so understood of a real change as wholly to exclude that which is relative It is meant of that whatsoever which tends to the soules profit It is spoken of profit in order to eternal rest If Justification be for our profit or tend at all to our everlasting rest then justification is not here excluded It followes The Scripture meaneth The Word had not further work on the heart as it hath in them that mix it with faith will you interpret it thus The Word did not justifie If I take this to be the meaning I must interpret it That the Word did not justifie them for it doth justifie where it is mixt with faith though I should not exclude other offices done by the Word It followes 2. It 's true that the Word did not justifie them but that is consequential onely of the former unprofitablenesse I might as well say that the Word 's not sanctifying is consequential as he may say the Word 's not justifying is onely thus consequential I see no shew of reason that the Text should be meant immediately of sanctification and consequentially onely of Justification and if it be consequentially onely proved that the Word did not justifie Them here is a reall and more then a shew of advantage to my cause I hope he is not the man that will dispute against proofs by consequence when the consequence by himself is granted It followes Once prove that man is but as much efficient in justifying himself as he is in the obedience and change of his mind or actions and then you do something When I go about the proof of it I think I shall have Mr. Baxter my sole and single adversary in it he is not pleased to give us in any difference And he ownes that which is usually quoted out of Austin He that made thee without thee will not save thee without thee and hath not justification as great an influx into salvation as sanctification I desire him onely to reflect upon that which he hath said in the Preface of his confession a book newly come to my hands Antecedently to believing all have an equal conditional gift of pardon and none have an absolute nor an actual right The Gospel findeth us equal and makes no inequality till we make it our selves But the secret unsearchable workings of Divine grace do begin the difference and make it in us before it be made by us Who ever went higher in speaking of mans work in his sanctification and higher it is then ever I spake of a mans pardoning himself It is said It is weak arguing to say the Word profiteth not because it was not mixt with faith therefore faith conveyes to it its efficacy of sanctifying yea of justifying you cannot but know the sequel would be denyed Others would think that there is strength in such arguing that it receives efficacy from faith upon that account that it profits where faith is and is unprofitable where faith is not especially when they find efficacy ascribed to faith both in justification and sanctification It followes In progressive sanctification and obedience and exercise of graces the Word and faith are concauses and one will not effect without the other And are not the Word and faith concauses in Justification as in progressive sanctification tell us whether you will exclude I dare exclude neither faith nor Gospel as instrumental workers But it followes not as is said that therefore faith gives efficacy to the Word in this for concauses have not influence on each other but on the effect I scarce think that maxime to be of universal truth but be it a truth I say no more then here is asserted for me Justification is the effect and the Word and faith are concauses It yet followes The want of faith may hinder the Word from that further work on the soul which presupposeth faith and that 's all that the Text saith If any sense can be made of this arguing so far as I understand it then Justification presupposeth not faith which is not Mr. Baxters judgment It followes May not the absence of faith hinder unlesse when present it doth effect And would the Apostle think we have spoke of effectual faith or the efficacy of faith yea would Dr. Preston have wrote a Tract of effectual faith if it had been idle in the soul and without all efficacy And to restrain the efficacy of it to sanctification excluding Justification never came that I know into the thoughts of any Orthodox Writer that hath treated of Justification neither would the Pen-men of Scriptures have expressed themselves in that way as to say we are justified by faith had faith been there and onely had sate idle The various applications of that Text Hab. 2.4 The just shall live by his faith may teach us not to pen up faith in such narrow bounds as to restrain the work of it to efficacy in one kind onely The Apostle to the Hebrewes plainly applyes it to support by faith in sufferings Heb. 10.38 and Gal. 3.11 to justification by faith and shall we say that in the one it is working and in the other it doth nothing If we do we shall have Paul our adversary who sayes that Christ is set forth a propitiation by faith what followes hath been already spoken to The second Text saith he I know not how you mean to make use of unlesse you argue thus The Word worketh effectually onely in believers therefore faith conveyeth efficacy to the Word I think I need not tell you saith he that I deny the sequel not to speak of the antecedent nor yet to tell you that this speaks not of working the relative change of justification He had a good mind to speak to the antecedent but if he can for disproof of that make any efficacious working of the Word appear in Infidels such as Scripture useth to honour with such titles I shall oppose him to maintain the Justification of Infidels The sequel in the word convey is his own and to that which followes I have already sufficiently spoken I inferred from the former words that the Gospel in it self considered is wanting in that honour assigned to an instrument to have influx to the producing of the effect of the principal cause by a proper causality If none dare say that faith hath such an influx they may much lesse say that the Word hath such This in very big terms is denyed and the opposite boldly asserted The Gospel saith he in it self considered without the co-ordinate or subordinate or superior causality of faith hath this honour so fully clearly beyond all doubt that no man that is a preacher of this Gospel should question it When I stand thus highly charged to deny that which no Preacher of the Gospel should question by reason of the clear evidence of it every man may justly expect full clear and evident Scriptures and reasons beyond all doubt for my conviction but I hear of neither but instead
conditions of Gods Covenant or promise rather than of ours for our own promise is the first part of them and our performance of that promise but a secondary part Is not here a convincing reason Our own promise is the first part our performance the second part Ergo they are more properly the conditions of Gods Covenant then of ours I deny not the thing but wonder at the reason but speed it as it will I thence collect that promises and performances are distinct things and that is enough for me Our promising to God I am sure is our covenanting this then differs from Covenant-keeping or performance and is not to be confounded with it There followes For 2. Gods Covenant is a free gift of Christ and life to the World on condition of their acceptance This our Divines against the Papists and the doctrine of merit have fully proved That God doth freely give Christ to those that accept him I freely yield and that our Divines have fully proved it against Papists I confesse and that it must be asserted against Antinomians but what Divines have proved that Gods Covenant is his free gift of Christ and life to the world on condition that they will accept I know not It is the first time I think that ever I heard it This then is a full definition of a Covenant which I yet think comes short of it and if it be a truth it well serves my purpose many a Covenant is made and conditions never performed After his expression of himself about the modification of our acceptance of Christ by faith he addes Our acceptance or consent is our Covenanting and our Faith So that our Covenanting with Christ and our Faith is the same thing that is our accepting an offered Saviour on his terms or a consent that he be ours and we his on his termes And who knowes not that this Faith or Covenanting or consent is the condition by us to be performed that we may have right to Christ and life offered I do know the latter and therefore upon that account as upon divers others I deny the former I know that justifying faith is the condition by us to be performed and I as well know that it is not our covenanting but our making good our Covenant That Faith by which the Romans stood in Covenant with God was such a faith that the whole visible Church of the Gentiles had and the Jewes both Rom. 11. But this was not a justifying faith but short of it To make justifying faith and Covenanting Synonyma is an error I am confident of what size I leave to others to determine If they were both one Scripture would promiscuously speak of them but we find that it still distinguisheth them and gives us clearly to understand that the greatest part of Covenanters are short of Faith that is saving and justifying Ordinances in which the Covenant of grace is dispensed and which speak all those that entertain them to be in Covenant are granted of God to men short of justifying faith as their proper inheritance Rom. 3.1 Deut. 33.4 Titles implying a Covenant-state as I have abundantly shewed are given of God to them that are short of this faith viz. Christian Disciple Saint Believer Called Brethren God imposes Covenant-conditions makes promise of Covenant-blessings upon these imposed conditions to those that are short of Faith that justifieth These therefore are in Covenant Though I hear neither of Scripture nor argument nor any thing else but bare words in two or three Paradoxes for my conviction yet by a similitude I shall understand that our own Covenant-act is the primary condition of Gods Covenant In his Aphorismes he sayes It may seem strange but now a similitude shall render it familiar If a King saith he will offer his Son in marriage to a condemned woman and a beggar on condition that she will but have him that is consent and so covenant and marry him here her covenanting consenting or marrying of him is the performance of the condition on her part for obtaining her first right in him and his but for the continuance of her right is further requisite If we had had either Scripture or argument to have given us a first light then a Simile might have served for somewhat and come in as a garnish but being served in alone it may speak the Authors thoughts but never settle any in the truth And I shall leave it to the Reader to judge whether the edge of it may not easily be turned against himself and whether when it is brought home it will not prove destructive to his own opinion I must therefore tell the Reader that our relation to Christ whilest on earth is more frequently expressed in Scriptures by espousals then marriages as we may see through the book of Canticles and Hos 2.14 2 Cor. 11.2 and that there is ordinarily a relation of men to God preceding faith that justifies Now Mr. Baxter is not so ill read in the Civill Law but that he knowes that there are sponsalia de futuro and sponsalia de praesenti Those God is pleased to take for his people that are his onely in the first relation and to honour them with priviledges to bring them on to the second Whereas he sayes Our Covenant principally is to receive nor is it onely de futuro but de praesenti I may answer first If our Covenant be to receive then it doth precede this receiving and secondly if he mean that it is our duty to receive Christ in present and not to delay the least moment of time I shall readily yield but in case he say that present profession and engagement to receive gives a people no title to any Covenant-relation before Christ be actually and savingly received I may well ask what we are to say to the whole body of Old Testament-Scriptures were not all Israel in Covenant were they not all visibly the people of the Lord are they not owned of God for such when they were at the worst and lowest How many thousands of Scripture-Texts may be brought to evince it Had they called themselves so and valued themselves as such on this account to be a people nigh unto the Lord and no people so nigh it might have been said to be their own vapour but when God gives them that testimony of honour and hath never done with it sure he would have us to believe it There is a first right therefore before that right in the similitude contended for and that is no other but a right of Covenant to be without God and without hope is the case of a meer heathen uncircumcised in the flesh Eph. 2.11 The state of visible relation is one step nearer than aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel do enjoy and yet too short of a state of salvation Mr. Baxter concludes By this time I leave it to the Reader to judge who it is that introduceth confusion about the Covenant and whether it be
