Explication of the Epistle to the Ephesians upon those words Chap. 2.5 He hath quickned us together with Christ says That all the Elect who are the Members of Christ when he by his death had expiated their sins were freed from the guilt of eternal death and obtained a right to eternal life Chamier hath much to this purpose Nobis potius est persuasissimum c. We are most certainly perswaded that our sins are pardoned before we do believe for we deny that Infants do believe and yet Infants have their sins forgiven And a little before viz. Chap. 6. of the same Book I deny saith he that Faith is the cause of our Justification for then our Justification would not be of Grace but of our selves but Faith is said to justifie not because it effecteth Justification but because it is effected in the justified person And in another place to the same purpose Faith doth neither merit obtain nor begin our Justification for if it did then Faith should go before Justification both in nature and time which may in no wise be granted for Faith it self is a part of Sanctification now there is no Sanctification but after Justification Quae re natura prior which is really and in its own nature before it Alstedius in his Supplement to Chamier saith That Faith concurs no otherwise to Justification then in respect of the passive application whereby a man applies the Righteousness of Christ unto himself but not in respect of the active application whereby God applieth unto man the Righteousness of Christ which application is in the minde of God and consequently from eternity Dr. Macouvius Professor of Divinity at Franeka hath a whole Determination to this purpose to prove that Justificacation actively considered or as it is the act of God blotting out our sins and imputing the Righteousness of Christ unto us goes before Faith Indeed he makes it to be not an immanent but a transient declared act which the Lord did when he first promised to send his Son to be our Mediator Gen. 3.15 Though one of our late Writers mentions this Doctors Opinion with much contempt and oscitancy calling his Assertions Strange senceless and abhorred which is the less to be regarded seeing he usually metes out the same measure unto all men else whose notions do not square with his own mould as to Dr. Twisse Mr. Walker and them that hold the imputation of Christs active Righteousness whom he calls A sort of ignorant and unstudied Divines c. Yet as he hath merited fairer usage amongst Christians for his other Labors So I dare say his Arguments in this particular will not seem so weak and ridiculous as Mr. Baxter maâ—â— them to an indifferent Reader that shall compare them with the Exceptions which he hath shaped unto them sharp Censures are but dull Answers Dr. Ames his Colâ—eague sayes no less who in his Marrow of Divinity having defined Justification to be the gracious Sentence of God by which he doth acquit us from sin and death and account us Righteous unto life he sayes That this sentence was long before in the minde of God and was pronounced when Christ our Head arose from the dead 2 Cor. 5.19 And in another place All they for whom Christ in the intention of God hath made satisfaction are reconciled unto God I might produce many others that are of eminent note who have asserted That all the Elect are reconciled and justified before they believe Now were all these Champions of Truth a pack of Antinomians and Libertines Hath Mr. Woodbridges humanity no better language to bestow upon them If he shall say he doth not mean them yet his reproaches do fall upon them for if Titius be an Antinomian for saying That the Elect are justified before they do believe Sempronius is an Antinomian who affirms the same § 6. Mr. Burges a man somewhat profuse in this kinde of Rhetorick seems willing to excuse some of those fore-mentioned Divines who have asserted the Remission of sins before Faith because they did it in a particular sence to oppose the Arminians who maintain a reconciliability and not a reconciliation by the death of Christ. But I believe he is not ignorant that Divine Truths are not to be measured by mens intentions let mens ends be never so good they cannot make Error to be Truth or if they are never so corrupt they cannot make Truth to be Error Nor do they whom he calls Antinomians assert Justification before Faith in any other sence then in respect of the absolute and immutable Will of God not to deal with his people according to their sins and in respect of the full satisfaction of Jesus Christ who by that one offering of himself hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified i. e. them whose sins are purged by his blood I could shew how frequently he and others have wounded some of our most eminent Divines both for Learning and Piety through the sides of Antinomians Mr. Burges in his Book of Justif. p. 219. calls it An Antinomian Similitude to say That as a man looking on the Wall through Red Glass conceives the Wall to be of the same colour so God looking upon us in Christ seeth nothing but the Righteousness of Christ in us and no sin at all Which Similitude is used by Dr. Reynolds in his Excellent Treatise on the 110 Psalm where he doth plainly assert that Doctrine which Mr. Burges condemns for Antinomianism Mr. Baxters Character of an Antinomian will bring all our Protestant Writers under this censure For with him they are Antinomians who hold 1 That our Evangelical Righteousness is without us in Christ or performed by him and not by our selves Or 2 That Justification is a free act of God without any condition on our part for the obtaining of it Or else 3 That Justification is an Immanent act and consequently from eternity which was the Judgement of Alsted Pemble Twisse Rutherford c. Or 4 That we must not perform duty for Life and Salvation but from Life and Salvation or that we must not make the attaining of Justification or Salvation the end of our endeavors but obey in thankfulness and because we are justified and saved c. Now let any man who is moderately versed in our Protestant Writers but speak on whom this Arrow falls I might instance in many others but I will not put the Reader unto so much trouble § 7. My business at present is to acquit this Doctrine of Justification in foro Dei before Faith from Mr. Woodbridges charge of Antinomianism And truly I wonder that he should give it this name For 1. It hath not the least affinity with the Antinomian Tenents which as they are related by Sleiden were That the Law is not to be Preached to bring men to Repentance or unto the sight of their sins That what ever a mans life be
no man hath his sins remitted before he doth actually believe As for his Allegation out of Mr. Shepherd Mark those men that deny the use of the Law to lead unto Christ if they do not fall in time to oppose some main point of the Gospel c. It doth not touch us for we deny not the use of the Law to bring men unto Christ we look upon the Law as the Ordinance of God to convince men of their sin and misery and thereby to indear to them the Grace of the Gospel Gal. 3.22 24. We say with the Apostle The Law is good if men do use it lawfully i. e. In a way of subserviency and attendance upon the Gospel the better to advance and make effectual the ends thereof And as we deny not this use of the Law so neither doth our asserting That all the Elect before their conversion and Faith stand actually reconciled to God and justified before him obscure the Gospel I doubt not but the judicious Reader will expect a better proof of this charge then Cranfords word Have all those Reverend Divines before mentioned obscured the Gospel What is the Gospel but the glad tidings that Christ is come into the world to save sinners that by his subjecting of himself to the curse of the Law he hath freed them from the curse who were given him by the Father How is this truth obscured by our saying That God did everlastingly will not to punish his Elect and that in Christ he beholds them just and righteous even whilest they are sinful and wicked in themselves Do not they much more obscure the Grace of the Gospel who make it depending upon terms and conditions performed by us then we that affirm it to be free and absolute They that assign no certain and actual effect to the death of Christ or we that say according to the Scripture that all the Elect were thereby freed from the Law delivered from the Curse reconciled unto God made perfect and compleat in the sight of God And therefore though Dr. Downham doth call it A strange Assertion I shall not be ashamed to own it The Lord complains That the great things of his Law were counted strange Hos. 8.12 We read in Eusebius That the Christian Faith though it were from the beginning was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 New and strange The multitude cast this aspersion upon our Saviours Doctrine Mark 1.27 and the Athenians upon Paul Acts 17.19 20. The imputation of novelty and new fangledness hath been commonly cast upon the truths and ways of God Many things are new in respect of Observation which are not so in themselves We have known that godly men have looked upon some things as very strange which in tract of time have been generally imbraced Dr. Downham no doubt thought it strange that any godly man should say the Angels of the Seven Churches were not Diocesan Bishops and yet I believe Mr. Cr. is not of his Opinion If it were the Doctors meaning That this Assertion of Justification before Faith was never heard to come from the mouth of a godly man before Pemble either his memory was very weak or his charity was too much straitned He could not be ignorant of what hath been alledged out of Calvin Zaâ—che Parker Chamier one of those passages in Chamier before mentioned is cited by the Doctor in that very Book which Mr. Cr. quotes He knew likewise That all our old Protestant Divines have defined Justifying Faith to be a certain perswasion and full assurance of the pardon of our sins from whence it must inevitably follow That pardon of sin precedes our Faith for every object is before its act And as strange as it seemed unto this Doctor he himself sayes little less for in answer to Bellarmine who would prove that a man may be justified without special Faith he granteth It is true in respect of our Justification in the sight of God which special apprehension or application of Christ saith he though scorned by Papists yet it is of all Graces the most comfortable most profitable most necessary most comfortable for the very life of this life is the assurance of a better life most necessary because without this special receiving of Christ first by apprehension and then by application we can have no other saving Grace How can we love God or our Neighbor for his sake how can we hope and trust in him how can we rejoyce or be thankful to him if we be not perswaded of his love and bounty towards us Most profitable because from it all other Graces do proceed and according to the measure of it is the measure of them c. Doubtless That Faith to which these properties do belong doth best merit the name of Justifying Faith So then according to this Doctors Judgement the Assertion is not so strange as true § 6. Mr. Cr. goes on and much faster then a good pace This Opinion says he that the Elect are actually reconciled to God before they believe is confuted in this Treatise and proved contradictory to Scripture fit onely 1 to sow pillows under the elbows of prophane men 2 to overthrow the comfort of Believers destroying the ground nature and end of Faith How solidly it is confuted the Reader will see anon when the weight of his proofs shall come to be examined I doubt not but an impartial Judge will acquit it both from being contradictory to Scripture or guilty of those horrid Consequences which he hath cast upon it I marvel that so rational a man as Mr. Cr. is held to be should say That all this charge is proved part of which is not so much as mentioned by Mr. W. who is liberal enough of his criminations which makes me to think That he writ his Epistle before he read his Author or at least That he is a man that will be satisfied with slender Proofs against persons and Doctrines which he doth not fancy It is true Mr. W. hath endeavored to obtrude upon us some ugly Consequences which are as remote from our Doctrine as Earth is from Heaven Mr. Cr. is not ignorant how much peaceable and prudent men have disliked this practise of wyer-drawing mens Opinions and raking absurdities out of them per nescio quas fidiculas consequentiarum as Bishop Davenant expresseth it By small threds of consequencies which they themselves do disclaim and abhor from their whole heart whereupon sayes that Learned Bishop Good men ought to deal more fairly then to fasten an Heretical sence on other mens words when the Writers themselves which are the best Expounders of their own words can and use to reduce them to a Catholick sence Mr. Cr. knows That the very same Consequences are fathered upon the Doctrine of absolute Election Justification by Faith alone and the certain perseverance of true Believers The Semi-Pelagians of old would have forced this inference from Austins Opinion of absolute
Predestination If Gods decree be absolute Nemo vigilet nemo jâ—junet nemo libidini contradicet c. The Papists say It follows That if we be justified by Faith onely then we need not do good works The Remonstrants and their followers say That if a Believer cannot fall from Grace then need he not fear to commit any sin whatsoever Nor do these Consequences flow any whit more naturally from our Tenent then they do from these Doth it follow That because all the Elect are by means of Christs death actually reconciled unto God and freed from the condemnation of the Law That therefore men may live as they list that they need not hear believe and obey the Gospel How doth this sow pillows under mens elbows or lull asleep in security more then the Doctrine of absolute Election Seeing as all men are not elected so neither are all men reconciled unto God nor can any man know That he is elected and reconciled unto God but by and thorow Faith which Faith is wrought in men by the Preaching of the Word and doth certainly produce a holy life § 7. I confess I am yet to seek of the Reason of his other Deduction That this Assertion of actual reconciliation before Faith overthrows the comfort of true Believers and destroyes the ground nature use and end of Faith Is it an uncomfortable Doctrine to tell men That we are not sharers with Christ in effecting of our peace with God and in procuring the pardon of our sins and that Christ hath finished this work before we knew it Is it not much more comfortable to poor souls that Christ hath absolutely and by himself obtained forgiveness for sinners then that he hath procured this Grâ—â—e but conditionally upon condition we perform such and such 〈◊〉 for which we have no strength or ability in our selves Whence have the Saints drawn all their comfort Surely not from Faith or any other work of theirs but by Faith from Christ and from the perfection and al-sufficiency of his Sacrifice Not onely the Protestants but the Papists themselves though in the Schools they contend for the dignity and congruity of works that they are Moral causes or necessary conditions of Justification and Salvation yet on their death beds they utterly renounce them they exhort men in distress of Conscience to roul themselves wholly upon Jesus Christ. In a form prescribed for visiting of the sick the Priest or Minister was enjoyned to put these Questions to the sick party Dost thou believe to come to glory not by thy own merits but by the vertue and merit of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ And dost thou believe That our Lord Jesus Christ did die for our salvation and that none can be saved by his own merits or by any other means but by the merit of his passion Whereunto when the sick person answered affirmatively I do believe it the Priest is bid to exhort him in this wise Go to therefore as long as thy soul remaineth in thee place thy whole confidence in his death onely have confidence in no other thing commit thy self wholly to his death with this alone cover thy self wholly intermingle thy self wholly wrap thy whole self in his death c. Dangerous saith Bernard is the habitation of those that trust in their own works And in another place Ubi tuta c. What safe â—est or security can the weak soul finde but in the wounds of his Saviour As he is mighty to save so dwell I there with most safety Parisiensis in his Book of Divine Rhetorick Thou must beware saith he in thy striving with God that thou dost not build upon a weak foundation which he doth that trusts in his own works Gerson often inculcates this That before the tribunal of God we must onely plead the merits of Christ Bishop Gardner though he would not have this gap to be opened to the people yet he acknowledged it to be the most comfortable Doctrine to such as were in his condition he being then on his death bed Which is the more to be observed because in his life time he had stickled so much for our Adversaries Conditional Justification Bellarmine himself when he had written divers Books for Justification by Inherent Righteousness in the end concludes That for fear of vain-glory and by reason of the uncertainty of our own works Tutissimum est c. It is the safest way to place all our trust in the Mercy of God and of Jesus Christ so that we may say as Moses Their rock is not as our rock our Enemies themselves being Judges Deut. 32.31 § 8. Mr. Cr. hath not the least reason to charge us with destroying the Ground of Faith for the Ground of Faith is either Fundamentum Quod or Fundamentum Quo. Material and Personal or else Doctrinal and Ministerial We say with all true Christians That the onely Material or Personal Foundation whereupon a poor soul can build securely for Life and Justification is Jesus Christ Now the Doctrinal Foundation whereby our Faith is united to the former we affirm with Calvin and many more that it is Gratuita misericordiae in Christo promissio The free promise of Mercy in opposition to those Conditional Promises which send men partly to Christ and partly to their own works and therefore our Adversaries are much more obnoxious to this Censure of Destroying the Ground of Faith who allow it no other support then Conditional Promises whereby mens hope and confidence is made to lean more upon themselves then it doth on Christ much more upon their own works then it doth upon his Righteousness The forementioned Author hath well observed That if our Faith doth relie never so little upon our own works it cannot possibly stand fast that soul will never attain to any setled assurance of his Salvation that builds his Faith upon such a sandy foundation § 9. The nature of Faith receives not the least prejudice by our Doctrine for if we define it as most of our old Protestant Divines have done Certa indubitata persuasio A firm and certain perswasion of the favor of God and the pardon of our sins it confirms our Tenent for mens sins must be pardoned before they can believe it or else of necessity they must believe a lie All men know that the object doth precede the act unless it be when the act gives a being to the object Or if we make it to be fiducia the trust or reliance of the soul upon Jesus Christ it receives no small encouragement from this consideration That Christ hath finished whatsoever was necessary by Divine appointment for the Justification of sinners not expecting the least condition to be performed by us for that end Our Faith is never so impregnable as when it rests entirely upon Jesus Christ. And as for the ends and uses of Faith which are cheifly to give us boldness and
