signification 1. If the meaning be that The Covenant of Grace doth as certainly pardon or justifie us in the way and degree promised by it for the merit of Christs Righteousness in performing his Mediatorial Covenant with the Father as our own merit had it been possible would have done or our Innocency would have Justifyed us by the Covenant of Innocency this is true 2. But if the meaning be that Christs merit and satisfaction by perfect holiness and obedience and suffering are supposed or Reputed by God to have been inherent in us or done by us in our civil person in Christ or that in a sence natural or Legal we did all those things our selves or that God judgeth us so to have done by Judging Christ and us to be the same civil person or else that all the Benefits of Christs Righteousness shall as fully and immediately be ours as if we had been and done and suffered merited and satisfyed in and by Christ All this is false 120. For if this were so we could need no pardon for he that is reputed to be Innocent by fulfilling all the Law is reputed never to have sinned by omission or commission And he can have no pardon of sin who hath no sin to be pardoned Therefore such an Imputation of Christs Righteousness to us would make his satisfaction null or vain or certainly neither imputable to us nor useful for us 121. Some to avoid this do divide the Time of our Lives and suppose Christs sufferings to have satisfied and purchased pardon of our sins for all the Time before our Believing and his Righteousness to be imputed to us for the Time since our Believing But this is a humane fiction For our sins after believing must have pardon too by Christ's satisfaction And some distinguish of our Time and State under the two Covenants and say that Christ's satisfaction was for the pardon of our sins under the first Covenant which continued but till the promise made to Adam Gen. 3. 15. And so was for none but Adam's sin imputed to us and that after that all being under the new Covenant it condemneth none but the finally impenitent who scape not and so that Gods pardoning men since the new Covenant is but his preventing their need of pardon or else pardoning temporal punishments only But this is contrary to the Gospel which tells us that Christ dyed for our sins even all that ever are forgiven and that all are forgiven to believers and not the necessity of forgiveness prevented and not only Adam's sin as ours Nor only the temporal but the perpetual punishment And even temporal punishment is not due to the innocent 122. Some distinguish only of Actions and not of Time and say Christ's Sacrifice satisfyed for all our sins that they may be forgiven and his righteousness is imputed to us that we may be also accounted just But this is but either ambiguity or the fore-detected gross contradiction For if by Justice they mean Reputed sinlessness or perfectiâ—â— then these two cannot stand together For he that is supposed a Sinner is supposed not sinless or perfect And he that is supposed sinless cannot be supposed pardonable 123. Some think to avoid the contradiction by distinguishing only the moments of Nature and double respect of the same mans actions They say that we are first in order of Nature supposed to be Sinners and pardoned and then to be such as moreover need the reputation of Innocency or Righteousness which is added to pardon But 1. He that is pardoned all sins of omission and commission is accounted Innocent and Righteous as to any Guilt of punishment either of sence or Loss 2. And he that is after accounted Innocent and Just from his first being to that hour is judged never to have needed pardon And so they make God come with an after act and condemn his own foregoing act of error and injury or at least to contradict it and in the first instant to say I pardon this Sinner and in the second to say I now repute him one that never sinned or needed pardon 124. But the commonest way of such Divines is to say that Christs Righteousness is first imputed that is we are reputed to have perfectly obeyed and been habitually holy in Christ and then sin is next pardoned as a fruit of the merits of this But this is still but the oft detected contradiction that we are first accounted sinless and therefore our sins are forgiven us 125. Some say that the Law since the fall obligeth us both to obey and to suffer and not to one only else a Sinner bound to suffer should not be bound to obey Therefore Christ must do both for us But this is too gross for any man to utter that ever knew what Law and Government is Do they mean that as to the same Act and time the Law bindeth us to obey and suffer or for divers acts and instants of time Do they mean that the Law bound man both to perfection and suffering for perfection or to suffering for sin No man doubts but when one sin is committed and punishment deserved the Law is still the Law and bindeth men still to obey or suffer more the next moment and again to obey or suffer more the next moment But this concerneth not our question Did the Law bind Adam to obey and to suffer before he sinned Did it bind him both to obey and suffer for his new sin the next instant It 's true it bound him to suffer for his old sin but not for the next before it is
person or as fully representing us all the Gospel is over-turned There is no room for Repentance none for the satisfaction of Christ none for Faith in his blood nor for Pardon or prayer for Pardon or any Grace Act Duty or Ordinance Sacraments Confession or any thing which supposeth Sin To say that Adam's Law meant Do this by thy self or by Christ and thou shalt live is a Humane fiction not found in Scripture confounding the Law of Innocency with the Gospel And to say that the New Covenant maketh us one Person with Christ and then the Law of Adâ—â— doth justifie us is a double error We are not reputed one Person with Christ nor doth the first Covenant justifie any but the Person that performeth it But we maintain as well as they that the same Righteousness of God in himself is manifested in both Covenants and the same holy love of perfect Obedience and the ends of the first Covenant are secured by the second But the tenour and terms are not the same nor the Righteousness of the subject as denominated from those terms It is not the same Law which condemneth us and justifieth us nor that justifieth Christ and us nor is it the same Habits or Acts which are the immediâ—â—e fundamentum of the Relation of righteous in Christ and in us â—ough his Righteousness be the meritorious cause of ours And thereâ—â—re not the same with the thing merited 130. The Truth which they grope after and must reconcile them â—â—â—â— is as followeth Christ in his Sufferings did stand in the room of â—â—ners as their Sponsor and satisfied Justice as was said before And â—â—d had other ends yet to accomplish It was meet that the perfection â—his Law should be glorified by a perfect fulfilling of it by Christ â—en we had failed Satan was hereby confounded God pleased and â—noured Man shewed what he should have been and yet should do â—ns nature in Christ was thus actively and habitually perfected By all â—s Christ performed his Obedience to the mediatorial Law and his Herveus Natal quodlib 4. q. 14. could speak thus much better than many Protestants Sicut meritum Christi quantum ad actum quem exercuit non transit in alios transit tamen in alios quantum ad effectum illius meriti illis qui applicantur ad Christum mediantibus Sacramentis vel mediante fide propria Qui quidem effectus est Gratia quae est câ—ntraria culpae quae reddit hominem dignum vita aeterna Ita etiam demeritum Adae licet non transeat in alios quantum ad actum quem exercuit tamen transit quoad effectum culpae originalis quae est contraria gratiae reddit dignum poenae aeterna indignum vita aeterna How doth this differ from the soundest Protestants as to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us or Adam's sin â—venant of Redemption and so acquired a right first to himself of giving â—t the purchased Benefits to Sinners by a new Law or Covenant of Grace â—â—d according to it By which Covenant only as his Instrument the â—her and Son give us Right to them in an Order there established â—â—â—â— that is there given to us Christ purchased for us by performing his â—n Covenant first with the Father by perfect Holiness and Obedience â—en in his Sacrifice on the Cross and by all that he undertook to do as Redeemer antecedently The Purchase was made for this Donation â— its end and is commensurate to it just so much as Christ hath given â—â—â—â— as to matter manner terms degree time c. he did purchase and â—rit for us and no more Had he antecedently done all that he did â—â—â—â— our person and we in him in Law sense the thing it self with its separable consequents and effects had been all ours ipso facto before and â—thout the donation or conveyance of a new Law or Covenant nor â—d they been ever given us upon terms and conditions when they were â—â—â—â— own before without those terms But now what is given us by the â—ew Covenant we have title to on this account because it was purâ—ased by the perfect Merit and Saerifice of Christ and so given us by â—m and by the Father So that it is ours as sure as if we had merited it â—r selves but not ours in the same order and measure and time and â—ms as if we had merited it our selves in our natural or legal perâ—ns For then it would have been all ours at once ipso facto even â—e merit it self and the fore-said effects We deserved punishment â—nd Christ was punished in our stead that we might be forgiven not â—mediately but on Covenant-terms we had forfeited Life by sin And â—hrist merited Life for us by his Perfection not in our persons but in â—e person of a Mediator which Life was to be given to us by the said â—ovenant The antecedent benefits such as the Covenant it self he â—veth absolutely and antecedently to any act of ours God reputeth all his Satisfaction and Merit of Christ to be as meet and effectual to proâ—ure us all these Benefits to be thus given as if we our selves had done and â—ffered And in this sense Christ's Righteousness is given us and made ours â—â—â—â— that it is given for us and we have the said benefits of it Not that God doth give us the very habits of Holiness which were in Christ nor â—he transient acts which he performed nor the very Sufferings which he â—nderwent nor the Relation of righteous satisfactory and meritorious as â—â—â—â— was that numerical Relation which immediately resulted from Christ's â—wn Habits Acts and Sufferings For such a translation of accidents is â—â—â—â— contradiction But God giving us all the effects or Salvation merited â—n it self properly is said also not unfitly to give us the Merit or Righteousness which procured them that is as it was paid to God for us to procure them even as he is said to give Christ himself antecedently â—â— our Faith to the World as a Saviour And thus Christ's Righteousness Merit and satisfaction may be said to be imputed to us in that it â—â— thus given us and thus truly reputed ours 131. But when the Text saith Rom. 4. 24. Righteousness is imputed â—â— us the meaning is no more but that God reputeth or judgeth us righteâ—â—â— though we have not the Righteousness of Innocency or of the Law â—â— Works which indeed is done for Christ's meritorious Righteousâ—â—â—â— procuring it But the Text speaketh not of Christ's personal Righteousâ—â—â—â— in matter or form imputed to us as being it self our own Impuâ—â—â—â— Righteousness to us is a consequent Act after Faith of God as Judâ—â— and not an antecedent donation 132. And it is true that formaliter non-punire praemiari â—â—â—punish and to Reward are not all one And in some cases a man may â—â— freed from punishment who is not rewarded But it is as true as is aâ—â—â— said 1. That Gods Salvation and
all his Benefits are ever free Gifts â—â— to the matter and value first and then the relation of a Reward is bâ— secondary as to the Order of collation and the reason comparative whâ— one man hath them rather than another as a thankful Child hath the Gift which the Contemner goeth without 2. And that here Not to have this Gift forfeited by our sin is to be punished And so hâ—â—â— non-donari is puniri materially though the relations differ 3. And that it is the same Righteousness of Christ which meriteth our Impunity quoad damnum sensum and which meriteth our Right to the Gift of Life both sub ratione doni as a Gift and sub ratione condonationis as a forgiveness of the forfeiture and of the poena damni So that here â—â— no room for the conceit that Christ's death was only to purchase Pardon and his Righteousness to merit Life That which confoundeth men here is their taking the divers Respects and Connotations and Coâ—ceptions of one and the same thing to be divers separable things Thâ— same Law hath the Preceptive part to do and not do and the Retributing part penal and rewarding The same Obedience of Adam was â—â— doing what was commanded and a deserving what was promised â—â—â—â— more was promised to persevering Perfection than to the first act of Obedience One Sin deserved death but one act of Obedience desernâ—â— not immutable Glory And as the same Act is formally Obedience related to the Command and formally meritorious or praemiandus â—â— related to the Promise And the same Act is sin and punishable as related to the Precept or Prohibition and Threatening so the same Glory is a free Gift in one respect as related ut bonum to God as Benefactor and a Reward in another as related quoad ordinem conferendi to God â—â— Rector And the same loss of Glory is poena related to the Threatening and it is the loss of a Reward as related to the Promise And so the sâ—â—â— Merits of Christ's active and passive and habitual Righteousness because our Glory both by giving us pardon of our forfeiture and by Covenant-Donation and as a Reward to Christ and to us when â—â— perform the conditions of his Gift 133. And it is certain that Christ's Sufferings are first satisfactory and then meritorious being a part of his Active that is voluntary Oâ—dience And Christ's Holiness and Obedience are meritorious of pardon â—â— Sin as well as of Salvation 134. If there be as there is any thing which is given us througâ—â— Christ more than our own Innocency or Obedience would have mâ—â—â—ted the Gift of that is more than remission of Sin And is to be ascribeâ— accordingly to the Purchase of Christ's Merits But yet both his Holiness and Sufferings though not as sufferings did merit it And that was not a fulfilling of the Law in our stead 135. This superadded Gift what-ever it is seemeth in Scripture to be included in Adoption and not in Justification But yet it may in this sense be called Justification in that when our Right to that Gift is questioned that Right must be justified by the Covenant-Donation and by Christ's meritorious Purchase of it But this is only de nomine We are agreed of the thing 136. It is greatly to be noted that as a Reward is in the formal notion more than not punishing where materially they are the same so Christ hath not at all merited that eternal Life should be ours by way of Reward for our fulfilling the Law in him but that it should ours by his free Gift as a Reward to Christ for his own Merits So that the Relation of a Reward for Perfection belongeth only formally to Christ who taketh it as his benefit that we are saved through his love to Souls but not at all to us And to say as too many hold that Heaven is our Reward for our perfection of Holiness and Obedience in and by Christ is a Humane Invention subverting Christ's Gospel or unfit speech if better meant 137. Yet a Reward it is to us to be glorified but that is not for our fulfilling the Law of Innocency by Christ but for our believing in Christ and performing the conditions of the Covenant of Grace which giveth us Life as a free Gift but yet in the order of the condition it hath the relation and name of a Reward to us in the Scripture 138. So that here are three rewarding Covenants before us 1. The Covenant or Law of Innocency rewarding man for perfection to the end And this rewarded none but Christ And it is false that we are rewarded by that Covenant or justified by it for Christ's fulfilling it But it All the stir of the Papists is to prove that we have inherent Righteousness as well as pardon which Protestants are as much for as they The rest is de nomine justificationis Malder 1. 2. q. 113. a. 2. p. 572. Apostolus 2 Cor. 5. non aliud vult quam Christum cui nullum debebatur supplicium factum fuisse hostiam pro nostro peccato ut nos qui apud Deum nihil merebamur praeter supplicium justitia Dei fieremus in ipso id est gratis sine nostris operibus consequeremur per ipsius merita justitiam coram Deo What doth this differ from the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches Idem ibid Quando Apostolus dicit multos constitui justos per unius obedientiâ—â— significatur causa meritoria non autem formalis And so say we But some call Christ's Righteousness the causa materialâ—s meaning no more but that it is the matter of that Merit for which we are justified As if Adam had perfectly fulfilled the Law his fulfilling it had been meritorious of his sentential Justification and yet the matter of his constitutive Justification that is of his Righteousness And some uâ—â—ptly call it the formal cause But an unapt logical notion is not an error in Faith or Theology Idem ib. p. 573. Quamvis â—x omnino rigida justitia solus Christus Dominus satisfactat de condigno tamen ita ut merces operi â—ono debeatur post Dei promissionem meretur justus coronam justisiâ— quam reddet in illa die justus judex Est nostra justitia tota totum meritum tota satisfactio dependens a meâ—ito satisfactione Christi Still here is a wordy Controversie justified Christ 2. The Law or Covenant made only to and with Christ the Mediator And this Covenant further rewarded Christ as Mediator giving him all that it promised to himself and us for his performing the mediatorial conditions And so our Life is Christ's Reward 3. The Covenant or Law of Grace for it is the same thing in several respects that 's called the Law and the Covenant which giving Life on the condition of Faith doth justifie and reward Believers And we are justified and rewarded by no other Law 139. When Rom. 4. oft saith and other Texts that we are
him total resignation and use as such 2. As our Ruler we owe him â—ubjection and Obedience as such 3. As our Friend Benefactor Amaâ—â—lissimus we owe him Gratitude and Love as such which yet is part â—f Obedience too Now Sin being the privation of all this God is to â—e satisfied for it as such in all these three Relations And is pars laesa â—â— all these three Relations that is he is injured though not hurt It is â—â—ue that Government and punishing Justice formally as such belong to God only as Rector And satisfaction is made him eminently in that Reâ—ation yet also to compensate the injury done by sin to him in the other â—wo Relations also SECT IX Of the nature and distinctions of Justification 152. Justification is a word of many significations the Scheme whereof And 1. Of constitutive Justification should I give them all would seem to most Readers a troublesome diâ—tinguishing Therefore I take up with these three most notable senses â— Justification constitutive 2. Sentential 3. Executive The first is to make a man righteous The second is to judge him righteâ—us The third is to use him as righteous 1. By Impunity 2. Reward * * * The Papists are confounded in the point of Justification by sticking to confounding words They talk of Justification and remission of sin but cannot tell men intelligibly what they mean They say that Remission is a putting away the sin it self and not only the Reatum poenae and yet say many that it may be done without any physical change of the Sinner 1. By sin they mean not the Habit for that cannot be removed without a physical change 2. Nor the act For that is past as soon as done 3. When they say it is macula moralis habitualiter remanens they talk gibberish and play with a metaphor and the word habitualiter A true habit is quid physicum and what macula is they can tell no man besides a habit disposition privation â—r relation If they mean that it is the Reatus culpae or culpability that is done away and not only the Reatus poenae they hold â—he same thing which they oppose in those Protestants that go too far from them And it is not sound For the pardoned Sinâ—er will be culpable though not punishable for ever that is will be really the man that sinned and it will be an everâ—asting truth This man sinned though he be pardoned See Pet. a S. Joseph Theol. Speculat l. 4. c. 10. pag. 509 510 511. The Papists say Homo est formaliter justus per formam gratiae ipst exâ—riâ—secam non tantum per justitiam Christi illi imputatam And yet Nullus actus quantumvis perfectus sive sit contritio sive Amor Dei super omnia est causâ— formalis justificationis Patres diâ—entes charitatem esse perfectam justitiam intelligendi sunt dispositive non autem formaliter Because it is in the Habit and not in the Act â—r rather as others of them say in some internal inclination antecedent to the habits of Faith Hope and Love that they place Justification or as we call it Sanctification Pet. a S. Joseph Thes Univers de grat Hab. pag. 88 89. 153 God never judgeth a man righteous either by secret esteem or open sentence till he have made him such 154. To be made righteous is to be justified in Law-sense which is To be justifiable or justificandus by sentence 155. A man is righteous 1. Particularly secundum quid as to some particular cause that he is accusable of 2. Or universally as to all causes 3. Or eminently as to all those causes that Heaven or Hell depend upon 156. 1. No man is universally righteous really or reputatively God judgeth no Saint in Heaven to be one that never sinned And he that hath once sinned is unavoidably under the Relation of â—â—â—â— that sinned to eternity ex necessitate existentiae which Relation is the very Reatus ipsius peccati though all the ill effects be remitted 157. 2. Every man hath some particular righteousness For the worst man may be falsly accused and be righteous as to that false accusation But this will not save him 158. 3. That eminent Righteousness necessary to our Salvation though it be not universal or perfect else we should never be afficted by chastiâ—â—ments or denials of Grace or permissions to sin yet is it at least perfect as to its proper use and to our glorious perfection And may be called our universal Righteousness because it is all that we have And â—â— consisteth not of any one or two Causes but of many Of which no oâ—â— must be excluded or set against the rest As there are several Allegatioâ—â— or Accusations against us so there must be several parts of the matter of our Justification 159. Not only an actual Accusation but a possible or a virtual oâ—â— which we are liable to sufficeth to denominate Justification as its contrary in the first Law-sense of Justification 160. It is our Right to Impunity and to the heavenly Glory which is to be justified finally in Judgment and our persons as the Subjects of that Right And our Actions but mediately in order to that end 161. It is only at the Bar of Christ as Redeemer that we are to be judged and justified and not by God only as a Creator Therefore it is by the Law of Grace that we must be judged to life or death finally and not by the sole Law of Innocency 162. Therefore no man is justified by the Law of Innocency either by the preceptive or retributive part But we are justified only by the Lâ—â— or Covenant of Grace against the Accusation which may be brought against us from the Law of Innocency Against it not by it 163. We are liable to all these following Accusations which will opeâ— to us the correlate Justifications and the matter of each part 1. It may be said by the Accuser of the Brethren Thou art a Siâ—â—â—â— against the Precepts of Nature and Grace He that denieth this is a Lyar Against this Charge there is no Justification for ever But we must â—â— Heaven confess that we have sinned but Glory be to him that washed â—s from our sins in his blood by Pardon and Sanctifiation 164. 2. Next it may be said that We did deserve Hell by our Sin This also is to be confessed for ever 165. 3. It may be said that by Gods Law of Innocency Hell is ouâ— due and therefore we are to be condemned to it To this we deny the consequence because we have right to Impunity and to Glory freely given us by God our Redeemer by a Covenant of Grace merited for us by the Obedience and Satisfaction given for us by Christ our Saviour Where note that here in this first part of our Justification there are all these conjunct necessary Causes 1. Gods Love and Mercy giving 2. Christ's Righteousness and Satisfaction meriting 3. The Covenant
reject and resist Gods Grace and break his Covenant he forfeiteth Gods further Grace And I have noted 1. That most Children which I have seen very early wicked have been such whose Parents grosly neglected their Duty and Covenant as to a holy prudent careful Education of them as if God must needs save their Children because they were the Children of Believers who thus betrayed them 2. And those that were well educated by their Parents usually shew hopeful signs at first till their own lusts grow up and deceive and overthrow them The nature of the mutual Covenant and the sad experience of the case of many baptized Children maketh me incline to this Opinion which I do not peremptorily assert but humbly propose to better judgments with submission â—ut what-ever we say of the Parents I doubt not but to the person at age future benefits have future conditions 174. Though Gods Decree is that his Elect shall persevere yet I conceive with submission to better information that the baptismal-Baptismal-Covenant as such doth not absolutely promise or give right to so much Grace as shall certainly cause the baptized to persevere that is all that are rightfully baptized even coram Deo as well as coram Ecclesia have not perseverance secured to them by baptism But only the Holy Ghost is given to them by Covenant to be their Sanctifier and carry on his work to their Salvation if they will use those means which God hath appointed and doth enable them to use in attendance on his Spirit Though Election infer the certainty of perseverance I never saw their assertions proved who say 1. That if Adam had once obeyed say some or overcome that one Temptation say others God promised confirmation to him and all his Posterity 2. That the baptismal-Baptismal-Covenant promiseth confirmation and certain perseverance to all the baptized regenerate or justified What God doth I am not now questioning but what in that Covenant he promiseth to do 175. It is plain in the Scripture that when men are converted and baptized the particular helps of Grace are promised them upon further particular conditions And that the continuance of Pardon and Right to Life is promised them upon the continuance of their Faith and use of means And that actual Glorification is promised them on condition of overcoming and persevering And therefore that we must use and take all these as conditions 176. It is ordinary with some Writers and Preachers to tell men What must be in our selves that no part of their Righteousness is in themselves and with others that at least none which they are justified by in any part is in them and that it is all in Christ only And that nature is loth to yield to this but thinketh it a fine thing to have some little part of the honour to it self And as to the honour of a good Action if it be but 999 parts that it ascribeth to God and taketh one part of a thousand to our selves it is a dangerous arrogation we must have none This well explained may be made sound But thus grosly delivered it is but a popular cheat under the taking pretence of self-abasement and giving Christ all The Devil is as willing as any one that you should have nothing honourable or praise-worthy in you and be as vile as he can make you It is God who honoureth those that honour him and praiseth his Saints as the excellent on Earth and his Jewels and peculiar Treasure adorned with his own lovely Image and partakers of the Divine Nature and members of Christ as his own Flesh And it is Satan and wicked men that vilifie and dishonour them And I have oft lamented it that these very men that hold this kind of Doctrine of self-abasement as having no part of Righteousness nor share at all in any good work are yet too oft so proudly conceited of their own goodness even for holding that they have none for which they are praise-worthy as that their pride is no small trouble to the Churches and all about them 177. What-ever is of God is good and what-ever is good is laudable or praise-worthy and meriteth to be esteemed as it is 178. All the sanctified are inherently righteous But with an imperfect righteousness which will no further justifie them in Judgment save only against this Accusation that they are unholy 179. There is no Righteousness which will not justifie him that hath it in tantum so far as he is righteous For the contrary is a contradiction For to be just is to be justifiable He that gave but six pence to the poor is justifiable against this Accusation that he did not give it 181. All the Righteousness which formally justifieth us is our own or on our selves where it justifyeth us For to be made just or justified in the I would here cite the words of Bâ—za Paraeus Dr. Field Bonhaus Bâ—llinger Alberius Zanchy Aepinus Spangâ—â—bergius Brentius Coâ—fess Augustan c. Asserting that Justification is oft used as Sanctification in Scripture and that plenary Justification hath three parts 1. Pardon 2. Accepting us into favour and life 3. The gift of the Holy Ghost or inherent righteousness but that Guil. Forbes hath largely done it Consid Pacific 2 Thes 1. 9 10. first sence constitutively is nothing else but to be made such as are personally themselves just Pardon of sin is made our own Right to Christ and Glory is made our own Though Christ's Righteousness was the only meritorious cause of all this which therefore is and may be called our Material Righteousness as that which meriteth it is the matter 182. He that is no cause of any good work is no Christian but a damnable wretch and worse than any wicked man I know in the world And he that is a Cause of it must not be denyed falsly to be a cause of it Nor a Saint denyed to be a Saint upon a false pretence of selâ—denyal 183. As God is seen here in the Glass of his works so he is to be loved and praised as so appearing Therefore he that dishonoureth his work dishonoureth God and hindereth his due love and praise And his most lovely and honourable work on earth is his holy Image on his Saints And as Christ will come to be admired and glorified in them at last so God must be seen and glorified in them here in some degree And to deny the Glory of his Image is the malignants way of injuring him and that in which the worst will serve you He that will praise God as Creator and Redeemer must praise his works of Creation and Redemption And is it the way of praising him as our Sanctifyer to dispraise his work of Sanctification 184. Those poor Sinners of my acquaintance who lived in the grosseâ—â— sins against Conscience as Drunkenness Whoredom c. have been glad enough of such doctrine and forward enough to believe that there is nothing in man that in any part can justifie
supposed in Gods Law which is the reason of our participation in his Sin and not any Will or Judgment of God without or beyond our Natural interest For else it should be God most properly who by his arbitrary imputation should either make us Sinners or repute us such when we are none But yet when we become Persons it is by Derivation from Adam and so the effect can be no better than the cause and as soon as we are Persons we are Guilty persons having Guilt with personality from him though we were not persons in him 3. So Christ is though not the Natural yet the Federal Adam or Root of Believers when he satisfied and merited we were not in him either as in Adam seminally as in a natural Generator nor as existent Persons nor did God falsly so repute us to be But he was then the Cause materially or had that Virtus effectiva which would Justifie and Sanctifie and Glorifie us in due time It was the Nature of Sinners though not a sinful Nature which he assumed But that Nature which he undertook was existent in his Individual person and no other Individual person was existent in his existent personal Nature So that when we say it was the common Nature of Man we mean only specifice that Nature which is of the same Species with all other mens but not that which existed individually in any but himself and a Species extra individuum is nothing but an ens rationis or a notion But it was individual Persons in whose stead or place Christ suffered and whom he undertook to Justifie Sanctifie and Save and gather into a holy Society to that end and to that end he undertook and performed his office and merited all this by his perfect righteousness So that hereby he made Himself a Federal Head and Root of a holy Society his Church And whenever any person doth Believe and is united federally to him he then receiveth the effects of that which was before in Christ as a Virtus effectiva The Law made to Adam or to us did not assign Christ to this office nor oblige him to suffer or merit for sinners according to it Therefore by so doing he fulfilled not the Law as it obliged us that is by that obligation nor suffered by that obligation which bound us to suffer But by the obligation of his own Consent and that Law which was peculiar to himself as to the formal obligation though materially he was bound by it to fulfill the Law of Nature and of Moses The Law of Innocency then or Works took not Christ for the Civil or Legal Person of such Sinner or Believer no more than it made him such 4. As Gods Law to the Mediator made him this office so Christ's Law of Grace doth quod jus Relationem give to every true believing Covenanter first Christ himself in union to be their federal Head and with him title to his Grace Spirit and Glory And now they are Personally and actually his federal Subjects Friends and Members and have right to all his conferred gifts 5. But this right floweth not immediately to them from what Christ did or suffered for them but from his Law or Covenant of Grace by which as his Donative and Ruling Instrument he conveyeth that title to them 6. And therefore they have no right before the Time nor any but on the Conditions and Measure specified in that Covenant or Law so that Righteousness is not theirs because it is Christs nor in the manner or measure and to the ends of the donation 7. This much containeth the matter of this Doctrine of the Collation and Imputation of Christ's righteousness still remembring that as no one till he was a Person could be a person-guilty of Adam's sin not when he was a person any sooner than he was also guilty of his own inherent pravity and none that had the use of Reason was guilty of either or both these only without the guilt of his own Actual Sin and all three together 1. Adam's sin justly imputed to us 2. And our innate Pravity 3. And our actual Sin are the parts which constitute our plenary guilt even so no one till he is a Believer is related as a Member of a Perfectly Righteous Saviour and that is done no sooner in time that he hath the Inherent Righteousness of his personal faith and federal consent and that obligeth him to the further active righteousness of a holy life and all these three conjunct though not co-ordinate make up the total Righteousness of a Saint viz. 1. Our Relation to Christ in Union as to a perfectly Righteous Head who fulfilled all righteousness for us to merâ—â— our Justification which is called Christ's Righteousness Imputed to us as being thus far reputed ours 2. And our penitent believing consent to his Covenant which is the condition of the foresaid Relation to Christ 3. And our after Sanctification and obedience to Christ's Law 8. And when we are commonly thus far agreed of the Matter if any will contend for their self-coyned phrases and words and not being content to call Christ our Redeemer Saviour Teacher King Priest Head Lord Teâ—â—ator Sponsor or Surety Ransom Price Sacrifice c. as the Scripture doth will needs plead that he is or was our Person or was holy obedient suffered in our Persons Legal or Civil or was our Substitute Delegate Instrument c. his contention will be both corrupting and dividing And yet I will acknowledge that among Lawyers the word Person hath so many senses that in some of them were they our way of speech here it might be said that Christ did in some things personate each Sinner or each believer limitedly in tantum ad hoc non simpliciter aut ad omnia And all verbal quarrel I would shun even with them that speak ineptly and dangerously and injuriously to â—he truth and Church so they will but by a sound and necessary explication vouchsafe us an Antidote against the hurtful tendency of their â—hrases 9. Obj. If Christ's person be given us then his personal Righteousness is given us with it Ans Yes as his Person is He is not given us as Proprietors and Lords to become our Own at our dispose Nor is his Person made one Person with each or any of us His Person is not turned â—nto ours nor ours into his As the Husband is not the person of the Wife nor the King of each Subject But as one that hath a Great Wise Learned Bountiful Holy King or Husband hath also his Greatness Wisdom Learning Bounty and Holiness as they have him that is As his perfections for their good as far as his Relation binds him but not as â—f his endowments were removed from him to them or falsly reputed to â—e in them or his person to be their persons so here as we have a Christ â—o we have a perfect Righteous Christ given us to be our federal Head when we believe
and the Righteousness which is not in us but in him is â—urs so far as to be for our Good as far as his Office and Covenant do obâ—ige him So that a Righteous Christ and therefore the Righteousness of Christ are ours Relatively themselves quoad jus beneficis so as â—hat we have right to these Benefits by them which we shall possess â—nd for the merits of his Righteousness we are conditionally justified and saved before we believe and actually after But are not accounted to be Christ nor the Legal Actors of what he did nor Christ â—ccounted to be each of us SECT V. Merit 192. The great Controversie about humane Merits which hath made â—o great a noise in the world is of so easie solution that I can scarce Confes August Art 6. Semper sentiendum est nos consequt remissionem peccatorum personam pranâ—nciari Iustam id est acceptari gratis propter Christum per fidem postea vero placere etiam obedientiam erga legem reputari quandam Justiciam mereri praemia Et Art de Bon. operib Quanquam hac nova obedientia procul abest a perfectione legis tamen est â—usâ—iâ—ia meretur praemia ideo quia personae reconciliatae sâ—nt It a dâ— operibus judicandum est quae amplissâ—â—iâ— laâ—dibuâ— orâ—anda sunt quod sint necessariá quod sint cultus Dei Sacrificia spiriâ—â—alia mereantur praemia Ib. Exâ—recitatio nostra conservat ea meretur incrementum uxta illud Habenti dabitur Augustinus praeclare dixit Dilectio â—erâ—ur incrementum dilectionis cum viz exercetur Habent enim bonâ— apera Praemia cum in hac vita tum post hanc vitam in vita aternaâ— â—hink but almost all sober understanding Christians in the world are â—greed in sence while they abhor each others opinions as ill expressed or misunderstood Distinguish but 1. Of Commutative Justice and Distributive Governing Justice 2. And of Governing Justice according â—o Gods several Laws of Innocency Mosaical Works and of Grace â— And of Justifying and Meriting simply and comparatively And the case is so plain that few things are more plain to us that Christians conâ—rovert Viz. 1. To dream of meriting from God by any Creature Man or Angel in point of Commutative Justice is blasphemy and madness that is That we can give him any thing that shall profit him or which is not absolutely his own as a compensation for what he giveth us He maketh himself a God that asserteth this of himself 2. To say that any since Adâ—â— save Christ doth merit of God in point of Governing Justice according to the Law of Innocency is a falshood And he that saith He bâ—â—â— no sin is a lyar 3. To say that we can merit pardon or Justification oâ— Salvation meerly by observing Moses Law was the Jews pernicious erroâ— 4. To say that our faith and performance of the conditions of the new Covenant doth merit by the retributive Sentence of the old Covenanâ— or that it is in whole or part any meritorious Cause that God gave the world a Saviour or that Christ freely pardoneth and justifieth us all conditionally by the new Covenant or that it supposeth not Christ's Righâ—â—ousness to be the total sole meritorious Cause of that pardoning Covenant and all the benefits as thereby conditionally given All this is gross contradiction 5. To deny subordinate Comparative Merit or Rewardablâ—ness as from Gods Governing distributive paternal Justice according to the Covenant of Grace consisting in the performance of the condition of that Covenant and presupposing Christs total merits as aforesaid iâ— to subvert all Religion and true Morality and to deny the scope of all the Scriptures and the express assertion of an Evangelical worthiness which is all that this Merit signifyeth To say nothing of contradicting Catholick antiquity and hardening the Papists against the truth 193. This Comparative Merit is but such as a thankful Child hath towards his Father who giveth him a purse of Gold on condition thâ—â— he put off his hat and say I thank you who deserveth it in Comparison of his Brother who disdainfully or neglectfully refuseth it This last being absolutely said to Deserve to be without it but the former only comparatively said to deserve to have it as a free gift 194. And those that reject the saying of some Papists who in thiâ— sence say that Christ merited that we might merit placing our Evangelical merit in a meer subordination to Christs do but shew what prejudice and partiality can do and harden those who perceive their errors 195. Some man may think that the high things required in the Gospel self-denyal forsaking all running striving working loving overcoming Whether faith be not the meer Acceptance of a free gift according to its Nature Against Merit read of Papists Waldens de Sacram. tit 1. Gregor Armin. 1. d. 17. q. 1. a. 2. Durand 1. d. 27. q. 2. Marsil 2. d. 27. Brugers in Psal 35. Eckins in Centur. de Praedest Et inquit Fr. a Sancta Clara Deus Nat. Grat. p. 138. tribuitur etiam Cusano nec longe differt Stapletonus nostras Leg. Suarez in 3. p. Tho. Disp 10. Sect. 7. q. 3. See the Thomists sence of Merit in Lud. Carbo Tho. Compend 1. 2. q. 23. art 4. p. 240. c. are more than the meer Receiving of a free Gift But 1. If it were so yet our first faith would be no more by which we are Justified from all the sins of our unregeneracy 2. But upon consideration it will all appear to be no more materially For 1. When we say that it is the Receiving of the free Gift we must mean According to the Nature and to the use of that Gift As if you be required to take food the meaning is to Eat it and not to throw it away If you be required to take such a man to be your King your Master your Tutor your Husband your Physician c. the meaning is As such to the use of his proper office And so Accept of God as God that is our Absolute Owner Ruler and End and Christ as our Saviour Prophet Priest and King and the Holy Ghost as our Sanctifyer to Illuminate quicken and renew us is the suâ— of all the Positives of the Gospel 2. For this very Acceptance of them in this Nature and to this Use includeth the using of them after accordingly And if we do not so use them we thereby reject them and lose our own benefit of them as he that eateth not his meat refuseth and loseth it and he that weareth not his Cloaths and he that learneth not of his Teacher 3. And then Self-denyal and forsaking contraries and resisting impediments is but the same motus ut a termino a quo And he that refuseth to come out of his Prison and Chains refuseth his Liberty and he refuseth the Gold that will not cast away his handful of dirt to take it So that
to God And so Faith is below Repentance as a means of it 204. By this the question whether Faith or Repentance be first may partly be resolved and partly cast out as founded in confusion As they are both one thing neither can be first any otherwise than the same Motus ut a termino a quo ut ad terminum ad quem But as they signifie divers things they have each of them divâ—râ— acts and in respect of each are before each other The Assenting act of Faith in general must needs be always before Repentance as it is an Act of the Will But the consenting Act of faith is also part of Repentance and must folow that part of Repentance which is a change of the understanding But whether the Repentance as towards God or Faith in Christ be first or Love to God and Faith in Christ I have discussed as accurately as I can in my Christian Directory Par 1. cap. 3. pag. 182. and therefore thither refer the Reader 205. And how Faith and Love differ I have there also opened and therefore shall now only say that Faith as it signifieth meet How Faith and Love differ Assent differeth from Love as the act of the Intellect from Volition And Love formally taken presupposeth the Assent and doth not contain it But Faith taken largely in the sence of the Baptismal Covenant containeth in it Consent which is the Wills Volition and therefore must needs have some initial Love in it as it acteth iâ— Desire This Faith in God hath some Desire and Volition of God and Faith in Christ which is the Souls Practical Affiance in him hath some Love to Christ in it But the denomination is not from the same ratio formalis in each It is eminently called Faith when giving up our Souls to Christ to be saved in practical Affiance is the great work of the Soul though it have something of Love essential to it And it is eminently called Love morally when the Complacency of the Soul in Christ thus trusted and in God our end is the great work or business of the Soul 206. This Holy Love as a fixed habit and employment of the Soul and our Relation to the Holy Ghost to work it in us is it that is promised and Given quoad jus in the Baptismal Covenant of which Faith though it have somewhat of actual Love or Volition in it is the antecedent condition which also I have so fully opened as afore cited that I refer the Reader to it for this also And somewhat was said of it before SECT XIII Of the degrees of Pardon or Justification 207. Some men lest they should yield that Justification is not one perfect finished act done but once do feign that it is only the first act of Faith by which a man is justified Indeed it is only the first act by which he â—s changed from an unrighteous to a righteous state But to think that therefore we are never after justified by Faith and so have no actually justifying Faith all our lives but for one instant only is fitter for a Dreamer than a theological Discourser 208. Our first constitutive Justification being in its nature a right to â—mpunity and to Life or Glory * * * â—â—â—â— tells us that 〈…〉 which 〈…〉 by Regeâ—â—ra â—â— and Just â—â—â—â— on â—uâ— what they mean by Râ—â—nission they cannot tell themselves as a â—oresaid Pardon of the guâ—â— they mean not or else they mean several things in one word is a Relation which must be continued to the end and therefore must have the true causes and condition continued and would cease if any of them ceased 209. As to the question therefore whether Justification be lossable and â—ardon reversible I answer that the grant of them in the Covenant is unalterable But mans will in it self is mutable and if he should cease believing by Apostacy and the condition fail he would lose his Right and be unjustified and unpardoned without any change in God But that a man doth not so de facto is to be ascribed to Election and special Grace of which afterward 210. Though all our past sins are pardoned at our first Faith or Conversion or as the Ancients speak in Baptism yet it is most certain that Pardon or Justification is not perfect at first no nor on this side death And the saying of many that Justification is perfect at first and Sanctification only by degrees is a palpable error as I have else-where oft shewed For that is not perfect 1. Which is not continued and brought on to its end but upon continued conditions and diligent use of means to the â—ast * * * Neque enim peccati sui veniam impetravit Adam ut a morte temporali immunis esset Twiss contr Corvin pag. 343. col 2. 2. Which leaveth many penalties unremoved which have further means to be used for their removal and further Right to it to be obtained To have more and more Grace and less and less Sin and to have â—earer communion with God are blessings as to the degrees which we must by degrees attain a further Right to and the privation of them are â—ore penalties to be removed 3. We have new sins to be pardoned every day 4. Our remaining Corruption is such as needeth a continued Pardon till it be perfectly done away 5. The Day of Judgment is not come for which the most perfect Justification is reserved SECT XIV Of Justification by Sentence of the Judge 211. The second sort of Justification which is by Sentence is done by Christ as Judge and so is an act of his Kingly Office 212. Therefore were it true as it is not that justifying Faith were only the receiving or believing in Christ as a Justifier of us it would not be a believing in him in his Priestly Office only but in act For he merited our Justification as a humbled Servant and a Sacrifice He giveth it us in Right by his Covenant or Law of Grace as King and Benefactor He promulgateth it as Prophet He passeth the Sentences as King and Judge He executively taketh off the penalty and glorifieth us as King and Benefactor There is no Justification by a partial Faith 213. Though the estimation of a man as just called the Sententiâ— judicis concepta as distinct from the sententia prolata be said to be â—â— immanet act of God and therefore from eternity yet it is a mistake For though it be not transient effectivè and do nihil efficere ad extra yeâ— it is transient objectivè and doth presuppose the existence of the qualified Object For though Gods Knowledge and Will in genere or as such are his eternal Essence yet Gods Knowledge and Love of John or Peter â—â— Believers are terms which signifie not his Essence as such but as transâ—â— and terminated on those existent persons relatively So that the extrinâ—â—cal denomination from the existent Object is temporary as it is 214.