it never came into the heart of any that is either grave A position by the Author disavowed and detested or godly to utter it and that there is scarce any so witlesse or gracelesse as to beleeve it and so Mr. Brs. volume of 31. Reasons five pag. 84 85 86. Twenty six pag. 94 to 107. are almost at one breath answered Few of them tending to oppose any thing that I hold but in the farre greatest part brought against his own conceit and no assertion or opinion of mine I suppose I could easily furnish him with a large addition of reasons to deny this fancy Faith is commanded in the morall Law Reasons evincing that a man unbaptized is bound to beleeve in Jesus Christ to justification as I have asserted Treat of the Covenant pag. 18. and I think no man believes that Baptisme doth first put a man under such obligation Some Papists do charge upon us that we maintain that Baptism delivers us from the morall Law and therefore the Councel of Trent anathematizeth those that hold it but never any I think were charged to say that Baptisme is our first obligation to it 2. An unbaptized man is bound to endeavour to avoid damnation but he that believeth not shall be damned 3. He is bound to endeavour to obtain Salvation but we must believe with the heart and confesse with the mouth to Salvation 4. Baptisme presupposeth the Covenant but the Covenant as I have often said engages to believing 5. None can be exempted from believing but they are withall exempted from repentance but unbaptised persons are to repent Act. 17.30 6. Faith in Christ hath been actually required of the unbaptized Act. 16.30 And therefore it is marvell that when Mr. Br. judgeth me to be overtaken in this folly he would spend so much time with me or so many words upon me transgressing the wise mans advice Prov. 26.4 Answer not a fool according to his folly When he thought I had no more wit than to think that no man is bound to accept Christ for justification before he be baptized I marvel that he would set his wit to mine But what is it that I have said to induce him to think that I am in that opinion I have said The great condition to which Baptisme engages is not a prerequisite in Baptisme and can any man imagine that I meant any more than that it is not required to the being of Baptisme Can any man think that I ever meant that it is not required of the person that is for Baptisme till after he be baptized and have I not in the next page cleared mine own meaning where I say that there is no necessity that justifying faith go before but a necessity that it must follow after Baptisme further explaining my self It is true that in men of years justifying faith sometimes goes before Baptisme as in Abraham it went before Circumcision but it is not of necessity required to interest us into a rite either of baptisme or Circumcision and doubtlesse I never thought that either Abraham or any other was justified by that work that was never required at their hand I say justifying faith or grace in the truth of it is no prerequisite in marriage and I further say that a Minister in times past might and a Magistrate at this time may lawfully marry persons void of justifying faith or grace and yet he is no better than a gracelesse man that thinks that persons unmarried are not tyed to faith and godlinesse Grace is no prerequisite to buying and selling A bargain of sail stands firm though there be no grace in them that make the bargain Men without grace may go to Kidderminster to buy hangings and curtains and those of that place may lawfully trade with them and yet both parties are before hand bound to grace and godlinesse But though my assertion is clear enough yet some may say my similitude darkens it I say No servant is tyed to do his work before he hath received his earnest no Souldier to fight before he be listed The Authors meaning in some mistaken expressions cleared or hath given in his name To this I say If my expressions which I thought were clear well knowing my own meaning yet to others seemed dark no candid man would draw them further then the proposition which my argument was brought to confirm which is That a faith dogmaticall or as I explain it a faith short of justifying entitles to Baptisme In my similitude I looked at the resemblance that is between a Souldiers listing a servants entertainment into his Masters service and a Christians Baptisme And as a Souldier is not bound in order to listing first to fight nor a servant in order to his entertainment first to work so a Christian is not bound in order to Baptisme first to believe to justification And thus I fully explained my self in the next page but one That faith which is the condition of the promise is not the condition in foro Dei of title to the seal an acknowledgement of the necessity of such faith with engagement to it is sufficient for a title to the seales and the performance of the condition of like necessity to attain the thing sealed To promise service and fidelity in warre is enough to get listed as to do service is of necessity to be rewarded So that any Reader I think might clearly have seen and I hope now will more fully understand my meaning Having taken notice of Mr. Baxters great mistake and upon it his injurious charge I think it most meet in this place to take notice of another though under another head that so at once I may vindicate my self from things of this nature I say in my Treatise of the Covenant chap. 16. pag. 111. Sincerity is said to be the new rule or the rule of the New Covenant To this Mr. Baxter is pleased to reply When I first read these words which you write in a different character and father on me I was ashamed of my nonsense for they are no better but it came not into my thoughts once to suspect a forgery in your charge Farre was I from imagining that so reverend pious and dear a friend would tell the world in print that I said that which never came into my thoughts and confute that soberly and deliberately as mine that I never wrote After many other words added If when we are dead men should read Mr. Bl. book that never read mine and there see it written that I said sincerity is the new rule or the rule of the New Covenant can any man blame them to believe it and report of me as from him and say what shall I not believe such and such a man that reports it in expresse words Can any man now think but that I father this upon him Mr. Baxter not injured by the Author as he is injuriously charged and that I report it to the world in print in
to baptize no Infant as being unable to know the Parents faith to justification and further with Walaes concluding that the Parents faith doth not justifie the child but as Calvin resolves lib. 4. instit cap. 16. Sect. 20. they are baptized into future faith and repentance which Walaeus also sayes is the opinion of most others Neither shall I baptize any man of years till I have as high assurance if not more of his justification than Mr. Baxter seems to think any man can have of his own If this must stand then Paedobaptists and Anabaptists must all leave their Principles and both men and women when they have learn'd to read that new name in the white stone that is have concluded their assurance must turn Sebaptists and then let us look for as many counterfeits as there were Jews in Christs time with broad Phylacteries Those that bottom Baptisme on the Covenant holinesse of Covenant distinct from that of sanctification stand ensnared in none of these difficulties or inextricable perplexities All the following Arguments to the 9th may be easily granted and that is thus formed Titles given by Apostles do not argue that in their thoughts they were alwaies answered with inherent grace If the Apostles use to communicate the proper titles of the justified to all that are baptized till they see them prove apostates or hypocrites then they did take all the baptized to be probably justified though they might know that there were hypocrites among them yet either they knew them not or might not denominate the body from a few that they did know But the antecedent is true Therefore For the truth of the antecedent here laid down That the Apostles use to communicate the proper titles of the justified to all that are baptized I expect better proof then a naked affirmation And all that is brought for proof is I need not cite Scripture to prove that the baptized ar called by the Apostles Believers Saints Disciples Christians Mr. Bl. hath done it already pag. 28. And he very well knowes that I there make it good That those titles are not proper to the justified but ordinarily given to those that are not justified nor in any saving condition But if my words in the place quoted or elsewhere may not be heard Mr. Baxters sure will take who in his Saints rest Part 4. Sect. 3. p. 105. saith There are many Saints or sanctifyed men that yet shall never come to heaven who are onely Saints by their separation from Paganisme into fellowship with the visible Church but not Saints in the strictest sense by separation from the ungodly into the fellowship of the mysticall body of Christ quoting these following Scriptures Heb. 10.29 Deut. 7.6 and 14.2 21. and 26.19 and 28.9 Exod. 19.6 1 Cor. 7.13 14. Rom. 11.16 Heb. 3.1 compared with vers 12. 1 Cor. 3.17 and 14.33 1 Cor. 1.2 compared with 11.20 21. c. Gal. 3.26 compared with Gal. 3.3 4. and 4.11 and 5.2 3 4. John 15.2 His demand therefore to me is strange Now who knows not that salvation is made the portion of Believers Saints Disciples when he himself affirms that there are Saints that never shall be saved He afterwards puts a further question Is it another sort of them or doth the Scripture use to divide Saints as a genus into two species Not that I know of It is but an aequivocum in sua aequivocata The name belongs to them but as the name of a Man to a Corps c. Then it seems that there is nothing of Reality in such Separations Camero tells us otherwise that there is a reality in this Saintship by separation In the relation of his dispute with Courcellius he affirmed that the Text of the Apostle 1 Cor. 7.14 was without doubt to be understood of reall holinesse To which Courcellius replying He that is really holy hath no need of regeneration and baptisme But Infants of Believers after they are borne have need of baptisme and regeneration Ergo. Which Camero answered as the relation sayes by distinguishing of real holinesse which is twofold One consisting in the bare relation of the person to the people of God or the Church and depends wholly upon birth within the pale of the Church and of parents embracing the Covenant The other is c. And it seems that the Scripture is still under the change of equivocal speeches all over As Camero hath somewhere observed that the word Saints in Scripture is far more frequently taken for Saints on Earth then for Saints in heaven so I doubt not but it may be maintained that it speaks far more frequently of Saints by dedication and separation and so of Believers and Disciples by profession then by inherent qualification and doth it in all these places speak equivocally had it been affirmed to be Genus Analogum in opposition to uni vocum Scripture Language real and not aequivocal as is said of Ens in respect of Substantia Accidens it had been lesse but to make nothing of this noble priviledge of which Scripture speaks so honourably is too plainly to side against the truth it self I would know for my learning what advantage or profit a dead Corps is in Capacity to enjoy I think one at all but these as the Apostle tells us have much every way even they that have no more then sanctity of this nature If such equivocation be found in the word Saint their the like is to be affirmed of the word Believer and believers having their denomination from their faith that is equivocal in like manner and so our Common division of faith into dogmatical or historical temporary miraculous and justifying is but a division of an aequivocum in sua aequivocata which I should think no man would affirm much lesse Mr. Baxter who makes common and special graces to differ onely gradually and then as cold in a remisse degree may grow to that which is intense so one aequivocatum may rise to the nature of another animal terrestre may become Sidus coeleste one of our dogs that we use on Earth may become a star in heaven then miraculous faith it self hath onely the name and nothing of the power and nature of faith in it Judas had power given him to cast out unclean spirits Maetth 10.1 4. and he never had faith that justifieth if his faith was onely aequivocal then the unclean Spirits were equivocall likewise I shall never believe that an aequivocal faith can cast out a real devil The Apostle tells us of faith to the remooval of Mountains void of charity 1 Cor. 13.2 If this were equivocall faith those must be equivocal Mountains Mr. Baxter addes To put the matter beyond doubt I wish Mr. Bl. to consider that it 's not onely these forementioned titles but even the rest which he will acknowledge proper to the regenerate which are given by the Apostles generally to the baptized Instances given in Adoption Gal. 3.26 27. union with
but then it would have been as arrogant Sixthly That he make some provision for tender and scrupulous consciences that shall admit his principles 1. In taking in of members into Church-fellowship as it is called A man without grace in a visible Church according to him is as a wooden leg in the body how great a deformity this is and how great a trouble to have such instead of those that are of flesh and bone it is easy to judge and yet how many of these necessarily will and must be received 2. In baptisme of Infants To baptize an Infant is with him not onely to espouse but to solemnize a full and actual marriage with Christ Jesus and that in words not de futuro but de praesenti and what further glory then they may expect from his hand I scarce can tell An illustrious Prince will have none but of noble and Royal blood and Christ will have none to be thus in marriage relation given to him but the seed of regenerate and graciously qualified persons How shall I get intelligence that this or that infant is descended of such a race where shall I learn his or her pedigree that I may thus give to Christ Iesus And in case probabilities must lead us we have need of further help then yet we see to judge of such probability Must we find those qualifications in the man who himself is for Baptisme or his child that may move us to conclude that in all reason and possible apparance here is a child of God or an Infant of a regenerate person Or will it serve our turn and satisfie our consciences that we cannot certainly conclude the contrary If the first be required it will put all the Ministers of Christ hard to it and prove such a snare that I know not how they will extricate themselves If the latter be that which we must receive here is then a loose rule for to lead in so high proceedings For men will be so laxe in their own marriage choice as for to take any into that society if they be not able to conclude her a strumpet or desperately wicked we have hitherto believed that Jesus Christ is pleased to receive in a greater latitude into visible relation Seventhly I desire Mr. Baxter to tell us how he hath mended the