us totally passive in this work Rom. 3.24 26. 8.33 Eph. 2.8 We can no more justifie our selves then raise our selves from the dead Eph. 2.1 5. or then we could give our selves a being when as yet we were not Vers 10. Man is so far from being the total or principal Cause of his Justification that he is no cause at all by ascribing the least causality or efficiency to man in his Justification we derogate from the Grace of God in Jesus Christ. § 4. Others do take Faith in a proper sence as the Papists Socinians and Remonstrants amongst whom though there be some difference in Expression yet they all agree in this That by Faith in this Proposition A man is justified by Faith is meant the act or habit of Faith or such a Faith as is accompanied with faithful Actions The Papists say That Faith and other inherent Graces though in their own nature they do not deserve Justification yet through the merits of Christ and Gods gracious acceptance they do procure and obtain the forgiveness of our sins Though they ascribe a meritoriousness to Faith it is but in a qualified sence Faith saith Bellarmine doth but Suo quidem modo mereri remissionem after a manner merit remission scil By vertue of Gods Promise and Covenant who hath annexed forgiveness unto this condition If a King saith he doth promise a Beggar a thousand pound a year upon no condition then indeed the Beggar doth not deserve it but if it be upon condition that he do some small matter as to come and fetch it or to bring him a Posie of flowers then he doth deserve it because the promiser is bound unto performance And in this sence Mr. B. ascribes a meritoriousness to works But the chief difference between them and us lies in this We say a man is justified by the imputation of Christs Righteousness they That we are justified by inherent Righteousness or by doing of Righteous Actions such as are Faith Love Fear c. Ipsa fides in Christum saith Bellarmine est justitia Faith it self is our righteousness And that it doth justifie us impetrando promerendo inchoando â—ustificationem Arminius and the Remonstrants though they have exploded the word merit yet they attribute as much to Faith and faithful Actions as the Papists themselves Dico saith Arminius ipsum fidei actum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere imputari in justitiam idquè sensu proprio non metonymicè The very same is affirmed by Vorstius Bertius Episcopius and the rest of the Remonstrants Their Opinion in brief is this That God in the Legal Covenant required the exact obedience of all his Commandments but now in the Covenant of Grace he requires Faith which in his gracious acceptation stands instead of that obedience to the Moral Law which we ought to perform Which say they is procured by the merit of Christ for whose sake God accounts our imperfect faith to be perfect Righteousness § 5. Some of our late Divines who seem to disclaim the Doctrine of the Papists and Arminians say the very same who explain themselves to this effect That Faith doth justifie as a condition or antecedent qualification by which we are made capable of being justified according to the order and constitution of God The fulfilling of which condition say they is our Evangelical Righteousness whereby we are justified in the sight of God Mr. B. is so fond of this notion That although in one place he findes fault with the length of our Creeds and Confessions yet he would have this made an article of our Creed a part of our Childrens Catechisms and to be believed by every man that is a Christian so apt are we to smile upon our own Babes Though I honor Mr. Baxter for his excellent parts yet I must suspend my assent to his new Creed I shall prove anon That Faith is not said to justifie as an antecedent condition which qualifies us for Justification but at present I shall onely render him the Reasons of my disbelief Why I cannot look upon Faith as that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified I shall not insist upon it though it be not altogether unconsiderable that this notion is guilty of too much confederacy with the aforenamed enemies of the Christian Faith for though it is no good Argument to say That Papists Socinians c. do hold this or that therefore it is not true yet it will follow That such and such Tenents have been held by Papists c. and unanimously opposed by our Protestant Writers therefore they ought to be the more suspected and especially such Tenents of theirs as are the cheif points in difference between us and them as this is Our Brethren that have started this notion do take Faith as the others do in a proper sence they attribute as much to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere as Bellarmine Arminius or any other Faith it self says Mr. B. is our Righteousness There was never any Papist so absurd as to say That our Faith Love c. are perfect Legal Righteousness but that God judicio misericordiae non justitiae doth account and accept of it instead of perfect Righteousness For my part I must confess that I can see no dâ—fference between them but in Expression The Papists do acknowledge the satisfaction of Christ and that he is the meritorious cause of our Justification They say indeed That we are not justified by the Righteousness of Christ imputed but by a Righteousness inherent in us or righteous actions performed by us And what do our Brethren say less less then this But I shall not follow the Parallel any further § 6. The Reasons which turn the Scales of my Judgement against this notion That our Faith or Faithful Actions are that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified Are 1. If we are not justified by our own works then our believing c. is not that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified but we are not justified by our own works Ergo. The Assumption is written with a Sun beam throughout the Scripture Tit. 3.5 Not by works of Righteousness which we have done Rom. 11.6 If it be of Works then were Grace no more Grace It is the cheif scope of the Apostle throughout this and the Epistle to the Galatians to prove That we are not justified by works The sequel of the Proposition is as evident Because Faith and Obedience to Gospel Precepts are our works It is man that believes and obeys and not God though we do them by his help and assistance yet they are our acts or works so that consequently we are not justified by them in the sight of God The Papists to elude the force of this Argument say That the minde of the Apostle was onely to exclude from Justification works of Nature and not of Grace works which we our selves do by our own strength without the help
of the Act or of the Object of Faith We have shewed before that the Apostle in his disputes about Justification in these fore-mentioned Epistles where he opposeth Faith to Works he takes Faith in a Tropical sense for the Object and not the Act of Faith for else there had been no ground for him to make any opposition at all between Faith and Works and in affirming That we are justified by Faith he had contradicted himself in saying That we are not justified by Works seeing Faith or the Act of Believing is a work of ours no less then love And therefore it is evident that the Apostle when he concludes That we are justified by Faith and not by Works understands by Faith the Object thereof to wit Righteousness imputed and not inherent which by way of distinction and opposition to the other he calls the Righteousness of God because it is out of us in Christ God-man The reason why the Apostle calls the Object by the name of the Act Christs Righteousness by the name of Faith besides the elegancy of the Trope is because Faith ascribes all unto Christ it being an act of self-dereliction a kinde of holy despair a denying and renouncing of all fitness and worthiness in our selves a going unto Christ looking towards him and a roulling of our selves upon his Alsufficiency So that in the Apostles sense we deny not That Faith justifieth in the sight of God Faith I say taken objectively to wit For Christ and his Righteousness it is for his Merits and Satisfaction alone that we are accounted Just and Righteous at Gods Tribunal But if Faith be taken properly for the Act of Believing we say indeed That it onely evidenceth that Justification which we have in Christ. Nor is this any contradiction to the Holy Ghost who ascribes our Justification in the sight of God to Chrâ—st alone § 2. Next he calls it A most unsound Assertion That Faith doth evidence our Justification before Faith Is the Apostles definition of Faith Heb. 11.1 Faith is the evidence of things not seen An unsound Assertion Though some do ascribe more to Faith then an Act of evidencing yet I never met with any one before that did totally deny this use thereof All the knowledge that we have of our Justification is onely by Faith seeing it cannot be discerned by Sence or Reason either we have no evidence of our Justification and consequently do live without hope or if we have it is Faith that doth evidence it to our souls Now let our Justification be when it will if Faith doth evidence it it will follow That our Justification was before that Evidencing act of Faith for actuâ— pendet ab objecto the Object is before the Act. But I will not anticipate Mr. Woodbridges Reasons § 3. If sayes he Faith doth evidence our Justification it is either improperly as an effect doth argue the cause as laughing and crying may he said to evidence reason in a Childe c. Or else properly and thus either immediately and axiomatically or remotely and syllogistically 1 Faith doth not evidence Justification improperly as the Effect doth argue the Cause I shall readily grant him that Faith doth not justifie evidentially as a mark sign or token but as a knowledge and adherence unto Christ our Justifier as that Organ or Instrument whereby we look not upon our Faith but upon Christ our Righteousness and by the same Faith do cleave unto him They that make Faith a condition of our Justification use it but as a sign or as an argument affected to prove That a person is justified seeing that where one is the other is also where there is Faith there is Justification and for this cause innumerable other signs and marks are brought in to evidence this sign which are more obscure and difficult to be known then Faith it self nay which cannot be known to be effects of Blessedness but by Faith whereby poor souls either walk in darkness live in a doubting and uncertain condition all their days or else compass themselves about with sparks of their own kindling and walk in the light of their own fire fetching their comfort from Faith and not by Faith from Christ. Though I might fairly pass by this Branch of his Dilemma it being none of my Tenent and favored more by his own then my opinion yet I shall briefly give my fence of his Reasons That Faith doth not evidence Justification as a sign § 4. His first Reason is because then Justification by Faith would not necessarily be so much as Justification in our Consciences A Christian may have Faith and yet not have the evidence that he himself is justified Many Christians have that in them which would prove them justified whiles yet their Consciences do accuse and condemn them To which I Answer 1. That Mr. W. may be pleased to consider how well this agrees with that passage of his Pag. 15. Where he alledgeth the words of the Apostle 1 John 3.20 to prove That if our hearts do condemn us God doth much more condemn us 2. I should grant him That if Faith did evidence our Justification onely as a sign or some remote effect thereof like other works of Sanctification it would be but a dark and unsatisfying evidence 3. Whereas he sayes That doubting Christians have something in them that would prove them justified either it is something that precedes Faith or something that follows Faith or else Faith it self First Nothing that precedes Faith doth prove a man justified secondly Nothing that follows Faith is so apt to prove it as Faith it self because it is the first of all Inherent Graces it is by Faith that we know our Love Patience c. to be Fruits unto God whereas some make doubting to be a sign of Faith they may as well make darkness a sign of light it being in its own nature contrary thereunto and therefore it must be proved by Faith it self 4. Though a true Christian may have a doubting accusing Conscience as doubtless there is flesh and corruption in their Consciences as well as in their other faculties and there is no sin whereunto we have more and stronger temptations then to unbelief yet wheresoever there is Faith there is some evidence of this Grace as in the least spark of fire there is light though not so much as in a flame And the least twinkling Star gives us some light though not enough to dispel the darkness or to make it day There are several degrees of Faith there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a strong Faith and a weak Faith Now the least degree of Faith carries some light and evidence therewith and according to the measure of Faith is the evidence and perswasion of our Justification § 5. Secondly He urgeth If Faith did evidence Justification as an effect of it then we might as truly be said to be faithed by our Justification as to
be justified by our Faith I see no absurdity at all to say That Faith is from Justification causally and Justification by Faith evidentially That Grace which justifies us is the Cause and Fountain of all good things whatsoever both of Spiritual and Temporal Blessings and more especially of Faith 2 Pet. 1.1 Phil. 1.29 Yet doth it not follow That We must invert the order of the Gospel and instead of saying Believe and thou shalt be justified we must say hence forward Thou art justified therefore believe 1 Because it is not the priviledge of all men to whom we Preach but onely of the Elect of God And 2 because we know not who are justified no more then who are elected though Faith be an effect or sign of Election yet it doth not follow that we must say to any Thou art elected therefore believe 3 When the cause is not notior effectu we must ascend from the effect to the cause as in the present case § 6. Thirdly He loads it with this seeming absurdity That then it will unavoidably follow That we are justified by works as well as by Faith for works are an effect of Justification as well as Faith 1 It follows unavoidably from his own opinion For if Faith be taken in a proper sence for the Act of Believing it follows That we are justified by a work of our own or if Faith be the condition of Justification it will follow likewise That we are no more justified by Faith then by other works as Repentance Charity c. Which Mr. W. and others of his strain do make the conditions of their supposed Justification so that he is like to father the Childe which he hath sought to lay at our doors 2 It is not denied That Works do declare and evidence our Justification where the Apostle denies our Justification to be by Works he speaks of our real and formal Justification in the sight of God which he affirms is by Faith scil Objectively taken and not of the declaring or evidencing of our Justification which Saint James in his Epistle attributes to Works in reference to men and other Scriptures to Faith in reference to the Conscience of the person justified Romans 1.17 Galatians 2.16 3 Though works be the effect of justification as well as faith yet it will no follow that works do evidence our justificationas well as faith doth 1 Because every effect is not apt to evidence its cause especially when the same effect may proceed from severall causes as smoak is not so certaine an evidence of fire as light and heat is because steems and mists are so like to smoak so works do not evidence our justification so clearly and certainly 〈◊〉 Faith doth because works may proceed from principles of natural ingenuity and morality c. as those Heathens have performed 2 Because every effect doth not evidence to every faculty a like but this to one and that to another as for instance forme or Physiognomy doth evidence a man to sence but yet reason requires another manner of evidence so conscience requires a better evidence of our justification then works can give Workâ— do evidence it in the judgement of charity and before men but they do not evidence it in the judgement of infallibility or with that clearnesse and demonstrative certainty which the conscience requires conscience will need a better evidence then works can give Paul could plead his works before men 2 Cor. 1.12 which yet he never mentions in the pleas of his conscience towards God and that which conscience dares not plead before God can bee no good evidence unto conscience § 7. The other horn of his Dilemma will be frayd as easily as the former Faith saith he doth not evidence justification properly for then it must doe it either immediately and Axiomatically as it is an assent to this Proposition I am justified or else remotely and syllogistically by drawing a particular conclusion of our own justification out of generall propositions But Faith doth not evidence our justification Axiomatically c. For 1 There is no such thing written the Scripture doth no where say Thou Paul thou Peter or thou Thomas art justified Ergo Justification cannot be evidenced by Faith immediately Mr. W. here mistakes the nature of true justifying Faith who it seems conceives it to be a bare intellectuall assent to the truth of a Proposition such as Devils and Reprobates may attaine unto contrary to all Orthodox Divines who doe place Faith more in the Will then in the Understanding Justifying Faith essentially include 1. An assent of the understanding to the truth of the Scriptures revealing the sole-sufficiency of Christ for the reconciliation of sinners and the non-imputation of sin as also the will and command of God that all men should beleeve in him alone for life and salvation 2 a Fiduciall adherence and reliance of the will upon the same Christ the understanding being made effectually to assent and subscribe to the fore-mentioned propositions sub ratione veri the will is also powerfully drawne to accept imbrace and adhere unto Christ sub natione boni Our Divines doe include both these acts in the definition of Faith making it to be fiducialis assensus or assensus cum gustu such an assent unto the truths of the Gospell as that withall the soule tastes an ineffable sweetnesse in the same and thereupon â—esteth and relieth upon Christ for all the benefits of his death They make the principall act of Faith to be the reliance of the heart or wil upon Jesus Christ and therefore they determine that the object of Justifying Faith is not a Proposition or Axiom but Christ the mercy of God in Christ on whom whosoever rests and roules himselfe upon the call of the Gospel hath a certain evidence of his Interest in Christ and in all the treasures of righteousnesse and remission that are in him according to the degree of his affiance or his taste of sweetnesse in Christ is his evidence or assurance of his owne interest and propriety in him There is no sense that doth apprehend its object with more certainty then that of Tasting as he that tastes hony knows both the sweetnesse thereof and that he himselfe injoyes it So he that tastes the sweetnesse of the Gospell Promises and of that precious Grace which is therein revealed knows his interest and propriety therein It is observed of Jonathan 1 Sam. 14.27 When he tasted a little hony his eyes were inlightned and the Psalmist exhorts us to taste and see how good the Lord is The soule that tastes i. e. beleeves the Gospell and the goodnesse of God therein revealed to sinners sees and knowes his interest therein for all manner of sweetnesse is a consequent and effect of some propriety which we have in that good thing that causeth it unto which the nearer our interest is the greater is the sweetnesse which we find in it The Soul cannot taste
Justification 3 From other parallel phrases in holy Scripture where we are said to be redeemed justified and saved per Christum per sanguinem per mortem per vulnera All which doe signifie That Christ and his sufferings are the true proper and meritorious cause of these benefits and so it must bee understood when wee are said to be Justified by Faith and not that Faith is but a sine qua non or meer cypher in our Justification Faith objectively taken is a proper meritorious cause of our Justification § 4. 4 I shall make use of my adversaries weapon of that very medium which Mr. W. last alledged page 8. That interpretation of the phrase which makes us at least concurrent causes with God and Christ in the formall act of our Justification is not true because our Justification in respect of efficiency is wholly attributed unto them Rom. 8.33.4.6.8.3 24. The internal moving cause was his owne grace and the onely externall procuring cause is the death of Christ there is no other efficient cause besides these We can be no more said to justifie our selves then that we created our selves But to make Faith a condition morally disposing us to Justification maks us at least concurrent causes with God and Christ in our Justification 1. We should not be justified freely by his grace if any condition were required of us in order to our Justification for a condition as Mr. Walker observes well whensoever it is performed makes the thing covenanted a due debt which the promiser is bound to give and then as he infers Justification should not be of grace but of debt contrary to the Apostle in Rom. 3. and 4. 2. If Faith were a condition morally disposing us for Justification we should then be concurrent causes with the merits of Christ in procuring our Justification for the merits of Christ are not a physical but a moral cause which obtain their effect by vertue of that Covenant which was made between him and the Father now by ascribing unto Faith a morall causall influx in our Justification we doe clearly put it in eodem genere causae with the blood of Christ which I hope Mr. W. will better consider of before he engageth too far in Mr. Baxters cause § 5. That interpretation of this phrase which makes Works going before Justification not onely not sinful but acceptable to God and preparatory to the grace of Justification without controversie is not according to the minde of the holy Ghost For as much as the Scripture frequently declares that no mans Works are acceptable to God before his person is accepted and justified the Tree must be good or else the fruit cannot be good Luke 6.43 44. Mat. 12.33 Joh. 15.5 That of Aug. is sufficiently known Opera non precedunt justificandum sed sequuntur justificatum the old orthodox doctrine taught in these Churches here in England was that works before Justification are not pleasing unto God neither doe they make men meet i◠do not qualifie or morally dispose them to receive grace and we doubt not but they have the nature of sin I could muster up a legion of orthodox Writers to defend this Tenent that no qualification or act of ours before Justification doth prepare or dispose us for Justification Nay the Councel of Trent confesseth that none of those things which precede Justification whether it be Faith or other Works doe obtain the grace of Justification But to interpret Justification by Faith that Faith is a condition which doth qualifie us for Justification necessarily supposeth a Work or Works before Justification which have not the nature of sin but are acceptable to God and preparatory to grace viz. the grace of Justification which is most properly called Grace § 6. That interpretation of any phrase of Scripture which involves a contradiction is not to be admitted but to say Faith is a passive condition that doth morally qualifie us for Justification implies a contradiction Ergo The proposition is undeniable and the Assumption is to me as cleare To be both active and passive in reference to the same effect is a flat contradiction Now that is active which is effective which contributes an efficacy whether more or lesse to the production of the effect A condition though in the Logical notion of it it hath not the least efficiency and therefore Aristotle never reckoned this sine qua non in the number of causes yet in the use of the Jurists as we are now speaking of it it is a morall efficient cause which is effective of that which is promised upon condition Chamier hath well observed That omnis conditio antecedens est effectiva he that performes the least condition imaginable for having of any benefit is active and passive in obtaining of it We will look after no other instance then that which Mr. W. hath set before us An offender against our Lawes that is saved by his Clergy or by reading his Neck-verse he is not passive but active in saving of his life he may properly be said to have saved himselfe his reading being not onely a physicall act but a morall efficient cause which makes that favourable law to take effect To say he is passive because he made not the Law nor sits as Judge on the Bench to absolve himselfe is but a shift to blinde the eyes of the simple seeing that when more causes then one concur to an effect the effect may be denominated from the lowest that which doth least is an active efficient cause nay in this case the Malefactor doth more in saving of his life then either the Law or Judge for though pro forma he acknowledgeth the grace of the State and the courtesie of the Judge unto him yet as the Welch-man that was bid to cry God blesse the King and the Judge cryed God blesse her father and mother who taught her to read intimated he was more beholding to his reading then to the courtesie of the Judge for else the Judge would have been severe enough his mercy would have deserved but little thanks I must needs tell my Old Friend Non loquitur ut Clericus We say such a man is Passive in saving his life who is not required to read or perferm any other condition but receives a pardon of meer Grace In like manner he is Passive in his Justification that doth nothing at all towards the procuring of i◠he that performs the least condition in order thereunto is not onely Physically but Morally active in obtaining this priviledge For though he did not make the Law by and according to which he is justified nor pronounce the sentence of Absolution upon himself yet he hath a subordinate or less principal efficiency in producing the effect nay a learned man whom I hope Mr. W. will not think more worthy to be derided then disputed with tells us That he that performs conditions for Justification doth more to his