As the Angels rejoyce at a Sinners Conversion and therefoâ—â— know it so the notifying of Gods acceptance and pardon to the Angelâ— may be called some sort of sentential Justification 215. And the notifying our constitutive Righteousness to our Consciences is some kind of sentential Justification 216. But this Justification called in foro conscientiae is not the Justification by Faith so much spoken of in Scripture For that ever goeâ—â— before this A man is ever made just before he can be esteemed judged or known to be so And this in conscience is an uncertain mâ—â—â—ble thing according to the weakness of the man And oft he that â—â— just before God doth most doubt of it and condemn himself This justification may cease when we sleep or think of other things and may rise and fall daily if not be often lost And it is not of that grand importance to our Salvation as justification by Faith is 1 Cor. 4. 4. SECT XV. Of initial executive Pardon or Justification 217. But the most notable justification by way of sentence is 1. By Gods initial Executions here 2. By the publick Sentence and Executiâ—â— at the Day of Judgment 218. God speaking not by Voice that is called his Sentence which dâ—cisively declareth his Judgment But the Execution most notably declareth that Therefore though they be two things with men and sometimes with God yet Sentence being oft passed principally by Execution they are then both one 219. In this sense to sanctifie a man is to justifie him executively and so sententially For executive Justification and Pardon is the actual Impâ—â—ity removing of deserved Punishment and actual giving possession of Life and Salvation which constitutive Justification gave us Right to And as our privation of the Spirit and Holiness and to be left in sin is a great punishment so to have the Spirit and Holiness given us is executive See my Epist before Mr. Hotchâ—â— Book Of Forgiveness and his Book Pardon and Justification And so will Glorification much more 220. Executive Pardon and Justification therefore though the last of three sorts is the noblest as supposing both the other and being their end and the perfecting of the whole work 221. Non-punire is not always Pardon because it may respect an innoâ—ent and uncapable Object But the Rulers non-punire sontem is pardon â— what degree soever But a non-punire as the execution of an Act of â—blivion or Gift of Right to Impunity is the fullest executive â—â—rdon 222. The same must be said of nolle punire which is no pardon as â—â— the Innocent nor to a fore-seen Guilt not yet existent no more than â—â— a stone But when the person becometh guilty and obliged to suffer â—â—en Gods nolle punire becometh de novo a pardon denominatione extrinâ—ca without any change in God 223. For God perfectly to forgive sin while any sin remaineth in the More of that imperfection of Pardon against Ockam and others â—oul epecially habitual is a contradiction For sin it self though not â—â— sin nor as effected yet as permitted and not healed is the greatest â—unishment as was said And there is no perfect pardon of the punishâ—ent while such punishment is continued And Ockam's great subâ—lty failed when Quodlib 4. q. 1. he determined that per potentiam abâ—â—lutam Deus potest salvare hominem sine charitate creata unless he meant that he can charitatem dare aliter quam creando For to save a man withâ—ut Grace or Love is a contradiction His first Argument is God can do that immediately which he can do by â—â—y second Cause efficient or final * * * Can they tell us intelligibly how the sin of Unbelief and not-loving God and other privations can be really put away without the contrary quality or act Scotus with Rada other Scotists go the same way upon the same false suppositions And to confute one of them is to confute all And so the Papists that say Original Sin is forgiven in Baptism as to the whole calpability and penalty as Petavins in Elench Theriac Vincent-Lenis i. e. Fromondi p. 111. c. 2â— do grosly err For 1. It cannot be that the pravity of mans will should not be culpable 2. And the remaining of that pravity is it self a great punishment of the sin which procured it The truth is which should satisfie them that to the truly baptized or â—â—eartconsenters to Gods Covenant Original Sin and all sin is pardoned at to the great eternal pernicious punishment But not absolutely and perfectly pardoned yet as to all degrees of punishment Nor is all the â—â—â—pability ceased But Love or Grace given is an efficiâ—t or final second Cause Therefore God can save a man without it Ans The minor is your mistake Love here is Salvation it self begun â—â— this life and perfected in the next And to give it and not to give it â—re contradictions All the rest of his arguments go upon the same â—istake as if Love were but a meritorious cause of Salvation and not â—e thing it self And as erroneously Q. 4. he determineth that per potentiam absoluâ—m God can remittere peccanti culpam poenam sine infusione gratiae â—eatae unless he had put the question only de modo conferendi gratiam â—n alio modo sine infusione Deus illam potest efficere But who knoweth â—hat infusion is distinct from other Divine efficience Or unless he had â—poken only of Gods giving the jus ad rem non rem ipsam viz. Ipsam â—mpunitatem For undoubtedly the poena damni properly poena is â—he privation of the Souls rectitude health and happiness which all â—onsist in the love of God And to pardon a mans forfeiture of Happiness executively without giving him the happiness which he forfeited â—r to give man happiness without giving him love to God are both gross contradictions unless equivocally you meant making a man some other thing and giving him the happiness of that other thing His first argument here is Whomsoever God can by his absolute power â—ccept as worthy of life eternal without infused Grace to him he can forgive â—all sin without infused Grace But c. For proof he referreth us to that which I now confuted adding That God could accept a man in his pure naturals to life eternal I answer It is a fiction that ever man had such naturals made by God as were not indued with the principle and disposition of holy love the same thing which infused Grace first restoreth much more that Adam lived without the acting of this love But if it were so yet to accept man to life eternal is to accept him to the love of God so that if he did prove that a graceless man might be predestinated to Glory he did but prove that he is predestinated to perfect holiness and the love of God And though without this he may be predestinated or might have had a promise and right by promise yet without
many had such distinctions of Believers But the weak and the strong or confirmed all distinguish 281. But the other side had need as much to be perswaded to pacifick moderation in their censures And first They say that it is an intollerable opinion which is confessedly contrary to all the ancientest Churches of Christ And by Vincent Lerinens rule quod ab omnibus ubique sâ—mper such singularity or novelty must be heresie or certain error at the least I answer 1. They that assert this certain perseverance of all the justified do believe that the Churches planted by the Apostles were of their mind which they gather from the Scripture 2. The foresaid Rule holdeth indeed in things so universally received as Essentials of Religion and Necessary Articles of Faith and Practice without which men cannot be saved But Universality of Consent in a doubtful or unnecessary opinion or practice may possibly be erroneous and may oft lawfully be deserted It was once and beyond the investigation of its original the practice of the Universal Church that there should be no Adoration by Genuflexion on any Lords Day or on any Week day between Easter and Whitsunday And this commanded in the Great Council of Nice and the Canons of Trull And yet the Papists themselves have now forsaken it To distinguish as is usual between such Canons of Practice and points of meer doctrine and to make consent of Antiquity more obligatory in the latter is but vanity For where a point of Practice is founded in an oportet or supposition of Divine or Apostolical authority it must needs be at least as obligatory as a meer Doctrinal so founded For all Precepts include Doctrines and all Obedience includeth Faith Though all Doctrine be not Preceptive nor all Belief for immediate practice For every Divine Precept includeth this assertion This God commandeth And that God commandeth it is de fide and then it must be obeyed for Gods Authority as it is first believed for his Veracity All therefore that can be said is that this practice was not taken to be by a Divine universal Law unchangeable but by universal Custom of the Church And so may there be a consent in unnecessary and questionable Doctrinals as there hath been for the peripatetick Philosophy almost The opinions of the Souls corporeity of the Millennium of the lust of Daemons that there were no Antipodes to say nothing of some that Augustinâ— opposed were little less than universally owned of some ages And I doubt many Texts of Scripture for want of perfect Translations and skill in the original Tongues were universally misinterpreted 282. And the common objection which maketh the greatest noise is a meer injurious pievish cavil or slander viz. when they say You lead men to all wickedness by teaching that let them commit never such heinous Sin they are sure that they cannot fall from Grace nor lose their Justification For it 's commonly acknowledged that if any man should fall into a state of Sin inconsistent with the love of God he would lose his justification and right to Heaven and that without any change in God And they constantly hold that Gods decree de fine mediis is one and that he decreeth of his Elect that They shall persevere in love and holiness and be saved and not that they shall be saved whether they persevere in holiness or not And that they are no surer to be saved than they are to persevere in holiness SECT XIX Of Mortal Sin or what Sin will not stand with Saving Grace 283. But as to the question How great the Sin must be which is inconsistent with true love to God or holiness that belongeth to the Controversie about Mortal and Venial Sin where the difficulty is as great to one side as another so great that not only Pious Gerson but many another have confessed it too hard for them well to solve 284. In general It is certain that all Sin is so far Mortal as to deserve Vid. Le Blank de Pece Mort. Ven. 2 Disp Death according to the Law of Nature and Innocency and so far as to make us need a pardon Though not so far as to be inconsistent with spiritual life and justification and right to Glory and to make damnation due to us according to the Law of Grace And Prâ—testants confess Vid. Rob. Baronim de Peccat Mort. Ven. The best I know on the Subject the distinction of Mortal and Venial Sin under the name of Wickedness or Reigning Sin and Sin of Infirmity in this sence that Mortal Sin is that which is inconsistent with true Faith Repentance Love Justification and right to life and is never pardoned till the person be changed by true conversion But Venial Sin or Infirmity is that which consisteth Vid. Episcopii Resp ad Quâ—st 64. q. 18. pag. 19. with all these aforesaid and is presently pardoned by the Covenant of Grace upon the actual or habitual Repentance or hatred of it in the Sinners 285. It is certain that the interruption of the Act of Divine Love will not prove a Sin to be Mortal For though I detest such conclusions as the Jansenist gathereth from the Jesuites Morals that loving God once or Davenant de Justit Actuali cap. 35. Saith that Sin may be called Mortal in three degrees 1. Because it is never pardoned as the Blasphemy of the Holy Ghost 2. Those which bring novum reatum mortis sed remissibilem upon repentance And such he maketh all such gross Sin acted as is mentioned 1 Cor. 6. and Gal. 5. which be they that the Papists call Mortal Sin 3. The daily infirmities of the faithful which in rigour of Justice deserve death but are pardoned by Grace twice in a man's life or once a month may save him yet it is certain that the love of God is not always notably acted by any It is interrupted in our sleep and in common studies and businesses which take up the whole man And therefore if a Sin as sinful study interrupt it that will not prove it a Mortal sin 286. And it is certain that a sin is not therefore Mortal because it diminisheth the Habit of Love For that may be in those that still are the justified Children of God 287. There are two Degrees of Mortality in Sin as our Divines at Dort do more than intimate and those of Breme there The one is when sin putteth a man into the same state as to the Love of God which he or any other was in in the next degree before true Justification or Sanctification or Conversion which is when the Habit of Divine Love and all other saving Grace is so far lost as that Habitually the Creature is more loved than the Creator If any do fall thus far which is the controversie then it 's granted that their Justification Adoption and right to Heaven is lost But while God is habitually dearest to the Soul and Sin is
disposition to love God as God and acted this he was Holy If he had not it must needs be a Privation in him and not a meer Negation For a rational creature must needs be naturally obliged to love his Creator yea this is the first and summary Law of Nature to him Therefore not to do it must needs be Sin and the sum of all Sin Therefore Adam thus is made a great Sinner ab origine before his fall 2. If Adam loved not God in his weakest degree of recovering Grace he was unsanctified But if he did as certainly he did then it is not like that in his least degree of his recovering Grace he was Holyer than in Innocency though he might stand on surer grounds 3. And this opinion maketh unholiness of Nature to be no part of Original Sin Because it would be no Privation but a Negation For our Nature in Infancy is not obliged to have that holiness which it never had and lost in Adam And so Original Sin is almost all denyed and an unholy heart is made as innocent therein 4. We are renewed according to the Image of him that created us in wisdom righteousness and true holiness Col. 3. 10. Therefore it was holiness which was the Image of God which we lost and needs renewing 336. The Argument for Perseverance from Gods Immutability will hold as to all the Elect as such but not to all the sanctified or justified as such For the Angels and Adam's fall did not prove God mutable And God can judge a thing or person to be changed without being himself changed but only denominatione extrinseca a relatione ad mutatum is variously denominated And even his Law or Covenant which saith He that believeth shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned will not at all be changed if it justifie a Believer to day whom it condemned as an unbeliever yesterday and should condemn him again to morrow if he should apostatize or if it conclude us guilty every day anew of every new Sin which we commit 337. It is a very hard thing to confute an Anabaptist without granting that Infant Justification may be lost For experience proveth * Brianson in 4. q. 4. 1. Corrob fol. 36. Handling the question why the baptized Infants have infused Habits of Grace and Virtues citeth their opinions that hold the contrary but inclining to the affirmative he hath no better answer to them that object experience which oftest findeth no signs of such habits when they come to age than that they are known to us only by Faith Matth. 28. 19 20. Eph. 4 2 3. that the Children of Godly Parents too often prove ungodly And if they had Justifying Grace in Infancy they lose it And if they have not then the Covenant in which they are entered doth not certainly Justifie them And if so then it is either the very same Covenant which the adult are baptized into or another If it be another then their Baptism is another thing For Baptism is but the celebration of our Covenant with God And another Covenant in specie maketh another Baptism in specie And if so it seemeth to be no Baptism of Gods appointing For he hath but One Covenant of Grace to be entered by us and sealed nor but one Baptism Indeed on man's part there is a Covenanting with the Heart and with the mouth an outward as well as an inward Covenanting or Consenting But it is all to one and the same Covenant of God It is the same species of Faith in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost which baptized Hypocrites and true Christians do profess And Infants have no Faith of their own to profess but are dedicated by another's will the title-condition of the Adult is their own consenting Faith but the title-condition of Infants is nothing in themselves but their Parents consenting Faith without them which dedicateth them to God Now we suppose the Parents to do this sincerely If then the Covenant ascertain not present Justification to the Infant who hath all the condition required by the Covenant how can we say that it any more ascertaineth Justification to the adult it being proved to be the very same Covenant and not another But if it do ascertain it then many lose it I run not into their error who tell us and would have none of us Preach Christ's Gospel that will not say the same that It is certain by the Word of God that Infants baptized dying before actual Sin are certainly saved without excepting the Children of any Infidels Pagans or Apostates which I cannot prove of the Infants even of Hypocrites or unsound Christians or that the Child can he saved by that false Faith which will not save the Parent or him that dedicateth him to God or that the Children of Hypocrites or Infidels have the condition of Justification And if that Word of God had been cited that maketh the assertion certain it would have been a great kindness to us from those whose Justice must go for such But we are thought unworthy of it For my part I determine not the difficult case of Infants loss of Justification Their case is left dark to us in the Scriptures But my judgment is fulliest expressed by the words of the Synod of Dort Art 1. § 17. And Davenant's Treatise on that point is very judicious and considerable if wherever he speaketh of Baptized Infants you will but suppose him to mean the Infants of true Christians and not all 338. It seemeth a hard saying that any member of Christ should be cut off and become a member of Satan and perish though he were but an Infant member But we must not let the Metaphor deceive us It is not a Natural member of Christ's Person that perisheth as if part of Christ himself fell off But a Metaphorical Mystical Political Member And Christ thought it no absurdity Joh. 15. to warn his chief Members that they fall not off and to speak by way of supposition of his branches as cut off withered and burned And Adam and the faln Angels before their fall were the Beloved of God and his Children and yet fell from that love There must be therefore stronger Arguments than this to turn the Scales SECT XXIV The sum and end of this Discourse of certain Perseverance 339. The end and sum of all that I have said of Perseverance is but this that the controversie is neither 1. Of such weight nor 2. Of such facility and certainty as that it should be made necessary to our charitable converse or Church Communion to hold either this or that But we should number it with the dogmata not to be imposed on others nor fit to make any breach in the love and concord of Christians and for my part I profess that I take him for the worser Christian caeteris paribus whom I hear with disaffection blotting the names of others with notes of unsoundness and culpability for dissenting in
custody 2. That the confirmed are necessitated to good but the meer persevering do it freely 3. That confirmation is only a more intense degree of the same Grace 4. Meer perseverance is by ordinary Grace with Gods custody and congruous means but confirmation is by Grace of it self most effectual though not necessitating 5. That confirmation is by a participation of the Gratia et charitas patriae Malderus resteth in this difference that the confirmed have such a measure of Divine help and heavenliness as is stronger than the strongest Temptations But the gift of perseverance only is with such a degree of Grace as would not serve if God did not keep such from stronger Temptations So that confirmation is a middle state between meer Perseverance and Glory which are too strong for him For 1. He that habitually preferreth God to the Creature and his life may yet fall into such an act as Peter did And by acting contrary to his habitual disposition and resolution may weaken the habit and forfeit Divine assistance and deserve desertion 2. And he that valueth Heaven and the love of God before his life may yet by the nearness of an alluring Object by the violence of sense and passion be drawn to a fleshly sin and thinking that he may have the pleasure of that particular sin without losing Gods love he may be drawn first to less and by degrees to greater 3. And he that is resolved for God and Glory and Christ and Holiness may meet with such subtile Arguments of Infidels or Sensualists which he is unable to answer and consequently unable to overcome And his Understanding being deceived his Will may follow so that perseverance must be by the avoiding of Temptations 345. The greatest sins after Conversion which are truly repented of are pardoned by God And must be pardoned by the Church in order to Communion if the manifestation of Repentance be such as answereth the ends the signification of its reality and the removing of the scandal and the dishonour of Religion of the Church and of Christ 346. The Sin against the Holy Ghost seemeth unpardonable by the Text though the Papists expound it by hardly pardonably And it is an obstinate insidelity and rejection of Christ as a Deceiver upon a setled conceit that he did his Miracles by the power of the Devil when they are convinced that they were actually done and so a blasphemous fathering of Gods great attestation upon the Devil and a rejecting his last Witness to the Truth which must convince those that ever will be convinced But I have wrote a Treatise of this Sin and so shall pass it by 347. If a true Believer should be supposed to fall quite away from the belief of Christ it seemeth hard to imagine how he can do it without this blaspheming the Divine attestation of the Spirit by which before he was brought to believe And it seemeth that therefore Heb. 6. 10. this Apostacy is made the same with the unpardonable blasphemy of the Holy Ghost which yet proveth not that it ever cometh to pass but what it would be if it did 348. Repentance which cometh from fear alone without the love of God and Holiness is no sign of justification nor consistent with it nor is such attrition sufficient to forgiveness For the heart is not changed to God without love 349. Though where there is more love to the Creature than to God there is no true Sanctification speaking of rational and not of sensual love Yet where there is more fear of God than love to God there may be Grace though weak so be it God be loved above the Creature 350. A Death-Bed or late Repentance is then acceptable and sufficient to pardon when it is the Heart or Love that is thus turned from the Creature to God habitually so that if the person did recover he would live to God otherwise it is uneffectual not because too late but because unsound But because fear is usually the principle of such mens Repentance it is much to be suspected though not dispaired of 351. The day of Grace is never past with any man while life continueth so as that if he truly repent he shall not be forgiven For that is contrary to the gospel-Gospel-Covenant But it is so far past with some as that after their obstinate forfeiture the Means Help and Grace of Repentance shall not be given them nor brought so near them as they were SECT XXVI Of final Justification and how Paul and James agree about Justification by Works 352. Having said this much of constitutive Justification and the not-losing of it and assurance of it and its continuance and touched the second and third sorts of Justification sentential and executive as they are here in the way I need not say much of them as after this life because it may be gathered from what is said of Pardon and Justification constitutive Yet a little I will add And 1. At death a particular doom is passed on the Soul as separated But whether only by execution and self-conviction we know not 353. The Resurrection as such is a common effect of Redemption in right antecedent to mens well or ill deserving And therefore all are raised Joh. 5 22 25 26 27. by Christ 354. The Justification of Believers at the last day will be that great Justification to which all that went before were but means and imperfect 355. Christ will be here both Judge and Advocate and as both justifie Believers And he will be the condemning Judge of the Wicked 356. All men shall be then judged according to their Works or Deeds done in the Body whether Good or Evil. * * * It is a gross over-sight of D. Petavius Elen. Ther. Vincent c. 27. p. 110 111. to acknowledge no other Reatus but obligation ad poenam when as there is 1. Reatus facti 2. Culpae which is the violation of the Precept 3. Ad poenam which resulteth from the threatning And worse p. 110. that non omne peccatum est culpa sed hoc solum quod ex voluntate id est libero arbitrio alectione committitur nec imputatur in culpam nisi ex deliberatione libera voluntatis electione trocedat A'as that God's Law must be thus denied or depraved that sin may be made no sin and so to need no Christ or Pardon Cont. 1. Analogically it is peccatum in an Ox to go out of the furrow But properly nothing in man is peccatum but culpa And all breaking a Law is culpa and nothing else is peccatum 2. Not to deliberate is a great and usual sin 3. The omission of the Wills election or intention is sin as well as an ill election Woe to him that repenteth not of these and is not pardoned them 357. To be justified then will not be to be judged sinless as is aforesaid but to be judged one that by Gods Law which must be the norma judicii is not
to be damned to Hell but to be glorified in Heaven or to be sentenced to endless life and acquit from this Accusation that we are damnandi or to be punished in Hell And in order to this to be sentenced such as have the true causes and conditions of Right to Impunity and Life which are 1. Immediately the gift of this Right by God himself in his Covenant with Christ the Fountain of it 2. A true Right and Relation to Christ as our Head and Saviour and the only Meriter of this Covenant-Gift and Justification and Adoption by his habitual active and passive Righteousness and Sacrifice advanced in dignity by Union with his Divine perfection 3. True Faith and Repentance with Love Obedience and Perseverance as the title-conditions required by the donative and condonative Covenant 358. As I have before said that a man must be justified at that Day from the charge of Infidelity by his Faith it self and not by Christ's Merits and from the charge of Impenitence by his Repentance it self So I add that he must be justified from the charge of Hypocrisie by his sincerity and from the charge of Rebellion by his subjection and from the charge of wickedness by final godliness and obedience and from the charge of Apostacy by perseverance But from the charge of his wickedness before Conversion and his pardoned sins and weakness since only by Christ's Sacrifice and meritorious Righteousness and the Pardon purchased thereby and given in the New Covenant And from the accusation that we are Sinners in general we have no Justification at all 359. Judgment is the Genus and Justification and Condemnation are the Species Therefore to be judged according to our Works is to be justified or condemned according to our Works 360. As I said that it is God's Justice and Mercy and Christ's Redemption of us which are chiefly to be glorified at that Day but it is our personal Gospel-Righteousness or performance of the Conditions of the New Covenant which is then to be tried and we and not Christ that are to be judged So I add that the New Testament referring to this fore-seen doth usually speak accordingly of justifying us by Faith by our words or by our works that he that doth righteousness is righteous c. And it speaketh of that same Righteousness as constituting us just first by which we must be judged just at last 361. It is very easie therefore where prejudice blindeth not men to see the concord of Christ's saying We are justified by our words and Paul's by Faith and not by Works and James by Works and not by Faith only Christ speaketh of a particular Justification from a common great Crime a wicked Tongue as the sign or product of a wicked Heart And this must be part of the personal material Righteousness by which we must be justified as true Christians * * * Tolet in Rom. 3. Annot 17. Estius in Rom. 3. 28. Vega de justiâ— qu 3. p. 899. say of Justification by Faith as the Protestants do Vid. Stapleton de Justifi li. 8. c. ult Bellarm. de Justif l. 2. c. 7 10 11. Suarez de Grat. l. 7. c. 7. n. 29. Topper art 8. de Justif p. 25 26 27. Vasqu in 1. 2. disput 202. c. 6. n. 45. Coster Enchir. p. 292. Paul speaketh of our being justified by being Christians and not by keeping Mose's Law or doing any Works which will be to us instead of a Christ or a free-given Pardon and Righteousness by him And James speaketh of the full condition of Justification as continued final and compleat as it consisteth of its essential parts 362. The Key of Understanding Paul's Discourses of Justification is to know 1. That the grand question which he first manageth is Whether the Gentiles may not be saved without keeping the Jewish Law as well as the Jews with it 2. To prove the Affirmative he proveth that the Jews themselves cannot be saved or justified meerly or primarily by the Law notwithstanding the divinity and great excellency of it but must be justified by a Saviour and free-given Pardon and Right to Life and to which the sincere keeping of Mose's Law was intended to be but subservient 3. That therefore it appeareth that the Jews did so fondly admire the Law and their national priviledges under it that they thought that the exact keeping of it was necessary and sufficient to Justification and Salvation And they thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness as a Sacrifice for Sin and Meriter of free Pardon and the Gift of Life but only a great King and Deliverer to redeem them by Power from all their Enemies and Bondage 4. That it was not Adam's Covenant of Innocency or Perfection which the Jews thus trusted to or Paul doth speak against as to Justification though a minore ad majus that also is excluded For the Jews knew that they were Sinners and that God pardoned Sin as a merciful God and that their Petavius de Leg Grat. li. 1. c. 7. Well openeth the various senses in which the Law doth or doth not promise life eternal And through his two Books is much worth the reading of the difference of the Law and Gospel See Mr. Allen's Treat of the Two Covenants with my Preface And Mr. Truman's Great Propitiat with the Append. Law had Sacrifices for Pardon and Expiation with Confessions c. But they thought that so far as God had made that Law sufficient to political ends and to temporal Rewards and Punishments it had been sufficient to eternal Rewards and Punishments and that of it self and not in meer subordination to the typified Messiah Therefore they thought that he that kept the Law so far as to comit no sin which the Law punished with death or abscission and that for all his other pardonable sins performed the required Penances and Sacrifices was by this which is called The Works of the Law that is the keeping of the Law a righteous justifiable person 5. That the thing therefore which Paul disproveth them by is 1. That the Law was never made for such an end 2. That even then it stood in subordination to Redemption and free-given life 3. That the free Gift or Covenant of Grace containing the Promise of the Messiah and Pardon and Life by him was before the Law and justified Abraham and others even without it 4. That their Law was so strict that no man could perfectly keep it all 5. That every Sin deserveth death indeed though their Law punished not every sin with death by the Magistrate 6. That their Law was never Obligatory to the Gentile world who had a Law written in their Hearts and therefore not the common way of Justification * * * Jansenius Aug. To. 2. c. 4. asserteth That the chief difference between the old Law and the new is that the old was written in Stone and Tables and the new only in memory and
is less than a good habit 10. That every man hath a moral proper power to do more good than he doth and forbear more evil 11. That every man is commanded to use some means in order to his salvation which he is morally able to use 12. That God useth to bear long with the abusers of their Power before he forsake them 13. That many have many perswasions and helps to use their power that abuse it 14. That it 's just with God to forsake such 1â— And great mercy to the elect not to be so forsaken All â—â—â—â— will be made cleareâ— in their due â—â—â—â— which I shall now here offer you § 2. AS for the five Articles I. The Article of Predestination II. And the Article of Redemption contain no difference between the parties but only as they relate to the Articles of Free-will and effectual Grace as is aforesaid For all must agree that God Decreed and Christ procured all that Grace or Mercy for men which he giveth them Of which the Conditional gift of the Love of the Father the Grace of the Son and the Communion of the Holy Spirit in the Covenant of Grace with a Commission to his Ministers freely to offer it to all Believing Consenters and to seal it and deliver it by Baptism is a great part And many mercies teachings perswasions and motions tending to draw them to Consent is another part God decreed not to deny men that which he giveth them and Christs Death procured them all that he giveth them To which add what elsewhere I have opened that there is no necessity of ascribing to God any Positive Decrees of Negations or nothings Else there must be a Decree against the existence of all the myriads of possible animals atomes names words c. And remember that to Permit is not-to hinder and so is a meer negation or a doing nothing and that not-to-give faith repentance grace the Gospel c. is a negation or a nothing and so need no Decree seeing a not-decreeing to give c. is sufficient so that the whole of the Controversie about these two Articles is clearly devolved to the Controversies of Grace and Free-will III. And concerning Free-will it cannot be denyed but that Natural Free-will is part of that excellency or Image of God by which man is differenced from bruits and that it is such a faculty by which man can in some instances determine his own will to this rather than that without Divine predetermination which is certain in the â—ase of sin yea and of some good For Adam's will could without any other grace than he had have forborn his sin Or else still all is but resolved into Gods meer will And it is agreed on as is said before that all men can do more good than they do and forbear more evil than they forbear and that without any more grace or help than they have when they use it not so that it is not abhorrent from the nature of Free-will for a man to make a good use or an ill of the same measure of grace at several times or for several men to make several uses of the same measure Therefore it is no unjust answer to the question Why did he forbear this sin to day and not yesterday or Why did this man forbear sin and not that supposing them to have the same measure of assisting grace to say Because this man at this time used that power which God had given him in stirring up his own will to concurt with grace and the other man or this at another time did not what he could Not that this answer is good in all cases where more grace is necessary to the effect but in this forementioned So that it is no Deifying of the will of a Rational free-Agent to say that it is essentially a self-determining faculty made by God in the Image of his Liberty and depending on him and not able to Act without him as the first Cause but yet on supposition of his Natural preservation and universal concurse and of his directions and Laws it is able to make choice hic nunc to will or not will to will this rather than that without Divine necessitating predetermination and without any more Grace or help than sometime it hath when it doth the contrary All which shewing the natural power of mans will and its liberty must be readily acknowledged by all sides that will not say that Adams first sin and every sin of all men else are all resolved into Gods causation in case of commissions and Gods non-causation in case of omissions and into Gods will in both and that man can no more do any thing but what he doth than he can be God or overcome God or live and act without God And as we must thus agree that natural Liberty consisteth in a self-determining power peculiar to Rational free agents so we are all agreed except the Pelagians that mans nature is vitiated by Original sin and therefore that the will which is naturally free from force and necessitation except from God who never necessitateth it to evil is yet in servitude to our own concupiscence and is not free either from the enticements of sense or the erroneous conduct of a blinded mind or from its own vicious habits averseness to God and holy things and proneness to things sensual and seeming good And therefore that this Holy or Moral Liberty of the will must have the Medicinal Grace of Christ to heal it of which next IV. And as to the Article of Effectual Grace it is agreed on and cannot I speak not of Grace as it is Gods favour but the effect â—e gratia data non de gratia dantâ— with sobriety be gainsayed without subverting the main doctrine of the Scriptures that whereas besides the Preparatory or Promeriting Grace of Christs own performance there is yet a three-fold Grace necessary for the application or conveyance of the Benefits purchased by Christ in the measure hereafter mentioned all this is common I. The first sort of Grace lyeth in the enacting of a new Law of Grace called also in several respects The new Testament the new Covenant and the Promise And as to this it is agreed 1. That God made this Law Covenant or promise in the first Edition with Adam and Eve after the fall Gen. 3. 15. the seed of the woman shall break the Serpents head and did by Actual Remission of their sin and not-punishing them as the first Law threatned yet more plainly manifest to them the pardoning Grace of this Covenant And that he made this new Law or Covenant to all mankind in and by them And that he again renewed the same Covenant of Grace with all mankind in Noah after the deluge Those few inconsiderate persons that deny this are not so valuable as to be an exception to our Concord It is an intolerable conceit of any to think that the tenour or sence of the
Conditional Covenant of Grace for I talk of no other extendeth not universally to all men but that any men are yet lest under no other Law or conditional-promise or Covenant than that of Innocency For if that were true 1. Then God should be supposed to make men a promise of Life on a condition of present natural impossibility And to say to sinners If you be not sinners you shall live 2. And to oblige men to the same Impossibilities as the means of their salvation saying still to sinners I require you sinners that you be no sinners that you may be saved 3. Which is indeed to say that the case of all that are under the first Law of Innocency only is desperate and they have no more hope or remedy than the Devils 4. And then Christ had mistaken the matter himself when he commanded his Ministers to Preach this Gospel or Covenant to all the world and every humane Creature and tell them that If they believe they shall be saved and to offer them Baptism if they consent 5. And either Preachers must preach an untruth to many or else not know what man to preach to 6. But the actu-al force and obligation of the Covenant puts all out of doubt that the world is under a Law of Grace For what man that by siding hath not his understanding utterly distorted to look only on one side can say that none but the Elect are bound to Believe in Christ or to Repent of sin or to turn to God and this as a means of their salvation What man dare say that any Heathens in the World are under no obligation to use any means at all for the pardon of their sins or the recovery and saving of their souls What man dare say that it is no sin in them not to use any such means And what duty or sin can there be without a Law And what Law can bind men to accept of Grace and to seek it and use means for pardon renovation and salvation but the new Covenant or Law of Grace Sure the Law of Innocency hath no such obligation 7. Lastly And Gods usage of all the world puts the case past Controversie For he useth no man according to the meer Law of Innocency All the world have a great proportion of the Mercies of the New Covenant and therefore are not under the Covenant of Innocency alone Yet we maintain that the preceptive part of the Law of Innocency as to the future is still in force to all men Obey perfectly And that the penal part is so far in force as to make death in the first instant due for every sin But we add 1. That the Remedying pardoning Law being in force with it doth immediately dissolve that obligation and make it uneffectual to the punishment of believers 2. And that the Promising part of the Covenant of Innocency is utterly ceased by the cessation of mans capacity And therefore that the Preceptive part for perfection is now no Condition of Life to any man Two things I was wont in my Ignorance to say against the universal tenour of the new Covenant 1. That God distinguished and excluded some at the first making of it under the name of the Seed of the Serpent But 1. No Scripture giveth us the least ground to think that men equally guilty are some called the Seed of the Serpent and some of the Woman meerly as denominated from or distinguished by Gods own will or decree without any real difference in the persons 2. And if the Image of Satan in Original sin were it that denominated the Seed of the Serpent then all the world should be excluded because all are such before they are regenerate 3. Therefore it is plain that it is not meer Original sin that denominateth any one the Serpents Seed in the sence of that Text but a consequent rejection and opposition of the Mediator or Grace of the new Covenant 2. I was wont in my great Ignorance in my youth to think that All men were meerly under the first Covenant till Conversion and then they came under the second only But this was but Confusion To be under a Law or offered Covenant as the terms of life or death is one thing And so all are under a Law or Covenant of Grace and no man under the meer Law of Innocency obliged to perfection as the sole condition of life And to be obedient to this Law and a Consenter to this Covenant and so to be in the Covenant as Mutual is another thing And this is the case of Consenters only So that I may take it for granted that we are agreed that as to the first Edition of the Law of Grace to Adam and Noe it extendeth or is in force to all the world at least till by enmity against Grace they have made themselves desperate as the Serpents seed Yea then the Law of Grace is in force to them though they reject the Grace of it 2. And as to the last Edition of the Covenant of Grace by Christ 1. The tenour of it extendeth to all as is visible Matth. 28. 19. Mark 16. 16. Joh. 3. 16. 2. And Christ hath made it the office of his Ministers by his commission to promulgate and offer it to all 3. And whereas providence concurreth not to the universal execution we must all confess that Christ came not to put the world into a worse condition than he found them in If he did any no good by his Incarnation he would do them no harm Therefore they that never hear the Gospel are still under the first Edition of the Covenant made with Adam and Noah so far as it is unaltered I add that word because that so far as the Promise was to give salvation by the Messiah hereafter to be incarnate none is now bound to expect his future Incarnation because it is past But the same benefits that were due to believers before Christs incarnation are due since upon the true performance of so much of the condition as is still in force and not repealed 3. And we must needs agree that the Ignorance of the Apostles before Christs sufferings of his death sacrifice and resurrection doth shew that the faith of the Godly Jews then was far more general and less particular than the faith now required of Christians 4. And also that more was required then to be known particularly by the Jews that had the Scripture and Tradition to acquaint them with the Messiah to come than of the rest of the world that had not those distinct discoveries nor Abraham's promises made known unto them And how much Gen. 3. 15. might cause them to understand we may conjecture by the words At least this much was required of all that they believe that their sin deserveth punishment and misery and yet that God of his abundant mercy by his Wisdom securing his Truth and Justice will pardon sin and grant salvation to all that truly Believe and Trust in