matter and provided for the honour and lustre of the Christian name or made up at all that gappe of which he speaks He saies the Church is bound to baptize as largely as I say men have right to Baptisme I think here he will find little or no difference and when he refuses none that I receive and where I say they have right he saies we are bound to baptize without right how will this make Christianity to look with any better face how much will Worcestershire Congregations where this is received exceed other Congregations where unanimously it is denyed I would have him to reflect on his 18th Argument and see whether the force of it be not evidently as much against hinself as it is against me against whom it is brought It is thus framed That doctrine which makes it the regular way in Baptisme for all men to promise that which they can neither sincerely promise nor perform is unsound But such is Mr. Blakes Ergo. And after much work to explain himself it comes to this that unregenerate men cannot resolve or sincerely promise to love believe or obey and therefore upon that account are without right to baptisme Let it be taken into consideration that when I say these men that in their present state are thus unable to love believe and obey have notwithstanding right to Baptisme and he saies that this inability notwithstanding they ought to be baptized how is the matter mended If my Doctrine upon this account be unsound his doctrine and practice will be found unsound likwise Mr. Baxter saith Vocation which is effectual onely to bring men to an outward profession of faith is larger then election and makes men such whom we are bound to baptize Eighthly I shall desire some Scripture text or cogent reason to make it appear that we are bound to baptize those that in the sight of God have no right to Baptisme the command given will argue with me their right unlesse I hear an injunction from heaven that notwithstanding their want of right we are to baptize them Peter argues the right of those Acts 10.47 for their admission to Baptisme which had been more then needed in case without any such right the water in Baptisme might have been applied unto them and I marvel that Mr. Baxter should so tenaciously hold to Philips speech to the Eunuch If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest seeing he believes as well as I that faith short of this which he saies these words necessarily imply might have admitted him and put a necessity on Philip to have baptized him though it would not have given him right to Baptisme His actual admission and not his right is there put to the question If these things be well considered Mr. Baxter may see cause to begin with a confutation of Mr. F. before he undertakes a defence and I suppose the Reader will see that he had small cause to censure my Arguments to be so dilute unlesse he himself had brought some of greater strength Lastly I would have Mr. Baxter seriously consider whether that which we have observed already out of him and might yet further be gathered may not make up a forcible Argument and conclusive of this title to Baptisme in those who yet rise not up to the Faith that is justifying when they are separate from Paganisme into fellowship with the visible Church as he asserts Saints Rest Part 4. Sect. 3. pag. 105. and with them their issue as he hath concluded from 1 Cor. 7.14 when they attain to graces real and true as we have seen from him I am sure the Apostle as hath been said Act. 10.47 argues from such qualifications to an interest in Baptisme when they have their interest in the Covenant of grace as a fruit of Christs death as he saith doubtlesse reprobates have Treatise of Infant-Baptisme pag. 224. when their Baptisme hath all that is essential to Gods sealing as he asserts it hath pag. 222. All of this laid together with more that may be taken up will in all indifferent Readers eyes conclude a title And further whether he have not spoken as much in plain words terminis terminantibus for the interest of unregenerate men or men of a meer visible profession in Baptisme let his words be considered Saints Rest Part 4. Sect. 3. pag. 104 105. Where giving holy and seasonable advice to beware the company of sensual and ungodly men he limits it with Cautions least it should be thought that he perswades as he rightly stiles it unto an ungodly separation he addes As I never found one word in Scripture where either Christ or his Apostles denyed admittance to
regenerate or unregenerate which is an undiscernable work and accordingly to admit or refuse SECT XIII Proposition 11. The Lords Supper with the Word as an appendant to it may be serviceable to bring a man of Covenant interest up to the terms of the Covenant THere is nothing hinders but that the Lords Supper with the Word as an appendant to it may be serviceable to bring up those of Covenant interest to the terms and propositions of the Covenant may serve to work a man of profession of faith unto faith saving and justifying a man in name the Lords to turn unfeignedly and sincerely to the Lord. This I shall endeavour by Arguments to confirm First Men of that interest that baptisme receives as the intention of the work in order to salvation these the Lords Supper serves to carry on by sanctification to salvation as the end of the work likewise But Baptisme receives men of visible profession onely and visible interest as the intention of the work into the visible Church in order to salvation Therefore the Lords Supper carries on these by sanctification as the intention of the work to salvation The Proposition cannot be denyed unlesse we will without reason bring in that vast difference between these two outward vâ—â—â—ble Ordinances both intrusted in the hands of man as that the one shall be of that latitude to receive men of visible interest and the other restrained to invisible members The one according to the mind of God shall let many into the Church for salvation the other shall be in capacity to nourish and bring on very few The Assumption cannot be denyed That Baptisme receives men of visible profession and visible interest in order to salvation and hath been abundantly proved we baptize infants upon the bare account of Covenant-holiness which is onely a visible interest men of years were baptized and by just warrant yet may in case not baptized upon a visible profession The conclusion then followes that the Lords Supper carries on those as the intention of the work that Baptisme receives to salvation Secondly If it be the mind of God in the Gospel revealed that men of visible interest having not yet attained to the grace of sanctification should have admittance to the Lords Table then it must needs follow that it serves as an instrument with the Word to raise them up by faith and sanctification to salvation But it is the mind of God in the Gospell revealed that men of visible interest having not yet reached unto sanctification should have admittance to the Lords Supper The Lords Supper then serves to raise up men of visible interest by faith and sanctification for salvation The Proposition is clear unlesse we will make mens admission most mens admission meerly vain having no power nor any capacity to advance their happinesse but being wholly in a tendency to increase their judgement Whatsoever the secret will of God to us unknown is that in the event it shall prove yet the work it self must have a tendency and power respective to those for whom it is appointed for edification not for destruction The Assumption is evident that those of visible interest having not attained sanctification according to the mind of God revealed in his Word should have admittance by the barres that are assigned for mens exclusion The alone barres that are ordinarily assigned to hold men in Covenant-interest off from the Lords Table are ignorance Error and Scandal But many that cannot be charged with ignorance error or scandall are yet short of sanctification Many short of sanctification then have no barre to their admission Either visible interest with capacity to improve it or saving interest in the Covenant must be the rule for admission But saving interest in â—he Covenant cannot then to use Mr Cobbets words Vindication pag. 54. it would either necessitate Ministers to come under guilt of sin or anomie breach of rule or for avoiding of that which they must needs do with such breach of rule never to administer any Church ordinances since they sometimes shall break that rule in administring it to hypocrites and albeit they do sometimes administer them to elect ones yet not being able to know that secret infallibly they observe not the rule in faith but doubtingly and so can have little comfort of any such of their administrations If any reply that saving interest in the Covenant is the rule but we are not tied infallibly to come up to the rule but as farre as our charity can judge men to be in grace we must admit them to this seal of grace To this I have several things to reply 1. God never puts mens charity to this work as respective to admission to ordinances to judge whether in grace or not whether regenerate or in unregeneration And indeed charity which is assigned by some to that place is most unfit to judge A Judge or Umpire in a businesse must be impartial and have nothing to byasse him on any hand But charity would be ready to cover a multitude of sins which is no blemish of the grace but a demonstration that this is none of its office If then man must judge as he is most unmeet his reason and not his love must take the chair for it and go as high as conjecture can reach 2. If charity or reason thus set up mistake then the rule is broke which though these will say is not the admitters sin seeing the thing is not so scibile or of possibility to be known and by the way we observe that he is therefore no competent Judge yet a seal is by this meanes put to a blank which is no small prophanation and the ordinance administred solely and necessarily for the receivers judgement 3. Though we infallibly know a mans unsanctified condition and were able to charge it yet whilest it is not open and breakes not into scandal we cannot upon this account as is confest exclude him from the Sacrament That Judas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper most of the Ancient held as Maldonate on Matth. 7.6 observes we have large lists brought to our hands of names that go that way The greater part of late Writers are of the same mind Ravanellus as the last man in verb. Sacrament is peremptory in it and there concludes also the interest of all in Covenant yet Judas was known to Christ to be a thief a Devil and yet he receives him Christ had doubtlesse power vested in him for his exclusion The non-suspition of the Apostles nor the close carriage of his treachery could not then have excusâ—d his receiving in case it had not been the mind of God that a man of visible interest though unsanctified might be admitted And to say that Christ acted here as a Minister and it was not fit that he should be both Judge and witnesse though it be a truth yet it serves not to take off the Argument Had it not been the mind of God that
farre as I could learn that it did succeed and spread as little as almost any error that ever I knew spring up in the Church Plain Scripture proof of Infants c. pag. 294. so inconsiderable was the party that stood for it And Vorstius speaking in the name of Protestant Divines in general saith b Id potissimum quaeritur an Sacramenta sint signa tantum sigilla foederis gratiae sive externa symbola signacula foederi gratiae appensa divinitus ad hoc institura ut gratiam Dei salutarem in foedere promissam nobis significent atque ita fidem nostram suo modo confirment simul publice testaram reddant quae quidem communis est Evangelicorum sententia an vero preaterea sint causae efficientes hujus salutaris justificantis gratiae sive an sint effectiva gratiae ejusdem organa nempe ad hoc divinitus institura ut gratiam istam realiter instar vasorum in se contineant omnibus illa percipientibus candem vi sua imprimant reipsa conferant quae Bellarmini Pontificiorum omnium opinio est It is disputed whether Sacraments are onely signes and seales of the Covenant of grace or outward signes annext the Covenant and appointed for this of God that they should signify saving grace of God promised in the Covenant and signifying seal and after their manner confirm our faith and give publick testimony of it which saith he is the common opinion of Protestants or whether they be further efficient causes of this saving and justifying grace or whether they be effective instruments of this grace appointed of God for this thing that they should indeed containe it in them and convey it which is the opinion of all Papists Vorstius Anti. Bellar. ad Contro 1 Gen. And our men further judge that opinion of the opus operatum or of the outward Sacramental action as though without the faith and pious motion of those that use it it could justifie any to be evidently false and pernicious And they teach that all Sacraments by the ordination of God himself have onely a power to signifie and seal and not to conferre the grace of the Gospel it self And whereas several passages in the Liturgy of this Church did seem to favour the opposite opinion affixing adoption membership of Christ and inheritance of the Kingdom of heaven and regeneration to Baptisme we know how great offence it gave to many eminently Learned and pious putting them upon omission of those passages And also what Interpretation as with a grain of salt others put upon them that they were onely Sacramentally such And doubtlesse these either hit upon the meaning of the Church which was held to these phrases in imitation of many hyperbolical speeches in the Fathers or else the Church had mist the meaning of Scriptures so loth were the sons of the Church to be quarrelling with their mother and yet more loth with her to run into errors The Observation it self if heeded hath a caution or limit in it Affirming that Sacraments work no otherwise then as signs and seals and that they conferre no inward graces or priviledges further then they work upon the understanding and faith of those that receive them