Justification then God who made onely a conditional grant notwithstanding which he might have perished but he by performing the condition makes the grant to be absolute And truly sayes the same Author whosoever makes Faith the condition of the New Covenant in such a sense as perfect Obedience was the condition of the Old cannot avoid it but that man is justified chiefly by himself and his own acts not so much by Gods Grace in imputing Christs Righteousness but more by his own Faith which is his own act though of Gods work God by making his supposed gracious conditional promise doth not justifie any man for that makes no difference at all amongst persons It remains therefore that man must be said to justifie himself for where there is a promise of a Reward made to all upon condition of performing such a service he that obtains the reward gets it by his own service without which the promise would have brought him never a whit the nearer to the Reward Thus a man justifies himself by believing more a great deal then God justifies him by his promulgation of the conditional promise which would have left him in his old condition had not he better provided for himself by believing then God by promising as in the old Covenant it was not Gods threat that brought death upon the world just so in the new if it be a conditional promise it is not the promise that justifies a believer but the believer himself § 7. Mr. W. may as well call the Blood of Christ a Passive condition in our Justification because it did not make the Law nor pronounce the sentence of Absolution let the indifferent Reader consider whether this be not I will not say a childish but an impertinent answer which draws his former Concession quite aside from the matter now under debate for the question is not whether man did concur in making the Law and Rule of his Justification but whether he hath any causal influx in producing the effect or whether before Justification he can or doth perform any condition to which God hath infallibly promised this Grace Which if granted will conclude That he is not Passive but Active in his Justification when our Protestant Divines say That a man is Passive in his first Conversion Their meaning is That he can perform no condition at all to which God hath inseparably annexed the Grace of Conversion So Cameron expresseth their sense and meaning Vocatio nullam poscit in objecto conditionem For though a man before conversion do perform many natural acts which have a remote tendency to this effect as Hearing Reading Meditating c. yet for all we say He is Passive therein because these are not such conditions to which God hath promised saving Grace So though a man doth never so many natural acts or duties whereunto God hath not immediately promised this priviledge he is but Passive for all in his Justification but if he do perform any condition to which Justification is promised then he is active and consequently may be said to justifie himself § 8. But says Mr. W. We do no more justifie our selves then we do glorifie our selves it is God alone doth both and we are Passive in both Pag 8. And again It is God that glorifies us and not we our selves yet surely God doth not glorifie us before we believe Pag. 10. First I shall readily grant him that we do neither justifie nor glorifie our selves seeing that we obtain neither of these benefits by our own works From the very beginning to the end of our Salvation nothing is primarily or causally Active but Free-grace all that we receive from God is gift and not debt Glory it self is not wages but Grace For though it be called The recompence of Reward Heb. 11.27 yet that is not to be understood in a proper sense as when the Reward is for the Work which may be two ways First When the work is proportionable to the wages as when a Laborer receives a shilling for a days work here the work doth deserve the wages because the work doth him that payes the wages as much good as the wages doth the worker Now surely no reward can come from the Creator to the Creature in this way bâ—cause no man can do any work that is profitable unto God Psal. 16.2 Job 22.3 35.8 Rom. 11 35. The very Papists will not say that Glory is a reward in this sense Works saith Bishop Gardner do not deserve Salvation as a Workman deserveth his wages for his labor Secondly When the work is not answerable to the wages but yet the wages is due by promise upon the performance of it as when a poor man hath twenty shillings for an hours labor though the work be not worth it yet is it a due debt and he may challenge it as such because it was promised him In this sense neither is Glory a Reward for under the New Covenant Blessedness is not to him that worketh but to him that worketh not Rom. 4.5 We are saved by grace and not by works Tit. 3.5 Eph. 2.5 8. And saith the Apostle If by grace then it is no more of works Rom. â—1 6 But when Glory is called a Reward we are to understand it improperly as when a thing is called a Reward onely by way of Analogy and Resemblance because it comes after and in the place of the work as the nights rest may be called the Reward of the days labor because it succeeds it Thus is that of the Apostle to be taken 2 Thes. 1.7 And thus the Heir inheriting his Fathers Lands hath a Recompence or Reward of all the labor and service he hath done for his Father although he did not his service to that end neither doth the enjoyment of that inheritance hang upon that condition In this sense Eternal Lâ—fe and Glory may be called the Reward of our Works because it is a consequent of them not that our works have any influence either Physical or Moral to obtain it All things being given us in and for Christ alone Rom. 8.32 Eph. 1.3 And therefore it is called by the Apostle A reward of Inheritance Col. 3.24 Which comes to us not by working but by inheritance as we are the heirs of God and joynt heirs with Christ. If Glory were a Reward in a proper sense we might properly be said to save and glorifie our selves because we concurred to the Production of this effect but Mr. W. sayes well It is God that glorifies us Eternal Life is called his gift in opposition to wages Rom. 6.23 2 Tim. 4.8 It is solely the effect of Gods grace and Christs purchase though God doth glorifie us after working yâ—t not for any of those works which we have wrought though by the help and assistance of his own Spirit § 9. But yet secondly Though God doth not glorifie us before we believe yet it will not follow that he doth not justifie
justitia bestow upon them those good things intended towards them in his Eternal Election The onely cause of Christs death was to satisfie the Law he did not die to procure a new Will or Affection in the heart of God towards his Elect nor yet to adde any new thing in God which doth perfect and compleat the act of Election as Wallaeus seems to intimate But that God might save us in a way agreeable to his own Justice that he might confer upon us all those Blessings he intended without wrong and violation to his holy Law for God having made a Law that the soul which sinneth should die the Justice and Truth of God required that satisfaction should be made for the sins of the Elect no less then of other men which they being unable to perform the Son of God became their Surety to bear the Curse and fulfil the Law in their stead God might will unto us sundry benefits which he cannot actually bestow upon us without wrong to his Justice As a King may will and purpose the deliverance of his Favorite who is imprisoned for debt yet he cannot actually free him till he hath paid and satisfied his Creditor So though God had an irrevocable peremptory Will to save his Elect yet he could not actually save them till satisfaction was made unto his Justice which being made there is no let or impediment to stop the current of his Blessings As when the Cloud is dissolved the Sun shines forth when the partition wall is broken down they that were separated are again united So the cloud of our sins being blotted out the beams of Gods love have as free a passage towards us as if we had not sinned Now that Christ by his death removed this let and hinderance the Scripture is as express as can be desired as that he made an end of sin Dan. 9.24 Blotted it out c. Col. 2.14 Took it quite away as the Scape-goat Levit. 16.22 John 1.29 And slew the enmity between God and us Ephes. 2.16 See Verses 13 14 15. § 4. Fifthly If it were the Will of God that the sin of Adam should immediately over-spread his posterity then it was his Will that the Satisfaction and Righteousness of Christ should immediately redound to the benefit of Gods Elect for there is the same reason for the immediate transmission of both to their respective subjects for as the Apostle shews Rom. 5.14 both of them were heads and roots of mankinde Now the sin of Adam did immediately over-spread his posterity All men sinned in him before ever they committed any actual sin Rom. 5.12 14. And therefore the Righteousness of Christ descended immediately upon all the Elect for their Justification Rom. 5.17 18. Sixthly If the Sacrifices of the Law were immediately available for the Typical cleansing of sins under that administration then the Sacrifice which Christ hath offered was immediately available to make a real atonement for all those sins for which he suffered The reason of the consequence is because the Real Sacrifice is not less efficacious then the Typical Heb. 9.14 But those Legal Sacrifices did immediately make atonement without any condition performed on the sinners part Levit. 16.30 § 5. Seventhly If it be the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without any condition performed by them then it was his Will that it should be so for all of them the reason is because the Scripture makes no difference between persons in the communication of this Grace The free gift saith the Apostle came upon all men i. e. In omnes praedestinatos to Justification of life to wit by the gracious imputation of God But it is the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without conditions performed by them viz. To Elect Infants or else they are not reconciled and consequently they cannot be saved Now if any shall say That God hath a peculiar way of reconciling and justifying Infants or of communicating unto them the Benefits of Christs death let them clear it up from Scripture let them shew us the Text that saith God gives Salvation unto Infants in one manner and to men in another to the one freely and to the others upon conditions If they say Infants have the Seed or Habit of Faith the Scripture will contradict them which affirmeth 1 That they have no knowledge at all either of good or evil Deut. 1.39 And that they cannot so much as discern between the right and the left hand And if so how can they who conceive not of things Natural understand those things that are Heavenly and Spiritual And therefore sayes Augustine If we should go about to prove that Infants know the things of God who as yet know not the things of men our own senses would confute us And can there be Faith without knowledge 2 That Faith cometh by hearing of the Word Preached Rom. 10. Now Infants either hear not or if they do they understand not what they hear We have sufficient experience that no Children give any testimony of Faith until they have been taught and instructed Elect Children which are afterwards manifested to be such are as obstinate and unteachable as any others As for the instance of the Baptist that he believed in his Mothers belly because it is said Luke 1.41 That he was filled with the Holy Ghost c. it doth not prove it for as one observes it is not said Credidit in utero but onely exultavit which exultation or springing Divinitùs facta est in Infante non humanitùs ab Infante And therefore it is not to be drawn into an example or urged as a rule to us what to think of other Infants But if any shall say that Infants do perform the conditions of Reconciliation and Salvation by their Parents then it will follow That all the Children of believing Parents are reconciled and justified because they perform the conditions as much for all as they do for one But I suppose no man will say That all the Children of believing Parents are justified we may as well assert works of supererogation as that one is justified by anothers Faith That any Infants are saved it is meerly from the Grace of Election and the free imputation of Christs Righteousness of which all that are elected are made partakers in the same manner § 6. Eighthly If it were the Will of God that Christ should have the whole glory of our reconciliation it was his will that it should not in the least depend upon our works or conditions because that condition or conditions will share with him in the glory of this effect and our Justification would be partly of Grace and partly of Works partly from Christ and partly from our selves Nay it would bee more from our selves then from Jesus Christ seeing that
1 he blames the Proposition For sayes he though it were supposed that we are in Covenant before Faith yet it will not follow That we are justified His Reason is Because the blessings of the Covenant have an order and dependance one upon another and are enjoyed successively one after another But by his favor the Sequel is not invalidated by this Reason for though a man be not sanctified and glorified before Faith yet if he be in Covenant with God i. e. One of the Elect to whom the Grace of the New Covenant appertains he is certainly justified For 1 God from all eternity did will not to punish his Elect ones which as hath been shewn is real Justification it being forgiveness in the heart of God Or 2 taking it for an effect of his Will Justification is the first benefit that doth accrew to us by the death of Christ. God hath promised from thence forth to remember the sins of his people no more Isa. 43.25 54.9 and in Ezek. 36.25 He first promiseth to cleanse us from all our filthiness which must be meant of our Justification for by Sanctification our inherent filthiness is not perfectly cleansed in this life and then to give us a new heart And Chap. 16. he first sayes unto the Soul Live which is the sentence of Justification and then he adorns it with the precious gifts of his holy Spirit It is sufficiently known That the generality of our Protestant Divines in comparing the blessings of the Covenant have given the precedency to Justification some have ascribed to it a priority of time but all of Nature before the rest Perperà m absurde prorsus inter effecta Sanctificationis numeratur Justificatio quae illam natura praecedit c. Justification sayes Tilenus is most absurdly made an effect or consequent of Sanctification which in nature doth go before it A man cannot be sanctified until he is first justified for the tree must be good before it can bring forth good fruit Bishop Downham accounts it a gross error to say That Sanctification goes before Justification For sayes he Sanctification is the end and fruit c. So that if they have right to any benefit of the Covenant before Faith it must be to Justification for Faith is a part of Sanctification and the same thing cannot be before it self § 3. 2 He denies the Assumption viz. That we are in Covenant with God or that we have any right and title to any blessing of the Covenant before we believe But before he will give his Reasons for the Negative he is willing to hear mine for the Affirmative This seeming civility ushers in a notorious slander That I was so obstreperous in our Conference that I would not give him a fair hearing which hath been sufficiently disproved in another place nay his own mouth did acquit me in the close of that discourse before I belive a thousand witnesses I wonder though his Conscience was asleep when this fell from his Pen that his memory should fail him Me thinks he should have been more tender of his own reputation then to contradict himself though he had a desire to blast mine but as if it were not enough to mis-report my actions he takes upon him the office of God to judge my heart I believe sayes he he is resolved to give it unto no body else whiles the judgement of the cause must be left to the people Yes to himself or any one else when I have an occasion for the like essay I am sure he hath not found me heretofore of so morose a spirit as not to weigh and yeeld unto better reason he is no fit champion to defend the Faith who is so much a stranger to the rules of Charity which thinketh no evil but hopes the best I confess I am yet to seek for the Reason of his next clause whilest the judgement of the cause must be left to the people One would think that he who leaves the judgement of his cause unto the people should be most willing they should have a fair hearing of whatsoever can be said either pro or con or else he cannot expect their Votes should be for him The people are apt to think he hath the better cause whose mouth is stopt But perhaps it sticks in his stomack That in our Conference I desired the people to weigh and judge of some interpretations of Scripture which were given by him It was far from my thoughts to refer the decision of the Question unto most voices either of Ministers or people The Judgement desired was that of private discretion and not of publick determination though the latter ought not to be usurped by Minâ—sters whose Reasons and not their Votes must satisfie mens Consciences yet the former ought not to be denied to the meanest Christians who are required to judge for themselves to prove and try the Doctrines which are brought unto them Now why this expression should be faulted I see no cause unless men would have the people to content themselves with an implicite Faith such as the Romanists do allow their disciples who use them as Babes which must swallow whatsoever their Nurses do put into their mouths The Church of Christ saith Optatus is rationabilis she hath the use both of Natural and Supernatural Reason Did Christians more generally see with their own eyes make use of that Light and Reason which God hath given them they would never acquiesce in many of those Dictates which are imposed upon them will any man that hath a spark of Reason beleeve that I am doth signifie I will bee § 4. Well now he hath heard my Reason That we are in Covenant or have a right and title to the blessings of the Covenant before we beleeve because some benefits of the Covenant to wit the Spirit which workes Faith is given us before we beleeve What hath he to say against it 1. He undertakes to explaine that which is plain enough the word Give as that it is taken 1 for constituting or appointing and 2 for the actual collating of a benefit so as that it is received and possessed by him to whom it is given 2. He tels us of sundry ways how the Spirit is said to be given 1 Essentially 2 Personally 3 Operatively All which is nothing at all to the matter in hand but serves meerly to raise a dust to blind the unwary Reader The termes need neither distinction nor explication being easie enough to be understood by the weakest capacity When we say That the Spirit which works Faith is given us before wee beleeve none can well imagine that we meant it of Gods purpose or decree to give the Spirit but of the actuall sending or bestowing of him nor yet of an Essentiall or Personal giving of the Spirit so as to be Hypostatically united to us as the God-head of the Son is to the Humane nature though some godly