that his Wisdom and Mercy and repent of their sins and unfeignedly give up themselves to God as their merciful Redeemer Thus far we are agreed about the Grace of the Covenant II. And as to the second sort of Communicative Grace that is The Promulgation of this Law of Grace and offers of the Covenant-Benefits to man we are and must be all agreed 1. That besides what Tradition sacrificing did intimate the first Edition of the Covenant of Grace as is said is universally promulgate by Providence For whereas by the violation of the Law of Innocency all blessings were forfeited and all miseries deserved and no man had any notice by that Law of any hope or means of his recovery on the contrary all the world hath great abundant mercies and are not punished according to the first Law and therefore have sensible forgiveness of sin and all have an inward testimony or conviction that they are obliged to gratitude for these mercies and also to the use of certain means as Repentance Prayer c. in order to their farther pardon and salvation And all this fully demonstrateth that God hath so far promulgated the old Edition of the Covenant of Grace as to make it notorious that the world is not under the meer Law of Innocency And to believe in a Merciful pardoning God as he was Exod. 34. proclaimed to Moses is become even the Law of lapsed Nature 2. And as I said the last Edition of the Covenant is commanded by Christ in his Ministers commission to be proclaimed to all the world Yea Magistrates parents neighbours all men in their several capacities are bound to promote it 3. And the world hath actually heard so much of the Gospel as that Paul in his dayes said That their sound went into all the Earth and their words to the end of the world Rom. 10. 18. when it had gone but a little way in comparison of what it hath since done Thus far we are agreed of the Promulgation III. The third sort of Grace is the Internal operation of the Spirit of God upon mens hearts And here it is that the heart of all our difference seemeth to lie SECT I. The presupposed Principles § 1. THe way of Gods operation on souls yea or bodies or any creature is so unsearchable that I had rather silence than pretend to decide abundance of the Controversies long agitated about it And had not mens audacious decisions and furious contentions not yet allowing the Churches peace made it accidentally necessary to repress their presumption and their error I should reverently have passed by much that I must now meddle with But the cure must be suited to the disease § 2. So much as is * * * See a notable discourse of Bradwardint of mans little knowledge of God li. 1. c. 1. cor 32. contrae philos which excellently rebuketh audacity in this case intelligible herein is divine and honourable and amiable and the prospect of Gods Providence is delectable to the wise For his works are great and wonderful sought out of them that have pleasure therein § 3. The nature or the order of them cannot be known by the single consideration of particular effects but by beginning at the original and proceeding orderly from the superiour Causes to the inferiour and seeing how every thing worketh in its proper capacity and place which man can do but very defectively and therefore knoweth but little or in part § 4. It is necessary therefore that I briefly look back to the Principles of Providence and Action which were partly mentioned before where UNITY in TRINITY shineth to us in God and in his works § 5. * GOD is ONE INFINITE SPIRIT in THREE ESSENTIAL VIRTUES or PRINCIPLES LIFE or ACTIVE POWER UNDERSTANDING and WILL †††Bradwardine li. 1. c. 1. cor 8. p. 5. Deus est Substantia Potentia rationalis habens intellectum liberam voluntatem cognoscens actualiter â—olens which are wonderfully ONE in ESSENCE yet THREE we know not perfectly how but as the Scotists say formaliter or rather as the Nominals by connotation of their objects and operations ad extra and so by Relation and extrinstck Denomination Not that Life Intellect and Will are formally the same in God as in the Creature or can formally be conceived by us But that while we must know God in a Glass mans soul must be this Glass and the Scriptures must be our Onomasticon and Logick Books and we must use such Notions and Names of God or none § 6. * * * Bradwardines language is Deum esse Omnipotentem active nullipotentem passivâ— li. 1. cap. 1. corol 1. n. 7. p. 5. These Principles as Transcendent in PERFECTION are called GREATNESS †††Communitâ—r antiqui Scholasticâ— agunt de intâ—llâ—ctu Voluntatâ— Potentiae operativae Dâ—â— quasâ— dâ— Potentiis ratione distinct is instâ—tâ—â—ntque de â—llis peculiares tractatus cum Magis Thom. c. Ruiz de Vohâ—â—â— Dei disp 14. â— 4. pag. 158. And he contradicting it saith as much Nihilomiminus intra â—asdem lineaâ— gradus intellectus voluntatis distinguimus Potentiam executivam â—â— partem â—arundem Potentia rum But less aptly or OMNIPOTENCE WISDOM and GOODNESS or LOVE by names borrowed from their effects upon the creatures § 7. This ONE GOD is revealed to us in THREE PERSONS The FATHER the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wisdom Word and Son and the HOLY SPIRIT One in Essence incomprehensibly Three ad intus but discernibly Three in their Operations ad extra and Relations thereto § 8. As we must conceive of GODS ESSENCE by INADAEQUATE Conceptions as aforesaid or not at all so must we of his EXISTENCE as in the Creature we call it Modally viz. His ESSENCE being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 substance VIRTUS PERFECTIO which in the Creature is MATTER or substance FORM and DEGREE and his FORMAL VIRTUS being Potentia-Vitalis Intellect and Will so his Existence is considerable 1. In VIRTUE it self radically which is Potentia Activa Inclinata 2. As in Act IMMANENT objectively as Gods self living self-knowing and self-loving 3. And as in ACTION ad extra either objectively or effectively TRANSIENT And in this third respect Gods Essence is the Operator of all his works § 9. The Three Divine Principles Vital-active Power Intellect and Will and the Three Divine Persons Father Word and Spirit do alwayes inseparably co-operate But so as that there is a Trinity also of their Impressions or Vestigia which are answerably to have a Trine attribution each Principle being eminently apparent in his own impression though with the rest § 10. Gods WORKS are CREATION GOVERNING and PERFECTING And so he is 1. The first EFFICIENT OF ALL BEING Ex QUO by creating and continuing which are as one 2. The DISPOSING or GOVERNING Cause PER QUEM 3. The END AD QUEM IN QUO perficiuntur § 11. God having given a BEING to the
the Threefold Divine Excellencies Communicated and the Threefold humane Receptive faculties viz. LIFE LIGHT and LOVE or spiritual Vivification Activity and Power spiritual Illumination of the Intellect and spiritual Conversion or Sanctification of the Will by holy Love § 21. It is certain that it is not only on believers that Christ operateth by the spirit For he draweth men by it to believe and many wicked men that are not his elect have common even miraculous gifts of the spirit * * * Mat. 7. 21 22 23. Gal. 3. 1 2 3. Heb. 6. 5 6. 1 Cor. 14. which are all communicated by Christ § 22. As Nature it self is in his Political power and is delivered to him so far as it is reparable and belongeth to the reparation of man so all gifts and operations Received by any in the world which are Mercies contrary to commerit are the effects of Christ Even as the Sun shineth in the night by the Moon and in the dawning of the day by it self unseen and after by it self appearing so Christ shineth to the Heathen world in abundance of natural and providential mercies and by the help of many Creatures and experiences and to some by nearer approaches as well as to the Church by the manifestation of himself All which is evident 1. Because the whole lapsed world in Adam and Noe were brought under his own Covenant of Grace according to which he operateth 2. In that so much mercy after sin will not stand with Gods regiment by the meer Law of Innocency violated 3. In that Christ is expresly called the Saviour of the World and the Saviour of all men especially of them that believe who dyed for all in that all were dead that they that live should live to him who tasted death for every man c. And Joh. 1. 9 10 11 12. That was the true light which lighteth every man coming into the world or coming into the world lighteth every man He was in the world and the world was made by him and the world knew him not And v. 4 5. In him was life and the Life was the Light of man and the Light shineth in darkness and the darkness comprehended it not c. § 23. This threefold Influx of Christs Spirit for LIFE LIGHT and LOVE is not equally effectual on all nor equally effectual on the same person at several times nor each part of the influx equally effectual on the same person at the same time The Reasons anon SECT III. Of the Operations and Principles as compared § 1. THough Power Wisdom and Goodness or Love all co-operate by the spirit of Christ yet in the work of Mans Recovery their Impressions are not equal But as POWER with Wisdom and Love more appeared in the CREATION as is aforesaid so WISDOM with Power conveying Love appeareth more in our Redemption and LOVE with Power and Wisdom is most conspicuous and illustrious in our Renewed state begun indeed by Sanctification but perfect in our GLORIFICATION * * * As to the Question between the Schoolmen define beatitudin undoubtedly the Thomists err in placing it chiefly in the Intellect And Medina and others give silly reasons for it and the Scotists of whom Rada well handleth it are far righter And Agid. Romanus briefly and clearly tells us the truth Quodlib 3. q. 18. p. 187. Btatitudo est in aliquo finaliter in aâ—â—quo formaliter Naâ— si ipsum objectum principaâ—â— Voluntatis prout habit rationem finis sit beatitudo oportet quod beatitudo principaliter sit in hoc objecto coâ—sequenter formaliter in actu Voluntatis Nam Voluntas in suum objectum tendit finaliter sed per suum actum teadit in objectum formaliter Ex quo apparet quod be â—titudo sit magis in ipso objecto Voluntatis quam in actu quia ratio finis est magis in objecto quam in actu This is clear truth if you put but finis alone for beatitudo For Beatitudo qua talis is not the principal end of man but God as God in his perfect Goodness and the fulfilling of his will next and then our own beatitude with that of the blesâ—ed And he maketh Vision and not Love to be the secondary final object of all The Omnipotent Father as is said Createth Nature with the Son and Holy Spirit The Son the Wisdom of the Father is the Physicion of souls and healeth them by SKILL with Power and Love The Holy Ghost called by the Schoolmen The LOVE of God dwelling and working peculiarly in us to and in perfection with power and Wisdom is the PERFECTION of the soul And so Natura Medela Sanitas are the various effects of the Divine operation § 2. Therefore the SONS operation in procuring and communicating the SPIRIT of Love and Holiness is eminently sapiâ—â—tial § 3. The Impressions of all the Divine Virtues are excellent in their several kinds And it 's hard for us to say that this is simply more excellent than that But we can say which is more suitable to the nature of man to be esteemed and Loved by him And so we esteem the Impressions of Wisdom and Love as most suitable to us § 4. A Horse or Oxe excelleth Man in strength and a Bird or Hare or Dog in swiftness and a Mountain and an Oak in Greatness And yet we account the Wisdom and Moral Goodness of man to be a greater excellency and to make him the more noble Creature § 5. And God seemeth to tell it us 1. By calling these his Image 2. And by making man the Lord of these stronger Creatures § 6. And among men we take him not for the most excellent who is the strongest but who is the Wisest and the Best And therefore the Wisest and Best are by Aristotle said to be born by Nature to Rule the rest and by all sober men are thought to be the Fittest to Guide and Rule others how seldom soever it cometh to pass while the Robuster sort are Labourers and Mechanicks § 7. Yet I deny not but the effect is answerable to the Cause And as Active-Power causeth Action and Wisdom and Government causeth the Order and Rectitude of action and Love and Goodness the Perfection of it and the agent so Gods Vital-Power Wisdom and Goodness are equal which are the Principles of all As the Father Son and Spirit are coequal And God is indeed glorious in the Motion of Sun and Stars c. as well as in the Wisdom and Holiness of man But besides the foresaid suitableness this difference must be considered that as Life Intellect and Will Power By special Grace some mean two distinct things viz. 1. Our Love to God and other holy Habits and acts or an Inclination to them 2. Gods favour to us and acceptation of us and that as relating to the Glory which he will give us so that the first they call the Habit of Grace quâ— ens qualitas
481. An Concordia liberi arbitrii cum gratia pâ—ssit demonstrari naturali ratione vel cum Infallibilitate Praescientiae Providentiae praedestinationis Divinae Where he tells you that one opinion of some Catholicks is that It is certain by the doctrine of faith that man hath Free-will but it cannot be proved by natural reason The second opinion is contrary that It is not only evident to natural reason that man hath free-will but also the concord of it with the infallibility of Divine prescience and providence may easily and clearly be made out by Scientia Media which is the Jesuites way But the third opinion which he defendeth is that Free-will may be evidently known and proved by natural reason alone But how the actual use of it consisteth with the infallibility of the prescience providence and predestination of God and with the efficacy of the helps of grace cannot be perfectly known or comprehended by natural light alone and therefore the reason of it must be Believed and the understanding captivated to the obedience of Faith Where note 1. That though he say perfectè he proveth that it cannot be known by that which is below a perfect knowledge 2. And that he denyeth not only a practical saving knowledge but a proper theoretical or dogmatical knowledge For this he citeth those words of Cajetan at large in 1. p. q. 22. art 4. which many others cite and commend In ignorantia sola quietem invenio c. And there is no man besides Alvarez higher for the Dominicans way of Absolute predetermination than D. Bannes who is of Cajetans opinion in 1. p. q. 23. art 5. 2. 2. q. 10. art 1. Siquis non intelligit quomodo usus liberi arbitrii sit liber nihilominus sit effectus jam praedefinitus à Divina providentia oportet eum credere Primum omnium debuisset credere quod aiunt se non posse intelligere Credimus enim Catholicum mysterium Trinitatis etiamsi non intelligamus And Alvarez citeth Calvin lib. de aetern Dei praedest cont Pigh p. 136. saying Siquis hoc mentis suae captu superius esse excipiat idem de me fateor Sed quid mirum si modulum nostrum imcomprehensibilis immensa Dei majestas exsuperet Atqui tantum abest ut pro carnis ratione explicandum suscipiam sublime istud reconditúmque arcanum ut quod initio praefatus sum assiduè in memoriam redire velim desipere qui plus scire appetunt quà m Deus revelaverit Quare nos potiùs docta ignorantia delectet quam intemperans ebria plus quam Deus permittit curiositas What Augustine confesseth you may see a little in Alvar. ib. p. 482 483. but more in himself often What Suarez Hurtado Mendoz. and other the most subtil philosophical Divines confess commonly of the incomprehensibility of these things and the darkness and uncertainty of our conceptions I have elsewhere partly cited and any that readeth them may find Now all this being so notorious and their ignorance commonly confessed may I not confidently inferr 1. That then seeing all must be reconciled by Believing we must have nothing obtruded on us herein which is not to be proved by the Word of God What the Word saith of Predetermination of the manner of Gods operation on second causes and influx on souls and of the nature of his first effect or Vis Impressa c. we will receive But yet men must not snatch up a metaphorical expression in one or a few Texts and urge that against the frequent and plain expressions of the Scripture of the spirits Operation on souls Christ himself saith which is more than all forecited The wind bloweth where it listeth and ye hear the sound thereof but ye know not whence it cometh and whither it goeth so is every one that is born of the spirit But as for the operations of God by the word preached and other means and the Holy Ghosts operation by and with those means and the Holy Ghosts indwelâ—â—ng and operating after in Believers these are frequently asserted in Gods Word And that all Christs members have his Spirit regenerating illuminating quickning sanctifying them both as he is in Covenant with them to be the sanctifier of their souls and as the Love of God and all his Graces are by him caused in us all this is sure But if men will go further with us and give us as many distinctions of Gods Grace as Alvarez doth and tell us that besides God himself one of them simultaneous operation is nothing but mans act and another previous motion is somewhat else but no man knoweth what but may be named motio Virtuosa though it be neither God nor a quality nor a humane act And then will dispute how much of this some thing this motio virtuosa will serve to such an effect and how much to another and how and by what reason it is efficacious and will build on his assertions such a systeme of consequents as shall make up the doctrines of a sect or party which shall set up with this stock to militate against the Love and unity of Christians this is the course that I oppugn Once more Let the Reader note that the waies of reconciling Grace and Free-will as Alvarez mentioneth them are these four I. The Jesuits way by scientia media which I need not recite to the Learned but think it meet to recite Alvarez words of their description of Grace Supponunt gratiam praevenientem excitantem esse formaliter actiones quasdam vitales quas Deus in nobis sine nobis operatur sine nobis inquam libere co-operantibus non tamen sine nobis vitaliter efficienter concurrentibus consistere in illustratione illuminatione Intellectus atque excitatione suasione voluntatis quae efficienter procedunt ab intellectu voluntate non quidem ut Libera sed ut Natura est quamvis antecedenter dependeant à Voluntate ut Liberum arbitrium est quatenus viz. ex ejus libertate fuit dependens quod homo compararet notitias mysteriorum fidei vel eorum quae facienda erant accedendo ad praedicatores vel alio modo eos propriâ industriâ acquirendo quibus notitiis Deus se insereret eas elevando suo speciali influxu ut supernaturales sint quales ad salutem oportet sic sortiantur naturam gratiae praevenientis Suppositâ ergo Illuminatione quâ Deus illuminat Intellectum proponit Voluntati bonum ut sibi conveniens affirmant quod statim absque ulla libertate oritur merè naturaliter in voluntate motus affectionis ad bonum sibi propositum quo motu allicitur quasi invitatur ad amandum illud bonum imperandum potentiis executivis ut illud exequantur ut v. g. ad imperandum intellectui ut assentiatur rebus fidei propositis explicatis In his ergo duobus motibus viz. in illustratione Intellectus affectione
is oft not Actually effectual for want of that Voluntary Reception and self-excitation § 27. As to the various effects of Grace fore-mentioned 1. As to the preparation of Means and Gracious medicine Christ the Covenant c. Grace is efficient of it self and doth it 2. As to the first Impulse or Impress on the soul God certainly effecteth it in some degree wherever his spirit worketh on the soul 3. Some Urgency and some degree of disposition to the act is constantly contained in this Impulse And usually it giveth a moral power to the Immediate Act-required 4. The Act of faith sometimes followeth this Impulse through its invincible force And sometime it followeth it through its sufficient force and the due Reception * * * Omne agens requirit de necessitate aliquam dispositionem in suo passo Maximè si illud pà ssum habeat dispositiones actionâ— illius agentis contrarias ut patet de igne c. Ergo cum Gratia non sit minus inmo magis quam naturalis forma Certum est quod Gratia requirit majorem dispositionem in passo Et voco illam dispositionem Libertatem arbitrii sui Deo submittere se ad alteram partem declinare scilicet ad volendum Gratiam recipere dolere de culpa commissa voluntarie libere per attritionem Brianson in 4. q. 8. cor 3. fol. 152. This is just the doctrine of our Protestant Preachers supposing that Common Grace must make this preparation which the Papists grant of the subject And sometimes it followeth it not at all through the Recipients indisposition 5. The Habit of faith ever followeth a special Act through the powerful operation of the Holy Ghost But usually it goeth not before the Act Man hath not a fixed Habit to promptitude and facility of believing before he believeth but after 6. The Habit ordinarily procureth following acts by the way of Inclination but not necessarily nor alwayes For by strong temptations Habits are oft born down § 28. If the question then be Whence Gods Grace is Aptitudinally and Potentially efficacious able and fit to effect It is because God is God that he is Able and his Impulse is such because he maketh it such And if the question be Whence Grace is Actually efficient of its first effect the Impulse It is because God will so do and his will hath no Cause being the first Cause And if the question be Whence Grace is Actually efficient of mans faith It is by its Impelling man to believe But if you ask Whence faith it self is or of what cause is it an effect I answer of God as the first cause and the Means as his Instrument and of the Believer as a free second Cause And if the question be Why sufficient Grace which is Effectual ad Posse is not effectual ad agere It is because being but sufficient mans Indisposition and wilful neglect or opposition maketh him an unfit Receiver § 29. There being nothing then but Gods essence and the means antecedent to the first effect on the soul and that effect ever following where God worketh and the second effect being the effect both of God by the first and of man as a free agent the questions unde efficatia Gratiae and unde effectus are thus healingly answered § 30. Obj. But the will of God is the first differencing and effectual Cause And that not as it is his essence but as it is terminated on the Creature and decreeth such an effect Answ 1. It is no will but his essence which is so terminated or decretive 2. That termination maketh no difference at all that 's real in the will of God but only in the effect or object 3. What is the difference then between Gods will simply in it self and as willing from eternity a thing not yet existent None really at all And that which is not yet being Nothing what Relative Connotative and Denominative difference such Nothings can make on the will of God besides the variety of imperfect notions in mans frail Intellect let the wise consider § 31. From whence it is that School-divines after Augustine say that with God there is no futurum velpraeteritum no fore-knowledge or fore-decrees properly because no difference of time but only knowledge and will of things as present § 32. Yet Gods Vital Activity Knowledge and Will as he himself is the object of them have a Greater distinction because to be self-living self-knowing and self-loving are his Essential Acts on himself the eternal object which made many Ancients account them the Trinity of persons And also to Will an existent Creature is an extrinsick denomination from existence But to will that which is not that man shall be that he shall believe hereafter c. as it is nothing really different from Gods essence so it is but an extrinsick denomination of his essence from nothing SECT XVI Of Infused Habits and the Holy Ghost Given us The Schoolmen that speak most for the necessity of Infused Habits cannot agree what use they are for Aureolus supposeth chiefly for the right circumstantiating of Acts rather than for promptitude to them and pleasure in them And when all is said they give men but small comfort from them saying as Aureolus Brianson c. that no man can be sure that he hath them seeing acquired Habits may do the same things that Infused do Utrum Beatitudo supernaturalis hujus vitae sit magis in Habitibus quam in operationibus vid. Suarez Metaph. disp 44. sect 8. n. 18. Molina 1. p. q. 12. ar 5. disp 2. ar 2. pro habitibus Sed contra inquit Aegid de Sancta Praesentatione Li. 4. de beatit q. 5. a. 3. pâ— 471. His non obstantibus oppositum affirmant omnes Theologi qui bac de re scripserunt nec videtur posse de hoc dubitari And yet Alens 2. p. q. 104. m. 3. Aquin. 1. 2. q. 51. a. 2. ad 3. q. 63. a. 2. ad 3. Valentiâ—â— To. disp 4. q. 3. punct 2. c. are for preferring Habits Idem Aegid de Praesentat li. 4. p. 443 444. tells us that by Grace God is Present in the soul as his Temple otherwise than by Immensity and sustentation But his praesentia Amicitia can mean nothing but the special effects of Gods Love Nostrâ tempestate non solum est temerarium periculosum sed ferè hareticum habitus insusos negare Nam Concil Vienens c. universi Theologi uno consensu affirmant dari habitus insusos Medina in 1. 2. q. 51. a. 4. 282. But Soto li. 2. de nat grat c. 17 18. saith that the Concil Trid. purposely forbore to define the case of infused habits Let the Reader note that Jansenius proveth that Pelagius himself asserted infused Habits given in baptism and that without merit Jans Aug. To. 1. li. 5. c. 22. p. 126. § 1. EVery operation of the Holy Ghost is not the Giving
have it not want it because they refused Preparatory grace which they were able to have better used oâ— submitted to So that the Reward is only such as a free gift which quoad ordinem conferendi rationes adjudicandi is given by God as a Father who at once useth Power Love and paternal Justice according to the tenour of his own Law of Grace which is founded in Christs perfect merits and is Christs own Law VIII and IX 1. That quoad eventum the good Angels grace was effectual and Adjutorium quo as well as sine quo non he granteth And Adams till he fell Let us find out the difference then To say that yet They could have sinned is a doubtful speech If could signifie Pâ—tâ—â—â—iam naturalem it is noâ— for want of Natural Power that Christ himself sinned not but because perfection caused the right use of that Power To be able to sin or not to believe or not to love God if it signifie any more than the Natural power which men abuse is an improper speech for sin is from moral impotency or indetermination and not an vaâ—t of other power But a Logical Possibility of any event but what â—ame to pass Gods very fore-knowledge will exclude and so his Decree And if the question be Whether Adam could not have stood when he fell it is agreed that he could It seemeth then that our Controversie lyeth plainly â—â— these two things 1. Whether any man now Holy or unholy have any help from God by Christ by which he is truly able to do any one good action more â—â—â—â— other than he doth or to forbear any more evil 2. Whether all Divine causation or operation â—e such as of it self alone will inferr the â—â—â—tainty of mans Volition as the Effect We gâ—ant that Divine prescieâ—â—â— doth inferr it eâ—â—â—oessitate infallibilitâ—â—â—â— Divine Volitions some think are ever efficient of all that is willed and that God hath no other operation but Volition as Bradwardine and others Others deny this 〈…〉 that God hath Power operative as much distinct from Volition aâ—â—â—tellection is and also that God willeth more than he operateth or totally causeth And of this opinion must Jansenius needs be because he held that the free-will of Adam before his fall and of the good Angels caused more obedience than God caused as to the totality of causation And yet â—ethinks he should be loth to say that it was more than God willed or decreed However the former is but a wordy strife For if God operate only Volendo yet his will as Immanent and a meer will as mans must be distinguished from his will as transient and efficient by operation So then the thing in question is Whether Gods power or will so far only as it is operative be so total a cause as that hac posita ex vi causandi necessario sequitur effectum viz. fidem charitatem humanam secuturum And we grant that as ex perfectione Intellectus it followeth Deus praescâ—t hoc futurum ergo futurum est so ex perfectione Voluntatis summo Imperio foelicitate Divina it followeth Deus vult hoc futurum esse ergo futurum est and that ex necessitate existentiae no doubt it is a good consequence Deus hoc fecit ergo factum est But Whether from his meer adjutorium or prime efficiency limited by his own will it be a good consequence God giveth as much help as is of necessity to mans volition ergo man will consent or will is the doubt He granteth that in Innocency it would not have followed but he thinks that now it will We grant that God giveth not only the posse velle but the ipsum velle to those that have it His giving it being but a causing their faculties to Act And we grant that wherever God absolutely willeth that his Help shall be successful it is so And also that whereas all the effect cometh from our natural Power and Gods grace conjunct God is the cause of both And is ever the total cause quoad effectum that is totius effecti And we grant that Gods causing Impress on the will is such on some and perhaps on all in the act of special sanctification as ex vi causae will inferr the effect and is unresistible and doth not only determine the will but so determineth it as overcometh all moral power or disposition to the contrary But yet that there is a Grace or adjutorium of Christ which giveth a power either not necessitating the act or when the act followeth not such as he calleth sine quo non I think for these reasons 1. Because else no man can do any more good or less evil than he doth which I believe not 2. Because else All men that perish are damned only for original sin and its consequents which they had never power to avoid which is quite contrary to the tenour of the Scripture 3. And then God would judge them only by the Law of Innocency whereas he will judge them by Christ and by his Remedying Law for rejecting the remedying grace 4. And then the Conscience of the damned would have nothing to torment them with or accuse them for but original sin and its unavoidable consequents And it would give them this excuse and ease God never made it Possible for me to do otherwise 5. Because it teacheth men great ingratitude to say I never had any help of Christ 6. And so it teacheth them impenitently to extenuate their sin if they do but find themselves wicked and to say I never sinned against any Grace of Christ 7. And it feigneth God to give men all that reprival and mercy which the reprobate have from some other Cause and not by Christ And so to make a kind of grace common in the World which the Scripture knoweth not nor is according to the Covenant of Innocency or of Grace 8. Because God is Immutable and too gross mutations are not without proof to be imputed to his Laws and Government Therefore it seemeth to me an injurious fiction to say as Jansenius that God had such Laws as supposed mans self-determining will and governed so as to use sufficient Grace or adjutorium sine quo non to man and Angels at the first and thaâ— now he hath no such at all but only a moving efficiency I should sooner yield to the Dominicans and Hobbes that no other than necessitated Volitions are possible or ever were than to hold as he that there were other before the fall and none ever since For as to his great argument vitiated nature I answer it 1. Man is man still And therefore God ruleth him as man And that in via And if then man and Angels were supposed to have a self-determining free-will that could do this or not do it we have reason to think it is so still Why is not grace meerly sufficient as consistent with Lapsed as Innocent nature supposing that it is not the
same help that is now sufficient to salvation as then 2. Consider the great difference between perfect Innocency and some one commanded act And 3. Consider that the helps afforded by grace are very great and that Habitual Grace doth in some measure heal lapsed nature or else what is it He that is Habitually Prompt to Love and duty hath some cure and some ability For to be prompt is more than to be able And therefore it is an incredible thing and a reproach of habitual grace that Adam was more able to live and persevere without any sinful thought word or deed than a Holy soul is to think one good thought or speak one good word or restrain one blasphemy or other sin Therefore it is as credible that Christs repairing habitual Grace enableth godly men and his commoneâ— grace common men to think or do somewhat better than they do as that Angels and Adam had no other grace and could without other live without any sin Therefore I take Jansenius to do well in opening Original pravity and the power of Gods grace and his special intent to save his chosen But I think he so earnestly studied for that side alone that he injuriously overlooketh the whole frame of sapiential Government and the common grace which is presupposed to the special and greatly wrongeth Christ and his grace by denying him to give to men in common that which our experience assureth us they possess Ad X. When he maketh uneffectual Velleities to be Christs unresistible grace either he thinketh that men are saved with such only or not for he speaketh not his mind plainly in that that I can find If yea then he abaseth the grace of Christ to think that many are saved by it that love a Whore or any sin much better than God and Grace and Glory If not as I think he held then he holdeth that most that have the effectual grace of Christ are damned and had no possibility properly of escape And why doth he make so harsh a thing of mens asserting a sufficiency of some uneffectual grace and say to what purpose is it and yet assert that to most men the grace of Christ had not so much as any sufficiency to save them nor put them into any true possibility of life Ad XI I. It seemeth to me a contradiction to say as in the second branch of his distinction that Homo potest Velle and yet that aliud adhuc adjutorium necessarium est ut de facto velit For necessarium est sine quo res esse non potest Therefore the non potest is present wherever the necessarium is wanting But if they talk only of a passive or obediential power and say Man can believe because God can make him believe and so denominate man Able to do that which they mean God is able to make him do this is but to play with words II. His saying that now there is no sufficient grace is before disproved and by him not proved That it is the same with that of the state of Innocency is vainly said It is the same in general as man is the same and Intellect and will the same But to be able to live without sin and to be able to forbear one sin or to hear a Sermon or do one commanded act are not the same And to hold none but this with Pelagius is not all one as to hold this with a more special grace And that it is pernicious to the lapsed is rashly said For in the reprobate it doth them no harm but good and in the elect it tendeth to higher grace And he mistaketh in saying that it supposeth nature sound For if it were proved that nature without grace hath no good inclination yet why may not unsound nature receive grace ad posse Is not that grace some cure of its unsoundness and tends to more III. But as to his saying that the more men have of it the more miserable they are and the more damnable and that no man ever used sufficient grace or will do I answer 1. The good man it seemeth forgot that all the same may be said as truly of his special Grace both in them that come short of faith and Justification and them that apostatize from it as he holdeth many do 2. But it is not true that having it maketh them damnable any more than having life health and riches but it 's the abusing it 3. That never any used sufficient grace by his leave and the School-mens is unproved viz. that no man since the fall ever did any good or forbore any evil obediently by such grace as left him able to have done otherwise in the instant before the act or as inferred not his volition as necessary exviillius causae 4. And that all that which cometh short of the effect is none of the Grace of Christ is unproved unless he mean only the adequate immediate effect The Law doth make Duty and so hath its effect And Gods motions make their various Impressions on the soul and so have their effect But whether a Godly mans will could not by that same motion have produced a better effect in his will than was produced by it he must better prove Ad XII I. Whereas Paul opposeth the Law of works and the Grace of Christ he opposeth or too far distinguisheth the Law of Christ and the Graâ—e of Christ Just as Sir H. V. in his Meditations He taketh all spoken and written precepts or Laws to be the Law which is distinguished from Grace which is meer Alteration of the soul But this is confusion and subverteth true Theologie For the Law is the instrument of signifying Gods mind and the Spirit worketh with and by it on our minds And both go together both before the fall and under Christ And both are Grace now even as body and soul are one man The Gospel is oft called Grace in the New Testament It 's true that a Law meerly as a Law may be distinguished from the Spirits operations on the soul And so Paul and Augustine oft shew that the Jewish Law as a Law could not make men righteous without grace And we deny not but the Law of Christ meerly as a Law is insufficient without the Spiritâ— Grace But to conclude hence that this is the difference between the Old â—ovenant and the New and the Righteousness of each of them of men under them that one is obedience to a written Law and the other is the effect of the Spirit is not sound For under each Covenant there was both Law and Spirit though with difference Adam had Grace as Jansenius confusseth And the Fathers before the Flood had Law and Spirit And the Godly â—ews had Law and Spirit And all Christians are subject to Christ their King and obey his Laws though by the Grace of his Spirit And it is not two Righteousnesses that relate to Law and Spirit but one as an effect of two concauses The
doctrine of faith and Law and promises of Christaâ—e the Means which the Spirit useth in operating our Faith Love and Obedience And it is not two Covenants that give these two but as soul and body make one man so the Word of Christ and his Spirit make up one total cause of our sanctification The Spirit causeth us to believe that which the Word revealeth and to love the good which it proposeth and to obey the Precepts of the Word Therefore the Gospel is Grace and the Spirit is Grace that is a free gift of God to miserable sinners for their recovery and inward holiness is the effect of both And to feign that all obedience as it is performed to Christs Law upon its proper motives is therefore not of the Spirit or is our own Righteousness opposed to Christs because our own reason and free-will is exercised in it is Phanaticism and subverteth the Gospel and the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ II. God never gave a Law no not to the Jews only to convince them that they could not keep it but to be the Rule of their obedience And the Just did keep it in sincerity But the Law of Moses as separated by the ignorant Jews from the promise and grace of Christ could not be kept by any to Justification To say that Christs Laws now have no higher end than to tell us that we cannot keep them is Antichristianity Are we commanded to repent believe love God only to tell us that we cannot do it It 's true that without the Spirits help we cannot But it 's as true that the Command is the Rule of our duty and all the Gospel and Covenant of Grace is the means of exciting us to our duty by which the Spirit worketh in us faith repentance love and obedience But saith Jansenius the Law of Christ is to humble men in the sense of their disability and drive them to seek to Christ for his grace I answer 1. Is not humbling men and driving them to Christ a good effect If so then his Law is the means of all that good 2. Were the Gospel and all the Apostles Epistles written only to drive men to Christ and not to edifie them and make them perfect to salvation Were not the Precepts of Love and Holiness means of working Love and Holiness in men Is not the Word the seed that begetteth men to eternal life and is not the receiving of this seed into good and honest hearts made by Christ the cause of holiness and salvation Were not the Disciples clean by the word that Christ spake to them and doth he not say that his Word was spirit and life as being the concause of the Spirits vivification He that never received more benefit by Christs Doctrine Law and Gospel than to be convinced that he cannot believe repent obey or love God hath not yet the benefit which they are principally intended for But suppose that by Law he had meant the meer penal part or threatning as some words would make a man suspect 1. It 's a strange description of a Law to exclude the precept and premiant part and include only the penal part which is the last and least 2. As it is the same Man that hath Love and Hatred Hope and Fear so it is the same Law of Christ which hath precept and prohibition promise and penalty And it is the same Holiness or New Creature which is a conformity to all together Of which more anon III. He can never prove that all unbelievers have no Power to â—â—e any means which tendeth to â—aith by a preparatory grace nor that the use of all such means is Impossible to them XIII His distinction of Natural and Moral Impotency is good But then that Moral Impotency it self must not be made the same with the Natural else there will be the same reason for excusing sin by it If mans Will had been made by God such as could not possibly love him or holiness it would not have left a man unexcusable in judgement that his enmity was Voluntary It is reason enough for a man to kill a â—oad or Serpent as malum sibi naturale because it is a hurtful creature But this is no Moral Evil in them nor is their death their punishment nor yet in any ravenous creature which preyeth on the rest that are innocent And so would it be with bad men if God had made them bad Indeed if Adam have made them all bad and God have given no Saviour Grace or Remedy they are conâ—emnable and unexcusable as they were virtually in Adam if judged only by the Law of Innocency as made to Adam But they are excuseable if judged by Christ by the Law of grace which condemneth no man meerly as not innocent or a sinner but as a rejecter of grace These things are so plain and weighty that Jaâ—senius should not joyn with the Antinomians in opposing them XIV While he confesseth that Christ so far dyed for all as to procure them all the mercy which he giveth them I have no further quarrel with him but to prove that a Condition pardon of sin and grant of Life eternal with much means and help to make men perform the Condition which is but a suitable Acceptance is indeed mercy XVI That Christs grace is Love or Complacency in good is a truth which I highly value but with all these exceptions to his doctrine 1. It is the Heart of the new Creature and that which must communicate it self to all the rest or else they are lifeless and unacceptable For the will is the man in Gods account And complacency or love or appetite is the first act of the will which is it that he calleth with Augustine Delectation Grace lyeth principally in a Placet But the man hath more parts than his Heart And all other parts of sanctification are graces of Christ in their several places and not love only 2. Though no man is to love himself as God nor instead of God nor above God nor as the noblest ultimate object of his love yet all men are necessitated by nature to love themselves and therefore to desire their own felicity in loving God next to God as the final object of that love And so our end is finis amantis vel amicitiae which includeth mutual complacency and union though not in equality And to such an end grace causeth us to use the means And Christ is proposed to us as our Saviour and all his grace as for our good and all Gods commands as necessary for our happiness and sin is described to us to be hated as our oâ—â— evil and destruction and against our good as well as against Gods will and honour And with us this is denyed scarcely by the Antinoâ—ians themselves Much less by any judicious Christians 3. It is past the reach of any of us to prove that our actual love is the first effect of the sanctifying Spirit on the soul