it implyes that they do conferre what an outward symbole or sign is apt to and of powder to convey and that outward priviledges in Sacraments are either conferred of infallibly evidenced This is clear the Apostle having so far undervalued Circumcision in the flesh as to make it Parallell with uncircumcision so that a circumcised Jew and an uncircumcised Gentile differed nothing as to their Spiritual state and condition inferres by way of objection What advantage then hath the Jew and what profit is there of circumcision And answers not that outward circumcision is altogether unprofitable but that it hath much profit and instances in one eminent one To them are committed the Oracles of God This is the inheritance of the Congregation of Jacob Deut. 33.4 as Moses speaks and carrying with it this great priviledge it conveyes with it all other inferiour Church-priviledges right to the Passeover upon this account was theirs Exod. 12.48 and not otherwise So it is with Baptisme men are taken into the Church at this door according to the Commission given to the Apostles Disciple all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father c. Whatsoever they were and whomsoever they professedly served before they are this way taken in as the consecrate servants of the whole Trinity and added to the Church Act 2.47 When they had by the Covenant a precedent title in Baptisme they have a solemn inauguration By one Spirit we are all Baptized into one body 1 Cor. 12.13 It is the Spirits work to shape the heart of unbelieving Corinthians to enter into one visible Church-body as that work of Gods power whereby he did perswade Japhet to dwell in the tents of Shem Gen. 9.27 And therefore when c Durandus docet characterem esse ens rationis id est respectum advenientem ex deputatione ad certum officium qualis est relatio in Doctoribus Praetoribus c. Quae sententia vix distinguitur ab haeresi hujus temporis Durand denyed that the Character which the Church of Rome speaks of was any quality in the soul but meerly a relation comming as by way of deputation to an office or duty exemplifying it by the relation that is seen in Doctors Praetors c Bellar. lib. 2. de Sacramen effectu cap. 14. saith That this opinion can scarcely be distinguished from the Heresie of this time d Haeretici non negant neque negare possunt quin sit aliqua relatio rationis in Ministris quae non est in aliis qui non sunt deputati ad ministrandum And further saith That Heretiques do not deny nor can deny but that there is some relation in Ministers which is not in others who are not deputed to the Ministery We do confesse indeed that there is that relation in Christians to Christ by the work done in the Sacrament of Baptisme which is not in Heathens And though we deny Orders to be any Sacrament yet we confesse there is that relation in Ministers to Christ by vertue of their Ordination that is not in those that are not called to the work of the Ministery There are those indeed that do deny it But those that Bellarmine had to deal with and that he charges for Heretiques as Luther Melancthon Calvin Beza Peter Martyr Chemnitius willingly yeeld it And in case this were all the character that they talke of to be imprinted in Baptisme yea in Ordination we should never contend about it And as these priviledges are conferred as to actual interest in the initiatory Sacacraments both of Baptisme and Circumcision so the same priviledges in the following Sacraments are infallibly evidenced as appears in that text 1 Cor. 10.17 The Apostle there making it
of faith in the baptized to obtain it and baptisme to them as Circumcision to Abraham is onely a sign and seal of it and doth not otherwise effect it The like I may say of impenitence that according to them it is a barre to the working of Sacraments Sacraments onely work in penitent persons repentance then is a qualification in them that obtain a pardon and Sacraments by way of seal assure penitent oneâ— of it Eighthly 8. The most eminent of the adverse opinion produce Scriptures clearly opposite to their assertions The most eminent that ever have appeared for this power in Sacraments to confer grace on the receivers either utterly deny or at least very doubtfully affirm that Baptisme works in Infants any real change but onely that which is relative that it conferres any habits or any thing more then priviledges on Infants baptized when yet the Scriptures that they bring for proof of this baptismal work almost all speak to such a change that is reall not relative of habits and not of priviledges When this is made good it will appear to any impartial eye that the Scripture-Texts alledged come far short of proof of any such baptismal power to confer grace on all baptized Infants This as it seems Reverend Dr. Ward suspected asserting the certainty of salvation of all baptized Infants dying in infancy he saith That o Quae est nostrae Ecclesiae totius antiquitatis indubitata sententia ut ego reor ipsius Scripturae it is the undoubted opinion of all antiquity of our Church and as he thinks of the Scripture it self For the former part of this assertion that the most eminent that have appeared on this party have held as before let Reverend B. Davenant in his Epistle speak Asserting by Arguments that which he sayes he had often affirmed that the argument borrowed from Infants which Arminians Papists and some of our own use to maintain the apostasie of Saints or believers is not onely invalid but altogether impertinent as to that controversie His third Proposition to make good this assertion is p Pontificii non agnoscunt pro fidei dogmate habitus fidei aut charitatis infundi parvulis in baptismo neque tanquam de fide docent effici uâ—los justos formaliter inhaesione habitualis justitiae aut Sanctitatis That Papists do not receive it for a point of faith that the habits of faith or charity are infused into Infants in Baptisme neither do they deliver it as of faith that are thereby made formally just by any inherent habituall righteousnesse or holinesse To make this good Bonaventure Aquinas Gerson among the more ancient Schoolmen are brought in and of the more modern Writers Soto affirming that habits infused into Infants are not so known as is the Catholique faith and that Estius doth ingenuously acknowledge that this infusion of inherent righteousnesse is problematically disputed the Master of the sentences inclining to the negative And whereas some later Papists affirm that this opinion of infused habits in Infants is now otherwise ratified then heretofore by the authority of the Trent Councel he first answers that that Councel hath no such authority as to make that an article of faith which for so many hundred years hath not been such and afterwards peremptorily denyes that that Councel did ever so determine concluding that it is resolved upon by Papists that all baptized Infants are some way rendred acceptable to God but that this is done by any such infused habits or by any inherent quality created of God is as he sayes as yet doubted among them His fourth Proposition is that q Protestantes non concedunt fidem justificantem aut charitatem Deo unientem aut gratiam regeneratricem quae reparat omnes animae faâ—â—tates in ipso Baptismi momento infundi insantibus Protestants do not yield that justifying faith or charity that unites us to God or regenerating grace that repaires all the faculties of the soul is infused into Infants in the very moment of Baptisme quoting Calvin Beza and Peter Martyr speaking fully to it r Nec quenquam scio nostris Theologis qui regenerationem illam quae sita est in spiritualium qualitatum creatione quam nos sanctificationem Pontificii formalem justificationem in digitant in ipso momento Baptismi productam definiant Cumigitur nec Arminiani nec Pontificii nec Protestantes agnoscant parvulos in ipsa Baptismi susceptione fieri participes illorum habitualium donorum aut Spiritualium qualitatum quae propriè dicuntur constituere hominem justum et inhaerenter sanctum nemo eorum potest amissionem fidei aut justitiae aut sanctorum Apostasiam argumento ab infantibus sumpto demonstrare Adding that he does not know that any of our Divines determine that that regeneration which consists in the creation of spirituall qualities which we call Sanctification and Papists formal Justification is infused in the instant of Baptisme And he brings in also Mountague in his appeal vouching it out of these Belgick and French Confessions and then concludes when neither Arminians Papists nor Protestants acknowledge that Infants in their participation of Baptisme are made partakers of those habitual gifts and spiritual qualities which properly make a man just and inherently holy none of them can demonstrate the losse of Faith or righteousnesse or Apostasie of the Saints by an argument drawn from Infants His fifth Proposition is That Å¿ Patres nec actualem nec habitualem fidem aut charitatem parvulis in baptismo donatam agnoscunt conversionem etiam sive novi cordis creationem quae propriè regeneratio dicenda est non nisi cum ad aetatem rationis capacem pervenerint in iis produci docent the Fathers do not acknowledge that either actual or habituall Faith or charity is given to Infants in Baptisme and that they teach that conversion or creation of a new heart which is properly regeneration is not wrought in them but onely when they come to yeares and are capable of reason For this Austin is quoted and frequent places out of him are produced and with him Hierome Nazianzen Justin Martyr and Bernard making all up with the testimony of Whitaker t Patres ne somniasse quidem de habituali Papistarum fide quam illi volunt in Baptismo ex opere operato infusam esse parvulis that the Fathers did not so much as dream of the habitual faith which Papists say is infused by the work done in Baptisme inferring this as the result of all that in five several propositions he had delivered that u Hinc quivis perspiciat quam invalida sit haec concludeni ratio Multi ex infantibus baptizatis postea pereunt in infidelitate et impoenitentia Ergo fides charitas reli quaeque Spirituales qualitates in renatis Spiritus virtute productae aliquando amittuntur from thence any man may see how invalid this argument is Many baptized Infants
a person capable of salvation on our part required It is a penitent and petitioning Faith whereby we receive the Promises of mercy but we are not justified partly by prayer partly by Repentance and partly by Faith but that faith which stirreth up godly sorrow for sin and enforceth us to pray for pardon and salvation Faith is a necessary and lively instrument of Justification which is amongst the number of true causes not being a cause without which the thing is not done but a cause whereby it is done The cause without which a thing is not done is onely present in the action and doth nothing therein but as the eye is an active instrument for seeing and the eare for hearing so is faith also for justifying If it be demanded whose instrument it is It is the instrument of the soul wrought therein by the Holy Ghost and is the free gift of God In the Covenant of works works were required as the cause of life and happinesse but in the Covenant of grace though repentance be necessary and must accompany faith yet not repentance but faith onely is the cause of life The cause not efficient as works should have been if man had stood in the former Covenant but instrumentall onely for it is impossible that Christ the death and blood of Christ and our faith should be together the efficient or procuring causes of Justification or salvation Rom. 3.21 22 28 30. Gal. 2.16 17. Rom. 4.2 3. When the Apostle writeth that man is not justified by works or through works by the Law or through the Law opposing Faith and Works in the matter of Justification but not in respect of their presence Faith I say and works not faith and merits which could never be without doubt he excludes the efficiency and force of the Law and works in justifying But the particles By and Of do not in the same sense take Justification from the Law and Works in which they give it to faith For faith onely doth behold and receive the promises of life and mercy but the Law and Works respect the Commandments not the Promises of meer grace When therefore Justification and life is said to be by Faith it is manifestly signified that faith receiving the promise Deut. 7.12 10.12 Jer. 7.23 Lev. 19.17 18. Luk. 10.27 Mark 12.30 doth receive righteousnesse and life freely promised Obedience to all Gods Commandments is covenanted not as the cause of life but as the qualification and effect of faith and as the way to life Faith that imbraceth life is obediential and fruitful in all good works but in one sort faith is the cause of obedience and good works and in another of Justification and life eternal These it seeketh in the promises of the Covenant those it worketh and produceth as the cause doth the effect Faith was the efficient cause of that precious oblation in Abel Heb. 11.4 7 c. of reverence and preparing the Ark in Noah of obedience in Abraham but it was the instrument onely of their Justification For it doth not justifie as it produceth good works but as it receiveth Christ though it cannot receive Christ unlesse it bring forth good works A disposition to good works is necessary to Justification being the qualification of an active and lively faith Good works of all sorts are necessary to our continuance in the state of Justification and so to our final absolution if God give opportunity but they are not the cause of but onely a precedent qualification or condition to final forgivenesse and eternal blisse If then when we speak of the conditions of the Covenant of grace by condition we understand whatsoever is required on our part as precedent concomitant or subsequent to Justification repentance faith and obedience are all conditions but if by condition we understand what is required on our part as the cause of the good promised though onely instrumental faith or belief in the promises of free mercy is the onely condition Faith and works are opposed in the matter of Justification and salvation in the Covenant not that they cannot stand together in the same subject for they