which â—e endeavored to maintain against those blessed Martyrs of Jesus Christ Barns Hierome and Garret who sealed the contrary Doctrine with their dearest blood 1 The effect of Christs passion hath a Condition the fulfilling of the Condition diminisheth nothing from the effect of Christs passion 2 They that will injoy the effect of Christs passion must fulfil the Condition 3 The fulfilling of the Condition requireth first knowledge of the Condition which knowledge we have by Faith 4 Faith commeth of God and this Faith is a good gift It is good and profitable for me to do well and to exercise this Faith Ergo By the gift of God I may do wel before I am justified 5 By the gift of God I may doe well towards the attainment of Justification 6 There is ever as much Charity towards God as Faith and as Faith increaseth so doth Charity increase 7 To the attainment of Justification is required Faith and Charity 8 Every thing is to be called freely done whereof the beginning is free and set at liberty without any cause of provocation 9 Faith must be to me the assurance of the Promises of God made in Christ if I fulfil the condition and love must accomplish the condition whereupon followeth the attainment of the Promise according to Gods Truth 10 A man being in deadly sin may have Grace to doe the works of Repentance whereby hee may attain to his Justification Never did the child saies G. Joy so lively resemble his own Father as these Articles do expresse the Bishop of Romes Anti-christian Doctrine And as for his choise Notion of Justification by Workes as they are our New Covenant Righteousnesse I finde it was a shift of the Papists long agoe The said Doctor Barnes having cited this passage out of Bernard I do abhor whatsoever thing is of me c. See saies he Bernard doth despise all his good works and taketh him onely to Grace Now had he no works of the New Law as you call them I shall not trace Mr. B. any farther there being now in the Presse as I am informed a large and full answer to his Paradoxicall Aphorismes by a faithful Servant of the Lord Jesus a workman that needs not to be ashamed though I heartily wish that the work may provoke others unto shame who have more strength leisure and far greater helps for such undertakings then Country Ministers I dare say that they who sate at the stern in our Vniversities heretofore such as Reynolds Whittaker Davenant Prideaux c. would never have indured to see so many Popish and Arminian books far more dangerous then the Ranters blasphemous Pamphlets shew their heads but would have sent forth their Antidotes to correct their poison I doe speake the more freely to stir up others of greater abilities then my selfe to undertake this cause least it should suffer overmuch through my weaknesse in managing it We were wont to say that if a man doth plead for the King all is to be taken in good part the design of this Discourse was to plead the cause of the greatest King that no flesh might glory in his presence who of God is made unto us Wisdome Righteousnesse Sanctification and Redemption though the Advocate hath not holpen the Cause yet the goodnesse of the Cause may excuse the Advocate I shall desire thee to read without prejudice and either to read all or none for that which is curtaild in one place is more explained in another If thou reapest any good from what I have written I know thy returns will be according to my hearts desire Praises unto God and more fervent prayers for Thy Servant in the Work of the Gospel W. EYRE The Third day of the Ninth Month. 1653. Justification without conditions OR The Free Justification of a Sinner justified CHAP. I. Shewing the occasion of this Discourse and the rise of the Controversie which is here debated SInce it hath pleased the Lord to reveal the riches of his Son unto me and to make me a Steward and Dispenser of this Grace unto his People the cheif design of my Ministry hath been to bottom my hearers upon Christ alone that they might have no confidence in the flesh but in that perfect and everlasting Righteousness which he hath wrought For which end it hath been my care frequently and clearly to demonstrate to them both the sole-sufficiency and efficiency of Christ in the work of Mans Redemption that he is able to save unto the utmost and that no work of ours either before or after our Conversion doth share with him in the glory of this atchievement In a word That there is no cause without God concurring with the precious and invaluable merit of his Blood to present us holy unblameable and unreprovable in the sight of God Which truth as it shines clearer then the Sun throughout the Scripture so it appears unto me to be of greatest moment when I consider the concernment thereof both to God and Christ and to the precious souls of Gods Elect I know nothing that gives so much glory unto God and Christ as to proclaim him the onely Saviour and that besides him there is none other that we ow the whole work of our Salvation from the beginning to the end unto Christ alone and surely there is no point in the whole Doctrine of Godliness which contributes so much to the Peace Security and Fruitfulness of the Saints as this doth It affords the greatest encouragement to sinners to believe to believers to hold fast their confidence firm unto the end and to serve God with a willing minde in Righteousness and true Holiness all the days of their life § 2 Now though this truth be so evident and my intentions in pressing it such as have been mentioned yet it hath hapned unto me as unto many of my betters to be mistaken and by some of my own Profession who insinuated into the people That I taught a new Gospel made Faith and Repentance to be needless things for no other reason that I know of but because I dare not give them that honor which is due to Christ in making them concauses with him in procuring our Peace with God and in obtaining our Right and Interest in all the Benefits which he hath purchased for they themselves are my witnesses would they speak their knowledge as to matter of Fact that in all my Exercises though usually something of Christ be the Doctrine which I handle yet the use that I make of it is to press men unto Faith and Holiness Nay I challenge all my Adversaries to say that ever I positively spake so much as one syllable to lessen the esteem of Inherent Holiness though I am not ashamed comparatively to say as the Apostle doth That I count all things but loss and dung that I may win Christ Jesus Phil. 3.8 But otherwise I thank the Lord if I should speak
though it be never so impure and wicked yet he is justified for all if he doth believe the Promises of the Gospel So that they held the necessity of Faith such as it was they made it as our Adversaries do the condition of Justification 2. Antinomianism is such an Error as doth oppose or is contrary to the Law of God But surely this is not such it offers no manner of injury unto the Law seeing that whensoever the Elect are justified they are not justified without Righteousness and such a Righteousness as doth fully answer the Law of God in respect both of the satisfaction and obedience which it doth require We say that God cannot justifie a person without Righteousness for then he should do that himself which he forbids to us and professeth his detestation of Exod. 23.7 Isa 5.23 Deut. 25.1 Prov. 17.15 If God could have dispensed with his Law in this behalf Christ needed not to have died the end of his coming was to bring in Everlasting Righteousness Whomsoever God doth justifie they have justice one way or other for otherwise the God of Truth should call darkness light and evil good they whom he accounteth just are just and righteous But yet we say That Faith is not that Râ—ghteousness that makes them so either in whole or in part but the perfect Righteousness of Christ which is put upon them Now to say That God imputes this Righteousness unto men before they believe is no ways contrary to the Law seeing the Law prescribes not the rules of this imputation it is altogether besides the cognizance of the Law So that if it prove an Error it must be an Anti-Evangelical and not an Antinomian Error But I doubt not but I shall be able to acquit it from this as well as from that other imputation CHAP. IV. Containing some Animadversions upon Mr. Cranfords Epistle to the Reader MR. W. for the better grace of his Book hath obtained a Commendatory Epistle from Mr. Cr. wherein some things are delivered contrary to truth and most injurious to them whom Mr. W. hath made his Adversaries It s true he begins his Epistle with a deserved Commendation of the Doctrine of Justification That it exceedingly illustrates the glorious riches of Gods Free-grace and magnifies his Justice is the onely support of comfort to a wounded Conscience takes away from man the cause of boastings and is altogether above the invention and credulity of Reason Wherein I do cordially concur with him accounting it as Luther did the Sun which enlightens the Church the Paradise and Heaven of the Soul therefore it was not without cause that our first Reformers so earnestly contended for it it being as they have well observed the sum of the Gospel and of all the benefits which we have by Christ the principal point of the Doctrine of Salvation the pure knowledge whereof doth preserve the Church How much short of them in this particular is the zeal of some amongst our late Reformers who have scoffingly called it the Antinomians common place Mr. Cranfords Testimony therefore to the singular excellency of this Doctrine is so much the more welcome seeing there are so few that have it in a right esteem though as he and much more as Mr. W. hath stated it the beauty and lustre of it is not a little obscured It looseth all those praises which in Mr. Cranfords Parenthesis are ascribed unto it For 1 how doth the riches of Gods grace appear if our Justification doth depend upon terms and conditions performed by us For as Mr. Walker hath noted Whatsoever is covenanted and promised upon a condition to be performed is not absolutely free nor freely given They are not justified by Grace who are justified upon the performance of conditions 2 What support is this for a wounded Conscience to tell him that is conscious of his extream weakness and inability That God will forgive his sins if he do perform such and such conditions which he is no more able to do then to remove a mountain Mr. Calvin hath well observed Nisi fidem tremere ac vacillare volumus c. That unless we would have our faith to be always wavering and trembling it ought to rest onely upon the free promise of Grace in Jesus Christ And he gives this Reason for it Quoniam conditionalis promissio c. Because a conditional promise which sends us to our own works promiseth us life no otherwise then if it were placed in our own power Nor 3 doth this take from men the cause of boasting Boasting saith the Apostle is not excluded by works call them by what name you will either Legal or Evangelical if they are our works they give to us occasion of boasting for to him that worketh the reward is not reckoned of Grace but of Debt a work or condition whensoever it is performed makes the thing covenanted a due debt which the performer may demand and the promiser is bound to give 4 It is not above the invention and credulity of Reason That God should justifie a Righteous man but that God should justifie sinners and meerly upon the account of anothers righteousness as heretofore it seemed foolishness both to Jews and Gentiles so ever since it hath been a stumbling block to the wisdom of the flesh it is such a mystery as will never contemper with the most rational principles of the natural man Hence have arisen all those jarrings and contendings against this truth in regard of its disproportion unto carnal Reason which believes no other Gospel but hoc fac vives § 2. The Doctrine of the Gospel sayes Mr. Cr. concerning the Justification of a believing sinner is plainly delivered in the Scripture But by his favor the Scripture no where calls Believers sinners nor yet makes Believers the adequate subjects of Justification It is most true That all Believers are justified and it is as false that men are Believers before they are justified An unjustified Believer and a justified Sinner are expressions palpably guilty of Self-contradiction We read in Scripture of Gods justifying the ungodly reconciling the world and enemies to himself and of his quickning them that are dead in trespasses and sins Now Believers as hath been hinted are never called ungodly or enemies to God they are no where said to be dead in trespasses and sins they have their name from their better part and from that esteem that God hath of them who beholds them holy and righteous without any spot or blemish of sin § 3. In the next place Mr. Cr. gives us in a List of all the causes which do concur unto our Justification in the enumeration whereof he will finde the Author he commends at a greater distance from him then those whom he opposeth He may if he please compare his Doctrine with Mr. Baxterâ— Notions whom Mr. W. follows at the very heels Thes. 56.26 73 c. in his
Aphorisms who denies That Christs obedience is the material the imputation of his Righteousness the formal cause of our Justification or that Faith is the Instrument by which we do receive it he plainly ascribes the same kinde of causality unto Christ and Faith making them to differ onely secundum magis minus that Christ is the sine qua non principalis and Faith the sine qua non minus principalis he might have listed sin in the same rank which too is a sine qua non of our Justification That Faith and works in a larger sence are meritorious causes of Life and Blessedness Now we say with Mr. Cr. 1 That God is the efficient cause or the onely Justifier that he hath no motive or inducement but his own Grace and Love to will not to punish us and to give to us his Son thorow whom we have Redemption◠and Deliverance from the curse of the Law We say too 2 that Christ is the onely meritorious cause of our Justification taking Justification pro re volita for a transient effect of the Will of God that Jesus Christ hath by his death and satisfaction fully procured and merited our Discharge and Absolution from the penalty of the Law which we deserved by sin For which cause he is said to have purged our sins by himself i. e. Without the help and assistance of other means Heb. 1.3 There are many who ore tenùs in word do acknowledge That Christ is the meritorious cause of our Justification that in deed do deny it The Papists in the Councel of Trent say That God is the efficient the glory of God the final the death of Christ the meritorious cause of our Justification But yet we know that they allow not this effect unto it unless other things do concur on our parts they say That Faith Charity c. do Impetrare remissionem suo quidem modo mereri Obtain and after a sort merit forgiveness though not by their own worth and dignity yet by vertue of Gods Covenant and Promise Too many of our Protestants setting aside the word merit which yet Mr. B. thinks may be admitted do tread directly in their steps they ascribe as much unto works as Papists do It is a poor requital unto Jesus Christ to call him the Meritorious cause of our Justification and in the mean while to deny the merit of his death as to the immediate purchases thereof and to ascribe at least a partial meritoriousness to other things 3 I shall go further with Mr. Cr. I freely grant him which I believe Mr. W. will stick at That Faith is the Instrument by which we receive and apply the Righteousness of Christ unto our selves whereby the gratious sentence of God acquitting us from our sins is conveyed and terminated in our Consciences We say indeed That Faith doth not concur to our Justification as a proper Physical Instrument which is a less principal Efficient cause Mr. Rutherford saith well That Faith is not the Organical or Instrumental cause either of Christs satisfaction or of Gods acceptation thereof on our behalf By believing we do not cause either our Saviour to satisfie for our sins or God to accept of his satisfaction Every true Believer is perswaded That God hath laid aside his wrath and displeasure towards him for his sins having received a sufficient ransom and satisfaction for them in the death of his Son Sed hoc fides non facit saith he sed objectum jam factum praesupponit Faith is a Receptive not an Effective Instrument an Instrument not to procure but to receive Justification and Salvation which is freely given us in Jesus Christ. It is called an Instrumental cause of our Justification taking Justification passively not actively or in reference to that passive Application whereby a man applies the Righteousness of Christ to himself but not to that active Application whereby God applyeth it to a man which is onely in the minde of God Therefore Calvin calls Faith Opus passivum a passive work § 4. Mr. Cr. proceeds This Doctrine saith he hath in all ages been opposed and obscured sometimes by open Enemies sometimes by professed Friends and such as would be accounted the great Pleaders for Free-grace It is most true That this Article of Free Justification hath and will be a Bone of Contention to the worlds end It is the cheif cause of all those contests and quarrels which have arisen between the Children of the Free-woman and the Children of the Bond-woman Mr. Fox hath well observed It is so strange to carnal Reason so dark to the World it hath so many enemies that except the Spirit of God from above do reveal it Learning cannot reach it Wisdom is offended Nature is astonished Devils do not know it Men do persecute it Satan labors for nothing more then that he may either quite bereave men of the knowledge of this truth or else corrupt the simplicity of it It is not unknown what batteries were raised against it in the very infancy of the Church how the Wits and Passions of men conspired to hinder it what monstrous consequences were charged upon the Doctrine and what odious practises were fathered upon them that did profess it never was any truth opposed with so much malice and bitterness as this hath been and by them especially that were most devout and zealous But when it could not be withstood and stifled Satan endeavored then to deprave and adulterate it by mixing of the Law with the Gospel our own Righteousness with Christs which corruption the Apostle hath strenuously opposed in all his Epistles and more especially in that to the Romans and Galatians where he excludes all and singular works of ours from sharing in the matter of our Justification For the eluding of whose Authority carnal Reason hath found out sundry shifts and distinctions As that the Apostle excludes onely works of Nature but not of Grace Legal but not Evangelical works and that our works though they are not Physical yet they may come in as Moral causes of our Justification It is certain That the most dangerous attempts against this Doctrine have been within the Church and by such as Mr. Cr. calls Professed Friends who have done so much the more mischief in regard they were least apt to be suspected Justification by works was generally exploded amongst us whilest it appeared under the names of Popery and Arminianism which since hath found an easie admittance being vented by some of better note such as would be accounted Pleaders for Free-grace § 5. Mr. Woodbridges Discourse saith Mr. Cr. deals not with the Errors of Papists Socinians Arminians but with Antinomian Error How unjustly our Doctrine is called Antinomian hath been shewn before and Mr. Cr. may be pleased to take notice That Mr. Rutherford accounts the Opinion we oppose the very cheif of the Arminians Socinians and Papists Errors about Justification to wit That
it being in terminis in the Text. I dare say no man that is called a Christian did ever deny it and therefore he might have spared his pains in transcribing any more places of Scripture for confirmation of it But I do much marvel That so learned a man as Mr. W. who pretends to be more then ordinarily accurate should take in hand a controverted Text and never open the Terms nor state the Question which he meant to handle for though it be a sinful curiosity for men by Dicotomies and Tricotomies Divisions and Subdivisions to mince and crumble the Scriptures till it hath lost the sense yet surely a workman that needs not to be ashamed ought rightly to divide the Word of Truth explain things that are obscure and dubious and where divers senses are given as he knows there are of this Text to disprove the false and confirm that which he conceives is true § 3. There is a vaste distance between the Apostles Proposition a man is justified by Faith and Mr. Woodbridges Inference Ergo Justification doth in no sence precede Faith Justification by Faith and Justification before Faith are not opposita but diversa though they differ yet they are not contradictory to each other The Scriptures which prove the former intend no strife or quarrel against the latter in a word The proof of the one doth not disprove the other The Scripture which he made his theam Rom. 5.1 Therefore being justified by Faith we have peace with God c concludes nothing at all against Justification before Faith For 1 we may without any violence to the Text place the Comma after justified as thus Being justified by Faith we have peace with God This reading is agreeable both to the Apostles scope and to the Context His scope here was not to shew the efficacy of Faith in our Justification but what benefits we have by the death of Christ the first of which is Justification and the consequent thereof is peace with God Again the Illative Particle Therefore shews that this place is a Corollary or Deduction from the words immediately foregoing which ascribed our Justification wholly to the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ Chap. 4 ult The Apostle thence infers Being justified q. d. Seeing we are justified freely without works by the death of Christ by Faith we have peace with God the Lord powerfully drawing our hearts to believe this we have boldness and confidence towards God the cause of fear being taken away or as the Syriack and vulgar Latin read it Let us have peace with God let us by Faith improve this Grace for the establishing of our hearts in perfect peace Now according to this reading his own Text will give in evidence against him That Faith is not the cause or antecedent but an effect and consequent of our Justification procured and obtained by the death of Christ. But 2 if we take the words as commonly they are read the sence comes all to one scil That being justified by Christ who is the sole object of our Faith we have peace with God who by the Faith which he creates in us causeth us to enjoy this reconciliation by vertue whereof our Conscience is so firmly grounded that we are not moved by any temptation or beaten down by any terror The Work of Faith is not to procure our Justification but to beget peace in our Consciences So then the words being rightly understood they neither deny Justification before Faith nor assert Justification by the act or habit of Faith which Mr. W. would conclude from thence § 4. The next Scripture whose suffrage is desired against us is Gal. 2.16 We have believed in Christ that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ. Where sayes Mr. W. Justification is expresly made a Consequent of Faith To which I Answer 1 That this doth no more infer That we are not justified before we believe then that of our Saviour Matth. 5.44 45. Love your enemies c. that ye may be the children of your Father in Heaven infers That works do go before adoption contrary to Eph. 1.5 6. 1 Joh. 3.3 the phrase that ye may be there is as much as that ye may be manifested and declared that ye may shew your selves or that all men may know that ye are the children of God by practising a duty so much above the reach of Nature and Morality A like place we have Rom. 3.26 God set forth his Son to declare his Righteousness that he might be just Now shall we hence infer That God was not just before or that Gods justice was a consequent of his sending Christ Now if we can understand that clause that he might be just That he might be known and acknowledged to be just Why may we not as well take this of the Apostle that we might be justified in the same construction that we might know that we are justified and live in the comfort and enjoyment of it So that not the Being of our Justification but the Knowledge and Feeling of it is a consequent of Faith Things in Scripture are then said to be when they are known to be so John 15.8 our Saviour tells the Disciples That if they did bear much fruit they should be his Disciples i. e. They should be known and manifested to be his Disciples as Chap. 13.35 Our Saviour is said at his Resurrection to have become the Son of God Acts 13.33 Because then as the Apostle speaks he was powerfully declared to be the Son of God Rom. 1.3 Again things are saâ—d not to be which do not appear as Melchisedec is said to be without Father and Mother c. Heb. 7.3 Because his Linage and Pedigree is not known so we are said to be justified or not justified according as this Grace is revealed to us But 2 in the Text it is We have believed that we might be justified by Faith so that from hence it can be inferred onely That we are not justified by Faith before believing and that the sentence of Justification is not terminated in our Consciences before we do believe § 5. His next Proof is grounded upon the order of the words Rom. 8.30 As glory saith he follows Justification so doth Justification follow Vocation unto Faith Whereunto I answer 〈◊〉 That the order of words in Scripture do not shew the order and dependance of the things themselves The Jews have a Proverb Non esse prius aut posterius in Scriptura The first and last must not be strictly urged in Scripture for that is not always set first which is first in Nature If we should reason from the order of words in Scripture we should make many absurdities as 1 Sam. 6.14 It is said that they clave the Wood of the Cart and offered the Kine for a burnt offering unto the Lord And then in the next Verse it follows That the Levites took down the Ark out of the Cart as