work but a grace of some other Providence 4. Consequently that there are men yea most who are no subjects of Christ nor under any Law of grace by Christ and yet not under the meer Law of Innocency and therefore are under some other Law who knows what or lawless 5. His damning all that perish meerly for Original Sin and its necessitated consequents which no man had ever the least power to avoid 6. His asserting that Angels and Adam had sufficient Grace and Free-will by which the Angels did and Adam could have persevered in Innocency and never sinned And yet that since the fall no ungodly man hath such help and free-will to any one better act than he doth nor the holiest person to any better than he doth but the best Saint is less able to do one better act than Adam was to keep all the Law 7. And so his consequent that it is properly impossible for any man in the World good or bad to do any better than he doth 8. That all they love God sincerely amore amicitia who love God and Justice propter se as amiable in himself though they love their filthiest sins so much better and all their fleshly worldly interest as that they have but an uneffectual wish that they could leave them 9. That we must not say that Christ giveth men either a Power to do better than they do nor yet that Grace of Fear which they have as being below him And yet must say that he giveth multitudes this uneffectually sincere love which never saveth them 10. That a Habit of true faith may be many years in a man before i◠justifie him when as the word true must mean some other faith or else that same will never justifie him which did not justifie him so long 11. His Antinomian or Phanatick distinguishing Law and Grace as if Christ had no Precepts or Laws but Operations or else his Gospel and Covenant in signis were no part of his Grace 12. And thence his fiction that all that which is done by any Grace ad posse and in obedience to Christs written Law is a Legal Righteousness of our own and no part of Christs Righteousness These with what else I have before disclaimed I dislike in Jansenius his way And yet think that a man that can well distinguish words from things and will not be deceived by ambiguous terms may shew that even he and his adversaries are not so far disagreed as they seem E. g. Whether Christ dyed for all They are agreed that he dyed to procure for all so much Grace or Mercy as he giveth them and that among these a conditional Pardon and Gift of Christ and Life is one c. And they agree that he dyed not with any absolute intent of giving them any more than he doth give them What remaineth then but the Controversie de nomine Whether this much be fitly called his Dying for all which Scripture putteth out of doubt The like I might say of many of the rest of the differences §. VIII I Conclude with this summary determination of all these Controversies to satisfie sober minds 1. GOD our CREATOUR is the Causa prima the spring and Master and end of NATURE and accordingly having antecedently made the creature in such variety as pleased him 1. He Actively affordeth them all that general Influx by which the Being given them is supported and they are sufficiently furnished for their several motions operations or receptions 2. And his Infinite Goodness and blessed Will is their common End in which they are all finally terminated but variously thereby felicitated according to the variety of their capacities 3. And as the Governour of the Universe he sapientially ordereth all things and conducteth them from their Beginning to their End but variously as they are various II. So GOD our REDEEMER having in Christ made all necessary preparations and Redeemed mankind as to what belonged to a Saviour to do in Person upon earth and having antecedently made an Universal Law of Grace 1. Doth Reveal his Mercy to lost sinners commonly but in various degrees as he pleaseth And doth concurr with his Gospel by vouchsafing a Common Gracious Help which hath an aptitude and tendency to the recovery of lost sinners 2. And as the final Infinite Good he felicitateth all that are by Grace conducted to him as their end and on the rest will have his absolute will fulfilled and will not be frustrate of his End though sinners may be frustrate of theirs and be unhappy 3. And as Rector he sapientially conducteth man in the way to this felicitating End antecedently by the Gospel which is the same in it self to all that have it and consequently as Judge by his Rewards In which supposing his foresaid commoner preventing Grace he consequently giveth men such further degrees of co-operating grace or help and spiritual mercy as in the use of former grace they are fit to receive and justly and penally denyeth that to others which they have made themselves immediately unapt for or uncapable of in the way of this ordinary common operation But withall as a free Owner and Benefactor who may do with his own as he list as he diversifieth the works of Nature though Nature keep a constant course except in Miracles so he freely diversifieth the gifts of his Grace external and Internal though as Rector and the common Benefactor of lost sinners he alter not the terms and means of Grace which he at first determined of And the equality and constancy of his Rectoral and Judicial distributions is no way inconsistent with the diversity which as a free Owner and Benefactor he maketh either in his Decrees or Gifts So that he is the Cause of All Good though not every way equally to All to make All Good and happy And he hath made man capable of Improving his Gifts to return him his own with Usury which he will require But he is the Author of no evil of sin nor punisheth any but for sin and as a means to that Good which is better than the Impunity of the sinner But he ruleth and causeth the Effects of sin when he causeth not the sin it self The Order of his Productions may be much perceived by man and are fit for our observation Of his own Knowledge and Volitions of them we know no more but that It is not formally the same thing as Knowledge and Will in Man that It is most perfect and incomprehensible that It is his Essential Intellect and Will variously named as variously connoting the effects and objects that To dispute of any other internal order priority or posteriority in God's Knowledge or Will as if he had particular Thoughts Ideas and Volitions as man hath or any thing in Him were Caused by the object and to vex the Church with contentions hereabout is a presumptuous arrogance and prophaneness which God will punish and good and sober men should tremble at and hate and not
his overlooking and undervaluing Gods Design in Making and Governing free Intellectual agents by his Sapiential Moral Directive way He supposeth this way to be so much below that of Physical Motion and Determination as that it is not to be considered but as an instrument thereof As if it were unworthy of God to give any creature a Meer Power Liberty Law and Moral Means alone and not to Necessitate him Positively or Negatively to Obey or Disobey And this looking only at Physical Good Being and Motion and thereby thinking lightly of Sapiential Regency is the summ as of his so of Hobbes Spinosa's Alvarez Bradwardines Twisses Rutherfords and the rest of the Predeterminants errors herein And had not I other thoughts of this one thing I should come over to their Opinion For I confess the case to be of very great difficulty § 28. I think that as the Divine Life and Power glorifieth it self eminently in the Causation of the Being Motion and Life of the creatures so the Divine Wisdom eminently glorifieth it self in the Order of all things and in the Moral Directive Sapiential Regiment of Intellectual free agents And that Gods Laws and Doctrine are the Image of his Wisdom and an admirable harmonious and beautiful frame And that all would think so and be wonderfully delighted in them were they compleatly printed on our Minds and Hearts § 29. II. And accordingly I think that the glory of his governing Wisdom and Punishing and Rewarding Justice is a great and notable part of that glory which man must give him now and for ever And that this Justice is not his physical using all things according to their physical aptitude only But his Judging and Executing according to that moral aptitude commonly called Merit by Punishments and Rewards And that to deny God the glory of all this is no small error in a Philosopher or Divine § 30. III. Accordingly I think that God made man a free self-determining agent that he might be capable of such Sapiential Rule And that it is a great Honour to God to make so noble a Nature as hath a Power to determine its own elections And though such are not of the highest rank of Creatures they are far above the lowest And that God who we see delighteth to make up beauty and harmony of diversities doth delight in the Sapiential Moral Government of this free sort of Creatures And though man be not Independent yet to be so far like God himself as to be a kind of first-determiner of many of his own Volitions and Nolitions is part of Gods Natural Image on Man § 31. IV. Accordingly I take Duty to be Rewardable and Laudable and sin to be odious as it is the Act of a free agent And that the Nature of Moral Good and Evil consisteth not in its being the meer effect of physical premotion but in being a Voluntary Conformity or Disconformity to the Sapiential Rule of duty by a free agent that had Power to do otherwise § 32. V. Free-will then is not only the same with willing it self or a meer agency according to Nature by the premotion of the first determining necessitating Mover It is not only such a freedom as Fire Water Beasts and every moved thing hath to be moved according to the first Moyers action which is in the will of man But it is a Power to be a first determining Specifier of its own acts as Moral Not that it is never predetermined but that it can do this § 33. VI. Accordingly I judge of Guilt and Shame and the Accusation of Conscience which will not be a bare discerning what God made us do or be but what we voluntarily did or were when we could do otherwise § 34. VII And I am past all doubt that he grosly mistaketh the nature and distinction of Law and Gospel 1. To think that Gods Law when it is not accompained with physical predetermination is but to shew us that we are creatures that cannot but sin 2. Yea hereby he wrongeth the glory of the Creator that made no creature with a power to do any thing but evil unless predetermined physically thereto 3. It 's gross to say that all the Doctrine of Redemption and Faith and Justification by Christ as a meer signum Letter or Law is the Law or Covenant of Works and so that every Command is the Covenant of Works and Physical Efficiency of Good in us is the Gospel or Covenant of Grace For that which we call the Gospel is not true if this be true For this Gospel is a preached word spoken by mans mouth which some believe and some believe not but reject and disobey and therefore perish Matth. 4. 23. 11. 5. 24. 14. 26. 13. Mark 16. 15. Luke 4. 18. 1 Cor. 9. 14 16 18. Heh 4. 2. 1 Pet. 1. 25. 1 Pet. 4. 6. 2. Thess 1. 8 10 11. Matth. 13. 10. Acts. 13. 7. It is a Law by which men shall be judged to life or death Rom. 2. 16. Mar. 16. 15 16. 2 Thes 1. 8. Rom. 10. 16. John 3. 19 20 21. 2 Cor. 4. 3 4. It is a word which some pervert Gal. 1. 7. and many sin against Gal. 2. 14. 1 Pet. 4. 17. The rejecters of it are to speed worse than Sodom and Gomorrah and they cannot escape that neglect so great salvation Whereas by his description 1. No man ever yet sinned against the Gospel or Covenant of Grace For it is not that Covenant or Gospel further than it is a physical effect on the soul 2. And every Heathen that hath any good effect on his soul by Common Grace hath so much Gospel 3. Yea why is not then all Gods Creation being a physical effect the Covenant of Grace if that he doth be it and all that he commandeth as such be the Law of Works 4. And how then can the Law of Works and Grace be two if every proper Law be the Law of Works For a Law is sub genere signi and a produced event is another thing 5. And what sense will be found throughout the Scripture if we must hold that It is the Covenant or Law of Works which telleth us that the Law of Works is abolished and calleth us to believe in Christ for free Justification and not to expect Justification by the Works of the Law and offereth us pardon and life in Christ c. But I will add no more seeing the plainness of the matter makes it needless § 35. The truth is he distinguisheth between the Law and the effect of the Law and Spirit of God and calleth one the Law of Works and the other the Gospel whereas the Scripture only maketh it the excellency of the Gospel that by it the Spirit effectually worketh on the soul more usually and more excellently and no meer Law of Works or Grace will renew us without the Spirit § 36. VIII And if Redemption be nothing but Physical efficiency by Christ who as a creating Mediator
that all mankind are now from under the meer Covenant of Innocency and that none perish but for the abuse of mercy which had a tendency to their recovery The case of Infants must be spoke to in its place once for all But all this belongeth to the Case of Grace and Free-will * How Augustine distinguished Election to Justification and to Glory See him lib. 1. ad simplic q. 2. Et quae de â—o habet Vasquez in 1. Thom. disp 89. cap. 6. And 2. As for Election we say that 1. The Object of Gods Will to glorifie men is man sanctifying and persevering in an immediate capacity for Glory in esse cognito 2. The Object of Gods Will to give the Grace of perseverance is a fore-seen sanctified person in the next capacity 3. The Object of Gods Will to justifie sanctifie and adopt is a fore-seen Believer 4. The Object of Gods Will to give special Grace which shall effectually cause men to repent and believe is ordinarily a fore-seen disposed Sinner prepared by his common Grace but sometimes an unprepared Sinner whom of his free will he will suddenly convert as it pleaseth him freely to distribute his benefits all being unworthy 5. The Object of Gods Will to give the highest degrees of common Grace external in the purest preaching of the Gospel and other mercies and internal in greater helps of the Spirit is sometimes a Sinner in esse cognito who hath not grosly rejected lower helps and sometimes freely the worser sort of Sinners who have abused former mercies 6. The Object of Gods Will to give the first common mercy which hath a tendency in its use to mens recovery and Salvation is all mankind fallen in Adam For all are under the New Covenant of Grace made with Adam Gen. 3. 15. in some degree and with Noah and all have much mercy tending to Repentance and none are left as the Devils in dispair without any offered remedy or help 7. The Object of Gods Will to give man the Covenant of Innocency was Adam fore-seen as meer man 8. The Object of Gods Will to create man was nothing in the sense that we now take an Object in that is for the materia circa quam But if you will call the intended effect the Object then the Object of Gods Will here and in the rest is the thing willed But if you will needs presume to seek one higher in the Mind of God * Man knoweth by Reception and so hath Ideas But God can be no Recipient you must say that it was man as conceived fit to be as well as possible For we can think no otherwise of the Divine Conceptions and Volitions but as we are led by the analogy of humane acts And so we must say that 1. Gods Power maketh it possible for all things to be 2. Next God knoweth them possible 3. He knoweth what is convenient or fit to be made to his unsearchable ends 4. He willeth that they shall be and man among the rest and so on If you will needs have the order of Decrees this is all that we can say of them A. All this pleaseth us well but it will not please your own Party or the Calvinists that you make so many acts of Election which they tell you is but one entire thing as mentioned in Scripture Nor yet that you lay every Decree or Will upon fore-sight B. You are mistaken No moderate considerate man of them will deny any thing that I have said For 1. As to the Scripture use of the word Election it is not the meer name that we are now opening but the matter in question Nor is it the expounding of particular Texts that I am upon And if I were no man will deny but that the word Election is variously used in the Scripture Sometime for Gods eternal Will to make us Christians of Infidels and to save us by Christ and sometime for actual choosing us by converting Grace in time and sometime for actual choosing men in time by Vocation to some office or special work c. 2. And as to the distinguishing of all these Volitions of God no man will deny the effects to be distinct undoubtedly these are various effects of God 1. To make man 2. To give him the Covenant of Innocency 3. To give him the Covenant of Grace with all the common mercies of it 4. To give some Persons and Nations the Gospel and other mercies above the greatest part of the World with answerable helps of the Spirit 5. To give men special Grace effectual for Faith and Repentance 6. To give men Pardon Adoption and Sanctification 7. To give men Perseverance 8. To give them Glory And if these are various works either you will distinguish of Gods Will by his various works or not * Sive secundum nostram rationem distinguamus illud decretum in plura five dicamus esse unicum non est multum curandum Certum enim est apud omnes Deum omnia singula volutsse unico simplicissimo acta suae voluntatis Est enim ipsius voluntas voluntatis operatio idem quod sua essentia simplex individua si aliquis contenderet esse etiam nostro modo intelligendi esse unicum actum simplicissimum voluntatis ego non cur abo Vasquez in 1. Tho q. 14. a. 13. disp 65. And is not this à short end of many Controversies If you do not our whole Controversie about the Order of the Decrees is quickly at an end and I am content with the abreviation For where there is no Distinction there is no Order And when I distinguish them never so much I say as well as any that they are all one in regard of the one Will or Essence of God that willeth them In God there is no real diversity but his Will is thus variously denominated extrinsecally from its respect to the various objects to which it doth transire and of the various effects which it produceth And thus do all men talk of God Else they could not distinguish his saving Will from his damning Will nor Election from Rejection in his Decree So that no man can tell how to differ here 3. And as to fore-sight you as much mistake For 1. I say not that God fore-seeth any good in any man but what he giveth him and willeth to give him But we speak of the Order of those Volitions in the way of execution * Alex. Ales is noted by Vasquez and others as singular for holding that Predestination to the first Grace was upon fore-sight of the future good use of that Grace as the cause But he denieth that the first Grace is actually given on the same Cause Therefore Vasquez thinks he changed his mind 2. And all men that ascribe Intentions Volitions or Purposes to God do and must make the Object of them as such to be Quid cognitum or something which some call an Idea in the Mind of God It
pleased or displeased in them yea I told you that these may oriri de novo without change in God And whether his judicial Will to condemn men as Judge have the same conditions we shall enquire further hereafter I have already manifested that the Objects of it have their proper qualifications The seventh Crimination A. At least you make Election absolute if not Rejection and say that God electeth men to Salvation without respect to any goodness in * To the question An electio ad beatitudinem praecesserit praedestinatiâ—nem meritorum The affirmative is held by Cajet and most Thomists by Scotus in 1. d. 41. q. 1. Durand q. 1. n. 8. Aegid ibid. q. 1. a. 2. Major 1. d. 4. q. 2. Sotuâ— in Roâ— â— Cordub li. 1. q. 56. â—pin â— inquit Vasquez in 1. Tho. q. 23. disp 89. c. 1. But Vasquez holdeth the contrary with Osâ—rius Turrian and many others maintaining that Augustine held Electionem ad gloriam esse eâ— meritis gratia prâ—visis And no doubt but God decreed Glory to be given per modum praemii if that be all them B. I have said enough to this already 1. Do you think that men are good before they are elected when they are not men You do not certainly 2. Do you think that God fore-seeth any good in men when he willeth to them their first good no doubt you do not 3. Do you think that God fore-seeth in men any second third or following degrees of goodness before he intend to give it them what need he purpose to give it them if he fore-see that they will have it without his Gift 4. Do you think that God fore-seeth any power to do good in men but what he intendeth to give them or any good act but what proceedeth from that power which he giveth them and from his concourse or co-operating influx I dare say that you do not 5. And do you think that we imagine that God giveth or purposeth to give any following mercy to him that hath not the necessary antecedent mercy As to glorifie any that is not justified or to justifie any that is not called 6. You see then that it 's necessary if you will quarrel that you distinguish of Election as before said Though Gods Will in it self as was now said have no proper suspending condition yet 1. The effects of Gods Will have 2. And the Objects of Gods Will have their necessary qualifications 3. And some of Gods Volitions are thence extrinsically denominated conditional Now 1. God giveth Salvation to no Unbeliever but on condition of Faith And God actually glorifieth none but penitent persevering Believers And both these he accordingly decreed or willeth And can you say then that Election hath no respect to the persons goodness It hath not only respect to the good intended him but to that good which is a necessary qualification found in him that is necessary to the benefit to which he is elected God decreeth to give glory to none but persevering Saints nor perseverance to none but the Holy nor justification to none but Believers But I will confess to you that we hold 1. That God absolutely willed to give Christ and the New Covenant to the World 2. That he absolutely willeth or decreeth to give the Gospel and common Grace in a greater degree to many a one that is no more worthy of it than others that are past by and to give it to none but the unworthy 3. That he absolutely decreeth to give Faith and Repentance to many that have long resisted him and are as great Sinners as those that have them not and to none but the unworthy in proper sense And dare you deny any of this your self The eighth Crimination A. Thus you bring presumption into the World and encourage men to Marlorate as from Calvin saith in Joh. 15. 2. Certum decretum Dei a nemine infirmari posse Stat igitur firma sententia Quemcunque Deus ante conditum orbem elegerit cum non posse perire Quem vero rejecerit cum non posse salvari etiamsi omnia sanctorum opera fecerit An ill supposition which Episcopius citeth with distast But Brentius ibid. cited by the same Marlorate saith Haec sententia occurrit câ—riositati carnis quae sâ—let argâ—te magis quam reverenâ—â—r de praedestinatione disserete pro suo ingenio colligere nullum a dominâ— ad vitam aâ—â—rnam electum posse damnari etiâ—â—si pessiâ—â— vivat nullum item a Dominâ— ad ignem aeternum deputatum posse salvari eti amsi optime vivat sâ— iâ—aque velle pro sua libidinâ— vivere sin If once they be elect let them do what they can they are sure to be saved for they are certain that Election will not change B. 1. You are leading us towards the question of Perseverance before the time 2. Do you think your self that Election changeth Is not this as much imputable to you as us or do we differ here Do not you say that God fore-knoweth who will be saved And can God be deceived or shall not all certainly be glorified that are so fore-known Nay do you not say that at least upon that fore-knowledge God decreeth each persons certain Salvation that shall be saved And can that Decree which is upon fore-knowledge be frustrate Do not you then as much encourage presumption by a certain unchangeable Election as we 3. It is factious perverseness reflecting on your selves as much as us which puts in that word Let them do what they will or live how they will or sin they never so much For it falsly intimateth that God electeth men to Glory that live impenitently in wickedness according to our Doctrine Whereas we say 1. That if the word Election be taken partially for the act of Gods Decree to glorifie them none but fore-seen persevering Saints are the Objects And a wicked Saint is a contradiction Or if it be taken for Gods Decree to convert a man we say that this is true that let the World live never so wickedly God doth decree to convert some of them from that wickedness but not all Do you question this 2. But if the word Election be taken comprehensively then mens Holiness Repentance and Faith is part of the Salvation But Brentius ibid. cited by the same Marlorate saith Haec sententia occurrit curiositati carnis quae solet argute magis quam reverenter de praedestinatione disserere pro suo ingenio colligere nullum a domino ad vitam aeternam electum posse damnari etiamsi pâ—ssimâ— vivat nullum item a Domino ad ignem aeternum deputatum posse salvari etiamsi optime vivat se itaque velle pro sua libidine vivere which they are elected to And to say that God absolutely electeth Peter to live and die a Saint let him after Conversion live and die never so wickedly this is a putid contradiction such paultry dealing faction causeth what do you differ from
God had for 4000 years till Christ's Incarnation but willed and given his mercy equally to all the World even so much as might leave the matter meerly to their wills and after that had given greater mercy to the Christian Churches taking nothing from the rest Had this been any injury or diminution to the rest Suppose now God should fetch half the damned out of Hell is this any more hurt or wrong to the rest than if he had delivered none But all these things are here anticipated and cannot be fully answered till we come to the Article of Grace where we must shew how God doth differ his Operations on mens Souls For none can deny but as he differenceth them so he decreed to difference them and no otherwise The tenth Crimination A. At least you make Gods Decrees and Ways unequal and make him a Saith Vasqueâ— in 1. Tho. â— 2â— â— 3. d. 95. c. â— Nullam dari causam Reprobationis ex parte reprebi dicunt Durard in 1. d. 41. q. 2. â— 14. Greg. Armi. q. 1. a. 2. con 1. 5. Marsâ—l 1. q. 4â— a. 2. con 4 c. Driedâ— 1. p. de concord c. 3. con â— 3. Adam in c. 9. ad Roman Ferrar. 3. cont Gent. c. 161. Aquin. 1. q. 23. â— 5. ad 3. â—x his tamen Doctoribus Tâ—om Driedo Durand non dicunt absolute Reprobationis nullum dari causam ex parte reprobi sed nullam esse causam ob quam hic potius quam alius reprobetur aut quod idem est cur hic praedestinetur et discernatur a mossa perditionis ille vero in ea relinquatur reprobetur vid. Laetera Respecter of persons as decreeing to save one and not another or to give â—â—re Grace to one than to another of equal demerit B. You may shew your ignorance about this your self but this is no difference between the parties For 1. No man can deny but that God standing towards us in a three-fold Relation as our Owner and the Lord of all as our Ruler and as our Benefactor so he is free in the first and third Relation A Proprietary may do with his own as he list And a Benefactor may unequally give his benefits as he seeth meet For he is supposed to give only that which is no mans Right till he give it them by promise or collation But as God is a Rector and governeth Mankind by a Law which hath Rewards promised and Punishments threatned to promote Obedience and as he is Judge according to that Law and as he is a Benefactor already obliged by promise thus God doth keep an equality in his Judgments and Executions and ever proceedeth according to his Word or Law He will in just equity and equality forgive justifie and adopt all penitent Believers and no others how great soever He will glorifie all persevering Saints and no others just according to his Word Because his Law is Norma judicii or that which he will observe in judging If God forgive and save one penitent Believer and not another you may say that he ruleth not in equity and equality But in cases of other disposals and benefits which no man hath right to by any Law or Covenant the case is otherwise 2. And full experience tells us this God made not every Man an Angel nor every Stone a Star nor every Star a Sun nor every Beast a Man nor every Toad a Bird nor the Dirt and Water Fire Wonderful is the Variety of his Works through all the World No two Birds Beasts Men Stones Trees are perfectly equal and like No two mens Faces Constitutions Parts Dispositions Virtues are perfectly equal With what various temperaments come we into the World And is God a Respecter of persons for this or are his ways unequal As a free Owner and Benefactor he will diversifie his Gifts and do with his own as he list though Sinners quarrel at it You dare not say that God giveth his Benefits equally to all that are of equal demerit 3. The sin of respecting persons belongeth to a Judge obliged by rules to equal distribution By a Judge I mean any judging and executing Governour or obliged distributer of Rights And it consisteth in partiality and injustice because of something in the person as Greatness Riches Learning Relation Flattery c. which is no just cause of that inequality But this is nothing to God who regardeth no mans person for any such thing nor denieth to any man his proper due The eleventh Crimination A. * Both sides charge this on each other Malderus 1 2. q. 111. a. 3. p. 519. Vocarâ—t illusorie Deus si talem gratiam sufficientem solum ideo daret quia non est efficax c. It is prophaneness thus to venture on blasphemous charges against God if 〈…〉 done by him â—â—â—â— You make God play the Hypocrite to send abroad Ministers to intreat men to repent and be saved when he hath decreed that they shall be damned and not repent And you make all the preaching and means that are used for such mens Conversion a meer mockery B. No more than you do For there is no difference as to this 1. Do not you say that God fore-knoweth from eternity that Judas e. g. will not repent or be saved yea that upon such fore-knowledge he hath decreed before he was born to damn him And doth this make God play the Hypocrite or his Word to be a mockery We say but the very same of all that perish 2. To help you to rescue both your selves and us from this accusation consider that Gods Decree hath several parts As 1. That the lapsed World shall have a Covenant of Grace and be intreated to be saved 2. That Judas one of this world shall have his part among the rest 3. Whereas Judas will not receive this offered Grace for rejecting it he shall be condemned These are the material parts of Gods Decree And is there any hypocrisie or mockery in this God decreed not to condemn Judas but for rejecting offered Grace And this presupposeth the offer He cannot reject that which never was offered him What would you have had God rather say I fore-see if I offer Judas Grace that he will not accept it and therefore I will offer him none but condemn him because he would have refused it had it been offered By this rule the sin of all the World against mercy and means of life should have been prevented by offering them no means or mercy and yet men perish and be damned for that which they never did because God fore-saw that they would have done it Are not these ways unequal in comparison of Gods which vain men quarrel with 2. But again I tell you that your feigning to hold that God decreed that Judas should not repent is not true of those that you now talk with It is enough that God did not decree that Judas should eventually repent The twelfth Crimination A. *
God knoweth all Names Notions Propositions and Syllogisms with their modes as they are the measures organs or actings of Humane Understandings 8. †I refer the Reader to Blank de Concord lib. cum â—ecretis 1. Thes 25. c. where by citing their own words at large he proveth that the most famous and resolute Antiarminians were for this scientia media conditionata viz. Fr. Gomarrus Arminius's chief Antagonist in Mat. 11. 21. Antonius Walaeus loc com de sctent Dei pag. 160. Paulus Ferrius Scholast Orth. vindic p. 203 209 210. Besides Rob. Baronius Metaph. sect 12. disp 2. num 55 56. who in his last days was nearest to the Arminians as appeareth in those Metaphysicks And Jo. Strangius l. 3. c. 13. p 675. nameth also Lud. Crocius Dyodecad dis 7. It is therefore undeniable to all Christians that the thing which they call * Could Alvarez and his fellows well prove that the permission of the first sin is an effect of Reprobation as the word is used in a fit and ordinary sense they would do more to overthrow the Doctrine de scientia media circa malum than is yet done But they fail in their attempts of proving this Of which after scientia media is as certainly in God as is the scientia simplicis Intelligenâ—iae Purae visionis that is that God knoweth the truth of all true conditional Propositions and knoweth what would be done by such and such causes or upon such and such alterations if they were put Doth any Christian doubt of this 9. Whether this should be called scientia media is a question de nomine and that of no great importance and not at all de re 10. Whether it be of any necessity or use in this Controversie is a question only about the order of argumentation as long as the thing it self is confessed to be true 11. Some that cashier it as an useless Engine in this matter do go as far from you as the Jesuites and Arminians who use it As you may see at large in Ludov. à Dola and Durandus himself 12. I am one that fear Presumption both in their and your distributions of the Knowledge and Decrees of God and dread the taking of his Name in vain And one that think that we need not the notion of scientia media for our satisfactory explication of these matters But as the truth of the thing is confessed so if it be applied only to the Doctrine of Reprobation as it is commonly called and not at least always to the Doctrine of Election I see no untruth that it inferreth nor no real difference that it will prove between us The fifth Crimination C. They deny absolute Reprobation at least and say that God reprobateth no men but upon fore-sight of sin And so that he hath no Decree that men shall sin nor that he will permit them to sin nor that they shall do the act in particular which is sin As if God had not decreed the hardening of Pharaohs heart the sin of Sihon of Rehoboam of the Jews in killing Christ c. B. 1. I told you before Reprobation is a word that signifieth several acts You dare not but grant them that God decreeth or willeth to damn no man but for sin and as a Sinner And this is the same thing that they mean 2. If by Reprobation you mean Gods Decree to give them no Faith or Repentance 1. You must prove that God hath such a Decree or Will for a meer negation where not-decreeing or not-willing to give them Grace will do as much 2. All Christians must needs confess that God made a Covenant of Grace with fallen Mankind in Adam and Noah And that no man is now under the meer Obligations of the Law and Covenant of Innocency which saith Be perfect and live sin and die for ever And that there is some common mercy extended to all the World which obligeth them to repent in order to Salvation He subverteth Scripture and all experience that denieth this Therefore all must grant that God denieth no special Grace to any but the abusers of this common Grace And he decreeth to do but what he doth * Thus our Brittish Diviâ—es at Dâ—rt in their suffrage on Ar. 3. at large Therefore the persons whom he decreeth to deny special Grace to are none but the abusers of common Grace or the rejecters of that special Grace when offered 3. If by Reprobation you mean Gods Will or Decree to permit them to sin and perish willfully 1. You can prove no such Decree or Will Because permission being a negation or nothing needs it not but will be as certainly without it upon a bare not decreeing to hinder them from sin 2. And you mistake in saying that Arminius denieth it For he * Arminius himself expresly professeth that in case God permits a man velle pâ—ccatum necâ—sse est ut nullo argumentorum geneâ—e persuadeatur ad volendum Exam. Perk. pag. 153. Dr. Twisse against Hoord li. 1. pag. 70. saith with you That God decreeth his own permission 3. You must take the pains to distinguish between negative and privative Unbelief and between negative and privative not-hindring Sin or not-giving Faith Negative Unbelief is meer not-believing And so none of us did believe from eternity or before we were born He that is not believeth not nor yet in the first instant that the Promise and Law of Faith was given us Our unbelief is not sin or privative but on supposition that we are men and have reason and have a Law and Object of Faith And Gods permitting us in this negative Non-belief is not to be called a privative but only a negative permission For God did from eternity so permit me to be no man and no Believer and yet this was not Reprobation So God did negatively not hinder Adams first sin but not privatively because not penally for any evil done nor yet by denying him any thing that was naturally or morally his due Therefore this was not an Act of Reprobation But when the New Covenant of Grace and the common Grace of the Covenant are once given men and they are obliged to believe then sometimes God penally denieth them Grace and that is all which the Arâ—inians put against absolute denial because this denial is only for mens fore-going sin But he also still negatively only and not privatively or penally denieth some Grace to some yea to all And that is only such Grace as is neither morally their due nor naturally due or necessary to them And the denial of such is no Act of Reprobation 4. If by Reprobation you mean meerly Gods Preterition that is his â—â—t-willing or not-decreeing to give men Grace 1. Not to Will or Decree is nothing And how can you call nothing absolute or conditional These are the modes of Acts and not of not-acting or of nothing All grant that Gods non-agency non-volition not-decreeing hath no cause much