be inseparably united but because they cannot concur or meet together in one and the same Court to the Justification or absolution of man For in the Court of Justice according to the first Covenant either being just he is acquitted or unjust he is condemned But in the Court of mercy if thou receive the promise of pardon which is done by a lively faith thou art acquitted and set free and accepted as just and righteous but if thou believe not thou art sent over to the Court of Justice Thus far Mr. Ball. In which words of his the blood of Christ faith in his blood repentance and works have all of them their due place assigned them The blood of Christ as the alone efficient procuring cause Faith as the instrument giving interest and making application Repentance as a necessary qualification of the justified person in order to glory In this which is the good old Protestant doctrine God loseth nothing of his grace but all is free in the work Christ loseth nothing of his merit it stands alone as the procuring cause Faith receives all from Christ but takes nothing off from the free grace of God or Christs merits God loseth nothing of his Soveraignty and man is not at all dispensed with in his duty God is advanced in his goodnesse and Soveraignty man is kept humble thankful and in subjection no place being left for his pride or gap open for licentiousnesse A Digression concerning the Instrumentality of Faith in Justification HEre I cannot passe by that which Mr. Baxter hath animadverted on some passages of mine in the Treatise of the Covenant concerning the Instrumentality of Faith After I had spoke to our Justification by Faith in opposition to Justification by works in several Propositions of which he is not pleased to take any notice I infer pag. 80. These things considered I am truly sorry that Faith should be denyed to have the office or place of an instrument in our Justification nay scarce allowed to be called an instrument of our receiving Christ that justifies us Mr. Baxter not acquainting his Reader at all with the premises immediately falls upon this inference making himself somewhat merry with my professing my self to be truly sorry for this thing telling me I was as sorry that men called and so called faith the instrument of justification as you are that I deny it acquainting his Reader with his Reasons which he would have to be compared with mine which he passes over in silence 1. No Scripture doth sayes he either in the letter or sense call faith an instrument of Justification This the Reader must take on his word and it should further be considered whether he do not in the same page contradict himself where he saith It is onely the unfitnesse or impropriety of the phrase that he
a principal efficient Mr. Baxter is I am sure as zealous as I can be to assert a conditionate Covenant and if an adversary be as streight-laced to him and me in that as he is to me in this he will hardly prove a condition either in the Covenant of works or grace I will as soon find the word instrument in Scripture applyed to justification as he shall find the word condition applyed to either Covenant And he can name I think no word implying a condition that is alwayes put for a condition and the context wheresoever we are said to be justified by faith or that Christ is a propitiation through faith is in all indifferent Readers eyes as clear for an instrument in justification as those which he and I can bring which yet are clear enough for a conditionate Covenant And that doctrine hath farre more adversaries then this though there is little cause that any man should be an adversary in either He sayes the same answer serves to Act. 15.9 and then the same reply may serve There followes To what you say from Rom. 8.13 I reply 1. An adjutor or concause is ill called an instrument must the Spirit needs be our instrument because it is by the Spirit as if by signified onely an instrument Mr. Baxters head was doubtlesse on somewhat else either when he read these passage of mine or when he framed his answer I never had it in my thoughts that justification is expressely spoken to in any of these texts nor was it my businesse to find out any instrument in them though I doubt not but that faith is spoken to instrument in two of them and as a condition non-instrumental in none of them neither did I dream of making the Spirit an instrument All that I intended was to prove The acts of God are entitled to man and the acts of man to God in Scripture that the acts of man were intitled to God and so the acts of God to man not considering as the businesse in hand let not to it about what these acts are exercised if they prove that It is to me sufficient whether it be in Justification Sanctification Mortification or any other work There is added 2. All this is nothing to the businesse of justification nothing directly immediately but much by way of Analogy It is enough to prove That to be the instrument of man and the instrument of God are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if he desire a proof more punctually applyed to justification let him consult Rom 3.30 It is one God that shall justifie the circumcision by faith and the uncircumcision through faith and Gal. 3.8 The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the Heathen through faith Faith for justification is usually ascribed to man being properly his act and therefore that text of the Prophet Hab. 2.4 The just shall live by his faith is by the Apostle more then once applyed to justification And in the text now quoted this act of faith is ascribed to God for that work I explained my self man neither justifies nor sanctifies himself yet by faith he is raised to close with God in both c. To this is answered If man justifie not himself and yet faith be his instrument of justifying then farewell old Logick Mr. Baxter is the first great Logitian that I ever heard talk so much of his Logick in the last Section but one we had it and now we have it in the same thing again there I shewed that old Logick may stand and yet his consequence not yeelded 2. It is said If man sanctifie not himself under God as to the progresse and acts of sanctification then farewell old Theology And if man may be said to sanctifie himself further then hath been said or so as to be a principal efficient which will follow from Mr. Baxters reasonings then welcome the newest Divinity It will not be denyed that a sanctified man differs from one that is unsanctified and then in case it may be allowed to say I sanctifie my self he may say I make my self to differ which I never heard that any in direct termes would say against the Apostle but Grevenchovius as I find him cited by Dr. Featly and yet it seems it is my great error that I will not say so I lift man up in that height in justification as to pardon his own sin in holding that it is of faith that it may be of grace not of works lest any should boast And I raise him not high enough in sanctification If I say no more then that by faith he receives power from God by the Spirit for it that text 1 Pet. 1.22 would farre better have served my purpose if I had first hit upon it The Spirit of God and not man is to have the denomination in sanctification Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit They that have done any thing in purifying their hearts through the Spirit will rather entitle the Spirit of God then themselves to it and will judge that he rather then they should be denominated a sanctifier And for other texts that are hinted and one mentioned 2 Cor. 7.1 To argue from the Command to the power is that old Theologie that I am ready to bid farewell to As God requires it so he doth often undertake it and declares that it is his work to do it Ezek. 36.25 26. Deut. 30.6 I think few will say that they make their own hearts new There is added 3. To close with God in pardoning me signifieth not that I pardon my self or that I or any act of mine is an efficient cause of pardon This is for me therefore I am contented it should be said over again and my faith is the instrument wherewith I close with God In case it be the instrument wherewith I receive Christ as Mr. Baxter hath sometimes yeelded There followes 4. When you say that faith as an instrument receiveth righteousnesse to justification you speak exactly the conceptions of most Divines that I have met with or read that go your way and therefore these words deserve a little further consideration and after some enquiry into their meaning There is added but these things must be more accurately considered I think Here it is confessed that I tread in the beaten road and that I do appear in the common cause and comparing what is here said with that which in his conclusion he delivers The Author is confest to appear in the common cause in behalf of Protestants It appears that the Divines of this corner of the world for 1300. years past have all taken this way which is all that go under the name Protestant whether Calvinist or Lutheran as they are wont to be distinguished I shall therefore expect that some of those that by grace have obtained to be as of the first three among Davids worthies will step in with their Auxiliary helps in case the
clearnesse as to accuse the doctrine of his adversaries which are all Reformers Forreign and English of such notable obscurity I must now look into that which he hath said for the sole-sufficiency of the grant of the new Covenant of the Gospel to stand in stead of faith for an instrument in this work And if I meet with no more satisfaction in this then in the former I must crave leave to say that I have very little in either I said in my Treatise of the Covenant The promise or grant of the new Covenant in the Gospel is instead of faith made the instrument in the work of justification adding This is indeed Gods and not mans It is the Covenant of God the promise of God the Gospel of God but of it self unable to raise up man to justification To which Mr. Baxter replyes I say there is none but Gods for non datur instrumentum quod non est causae principalis instrumentum And I say still that God acts not in this work without the concurrence of him that is justified which Mr. Baxter grants And this concurrence of man having its instrument In justification of man God acts not without man God thereby doth carry on his work otherwise the Apostle had not onely said that God is a justifier of those that believe in Jesus Rom. 3.26 but also that he justifies the circumcision by faith and the uncircumsion through faith And this act of man is interpretativè the instrument of God but more directly and properly the instrument of man where I say it is of it self unable to raise up man to justification he gives in his answer In which we have First his concession what of it self it is not able to do Secondly his assertion what of it self it can do Thirdly his explication under what notion it doth it His concession is That it is not of it self able to do all other works antecedent to justification Mr. Baxters concession as to humble to give faith regenerate c. But he doth not tell us from whence it hath any supply for those antedaneous works or whether it be employed in those works at all His assertion is that as to the act of justification His assertion or conveying right to Christ pardon and righteousnesse it is able of it self But it is worth our enquiry to whom this new Covenant grant doth convey right to Christ pardon and righteousnesse whether to the unhumbled unbelieving unregenerate or to the humble believing and regenerate soul The former are not in a present capacity of him and the latter are already in possession if he can find me an humble believing regenerate man void of all right to Christ pardon and righteousnesse I will confesse that the grant of the new Covenant is of it self able to do what Mr. Baxter sayes I looked that he should have proved that the grant of the new Covenant in the Gospel doth this constitutivè as he useth to speak That it should work an unjustified man up to a justified state but it seems he will have it to do it onely declarative to make it appear that he is already justified which honours is very low and that about which I intend not to raise disputes If I mistake him and that he will say that he means more then a naked declaration I would he would explaine himself and speak out what more it is that he inteds for if he intend more I know not how to help him out of an high contradiction seeing he talkes of conveyance right to them that all know are possessed before-hand of right The same Gospel-grant which works those antecedaneous acts of which he speaks doth together convey right to all those in whom such a work is found It is able to do it of it self as he explaines himself ac signum voluntatis divinae but where is it revealed from God that either the unhumbled unbelieving unregenerate shall have right to Christ pardon justification or that the humble believing regenerate want it Faith with Mr. Baxter is an acceptance of a freely given Christ and life in him how doth a man in faith stand in need of a new conveyance of right to him There followes If you should mean that that of it self i. e. without the concomitance of faith as a condition is not able I answer that is not fitly called disablity or if you will so call it the reason of that disability is not because there is a necessity of faiths instrumentall coefficiency but of its presence as the performed condition It being the will of the donor that his grant should not efficere actualites till the condition were performed This assertion That there is no efficiency in faith but a naked presence to stand by and as it were to look on in the work of justification calls for some proof seeing he well knowes that among all Reformers his adversaries this will passe for so high a Paradox How is Christ a propitiation through faith and how are we still said to be justified by faith If no more then a bare presence is required the presence of other graces is equally required as love meeknesse temperance chastity they have still been confest necessary in justification quoad presentiam though not quoad efficientiam yet Mr. Baxter can I think no where shew that Christs is set forth a propitiation through any one of these graces or that we are justified by love meeknesse temperance c. I shall as soon believe that the presence of the eye is barely required for sight without further efficiency as I shall believe that the bare presence of faith is required and no more for justification and where he will will prove that it is the will of the Donor that his grant should not efficere actualiter till the condition be performed intending as he expresseth himself that after the condition is performed a new grant must passe actualy to effect this right I cannot tell when the condition is to accept Christ which is present possession They cannot take Christ for justification but by virtue of this grant and when they have thus taken him and are possest of him must they have a new grant for right to him If I give a begger a gift upon condition that he will come and take it when he hath taken it and is possest of it hath he need of any further grant of right to it I said It is often tendered and justication not alwayes wrought and so disabled from the office of an instrument by Keckerman in his Comment on his first Canon concerning an instrument As soon as the instrument serves not the principal agent so soon it loseth the nature of an instrument mentioning instances that he gives and adding neither is the Gospel an instrument of justification where it justifies not Mr. Baxter being gotten into a vein that he hath not yet a mind to leave replyes I am too shallow to reach the reason of