by Justification we are to understand a Justification in the Court of Conscience or the Evidence and Declaration of a Justification already past before God So that Faith is said to justifie us not because it doth justifie us before God but because it doth declare to our Consciences that we are justified Now because this report is very imperfect I shall crave the patience of the Reader whilest I declare our Judgement a little more fully concerning this Matter together with the Grounds and Reasons that do uphold it and then I shall return to secure this Answer against the Exceptions Mr. W. hath made against it But first I shall shew the several Explications which Divines have given of his Proposition A man is justified by Faith CHAP. VI. The several Opinions of Divines touching the meaning of this Position A man is justified by Faith THe Question depending between me and Mr. W. is not Whether we are justified by Faith which the Scripture frequently affirms and no man that I know denies it Papists and Protestants Orthodox and Socinians Remonstrants and Contra-Remonstrants do unanimously consent That we are justified by Faith All the difference is about the Sense and Meaning of this Proposition A man is justified by Faith Whether Faith therein be to be taken Properly or Tropically For though there be great variety in Expression amongst Divines concerning this Matter yet all their several Opinions and Explications may be reduced unto these two heads The first takes Faith in sensu proprio for the act or habit of Faith the other takes Faith metonymicè relativè for the object of Faith i. e. The obedience and satisfaction of Jesus Christ. § 2. Our Protestant Divines who have hitherto been counted Orthodox do take Faith in this Proposition A man is justified by Faith in a Tropical and Fâ—gurative Sence as thus A man is justified in the sight of God from all sin and punishment by Faith i. e. By the Obedience and Righteousness of Jesus Christ in whom we believe and upon whom we relie for Life and Righteousness Nor is this any unusual Trope either in Scripture or in other Authors to put Habitum vel actum pro objecto as Rom. 8.24 Hope that is seen is not hope i. e. The thing that is seen is not hoped for Christ is oftentimes called our Hope our Joy our Love c. because he is the object of these Acts and Affections when the same thing is attributed distinctly both to the act and the object it must needs be attributed to one in a proper and to the other in an improper sence and therefore says Dr. Downham When Justification is attributed to Faith it cannot be attributed in the same sence as to the death and obedience of Christ in propriety of Speech but of necessity it is to be understood by a Metonymy Faith being put for the object of Faith which is the Righteousness of Christ c. And holy Pemble If we list not to be contentious it is plain enough saith he that in those places where the Apostle treats of Justification by Faith he means the Grace of God in Jesus Christ opposing Works and Faith that is the Law and the Gospel the Righteousness of the Law to the Righteousness of the Gospel which is no other but the Righteousness of Christ. Thus saith he Faith is taken Gal. 3.23 before Faith came i. e. Before Christ came and the clear exhibition of his Righteousness And in this sence as another hath observed it is used at least thirteen times in this Chapter where the Apostle expresly treats of our Justification before God Albertus Pighius though a Papist was so far convinced of this truth by reading of Calvins Institutions that he acknowledged If we speak formally and properly we are justified neither by Faith nor Charity but by the onely Righteousness of Christ communicated to us and by the onely mercy of God forgiving our sins § 3. Some of our Divines who do utterly deny That Faith in this Question is taken sensu proprio or that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere or act of believing is imputed to us for Righteousness do yet ascribe an instrumentallity or inferior causality unto Faith it self in our Justification before God They say That we are justified by Faith instrumentally and relatively which terms I confess sound harshly in my ears but I hope I shall be excused if I do not understand them seeing a far learneder man then my self hath professed That they were not very intelligible to him That Faith is taken relatively in this Question of Justification to wit For the object it relates unto Christ and his Righteousness I do readily grant but that it justifies us Relatively I cannot assent to it for it seems to me to carry this sence with it either 1 that Faith doth procure our Justification though not by its own worth and dignity yet through the vertue and merit of its object As the Papists say of Works That they do justifie and save us tincta sanguine Christi being dipped in the Blood of Christ Or 2 that Faith together with Christ its object doth make us just in the sight of God whereby it is made a social cause with the blood of Christ which shall be sufficiently disproved anon Again that Faith is a passive Instrument of our Justification to wit such an Instrument whereby we receive and apply this benefit to our selves was shewn before but that it is an active efficacious Instrument to make us just and righteous in the sight of God is no part of my Creed For 1. it seems to me a contradiction to say That Faith is not to be taken sensu proprio but metonymicè for the object thereof and yet say That we are justified by Faith instrumentally for it is not the object but the act of Faith which is an Instrument Faith considered as an Instrument is taken sensu proprio and consequently the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere which they disclaim must be said to justifie 2. Mr. Baxter in my judgement disputes rationally against this notion If Faith saith he be the Instrument of our Justification it is the Instrument either of God or man not of man for Justification is Gods act he is the sole Justifier Rom. 3.26 man doth not justifie himself not of God for it is not God that believeth To which I adde that God neither needs nor is capable of using an Instrument in the act of justifying for though he useth Instruments to declare and reveal this Grace to sinners yet not to will it to particular persons the acts of his will are not wrought by any Organ or Instrument without himself 3. By making Faith the Instrument of our Justification Justification is made the Effect and Faith the Cause and so consequently a man shall be said to justifie himself whereas the Scripture every where ascribes our Justification unto God and Christ making
2.2 3.10 13.10 c. Now the Scripture doth not call these Inherent Graces ours to exclude the Divine assistance in the working of them as if they proceeded onely from our selves the strength of Nature in us or the towardliness of our own wills The Jews who went about to establish their own Righteousness or Justification by their own works did not deny that these works are the gift of God the Pharisee expresly acknowledgeth as much therefore gives thanks unto God for them Luke 18.11 But they are called ours because they are subjectively in us and instrumentally wrought by us and in opposition to the Righteousness of Christ which is neither in us nor performed by us but is as the Scripture rightly terms it the Righteousness of God not the Essential Righteousness of God as Osiander supposed but the Righteousness of our Mediator God-man which though it be Inherent in the Humane Nature and performed by it yet is it truly called the Righteousness of God because it is the Righteousness of that Person who is perfect God And thus the blood by which we are redeemed is called The blood of God Acts 20.28 Or which is all one The blood of the Son of God 1 John 1.7 The life which was laid down for us was the life of God 1 John 3.16 The death by which we are reconciled to God is the death of his Son Rom. 5.10 The Obedience by which we are constituted just Rom. 5.19 is The Obedience of the same Son of God See Gal. 4.4 5. Christs Mediatorial Righteousness is called the Righteousness of God to shew the dignity and perfection of it it being the Righteousness of so great a person who is not onely Man but God And that we should not think it to be any thing in us from God it is sometimes called his blood Rom. 5.9 sometimes his obedience Vers. 19. By the imputation whereof we are made the Righteousness of God in him as he by the imputation of our sins was made sin for us And thus the godly learned yea and some of the Popish Doctors have expounded the Righteousness of God mentioned in the 1 3 and 10 Chapters to the Romans of Christ and his Righteousness which says Cajetan is called the Righteousness of God Quia est in Deo personaliter sum quia est apud divinum tribunal vera justitia ad differentiam justitiarum nostrarum quia apud divinum tribunal sunt velut pannus menstruatus c. i. e. Because it is personally in God as also because at Gods tribunal it is accounted Righteousness and to distinguish it from our Righteousness which in the sight of God is as filthy rags There is nothing more clear then that our Obedience to Evangelical precepts is not that Righteousness of God the Scripture mentions which is not inherent in us but imputed to us being without us in Christ God-man The Assumption That the Righteousness whereby we are justified is the Righteousness of God is undeniably proved from Rom. 1.17 3.21 10.3 In which last place the Apostle shews there is such an opposition betwixt Gods Righteousness and ours in the point of Justification That whosoever seeks to be justified by his own Righteousness cannot be justified by the Righteousness of God and therefore he himself professeth that in the Question of Justification he utterly renounceth his own righteousness desiring to be found in Christs Righteousness alone Phil. 3.9 This Righteousness of Christ which is out of us in him is properly called Evangelical Righteousness because it is the matter or substance of the whole Gospel the Gospel doth reveal it and not the Law Rom. 1.17 If the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere or act of believing were that Evangelical Righteousness by which we are justified this Scripture would be guilty of a gross Tautology The Righteousness of God is revealed from Faith to Faith for then the meaning must be our Evangelical Righteousness is revealed from Evangelical Righteousness to Evangelical Righteousness which is absurd § 9.4 If we are not justified by two Righteousnesses existing 〈◊〉 two distinct subjects then our Obedience to Gospel precepts is not that Righteousness whereby we are justified But we are not justified by two Righteousnesses existing in two distinct subjects Ergo. The Sequel is manifest in regard the Righteousness of Christ is inherent in him and obedience to Gospel precepts is a Righteousness inherent in us The Scripture sundry times declares That we are justified by Christ and his Righteousness Rom. 3.24 5.9 19. Now if we were likewise justified by our Obedience to Gospel precepts it would follow That we are justified by two Righteousnesses existing in two distinct subjects But this is gain-said in the Assumption which will be secured by this proof If by Christs Righteousness alone we are made perfectly just and righteous in the sight of God then there is no other Righteousness which concurs with his to our Justification For what needs an addition to that which is perfect But by Christs Righteousness alone we are made perfectly just and righteous in the sight of God as these and many other Scriptures do witness Heb. 1.3 10.14 Col. 1.22 2.10 13. Again if we are justified partly by Christs Righteousness and partly by our own our Faith for Justification must relie partly upon Christ and partly upon our selves Paul might have desired to be found in his own Righteousness But our faith and trust for Justification may not in any part relie upon our selves Jere. 17.5 Phil. 3.3 Gal. 5.2 3 4. The Adversaries of Grace as we shewed before acknowledge that it is the safest course to trust and relie upon Christ alone and to fetch the comfort of our Justification from his perfect Obedience onely § 10.5 That which overthrows the main difference between the Law and the Gospel ought not be admitted for the confounding of them will open an in-let to innumerable Errors nay by this means the Gospel it self will become a meer cypher The Apostle we see was exceeding careful to keep these Doctrines distinct each from other and therefore throughout all his Writings he still opposeth the Law and Grace Works and Faith our Righteousness and Christs Righteousness instructing us thereby how needful it is they should be kept a sunder But the making our Obedience to Gospel precepts the Righteousness whereby we are justified overthrows the main difference between the Law and the Gospel Ergo. For herein as Bishop Downham well obâ—â—â—ves standeth the chief Agreement and Difference between the Law and the Gospel they agree in this That unto Justification both do require the perfect fulfilling of the Law but herein they differ That the Law requireth to Justification a Righteousness inherent in us and perfect Obedience to be performed in our own persons the Gospel reveals for our Justification the perfect Righteousness of an other even of Christ which is accepted in their behalf that do believe in him as
therefore his suggestion in the Minor Proposition That we interpret the phrase of Justification by Faith meerly of Justification in Conscience is false and groundless But let us weigh the force of his Argument a little more distinctly the sum of it then is this Justification by Faith is not Justification in our Consciences for then we should be concurrent Causes with God in the formal act of our Justification The formal act of pronouncing us just must be attributed unto us which the Scripture attributes unto God alone making us but passive therein Rom. 8.33 4.6 8. To which I answer That the pronouncing of us just is not the formal act of Justification but the imputing of Righteousness and the non-imputing of sin which is the act of God alone whereas the pronouncing of us just and righteous is in Scripture attributed to others besides God and yet no robbery is done to God As for instance the Minister of Christ pronounceth the Word of Grace and Forgiveness and therefore is said to remit and forgive sin Whose sins ye remit they are remitted Joh. 20.23 Is he therefore joyned with God in the formal act of Justification Yet all Protestants grant him the office of pronouncing Remission though they deny him the power of giving Real Remission which would make him arrogate that which is peculiar unto God So though we say That Faith doth declare and reveal to our Consciences the sentence of Absolution yet we do not thereby derogate from God or attribute that to Faith which belongs to God We grant that as to our Justification in the sight of God which is properly Justification we are meerly Passive we contribute nothing at all either Physically or Morally by way of Merit or Motive That God should account us righteous and not impute to us our sins This work was done without us and for us by Christ with his Father it hath no other cause but the Grace of God and the Merit of Christ. He and he alone purged and washed us from our sins in his own blood Revel 1.5 Heb 1.3 Now in regard of our Passiveness in this act of our Justification we say That Faith hath no hand at all in procuring obtaining and instating us in this Grace for if we did any thing though never so little in order to this end we were not Passive but Active Yet we say That as this gracious sentence of our Justification is revealed and terminated in our own Consciences so Faith hath an Instrumental efficacy we are therein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agents with God 2 Cor. 6.1 And the Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beareth witness with our spirits Rom. 8.16 And therefore though we are no where exhorted to justifie or to make our selves righteous in the sight of God yet we are oftentimes bid to grow in Faith and to press forward to more assurance in believing our peace and reconciliation with God 2 Pet. 1.5 3.18 Rom. 5.1 § 14. This Concession of Mr. W. That a man is wholly Passive in his Justification gave occasion to the first Argument I offered to his consideration it being as I conceive a flat contradiction to the cheif scope and intendment of his Sermon which was to derive to Faith at least a Federal or Moral causality in our Justification I am sorry I should have so much cause to complain of his injurious dealing not onely in that unworthy language he is pleased to give me but in casting my Argument into another form then that wherein I proposed it In his report it runs thus If we were altogether Passive in being justified then we are justified before we believe In which form I confess it is obnoxious to more exceptions then one for besides the Grammatical part which is very harsh the Logical consequence may be justly blamed Though the consequent be true yet it is not a true consequence it is not rightly inferred from the Antecedent Though we are Passive in our Justification yet it doth not follow from thence That we were justified before we believed A man is Passive in the first act of his Conversion yet it were absurd to conclude therefore a man was converted before he had a Being or ever heard of the Gospel But the Argument as I proposed it was as followeth If we are wholly passive in our Justification then our Faith doth not concur to the obtaining of it or we are not justified by the act of Faith in the sight of God But according to you we are wholly Passive in our Justification Ergo Faith doth not concur unto our Justification or we are not justified by the act of Faith His Answer hereunto I could not very well heed by reason of my distance from him and the rudeness of some people who do go for Professors that stood about me but as I conceived it was to this effect That Faith doth necessarily concur to the Application of this Priviledge whereunto I replied But the Application of this Benefit is not Justification the one being Gods act the other ours His Answer in Print we are sure is authentick let us see therefore how well he hath now quitted himself from the guilt of this contradiction 1. He calls the Argument A childish Exception a peece of witchery and wonders it should proceed out of my mouth I must confess I cannot but wonder to hear such language from a civil man much more from a Minister and more especially from one who hath sometimes owed me more respect let the prudent judge whether there be any ground for this hideous clamor 2. He shapes some kinde of answer to the Sequel That though Faith be a formal vital act of the soul in genere Physico yet the use of it in Justification is but to qualifie us passively that we may be morally capable of being justified by God And again Faith is required on our part which though Physically it be an act yet Morally it is but a Passive condition by which we are made capable of being justified according to the Order and Constitution of God Now here 1. I shall desire the Reader to observe how much Mr. W. is beholding to a Popish Tenent opposed by all our Protestant Writers to support his cause which is That Faith goes before Justification to dispose us for it c. Bellarmine undertakes to prove that Faith doth not justifie alone because there are other things to wit fear hope love penitency a desire of the Sacraments and a purpose of amendment of life all which sayes the Jesuite doe prepare and dispose a man for Justification as well as Faith Against whom all our Protestant Divines which my little Library hath obtained do unanimously affirme That Faith doth not dispose or prepare us for Justâ—fication Now were they all bewitched as well as we who would not subscribe to this Popish Dictate 2. I shall leave it to the Reader to judge whether my Argument or his Answer doth deserve