and Arminians have run out into the contrary extream and so the difference hath been made and maintained So that with most Christians the controversie is not whether Christ be the Saviour of the World or died for all men but how far and in what sense he did so that this Article may agree with the rest of our Theology A. The sense is all If we agree not in sense we agree in nothing B. The few extream Contenders agree not in sense But the generality of Christians much more may I say Protestants do in all that is necessary to our common concord If really you differ tell me your self What do you hold that Christ purchased for all men more than the Synodists do Name me one benefit if you can A. You would perswade me that we differ not indeed 1. We hold that Christ procured and made the first Covenant of Grace with all Mankind in Adam and Noah and so do not the Synodists B. I think you can name few Protestants that deny it Beza himself in that Edit of his Annot. in Eph. 2. 12. which H. Stephanus printed 1588. saith This Covenant was made in the beginning Gen. 3. 15. with Adam and all that should be born of him and afterwards Gen. 9. 10. with Noah the other Parent of Mankind as we have else-where noted plainly they say that it is made to all men as a Law then promulgate to Adam and Noah even a Law of Grace which Mankind was put under And as an offered Covenant and conditional Promise But as 1. A mutual Covenant 2. And as giving right to Life it is made only with Consenters Tell me whether you differ from this sense A. No this sense is according to the Scriptures But moreover 2. We hold that the second Edition of the Covenant also is made to all B. It 's granted you that it 's made to all that hear it as far as aforesaid and that Ministers should do their best to preach it to all And do you hold any more A. No But 3. We hold that this Covenant pardoneth all mens sins on condition of Faith and Repentance and not only the Elect. B. So do they unanimously I told you Twisse twenty times over saith the same No man can deny that which is the very plain scope of the Covenant it self to pardon all if they will repent and believe A. 4. But We hold also that Christ purchased for all men sufficient Grace to enable them to repent and believe B. I told you that is the Controversie of the third and fourth Articles what Grace Christ giveth all he procured for all which is not here to be anticipated but opened in due place And if I then manifest that in that point also you differ not I shall prove that you differ not at all in these Points of Christ's Death and Universal Grace A. But they say That Christ died only for the Elect effectually and with a purpose to save them and purposed to save no other B. You carry back the Controversie to Gods Decrees which we dispacht before Tell me 1. Do you hold that all are saved by Christ A. No that 's none of the Controversie B. Why then quarrel you with them that say He died but for the Elect effectually when they mean but that he saveth no other A. But his death effected something for them viz. the new Covenant and common Grace though it effect not their Salvation B. Who denieth any of this not the Synod of Dort But 2. Do you hold that God absolutely purposed to save any by Christ that never are saved A. No but conditionally he purposed it B. Have we not before proved that your quarrel about conditional Decrees is but a strife about words in the dark A. But they say Christ died not equally for all B. Do you or dare you say otherwise your selves 1. You confess that his Death doth not equally save all 2. You confess that from eternity God fore-knew who would believe and be saved and who not Now the question is of equality of benefit before denied and equality of Intention And can you think that Christ as God at the time of his Death or before did equally intend or decree to save those that he fore-knew would neither believe nor be saved and those that he knew would believe and be saved You cannot you do not imagine this A. We do not But we say that as to Gods antecedent Will he both elected and redeemed all alike and the inequality is only in his consequent Will But the Synodists say otherwise B. 1. If you understand the distinction aright they say the same as you that is If you thus distinguish only of the Will of God as Rector or his governing Will and by the Antecedent Will mean only the Legislative which making our Duty goeth before our doing or not-doing it and by the consequent Will mean only the judicial which followeth Duty and Sin God dealeth equally by all men in the first as to the tenour of his Law though the different promulgation make a difference of Obligations but unequally in the second 2. And if you distinguish thus of his eternal Decrees either they respect Damnation or Salvation And by his Antecedent Will you mean that which goeth before the fore-sight of mans Will and by the consequent that which followeth this fore-sight Now 1. Have I not said enough to convince you that as it is Actus Agentis in God we cannot prove any diversity or priority But only ex connotatione objecti 2. And as to Damnation I have proved that they commonly agree with you that God decreeth not Sin but fore-seeth it and decreeth Damnation only as for fore-seen Sin What-ever Piscator and a few more say this is the common Doctrine of Protestants and Fathers 3. But as to Election dare you say your self that God decreeth to change no mans Will but upon fore-sight that the person himself will first change it * Vasqu and many Jesuits profess that Gods first Grace is given without any cause condition or occasion in man And saith Malderus in 12. Tho. q. 110. a. 1. pag. 469. Deus non praesupponit in creatura bonum quo ad ipsius dilectionem moveatur sicut voluntas hominis benefactoris sed bonum creaturae provenit ex voluntate Dei qui vocat ea quae non sunt tanquam ea quae sunt That is Gods efficient Will of Beneficence is first and then his final Will of complacence first God maketh us good and then loveth us as good If man change it first God need not to come after to change it If God change it first then he decreed first to change it and did not first fore-see it changed A. Neither But he fore-seeth mans concurrence or not-concurrence with his changing Act of Grace B. But can you think that he equally operateth on all and that all the inequality is in their concurrence Doth he do as much on every Persecutor
Universal Grace which is the very express Covenant of Grace it self that all men are already through Christs satisfaction reconciled to God and pardoned if they will believe or that a conditional pardon is already given to the World And to deny this is to deny the Gospel and Christianity it self and to be no Christians B. You would make your selves and others believe that they deny that which they never dreamed of denying Like him that dreamed that he was wounded and call'd out for something to stop the blood Do not all Protestaents profess to believe that Covenant and conditional Pardon as well as you Do they not preach it constantly and administer Baptism in the same terms as you do who denieth that all are reconciled if they will believe A. But by that they mean only exclusively that all are not reconciled or pardoned because all believe not And not inclusively that all men are conditionally pardoned already B. You mistake and slander them Do they not read the very express pardon made already in Gods Word That Whoever believeth shall not perish c. Joh. 3. 16. Mark 16. 16 Do they not all acknowledge that this is a Law of God an Act of Oblivion Enacted long ago by God And is not this visible written Promise or Law of Grace an existent conditional pardon of all No man of sense and understanding and faith denieth it A. But they say that in making it Gods secret intent was that none but the Elect should have any saving benefit of it * What say others less Malderus in 1. 2. q. 111. a. 3. d. 5. p. 486. Cum de Redemptore dando Deus constituisset ut secerneret illos quos elegit eum rerum ordinem elegit in quo certi quos voluit homines a reliquis discernerentur cosque pro beneplacito suo ad nullum bonum usum liberi arbitrii respiciens ad vitam aeterâ—am praedestinavit talemque tis gratiam decrevit cum qua certissimo infallibiliter ad regnum pervenirent Reliquos autem qui ex illo numero non sunt reliquit non quidem sint omni auxilio Gratiae sicut juste potuisset propter Adae peccatum sed cum auxiliis gratiae secundi Adae ad ipsos derivandis in ordine ac cursu rerum jam electo Et videns scieâ—tia visionis hos in peccato vitam finire reprobavit eos statuit in aeternum punire a regno excludere Thus the Jesuites ordinarily And what is here considerably different from the Synod of Doâ—t If the name of sufficient Grace be the quarrel call it Gratia efficax ad posse and all is ended B. 1. Still you are returning to the dispatched Controversie of the Decrees which is a confession that you disser not otherwise about Redemption 2. Do not you your selves hold the same which you quarrel with 1. Inclusively they hold that the Elect shall be saved by Christ And do you deny it 2. As to the exclusion of others they hold that God decreed not any mans Infidelity and Sin but fore-seeing their Infidelity and Sin decreed that they should not be saved by Christ but perish And do not you say the same Away with these contentious dreams A. I am sure I can name you divers that say otherwise B. It is the Synod still and the common Confessions and Doctrine of the Churches which you have to do with Tell not me of singular men The Doctrine of the Church of England I told you out of the Catechism The Synods words I recited And remember as Dallaeus tells Spanhemius that Davenant with the rest of the British Divines Martinius and the other Breme Divines who all gave their suffrages and writ for Universal Redemption did yet all subscribe in the Synod And therefore undoubtedly understood that no words of the Canons were contrary to their sense of Universal Redemption The later famous Helvetian confession saith We teach and believe that this Jesus Christ our Lord is the only and eternal Saviour of Mankind yea and of the whole world upon which words the English Collector of the Confessions giveth us a ridiculous Observation that he thinks they meant the restoring of the world at last contrary to the context As if he had not known that Musculus Bullinger c. were for Universal Redemption But that I be not over-tedious I pray you peruse in Dallaei Apolog. To. 2. the citations out of the Confessions and Catechisms and Liturgies of the Reformed Churches viz. Of Berne August Bohem. Helvert Saxon. Anglic. Palatin Synod Dord Colloq Torun with a multitude of Protestant Divines The fourth Crimination A. They make it impossible for any man to believe in Christ at first by a rational and true Faith For his dying for men being the Object of Faith must be before the Act. And no man by their way can know that Christ died for him till he is a Believer and yet they say that our first saving Faith must be a believing and trusting in Christ as one that died for us So that men must stay till they believe that Christ died for them that they may have reason to believe that he died for them For before the first Faith or belief of it they can have none B. You still make the world believe that men hold that which they do not This concerneth not the Churches but some singular men The common Protestant Doctrine is That Christ by his Death hath procured the universal conditional Gift of Pardon and Life contained in the Covenant of Grace Mark 16. 16. Joh. 3. 16 c. And that his death was thus far efficient by which it is sufficient for the actual Justification and Salvation of penitent Believers And that this is it that men must first believe and so accept of an offered Saviour for Justification and Life and give up themselves to him in the baptismal Covenant which when they do they are justified and adopted having right to and union with Christ and in him right to the Covenant-benefits And then Christ's death which was sufficient by its efficiency of Satisfaction Merit and the Covenant-grant becometh efficient of Justification c. And are not you and they agreed in this I confess that many singular Divines have given you this occasion But what 's that to the Churches The fifth Crimination A. They tell men that they must believe a Lye or an unrevealed thing that by believing it it may become true and they may be saved and ese they shall be damned For they say that Christ died for none but the Elect And yet that others also are bound to believe that he died for them And because they believe not this Lye God will damn them But if they did believe it it would be true As if the Objective Truth were not before the belief of it B. This also is but your quarrel with singular men and not with the Churches unless you wrong them Their common Doctrine is that no man
Which privation is the greatest punishment here 2. They are hereupon left to the power of their own Corruption which desertion is a grievous punishment 3. They have pain and sorrow 4. And they die And if they have all this suffering here it is unlikely that they are wholly free hereafter if not pardoned Because 1. They have immortal Souls that are capable 2. And future as well as temporal death or misery is the wages of sin And that their suffering is for sin is undoubted from Rom. 5 c. And the Pelagians scarce deny but that Adam's sin caused it And if it be proved that they have moral pravity or sin of their own then it is for their own sin And if so it is their own punishment All the doubt then is Whether all Infants are forgiven And for that 1. We see that the temporal punishment is not forgiven them 2. We see as soon as they come to action that to many at least the foresaid penal desertion and privation of the Spirit of Sanctification is not forgiven them And 3. Without holiness none can see God 4. They that affirm it must prove it which they neither do nor can do There is no word of Scripture which telleth it us How then should that be part of our Faith which is no part of Gods Word If you say that Christ being the second Adam saveth the World from all the sin and misery brought on them by the first Adam I answer 1. Conditionally he doth He hath purchased Salvation to be given men on the terms of the Covenant of Grace and all that perform the Conditions shall have Salvation But 2. His bare Sacrifice it self without such application saveth none any further than to bring them under the terms of the said Covenant It is apparent by experience that Christ doth not undo all the hurt that Adam did immediately to all or any one in the world no not till death no nor till the Resurrection Sin and misery is still upon us Infants shew as soon as they come to the use of reason that they were not brought to the Innocency that Adam had before the Fall You your selves distinguish the Impetration from the Application of Salvation as to the adult and the reason is the same as to Infants though the condition be not the same Shew us a promise of the Salvation of all Infants and we will believe it 5. Indeed they are saved conditionally as the adult are and the condition is expressed in Scripture That they be the Children of the Faithful dedicated to God The Parents and their Seed are in the same Covenant And this is all that God revealeth of them * Saith Twisse Cont. Corvin pag. 136. c. 2 De Infantibus infantia sua morientibus falsum est quod nobis obtrudit Neque enim dicimus ullos Infantes credentium foederatorum Dei in infantia decedentes ad exitium destinatos Sanctos enim eos pronunciat Apostolus Et una cum parentibus fidelibus in foedere Dei comprehenduntur But I doubt he befriendeth the Anabaptists more than he was aware of when he addeth Obsignant Sacramenta credentibus remissionem peccatorum vitam aeternam At Infantibus quoties administratur Baptismus non tam credentibus quam credituris obsignat promissiones istas Non credituris autem nihil obsignant If so then to them that die in Infancy or yet are Infants no pardon is delivered and sealed by Baptism which is not sound Of our guilt of nearer Parents Sin Let them that reject me in this hear Augustine in Enchirid. c. 46. Paâ—entum quoque peccatis parvulâ—â— obligari non solum primorum hominum sed etiam suorum de quibus ipsi nati sunt non improbabiliter dicitur Illa quippe divina sententia Râ—ddam peccata patrum in filios tenet hos utique antequam per regenerationem ad testamentum novum incipiant poenitere Reperiuntur plura peccata alia parentum quae etsi non ita possunt mutare naturam reatu tamen obligant filios nisi graâ—uita gratia miserecordia divina subveniat But whether God do also without a Promise save any of the Children of the Heathen World or of wicked Parents and how many and with what Salvation and also what degree of punishment they have in the life to come we take for unrevealed things which we are so far from making Articles of our Faith that we take it to be presumptuous arrogancy to dispute it and meddle with the Secrets of the Almighty The Papists themselves are not agreed whether Infants have only the poenam damni as shut out of Heaven or also poenam sensus Jansenius and many more yea most have written for the first and Petavius and others for the latter But secret things belong to God A. We cannot prove that all Infants are saved nor do we presume to tell you what Salvation it is that they shall have But we hope the best And I am glad to find that you take the Salvation of true Believers dying Infants to be sure by the same Covenant which pardoneth their Parents and that you do not peremptorily condemn all the rest B. You know that the Synod of Dort have said the same that I do of true Believers Children Art 1. Sect. 17. and the rest they meddle not with A. But I pray you tell me your thoughts Whether Infants themselves do perish for Adam's sin alone And what remedy is provided for them B. The whole tenor of the Scripture putteth me past doubt that Divines have strangely erred by over-looking the common Interest and Communion of all Parents and Children and appropriating our Original Guilt to Adam's sin alone But this requireth a larger Disputation by it self At present consider 1. That no Text of Scripture doth so appropriate it or make Adam only the Corrupter of our Natures But only maketh him the Original of our Guilt and Pravity as he was the Original of our Nature And so he only is the Original of our Death and Punishment 2. That the whole scope of Scripture containeth Promises and Penalties to Children with the Parents for and by the Parents sins more plainly than any was antecedently expressed of Adam's Posterity as his Yea the very Moral Law in the Second Commandment and in the Proclamation of Gods Name and Nature to Moses Exod. 34. 6 7. which nothing but prejudice and partiality can deny to be a valid proof of a secondary Birth sin derived to us And he that will read the Sacred History from the Curse on the Seed of Cain and Cham of the Case of Ishmael Esau Moab Amnon Sauls Grand-Children hanged and so on to Matth. 23. 38. On this Generation shall come all the righteous blood c. And His blood be on us and on our Children with all the Promises to the Seed of the Righteous only and Threatning to the Houses and Seed of the Wicked with the reason of Infant-Baptism it self 1
Cor. 7. Else were your Children unclean but now are they holy will soon be convinced that we are born under more guilt and punishment than what we derive from Adam 3. And even Adam's sin could not be or is not made ours immediately but as we derive it from our nearer Parents For our nature is no otherwise from him Why am I guilty of what Adam did but because I have a nature that was seminally in him And was it not proximately in my nearer Parents And can they convey their part of Adam's guilt and pravity to me and no other 4. And few sober men can deny but that the Children of some Gluttoâ—s Drunkards Fornicators c. derive extraordinary diseased and vitiously-inclined temperaments from their nearest Parents 5. And no peculiar reason can truly be given for our guilt or pravity from Adam which reacheth not to prove the derivation of the like from our nearer Parents save only 1. That Adam only was the Original 2. And in Adam we sinned under a Covenant that gave no pardon But now under a Covenant of Grace A. If this hold it will make easie the Doctrine of Original Sin which I confess to you that I have been inclined to doubt of by your Divines fastening all upon Gods Arbitrary Imputation rather than from the Childrens seminal in-being B. Doubtless they have much tempted Arminius Episcopius Arnoldus Corvinus Bishop Jer. Taylor and others to say so much against Original Sin as they have done by feigning an unproved arbitrary Covenant of God made with Adam and his Posterity which was no Law of Nature nor is made to any other since according to the change of the Covenant and by which God imputeth Adam's sin to us not because we were in his Loins for then it would extend to others but because it was his Will to do so As if it had been God and not Adam that defiled our Natures and made us all Sinners by an unnecessary if not ungrounded imputation By which also they have kept men from knowing their secondary birth-sin * Dr. Twisse frequently speaketh rightlier of the reason of the imputation of Adam's sin The Church of England prayeth not for the Dead but for the Living when it saith Remember not our Iniquity nor the Iniquity of our fore-Fathers And Nehemiah and Daniel were of the same mind A. But they say that then our Sins would increase as Ages go on and the last Age would be the most sinful B. Men will say almost any thing in their partiality while they look but on one side 1. The Covenant is now changed which men sin under Not so as not to extend to Children But it is now a pardoning Covenant And when the sins of the Fathers are pardoned to themselves they are pardoned to their Infants dedicated to God in the same Covenant even by the same 2. But where they are unpardoned there is a certain sort and degree of guilt increased on the Posterity and so no wonder if many Kingdoms of Heathens and Infidels feel it 3. But as it is not so much to have a nature essentially derived from Parents and to be seminally in them as it is to be a sinning person so the guilt proportionably differeth 4. And there is a pardon of some temporal punishments which God giveth some bad men in this life 5. And as to the punishment in Hell there is a certain degree that God will not exceed in hiâ— execution and that humane nature as it is is capable of no more And a man may have many Obligations to one and the same punishment as he may to the same duty and so a man is but hanged or put to death that hath deserved death seven times over among men For the ends of punishment set the bounds in all executions A. Well but what say you to the second The perishing state of Heathens B. II. I have said so much in the First Book that I must refer you thither Now only saying 1. That it is first to be considered what Law they are under 2. And next how they keep it 3. And then how they are judged by it 1. Undoubtedly all the World is now under the Law of Grace as to the essentials as it was made with all men in Adam and Noah though not as to the mutable part which bound men to expect a future Messiah That Law was made with all Mankind Gen. 3. 15. and is never repeâ—â—ed to Mankind The World was under it as to Obligation before Christ's Incarnation And Christ took no benefit from them which they had Clemens Alexandrinus and other Fathers erred not in this to much as some have charged them to do No man is now under the Covenant of Innocency alone 2. But how all men keep or break their proper Conditions of this Law of Grace as they are under it he that knoweth every man in the World and all their hearts and deeds can tell but not I. 3. And no doubt but they are judged as they kept or kept not the Conditions of that Law of Grace which they were under What difference there is 1. Between the Conditions to the Christian-Church now and the Jewish of old 2. And between the Conditions to the Jewish of old and the rest of the World I have shewed partly Lib. 1. But because many self-wise persons are bitterly censorious against me or any man that speaketh of any possibility of the Salvation of any save Jews formerly and Christians now I beseech the sober but to think of this one thing that Abraham thought there had been fifty righteous persons in Sodom even when God had told him how much worse it was than other places How many then proportionably did he think there was in Canaan and all other Countries of the World By which Abraham's judgment about the Salvation of others is manifest though he was mistaken in thinking Sodom better than it was And I desire to be a Son of Abraham and am not wiser than he A. This seemeth plain truth however the World take it And it is a wonder to me that any good man should take it ill to have so much of Gods certain Grace acknowledged But what say you to the third point The necessity hence of sinning B. I have answered it to you before I now add 1. It is not a physical necessity from the principles of Nature but a moral necessity from the pravity of Nature 2. It is not caused by God but by sinful man 3. It is not a necessity of committing all sin or every particular sin nor of omitting every duty 4. It is not an uncurable necessity 5. God of his free Grace hath provided the remedy himself and tendered it in some degrees to all 6. And he appointeth to all men certain duties and means to be used to this end which they can use 7. Therefore it is no necessity What cold comfort the Papists give to Infants and what insufficient Grace they have
Jesuites hold that Infants that have no remedy are excluded from Glory only for Original Sin B. And I think so do all Christians or should do 1. Of all the Adult there is no question Is there any that hath no sin of his own Or doth God forgive all their own sin to the damned And as to Infants 1. Wise men should not vex Gods Church with matters no more revealed 2. All the Scripture maketh them members as it were of their nearer Parents as well as of Adam and as I have proved to you threatneth them for nearer Parents sins even in the Second Commandment and Exod. 34. as well as for Adam's And all the world being Gen. 3. 15. brought under a Covenant or Law of Grace which conditionally pardoneth all sin the not-believing of the Parent is the cause of the non-liberation or not-pardoning of himself and his Infant How can you say then that they suffer only for Adam's sin 3. And sure their natural pollution is their own sin And the Church of England Art 9. thus describeth Original Sin Original Sin standeth not in the following of Adam as the Pelagians do vainly talk but it is the fault and corruption of the nature of every man that naturally is ingendred of the Off-spring of Adam whereby man is very far gone from Original Righteousness and is of his own nature inclined to evil So that the Flesh lusteth always contrary to the Spirit and therefore in every person born into this world it deserveth Gods Wrath and Damnation And this infection of Nature doth remain yea in them that are regenerated whereby the lust of the Flesh called in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which some do expound the Wisdom some Sensuality some the Affection some the Desire of the Flesh is not subject to the Law of God Though I think that Text Rom. 8. speak not of the Regenerate C. I include this Corruption when I speak of Adam's sin imputed And though the Article mention not this Imputation I suppose it was but through forgetfulness and not that they denied it as no part of Original Sin B. * Vid. Chamier Paustr at To. 3. l. 1. c. 2. 7 8. Contr Pigh Salmeron Pet. Mart. in Rom. 5. Placaeum in Thes Salmuriens Vol. 1. in Tractat. pecub defens de Imputatpeccati Adae who are less for the imput of Adam's sin than others e contra vid. And Rivet's enumeration of Writers for that imputation Defens Concil c. I have nothing to do with that and am no judge of other mens thoughts that are dead All that I desire you to observe is that all understanding Protestants agree that the sole Law of Innocency Obey perfectly and live is not the Law that God governeth the World or any in it by since the Covenant of Grace was made but all are under a Law of Mercy And therefore Parents and Children in and out of the Church are judged by that Law which they were under and not by the Law of Innocency alone without any remedying Law of Mercy THE Seventh Days Conference Between A. and B. Of SUFFICIENT and EFFECTUAL GRACE A. You have made us hitherto believe that the Controversies about Predestination and Redemption are all resolved into those of Free-will and Grace and if there be no difference here there can be none there Let us now then come to the core of the Controversie which is all The first Crimination 1. The Calvinists deny sufficient Grace * By sufficient Grace is meant that by which a man may be saved and without which he cannot in q. Vasqu in 1. Tho. q. 23. disp 97. c. 1. 1. Some say that to some men for former sin God penally denieth Grace sufficient for Faith and Repentance So Tostat in Mal. 4. q. 12. Greg. Armin. 1. d. 46. qu. unica Cajet in Joh. c. 19. Roffens Contr. Luther ar 26. Tapper in art 7. pag. 254. Henric. quodl 8. q. 5. 2. Others say that auxilium sufficiens is offered to all and denied to no man in this life how obdurate hower which Vasq in 1. Tho. q. 23. d. 98. c. 3. saith is the commoner Opinion of the Schools Ita Adrian in 4. q. 1. de poenit Sotus de nat gra c. 18. Driedo de Red. c. 3. 5. Vega in Conc. Trid. l. 13. c. 13 c. But Vasquez saith cap. 5. That ad poenitentiam ad fidem it is non omnibus momentis sed certis temporibus datum They commonly agree to Augustines words though none know just how God changeth Wills Certum est nos velle cum volumus sed ille facit ut velimus bonum Et certum est nos facere cum facimus sed ille facit ut faciamus praebendo vires efficacissimas De Grat. lib. arb l. c. 16. c. 17. Ut vâ—limus sine nobis operatur These words put his Expositors hard to it And Vasquez saith That ut is here put finally and the meaning is that to make us willing he giveth us without us his preventing or operating Grace or as Greg. his impulse And if it mean any more it cannot be true For doubtless man is the Agent or Willer when he willeth So li. 1. ad Simplician q. 2. Aliter Dâ—us praestat ut velimus aliter praestat quod voluerimus Ut velimus enim suum esse vâ—luit nostrum Suum vocando nostrum sequendo quod autem voluerimus solus praestat id est posse bene agere semper beate videre where the words also are obscure but Vasquez noteth that here the ut is not final as before and that Voluerimus is not preterpefect tense but the future tense as the following words explain it else he should contradict himself Et de Eccles dogm c. 21. Manet ad quâ—râ—ndam salutem â—rbitrii libertas sed admonentâ— prius Deo invitante ad salutem ut vel eligat vel sequatur Et initium salutis nostra Deo miserante habemus ut acquiescamus saluti-â—erae inspirationi nostra potestatis est and so make all men that are damned to suffer for meer Impossibilities having no Grace to enable them to escape Sin or Misery And consequently that Adam's sin only was avoidable for which all the World is cast into a necessity of sinning and none but a few elect ones have ever had so much as the possibility of any true remedy Yea many of them deny that Adam himself had sufficient Grace B. 1. The word Sufficient is sometimes taken for all that is any way needful and so it is that they commonly deny sufficiency of uneffectual Grace More Grace might have certainly produced the Effect A man is commonly said to have enough who needeth no more Now more is here useful needful desirable to the facilitating and ascertaining the event If you are not agreed with them in this why do you pray for more Grace and labour for more and take it to be a sign of
Grat. Univers p. 113. saith Sed non quemadmodum Pomificii alii qui eorum sententiam vel sequuntur vel interpolant nobis imponunt ita ut plane negemus sufficientis Gratiae phrasin posse usurpari aut dicamus nullam esse sufficientem ullo modo quae efficax non sit vel nullam esse efficacem quae ad conversionem salutem non sit efficax Id tantum dicimus non dari omnibus talem Gratiam sufficientem quae ita moveat omnium hominum voluntates ut sit in potestate electionis motioni aut obtemperare aut resâ—agari adeoque nullum esse qui per talem gratiam non possit ad salutem pervenire Deumque id velle omnibus intendere You see that he will own no more but the denial of a universal sufficient Grace for Salvation intended of God to all men And you your selves confess 1. That God intendeth not Salvation for all men unless conditionally if they believe and repent which from eternity he knew before he made them that they would not 2. And that all men have not sufficient Grace to Salvation no nor to believe but only to make them better and bring them nearer it and prepare them for it which some call Grace mediately sufficient to Salvation but that 's an improper Speech as long as for want of their Obedience they never attain to much that is absolutely necessary For my part I doubt not to assert 1. That no man in the World hath Grace sufficient for Salvation that is Glorification an hour before he dieth For he cannot be saved without more that is without the Grace of perseverance to the end But every believing Penitent hath Grace sufficient and effectual to give him a present Right to Salvation And 2. I add that there is no such thing as Grace sufficient to Salvation which is not effectual and doth not save Seeing all that persevere in holiness are saved and they that do not have not Grace sufficient that is necessary to Salvation 3. And I add that no man hath Grace sufficient to give him a Right to Christ and Pardon and Salvation which is not effectual and doth not procure it For every penitent true Believer hath that Right to Christ Pardon and Life And he that is not a penitent Believer hath not Grace sufficient to obtain that Right A. Yes if he have sufficient to help him to believe B. Not so unless he actually believe For is not Faith in act somewhat more than power to believe When you confess that men are damned that have the Power but not that have the Act. A. Yes but man causeth the Act oft when God hath given only the Power and necessary concurse to the production of the Act. B. Corvinus and others of you ordinarily confess that Faith it self is the Gift of God and that Faith is more than a power to believe And we denominate Gods Grace by the various effects Therefore I may say that a man that hath Grace sufficient to believe yet hath not Grace sufficient to Justification till he have 1. The Grace of Faith 2. And so the Grace of the moral donation of the Covenant which is the justifying pardoning Instrument A. You seem then to deny sufficient Grace your self B. I assert 1. That godly men have power or sufficient Grace to many acts of Faith Love and Duty which they never do 2. And that all men by common Grace or sufficient are able to do better than they do in preparation for special Grace 3. And that they are bound so to do in order to their Salvation And so that all men have some helps and Grace in its kind sufficient to enable them to seek Salvation and that God will not forsake them till they forsake him * But I am not able to prove what Vasqu asserteth in 1. Tho. q. 23. disp 98. c. 4. Nunquam occurrere nobis obligationem praecepti aut tentationem sine sufficienti cogitatione qua hanc vincere illud observare possimus Loquor de praeceptâ— affirmativâ— cui non solum tempuâ— adest quo solet obligare sed etiam cujus obligatio memoriae occurrit And he addeth a great untruth Nam si nulla illius in mentem subiret cogitatio nulla nobis ejus obligatio inâ—umberet unless by sufficient Grace he meant meer natural power and by cogitation the natural power of cogitation this is odious As if a man were bound by no. Law of God or Man if he could but make himself ignorant contemptuous and wicked enough never so much as to think of iâ— A. But doth not your Church of England Art 13. say Works done before the Grace of Christ and the Inspiration of his Spirit are not pleasant to God forasmuch as they spring noâ— of Faith in Jesu Christ neither do they make men meet to receive Grace or as the School Authors say deserve Grace of congruity yea rather for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done we doubt not but they have the nature of sin B. This Article is intended against merit of congruity in the works of wicked men And it is certain that all their works are sin in that they are in defectiveness of ends and manner and in perverseness the violations of the Law of God as to pray to God only to be saved from Hell without love to God and Holiness or hatred of Sin to give Alms for the same ends c. where the love of God the true end is left out the action must needs be sin But we say not that it is only sin or totally sin It is good and pleasing to God secundum quid though not simpliciter And such Actions as are sin by deficiency may have a tendeney to better Actions and so to Salvation by that good that is in them He that in meer love to his own Soul will pray hear meditate avoid sin c. is in a likelier way to Grace and Life than he that will do none of this And 2. The Authors of the Artiâ—le by merit of congruity meant somewhat more than preparation for Conversion For no English Divines I think have denied that 3. And by Works done they meant such as the Papists taught men too much to trust in as giving Alms building Hospitals going on Pilgrimages c. which went under the notion of Sacrifices and Oblations under the old Law when God said He abhorâ—d the Sacrifice of the Wicked and bid them be readier to hear than to offer the Sacrifice of Fools But it is not I think Soul-humbling Repentance Confession begging for Grace considering their Ways hearing the Word c. though but such as preparatory Grace may do which they meant by Works 4. And that is not done without Grace and the Spirit of Christ which is done but by his common Grace And yet I could wish the Article had been better worded But if you will see the consent of an
to sin against 5. You will make Conscience justifie the Wicked and condemn Gods Judgments in Hell instead of justifying God and accusing themselves 6. You must accordingly conclude that you never shewed mercy to Child Neighbour or any but the Elect your self because it was all to end in misery or else that you were to them more merciful than God 7. When man is made in Gods Image and we must be holy and merciful as our heavenly Father is you set all men such a pattern of mercy and justice as you would be loth your Prince or Parent should imitate 8. You expose Christ's most compassionate tears to reproach when Luke 19. he lookt on Jerusalem and wept over it as having had a day of mercy and when Matth. 23. he saith How oft would I have gathered thee as a Hen gathereth her Chickâ—ns under her wings and ye would not 9. You teach all Gods Children in the World to acknowledge no mercy nor be thankful for any till they are sure that they are Elect. And how few have that assurance 10. You injure the Lord Jesus and his Covenant of Grace while you say that a conditional Gift of Christ and Life Pardon and Salvation even if they will but accept it is no mercy to any that refuse it nor yet the blood that purchased it as such 11. You measure and denominate Gods great Mercies according to mans vile abuse As if it were no mercy what tendency soever in it self it had to their Salvation unless they accept it and use it well or if they reject it 12. You are singular from almost all the Churches of Christ in the World Contrary to the judgment of the ancient Churches and of all present Chuâ—ches of Greeks Abassines Arminians Papists or Protestants expresly contrary to the Synod of Dort and the particular suffrages of our British Divines there except a very few men that by the heat of perverse Disputings against Amyraldus the Arminians c. have been carried into such extreams C. What mercy is it to a man to have Pleasure here a while and Torment in Hell for ever yea to have Christ and Life offered him to make him more unexcusable and miserable B. In all this Discourse it is not the nature of the mercy in it self that you deny but Gods merciful Intents It is your mis-apprehensions about Predestination which you are vending all this while and there is the Core of your mistake which we have sufficiently spoken to already You talk as if God decreed men to Sin to reject Christ to abuse Mercies to Impenitency and consequently to Hell for so doing which is all false God decreed no man to these or any other sin nor to any punishment but as for sin by them committed against his holy Law which he foresaw but willed not Yea God decreed to set open the door of Grace to Sinners and to tender them mercy when they deserved misery and to bring Life to the acceptance or refusal of their own Wills and to intreat and importune them to accept it His end in giving them mercy is not to make them miserable though consequently he will their misery for their sin Now you feign in your own erronious Imagination that God first decreeth mens sin and damnation and then giveth them all which we call Mercies as a means thereto and then denominate them as bad as you have feigned them to be by such aâ— imagination And you conceive of Gods Decree as that which doth transire in praeteritum is past and gone when to God all time is nothing but eternity is one everlasting instant C. When you have talkt all that you can for such kind of Mercy it will not satisfie a mans understanding who believeth that most of the world shall be damned and that God fore-knew this from eternity and would not prevent it when he easily could Mercy that ends in Hell is sad mercy He will have mercy on whom he will have mercy B. Even under the terrible Law at Mount Sinai God proclaimeth his Name and Nature As gracious and abundant in Mercy This Glory of his which he shewed to Moses is more gloriously shewed to the World in Christ And this you study perversly to obscure And when you have contracted Salvation it self out of our own brain into a narrower compass than God in Scripture doth who in every Nation accepteth them that fear him and work Righteousness then you devise false Decrees and Intents and father them on God to obscure the rest And what do you by this but seek to render God as little comely to his Creatures as you can And if the love of God be Holiness and Happiness If his Amiableness be his Goodness even Himself If it be Christ's great Work to reveal God in his Goodness and by Faith to kindle holy Love And if it be the Devils malignity and work in the World to counterwork Christ and represent God as unlovely judge whether you serve Christ or Satan and whether it be not his chief work of enmity against God that you carry on But that you may have the true prospect of Gods goodness in all this you must remember that Gods Work as Creator goeth before his Work of Government and his Work of Government in general before his Work of our Redemption and his Work of Redemption and the Law of Grace before mens sin and Judgment And 1. If God that hath diversified all lower Creatures as we see did please in the Creation to make a rank of free-intellectual Creatures here on Earth with power and help sufficient to attain to an Angelical Glory if they would not wilfully prefer the way of misery is there any want of goodness in making such a World Are they not nobler than Bruits that have no such hope though not than Angels that are confirmed 2. And if he take pleasure having made such an Intellectual free Agent to rule him morally by Laws according to his nature and to take it for his own great work to be his King or Rector in this sapiential way That which much deludeth men in this and wrongeth God is that these foundations in Nature are not well considered The issue of all the Atheists and discontented Unbelievers Accusations of God is but this That he made man but man and nothing higher A man is a mutable Intellectual free Agent whose duty and happiness is left much to his own choosing or refusing And being so made he is accordingly to be governed And as God sheweth his greatness of Power as Creator and Actor of the universal frame of Nature so he hath chosen eminently to shew his Regent Wisdom in his * Cusp Peucer Hist Carcerum against the Luthâ—rans pag. 719. An in homine ocioso nihil agente habenteque se pure passive aut sicut truncus ad coactionem necessiâ—atis stoicae afflatusve an abaptistici sicut Flaciani somniarunt aut velut brutum mutatione conversione hominis physica aut