of it first a piece of a Concession Secondly a Simile The Concession is That the Gospel without the concomitance of faith doth not actually justifie else faith were no condition or causa sine qua non That faith should barely wait effecting nothing and gain no further honour then here is assigned will appear a strange assertion If it had its efficacy where it was in being in miraculous cures so that it was said Thy faith hath made thee whole I think it is much rather efficacious in justification there being so much spoken of justification by faith I desire Mr. Baxter to consider the words of his learned dying friend Mr. Gataker in his letter to him And surely faith as a medium seems to have a more peculiar office in the transaction of that main businesse of Justification then either repentance or any other grace as the love or fear of God and the like Which to me seems the more apparent because I find it so oft said in the Word that men are justified by faith but no where by repentance Albeit that also be as a condition thereunto required as also that form of speech 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fides or fiducia in sanguine seems to intimate and imply that this grace hath a more special reference then any other to the satisfaction made to Gods Justice for our sins by Christs sufferings which alone we can plead for our discharge of them at Gods Tribunal Much more followes worthy of Mr. Baxters consideration in laying so high a charge as he hath done on our Reformers in this particular There followes a Simile as full of obscurity as the earth is of darknesse and it were aesie so far as it is intelligible to make it appear how much it halteth but that I will not trouble the Reader with such impertinencies and I look for proofs rather then Similes and here is no proof at all I further infer in my Treatise Mr. Pemble therefore affirming the Word to be an instrument of Gods Spirit presently addes Now instruments are either cooperative or passive and the Word must be one of these two Cooperative he saith it is not and gives his reason It is therefore saith he a passive instrument working onely per modum objecti as it containes a declaration of the Divine will and it proposeth to the understanding and will the things to be known believed and practised Here many exceptions are taken Whether the Word be a passive instrument or cooperative with the Spirit First That Mr. Pemble speakes of the Word as the instrument of sanctification we speak of it as conveying right to Christ and as justifying Secondly That Mr. Pembles reason of the passive instrumentality of the Word is but this that it cannot be declared what operative force there should be in the bare declaration of Gods will Thirdly That himself will undertake to declare that an operation there is by the agency of this declaration though not punctually how it operates Fourthly That this passive instrumentality of the Word in sanctifying doth very ill agree with the language of Scripture which makes the Word to be mighty powerful pulling down strong-holds c. Fifthly That Mr. Pemble herein is single and singular To speak to these in order To the first I say Though Mr. Pemble gives an instance of the Words work in sanctification yet there is no reason to believe that he limits his whole discourse to it indefinitely affirming that it is a passive instrument and giving instance in one there is no imaginable reason that he can exclude the other For his second He lets his Reader know that he took an hasty view of Mr. Pemble when he said that this was all his reason he may see the thing fully argued by him mihi pag. 97 98 99 c in quarto which is too long to transcribe The work which is done upon the soul is wrought by the Spirit as the principal agent whether it be to regeneration progressive sanctification or in order to justification every previous work in tendency towards these is from the Spirit likewise as illumination conviction the beginning and whole progresse is by the Spirit The Word is no more then an instrument and all that the Word doth is by power from the Spirit and therefore said to be mighty through God 2 Cor. 10.5 Now the Spirit must work by way of power either on the Word or the soul as its object It must infuse power and strength into the one as the principal agent in the work Mr. Pemble denies that it works thus by an infusion of power into the Word and affirmes that the infusion of strength is into the soul and not into the Word which the Apostle confirmes Ephes 3.16 As for his third which he saies he will undertake to declare he brings nothing but bare authorities He faith he hath read many that say one thing and some that say another but himself is of Scotus his mind and we have not one syllable to induce any other to be of the same judgement His fourth Mr. Pemble answers and saith That all those phrases there reckoned up are to be understood by a metonymy which though they properly belong to the invisible power of the Holy Ghost giving effect unto his own Word yet are figuratively attributed unto the Word it self which he useth as his visible instrument explaining himself by several similitudes For his last If Mr. Pemble be thus sole and singular he was much mistaken Having fully spoke his judgement in this thing he addes pag. 99. And this is the sentence of the Orthodox Church touching the nature and distinction of these two callings Inward by the work of the Spirit outward by the voice of the Word The Arminians are of another opinion whose judgement saith he about this matter is thus c. At large laying down their doctrine And it were easy to multiply those testimonies that take all efficacy or energy from the Word to give it to the Spirit usually quoting 1 Cor. 3.6 7. 2 Cor. 3.6 2 Cor. 10.4 5. He tells me I doubt whether you believe him or your self throughly for if you did I think you would preach but coldly I am perswaded you look your preaching should operate actively And does he think Mr. Pemble did believe his own doctrine or was he a cold Preacher he delivers his doctrine with confidence and backes it with reasons and the workes that he hath left behind argue that he spake with some heat and fervour and I wish that I could gain more heat both in prayer and preaching and I do look that my preaching should operate actively but whether of it self or through the power of the Spirit there lyes the question He concludes If it were proved that there were an hundred passive instruments it would never be proved that faith is one as an instrument doth signifie an efficient cause of Gods work of justifying us neither really nor reputatively is
he saies He speaks not of the effect of Gods Word as preached to mens hearts but c. I think he ought to speak so of it when he speaks of it as an instrument of justification In his sense I suppose it can be no instrument of justification an instrument must serve to work the thing of which it is an instrument but in this case justification is before-hand wrought and therefore according to the proverb it cannot do that which is done before it comes for the truth of this let Mr. Baxter speak The accepting Christ in this Covenant is true justifying faith if an unregenerate man have this indeed then he is justfied pag. 66. A believing man hath this indeed and so is indeed justified and the grant of the Covenant is an instrument for justification of a justified person I am demanded Do you not often read in Divines of justificatio juris vel legis as distinct from justificatio judicis vel per sententiam And I demand whether of these justifications do procede If justificatio juris go not before justificatio Judicis then the Judge justifies him whom the Law justifies not In case it follow after then it is onely a manifestation or declaration of it of which we may have further occasion to speak hereafter And this considered it appears to me that Mr. Baxter speaks ef the Covenant onely as eyed of God and not applyed to us and then indeed it is no instrument of God whereby he justifies but his rule according to which he justifies Pardon of sin is a relative change yet Ministers appointed of Jesus Christ for the pardon of sin are instrumental in working a real change from unbelief to faith in order to this work and so are instruments of pardon dispositivè as Mason de Ministerio Anglicano speaks as well as declarativè I added in my Treatise Forgivenesse of sin is preached in the Gospel Act. 13.38 but it is to those that believe that are justified faith through the Spirit gives efficacy and power of working to it And here comes in my second charge mentioned I should tremble saith Mr. Br. to say so what Romanist by the doctrine of merit gives more to man in the work of justification I answer Paul a Romane extols faith as high as I have done in Scripture already quoted in the work of justification The Author acquit from complyance with Romanists and according to Mr. Baxter farre more seeing through the whole Chapter of Heb. 11. he speaks as he sayes not onely of justifying faith but as justifying yet he is no Romanist 2. Mr. Br. well knowes the Romanists distinction of a first and second justification which first justification Protestants onely allow according to Scripture to be called justification and that there is according to them no ingrediency of any other grace but faith and no merit in faith but all of grace for which he may see Mr. Crandons first parallell Part 2. pag. 215. It followes If our faith give efficacy and power to the Gospel to justifie us then we justifie our selves when the Gospel justifies us then the Gospel is our instrument of justification and can this be unlesse it be also said that we made the Gospel then God and we are concauses in the Gospels act of donation But how this can follow I think few but himself can see It will onely follow that the Gospel cannot justifie us without us that which Austin hath de verbis Apostoli Ser. 15. will follow He that made thee without thee doth not justifie thee without thee It will follow that somewhat is to be done by us without concurrence of which the Gospel for justification is inefficacious Qui ergo fecit te sine te non justificat te sine te and how the second can follow that the Gospel is our instrument of justification I desire to know If Naamans dipping himself seven times in Jordan rendred it by Divine appointment efficacious for cure of his Leprosie will it follow that Jordan was his instrument whereby he cured himself If the Angels moving on the water Joh. 5. gave efficacy for cure to him that first entred will it then follow that it was either the Angels or his instrument that first entred and not rather the instrument of God onely And to his question moved Can this be unlesse we made the Gospel If we should grant that it is our instrument will this follow Can no man use an instrument unlesse he first made it Peter it seems was no fisher but rather a Cutler and made the sword wherewith he cut off Malchus ear or else he could not have used it as his instrument Neither followes it that God and we are concauses It would onely follow that there is a willing concurrence in us to accept of that which God of grace doth give That of Austin will follow which immediately is added in the place quoted Ergo fecit nescientem justificat volentem tamen ipse justificat ne sit justitia tua He therefore that made thee unwilling doth not justifie thee unwilling yet he doth justifie thee lest it should be thine own righteousnesse It will then follow that in self-denyal renouncing all self-righteousnesse we humbly accept what God of grace doth give After these supposed absurdities we have a list of subtle questions Is it the same power and efficacy for justification which the Gospel receives from God and which it receives from faith or are they divers If divers shew us what they are and which part of its efficacy and power the Gospel receives from faith and which from God If they are the same then God must convey justifying efficacy and power into faith first and by faith into the Gospel which who imagineth or why should I be so vain as to stand to confute it That faith gives efficacy to the Gospel for sanctification Mr. Baxter will not deny as appears in his words that follow and his own exposition of Heb. 4.2 1 Thess 2.13 before mentioned here let him then first answer his own question respective to Sanctification and by the help of him and light borrowed from his illuminate notions I shall aym somewhat at it to answer his respective to Justification If it be the same power and efficacy for sanctification that the Gospel receives from God and from faith then God must convey efficacy and power into faith first and by faith into the Gospel for sanctification and till I have his answer why should I be so vain as to confute his There followes Oh that you had condescended to your Readers weaknesse as to have deigned to shew him Quomodo patitur Evangelium recipiendo Quid recipit ut fiat potens efficax Quomodo haec potentia efficacia fuit in fide utrum eminenter an formaliter Aut utrum fides id communicavit quod nunquam habuit quomodo agit fides in hoc influxu causativo in Evangelium For answer