till it looks unto him in whose wounds and stripes is the healing of sinners 3. This very comparison doth make against him as the Israelites were alive when they looked upon the Brazen Serpent or else they could not have seen it So they that â—â—ok upon Jesus Christ i. e. Believe in him are spiritually alive or else they could not put forth such a vital act It is said indeed Numb 21.9 that when any man that was bitten beheld the Serpent of Brass he lived i. e. He was healed or had ease from his anguish so they that by Faith look up unto the Antitype they finde ease and rest for their wearied souls they do then live i. e. they have the comfort and enjoyment of that life which before they had in Christ. A man is said to live when he lives comfortably and happily § 2. 4. Mr. W. to make the comparison suit hath falsified the Text Joh. 6 40. The words are It is the Will of God that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life it is not may be justified as he corrupts it 5 Whereas he sayes Faith is compared to eating and Justification to nourishment Joh. 6.51 It is a mistake like the former for it is Christ himself who throughout that Chapter is compared to bread and food whom by Faith we receive for our refreshment consolation and spiritual nourishment § 4. His fourth Argument is drawn from the perpetual opposition between Faith and Works from whence he reasons thus What place and order works had to Justification in the Covenant of Works the same place and order Faith hath to our Justification in the Covenant of Grace But Works were to go before our Justification in the Covenant of Works Ergo Faith is to go before our Justification in the Covenant of Grace I answer That his Major is extreamly gross I dare say a more unsound Assertion cannot be picked out of the Writings either of the Papists or Arminians then this is That Faith taking it as he doth in a proper sence hath the same place in the Covenant of Grace as works have in the Covenant of Works That I have not charged him too high will appear to any one that shall consider these few particulars First Works in the first Covenant are meritorious of Eternal life he that doth the works required in the Law may in strictness of Justice claim the promise as a due debt Rom. 4.4 Was ever any Protestant heard to say That Faith and Faithful actions which as hath been shewn men of his notion do include in Faith do merit Eternal life Secondly Works in the first Covenant are the matter of our Justification he that doth them is thereby constituted just and righteous in the sight of God Righteousness consists in a conformity to the Law so that whosoever keeps the Law must needs be righteous But now Faith is not the matter of our Righteousness God doth not account men righteous for their Faith I confess he hath Bellarmine and Arminius on his side who say that ipsa fides or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere imputatur in justitiam but the Apostle hath taught us other Doctrine Rom. 5.19 That by the obedience of one i. e. of Christ many are made righteous And 2 Cor. 5.21 That we are made the Righteousness of God in him Thirdly If Faith hath the same place in the second Covenant as Works in the first then must God account Faith to be perfect Righteousness which is contrary to his Truth and Justice To say that Faith is perfect Righteousness by the second Covenant though not by the first is but petitio principii Legal and Evangelical Righteousness being one and the same as to the matter of Righteousness though they are inherent in divers subjects The first Covenant requires a Righteousness in us the second gives and accepts a Righteousness which is anothers Fourthly If Faith hath the same place in the second Covenant as Works had in the first then were the second Covenant a Covenant of Works seeing Faith is a work and a work of ours So that by this means the two Covenants should be confounded nor would the latter be any whit more of Grace then the former Fifthly This Assertion makes Faith to be not of Grace because not from the Covenant of Grace seeing the Covenant it self depends upon it How contrary this Doctrine is to the sense of our Protestant Divines hath in part been shewed before who till this last Age have taught that these two Propositions A man is justified by Works and A man is justified by Faith do carry meanings utterly opposite to one another The one is proper and formal the other is metonymical and relative In this Proposition A man is justified by Works we are to take all in a plain and literal sence That God doth account him that hath kept the Law exactly in all points a righteous person and consequently worthy of Eternal life but now that other Proposition A man is justified by Faith we must understand it Relatively thus That a sinner is justified in the sight of God from all sin and punishment by Faith i. e. By the Obedience and Righteousness of Jesus Christ which we receive and apply unto our selves by true Faith § 4. Let us now hear what Mr. W. hath to say for the defence of his Major which treads Antipodes to the current of all out Protestant Writers If saith he the Minor be granted the Major must be out of Question I must confess if confidence did prove here were proof enough That which he addes hath as little weight as 1 Why should not Believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved which is the tenor of the New Covenant Rom. 10.6 9. plead as strongly for the antecedency of Faith to Iustification in this Covenant as do this and live doth evince that works were necessary antecedents of Justification in the Old Covenant Answ. Here he takes for that granted which will certainly be denied scil That believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved is the tenor of the New Covenant for 1 it is no where called so 2 where the New Covenant is recited as Jer. 31. Heb. 8. it runs quite in another strain it doth not promise Salvation upon condition of Faith but Faith and Salvation and all other Blessings present and future That Text Rom. 10.6 9. is not the tenor of the New Covenant for that requires Confession as well as Faith and then the Justification of the New Covenant should be called Justification by Confession as well as by Faith The Apostle there describes the persons that shall be saved they are such as do believe and profess the truth His scope as our Divines have noted is to resolve that grand and important Question How a man may know that he shall be saved You need not sayes he to ascend into Heaven or descend into
men have affirmed that the person of the Spirit dwels in the Saints from those Texts John 14.16 17 26.15.26 2 Tim. 1.14 Rom. 8.11 1 Cor. 6.19.3.16 Yet none that are sober ever affirmed that the person of the Spirit dwelleth in us in such a manner as to make us one person with himselfe or to communicate his personal Properties to us so that I may say of this Argument as Maldonate of a certain Text in the Gospel hic locus facilior esset si nemo cum exposuisset it had been more plain and perspicuous if these distinctions had been omitted I see not how a man could imagine any other sence then this That God according to his gracious Covenant doth in his appointed time give or send his Spirit in the preaching of the Gospell to work Faith in all those that are ordained to life So that the Spirit is the cause and Faith the effect It matters not how he is given whether Personally or Operatively for if the Spirit which works Faith be given us by vertue of the New Covenant then some benefit of the Covenant is bestowed upon us before we beleeve Quod erat demonstrandum § 5. Though the Spirit be not given us as he saith one atome of time before we beleeve yet that weakens not the force of the Argument it is enough for my purpose that it hath a precedency in order of nature though not of time and that Faith is not before the Spirit for then Faith is not the condition of the Covenant seeing the condition goes before the thing conditioned and consequently that conditional Promise If thou beleeve c. is not the tenor of the New Covenant Either he must say 1 That the Spirit doth not work Faith and that it is a work of Nature to wit of our own Free will contrary to innumerable Scriptures Or 2 That the Spirit which works Faith is not given us by vertue of the New Covenant which was disproved by comparing Joh. 6.45 with Jer. 31.34 is contrary to those Scriptures which affirmed that all spiritual blessings are given us in and through Christ Eph. 1.3 Rom. 8.32 Or 3 that there is some other condition of the Covenant besides and before Faith as they that make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ingenuity and towardlinesse of nature the condition of conversion or 4 that there are two New Covenants one absolute and the other conditional one wherein Faith is promised without condition the other wherein all things else are promised upon condition of Faith of which more in its place § 6. Whereas he chargeth me with often abusing that received maxime Posita causa ponitur effectus Leting passe his uncivil language I say 1 that in our discourse I did not so much as mention it nor at any time else but with such cautions and limitations as Artists give understanding it of causa proxima completa and then I conceive causa posita in actu the effect must necessarily follow 2 I cannot see that it is any abuse to apply it to the death of Christ in effecting our Justification or deliverance from the curse his death and satisfaction being the adequate and immediate cause therof for when the debt is paid the oblâ—gation is no longer in force 3 Though I understood this maxime never so well it would little advantage Mr. Woodbridges cause That Faith is the condition of having the Spirit in our first conversion unlesse it would prove that the cause is produced by its immedate effect § 7. That which follows is altogether impertinent as a man saith he doth first build himselfe an house and then dwels in it so Christ by his Spirit doth build organâ—ze and prepare the Soule to be an house unto himselfe and then by the same Spirit dwels in it immediately What is this to prove that no man hath interest in the Covenant before he beleeves or that the Spirit which workes Faith is not given us before Faith We grant that Christ by his Spirit doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 build or prepare the Soule to be his house and then dwels in it vouchsafes more sensible effects of his presence but is not that organizing preparing act of the Spirit one benefit of the Covenant and is not the Spirit in that act the cause of Faith if so then wee have an interest in the Covenant before Faith for he that hath jus in re doubtlesse hath jus ad rem when wee have the benefits of the Covenant it cannot bee denied but wee have a right and title to them I find that Mr. Burges mentions this answer but saith he it is not safe to go this way for that grand promise Ezek. 36.26 Doth evidently argue the habits or internall principles of grace are before the actions of grace § 8. His next passage gives us little evidence of a heart prepared and organized by the Spirit of Christ it being false and slanderous This saith he is that which I would have spoken publickly in answer to the Argument if Mr. E. had not been beyond measure obstreperous 1 I dare say such as know Mr. Woodbridges tongue and forehead will not easily beleeve that he would be hindred from speaking his whole mind But 2 my innocency in this matter hath been cleared by persons more worthy to be beleeved then Mr. W. especially when be speaks in his owne cause 3 I shall adde that I verily beleeve he then spake near as many words I am sure as much to the purpose as this which he hath Printed I well remember some passages which are here omirted as that saying anima fabricat sibi domicilium the Soul formes the Body and then dwels in it as the soul works first efficiently that afterwards it may act formally so doth the spirit in our conversion c. 4 If he spake no more it was his owne fault for all that were present doe know that the onely answer I could get unto divers Syllogismes was I deny all But this he intended rather to vilifie me then to excuse himselfe CHAP. XVII Concerning the Covenant wherein Faith is promised and by vertue whereof it is given to us MR. W. in the next place propoundes this Question Whether Faith it selfe be not given to us by vertue of the Covenant made with us Which he answers negatively Faith is not given us by vertue of the Covenant made with us but by vertue of the Covenant made with Christ His Answer implies that there are two distinct Covenants of Grace one made with Christ and the other with us which will need a clearer evidence then yet he hath given us We deny not but Faith yea and all other blessings are promised in the Covenant which was made with Christ the promise of giving him a seed and that this seed shall be blessed doth include no lesse All the Promises both of this life and that which is to come are but so many explications of the grand
promise Gen. 12.3 All the Nations or Families of the Earth i. e. all the Elect whom God hath chosen out of every kindred and tongue and People and Nation shall be blessed in him Mr. W. should have proved that these Promises were not made with us in Christ he should have shewed us any other Covenant made with the Elect then that which was made with Christ. We say with the Apostle that all the Promises of God are yea and amen in him 2 Cor. 1.20 and with the late Assembly that the Covenant of Grace was made with Christ and with us in him With him actively as the person that performed all the conditions upon which the Promises thereof are grounded with us passively as the persons to whom the benefit of those Promises doth belong If one man promise another that in case he shall bear so many stripes indure so long imprisonment or performe any other condition be it what it will he will then take care of and provide for his children doth not this promise which was made with the Father most properly belonging unto his children The case is the same between Christ and us he performed the conditions and we receive the benefits of the New Covenant the same Covenant is made with both and consequently Faith is given us not onely by vertue of the Covenant made with Christ but by vertue of the Covenant made with all the Elect which might be further proved by many Reasons § 2. 1. If there be but one Covenant of Grace which is made both with Christ and us then Faith is given us by vertue of the Covenant made with us But there is but one Covenant of Grace Ergo. The Sequel is undeniable I doubt not but our adversaries will grant that Faith is given us by vertue of the Covenant of Grace and the Assumption is as evident that there is but one Covenant of Grace though there are many promises yet is there but one Covenant For as much as all the promises have the same ground and foundation scil the merit and purchase of Jesus Christ and therefore they are said to be yea and amen in him The Scripture makes mention but of two Covenants the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace the former was made with the first Adam and his Seed the other with the second Adam and his Seed and is commonly called the New Covenant I confess this latter hath been variously administred in the times of the Old and New Testament In which respect it hath been looked upon by some as two distinct Covenants and distinguished by the names of the Old and New Covenant But this controversie is easily reconciled if it be considered that the Old Covenant is sometimes put for the promise vailed and sometimes for the vail it self 1 When it is put for the vail it self as doubtless it is when it is said to have waxen old and to vanish to be changed abolished disannulled c. Which things cannot be affirmed of the promise which is an Everlasting Covenant and always remains one and the same it may be said to be a distinct Covenant from the Covenant of Grace exhibited in the times of the New Testament But 2 when it is taken for the promise vailed there is no doubt but it is the same in substance with that in the New Testament for though this Grace was then but darkly revealed and as it were covered out of sight by the Mosaical Administration yet it brought upon them the same Righteousness and Salvation which is now enjoyed by the children of Faith Acts 15.11 John 8.56 Gal. 3.8 and Heb. 11.14 But be the Old and New Testament Administration one or two Covenants it matters not much to our Question it lies on Mr. W. to prove that there are two New Covenants or two distinct Covenants of Grace in the times of the New Testaments one made with Christ and another with the Elect one in which God doth promise us Faith the other in which he doth promise all other Blessings that follow Faith which I suppose he will finde to be somewhat difficult § 3. 2. If Christ merited nothing for himself but onely for the Elect then all the promises made to him do belong to them or the Covenant which was made with him as Mediator is made with them But Christ merited nothing for himself Ergo. The Minor is the unanimous Tenent of our Protestant Divines who have sufficiently cleared it from the Scriptures And for my own part I see not what can be rationally excepted against the consequence of the Major for if he merited nothing for himself then all the promises made to him do belong to others In this regard he is called The Mediator of a better Covenant Heb. 8.6 and the Mediator of the New Covenant Chap. 12.24 Now a Mediator doth not act for himself but in their behalf whose Mediator he is I suppose Mr. W. will not deny but Faith is bestowed upon us by vertue of that Covenant whereof Christ is the Mediator Now Christ is Mediator of the Covenant made with us and not of a Covenant made singly and particularly with himself for a man cannot properly be called a Mediator for himself The Apostle is express That we obtain Faith by the same means whereby we obtain all good things else to wit By the Righteousness of Jesus Christ 2 Pet. 1.1 Eph. 1.3 Rom. 8.32 So that consequently it is one and the same Covenant by vertue whereof Faith and all other Spiritual Blessings are bestowed upon us I adde therefore § 4. 3. If Faith be given to us by vertue of that Covenant whereby Justification Sanctification Perseverance and Glory are bestowed upon us then Faith is given us by vertue of that Covenant which is made with us But Faith is given us by vertue of the same Covenant wherein Justification Sanctification c. are promised and bestowed upon us Ergo. Neither Sequel nor Assumption do need any proof In the same Covenant wherein God promiseth to cleanse us from our filthiness to cause us to walk in his ways c. He promiseth to circumcise our hearts to write his Laws in our inward parts and that we shall be taught of God i. e. Made to believe John 6.45 Ezek. 36.25 c. Jere. 31.34 § 5. 4. If Faith be given to us by vertue of that Covenant which was made with Abraham and his Seed then is it given by vertue of the Covenant made with us For the same Covenant which God made with Abraham is made with all the faithful to the end of the world and therefore they are called the children of Abraham Gal. 3.7 29. Now God in promising to be his God and to be a Sun and a shield c. promised also to give Faith whereby the Refreshing Beams of this Sun are conveyed into the soul and this shield is managed for our best advantage Ephes. 6.16 5. Which was the medium I made use of at
our Conference If Faith be given us by vertue of the Covenant made with the House of Israel then is it given us by vertue of the Covenant made with us for the House of Israel is the whole company of Gods Elect who are therefore called Spiritual Israel Rom. 9.6 But Faith or the Spirit which works Faith is promised in the Covenant made with the House of Israel Jere. 31.31 Heb. 8.19 § 6. Whereunto Mr. W. answers 1 by way of retortion If Mr. E. saith he will urge the words of this Text rigorously they would prove more then he would have I hope there is no hurt in that though the place doth prove more that doth no whit invalidate its force as to the purpose for which we alledged it but what is that which it proves more It is manifest says he that this Covenant contains a promise of sending Christ into the world to die for our sins as the Apostle proves Heb. 10.14.15 16. So that we may as well infer from hence that we are in Covenant with God before the death of the Mediator as that we are in Covenant before we believe and then his death shall serve not to obtain all or any of the blessings of the Covenant but onely as the Socinians to declare and confirm c. If he please to admit of a Reply we say 1 That he mistakes the inference that was drawn from hence The Proposition to be concluded was not That we are in Covenant before we believe but that Faith or the Spirit which works Faith is given us by vertue of the Covenant made with us which is sufficiently secured by these Texts for if by the House of Israel be meant all the Elect as undoubtedly they are and the Spirit which works Faith is promised in the Covenant which is made with the House of Israel then the Spirit and Faith are given by vertue of the Covenant which is made with us we being in the number of Gods Elect. 2 It is not so manifest as he pretends that these Texts do contain a promise of sending Christ to die for us The promises here mentioned do express onely what benefits do accrew to us by the Death of Christ I grant that this Covenant supposeth the Death of Christ as the onely meritorious procuring means by which these benefits do flow down unto us and therefore it is said In those days or after those days meaning the days of the Son of Man when the Messiah whom God had promised should be exhibited which in Scripture are called The last days the last times and the world to come c. Though the Apostle mentions the Covenant Heb. 10.15 it is not to prove That God would send his Son to die but that being come as these believing Hebrews acknowledged though they saw not the vertues of his death as to the abolishing of other Sacrifices he hath offered up a perfect Sacrifice Verse 10 12 14. and consequently they needed no other Sacrifice to take away sin for otherwise God had not made such ample promises in reference to the times of the Messiah as you finde he hath Jere. 31. That he will remember the sins and iniquities of his people no more c. For says the Apostle when there is such a full remission there needs no more offering for sin Verse 18. § 7. 3. Though we should grant him that this Text Jere. 31. contains a promise of sending Christ what were this to the purpose to weaken our inference That Faith is given by vertue of the Covenant made with us May not God in the same Covenant promise both Christ and Faith But sayes Mr. W. it will follow then that this Covenant was made with us or that we were in Covenant with God not onely before we believe but before the death of Christ. I am so far from looking upon it as an absurdity that I shall readily own and acknowledge it as an undeniable truth That the New Covenant was made with all the Elect in Christ before the foundations of the world were laid it being the fixed and immutable Will of God concerning all those good things which in time are bestowed upon them and therefore it is called an Everlasting Covenant 2 Sam. 23.5 not onely a parte post but a parte ante as it shall have no end nor be changed So it had no beginning God having from all eternity immutably purposed in himself to bestow upon them all those blessings which they do receive in time yet we say there are more especially three moments or periods of time wherein God may be said to make this Covenant with us As 1 immediately upon the fall of Adam when he first published his gracious promise of saving all his Elect by the womans Seed Gen. 3.15 The first Covenant being broken and dissolved the Lord immediately published that other Covenant which cannot be broken and hereunto as hath been shewed do those Scriptures relate Tit. 1.2 2 Tim. 1.9 2 At the death of Christ because thereby all the benefits willed to us by the Everlasting Covenant were merited and procured for us the full price which was paid for them was then exhibited for which cause the New Covenant is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Testament which was confirmed by the death of the Testator Jesus Christ Heb. 9.17 And the Blood which he shed the Blood of the Everlasting Covenant Heb. 13.20 and the Blood of the New Testament Matth. 26.28 So that his charge of Socinianism doth not touch us for though we do not say That Christ procured the Covenant or that God should will to us â—hose mercies which are therein promised yet we say the effects of the Covenant or the mercies themselves were all of them obtained by the Blood of Christ as our deliverance from the curse inherent holiness c. 3 The Covenant is said to be made with men when God doth confer upon men the benefits which are therein promised or at least makes them to know and understand their interest and propriety therein Thus is that to be understood Isai. 55.3 I will make an Everlasting Covenant i. e. I will fulfil my Everlasting Covenant or bestow upon you all those mercies which I have promised and which my Son hath purchased by shedding of his Blood And thus we grant That God makes his Covenant with his people when he gives them Faith when he enables them to lay hold of it and to plead it at the Throne of Grace now though in this sence God may be said to take men into Covenant when they doe beleeve yet will it not follow that the Spirit and Faith are not given by vertue of the Covenant which is made with us so that his retortion is pittifully unsuccessefull it gives not the least wound to the cause which we maintain § 8. The second branch of his Answer is That upon a most serious perusall of these Texts I finde them so contradictory to Mr. Eyres purpose