to Gods Providence But whether it will reconcile our own differences I doubt How is that Grace sufficient to all men for Salvation which never telleth most of a Christ or of Salvation at all * Jansen de Grat. Christi l. 2. c. 27. Non quaevis Gratia ad quosvis effectus inferendos sufficit ut quidam imaginati sunt sed potestates operationum difficultati attemperandâ— sunt B. You mistake your Adversaries They hold not that all men have sufficient Grace to Salvation But sufficient to help them nearer to Salvation I tell you again no Saint hath Grace sufficient to his full Salvation till he is fully saved Otherwise what need he any more Some indeed call it mediately sufficient to Salvation but that 's but lis de nomine C. If it be sufficient what need they any more to that which it is said sufficient for And yet more would do that which is not done But no man should desire more than is sufficient B. All this is a Game at words * Blank de dist Grat. c Thes 77. Quod Thomistae recentiores affirmant illos in quibus gratia non est efficax ad conversionem nihilo minus gratiam sufficientem ad â—am haberâ— id vero Reformati cun Jansenio negant mâ—ra logomachia est siquidem c. By Sufficient they mean only necessary help without which the act cannot be done and with which it can and may be done They do not mean all that is needful ad certâ— esse or ad melius esse Therefore I use rather to call it All necessary help or Grace ad esse C. I pray you yet make it plainer to me what that necessary or sufficient Grace is that we may judge of it B. Grace is taken either for the Favour of God or for his Gifts And so either for free Gifts without merit in point of commutative Justice And so all that God giveth to any Creature must needs be Grace Or else for that which is given contrary to commerit of evil And so all is Grace which is given to Sinners Grace is either 1. Efficient-principal 2. Efficient less-principal 3. Objective 4. Or subjective which is the effect I. Grace as the principal efficient is either Gods meer Benevolence or Will to give 2. Or his Act of Collation as ex parte agentis Both these are really one and God himself though differently denominated and diversly conceived of by us God operateth per essentiam II. Grace as the less principal efficient is all those means which have an Aptitude to effect and so are apt to be efficients or actually do so As Christ the Gospel the Ministry outward Mercies Afflictions c. III. Objective Grace is those means which as Objects are appointed for man himself to act upon towards his own Salvation As a Christ to be believed in and accepted An offered Glory a certain Promise c. IV. * The School-men have so many sorts of Grace as confoundeth themselves when they have agreed partly 1. Of exciting Grace 2. And of infused habits 3. And of Concurse 4. They are all to pieces about Gratia adjuvans per modum principii what It is Malderus tells us of four Opinions in 12. q 111. a. 3. dub 2. 1. That it is nothing but the infused Habit it self 2. That it is but gracia excitans 3. That it is quaedam qualitas infusa transiens cum ipso actu 4. That God himself immediately supplieth the absence of a habit and defect of power to acts supernatural He accounteth the case too difficult to be confident in but inclineth to this that this concomitant Grace giving power to supernatural acts before the habits called by them Adjuvant Grace is quasi formalis terminus seu effectus gratia excitantis praevenientis secundum rem non differre Yet excitation is it self taken for an effect and this effecteth this power in question But in the justified he saith the Holy Ghost besides habits and powers dwelleth Will you lay any great stress on such nicities as these past humane reach and so confessed by the subtilest Contenders Per peccatum non miunitur inclinatio naturalis ad bonum per subtractionem sed per oppositionem impedimenti quod neque tollit neque minuit radicem inclinationis cum enim peccatum non diminuat ipsam naturam rationalem minuere non potest radicem naturalis inclinationis ad bonum quae identificatur cum natura solum ergo minuitur bujusmodi inclinatio ex parte termini quatenus viz. per peccatum pâ—nitur impedimentum pertingendi ad terminum unde quamtumvis in inâ—initum multiplicantur peccata non potest totaliter destrui inclinatio naturalis ad bonum rationis Alvar. de Aux li. 6. disp 45. p. 210. Ita Aquin. 12. q. 85. a. 2. ad â— 1. p. q. 48. ar 4. ad 3. Peucer Histor Carcer reproveth the Lutherans Concordia 2. quod non distinguunt inter vocationem generalem seu universalem communem omnibus vocationem efficacem pag. 724. Subjective Grace is that effect which is wrought on mans Soul as the beginning of his recovery or healing and having a tendency to more C. Now tell us which of these it is that is sufficient B. I. Undoubtedly there is no insufficiency in God All that he willeth to do he doth And if he will no more his Will is not to be called insufficient as to more but null as to that Object And we affirm no other proper Will of God but such as is fulfilled II. Gods means which wicked men enjoy are the same that the godly enjoy and are sufficient ex parte sui but not ex omni parte that is for as much as concerneth their own Office So Christ's antecedent Preparations his Satisfaction and Merits are sufficient The Covenant of Grace is sufficient The preaching of the Gospel is sufficient in its kind c. III. The objective Grace is sufficient that is God as he is to be believed in and loved revealed in the Word and in his Works Christ to be believed in the Precepts to be obeyed the Promise to be trusted c. And though it be doubtful to many whether Amyraldus and his Fellows were in the right that thought that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and other objective Grace be qua objective sufficient to all Heathens for Salvation yet none can doubt but it is in suo genere sufficient to all those good and holy acts which those persons may immediately exercise about them And indeed he that loveth God but as the light of Nature hath taught Heathens or may teach men that he should be loved if he be damned must be a damned Saint in the love of God But who do so love him is another question IV. Subjective Grace is either Power Act or Disposition or Habit. 1. This Power is the very thing precisely which they meant by necessary or sufficient Grace All men have true power to draw
proportion of gracious means * Protestant Divines do commonly conjoyn the operation of the Spirit and Word as well as Papists and in some cases more Thom. docet q. 22. de Ver. a. 8. Deum inclinare Voluntatem ad aliquid appâ—tendum eam â—fficaciter physice praedeterminando non solum immediate sed etiam mediate aliqua entitate recepta in voluntate ex mente D. Tho. Deus movet omâ—â—s causas secundas eas applâ—â—a ' ad suas operatioâ—â— ita ut etiam quando â—â—â—â—â—t voluntatem aliquid â—â—â—imit in illam per moâ—â—â— transeuntis Alvaâ—ez de Aux disp 23. p. 114. and helps than to others but leaveth them under the common helps which convert the more prepared Souls Not that God always doth so For oft times to his Elect he doth as he did by Paul or the Eunuch vouchsafe them extraordinary means For as a Benefactor he is free and may do with his own as he list and may make Vessels of Mercy and Honour of them that deserved worst And the case of the Tyrians and Sidonians compared with theirs of Capernaum and Bethsaida doth prove that less means are proportionable to some as being less ill-disposed when greater to others may be uneffectual III. And then as to objective Grace it being the same God the same Heaven the same Christ and the same Promise which is set before all that have the Gospel this cannot be the Controversie Though the revealing means be divers with many so is not the Object nor the Means to all IV. All that remaineth then to be questioned is the Effect which is subjective Grace whether that Grace in one man which is but sufficient be efficient in another or in the same man at several times And here by this subjective Grace is meant either 1. The vis impressa 2. Or the Power 3. Or the Act produced 4. Or the Disposition or Habit. The two latter are shut out of the question which is not whether the Act or Habit be sufficient and effectual but whether the Grace be so that is to cause them Whether this vis impressa be always caused by means with Gods Power set home as the impress of a Signature by the Arm and Seal or be caused immediately by God without any proper means the word being but a Concomitant and not mediate Operator is made a Controversie by some But he that well considereth the Scripture here abouts and the experience of man will be likelier to think that it is God by means that ordinarily maketh the impress on the Soul and that the same impress is the effect of both though extraordinarily God can do without means For 1. It is most likely that God should work on man most agreeably to his nature and to his subject state under God his Governor 2. And Christ himself as our Teacher and Example and all his Gospel are appointed to this use 3. The Ministry and Ordinances are appointed to the same end And Ministers commanded to fit their teaching to that end 4. No man can prove that ever any came to actual Knowledge Faith or Love but by some means Experience telleth Gods Servants that he worketh by them 5. The most apt and powerful usually have best success and those prosper most in Grace that use means best and those speed worst that use them least 6. God strictly commandeth the use of the means as means for that end that his Grace may be wrought by them 7. God promiseth his blessing on the means Act. 26. 17 18. 1 send thee to open their eyes c. Rom. 1. 16. The Gospel is the Power of God to Salvation 2 Tim. 4. 16. Thou shalt save thy self and them that hear thee Jam. 6. last He that converteth a Sinner saveth a Soul from death c. 8. When God forsaketh a Nation by taking away the means he usually forsaketh them as to further Grace 9. The Devil seemeth to know this by his earnest opposition to a holy powerful Ministry and other means throughout the World so that we may say with Cypriam Epist. 69. ad Pupian Ut etiam qui non credebant Deo Episcopum Constitâ—enti vel Diabâ—lo credebant Episcopum proscribenti But whether it be by means or not it must be somewhat different from Gods own Essence which is imprinted or communicated And to get a formal conception of it what it is if it be not the Power Disposition Act or Habit is past mans reach Whatsoever it is this is certain 1. That God doth not give an Act as a thing pre-existent but giving Faith is but causing us to believe or do that act our selves which was none till we performed it 2. That quoad effectum disposed Power and Act also are more than Power and Disposition without the act 3. Undoubtedly Dr. Fairfax Of the Bulk c. of the World pag. 5. 6 7 c. Though God be the Maker of every Being that is physicaly so it follows not that he is so of every Being that is morally so It is enough that God is the Maker of the Power to do evil which being good may spring from him c. All that God doth towards sin is to leave us to our selves to bring it forth if we will and instead of driving on to it as a fellow-helper or procatarktick cause he draws from it and towards the good with unspeakable endearments of wooing and drives from it by forbidding the Evil with all that earnestness of threatning which may beget in man the utmostness of dread Nor is he any nearer the physical cause of it than to give that good power which is not the cause at all as it looks towards him for by giving this power he is at the same time the evil is done as much the cause of the good that is not done therefore he is not the cause at all Besides this power is not only good but also needful For though the the perfection of the Will in the next life will not be in a wavering alike towards Good and Evil but only in a selfwillingness to Good yet in this life I think it mainly does and must For this is a life of doing or believing as it looks on to reward in that to come and that is a life of rewarding as it looks back to doing or believing here c. Hence we may answer the old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For â—s sin is a moral thing c. unbounded Wisdom and Goodness having â—aid out endless happiness as a reward for Obedience and endless wretchedness as punishment for sin without this Obedience there could be no Heaven without Sin no Hell And without a power not to do in both there could be neither So then that God may have leave to make man happy for holiness man must needs have power to make himself wretched for sin That evil should always flow from evil in a chain of Breeders is a great misunderstanding Object Then man may
so doing it was not a Will but bruitish Appetite B. The Understanding said truly It is pleasant and Appetible and so the Will in its initial desire sinned not But that it looked no further and excited not the Intellect to remember and it self to desire more to please God was by an abuse of its power and liberty of self-determining and so the sensible good prevailed because the superior good was forgotten and neglected And the Will may thus suspend its act after an intellectual perception without being bruitish though it so â—ar disobey Reason its guide C. These things are exceeding intricate and difficult for all that you say B. They are so * The same I say of objective and intellectual necessitation of the Will saith H. Kipping truly Inst Philos Nat. li. 9. c. 10. pag. 416. Errant Scholae reformatâ— doctores qui asserunt voluntatem ad actum suum determinari a judicio intellectus ita ut voluntatic libertas nulla sit constricta vero sit ad intellectus ductum a quo semper determinatur Joh. Camero Mart. Schogkius Hornbeck Maccovius Heerbord Hos prolixe bene refellit Episcopius But forget not that the great difficulty is between us and the Hobbists or Infidels and Fatists and not between the true Christians among themselves as to our present Controversies I confess that the confuting of their Opinion that all Volitions are necessitated unavoidably by Gods Operation is a far harder work than the reconciling of the Lutherans and Calvinists who go upon no such Principles Tell me Is this it that you would come to or not If you once perswade me that God causeth all sinful Volitions as necessarily as he causeth a Tree to grow and that man can no more avoid them and that liberty of Will signifieth no more than velle or not nolens velle and so that God is the prime irresistible cause of all Sin as much as of all Good so far as it is capable of a Cause I must needs next believe 1. That God hateth not his own Work yea that he loveth it 2. That he hateth no man for it 3. That moral Good and Evil is nothing in man but such as obeying or disobeying proportionably in a Horse or Dog 4. Yea far less because man doth â—ut as my pen which writeth as I move it in respect to God But so is not my Horse or Dog to me 5. And how then to judge of all the Scripture the Ministry of the Incarnation and Death of Christ of the Duties of a Christian life of Hell c. it 's easie to perceive viz. That as God differenceth Men and Toads meerly because he will do so even so doth he the good and the bad in the World and that Sin is no evil any way but to our selves and that God is as much the cause of it as of Sickness and is as well pleased with the Worlds Infidelity and Impiety as with the Churches Sanctity And that he will no otherwise damn men for Sin than erbitarily to make such baser than others as Dogs are than men Benedictus Spinosa hath given you the Consectaries more at large O how heartlesly should I preach and pray how carelesly should I live if once you brought me to this Opinion that all sin is the unresistible Work of God so far as it is a work as much as holiness is C. If there be no middle between Free-will and this Impiety as I confess I cannot disprove your Consectaries it's time for us to turn our studies against the common Enemies of all Religion and Morality instead of contending with one another specially when they have so much to say B. And do you think they do well and friendly by the Church who take these mens part and own their Cause in the foundation and entangle poor Souls in such intricate difficulties when we that know not the least of Gods Creatures or the mysteries of any of his Works do little know all the quick and intricate actions of our own Souls In a word man hath more power to good than he useth and that power is called sufficient or necessary Grace to the act though there be many difficulties which no one of either side can resolve The second Crimination C. But I fear many of them with Pelagius by GRACE do mean nothing So Dr. Twisse frequently repeateth that meeâ— posse credere is but Nature and not Grace because it is equally a posse non credere But 1. A natural power reprieved by Grace and preserved and given for gracious ends 2. And many and great helps of Grace to excite and rectifie it may be called an effect of Grace but Nature it self at least when they speak of the Heathens who they say have some kind of Grace B. Turn your eyes a little from the name of Pelagius and every thing else that useth to blind Disputers with prejudice and partiality and then answer me these following questions Quest. 1. Do you think that Mercy contrary to sinful Commerit is not properly Grace C. I confess it is B. Quest. 2. Is not the whole frame of Humane Nature and our Utensils put into the hand and power of Christ the Redeemer to be managed by him to his Mediatory ends Joh. 17. 2. Math. 28. 19 20. Joh. 13. 3. Ephes 1. 22 23. Phil. 2. 7 8 9 10 11 12. For this end he died rose and revived that he might be Lord both of the Dead and Living Rom. 14. 9. Joh. 5. 22 23 24. The Father judgeth no man but hath committed all Judgment to the Son c. And is not the very reprieval of the World from deserved ruine and misery so many thousand years an Act of Grace and Nature now continued used and improved by Grace and so far may be said to be of Grace C. This is plain truth and must not be denied B. Quest 3. Is it not undeserved Mercy to all Mankind that ever since Adam's Sentence Gen. 3. 15. they are all ruled by a Law of Grace and not the Law of Innocency alone and by that Law of Grace must all be judged C. If you before evinced that any thing is truly mercy to the Reprobate I must confess it But I have not before so much thought of this what Law the World is under as the case deserveth But I remember Camero in the fragments of his dispute with Courcellaeus taken by Testardus though he deny not that the Covenant of Grace was made with all mankind in Adam and Noah yet saith That by or for their nearer Parents sins the Infants of Infidels are out of that Covenant B. 1. It 's well you note that it is not only Augustine Enchir. ad Laâ—rent and I that are for the Imputation of nearer Parents sin in some Vid. Pet. Martyr in Rom. 5. confessing Augustine's judgment sort as well as Adam's 2. He speaketh there of the Covenant as mutual and not as a Law or an offered Covenant or Divine
Disposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which Grotius speaketh at large in his Preface to Annotat. in Evang. And so I say the same as Camero which is but this that though it be a Law or offered Covenant of Grace and not the sole Law of Innocency which the whole World are now under as Subjects to be ruled and judged by it Yet no Parent that consenteth not hath any right to the promised benefits nor is in it as a mutual Covenant unless as any counterfeiting consent may oblige themselves nor are the Children of such Parents any true Heirs of the said promised benefits for the sake of remote Ancestors as long as their nearest Parents are Infidels This is all that Camero there maintaineth Quest 3. Are not all the teachings helps means time and innunerable Mercies which Heathens and Infields have contrary to their Commerits and consequently truly Grace * Le Blank tells you that Polanus distinguisheth Grace into natural and supernatural Thes 27. dist Grat. 2. C. They are at best but common Grace But I am loth to grant that Nature is so much if I could deny it B. I am sorry that unwillingness and willingness can do so much with you about these matters But I pray tell me Quest. 4. What is it that you mean by Nature C. I mean that fixed order of being and operation which God put all things in at their Creations at the beginning B. You have done as the Incendiaries of the Church have done from the beginning of contentious Disputes you have chosen a word unexplained Media aâ—tem destinatâ— propria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sunt verbum et spiritus Quibus etiam jungi possunt bona mala hujus animalis vitae quibus Deus ad eundem finem utitur Armin. Disput Privat Thes 41. Sect. 8. to make a maâ—ter of reproach of which hath so many significations and is so uncertainly used that Philosophers themselves even in their greatest accurateness know not what to fix upon though there are few words which they are more concerned to be agreed in if they could But where the thing is unknown no wonder if there be discord about the Name Fortun Licetue alone de natura primo moveâ—te may suffice to evince this But I perceive you take not Nature for Principium motus et quietis c. nor for the essence of things matter or form or both nor with Scotus de potentia for the passive power nor in other senses usually intended by various Writers But for the created status ordo rerum and the motus thereby alone caused And if this he NATURE with you you cast your self into inextricable difficulties to know what you say For 1. We are very much ignorant of second Causes and their concatenation and co-operations who ever took in pieces this great Engine of the Universe as men do a Clock or Watch to find out the form and compagination of each part or ever understood it 2. Who can tell certainly what is done by this compagination of Causes and Author fidei est spirituâ— sanctus quem filius mittiâ— a patre tanquam advocatum vicarium suum qui ipsiuâ— causam in mundâ— contra mundum agatâ— Instrumentum est evangelium seu verbum fidei continens sensum de Deo Christo quem spiritus intellectui proponit persuadet Arminius Disput Privat Thes 44. Sect. 6. co-operation according to its primitive state who knoweth not the whole Engine but some parts alone not so much as one sand is to the whole Earth seeing that it is the whole that co-operateth to the fore-described motions And 3. Who knoweth how far God hath fixed the state and operation of second Causes and how far he is pleased to alter them from their first state and course of motion or daily doth it 4. And who is so well acquainted with the state of the Universe in the Creation and the state of it now as to be able to make an acâ—â—rate comparison and tell whether or how much it is since then altered or whether all things continue just as in the beginning 5. Yea it is certain that a great alteration was made both on mans Soul and Body and on the Earth by the sin of Adam and the Curse 6. And it is certain that God maketh much use of the Ministry of free Agents in the affairs of the World even of Angels Devils and Men whose voluntary contingent acts and consequently their effects go not as a Watch or Clâ—â—k in one constant natural course of motion How then can you tell here what is natural as to a great part of the changes upon man C. You would make me believe that WORDS are so defectiâ—â— as to delude us and befool us all and that nothing men say can be understood Doth not all the World distinguish between Nature and Grace B. The vanity of speculative Sciences and the misery of Mankind thereby and the reason of Paul's contempt of the Philosophy then predicated and the cause of all our love-killing Contentions cannot be Sine hoc speciali auxilid Gratiae nihil boni posse ab ulla creatura rationalâ—â—eri est certissâ—â—um â—ed an hoc auxilium Gratiae sit voluntatis Diviâ—â— volentis illud absolute communicare per illud communicaâ—â—â— absolute bonum â—pâ—rari est in controversia poâ—itum Thealogis nec immerito cum vox absolute in Scripturis non inveâ—iatur c. Armin. exam Perkins de praed Sect. 6. pag. 501. Among many others read but Vasquâ—z in 1 Tho. Pet. a S. Joseph de Auxil divin in Thes Univers spec moral Ruiz Bellarmin de Auxil And you may see how much supernaturality the Papists stand for Indeed for more thâ—â— the Protestants in some cases as in asserting the supernaturality of Adam's first Righteousness c. And many of the Schoâ—â—men speak higher of Infusion than most Protestans so that this aâ—tiâ—â— will not prove the difference readilier assigned than by charging them on the lamentable defectiveness and ambiguity of words next to the darkness of Humane Intellect But the distinguishing of Nature and Grace is needful but must be rightly understood 1. Principally as Nature signifieth the constitution of man and all things as made by their Creator and GRACE the medela or medicinal Operation of God by which he recovereth the lapsed sinful and cursed World 2. And as any Motus Action or Change can be said to be from the first natural Principles of Action so far they may be called natural If from Nature alone they are only natural But as they come from recovering Grace they are gracious If from Grace alone without Nature they are only gracious whether there be any such or any but Miracles I pass by But as they are by and from Nature either sanctified or ordered and over-ruled by Grace so they are both natural and gracious in several respects C. This seemeth plain and true
a sweet connatural manner like as an effectual perswader doth not forcing the Will but preserving its liberty and as the Arminians speak not irresistibly or by necessitation leaving the act to be contingent 4. But withal it is most certain that God operateth on the Mind and Will it self and not on the Preacher of the Word only 5. But no mortal man knoweth how nor is able to comprehend his way of operation 11. But next tell me what you mean by Physical which is the other branch of your distinction C. What should I mean but Natural by Real Contact attingency or influx on the Recipient B. 1. God is above Nature and not included in your Physicks How then do you call his operations Physical ex parte agentis No Physicks pretend to treat of God 2. Contact and proper attingency belongeth to Bodies But God is not a Body and therefore the Contact or Influx by which he operateth is utterly unknown to mortal man any farther than that it is by his Essence 3. God is immense and essentially every where and therefore such a Metaphysical Attingency or Contact as may be spoken of him he hath to all things in the world and therefore must do all that he any way doth in such attingency C. Explain it and resolve it your self if you like not my Explication B. Gods operations are called Physical or Moral 1. In regard of God the Agent 2. In regard of the means or second causes 3. Or in respect of the effect I. In respect of God the Agent they are not properly either Physical or Moral but transcendently they are above both for they are his Essence The Papists who are most for meer moral operations in this Controversie yet have such strange opinions about the physical operations of Sacraments e. g. Baptism on Infants as that they make them to be instruments of Miracles the Miracle being first wrought upon them e. g. the water and then on the receiver Yea they seem to make God to operate miraculously with every Sacrament and Will which is the transcendent Head of all operations and causes Physical and Moral II. As to the Means or second Causes those acts of God that have no such means or causes are not here concerned And as for all those that have such means no doubt but they are to be called both Physical and Moral for Morality is but Modality or Relation ex rerum ordine And all Order Mode and Relation is Alicujus entis ordo Modus Relatio And e. g. preaching the Gospel is such an act of a Physical and Moral Agent as is it self both Physical and Moral Man is quaedam natura and yet Intellectual and Free And his act is quid physicum in genere entis and yet quid morale in genere moris imputanda juxta lâ—egem morum III. And as to the Effect it is no doubt both quid physicum for Faith is actus realis and quid morale For it is morale bonum ita reputanda And will any Arminian deny any of this that understandeth words Where then is your difference in this C. But when you dispute about Pre-determination you can say it is not Physical what mean you by it then B. We marvail that men should say that God physically pre-determineth the Will to all acts of sin in the specifying circumstances when as he pre-determineth it not really to them at all either physically or morally So that it is here a Real efficient motion of God to the evil act which we deny C. And it is a Real efficient motion of God to the act of Faith and Repentance which we assert and mean by the word Physical B. And this your Adversaries will not deny and so you are in this agreed The fourth Crimination C. I doubt they hold not Faith to be infused but acquired whereas Arminius professeth Faith and Repentance Nisi Deo dante haberi non posse Exam. Perk. pag. 57. and that both of them are denied to the Reprobates by the Decree of Reprobation See his own words At Deus statuit Dâ—ereto reprobationis reprobis fidem poenitentiam non dare concedo lubens illam assumptionem sed recte intellectam Twisse against Hord p. 70. l. 1. Dr. Twisse sheweth the difference to be so great that an unjustified person may have an Acquired Faith about the same objects when yet only an Infused Faith will justifie B. 1. Tell not me what you Doubt but what you Prove unless you mean no more than to tell me of your injustice and uncharitableness I find the Jesuites and Lutherans commonly asserting an Infused Faith and I have met with few Arminians if any that deny it though the word be not so much in use with them 2. But because you that are the Accuser are supposed to understand what you speak against I pray help me to understand it Quest 1. What mean you by Acquired Faith C. That which we our selves get by our use of means and consideration B. Quest. 2. Is there any man in his wits that denieth Faith to be the effect of consideration Do you not think what and why you must believe and even believe in and by Thinking or Considering Do you believe and not think what or why C. No but it is by Infusion that we have those thoughts B. Infused Faith then is by Infused Thoughts Be it so but then it is not without Thoughts or Consideration But further Quest 3. Is there any Christian that denieth that Faith cometh by hearing and the use of the means which God hath appointed us I pray you hear Dr. Twisse against Hord pag. 169. God in his Covenant of Grace requireth obedience to salvation but of his Free Grace undertakes to regenerate them and work them to obedience But how agreeable to their rational natures that is by admonition instruction exhortation that is to work Faith and Repentance by exhorting and perswading them to repentance All this he performs by his Ministers Do you not believe that the Apostles were sent to open mens eyes and turn them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God Acts 26. 17 18. And that Ministers must The Schoolmen-men and even the Jesuites ordinarily profess the necessity of infused Grace yea many of them in a higher sense than many Protestants dare own Even Molina himself asserteth the supernaturarality of Grace thus Ut consensus liberi arbitrii Deo excitanti vocanti per gratiam praevenientem nihil in re sit qd non supernaturale quod non simul a Deo emaâ—et non solum tanquam ab allicâ—ente excitante invitante ad id arbitrinm sed etiam tanquam a co-operanee per auxilium gratiae And he pronounceth Anathema on them that affirm Consensum arbitrii nostri Deo excitanti vocanti per auxilium Gratiae praevenientis esse actum naturalem aut posse elici sine auxilio co-operatione ejusdem praevenientis Gratiae
never read that any mans damnation was any whit the more increased for not performing these acts And again page 170. It is true there is a Faith infused by the Spirit of God in regeneration But who ever said that any man was damned because he doth not believe with such a Faith As much as to say that non-regeneration is the meritorious cause of damnation C. I am amazed at this especially his supposing that no man ever said that which I thought no man of us had denied B. I would think that his meaning is that men are not condemned for want of Gods infusing act but their own believing act or for the privation of Infusion but for the privation of Faith or of Faith not quatenus infused but as they ought to have believed without infusion But he was not so wanting in accurateness but that he knew how to have exprest himself had that been his meaning And then I know not how his words will consist with this sense I never read that any mans damnation was the more increased for not performing these acts where changing their own hearts is one And whoever said that any man was damned because he did not believe with such a Faith Here it is the Faith as such which is supposed spoken of the privation whereof is not the meritorious cause of damnation And indeed though the power of this Faith would have been in us had there been no Sin or Saviour yet there would have been no obligation to believe in Christ as Mediator And therefore if the Law of Innocency had stood alone even the want of an acquired Faith in Christ would have been no sin But this is the unhappiness of such as must read Controversial Writings There is no end of searching after the Writers meaning But the thing it self I think is plain c. that only an effectual special Faith will save us and it is such a Faith of which Christ speaketh Mat. 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned though he believe with any other Faith whatsoever which he calleth acquired Perhaps this his opinion hath some dependance on what he saith before ibid. He punisheth the disobedient with eternal death True but according to what Covenant Not according to the Covenant of Grace that is only a Covenant for Salvation but according to the Covenant of the Law the Covenant of Works Woful error and confusion The Covenant of the Law is almost as bad a phrase as the Covenant of the Covenant 1. Gods Law of Innocency was a Law and Covenant in several respects 2. So was the Jewish Law which Paul meaneth by the Law of Works 3. So is the Christian Law of Christ and of Grace No man is now condemned by the Jewish Law of Works as such it being ceased and never did it bind the Gentile world The Law of Nature and of Innocency indeed condemneth the disobedient but the Law or Covenant of Christ or of Grace doth condemn them to much sorer punishment Luke 19. 27. Those mine enemies that would not I should reign c. Mark 16. 16. He that believeth not shall be damned Heb. 10. 29. Mat. 25. throughout But this confounding of the Covenants I must not here rectifie But yet I hope he meant only that men suffer not for want of Gods Regenerating Infusing Act but for want of their own act of Faith The fifth Crimination C. I find Dr. Twisse ibid. alibi saepe charging it on them as holding that Grace is given according to Works which is Pelagianism For they think that God looketh at some preparation in the Receiver and giveth it to some because they are prepared for it and denieth it to others because they are unprepared whereas it is not in him that willeth nor in him that runneth but in him that of his meer good pleasure sheweth mercy B. There is enough said of this after about differencing and effectual Grace But if we must say more I ask you Quest. 1. Do you by this phrase according to Works mean to urge the Scripture that speaketh in that phrase in its proper sense or do you Vulgatum illud facientâ— quod in se est Deus non denegat Gratiam intelligitur de faciente â—â— gratia auxilie Pet. â— S. Joseph Thes Univers de auxil pag. 83. Idem pag. 90. Nequidem ipsius Christi opera fuerunt actu meretoria citra promissiâ—nem Dei usi ex se essent valoris inâ—â—â—iti which needeth explication only use the phrase in some other sense of your own C. I use Scripture phrase in Scripture sense because I rest on its Authority B. Quest 2. Are we not also saved without Works in Scripture sense And would it be contrary to Paul to say we that we are saved by Works yea or according to them in that sense that he speaketh of them See James 2. 14 c. Tit. 3. 5. Ephes 2. 5 8 9. Gal. 3. 2. 5. 10. Acts 15. 11. c. and 16. 31. Rom. 5. 10 And yet saved according to Works in another sense James 2. 14 c. Phil. 2. 12. Gal. 6. 4. Rom. 20. 12 13. 2 Cor. 5. 10. C. In several senses of Works we deny it not B. Quest 3. At least you will grant that we are not justified by Works and yet that we are justified by Faith yea in another sense by Works Quest 4. Is not believing and repenting in order to Justification and all holy obedience in order to Salvation as truly opâ—â— a work and in a far nobler sense than preparation for Faith is C. That cannot be denied B. Then you cannot affirm that the phrase not according to Workâ— which excludeth not Faith Repentance holy Obedience to justification and salvation doth intend the exclusion of all preparation in order to Conversion or Faith in Christ when by Works excluded it meaneth the same thing or sort in all C. But saith Dr. Twisse ibid. page 154. Pardon and Salvation God doth confirm only on condition of Faith and Repentance But â—â— for Faith and Repentance doth God confer them conditionally also If so whatsoever be the condition let them look to it how they can avoid the making of Grace to wit the Grace of Faith and Repentance to be given according to Works B. I know he frequently saith the same But 1. I speak now only of the sense of that Scripture and say that this goeth upon a most false and dangerous supposition that Justification and Salvation are given according to Works though Faith and Repentance be not whereas in the sense of Works there meant by Paul no man can be justified by Works And though Christ saith This is the work of God that ye believe in him whom the Father hath sent yet it is not that which Paul meaneth Let not therefore Scripture words be abused to mislead mens understandings 2. But as to the matter of the Controversie I spoke to it enough
before No man can deny but that God usually prepareth the Soul fer Conversion by a common sort of Grace And though he may do what he list with his own and extraordinarily may in an instant convert the most unprepared malignant obdurate person yet that is not his usual way And some that think otherwise are led into the mistake by thinking that a man is converted when he hath suddenly some terrifying humbling preparation which endeth in conversion Whether he convert all that are brought to the very highest and nearest degree of preparation I know not nor perhaps you neither But that usually he converteth all such we have very great reason to think probable And that he hath not commanded men to seek his special Grace in vain So that whether it be a proper promise on Gods part or only an encouragement short of proper promise I told you before is a hard question But we maintain that it is not that proper mutual Covenant which maketh a Christian and is celebrated in Baptism and giveth Salvation If one of old John Rogers's Thomas Hooker's or Robert Bolton's hearers when they were vehemently urging preparatory humiliation desire endeavour c. should have said to them Sir you play the Arminian and contradict St. Paul who saith that Grace is not given according to Ista â—â—â—dia nemini Deus destâ—â—â—â— propter vel secundum morita ipsius sed ex pura puta Gratia Nemini etiam denegat nisi juste propter gracedentia peecata Armin. Disp Privat Thes 41. Sect. 10. Adrian VI. Quodl 3. q. 1. fol. 21. expoundeth Habenti dabitur thus Qui habet verbi Dei amorem ut illuc mentis intuitum dirigat dabitur ei sensus intelligendi qui non habet verbi Dei amorem auferetur ab eo naturalis capacitas intelligend c Works Therefore God will give it me never the more for such preparations what would you have said to him The truth is practical Preachers in these practical cases are carried with full sail into that truth which Disputers would wrangle out of Doors But as for any workâ— meritorious in point of commutative Justice yâ—a or of any full and proper Covenant of God giving a proper Right to the Sinner upon which he may claim special Grace as his due I know of none such before true Conversion though Gods commands and general promises give men sufficient encouragement C. But what say you to Rom. 9. It is not in him that willeth or runneth c. B. I do not love to expound hard Texts unsatisfactorily by scraps I will give you God willing a Paraphrase of the Chapter together by it self I suppose you have read John Goodwin's and Dr. Hammonds Paraphrase At present it may suffice to say 1. That the meaning is not that he that would have Christ and Grace and Holiness is no fitter for it than he that would not have them nor that he that seeketh them is no fitter for them than he that rejecteth themâ—nor that he that believeth is no fitter for Justification than â—n Iâ—fidel nor he that is holy any fitter for Heaven than the unholy nor yet that he that heareth meditateth prayeth aâ— he can and attaineth the highest degree of common Grace is no fitter or likelier for Faith or special Grace than he that despiseth it and the means of it 2. But the meaning is that God of his free mercy câ—lled the Gentiles that were further from him than the Jews and may give both the Gospel and the Grace of the Gospel to one and take it from or not give it to another when both of them are equally unworthy of it by their sin So that the first and principal cause that differenceâ—ha Jacob from an Esau is not that Jacob before Gods Grace did will and râ—n deâ—ire and seek Grace but that Mercy begun with him and gave him though as unworthy as Esau both commonner and special Grace which caused him to will and run And yet for all that both are supposed to have forfeited mercy by sinning against it and it is in him that willeth not and runneth not that the cause of his misery and privation of mercy is to be found Yea in many an instance where mercy and helps are given by an equality a wicked man may make himself to differ by his sin and wilfully become worse than others C. At least you must here confess that de facto we do really differ from each other in this point B. All they that hold all that Doctrine of Preparation for Conversion which you find in the suffrages of the British Divines in the Synod of Dort do not that I know of differ from many of the Lutherans and Jesuites nor from many of the Arminians herein while by the name of merit of Congruity used by some and Preparation by the other no more is meant than they there assert And as to the question of a promise or no promise I shew'd you before how small the difference is yea with some it is but de nomine while one calleth that a Promise which another calleth but a half promise with Mr. Cotton or a precept to use means with sufficient encouragement when perhaps in the description of the thing they agree So that among the most and sober practical Preachers I yet see no real difference in sense at all about the necessity of preparatory Grace The sixth Crimination C. For ought I can understand some of them acknowledge no Corruption nor Grace in the Will as having no Habits but meer Indifferency or Liberty but think that the illuminating of the understanding is enough to change the will * The Remonstrants say Synod circ art 3. 4 p. 15. Voluntatem iâ—super Deus in obsequium suum fle ctit ad actuâ— fidei obedientiâ— ita inclinat per spiritum suum sanctum verbo utentem ut voluntas per illam operationem non solum possit obedire â—ed obediat quoties obedit non ex se anâ— per se aut a se B. 1. These are a few odd persons that differ from the generality of your Adversaries and I am not to justifie all that every man writeth 2. But even of these I suppose the meaning of the most is but this that sin began inthe Intellect and there Grace must begin and that God worketh on the will but mediante Intellectu And these Camero held as well as they and so do many more And these seem to differ not about the necessity of Grace but the manner of its conveyance to the will whether it be only by the intellect 3. And as the wind bloweth where it listeth and we hear its sound but know not whence it cometh or whither it goeth so is every one that is born of the Spirit We know that the will is vitiated as ill as the understanding and needeth Grace as much as it and that God is as near to the one in his operations as to the