This proposition consists of two parts 1. That faith puts into possession of Christ 2. That justification necessarily followes this possession But I shall stand upon the proof of neither seeing as in themselves they are plain so they are confessed by Mr. Baxter Faith then is either the efficient or instrument in our justication Not the efficient all know and therefore an instrument 4. That which is ascribed in Scripture both to God and man in a work in which there is a concurrence of God and man in such expressions which usually hold forth the efficiency of an instrument and cannot fairly be interpreted otherwise is not unfitly called an instrument both of God and man in such a work This I know not how fairly can be denyed and any man will but abuse his reason that calls for a proof of it But faith in Scripture is ascribed both to God and man in the work of justification in which there is a mutual concurrence of God and man and in words that usually hold out the working of an instrument and cannot fairly be interpreted otherwise Therefore faith is not unfitly called the instrument of God and man in justification The Minor consists of four parts 1. That faith in justification is ascribed both to God and man and this consists also of two parts 1. That faith is ascribed to God in justification and this we have already proved from Rom. 3.30 Gal. 3.8 as it is also ascribed to him in sanctification Act. 17.9 2. That it is ascribed to man in justification which is held out to us wheresoever we are said to be justified by faith seeing faith is the act of man and the Prophet tells us The just shall live by his faith which the Apostle applyes to justification Rom. 1.17 Gal. 3.11 The second part in this Proposition is That there is a mutual concurrence of God and man in this work as God gives a discharge so man accepts Which by Mr. Br. himself is acknowledged according to that before quoted out of Austin The third part is That thâ—â— is ascribed to God and man in expressions that usually hold forth the efficiency of an instrument which the phrases by and through do manifest The fourth is That it cannot be fairly interpreted otherwise or of any other thing but an instrument And this is also clear Either it must hold out a meritorious cause a meer condition or else an instrument A meritorious cause none will say a meer condition or bare causa sine quâ non it cannot be for two reasons 1. Such phrases are uncouth to say That a thing is done by that which is meerly a condition sine quâ non of it 2. There are many other such conditions to which this is never thus applyed as the Apostle saith To which of the Angels said he at any time Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee And again I will be to him a Father and he shall be to me a Sonne Heb. 1.5 To which of the Angels said he at any time Sit on my right hand untill I make thine enemies thy footstoole Heh 1.13 so we may say To which of the graces when all are reckoned up by number was it ever said that we are justified by it Tthe conclusion then followes as before that faith is an instrument of God and man in justification 5. Out of this we may more briefly thus argue If the holy Ghost single out faith from among all other graces which are yet conditions or causae sine quibus non and ascribes alone to it that which in the ordinary acceptation holds out an instrumental efficiency then it is not a bare condition or causa sine quâ non but an instrumental efficient But the holy Ghost singles out faith from among all other graces which are conditions and causae sine quibus non and ascribes to it and no other that which in the ordinary acceptation implies an iâ—strumental efficiency The conclusion then followes that faith is an instrumental efficient in justification Lastly To bring if it may be a compromizing argument If faith works at least that which is proportionable to an instrument properly and rigidly so called in the work of justification then it is not unfitly called by the name of an instrument This is plain that which does work that every way answers to the work of an instrument that may fitly be called by that name But faith works at least that which is proportionable to the work of an instrument This is confest by Mr. Br. who is ready to yield that it should be called Instrumentum Metaphoricum and a Metaphor is a figure whereby a word is carried out of its most proper signification unto an other that carries resemblance and proportion with it In case then it does not that whch is proportionable to an instrument properly so called it is no instrumentum Metaphporicum but Catachresticon And indeed Mr. Baxters glosse renders it such a Catachresis as may make all Rhetorique ashamed of it A Metaphoricall Instrument that shall have no resemblance of an instrument in it But if any will say that an instrument is externall sensible whether it be for operation or reception but faith is internall invisible and therefore no instrument rigidly and properly so called though there be no cogent reason to yield it for as is the agent so well may be the instrument yet I shall not be so stiff to contend about it yield that it doth the work to put into Christ from whom Justification necessarily followes and I will no longer contend about the Word but let it be an instrument in exact property of speech or in a Metaphor as men shall please As to that of the sole sufficiency of the Word without faith as an instrument in Justification I might take up an argument from Mr. Baxters and thus reason That which cannot bring a man to the works that are antecedent to justification cannot justify This is clear That which cannot work the prerequisites cannot work the thing it self But the Word alone according to Mr. Baxter cannot bring a man to these antecedent works Sect. 14. Chap. 29. Ergo. But I shall content my self at present with this onely That which the Word saies is done by faith it cannot do without it This is clear But the Word saies and frequently saies we are justified by faith Ergo the Word cannot justify without faith Here some distinction must be used if any evasion be endeavored But then it must be confessed that it is an other kind of justification that is spoke to by Mr. Baxter then is laid down in Scripture For Scripture-justification is still by faith that is the Holy Ghosts constant language And to come to a right understanding if it may be of parties somewhat must be yielded and somewhat asserted and maintained That which must be yielded is That God in his Word declares upon what terms a man may attain unto justification and to this the Word
Lastly as Durand Reas 4 doth observe The whole that is done in it speaks its own use and signification and the use and signification of Sacraments wholly depends upon divine institution They have nothing that beares any colour to say for the Sacramentality of it save that Text of the Apostle Ephes 5.32 where the Apostle having illustrated that love which is due from the husband to the wife by that similitude of the love of Christ to the Church concludes This is a great Mystery and having spoke both of the union betwixt Christ and the Church and between man and his wife to prevent all mistakes he addes but I speak of Christ and his Church so that first we have not the word Sacrament there but the word Mystery which by Bellarmines own confession is not elsewhere in Scripture to be understood of any Sacrament and Cajetan on the words as Amesius observes warnes the prudent Reader to observe that we have not from Paul in this place that Marriage is any Sacrament So that neither word nor thing is found in Scripture that Marriage is a Sacrament Every one of these might have born a large discourse as is well known to all that are verst in these controversies But so many having spoken so fully to them though I was unwilling intending a Treatise of the Sacraments wholly to omit them yet was resolved that the Reader might not be overburthened to be as brief as possible in them FINIS A POSTSCRIPT TO REVEREND and LEARNED Master BAXTER IN WHICH These following QVESTIONS are friendly debated Whether faith in Christ quà Lord be the justifying act Whether mans Evangelicall personall righteousness be here perfect Whether the Morall Law is a perfect rule of righteousness Whether Vnbelief and Impenitence in professed Christians are violations of the Covenant of Grace Whether Faith and Repentance be Gods conditions or mans in the proper conditionall Covenant Whether the Covenant of Grace require perfection and accept sincerity With an enquiry into the judgement of Antiquity about severall things in reference to Justification Sicut meritum Christi non potest apprehendi ad justitiam salutem nisi per organon fidei divinitùs ad hoc ordinatum ita si fides alibi quà m in suo proprio principali objecto quaerat Justificationem non invenit nec accipitillam Chemnit exam concil Trident de fid Justif pag. 159. LONDON Printed by S. G. for Abel Roper at the Sign of the Sun against Dunstans Church in Fleet-street 1655. THE INTRODVCTION REverend Beloved and much Honoured I have received your Apologie according to your appointment from your Stationer for which I return you hearty thanks as for the gift it self so for the pains that you have taken to rectifie me where in your judgement I have publickly stept aside An error in Divine things if it stand alone without addition of further aggravations is not light Truth being of such divine excellency that no pensil can draw out all deviation from it into opposite error must needs answer in black deformity and darkness But when it is not simple error but joyned with endeavour to engage others it is far above it self in fowlness To reduce a brother therefore not onely erring but thus erring must needs be an high acceptable office of love But in this I need to do no more than to say over to you what you have said to me in your first and second page which you stile your Prologue In this if we both speak our hearts thoughts we are one And I wish that in all other things there were a like unity in judgement and the time I hope with some confidence is near at hand that all mists and clouds will be so dispelled that we shall arrive at perfect union And as for infinite other reasons so for this glory is infinitely desireable In order to a right understanding between us I must acquaint you that your first words after your Christian salute have their mistake though not much material whether upon mistake of my words when I last saw you in Shrewsbury or fayling in memory I cannot determine I told you not that I had then sent to the Press a treatise of the Covenant◠but wished you indeed not to be offended in case I should in such a treatise publish somewhat in the way that you mention In which I do not barely oppose my memory to yours but also the witness of the Reverend Brother whom you know was then present together with the computation of time which speaks it to me to be above contradiction It was May 3. that we spake together as I well know by the errand that I had at that time into those parts and my book saw not the light till towards the end of November following and yet made speedy haste after it went out of my hands I was glad of the opportunity as of a brief discourse of some things as the little scantling of time would bear so also to understand your mind in the thing already mentioned before any further proceeding that there might be no unbrotherly difference which at that time you express'd with all possible candor for my encouragement in that way Yet you now complain that I have given the first onset and so put you upon a necessity of this way of dealing against me which you mention in your Preface Apologetical and in this Prologue and more at large in the Preface of your Confession preferring in your judgement a more private Collation and enquiry into things before this publique way of appearing in the Press And indeed I had it in my thoughts to have written to you before I had any setled resolution at all any more to have appear'd in publique had done some little that way as soon as your Aphorisms came to light which was more than three years and an half before my treatise of the Covenant was published as may be seen comparing the dates of either but after-thoughts took me off And indeed I see no cause of Repentance considering the issue of things between you and others After so much pains of writing on both sides I do not hear that any of those eminently learned men which you say from most parts of the land have taken this way to impart their animadversions have at all prevail'd to change your mind Neither do I hear that any of your replies have wrought any change in them for satisfaction And in the mean space those elaborate writings on both sides are buried in your Study and theirs and no other but your selves have any benefit at all Only we have their complaints such is humane frailty that their names suffer in your publick writings As to the Charge against me for making the first onset I had not appear'd at all had I not upon other occasions which may be seen in my Preface been put upon it to come out in open view And how far I stand guilty of that in which I