the Covenant but as the means by which we are brought into Covenant It being so crudely asserted a bare denial might serve the turn But 1 I shall appeal to the indifferent Reader whether it doth not sound very harshly That the same words should be formally both a precept and a promise and that God should require a condition of us and yet promise to work it in us How shall we distinguish between precepts and promises Mr. W may be pleased to consider what some Grand Assertors of Conditions have said thereof 2 I would ask whether this promise of Faith be not a part of the New Covenant All the promises of God do belong either to the Covenant of Works or to the Covenant of Grace It is no part of the Covenant of Works Ergo It is a part of the Covenant of Grace Now if the promise be a part of the New Covenant the thing promised is an effect of the Covenant or a benefit given by vertue of it 3 I would ask whether the promise of Faith be not an effect of Christs death If it be then is it an effect of the Covenant already made for all the effects of his death are effects of the Covenant which was confirmed by his death who for this cause is called the Covenant Isa. 42.6 49.8 implying That all the benefits of the Covenant are the fruits and purchases of his death and that Christ hath not purchased any thing for us but what is promised in the Covenant the effects of the Covenant and the effects of Christs death are of equal latitude 4 The Scripture no where affirms That Faith is promised as a means to bring us into Covenant or to invest us with a right and title thereunto That which gives men interest in the Covenant is the good pleasure of God willing those blessings to them and the purchase which Christ hath made in their behalf who hath performed whatsoever was necessary by Divine constitution in order to our having of them We grant That Faith is the means whereby we come to know our interest in the Covenant and in all the benefits thereof But their saying That hereby we have or do obtain our interest and title to the Covenant hath not any ground that I finde in the Written Word If any shall infer it from hence because it is said Believe and thou shalt be saved they may as well make Baptism Sanctification Perseverance c. to which the promise of Salvation is sometimes annexed means to bring us into Covenant or to invest us with a right and title to the benefits of it and consequently no man shall have any interest in the Covenant as long as he lives and till these conditions be performed To conclude If the promise of Faith be a part of the Covenant as hath been shewed then is it not a means to bring us into Covenant or to invest us with a title to the benefits of it because it is impossible that the same thing should be the means or cause of it self CHAP. XVIII Wherein Mr. Woodbridges Exposition of the New Covenant mentioned Jere. 31.33 and in other places is further examined THe Tenor of the New Covenant in the Prophet whose words are punctually cited by the Apostle Heb. 8. runs thus This is the Covenant that I will make with the House of Israel after those days saith the Lord I will put my Law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts and will be their God and they shall be my people and c. But now Mr. W. renders it thus This is the Covenant which I will make with the House of Israel when I shall write my Laws in their hearts I will be their God c. or This is the Covenant which I will make saith the Lord that giveth his Laws into their mindes and writeth them in their hearts c. I know not what can be called wresting of the Scripture if this be not If men may take the liberty to chop and change to adde or diminish from the Word at their pleasure nothing can certainly be concluded thence nay the Scripture might be made a shelter for the foulest Errors It savors not of a spirit that trembles at the Word and believes that threatning Revel 22.18 to make so bold with the Oracles of God The word when is neither in nor agreeable to the Hebrew or Greek Text though he would make his Reader believe that it is in both The Verbs in the first clause are not in the Present but Future tense as in the rest which follow Besides his Paraphrase chargeth the Holy Ghost with a gross tautalogy if not a flat contradiction The time of making this Covenant is signified in these words After those days which undoubtedly ought to be referred unto the days of the Messiah in opposition to the times before when the Grace of this Covenant was not so clearly revealed so that it was needless he should adde When I put my Laws c. And if God makes not his Covenant with Spiritual Israel till he writes his Laws in their hearts then the former clause After those dayes must either stand for nothing or else imply a falshood In a word The unsoundness of this gloss doth appear from hence that these words are not onely here but in many other places mentioned as a distinct promise of the New Covenant and not as a bare connotation of the time or a Periphrasis of the person that makes the Covenant as Mr. W. carries it See Deut. 30.6 Ezek. 36.26 27. Jere. 32.38 39. where that promise which Mr. W. calls The matter or substance of the Covenant on Gods part is put first and the other which he calls the Condition is made as it were the Consequence of the former § 2. The Scriptures he hath brought to countenance his new found interpretation of the Covenant will by no means shelter it as Jere. 24.7 I will give them a heart to know me that I am the Lord and they shall be my people and I will be their God for they shall return unto me with their whole heart Where says he the condition on the peoples part of the Lords being their God is their returning with their whole heart The affirmation is not so clear as not to need a proof that promise I will give them a heart to know me is as hath been shewed one principal blessing of the New Covenant the immediate effect whereof is Mens returning unto God with their whole heart Now to call their returning unto God the condition of Gods being their God is as unhappy a mistake as his That set the Cart before the horse Could they have returned to God unless God had returned to them Are not Faith and Repentance the fruits of our Reconciliation by the blood of Christ God having given us his Son hath with him given us all things else Rom. 8.32 Mr. â—alvin calls this blessing of Gods being our God Causam
principium omnium bonorum i. e. The cause and fountain of all other blessings and particularly of the renewing of our hearts and our returning unto God Now the consequences and Effects of a Blessing are not the Conditions of it § 3. His next Allegation from Heb. 10.14 c. hath the fate to fall as short of the mark as the former did For the Apostles scope there is not to shew in what order and method the benefits of the Covenant are bestowed upon us but that there needs no other Sacrifice for sin besides the Sacrifice which Christ hath offered which he proves because God in that Covenant which he promised to make with his people in the times of the New Testament declares That he will not onely give them a new heart but their sins and iniquities shall not be remembred any more Now where there is no more remembrance of sin there needs no more Sacrifice for sin so that the words expressed are sufficient to compleat the sense without understanding of then he saith or then it followeth which Mr. W. hath added in the close of the sixteenth Verse We may take them as they lie from Verse the fifteenth Whereof to wit of Christs perfect Sacrifice mentioned Vers. 14. the Holy Ghost is a witness to us for after he i. e. the Holy Ghost had said before This is the Covenant that I will make with them after those dayes to wit of the Old Testament which are now expired The Lord saith viz. The Holy Ghost who is the Lord Jehovah and with the Father and Son the Author of the New Covenant I will put my Laws into their hearts and in their mindes will I write them and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more So that I say there is no need that either of those clauses Then he saith c. should be foisted in between the 16 and 17 Verses It seems to me That the Copulative And is set as a bar to keep it forth shewing that the words in the 17 Verse ought to follow immediately upon the sixteenth I grant that the promise of Remission is one of the most special and noble Blessings contained in that general promise I will be their God yet it doth not follow that Regeneration or Inherent holiness is required or promised as the means or qualification to obtain this Blessing Pareus his Note upon the place is very sound That the Apostle here doth ground the promise of remission of sins upon that perfect oblation which Christ hath offered and not upon works of Sanctification which according to Mr. Woodbridges Doctrine is the immediate principle from whence it follows § 4. His next Assertion That in the New Covenant the giving of the first Grace is always promised not as a part of the Covenant but as a means and qualification on mans part for his entrance into Covenant is justly obnoxious unto more then one Exception 1. The work of Conversion or the renewing of our hearts i◠unfitly called The first Grace For 1 to speak properly the first Grace is that which is Grace indeed to wit the Everlasting Love Favor and Good-pleasure of God towards his people for this is the rise and fountain of all those mercies which we receive in time yea of Christ himself John 3.16 Or 2 if by Grace we understand the Fruits and Effects of this Grace then certainly the precedenc◠or priority must be given unto Jesus Christ for whose sake all other blessings are bestowed upon us Ephes. 1.3 Or else 3 if by Grace we understand the Fruits and Effects of Christs death or the benefits which are freely given us for his sake even in this sense Inherent Sanctification is unduly put in the first place which is a consequent both of Justification and Adoption Gal. 4.5 6. Though it be promised in that place of Jeremy before Remission of sin◠yet in other places it is put after it as Ezek. 36.25 26. Jere. 32.38 39. The Reason why this promise is sometimes put first may probably be because the Grace of Sanctification is most apt to affect our senses we do apprehend and perceive it before we come to know our Justification § 5. 2. It is utterly false That the giving of a new heart is not promised as a part of the Covenant but as a means on mans part for his entrance into Covenant For 1 the Scripture no where affirms it and it is weakly concluded hence because it is sometimes mentioned first in the recital of the Covenant which is all he hath to pretend for this notion seeing that in other places the promise of Sanctification follows that of Justification from whence he may as well conclude that Justification is promised not as a part of the Covenant but as a means to intitle us unto Sanctification so that not onely the promise of Faith but of Remission also shall be excluded from being a part of the Covenant 2 The promise of a new heart includes not onely the first act of Faith and Repentance but the continuance and increase of these Gifts so that either he must say that all the Promises of Sanctification which are included therein are no part of the Covenant or that the same promise is both a means to bring us into Covenant and a part of the Covenant i. e. it is a part and no part I must confess that I never yet met with that man who had the forehead to deny that the promise of Faith and Repentance is a part of the New Covenant 3 It seems to me an undeniable truth that the promises of Sanctification as well as of Justification are parts of the Covenant considering 1 that they have the same ground and foundation to wit the merit and purchase of Jesus Christ Christ hath merited Faith and Repentance no less then remission of sins Now whatsoever Christ hath purchased the Covenant promiseth All the effects of his death are equally parts of the New Covenant 2 Both these promises have the same end and design viz. The glory of God Faith and Repentance are not promised onely subserviently for our benefit but ultimately for the praise of his glory Tit. 2.14 1 Thes. 4.3 3 They are promised in the same manner as distinct and not as subordinate benefits he doth not say I will write my Laws in their hearts that I may pardon their sins and iniquities But I will write my Laws c. and their sins and iniquities I will remember no more § 6. 3. It sounds harshly That God promiseth Faith as a means on our part to bring us into Covenant for if God doth promise to bestow Faith it cannot properly be called a means on our part it were a means on our part if we performed it our selves and by our own strength as the condition required of Adam should have been For the removing of this rub I shall make it to appear that in the New Covenant there is no condition required
things whatsoever which we stand in need of and are good for us Now I say that Promise or Covenant by vertue whereof we obtain both Grace and Glory good things present and future is not conditional to us I say to us for to Christ it was conditional though to us it be free to him it was a Covenant of Works though to us it be a Covenant of pure Grace there is not so much as one blessing doth descend to us but he hath dearly bought it even with the price of his own blood for which cause he is called the Mediator Witness and Surety of the New Covenant § 2. 2. When we say the New Covenant is not conditional we understand a condition in its proper and genuine sense as the Jurists use it in reference to mens contracts and bargains A condition saith Dr. Cawel is a rate manner or Law annexed to mens acts or grants staying and suspending the same and making them uncertain whether they shall take effect or no. And our English Papinian Conditio dicitur cum quid in casum incertum qui potest tendere ad esse aut non esse confertur To the same purpose the Expositor of Law terms A condition is a restraint or bridle annexed and joyned to a promise by the performance of which it is ratified and takes effect and by the non-performance of it it becomes voide the person to whom it is made shall receive no commodity or advantage by it Hence is that Maxime amongst Lawyers Conditio ad impleri debet priusquà m sequatur effectus i. e. The condition must be performed bâ—fore the Grant or Promise becomes valid In this sense we say The Covenant which God made with Adam was conditional God annexed to the promise of Life the condition of Obedience Do this and thou shalt live The stability and success of that promise did depend upon his performing of the condition he failing in his part the promise became voide Now we deny that the blessings of the New Covenant do depend upon this or any other condition to be performed by us Lawyers do distinguish of a twofold condition 1 Antecedent and 2 Consequent The Antecedent condition being performed doth get or gain the thing or estate made upon condition the Consequent condition doth keep and continue it As for instance If I fell a man a Farm on condition he shall pay me five hundred pounds present and forty shillings nay be it but six pence per annum for the future the payment of the five hundred pounds is the Antecedent condition which gives him possession of the Farm the forty shillings or six pence per annum is the Subsequent condition and that continues his possession and if he fail in this latter the Estate is forfeited and in Law I may re-enter upon the Farm as if no such bargain had been made between us Now we say further That the Blessings of the New Covenant require not onely no Antecedent but no Subsequent condition to be performed by us there is nothing on our parts that procures our Right and Interest nor yet that continues and maintains our interest in them The Lord Jesus is both the Author and the Finisher of our Salvation it is by and through him that we are made Sons and doe continue Sons are made Righteous and doe continue Righteous that we Obtain and do Injoy all the effects of the New Covenant § 3. I am not ignorant that the word Condition is sometimes taken improperly for that which is meerly an Antecedent though it contributes not the least efficiency either natural or morall towards the production of that which follows it A condition properly taken is a moral efficient cause which produceth its effect by vertue of some compact agreement or constitution between persons omnis conditio antecedens est effectiva a condition properly so called is effective of that which is promised upon condition Now I say not onely conditions in a proper sense but all certaine and constant Antecedents though they are not expressed or included in their Federal constitution so as that the Promise doth depend upon them may in a vulgar sense be called conditions of those things that follow them and in this sense our Divines doe commonly call one benefit of the Covenant a condition of the another as that which is given first of that which is given after Thus Dr. Twisse makes inherent holinesse to be causa dispositiva or the sine qua non not of Justification but of Salvation or Glorification because the one alwaies precedes the other Many other do expresse themselves in the same manner It is evident that some benefits of the New Covenant in their execution and accomplishment doe follow others though we have a right unto them all at once for as much as that flowes immediately from the purchase which Christ hath made yet we have not possession of them all at once but in that order and manner as God is pleased to bestow them Christ hath procured both Grace and Glory for his Elect yet he gives Grace i. e. Gracious Quallifications as Knowledge Faith Love c. before he brings them to the possession of Glory in which sense I conceive it is that the Scripture annexeth Salvation unto Faith and other works of inherent Holinesse Matth. 5. pr. Heb. 12.14 c. because these are certain and infallible Antecedents in all that shall be saved none who live to years of understanding are saved but they that doe beleeve the Gospell and shew forth the fruits of it in a suitable conversation If in this sence onely Faith and Repentance be called conditions of the Covenant to wit because they are wrought in all those that do injoy the ful effect of the Covenant I will not contend § 4 Yet I think it fit rather to forbear this expression 1 Because it is so improper to call a part of the Covenant the condition of it Chamier though he often useth the expression yet hee acknowledgeth that Faith is called a condition verbis minus propriis And a little after Fidei conditio non est antecedens sed consequens non est causa salutis sed instrumentum apprehendendi gratiam i. e. Faith is not a proper antecedent condition but an improper or consequent condition it is not a cause of salvation but only the instrument whereby we receive and apply it Mr. Rutherford himselfe though he cals them Libertines and Antinomians who say the Covenant of Grace is not conditionall yet almost in the same breath he hath let fall these words To buy without mony and to have a sight of sin is the condition of our having the water of Life but the truth is it is an improper condition for both wages and worke is Free Grace I confesse improper locutions ought to be borne with when they serve to illustrate truth but this I conceive doth exceedingly darken it 2 Because of the advantage