by it self anon Before we come to that these things I here conclude of 1. That the Diversity of Nature or Receptive Dispositions being presupposed God hath an established order of means and a congruous established universal Concurse which quantum in se as far as belongeth to it to do worketh equally on all 2. That this established measure of aid or concurse recipitur ad modum recipientis and operateth variously as to the effects according to the various disposition of the Recipients from whom the ratio diversatis is to be fetcht and not from it 3. That this established measure of Concurse or aid may by the greatness of the Passive and Active Indisposition and Illdisposition of the Recipient be both resisted and overcome or frustrate 4. That as Adam did resist and overcome such Grace so do all wicked Hi praecedanâ—i effectus virtute verbi spiritusque in hominum mentibus producti rebellis voluntatis vitio suffocari penitus extingui pâ—ssuâ—t in multis solent adeâ— ut nonnulli in quorum mentibus virtute verbi spiritusque impressâ— fuit aliqualis notitia veritatis divinae c. mutentur plane in contrarium c. And even Alvarez Disp 18. n. â—0 saith Si non operatur actione qui est in praeceptâ— imputabitur illi ad culpam eo quod suâ— culpa se impedivit ne dareter illi auxilium efficax quod necessarium erat ut actualiter operaretur sicut si Deus imponeret homini prâ—ceptum volandi quantum est ex parte sua offerret illi alas adjutorium necessarium uâ— volaret ipse autem responderet Dâ—mine nec vâ—lâ— alas accipere nec volâ—re meritâ— reputaretur reus etiamsâ— non possit absque alis volare qâ—ia sua culpaâ—se impedirit ne illi dâ—narentâ—r a Deâ— men in some cases now And so do all godly men in most of the sins if not all which they commit 5. As God rarely worketh Miracles and we hardly know when he violateth his established course of nature though we may know when he worketh beyond the power of any second cause known to us and when he leaveth his ordinary way but ordinarily keepeth to his established course and use of the second causes even in his wonders So it is very probable that in the Works of Grace Recovery and Salvation he ordinarily keepeth to his established order his Ordinances and fixed degree of Concurse 6. Yet as God is still above all his Works and a free Agent and is no further tied to one constant order and measure of Concurse than he tieth himself by his Wisdom and Free-will so God is free in the conveyance of his Grace and can when he please forsake that order and work Miracles by Grace as well as on natural things above nature He can strike down Saul and convert him by a voice from Heaven and in a word can do what he will 7. And as in most wonders its past our power to know whether and when God doth indeed forsake his established order and work contrary to it or without such second causes as are unknown to us though we can tell when he acteth unusually So is it in this case about his works of Grace A Comet or Blazing Star is an unusual thing whose necessary antecedent cause we know not And yet it is but a natural effect of second causes operating in their established course so are ecclipses better known and unusual Tempests and terrible Lightnings c. So great and sudden unusual and wonderful changes may be made by Grace on sinners and yet all in Gods established course of working and by those second causes which are to us unknown C. But God is not a natural but a voluntary Agent and Grace is hiâ— immediate work or off-spring B. 1. He is a voluntary Agent in Creation Preservation and in all the works and changes of nature and yet he operateth constantly in his appointed course 2. It s unknown to us what means he useth out of our reach in his operations upon souls as well as in nature 3. We find that Grace keepeth a harmony with nature yeâ— as morality is but the modality of things natural so we may conceive that God may possibly work it by the modifying of physical Agents and their actions and the recipients 4. Immutability and constancy is one of Gods perfections and the expression of it in the constant order of his Works is part of his glory in the world Though our mutable Free-wills are better than the fixed or necessitated appetite of Bruits that is not as they are mutable and the acts contingent but as they have a higher object But the fixed unchangeable wills of the Glorified Angels and Saints are far better than ours And why should we think unsetled mutability of efficiency to be the best discovery of Gods Immutability 5. But yet we grant that God is free to do what he please C. But it is by fixed second causes that God keepeth a fixed order of natural productions and alterations in the world But you can name no such universal second cause of Grace affording under God a resistible Influx as the Sun doth in Nature B. What will you say if I name you such a second universal cause though if I could not it followeth not that therefore there is none such I think I can name you one that all Christians should know and yet it seems is not well by Divines themselves considered JESUS CHRIST as MAN and MEDIATOR is Gods Administrator General of the humane world and is compared to the Rising Sun which illuminateth all the world with a light suitable to it and them So Christ is the light of the world the Sun of Righteousness that ariseth with healing Grace and enlightneth every man that cometh into the world or as Crotius and Hammond render it which coming into the world enlightneth every man supposing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the Nominative Case and Neuter Gender and not the Accusative Masculine In him was Life and the Life was the light of men not only to the sanctified who received but uneffectually though quoad se sufficiently the light shined in darkness and the darkness comprehended it not The world that was made by him knew him not He came to his own and his own received him not yet he came to them But as many as received him to them gave he power to become the sons of God John 1. 3 10 11. It is apparent in Scripture that all power in Heaven and Earth is given to Christ Matth. 28. 19 20. that all things are delivered into his hands John 13. 3. and God hath given him power over all flesh John 17. 2. and he is head over all things to the Church Ephes 1. 22 23. C. We all grant that Christ is an universal light and Saviour 1. Objectively 2. And as to his Doctrine Covenant and Example But what 's that to internal efficient Grace which is immediately from God
Whether God Actually in his mind thus Compare men and prefer one before another and say I will cause this man to believe rather than that I answer 1. There is no Act in God but his Essence which is invariable and indivisible 2. But because his operations as terminated and productive ad extra are various and have objective material causes of their diversity in the recipients therefore we usually thence denominate Gods volitions as various And so when we see that one man hath Grace given him to believe when another hath not we hence say that God mentally and by Decree preferreth one before the other when the difference is not at all in God not his Act ex parte agentis but only of and by God in the Recipients C. But come yet nearer the heart of the case and tell me plainly 1. Whether the difference of Effects be more from the will and action of God or from mens different Receptive dispositions And 2. Whether all these different Receptivities be not of God B. Order bids me begin with the latter 1. The different Dispositions are of two sorts Good and Bad. God is not the cause of the Indisposition or illdisposition of any And as to the good disposition or Preparation of Souls no doubt but he is the principal Cause of it all but not the sole Cause nor always at least the necessitating Cause but oft giveth men that necessary help by which they might have been prepared for more when yet they are not through their wilful resistance or neglect For few men will deny that men have sufficient uneffectual Grace for some preparatory acts though not for faith Ad. Q. 2. I told you that the difference in the effects resulteth from the Causes in both Subjects and not in one only That which maketh one a believer and the other an unbeliever maketh them differ And I have told you what these Causes are But further I suppose as aforesaid a certain established order and degree of universal help external and internal by Christ to the Soul as the Sun affordeth to inferior Bodies This stablished order of Grace universally affordeth such a degree of Divine Influx and help as will cause faith in a prepared Soul and will not cause it in some much unprepared Souls For if as little help would serve the unprepared as the prepared to what use is preparation quomodo recipitur ad modum recipientis In this case now the efficient of Grace is God and not Man but * That even Jesuits confess in their way of scientia media that the Ratio discriminis why one person rather than another hath Grace is from God initially and principally and not from any beginning in man See Ruiz proving it at large in all his Tract 3. Disp 18. 19. De Praedest exordio So that this is no difference between us Yea more he maintaineth that ante fidem niâ—il est dispositionis meriti aut impetrationis Sect. 3. Disp 19. 24. And one would think that this should satisfie even the Antinomians But he meaneth only that this disposition is not always necessary He that will in brief see what the Schoolmen say of preparative Grace may find abundance of them cited by Ruiz ibid. d. 21. per totam and what nature can do in preparation Greg. Armin in 2. d. 28. q. 1. a. 1. speaketh most like the Reformed Aug. de bono persever c. 8. Sed cur Gratia Dei non secundum merita hominum datur Resp Quia deus miserecors est Cur ergo non omnibus Et hic respondeo Quoniam Deuâ— justus Judex est the Ratio proxima of the difference in the event and effects is the Diverse disposition of the Recipients But here mark well that it is not the good disposition or preparation of one party that is the only and I think not the chief reason of the difference but the Privative and Positive indisposition of the other party is as much if not the chiefest reason If one man shut his eyes against the light when another doth not the Ratio discriminis why one man differeth from another in seeing and not seeing is on both parts but principally on his part that shutteth his eyes because the other doth but what he was made to do and all living creatures should do But the other absurdly crosseth nature So that under an universal Influx and help the said Influx is the efficient of the action or effect but the disposition of the Recipients are the Occasions and Reasons to be assigned of the various effects but especially the incapacity of the defective party As the reason why the Sun doth make a Tree bear fruit and not a dead stock is because the Tree is an apt recipient of its influx but the stock or stone is not 2. But Note that in case that God operate not by such an universal Influx only but also by superadded special or extraordinary degrees of particular Grace which by a difference from the universal Influx or degree is peculiarly apt to procure the effects here the ratio discriminis is principally to be ascribed to that special Grace and not to the preparations on the Soul C. Tell me then what you think whether God works by such an universal Grace or by such a special Grace 1. How far doth he work by universal Grace 2. Is that universal Grace ever effectual of it self on prepared Souls 3. How far doth he also use the special particular Grace which you mentioned B. I. To your first Qu. I answer 1. God in the beginning made mankind upright in Adam and Eve and made no difference as to the present case 2. Eve having first sinned did make a difference between her self and Adam which God made not nor altered first his universal Grace 3. Adam next without Gods alteration by Sin did difference himself from himself as he was before 4. God then set up a new universal Grace even Christ with the new Covenant and Recovering means to give out universal help suited to his Covenant and means to be the Giver of the Spirit and the Light of the world we cannot have time now to open the difference between Christ's administrations before and after his Incarnation There was at first an universal sufficiency in this Recovering help of Grace 5. Cain that could have done otherwise wilfully sinned against this universal Grace and Covenant and so made a difference between him and the rest of mankind when God made none 6. Whether Abel did offer his acceptable Sacrifice by this same universal Help alone or by any special extraordinary Grace ex parte mediorum vel Influxus primi recepti is a thing unknown to us because unrevealed 7. The Posterity of Cain as of Adam at first because Seminally in him and personally from his very guilty essence were justly deprived of some of that Grace both Subjective and Objective which Cain had deprived himself of Their natures were more vitiated and so
cannot answer what you have said for it And when I read Dallaeus Apolog. and in him almost all ancient Writers and late Churches for it I dare not be so singular as Spanhemius and a few more of late in denying this Grace of God Though I once thought that it had been Objective only and with Amyrald I noted little more in the Controversie than between the Objective and Subjective grace as if there had been no other Efficient grace to come in question But I am convinced 1. that de facto there is a degree of Grace ad posse that leaveth men unexcusable which is not effectual in the event For I dare not say that I could never have sinned less or done better than I did 2. And that the same degree of the Spirits help is not sufficient to an utterly unprepared Soul as to the prepared or to cause a man to believe and love God above all as may cause him to forbear some sin or to use some means Non possunt initia illa accendi aut fides inchoata retineri dum voluntas omnino repugnat Non enim Efficax est Spiritus Sanctus in eo qui ne vult quidem audire Evangelium excuteretur si voluntas succumberet dubitationibus Loc. Com. de lib. art c. 7. for further Grace Therefore such a thing as is called sufficient and universal Grace or help I do confess But by the way if Christ be the universal Dispenser of this Grace how reacheth it to those that know not Christ B. 1. I have shewed you in Cain's instance and his posterity that it reacheth not Equally to all no more than the Sun to the Southern and the Northern Nations 2. I have proved to you that Christ was after the fall made the Head of the new Covenant and that this Covenant was made with all Mankind And that he is the Administrator General to all Mankind and all things Power and Judgment is committed to him that he is now the Owner Ruler and Judge of all 3. Therefore all the Light Means and Mercies that are in any parts of the world are as truly from Christ as the universal Mediator as all light is from the Sun Even in Dungeons and Caverns and where there is least And as the Sun sends forth some light before it ariseth and some after it is set and some in the night even by the Moon c. so doth Christ enlighten all the world so far as they have light though in very various degrees 4. You will not say that Christ by his Incarnation did put all the rest of the world into a worse condition than they were in before his coming and to take away from them any of the mercies of the Law of Grace which God had made with them in Adam and Noah C. I am afraid you go about to confound the world and the Church while you make all to be the Kingdom of Christ and to be under the Law and Covenant of Grace B. I must still call you to difference the question de re from that de nomine Whether all should be called the Church is one question And how really they stand related to Christ is another To that de re I say 1. It is past doubt that Christ the Mediator is the Owner and Ruler of all the world de jure even jure Redemptionis as all are given to him of the Father 2. It is doubtless that all are under his foresaid Law of Grace as that which is in force to oblige them and to punish them if they break it and to reward them if they keep it For they are not Lawless nor hopeless 3. It is doubtless that all are possessed of many and great Mercies as well as obliged to many duties as tending to their recovery and salvation And thus they are so far the Kingdoms of Christ But yet de nomine they are not to be called the Church because the Church is Regnum peculiaritatis As the Israelites had the foedus peculiaritatis and were Regnum peculiare before Christs coming and yet not the only people in the world that were under a Law of Grace for that was universal So is it now with the Christian Churches and much more Briefly Christ hath three sorts of Subjects in the world 1. Subjects quoad obligationem and so all the world are his Subjects because first his beneficiaries 2. Subjects by professed Consent which is 1. A half consent as many without the Church 2. A full consent by Baptism and these are the Church visible 3. By sincere Heart-consent and this is the Church mystical or regenerate that shall be saved In this I think we are agreed C. Well Supposing an universal help of Grace how answer you the question Under fit Efficax B. Do you grant me then that this universal Grace is ever effectual C. Stay there You told me that 's the turning point where Dr. Sanderson and Dr. Hammond came to a ne plus But 1. As to preparatory Acts we shall not deny it I find not that our Divines do assert the necessity Vasq in 1. Tho. q. 23. Disp 88. Reciteth various opinions of the Schoolmen of the nature of operating and co-operating Grace 1 Vega's in Conc. Trid. l. 6. c. 8. That operating Grace is each holy cogitation and first motion of the will in which God acteth Physically and Man is but Passive And so the Nominals who make God only Active and Man Passive in the efficience of Intellection and Volition as he saith And some Thomists 2. The way of Aquin. Coâ—rad Cajet Dur. Anton Sot Dried Tapper Who say that Gratia operans is in the first free motion of the will circa finem whence the will is moved ad media c. 3. Greg. Armine's which many follow supposing it Augustines Omnâ— opuâ— intellectuâ— voluntatis non solum a Deo fieri sed etiam a nobis tanquam a causa secunda efficientâ— Physice produci Deum tamen sola sua virtute primo voluntatem applicare ad libere volendum non jolum â—am praeveniendo praevia Cogitatione ex parte intellectus primo motu non deliberato timoris aut spei sed etiam â—am impellendo ad consensum liberum Hâ—nc impulsum putat Gregor esse medium quid inter ipsum consensum liberum ad quâ—m cooperatur voluntas primum motum non deliberatum voluntatis Iâ—u cogitationem intellectus appellati ab Augustino Initium boni operis 4. This Vasquâ—z confuteth and asserteth that Gratia operans quam sine nobis in nobis Deus operatur according to Augustine is no such middle impulse but â—psam Sanctam cogitationem quae est ante consensum motum voluntatis subitum sine nostra libertate ex pia illa cogitatione ortum quo deterremur a malo he meaneth some passion ad bonum provocamur And that co-operating Grace is Ipse consensus liber in quo meritum reperitur Etiam circa
have followed thereupon The just Extenuation of this last Controversie IN all these things following the parties are agreed for the most considerable 1. That Adam fell from true Righteousness and Holiness and lost the Spirit 2. That therefore we cannot argue from the Nature of Holiness alone to prove that it cannot be lost 3. That as the word Possible relateth to man's Power to do evil and omit good it is not only Possible to fall away but too easie yea it is not opus potentiae sed Impotentiae except as Natural Power is exercised in the meer Act with Moral Impotency 4. Yea without Gods preserving Grace it is not possible to persevere 5. God hath appointed us much duty to be done that we may not fall away And among the rest to discern and fear the danger of falling away and in that fear to depart from evil and temptations 6. God hath promised us Salvation on Condition that we persevere 7. God oft threatneth the faithful with damnation if they fall away and describeth to us the sin and misery of Apostates 8. The Justified may lose many degrees of true Grace and dye with far less than once they had and so become uncapable of that Greater Glory which they were morally capable of before 9. It 's too possible for them to fall into heinous sin They are not certain that they shall never commit Adultery Incest the Murther of Parents Wife or Children c. nor certain just how oft they may so fall or not 10. Such Sins make them so far morally uncapable of Glory as that See the Brittish Divines Suffrages at Dort of perseverance a sound Repentance for them and from them and a renewal of Faith are necessary to full right or moral capacity 11. God doth not decree any man's perseverance let him live never so securely negligently or vitiously For those that do so are faln already It is a contradiction to persevere in holiness and to live unholily But Gods Decree is ever entire that such a one shall fear danger fly temptations live holily in the use of means and therein persevere unto the end He never separated these in his Decrees 12. Except Hierome truly accuse Jovinian with it there is not that I know of any Father Christian or Heretick that hath written that Lege Vossi Histor Pelag de Perseverant no truly Justifyed persons fall finally away from Grace and perish for above a thousand years after Christ And it 's commonly granted that generally they held the contrary Even Augustine Prosper and Fulgentius not excepted 13. It is confessed to be a sad clog to the contrary opinion that it is held against the Judgment of the Universal Church for above a thousand years and so seemeth to bear the imputation of novelty and singularity Though that be not a sufficient confutation of it 14. It is confessed that the Greek and Roman Church the Lutherans and Arminians and most Anabaptists are against this Doctrine 15. It is confessed that all these Fathers and Churches of old and all these Churches and Christians of late are not void of the Christian comforts of the Gospel even of faith and hope of Glory 16. It is confessed that the Scripture hath many passages so much seeming to favour both the opinions as hath made the controversie thus difficult to so many Learned Godly Men And what the Scripture is it will be to the worlds end 17. It is confessed that none can be sure of Salvation or perseverance who are not first sure of their Sincerity and Justification 18. And to be uncertain whether one be a true believer and justified is more uncomfortable than to be sure of that and uncertain of his perseverance 19. No man can ordinarily be certain that he is Sanctified and Justified that is not certain of the truth of the Gospel and hath Grace somewhat strong and active not clouded by great Soul-wounding Sins nor frightful or melancholy passions nor any that through Ignorance is uncertain of the true Nature of the conditions of the Covenant of Grace 20. Certain experience of the defect of these qualifications and of mens own Consessions assureth us that not one of a multitude of the strict Religious sort have that which we call proper certainty of their Sincerity Justification and Salvation though they hold against the Arminians that certainty of perseverance must be asserted as that which may be attained by them that are first certain that they are in a state of life 21. Yet the fore-mentioned knowledge of Gods Mercy Christ's Love and Covenant with experience and many evidences of great probability may cause even such as are uncertain of their Justification to live in some good measure of true Christian peace though mixed with some doubts and fears Because their Probability is much greater than their cause of fear And much more may they do so that doubt only of their perseverance 22. It must be confessed that the Doctrine that none fall from Justification hath its temptation also to discomfort as in the two or three fore-mentioned particulars which I 'll not repeat 23. It is confessed that if God should condemn those whom he before Justified it would argue no change in Him or his Word but in them alone 24. It is confest that some Justified persons who live in as much sin as will stand with sincerity are at present unfit for assurance of perseverance and salvation For it would not stand with that humbling correction which they are then most fit for 25. Lastly it is confest that this point is no Article of our Creed nor is an agreement in it necessary to Church-communion or Christian Love but difference in it must be accounted tolerable In all this the moderate are commonly agreed On the other side 1. It is commonly granted that all that are elected to salvation shall persevere though how far that election is upon foresight they quarrel Cur ergo id quod Apostolis tunc fecit Christus non concedemus pro omnibus praedestinatis fecisse ut peculiari modo sua merita illis applicaret perseverantiam eis obtineret nam si multi sancti pro aliis orantes conversionem eorum perseverantiam impetrarunt cur dicemus Christum pro omnibus praedestinatis non orasse peculiari suâ oratione tantam gloriam gratiam illis obtinuisse Vasquez in 1 Tho. q. 23. a. 8. d. 94. c. 3. 2. It 's granted by all that not only such election but fore-knowledge of salvation and perseverance maketh it Logically Impossible quoad consequentiam not to persevere that is It Necessarily followeth God foreknoweth it Therefore it will come to pass 3. It is commonly granted that God forsaketh none till they forsake him 4. And that so great is his Goodness that no willing â—oul that solidly understandeth the Grounds of the Christian faith and hope and is in Love with God and Holiness and willing to use means and avoid temptations hath any
to anything in our duties in his reward tell me 1. Why are they said so oft to Please him and we are commanded to do those things that Please him and 1 Joh. he heareth us because we do those things that Please him 2. And why then doth he not as well for Christs merits or Righteousness reward our sinning our folly and vanity our idleness our dreams or all our natural indifferent actions as our Love and holiness 3. And why do you and all men regard or reward a loving thankful obedient child more than one that will scorn you and spit in your face And why do all Princes and Rulers make any difference between the righteous and the wicked a rogue and an honest man And why do Churches so strictly try the Godliness of their members Why do you make any difference in your Communion What meaneth Church discipline And why are you your selves so desirous to be esteemed Godly persons and differenced from others if God himself do make no difference And how is the righteous more excellent than his neighbour and called Gods jewels and the apple of his eye his peculiar people a holy Nation and his treasure And why is it made the mark of a faithful man Psal 15. 4. that a vile person is contemned in his eyes but he honoureth them that fear the Lord if there be nothing in holiness and obedience any more than in sin for God to reward Lib. You delight to make me seem foolish by your Cavilling You might easily understand that I did not mean that good works are no more Rewardable than Idleness or Evil But that they are not rewarded for their proper worthiness as being faulty and so unjustifiable with God but it is for the merits of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to believers P. When you understand what you should say you will speak intelligibly But be not angry that your confusion is laid open to you About Merit and Imputation we must speak distinctly afterwards That no works of ours are Rewardable till their faultiness is pardoned nor Rewardable according to the Law of Innocency nor upon any terms but those of the Covenant of Grace which freely giveth salvation to penitent believing accepters which free gift and acceptance of our duties is purchased by the meritorious righteousness of Christ all this we hold as fast as you do We dream not of any access to God but by a Mediator nor of any acceptance of our selves or our duties works or righteousness but on the account of Christs merits and intercession by which the sins of our best works are pardoned and life eternal freely given to obedient believers Of the worthiness of our works we must speak more anon Lib. I smell whereabout you are You make us hear the Pope that is in your belly You mean as the Papists that Christ hath merited that your works shall be meritorious P. Hath not Christ Merited that our holy Love and obedience be Rewarded Lib. Yes but what 's that to Merit P. Hath he not by his Merit made them Rewardable Lib. Yes or else how can they be Rewarded P. Do you not know that by Merit the Papists themselves profess that they mean nothing but Rewardableness At least do we Protestants mean anything else by it Lib. What the Papists or you mean you best know your selves but I know what you say And you both talk like the ignorant enemies of Grace P. Do you include the Jansenists who say that all Christs Grace now is nothing but his irrestible efficient operation of Holy Love in the soul and that God moveth us to it necessarily or insuperably and that he now giveth no Grace meerly sufficient which is not effectual or meerly effectual to make us Able but also to make us Act and that now he leaveth nothing to our Free-will in Christs gracious operations but giveth in act all the Will and all the merit that men have and that Fear and obedience of a Law written is our own Legal Righteousness though it respect the new Law but Christs Righteousness which he giveth us as distinct from our Legal Righteousness is only his Spirit or Love put into the heart Lib. I do not believe that any Papist is so much for free grace P. But if you deny it and the book be opened and it found there written is it nothing to you to be found in falshood Lib. But I say not as Jansenius that it is the Law written in us but Christs Righteousness imputed to us which is our Righteousness P. Did you not even now confess an Inherent Righteousness Lib. Yes but not to our Justification P. Of that more anon By Justification they mean Making us holy Lib. But Jansenius is not a common Papist why tell you me of him P. My business here is not to justifie the Papists but to understand your mind I do not think you know what the Papists hold in it Lib. I am not ashamed to be a stranger to their Books But I will bring one when you will that shall open the abomination of their doctrine of merit Till then it 's you to whom I speak P. Content we will make another dayes work of that Tell me then whether it be Names or Things that you make so much ado about Lib. Both we like not ill names and worse false doctrine P. What are the Names that displease you Is Reward or Rewardableness one Lib. No if you will understand them well For they are Scripture words P. Is worthiness one of them Lib. Yes if you will say that we are worthy of the Reward or of salvation P. Do you not know that the Scripture usually so speaketh Rev. 3. 4. They shall walk with me in white for they are worthy 2 Thes 1. 5 11. Worthy of the Kingdom of God 1 Thes 2. 12. Walk worthy of God Luke 20. 35. That are accounted worthy to obtain that world 21. 36. That you may be counted worthy to scape all these things and to stand c. Matth. 10. 11. Enquire who in it is worthy 13. If the house be worthy let your peace remain If it be not worthy let your peace return 37. He that loveth Father or Mother more than me is not worthy of me Matth. 22. 8. They which were bidden were not worthy Acts 13. 46. Ye judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life Is not this Scripture Lib. By Worthy the Text meaneth not merit but fitness to receive P. Our question is not now of the Meaning but the Name you know Lib. I am not against the Scripture names if well understood P. Merit is a name I perceive that you are against And we make so small a matter of words that you shall choose any other name of the same signification and we will forbear this rather than offend you But yet tell me Q. 1. What if the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were translated Deserving and Merit would it not be as
true a translation as Worthy and Worthiness when it is the very same thing that is meant Nay when Merit of Condignity is the highest kind which the Papists themselves mention and are reproved for do you not hereby imply that Condignity is a bigger word than bare Merit Quest 2. And I ask you Whether all the antient Teachers of the Churches since the Apostles whose Writings are come down to us do not familiarly apply these names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Meritum to believers And if you perswade men that all these Teachers and Churches were Papists you will perswade most that believe you to be Papists too But such is the success of over-doing Quest 3. And I would know Whether in common speech Reward and Merit or Desert be not Relatives as Master and Servant Husband and Wife are Is there any Reward which is not Meriti Praemium the Reward of Merit What mean you your self else by the word Reward Lib. I mean Gods free Gift without respect to merit or desert P. Doth not the usage of the World distinguish between a meer Gift and a Reward What if you give money to the next man you meet without respect to any thing in him will you call it a Reward Review all the Scripture Texts that speak of a Reward and see whether they have no relation to any foregoing act in man God gave Christ himself to the lapsed world Was this Gift of Christ a Reward God gave some Prophets some Apostles c. and giveth the Gospel to Infidel Nations Is this Gift a Reward or ever so called Your humane nature is Gods Gift but is it a Reward Nay will you say that the first Grace is a Reward which is said to be Pelagianism Lib. Well but Rewards are Gods second Gifts as they follow the former without respect to Worthiness or Merit P. That cannot be neither If God first Give the world a Saviour and then give them the Covenant of Grace and Pardon through him is this a Reward If Christ first heal the sick man and then cause him to walk or if Peter and John first heal the lame man and then cause him joyfully to leap c. is the second a Reward If an Infidels Life be first preserved and then the Gospel given him is this a Reward Lib. No but a Reward supposeth only our Fitness to receive a free gift which is called our worthiness and not our Merit P. Do you mean our Natural fitness or our Moral A man is Naturally fit for his food when he is hungry Will you say therefore that his food is his Reward for being hungry Lib. Well Let it be then his Moral or rather his Spiritual fitness P. Your explications are but darkning Spiritual is either Natural or Moral as well as corporal The soul as a Spirit is in its nature fit to understand common things here in the body Is this understanding its Reward for being a Spirit But Heaven is a Reward Lib. Well Call it a Moral fitness if you will but what is that to Merit P. It is so much to it as to tell the world that such as you do revile others for holding the same which you are forced to profess your self and wrangle about meer words and know it not For by Merit is meant nothing else but A moral aptitude for Reward or that Rewardableness which consisteth in Moral Good or Evil as freely done and had and so acceptable to God as our Governour But tell me next what word will you choose to serve instead of Merit that we may agree in it Lib. I know not what words to use that please you when we are not agreed about the thing signified I hold not any Reward in proper sense but only free gift and therefore how can I tell you what word to use instead of merit I think the word Reward is used but figuratively P. Christ saith Matth. 6. 4 6. Your Father which seeth in secret shall Reward you openly Col. 3. 24. Ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance Heb. 10. 35. Cast not away your confidence which hath great recompence of reward Heb. 11. 26. He had respect to the recompence of reward v. 6. He that cometh to God must believe that God is and that he is the rewarder of them that diligently seek him Mat. 16. 27. He shall reward every man according to his works I ask you again What is meant here by Rewarding Lib. I tell you again the meaning is that as men shew their liking of a thing that pleaseth them by a proper Reward so God sheweth his liking of our duty by a free gift of some greater good which therefore after the manner of men he calleth a Reward P. If it be a Metaphor I ask you but the Meaning and Reason of the name If it be because it followeth our duty then every gift that followeth our duty is a reward without any further respect to that duty but the order of time but that you denyed before Else Christs Incarnation and the Apostles and the Gospel and all that ever followeth our duty should be a Reward But if you mean that it is called a Reward as it is a sign of Gods approbation of our duty only then if God should tell men that he Approveth of their duty it would be a reward though he immediately annihilate them or should never do them any good which I think you will not say If you say that all three must concurr viz. that it be 1. A Benefit or Gift 2. Following duty 3. Signifying an Approbation of it you come almost up to all that is asserted by them that you quarrell with If God should by some benefit to one man signifie that he approved the duty of another or of a thousand more and should annihilate them all this were no reward to them Therefore when you have talkt all that you can devise to say you must say that there is some Fitness in the duty for that approbation and benefit and that the Relation of the Gift to that Fitness is it that denominateth it a Reward And that though there be no Cause in man of any Acts of God ex parte agentis yet are there Causes in man of our Reception and of the effects ex parte recipientis And so that mans Rewardable duties are his Moral aptitude cause or condition why he rather than one that doth otherwise receiveth that Gift which is called the Reward But we are gone from our question de nomine and have already dispatched also that de re Have you any more to say of any Matter besides words in which you confess we speak as the Scripture doth in which we differ Lib. Seeing you like not my explications tell me fully what you hold your selves and then I shall better know whether we differ in sense or words only P. It 's great pity for the Churches sake but you would have understood that first before you reviled us as Legal
15. 58. And they work out their salvation with fear and trembling laying up a treasure in Heaven Matth. 6. 20. and laying up a good foundation for the time to come and pressing forward for the prize Phil. 3. 8 9. and laying hold upon eternal life Lib. All this leadeth us to our own works and sets up the Law and taketh down Christ and his righteousness and is meer Popery for humane Merits P. If this be Gods Word and Christs own Law and Doctrine then you inferr that Christ taketh down himself and his own righteousness and sets up man and humane merits But give me leave to tell you that if you deny the Reward of Evangelical duty and the Rewardableness or Worthiness or Merit of such duty as it is but our Merit or Worthiness of the free Gift of Christ and Life given by Paternal Love and Justice to believing Penitent accepters according to the tenour of the Covenant of Grace 1. You do contradict so much of the most express Texts of Scripture as alloweth us to suspect that really you believe not the Scripture to be true or that it is not it but your own contradicting fancy that is the measure of your belief and you may on such terms hold the vilest absurdities even what you list as in despight of Scripture while you pretend that it is for you 2. You will deny the honour of Gods Image on man and the work of the Holy Ghost and the design of Christ who came to destroy the works of the Devil and save his people from their sins and purifie to himself a peculiar people zealous of good works 3. You will disgrace the Church of God which Christ washeth and sanctifieth and render it too like to the unsanctified world 4. You will leave man no ground for true assurance of Justification or Salvation while the difference between the worthy and unworthy is taken away 5. You will harden the wicked in their false presumptuous hopes and teach them to say We are but unworthy and so are all 6. You will destroy the comfort of well doing by denying the reward and making it seem to be in vain 7. Hereby you will take down all holy diligence in our Christian race and warfare while you deny the prize and recompence of reward Heb. 11. 26. We run for an incorruptible Crown 1 Cor. 9. 25. Phil. 3. 14. 8. You will strengthen all Temptations while you take down that which should be set against them See Luke 12. 4. Heb. 4. 1. 12. 28 29. Matth. 6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 19 20 c. Matth. 5. 10 11 12. 9. You will disgrace the Word and Ministry and all Means if after all we are never the more accepted 10. In a word you deny Gods Government in denying his Governing Justice and Judgements and that is to deny God to be our God Yea you deny all Religion all the Kingdom of Christ all Law all Judgement all Retribution Heaven and Hell all the true difference between Good and Evil Holiness and Sin all Praise and Dispraise while you deny the Reward and Rewardableness of holy obedience by the Paternal Government of the Law of Grace and that glory honour and peace is to every one that doth good both Jew and Gentile Rom. 2. 7 10. Lib. You would perswade us that holiness is good for nothing if it be not Rewardable as if you knew of no other use of it so ignorant are natural men of the things of God which are spiritually disâ—erned I will tell you that which your carnal mind cannot understand 1. Holiness Faith Love Obedience c. are Gods free Gifts excellent in themselves without a Reward 2. They are Fruits of the Spirit and marks and signs of our future felicity though they deserve it not 3. I told you that they are Rewards to Christ and Gifts to us P. 1. That they are Gods Gifts we doubt not But are not Faith Love and Obedience also the Acts of man by that Grace which is the gift of God Lib. Yes they are mans acts but it is God that worketh them in us P. And tell me if you can 1. Why God cannot Reward those acts which are done by his own Grace Cannot God make the Promise of a Reward to be a fit Moral Means for his Spirit to work by Nay doth not the scope of the Scripture tell you that he doth so 2. Is there ever the less worthiness in it because God causeth it Tell me without shifting Is an honest man no more worthy of a Princes favour than a Thief If you are no more worthy of liberty and protection and life than Atheists and Rebels why do you call men Persecutors for using you as if you were such Why call you men Malignants for hating deriding and opposing godly men if they deserve no better than the worst Lib. They deserve better from men but not from God P. Do you deny Rulers to be Gods Officers and that they are to make this difference by his appointment and therefore it is done by God 3. But without shifting tell me Doth not every good action or inclination deserve praise from God and man Doth it not deserve to be accounted and called just as it is Lib. All our Righteousnesses are as menstruous rags and what praise then do they deserve Can that deserve praise which deserveth Hell P. 1. Come on then let Conscience be a while unmuzzled Why do you so much praise those of your own Church or Opinion Why praise you so much the Ministers and people that are of your way Why do you make a difference between them and such as are against you 2. Why do you so aggravate the sin of those that vilifie deride and persecute you Why call you the Saints the precious ones on earth Gods treasure and peculiar people 3. Why were you lately so angry with the Ecclesiastical Politician the Debate-maker and other such Books which vilifie men whom you and I have better thoughts of if they deserve no more praise than the vilest men 4. Why were you so angry lately when you heard of one that reproached you and so pleased with one that proclaimed your wisdom and goodness and took your part 5. And if good actions deserve not praise from God himself why doth he praise them so greatly in his Word Why will he say before all the world Well done good and faithful servant c. 1. Dare you call God Ignorant Legalist or charge him with mistakes 2. Doth not every thing and person deserve to be thought and called just as it is Else lying or silence must be the virtue and Truth the Vice 3. Is there no more good in a Saint than in a Devil If there be doth it not deserve to be called just as it is 4. May not he who deserveth Hell by the Law of Works or Innocency be yet Morally fit for that is Worthy of Heaven according to the Law of Grace which pardoneth his sins
faith mentioned so oft in Scripture that is Upon and by believing we are first made just by free-given pardon and right to life and true sanctification with it and we are sentenced just because so first made just But this is not without our Faith and Repentance 2. And that Faith and Repentance are a Righteousness Evangelical that is a performance of the conditions on which the Covenant of Grace doth freely give us right to Christ pardon and life and so are the Constitutive causes of that subordinate Justification Lib. But your subordinate Righteousness hath no hand in our Justification P. This is but singing over the old Song by one that will not consider what is answered Have you thought on all the Texts even now cited Hath faith no hand in our Justification Hath the performance of a Condition and the Moral Disposition of the Receiver no hand in the Reception of a Gift What think you is the meaning of Christs words Matth. 12. By thy words thou shalt be justified and by thy words thou shalt be condemned What meaneth St. James that a man is justified by works and not by faith only Are men justified by that which hath no hand in their Justification Lib. Christ meaneth before men and so doth James and not before God P. This is notoriously false as contrary to the plain Text Christ speaketh of the Account to be given of our words in the day of Judgement vers 36. And James speaketh of that which men are saved by vers 14. and that Justification which Abraham had and that in an instance where Man did not justifie him and of that which was faiths life and perfection vers 17 22. and of Gods imputing faith for righteousness as to a friend of God vers 23. And is this nothing but Justification before men Lib. This is not the justifying of the man but of his faith P. 1. You contradict the Text which saith Abraham Rahab A man is justified by Works 2. You contradict your self For if the faith be justified the man is justified to be a true believer For how could a man that fulfilled the Law as Christ and Angels did be justified but by justifying his actions And how can he that fulfilleth the Gospel conditions be justified in that point but by justifying that he fulfilled them Lib. At least I may say that this is not the great and notable Justification which is only by Christs Righteousness P. We are not contending for its preheminence but its truth and necessity in a subordinate place Indeed we have one Justification by our Judges sentence which hath many parts and causes God as Donor is one cause and God as Judge another And Christ as meriting is the only meritorious cause of the Justifying Gift and Covenant and Christ as Intercessor another cause and Christ as Judge another And our Righteousness as it is our Right to Impunity and life another and our faith and Repentance are conditions All this is sure Lib. But the Justification by faith is our Universal Justification and that can be only by Christs Righteousness And we are not to trust to a Righteousness mixt of Christs and ours nor doth Christs Righteousness need to be patcht up with our menstruous rags P. 1. No question but Christs Righteousness is perfect and ours imperfect and ours is no patch or supplement to Christs He is not made righteous by our righteousness but we by his 2. But that which is perfect in him is not made perfectly ours nor formally ours in it self as distinct from its merited effects It is not ours as it is Christs Christ that is our Righteousness is also made of God to us wisdom and sanctification And will you say therefore that we are not to be Wise or Holy by any Wisdom or Holiness of our own for fear of adding our patch to Christs 3. You use to say that Christs Righteousness is ours as Adams sin is ours and say some as Adams Righteousness would have been had he persevered But 1. Adams Righteousness would have indeed made an Infant initially just by propagation that is the innocent Child of an innocent Parent But as soon as that Infant had the use of Reason and Choice he must also have a Righteousness of his own or perish And this is no patch to Adams righteousness And indeed in his Infancy he must have a seminal Holiness of his own to justifie him as well as the relation of a Son of Adam 2. So also though we are guilty of Adams sin by propagation yet we have with that guilt 1. An inherent pravity of our own 2. And at age our actual sin And both these are our unrighteousness as well as Adams sin imputed to us Even so Christ the second Adam is a Root of a righteous seed Our Contract by faith is as to him what our Natural propagation is as to Adam that is the Condition of our Interest in his merits We have as believers an initial righteousness in our relation to Christ But we have also from him 1. Inherent habitual righteousness 2. The actual righteousness of faith and true obedience and love And these have their proper use and office without which we must perish 4. And I must tell you that the word Universal is too big to be properly given to any mans justification or righteousness but Christs Properly he only is Universally justified or righteous who hath no unrighteousness at all imputable to him and is justifyable in all things But the best believer 1. Was once a sinner originally 2. Did oft sin actually 3. Hath still sin in him 4. And for some sin may be punished by the Magistrate 5. And for sin is judged and punished by chastisements and death by God 6. And the earth still cursed for our sake 7. Yea which is worst of all we are still under the penaâ—ty of some privations alas how great of Gods Spirit and its Grace and our Communion with God And all this must be confessed And such a one is not Universally justified or just Lib. But still our own Righteousness doth but make us such as thankful persons must be for their Justification by Christ and is no part of that Justification by faith For if faith it self be that Righteousness we have not faith by faith and faith is not imputed to faith but Christs Righteousness is it that is imputed P. Of Imputation in due place 1. What need you talk against that which none of us assert Do we not all hold that our personal Gospel-Righteousness is subordinate to Christs and is by his Gift as ouâ— Wisdom and Sanctisication is Who dreameth that our faith is any part of Christs Righteousness But why do you waste time in vain cavilling against plain certain truth Is there any thing in Name or Thing asserted by us that you can deny or question Quest 1. Do you deny that Scripture commandeth us to Believe that we may be justified Lib. No. P. Quest 2. Or
22. 2. For Name and Thing note the terms of Equivalence and Connotation 1. All the Texts where Christ is called a King and his Kingdom named why should I needlesly recite them 2. All the Texts that mention his Commanding and Commandments the same which we mean by a Law Matth. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you Acts 10. 42. 13. 47. Acts 10. 33. 1 Cor. 7. 10. John 15. 14. If ye do whatsoever I command you 17. These things I command you So John 15. 12. 14. 21 31. 1 Tim. 1. 1. Titus 1. 3. 1 John 3. 23. 4. 6. John 13. 34. 1 John 5. 3. 2. 4. 3. 24. 1 Cor. 14. 37. Acts 1. 2. Acts 17. 30. Blessed are they that do his Commandments c. Rev. 22. 14. 3. All the Texts that mention his Covenant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being a Legal institution Heb. 8. 6. He is the Mediator of a better Covenant 8. 13. 8. 10. 10. 16. 12. 24. Gal. 4. 24. 4. All those Texts that not only call him Lord of all but say that All power in Heaven and Earth is given to him therefore Legislative power Matth. 28. 18. and all Judgement committed to him John 5. 22. The Government is laid upon his shoulders and of the increase of his Government there shall be no end Isa 9. 6 7. 5. De re how can that man be a Christian that denyeth that Christ hath made us any Law and so denyeth his Kingdom and our obedience I argue from the definition That which hath the essential parts of a Law is a Law But Christ hath made that which hath the essential parts of a Law Therefore he hath made a Law The Major is past dispute The Minor I prove That which hath a Precept making Duty and a Promise and Threatning instituting the Retribution by Rewards and Punishments as an Instrument of Government hath all the Essentials of a Law But such is made by Christ Ergo The Minor which only needs proof I prove by parts and instances 1. There is a Command to believe in God as our Reconciled Father by Christ 2. To believe in Christ as Incarnate and the Mediator conceived by the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary fulfilling all righteousness dying buried for us justifying us by his blood rising ascending glorified interceding that will raise the dead and judge the world c. We are commanded to believe all the Gospel And to give up our selves to Christ in the Covenant of Baptism to trust in him to pray in his name c. We are commanded to believe in the Holy Ghost as the Spirit of Christ and to live in Communion with the Christian Church to observe the Lords day the first of the Week to preach and hear the Gospel to receive the Lords Supper to imitate Christ to receive his Apostles and Ministers to relieve his members as such to take Moses Law as abrogated or ceased And do you that are so strict in condemning all humane impositions as bold additions believe that Christ himself hath made no Laws for Ordination Sacraments Preaching Worship and why fear you adding then can one add to Nothing And what a lawless sort of persons are you if you will neither have Christ nor Man to make Laws for you 2. And as to Promises and Threats or Penalties of a far sorer punishment Heb. 10. I am ashamed to stand to prove them to you He that believeth shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned is sure a Law How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation See that ye reject not him that speaketh Heb. 4. 10. These mine enemies that would not that I should reign over them bring them hither and slay them before me Luke 19. 27. with abundance such Pardon here that my indignation suffereth me not to be longer or colder but shortly to tell you further that to deny Christs Law is 1. To deny him to be a King and to be Christ 2. To deny his Kingdom 3. And his Government 4. And his Gospel 5. And his Officers power both Kings and Pastors 6. And your own subjection 7. And all duty and obedience to him 8. And the being of all sin as against his Laws 9. And all Judgement according to his Laws 10. And all reward for keeping his Laws 11. And all punishment for breaking them 12. And all duty to preach learn or meditate on them 13. And all blame on such as silence such preaching 14. And indeed the very being of all Law and Government in the world For since the Promise Gen. 3. or at least now there is no Law of God in the world but what is the Redeemers Law Even the Law of Nature now is in his hand and is the Law of the Redeemer to lapsed Nature And all the world had a new Law of Grace made to Adam in the first Edition and the Church hath it now in the second Edition And now what part of Christianity do you not destroy Choose you now whether you will come off by confessing that you erred and differed from us but in a word not understood or whether you will allow us to take you for downright Hereticks And bethink you whether those rash and self-conceited Divines that have reviled Papists and Arminians for saying that Christs Gospel was a Law or that he made a new Law have done good service to the Christian or the Protestant Cause or have rather done much to harden the Rapists into a more confident conceit that Protestants are Hereticks CHAP. V. Whether Christ be the only Party in Covenant with God and not Believers or lapsed man Lib. IV. Mr next Charge it that you feign the Covenant to be made with us which is made only with Christ Do you not remember that even the Westminster Assembly say in their larger Catechism that The Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam and in him with all the Elect as his seed But you feign it to be made with the Elect nay to others immediately and not only as Christs seed in him nor to Christ at all P. I will not waste time in expounding or censuring other mens words but as to the matter is it not a most shameful thing that a man of your profession and pretensions to knowledge should confound those two Covenants which children should be taught in their Catechism to distinguish By a Covenant here we mean 1. A Covenant offered and imposed which is also a Law 2. A Covenant consented to and mutual And now tell me Quest 1. Was it not a distinct Law that was made to us from that which Christ was obliged by I mean the Law of Grace and Faith Was Christ commanded to Repent of his sin or accept a Saviour or pray for pardon or mortifie his lusts or trust another to reconcile him to God or be Thankful for such mercies or any such like
not by such talk as this believe either that God Rewardeth himself or that he Rewardeth not us But we easily grant that he rewardeth us for nothing which cometh not from his free bounty For no creature can have any other good 2. But if Faith and Love and Obedience be not commanded to us but only given us then they are no Duties but Gifts only and unbelief hatred of God and disobedience is no sin nor brings no punishment Lib. At least they are no Conditions of the Covenant P. Do you think that they are any proper Means of our Justification and Salvation as their End or not Lib. Yes I dare not say that they are no means at all Faith and Repentance are Means of our Pardon and Holiness and Perseverance of our Glorification P. What sort of means do you take them to be Lib. They are such Gifts of God as in order must go before Salvation P. Going before signifieth only Antecedency and not any Means Lib. One Gift maketh us fit for a thankful improvement of another P. This speaketh them only to be a Means to our Thankful improvement and not to our Right to the things to be improved Lib. I do not think that they are a means of our Right or title P. Rev. 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his Commandments that they may have Right to the tree of life c. Lib. It may be translated that wash their garments and that they may have power upon as Dr. Hammond noteth P. 1. The Alexandrian Copy which giveth him this occasion is singular and not be set against all other though the Vulgar Latin go the same way Beza who yet thinks that a transposition of two Verses hath darkned these Texts this Book being negligently used because many for a time took it not for an Apostolical Writing or Canonical yet saith that it is contra omnium Graecorum codicum fidem that the Vulgar goeth 2. But all 's one in sense For to wash their Garments is to be sanctified or purified from sin and not only from guilt of punishment And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth such a Power as we call Authority oâ— Right usually But what maketh you deny Conditions on mans part Lib. Because 1. It is supposed that a condition is profitable to him that requireth it 2. It is some Cause of the benefit 3. It is to be done by the performers own strength whereas God giving â—s Faith that can be no condition on our part which is first a Gift from him that requireth it For to give it first maketh it no condition of ours P. Here we see what it is to quarrell about ambiguous Words No one of these is true that you say of the common nature of a condition or at least as we mean by that word 1. Civilians define a Condition to be Lex addita negotio qua donec praestetur eventum suspendit As it is Required it is only Modus promissionis donationis vel contractus as Performed it is only a Removal of an Impediment and a Disposition of the Receiver So that as the Non-performance is but the suspension of a Causation so the performance of a Condition as such is no Cause efficient But it is dispositio subjecti which you may call a necessary Modus of a Material Cause as the Recipient may improperly be called Dr. Twisse therefore calleth faith Caâ—sa justificationis dispositiva 2. So it be an act of our own it is no way necessary that it be done without the Commanders help or gift For he that giveth us to believe doth give it by this means even by commanding it and making it a Condition of his further benefits that so he may induce us as rational free agents to perform it ex intuitu mercedis or by the motive of the end or benefit For he causeth it by suitable means And no doubt but faith and the rest are free acts of ours though caused by Gods grace 3. And it is accidental to a Condition that it be any way commodious to the Imposer What profit is it to a Father that his Child put off his Hat and say I thank you And yet he may make that a condition of his gift What profit is it to a free Physicion that the Patient observe his order in taking his Medicines And yet he may give them on that condition But yet I will add that as usually men make that the condition of a Gift or Contract which the person obliged is backward else to perform and that which is somewhat either for the Donor or Contracters Interest or the Ends of his contract so God who taketh his Glory and Pleasure in his Childrens Good to be as his Interest and the End of his Gifts and knoweth how backward we are to our duty doth on these accounts impose on us our duty and conditions his Pleasure and Glory being instead of his Commodity But if If be a conditional Particle and if Gods suspending by the tenour of his Donation our Right to Justification upon our free believing and our Right to Salvation on our free obedience do prove Conditionality as it doth all that we mean then you see that the new Covenant hath conditions Lib. Doth not God promise us the first Grace even to take the hard heart out of our bodies and give us hearts of flesh and new hearts c. And I pray what condition can the first grace have unless you will run in infinitum to seek Conditions of Conditions P. 1. This is a Cause of great moment of which I have my self had darker thoughts than now I have 1. If one Benefit of the Covenant have no Condition viz. the first will it follow that none of the rest are given upon condition May not God in Baptism give us a Right of special Relation to the Father Son and Holy Ghost his Love Grace and Communion Pardon Adoption and Glory on condition of Faith and Repentance and yet himself give us that Faith and Repentance which is the condition of the rest 2. But upon fuller consideration it will appear that It is not the first Grace that those promises mean by a new and soft heart For who ever will examine them shall find that the Texts mention Conditions and also antecedent Grace And indeed A new and soft heart is but the same thing which the New Testament calleth Sanctification And yet that Sanctification is promised as consequent to Faith as its condition And our ordinary Divines do accordingly distinguish of Vocation and Sanctification holding that in Vocation the Act of Faith and Repentance are caused by Gods Grace before proper Habits and that Sanctification is the Habits specially of Love and Holiness following them vid. Ames Medull de Vocat Rolloc de Vocat Hookers Souls Vocat Humil. Rogers of Faith c. And this is the new and fleshy heart But what need we more to prove that Covenant Conditional which I mean when it is nothing
but the Baptismal Covenant where sure the condition is notorious and every Baptizing Minister prerequireth the profession of it CHAP. VII Whether Justifying Faith be a Believing in Christ as a Teacher Lord c. or only a Receiving of his Righteousness P. VI. AS to this your sixth Charge I have said so much elsewhere in my Disputations of Justification and in other Books that I cannot justifie the tiring of Readers by repeating it And will say now but this little following 1. That Paul doth not distinguish between justifying faith and saving faith but excludeth the Works excluded by him from being the causes either of Justification or Salvation 2. That if Receiving Christs Righteousness be meant by them properly and physically it is no sort of faith at all but only the effect of the donation which they call Justificari or passive Justification But if it mean a moral metonymical Reception that is nothing but Consent to have the offered gift And if only Consent to have Christs Righteousness be Justifying faith then all the Assenting part is excluded in which Scripture much placeth it and most Divines in part and many in whole besides Camâ—ro and his followers And so also all the Affiance or Fiducial â—cts are excluded which almost all include even that which they call Recumbency being distinct from Consent 3. All these acts following are essential to Justifying faith as well as this Consent to be Justified 1. An Assenting belief in God in the baptismal sense 2. An Assent to the truth of Christs Person Office and Doctrine 3. A belief in the Holy Ghost 4. A belief of Pardon Sanctification and Glory as possible purchased and offered by Christ 5. A Consent that God be our God in Christ 6. And a Consent that Christ be our Teacher 7. And our King and Ruler 8. And our Intercessor 9. And our Judge and Justifier by sentence and as our Advocate 10. A belief of his Resurrection Power and Glory 11. A Trusting to the Father and the Son according to these forementioned Offices 12. A Consent to be Sanctified by the Holy Ghost 4. Plainly our Justifying and Saving Faith in Pauls sense is the same thing with our Christianity or becoming Christians And the same thing with our Baptismal faith and consent 5. To believe in Christ as Christ is in Scripture Justifying faith But to accept his righteousness only and not to believe in him as our Lord and our Teacher and Intercessor c. as aforesaid is not to believe in him as Christ 6. In my Answer ubi sup to Mr. Warner and elsewhere I have detected the fraud of their quibling distinction who say that All this is in faith quae justificat but not quà justificat as supposing a falshood that any act of faith quà talis justifieth 7. They that say that only our Acceptance of Christs Imputed Righteousness is the Justifying act of faith and that to expect to be Justified by any other viz. by Believing in God the Father and the Holy Ghost and believing a Heaven hereafter and believing the Truth of the Gospel and of Christs Resurrection Ascension Glory c. and by taking him for our Teacher Ruler Intercessor c. is to expect Justification by Works in Pauls disclaimed sense and so to fall from Grace I say they that thus teach do go so far towards the subverting of the Gospel and making a Gospel or Religion of their own as that I must tell them to move them to repentance not only the adding of Ceremonies is a small corruption in comparison of this but many that in Epiphanius are numbred with Hereticks had far lesser errors than this is CHAP. VIII Of Faiths Justifying as an Instrument P. VII ANd I have said so much in the foresaid Disputations of Justification and other Books of Faiths Instrumentality and the reason of its Justifying interest that I cannot perswade my self now to talk it out with you all over again but only to say 1. That I have fully oft proved from many plain Scriptures that pardon and salvation are given with Christ in the Covenant of Grace on Condition of a penitent believing fiducial acceptance And therefore that it is most certain that faith is a Condition of our Justification and so to be profest in Baptism 2. The name of An Instrument given to faith and its Justifying as an Instrument are of mens devising and not in Gods Word 3. But as to the sense It is certain that faith is no Instrument of our Justification Gods or Mans if it be meant properly of an Instrumental efficient cause 4. But if it be taken Metaphorically for an Act whose Nature or essence is An Acceptance of a free Gift and so by Instrumentality be meant the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere that is Faith 's very Essence in specie then no doubt it is what it is 5. Or if by an Instrument be meant A Moral aptitude or Disposition of the person to be justified answerable to the Dispositio Recipientis vel materiae in Physicks then it is such an Instrument But how well this is worded and what cause there is to contend for a word both of humane invention and metaphorical and this as if it were a weighty Doctrine I leave to sober judgements 6. But it is certain that the Accepting Act of faith is but its Aptitude to be the condition of the Gift and therefore that its being made by Christ the Condition is its Moral nearest interest in our Justification CHAP. IX Whether Faith it self be imputed for Righteousness Lib. VIII WHat do you but subvert the Gospel when you put faith instead of Christ or of his Righteousness When the Scripture saith that we are justified by Christs Righteousness Imputed to us you say it is by faith imputed P. Do you think any sober Christians here really differ or is it only about the Names and Notions Which ever it be 1. Of the name Is it not oft said that Faith is and shall be imputed for Righteousness Rom. 4. 22 23 24. James 2. 23. Lib. Yes I must grant the words but not your meaning P. Where doth the Scripture say that Christs Righteousness is Imputed to us Remember that it is only the Name that I ask you of Lib. It saith that Righteousness is Imputed and what Righteousness â—an it be but Christs P. I tell you still it is only the phrase or words that we are first trying Are these the same words Righteousness is Imputed and Christs Righteousness is Imputed If not where are these latter words in Scripture Lib. Grant that the words are not and your words are P. Then the question is Whether Scripture phrase or mans invented phrase be the better and safer in a controvertible case And next Whether you should deny or quarrel at the Scripture saying that faith is imputed to us for righteousness and not rather confute our misexpounding it if we do so Lib. Well Let us examine the sense then What
imputed to us for righteousness If it be only the object and not faith why is it so often called faith believing being perswaded c. Will you say that It is not faith as an act of ours only Whoever dreamt it was For à quatenus ad omne If as an act then every act even plowing and walking and sinning would justifie us Will you say that It is not Faith as a Moral Virtue or Good act only Who saith it is For then every moral good act would justifie men Do you say that It is not by faith as faith in genere It is granted you For else à quatenus ad omne any act of faith would justifie even believing that there is a Hell Will you say that it is not any other species of faith besides our baptismal faith We grant it you But if you will also say that It is not this species even the Christian faith neither that is meant but only the object of it then 1. Why say you that it is Faith as connoting the object contradicting your self for if be not faith at all it is not faith as connoting that which is not doth not connote 2. And why say you that it is not faith it self essentially Is not the object essential as an object to the act in specie Is it not essential to our Christian faith to be a Believing in Christ 3. But what sober unprejudiced Christian that readeth the Text throughout and hath not been instructed to pervert it can choose but see that it is Faith it self that the Apostle speaketh of and that it is our personal Relation of Righteousness that it is said to be imputed for And who can believe that this is the sense Abrahams faith was imputed to him for Christs Righteousness or this either His faith that is Christs Righteousness and not his faith was imputed to him for Christs Righteousness Undoubtedly by faith is meant faith and by Righteousness is meant our own Relation But it is most easie to discern that the plain sense is Christ being presupposed the Meriter of our Justification and Salvation which he hath given the world conditionally by a Law of Grace or Covenant Donation by which now he ruleth and judgeth us all that this Covenant Gift or Law requireth on our part to make us Righteous and entitle us to the Spirit and everlasting life is that as Pâ—nitent Believers we accept Christ and life according to the nature ends and uses of the gift and this also by his grace Reader hold close to this plain Doctrine which most of the lower sort of Christians know who have not faln into perverters hands and youâ— will have more solid and practical and peaceable truth about this point than either Dr. Thomas Tullie or Maccovius or Mr. Crandâ—â— or Dr. Crispe or the Marrow of Modern Divinity * Written by an honest Barber Mr. Fisher as is said and applauded by divers Independent Divines or Paul Hobson or Mr. Saltmarsh or any such Writers do teach you in their learned Net-work Treatises by which being Wise or Orthodox overmuch being themselves entangled and confounded by incongruous notions of mans invention they are liker to entangle and confound you than to shew you the best method and grounds for the peace of an understanding dying man Christs Righteousness is Imputed or Reckoned to be as it is the total sole Meritorious Cause of all that Grace and Glory given us in and by the Conditional Law or Covenant of Grace and of our Grace for performance of the Conditions and it needeth nothing at all of ours to make it perfect to this use nor hath our faith any such supplemental Office But this condition of our part in Christ and of our Right to his Covenant-gifts must be performed and the sentence of Absolution or Condemnation life or death must be passed on us accordingly it being not Christ but we by this very Law that are to be Judged Justified or Condemned And this is the Condemnation that light is come into the World and men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil But to as many as Received him he gave Right to become the Sons of God even to them that believe in his name And there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit For being perfected he is become the Author of eternal Salvation to all them that obey him And it is not they that cry Lord Lord that shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but he that doth the will of our heavenly Father For Godliness hath the promise of the life that now is and of that to come CHAP. X. Whether Gods justifying those to day that were yesterday unjustified signifie any change in God P. IX OF this also I have said so much in my Apologie to Dr. Kendall and in the two first parts of this Book before that I shall now put you off with this short notice 1. There is nothing changed or new in God That which on his part is in God the Cause of our Justification is his eternal simple essence 2. But Gods Essence Understanding or Will considered simply in it self is not to be called Mans Justification But the effect produced by it And partly the extrinsick object as terminating Gods act and so by extrinsick denomination or connotation Gods Essential Intellect and Will is said de novo to justifie But it is only man that is really changed 3. The New effect in man from which God is said de novo to justifie him is 1. A new Right or Relation to Christ pardon and life and to the Father and the Holy Ghost 2. A new objective termination of Gods estimation acceptance and complacency And 3. A new heart hereupon at the same instant given us I think none of this is from eternity And that as God did de novo make the world and judge it existent and love and order it as existent without any change in him as also millions of creatures proceed from his simple Unity so is it here And this needeth no more words with knowing or teachable men And to others there is no end CHAP. XI Whether a Justified man should be afraid of becoming unjustified Lâ—b THis fear of losing our justification which you teach men is most injurious to Gods free grace and immutability and a rack for Conscience to destroy mens peace P. I have said so much of this before about Perseverance and Assurance as forbiddeth me tedious repetitions Here needeth no more but this explication of the matter which you confound 1. Fear is either Causeful or Causeless 2. Fear is either such as hindereth comfort or such as helpeth it 3. Fear is either a Duty or an unavoidable natural passion or a sin of unavoidable infirmity or a more deadly or heinous sin 4. It 's one thing to cause and cherish Fear and another thing to teach men that cannot avoid
promised as if he had been surprized into a promise not suited to the nature of the thing this would be abhorred by the same professours who in other words as it seemeth to be against Popery will applaud it But in all this you must remember that it is presupposed that mans soul is before made Immortal by God as Creator and that he might anniâ—â—â—late the most holy Creature if he will But he hath declared that he will not partly by the Nature of his soul and partly by his natural and positive revelations so that it is presupposed that God will continue us men and then Holiness will be a proportionable Happiness L. But I pray you give me further proof that the Papists mean so well and near us â—s you describe the case Cite me the Authors R. 1. You must take nothing for their Religion but what is in their Councils And you must charge no errour on them but what you can prove For the Accuser is the prover And I before cited to you the words of the Trent Council But I justifie not all that they there say And one passage as it soundeth I greatly abhorr which is that a Just man doth not venially sin much less deserve hell in every good work Can. 11. de Justif whereas I doubt not but the very culpable defect of Love to God and other holy qualifications defileth our best works with sin and every sin deserveth some degree of a hell according to the Law of Innocency But if they mean 1. That Good works as such are not sin 2. Or that our infirmities are not such as to which the Law of Grace threatneth hell and will condemn us we are then of their mind but we much mislike their words For were there not an antecedent desert of hell and a sinfulness so deserving though not by an unremediable guilt there would be no need of pardon But to speak freely the Council Doctors seemed not well studied in the doctrine of the Covenants even Suarez de Legibus one of the best is herein short and so to speak confusedly of these matters But they seem mostly to take notice only of the Law of Grace and because that accepteth sincerity and condemneth none for meer Infirmities therefore they thence measure both fault and guilt which they should not do For I find that they still presuppose Redemption and Pardon of sin in the present case But to proceed to their Doctors Vega q. 4. defineth Merit thus Meritum est actio libera acceptata ad aliquod praemium And de re do you deny this Davenport thus amendeth it Meritum de condignâ— est actio libera ab homine in gratia elicita qua ex Justitia acceptatur ad praemium c. meaning Justitia promissoris Scotus 1. d. 17. q. 1. c. will not have it meritorious because is done by grace but by Divine decree promise and acceptance And this he calleth Justice ex suppositione decreti promissi Non igitur ex natura actus oritur obligatio ad praemium saith S. Clara factâ autem pactione est debitum ex justitia And thus say the generality of the Scotists Yet some will not yield that God is so much as a Promiser lest he be obliged but only an Assertor as S. Clara noteth Tho. Waldensis and some others deny all merit fitly so called De sacram tit 1. Eckius Marsilius and Bellarmine saith S. Clara deny all merit of congruity Greg. Arim. 1. d. 17. q. 1. a 2. saith that there is no merit of blessedness by condignity Durandus 1. d. 27. q. 2. saith there is no merit of condignity with God nisi largo modo So Marsilius in 2. d. 27. Brugensis in Psal 35. Eckius in Cent. de Pradest Cusanus Stapleton and others of whom S. Clara referreth you to Suarez in 3 Tho. disp 10. sect 7. q. 3. Bradwardine c. 39. fol. 338. laboureth to prove that the increase of Grace or Glory is not merited de condigno but de congrâ—o and that all Catholicks so hold And next denyeth merit de congruo and all by reasons which S. Clara taketh to be valid Soto a Thomist denyeth all merit de congruo and saith the Fathers held it not 4. d. 14. q. 2. a. 5. l. 2. de nat Grat. c. 4. Bonaventure 2. d. 28. a. 2. saith Pelagius erred 1. In holding that the first grace was merited 2. That by the strength of Free-will we can dispose or prepare our selves for grace S. Clara saith Aestimo esse omnium Scholasticorum non dari ex parte peccatoris ullam causam meritoriam dispositionem aut conditionem ad primam gratiam For which he citeth August P. Innoc. 1. ad Concil Carth. Concil Arausic 2. can 3 4 5. Concil Trident. Sess 6. c. 5. concluding Et sine dubio hoc est de fide apud omnes Catholicos Doctores nec ullus unquam oppositum tenuit Et Bradward optimus divinae Gratiae propugnator dicit expresse esse Pelagianismum licet intelligeretur solùm de merito de congruo Yea Aquinas denyeth all merit de congruo as to Justifying grace 1. 2. q. 14. a. 7. in Rom. c. 4. Vega's judgement is commonly known See Carthusian in Jac. 2. c. I may conclude then with S. Clara that Cassander spake not unreasonably when he said Quo sensu hoc vocabulo Meriti Merendi usi sunt Patres Catholici obscurum non est nempe ut per illud gratiae Dei ex qua merita omnia oriuntur nihil detrahatur Quare nil est cur aut Ecclesiastici à loquendi forma sententia in Ecclesia jam olim usitata discedant aut Protestantes eam tam odiosè repudient aut condemnent And that Bucer said well colloq Ratisb Si sancti patres aut alii intelligunt Promereri facere ex fide gratiae dei bona opera quibus Deus mercedem promisit hoc sensu usurpare illud verbum minimè damnabimus L. Thus you seem to like the very word merit which in your confession you do not R. 1. I like the Scripture word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And they that translate it worthy and account condignity the highest notion of merit seem to allow that it may be translated Meriting 2. I would fain find a word to serve instead of merit answering Reward and I cannot What word can you find Premiability and Rewardableness are long and unhandsome and I remember no other without using many words 3. Yet I wish it disused to avoid abuse and offence L. But when Cassander saith It is used as not encroaching on grace I take all merit to encroach upon it and injure it R. I ask you Quest 1. If you preach that a Holy Lover of God is fitter for Heaven and Happiness in Gods love than a wicked man and hath a promise of it and another preach that the Saints are no fitter for Gods love and happiness than the wicked but only it 's promised
them without any fitness which would good men more dislike I think that the first is but the very thing that most of the School Doctors mean And that we at once abhorr their words and abhorr the contrary as they are variously presented to men Quest 2. And I ask you Whether do you think it a greater Grace or Gift of God to give a man that Holiness which shall fit him for Heaven or as they call it Merit it or to give him Heaven without such Holy fitness or merit L. Heaven without Holiness is a contradiction But if God could make a beast or bad man Happy without it doubtless yet both is more than one I had rather God would make me here fit for Heaven by holiness than not and so all Christians But we all take Merit to signifie somewhat which profiteth God and which is our own and not of his gift and grace In which I see we are mistaken R. Doubtless as that God who can relieve your poor or sick friend without you sheweth you a double favour if he will make you his instrument in relieving him so if he cause you to work out your own salvation it is a greater mercy than if he would carry you asleep to Heaven And it 's strange that men that know that all that we have is of God should think his grace dishonoured by giving us the greater mercy But to return to my account of the Papists I will mention Aquinas farther because you know who numbreth him with the grosser sort 1. 2. q. 114. a. 1. He concludeth that man meriteth not at all of God according to absolute or simple Justice which goeth by equality sed secundum divinae ordinationis quandam praesuppositionem as man obtaineth that as a reward by his operation for which God gave him the operative virtue And so that here is but modus quidam Justitiae as a Father hath to a Child and merit only secundum quid at non simpliciter And he addeth that our voluntary doing our duty is our merit not as profiting God but manifesting his glory and pleasing his will and so God is not a Debtor to us but to his own will or to himself And a. 2. he concludeth that without Grace even man in innocency much less in sin could thus merit life eternal When after therefore he speaks for merit of condignity as the acts are from the Holy Ghost it is such a merit as aforesaid that he meaneth But the first Grace he saith none meriteth But I desire you for the understanding of Aquinas and such others to take notice that the foundation of many confused speeches of theirs is their confused notions of Gods Laws or Covenants For Aquin. q. 106. a. 1. doth go the way of Mr. Sterry and Sr. H. Vane and the Quakers and conclude that the New Law of Grace is not written but in the heart that is that Lex nova principaliter est ipsa gratia spiritus sancti in corde fidelium scripta because unaquaeque illud videtur esse quod in ea est potissimum and so that Lex scripta is called a Law secondarily as a means to the former Now this is gross abuse of an equivocal word by a vain pretence For the word Law doth not first signifie another thing because that other is most excellent but less excellent things as media ad finem have their proper notions And the world knoweth that the famosius significatum here is a Law ut signum voluntatis imperantis constituens debitum as an instrument of Government And that Sanctity of heart is the effect of the doctrine and a disposition to obey and is called a Law but in tropical sense But indeed Paul oft describeth the Gospel as in the heart and the Law as a thing But that contradicts not what I say but it was because the New Testament was not then much of it if any written and received in the Churches as Gods Law But Baptism expounded by word of mouth in the three Articles was the Christianity which Paul bid Timothy keep and commit to faithful men that might teach it The Christian Religion was by word committed to mens memory first and so to their hearts before it was put in writing But yet it was primarily and properly a Law ut signum obligans and but metonymically as the soul was holy by it The Law was one thing even in the mind and memory and the Love of God and it another though called a Law But from this notion that the old Law was a writing and the new Law was the spirit in us no wonder if Aquinas gathered that the word Justifie chiefly signified to make us Good and holy persons and that our Holiness being our real aptitude for our Glorifying and pleasing God and so for our Happiness therein was to be called our merit meaning thereby but that same fitness for the End oâ— Reward which Scripture calleth worthiness and all religious Preachers and people among us zealously defend in other notions where the Papists are forgotten L. It can never enter into my thoughts that so many Godly Learned Protestants would make odious the Papists if some of them at least meant no worse R. Know you not that judicious George Major was made the head of Hereticks by Gallus Amsdorfius c. for but saying Bona opera sunt necessaria ad salutem Read your Schlusselburgius of his heresie and judge as you see cause But whereas our Divines in confuting merit do still describe it as of commutative justice and not as of paternal Governing distributive Justice according to the Law of Grace I will yet tell you what is said by Vasquez the Jesuite in 1 Thom. qu. 21. disp 83. c. 1. 2. sequent Which when you have read I will appeal to common Reason and Christianity 1. Whether it be not a sinful thing for ignorant Protestants to take it upon one anothers reports that the Papists hold that doctrine of merits which they do not and so to make them unjustly more erroneous and odious than they are 2. Whether it be not a very sinful serving of the Devil for unlearned Divines that have read little of the Papists writings to backbite and calumniate those of us who truly state the Controversie and narrow the differences as if we made the Papists better than they are and took their parts meerly because we would have no good men belye them 3. Whether it be not the way to harden and increase the Papists to find such false dealing among their adversaries Cap. 1. Vasquez falls upon some late Doctors who say that Commutative Justice is properly and formally in God yet they say that it is not in God as it is in men nor as including any imperfection In the second Chapter he maintaineth that Commutative Justice is not in God according to propriety of speech and that this is the judgement of all the former School Doctors to a man He citeth many