concerning the blessing of his seed The Prophet infers this their relation unto God from his everlasting love Jer. 31.1.3 The Apostle likewise Rom. 8.31 grounds the Saints interest in God or their having God to be with them upon his eternall and unchangeable good will towards them even before he spared his Son to dye for them So 2 Tim. 2.19 The foundation of God standeth sure the Lord knoweth them that are his Implying that the election and fore-knowledge of God doth make men his § 3. Secondly If the Lord be a God not onely to his people but to their seed also then is he a God to some before they beleeve But he is a God not onely to his people who are called and doe beleeve but to their seed who are not called and do not yet beleeve Ergo. The Lord promised Abraham that he would be not only his God but the God of his seed the seed of Abraham did not then beleeve yet the Lord stiles himself their God And the Apostle tels those converts Act. 2.39 That the Promise was to them and to their children Now what was that Promise but Ero Deus tuus seminis tui If our opposers say That God was not the God of their children untill they were called they will be guilty of the same Tautalogy which they charge upon the Anti-pedo-baptists upon this ground it is that the children of beleeving Parents are admitted to baptisme before they beleeve because God hath declared that hee is their God § 4. Thirdly They whom the Lord hath purchased to be a peculiar people to himselfe have the Lord to be their God But God hath purchased some to be a peculiar people to himself before they beleeve Ergo. The major is evident for when a man makes a Purchase he obtains a legall right and propriety in the thing purchased Quod venditur transit in potestatem ementis And therefore the Apostle concludes from hence that we are not our own but Gods because we are bought with a price 1 Cor. 6.19 20 The minor is undeniable That God did purchase us before we do beleeve even when he gave himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ransome for us 2 Tim. 2.6 he bought us saith the Apostle with his precious blood 1 Pet. 1.18 19. thereby we were made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a peculiar people Tit. 2.14 Though he had not immediately upon the payment of the price the possession of us yet thereby he obtained a right to us we became his in right though not in injoyment It was here as with a man that buyes a Living and payes down the price he hath immediately a right to it though he hath not the present possession of it he may call it his own though it be not in his hands § 5. Fourthly If we recive all good things from God yea Faith it selfe upon this account because we are his people then God is our God before wee beleeve But wee receive all good things from God even Faith it selfe meerly upon this account because we are his people as Gal 4.6 Because yee are Sons God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts They were Sons before they received the Spirit of his Son So Isa. 48.17 I am the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to profit scil By my word and works by which means men are brought to Faith and Repentance No reason can be given why one man profits by the Word and another doth not but because the Lord is a God to one and not to the other he hath chosen one and not the other Act 13.48 as many as were ordained unto eternall life i. e. chosen and separated from the rest of mankind to be a peculiar people unto God beleeved § 6. Fifthly If none can or do Beleeve and Repent but they to whom the Lord doth manifest this Grace That he is their God then the Lord is our God before we beleeve and repent But none do or can beleeve and repent but they to whom God doth reveale and manifest this Grace Ergo. We chuse him because hee hath chosen us and love him because he hath loved us first Joh. 15.16 1 Joh. 4 10.19 In Hos. 2.23 saith the Lord I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy and I will say to them which were not my people thou art my people and they shall say Thou art my God I have observed that Expositors generally doe take notice of the order of the words As Mr. Burroughs God must begin with us we cannot begin and say Thou art my God but God must begin with us first and say You are my people And Dr. Rivet Hic ord◠est considerandus c. The order of the words ought diligently to be observed It is God that begins and calls them his people who being made his people through Grace doe by Faith give their consent and own him for their God And Zanchy to the same purpose The order of the words shewes That God doth first prevent us with his Grace and makes us his people then follows the assent of our Faith whereby we acknowledge and imbrace him for our God So that our Faith doth not make him to be our God but suppose he is so § 7. Sixthly They to whom God is a Father and a Shepherd have the Lord for their God But God was our Father and Shepherd before we beleeved Ergo. All the Elect are the Sheep and Children of Jesus Christ. They are his Sheep Joh. 10.15 I lay down my life for my Sheep he laid down his life not onely for them that were then called but for them that were to be called afterwards so ver 16. Other sheep I have which are not of this fold The Elect Gentiles were his sheep before they were brought into his Fold scil the visible communion of Saints They are also called his Seed and Children Isa. 53.10 and Heb. 2.13 Behold I and the children which God hath given mee Hee speaks of all those Sons whom he was to bring unto Glory ver 10. So Jer. 3.19 Thou shalt call me my Father Their calling him Father did not make but suppose him to be their Father and in this respect he is called an Everlasting Father Isa. 9.6 § 8. Mr. W. tels us That he hath onely one observation to adde which the most learned among the Jewish and Christian writers doe often take notice of and that is this That God is never said to be our God in reference to his giving of the first Grace but onely in reference to the blessing which he promiseth to them that have Faith Heb. 11.16 He is not our God that he may give us Faith but is every where said to give us Faith that he may be our God 1 Pet. 2.10 I acknowledge that Mr. W. is a learned man yet I know it is much above his reach to determine who are the most learned amongst the Jewish and Christian Writers who
perswaded better things of him and such as do accompany Salvation In the mean time I shall gladly hear the utmost that he hath to say in the defence of his Opinion § 2. His first Argument of this last rank is grounded upon those words Isa. 55.3 Come unto me that is Believe in me John 6.35 and I will make an Everlasting Covenant with you Ergo The New Covenant is not an absolute promise and none have any interest in the Covenant before they believe To which I answer 1 the Particle Vau may be taken Illatively as in some other places it is thus For I will make an Everlasting Covenant so that the Covenant is the ground of our coming and not è contra Or 2 if we take it Copulatively as our Translators do no prejudice can come thence unto our Assertion for I will make an Everlasting Covenant is all one as if he had said I will perform or give to you all other benefits promised in my Everlasting Covenant even the sure mercies of David as the Apostle expounds it Acts 13.34 Those promises which are proposed conditionally by the Prophets are rendred absolutely by the Apostle as for instance that of the Prophet Isa. 59 20. The Redeemer shall come to Zion and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob. The Apostle Rom. 11.26 renders it Then shall come out of Zion the Deliverer and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob implying that Faith and Repentance are parts of the Covenant which God will give unto them for whom Christ hath procured them § 3. His second Argument is That the voice of the Gospel which is the Covenant of Grace is every where Believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved in opposition to the Covenant of Works which saith do this and live Ergo before believing none have interest in the Covenant We grant that this precept or exhortation Believe in the Lord Jesus is frequently found in the New Testament but that this doth formally contain the tenor of the Gospel or New Covenant we have before disproved The Gospel properly and strictly taken consists neither in the precepts nor promises of the New Testament but in the declaration of these glad tidings that the promises which God made unto his people in the Old Testament are now fulfilled to wit the promises concerning the coming of the Messiah and the clear exhibition of all the fruits and effects of his Mediatorship So that the sum of the Gospel is rather comprized in this That Jesus Christ is come into the world to save sinners yea the cheif of sinners That by his one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Now they that are sent forth to publish and declare these glad tidings are to invite and command all men every where to believe in him whom God hath sent assuring them in the Name of God That all that do believe in him shall not perish but have everlasting life The command of believing with the promise of life to Believers are parts of our Ministery they are not the tenor of the Gospel or New Covenant The Covenant whereof Christ is the Mediator is said to be better then the former because it doth consist of better promises Heb. 8.6 Now what those better promises are he tells them immediately out of Jeremy I will put my Laws into their hearts c. wherein the Lord promiseth all good things unto them without the least restipulation from them It is said indeed they that are called i e. do believe shall receive the promise of the eternal inheritance It doth not follow that their calling unto Faith was the condition whereby they obtained the inheritance no more then because it is said Chap. 5.9 Christ is the Author of Salvation to them that do obey him Ergo. Works and Obedience are conditions on our part to obtain Salvation Which places do describe the persons that are saved but not the tearms or means by which they do obtain Salvation they that are called do receive i. e. Enter into the promised inheritance he doth not say that by vertue of their calling they do enter or were invested with a right and title thereunto the repeating of his Consequence is answer enough They that are called shall receive the eternal inheritance Ergo None have any interest in the Covenant before believing or the New Covenant is not an absolute promise § 4. His next Argument is to this effect The Covenant of Grace is to be preached to every man but the absolute promise is not made to every man Ergo The Covenant of Grace is not an absolute promise Answer The Argument is faulty both in Matter and Form the Assumption should be But the absolute promise scil of Mercy and Forgiveness without Works and Conditions performed by us is not to be preached to all men which is false But we will take things as they lie before us The Covenant of Grace is preached to every man and every man called upon to fulfil the conditions of it that he may receive the blessings of it which condition is Faith Heb. 4.1 2. Here is a grain of Corn in a heap of chaff It is true that the Gospel or Covenant of Grace ought to be preached unto every Creature Mark 16.15 Matth. 28.19 But it is not true that the Preaching of the Gospel is to call upon men to fulfil the conditions of the Covenant or that Faith is the condition of it The place alledged sayes no such thing the words are an Exhortation to sincerity and perseverance in our Christian Profession by a similitude taken from foolish Racers who by giving over before they come to the Goal do lose the Crown We also have a race to run there is a Crown set before us and therefore we ought to take heed least by any means we fall short thereof though no man shall enter into the Heavenly Canaan without Faith yet it follows not that Faith is the condition whereby we get an interest either in that or the other blessings of the Covenant The Absoluteness of the New Covenant is no ways inconsistent with the Preaching of the Gospel unto every Creature For what is it to Preach the Gospel But 1 to publish these joyful tidings That the Son of God is come into the world to save men from their sins that in the Sacrifice which he hath offered there is plenteous Redemption for the cheif of sinners 2 To press and exhort all men without exception to believe in him 1. With the assent of their mindes that all things which are written of him cheifly concerning the merit of his sufferings and the efficacy of his death are true and infallible 2. With the imbraces of their hearts to wit With such affections as are suitable to so great a good and more particularly to trust relie and roul themselves upon him for all the purchases of his death and in so doing confidently to expect the fruition of
them in the fittest times Now the Absoluteness of the New Covenant is so far from being any impediment to Faith as that it affords men the greatest encouragement to believe both to cast themselves into the arms of Christ and to put on a strong confidence of inheriting all the promises seeing that in their accomplishment they depend not upon Works and Conditions performed by themselves § 5. Mr. W. demands 1 Whether there be an absolute promise made to every man that God will give him grace Though there be not yet are the general promises of the Covenant a sufficient ground for our Faith for as much as Grace therein is promised indefinitely to sinners which all that are ordained to life shall believe and lay hold of But says Mr. W. is it sense to exhort men to take hold of Gods Covenant or to enter into Covenant with God if the Covenant be onely an absolute promise on Gods part c. What contradiction is there unto sense in either of these For 1. what is it to lay hold of the Covenant but as Benhadads Servants did by Ahabs words 1 Kings 20.33 to take up those gracious discoveries which God in his Covenant hath made of himself to sinners and to resolve with the woman of Cannan not to be beaten off with any discouragements Which act of Faith is called The taking of the Kingdom of Heaven by violence Matth. 11 12. Which is when a Soule appropriates generall Promises to himselfe in particular And against Hope beleeves in Hope The Apostle calls it Fleeing for refuge to lay hold on the Promise Heb. 6.18 which Promise is the same which God confirmed by an Oath Vers. 17. Now wee doe not finde that God did ever confirme any Conditionall Promise with an Oath but onely those Absolute Promises of his Grace Isai. 54.9 10. Psal. 89 34 35. As for the other phrase of entering into Covenant with God Though wee never find it in the New Testament that the Apostles did exhort men to enter into or to make a Covenant with God yet I conceive that it may bee used in reference to the Externall Administration of the New Covenant Men may bee said to enter into Covenant with God when they take upon them the profession of Christianity and give up themselves to bee the Lords People In this respect wee may exhort men as the Apostle doth To give up themselves a living Sacrifice holy and acceptable unto God and to abide stedfast in the Covenant of God or rather as the Apostles phrase is To hold fast their Profession firme unto the end Hebr. 3.6 It were absurd to exhort men either to make or to concurre to the making of the Covenant of Grace which is his act alone who sheweth mercy unto whom he will § 6. His next Interogative is a very strange one he asks us Whether if the Covenant be an absolute Promise it be sense to accuse blame and damne men for unbeleefe and rejecting of the Gospell Was it ever known that men should be counted worthy of death for not being the objects of an absolute Promise By his favor who did ever say that men are damned for not being objects of an Absolute Promise We say the condemnation of Reprobates doth inevitably follow upon their not being included in that Covenant which God hath made with Christ or Gods not giving them unto Jesus Christ but this is antecessio ordinis non causalitatis their exclusion from this Covenant is but an Antecedent and not the cause of their destruction Men are damned for not beleeving that Grace which God hath manifested to sinners for not receiving it with that esteem and such affections as it doth deserve so that formally the cause of their damnation is not their non-being objects of Gods absolute Promise but their disobedience to the Command of God If he say as the Remonstrators have done before him That they are unjustly blamed and damned for unbeleefe seeing they have no Object for their Faith no Christ to beleeve in We shall Answer That there is a reall Object proposed to their Faith though there be no such absolute Promise that God will give Grace to every man in particular the Object of Faith is the Written Word and more especially the Free Promises of Mercy unto wretched sinners for the sake of Christ which all men are commanded to beleeve both assensu intellectus amplexu voluntatis and for their unbeleefe they perish everlastingly If he shall ask Why God doth command them to beleeve in Christ seeing he never intended they should have any good or benefit by Christ I must say with the Apostle Rom. 9 20. O man who art thou that disputest against God We ought to look to his Commands and not curiously to search into his Councels Deut. 22 29. We know that the Preaching of the Gospell was ordained principally for gathering Gods Elect now because Ministers know not who are Elected and who are not It was necessary that the offer of Grace and command of Beleeving should be universall which will be imbraced and obeyed by all that are ordained to life § 7. His fourth and last Argument against the absolutenesse of the New Covenant is If the Covenant of Grace be an absolute Promise then no men in the world but wicked and ungodly men are in Covenant with God To which I Answer 1 It is very true That the Covenant of Grace is made with Christ in behalfe of sinners and none else Matthew 9.13 The whole need not a Phisitian but the sick If men were not sinners and ungodly there would be no need at all of the Covenant of Grace the Covenant of Works would have been sufficient either it is made with sinners or none 2 It will not follow that when men are in Covenant or doe partake of some blessings of the Covenant that immediately the Covenant ceaseth when we are in Glory the Covenant shall not cease for the continuance of Glory is promised in the Covenant no lesse then Glory it selfe for which cause it is called an Everlasting Covenant So that his inference is very irrationall If the Covenant be an absolute Promise then none but wicked i. e. unregenerate persons are perfectly in Covenant with God It followes rather from his owne opinion for if the Covenant be a conditional Promise when the condition is performed the Covenant is so far forth fulfilled and the Preformers of it so far forth doe cease to be in Covenant and so consequently none but wicked men i. e. such as have not yet fulfilled the Condition shall be the objects of the Covenant or the persons to whom it doth belong Or else it must follow that none at all are perfectly in Covenant with God the Performers of the Condition are not because the Condition being performed the Covenant is fulfilled and thereby ceaseth to be a Covenant and the non-performers of the Condition are not for till the Condition be performed
men have no right or interest in the blessings promised By this Sophistry a man may soon dispute himselfe out of the Covenant and consequently out of hope § 8. I have now through the assistance of a good God and the advantage of a good Cause followed Mr. W. to the end of his race Hee seems weary of his walke as well as I. It is saies he beyond my purpose and worke to follow this pursuit any further i. e. I have no more to say for I dare say if he could have thought upon any thing else either to colour his own or to vilifie the cause which he doth oppose he would not have held it in his last Argument sufficiently shews he hath pumped to the bottom I must confesse I am as glad as he that I am arrived so near to my journeys end though the passage hath not been very difficult yet I must needs say it hath been to me somewhat more perhaps then ordinary troublesome in regard I have so little time and strength to bestow upon these paper conflicts And therefore though my adversary who I know wants neither words nor confidence shall offer a Reply I shall not ingage to make a Rejoynder Having declared my judgement with the Reasons of it I shall submit my selfe to the censures of the godly Reader beseeching the Father of Lights to lead both him and me into all truth and more especially into a fuller manifestation of our Free Redemption by Jesus Christ. § 9. But before I can take my leave of the Reader I must request his patience whilst I take notice of a passage or two in Mr. Woodbridges conclusion to his Worthy Sir First He tels him though it is likely something is or will be said against my Sermon which at this distance I am never like to hear of yet sure I am that nothing can be answered consistent with the truth of Scripture Concerning his Sermon I have said no more in his absence then I was ready to have spoken unto his face had the time and the patience I had almost said the passions of some of his friends given me leave I confesse I had not made my Replies so publick had he not offered such open wrongs both unto the Truth and to my selfe His Bravado sure I am that nothing can be answered c. argues rather his conceit of himselfe then the soundnesse of the Doctrine which he would maintain A bold face is usually the last refuge of a bad cause which the Advocate puts on to uphold his credit amongst the simple who are apt to thinke that hee hath the strongest Argument who shewes the greatest confidence I remember Campian the Jesuite in his Epistle to the Universities tels them he was as sure he had gotten the victory as that there is a God a Heaven a Faith a Christ. I shall not answer Mr. W. as Dr. Whitaker doth the Jesuite Pudet vanitatis jactationis arrogantiae tune audes promittere c. But I must needs say that he talks at too high arate and not as a man sensible in how many things wee offend all doth he know as much as all men besides Or can he judge of mens Answers before he hath heard them Had Parker Twisse Pemble c. nothing at all to say in defence of their Doctrine Doth he think this Sermon such a solid peece that all men living will be struck dumb therewith Though I am not conscious of deviating a sillable from the sence of the Scripture in this Discourse yet I dare not say That nothing can be answered unto what I have written I shall say of my writings as the Apostle of himselfe 1 Cor. 4.3 I know nothing in them inconsistent with the Scriptures yet are they not hereby justified All that I desire is that the Reader would bring them to the Standard of Truth and hold fast that which they shall finde agreeable thereunto This I am as sure of as Faith can make mee whose certainty is greater then that of Science that the whole glory of our Justification and Salvation ought to bee given to the Grace of God and the Merits of Christ which would not be done if either of them did depend and were obtained by Works and Conditions performed by us § 10. Next he tells him How sorry he is for the breaches that are amongst us Truly if he be not I think he may having contributed not a little to the widening of them for before his Sermon we were upon the matter agreed concerning the point which is now in difference we had oftentimes Friendly and Christian communion which ever since hath been interrupted It was not a moneth before that I had Conference privately with my Reverend Neighbor my first Antagonist about this thing who told me That he held the New Covenant to be Conditional no otherwise then in respect of Gods order and method in bestowing the blessings of it To whom I replyed That if he asserted Conditions in the Covenant in no other sense we were agreed And he knows that in the Letters which had passed between us I had yeelded as much to wit That in improper speech the Covenant may be called Conditional though for the causes before mentioned I use not the phrase And therefore if any new breach hath hapned about this matter the guilt of it must rest on others and not on me For my own part I am not conscious in my self of the least breach in Affection with any of my Neighbors being ready to serve them in love as opportunity is offered though some of them have used me spitefully refusing as of old the Jews did towards the Samaritans to have any dealings with me so much as in Civil Affairs I confess I have forborne some of their Lectures because I would not by my silence give Testimony to that which I know to be heterodox and unsound And I thought good a while to desist from making open Exceptions until I had given a more publick account of my practise in this particular For the future I shall not put my self to the trouble of writing more Books unless it be to answer the Exceptions of my Reverend Neighbor who first engaged me in this Controversie either against my Doctrine or Practise But if in any Congregation of this City where a charge of Souls is incumbent on me I am present when these Fundamental Truths of the Gospel are darkned and undermined by strangers or others I shall God willing put on the Apostles resolution though the weakest and unworthiest of my Brethren Not to give place to them by subjection no not for an hour that the truth and simplicity of the Gospel may continue amongst us and yet with due respect unto all mens persons Let any man do the like by me I shall not account it a breach of peace If Mr. W. had any intent to heal our breaches I must needs say he was very unhappy in the choice of Means No prudent man