He is set out a propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3.24 not through faith in his command It is the blood of Christ that cleanseth all sin and not the Soverainty of Christ These confusions of the distinct parts of Christs Mediatorship and the speciall offices of faith may not be suffered Scripture assignes each it's particular place and work Soveraignty doth not cleanse us nor doth blood command us Faith in his blood not faith yielding to his soveraignty doth justifie us Mr. Brs. reply analized In your reply to this passage of mine you 1. Acquit me of any further error then what is found in my method affirming that I agree with you in substantiâ rei 2. You lay down six several distinctions 3. You lay down nine propositions All of which both distinctions and propositions I believe you intended for illustration of the point in debate but your Readers and those neither of the younger nor duller sort complaine of your obscuring of it 4. You fall upon your charge of me and here you charge 1. My expressions with confounding that which was my business as well as I could to distinguish 2. You charge my implications or implyed sense which it seems you far better know then I with triple injustice 1. Against the truth and word of God 2. Against the souls of men 1. In such nice mincing cutting the conditions of their salvation to their great perplexity if they receive my doctrine That which all complain of in your expressions you are pleased to blame me withall in my implications Upon the comming out of your Apologie I was wrote unto by an eminently-learned hand in these words I wish that it may not divert you from better employment and namely your Treatise about the Sacraments to which if you adjoyn as an appendix something by way of reply to Mr. Br. not so as to trouble your self and others as Mr. Br. doth too much with Logicall niceties but to clear and confirm the main matter I think it will be most convenient 2. I am charged as not affording one word of Scripture or reason when yet in those few words recited I think the reader may see as many as in all your distinctions and propositions Lastly and leastly as you term it my charge is of evident injustice to my friend For it is as is said no hard matter to know who I mean in charging him with confounding the distinct parts of Christs mediatorship I am expresly spoke to and charged without injustice for confounding Christs actions with mans faith How truly let the Reader judge And am yet guilty of injustice in charging my implyed friend in my implyed sense with such a crime 5. You excuse your self for your not much troubling me with arguments Giving your reason that you have done it over and over to others Where I would have the Reader to observe that you have other Adversaries besides me in this point and those of the most learned who as else where you say have vouchsafed that condescension as to give in animadversions 2. That we hear none of these learned mens reasons A few words of mine let fall by the bie are fallen upon and elaborate learned Treatises of others lie dormant industriously written on this subject 6. You come in with your ten arguments which it seemes you take to be a number below trouble It would trouble you If I should say your implyed sense is That they are such to which I may without trouble give in an answer 7. You amplifie your tenth argument with a large discourse and all of this before you can reach my words I should trouble the Reader in his purse and patience if I should follow you in all these particulars and indeed I was scarce ever brought so near to a non-plus To speak to all Time will not suffer and to take to some and leave others will expose me to censure Your distinctions should be look'd into and if they had been either proved or explained you had done your Reader a Favour Your first distinction is between Constitutive Justification His distinctions considered or remission by the Gospel-grant or Covenant and Justification by the sentence of the Judge I hope you do not make these two distinct Justifications that so it should be a distribution of a Genus into its species So I think few Readers will own it But if you mean by the former a Justification wrought and in it self perfect and compleat as your word constitutive would seem to imply And by Justification by the sentence of the Judge Justification manifested and declared then I freely yeeld That is Justification in it self perfect and full that renders a man blessed And this your constitutive Justification which you call remission by the Gospel-grant doth Psal 32.1 Commented upon by the Apostle Rom. 4.7 8. Whether the Elect shall have any other justification or this manifested and more fully held out let Christ himself determine At the day when God by him shall judge the world he will pronounce this sentence Come yee blessed of my Father Matth. 25.34 This Justification then by the sentence of the Judge is a manifestation of this blessedness which is in remission and non-imputation of sin Your next distinction is between Constitutive Justification as begun and as continued or consummate And here I doubt not but you may distinguish provided that you donot divide and make one condition to be required for the first as you use to do viz. Faith only and another which is works the condition of the second When David through faith was put into a justified state and after fell into sin there was a necessity of his return in the order established of God You may say if you please that works must now acquit him from this second guilt but this I shall hardly imbrace He sought in his faln condition to have sin by free grace remitted and to be purged with that which Hysopin Ceremoniall purifications did typifie Psal 51.7 A justified state is carried on in a way of obedientiall affiance But faith in Christs blood first and last doth only justifie The Apostle speaks of the falls of the Children of God when he sayes If any man sin 1 John 2.1 and tels us the way to be acquited not any new but the old and first way We have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sin And I know no other way of propitiation then through faiths in his blood I know what you say Pref. to your Confes pag. 8. if I number right They are very different questions How we are constituted just or put into a justified state at our conversion How we are sentenced just or justified at Gods Judgment seat You may if you please make them two questions but were I to be Catechized by you I should give you the same answer And I believe Paul was of the same mind when he
Where world in the first place signifies the earth in the second place men on the earth 2 Cor. 5.21 Him that knew no sin he made sin for us Where in the first place sin is taken properly in the latter place by a Metonymy 2 Chron. 35.24 And they brought him to Jerusalem and he died and was buried in one of the sepulchres of his Fathers and all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for Josiah In the first place Jerusalem is taken for the City in the second place for the Inhabitants of it And so also Matth. 2.1 3. There came wisemen from the east to Jerusalem When Herod the King heard these things he was troubled and all Jerusalem with him With further instances which there may be seen concluding that therefore the supposition of the adversaries is false that the repetition of the same word must be allwaies in the same sense 3. No doubt say you but Paul and James handle two distinct questions but not the two that you here expresse Paul speaks of meritorious works which make the reward of debt and not of grace if you will believe his own description of them Rom. 4.4 But James speaks of no such works but of such as have a consistency with grace and a necessary subordination to it I prove it The works that James speaks of we must endeavour for and perform or perish Paul excludes not only works of merit but all works from Justification supposing time but the works that Paul speaks of no man must endeavour or once imagine that he can perform viz. such as make the reward to be of debt and not of grace To this I answer 1. That if Paul speaks only of meritorious works then according to you he speaks of no works at all for there are none such no not in Angels Confess Chap. 3. § 6 Paul speaks in the place quoted of works where there is a reward of debt and yet speaks not as I conceive of works of merit seeing as he mentions none such so there are none such He exclude then works to which a reward is due vi promissi rather then meriti As Eph. 2. he excludes boasting of works done by the help of grace for there is a matter of boasting in these as we see in the Pharisee Luk. 18.11 2. If Paul had here spoken of works of merit and I must believe him so elsewhere he speaks of other works and there both you and I are to believe him likewise 1. He speaks and excludes all the works that we have done Tit. 3.5 Which he universally opposes to Justification by free grace v. 7. and it is of faith that it may be of grace Rom. 4.16 2. He speaks of and excludes all those works or that righteousnesse which is not the righteousnesse of God by faith Phil. 8.8 9. that is all the righteousness that is inherent in us and not in Christ alone and made ours by faith therefore he is called the Lord our Righteousnesse Jer. 23.6 and said to be made of God unto us righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1.30 3. He speaks of and excludes all those works which the Law commands Rom. 3.20 Now there is no work of grace but the Law gives it in charge yea the Law commands to take in grace wheresoever there is a tender of it for our assistance Requiring a duty it requires all necessary helps to it And therefore Chemnitius observes that when the Apostle excludes the works of the Law from Justification his intention is to exclude the highest and noblest not only done by Pharisees or unregenerate persons but Abraham David or the most eminent convents 4. He speaks of and excludes all those works that any man in the highest pitch of grace can attain unto in the place quoted 1 Cor. 4.4 I know nothing by my self yet I am not thereby Justified He knew no matter of condemnation say you sensu Evangelico he then kept up to that which God in the Gospel-Covenant calls for And yet he is not thereby justified Though God will not condemne a man of that integrity through grace yet this doth not justifie This place saith Cartwright on the words is the death of your Justification by works For if Paul knew nothing by himself in that wherein the Corinthians might suppose him most guilty and was not so much as in that point Justified before God who is he that dares to Justifie himself before God in any work And Fulk on the words Paul doth acknowledge that he is not Justified by his faithfull service and labour in the Gospel therefore no man can be Justified by his works done of grace in as great perfection as can be done of mortall man If the whole discharge of Paules ministeriall function wherein he took heed to himself and to his doctrines was not such where by he could be Justified How then could Abraham be justified in offering Isaack or Rahab in her hiding of the spies If the Apostle therefore do exclude works of merit we see what works he also excludes with it You futher say Paul speaks indeed of faith collaterally but of Christs merits and free grace directly and purposely So that the chief part of Pauls controversie was Whether we are justified freely through Christs merits or through our own meritorious works But James question is Whether we are Justified by faith alone or by faith with obedience accompanying it and both as subordinate to Christs merits Answ Some will think that you judge faith not worthy to be named but on the bie Who can be of your mind that reads the Apostle speaking so often Paul treats diversly and industriously of Justification by faith and so fully to the office of faith in Justistification but that his scope is no lesse to shew what justifies ex parte nostri which it still faith then what that is that justifies ex parte Dei which is grace or ex parte Christi which is his blood or merit Pauls question you say is of the meritorious cause of our Justification James his question of the condition on our part If you are in the right Paul certainly was much defective in his Logick We think the question in debate is to be put into the Conclusion see how he concludes Rom. 3.28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the Law Inferences are made and consectaries drawn from that which is mainly in dispute and not from that which is collaterally mentioned and upon the bie onely touched upon Now he concludes from the doctrine of Justification by faith mentioning as we see Justification ex parte nostri peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ Rom. 5.1 You further say Paul speaks of Justification in toto both in the beginning and progresse but especially in the beginning but James speaks only of Justification as continued and consummate and not as begun For both Abrahams and every mans was begun before works of obedience I Answer
of them I confess I have not seen as Polycarp Tatianus Macarius Athenagoras Vigilius as I have severall others that you mention not and I would fayne see what they have either for or against the Protestant belief Those that have not treated at all on this subject as in some of them that you name I am told by Dr. Prideaux that Christ is scarce mentioned or have spoken upon it only be the by are as much as nothing their names might as well have been spared as mentioned Mr. T. hath done as much for his Antipadobaptism in naming some of the Antients that never appeared for Infant-Baptism when they have not at all spoken to it and their contemporaries have asserted it 6. Whether the present Church of this age in which we live taking in our Fathers that lived within this happy 150. years since the Romish yoke hath been cast off be not as considerable and as much to be heeded in this controversie as all of those in your list mentioned if you should put in yet more to encrease so far as names could do it both weight and number They were subject to error and humane frailty as well as the Church that is and of late was They were not able to decide their own Controversies but laboured as well as we under contentions and divisions they were seldome unanimous but often at difference not only with others but themselves Nay have not our Writers the far greater advantage 1. Being far above yours in number go through Protestant Learned Writers within this Compasse of time and we shall find your List of names far exceeded 2. They have fully debated the cause and in publick Assemblies determined it in Confessions openly professed it Considered of and answered arguments against it turning over every stone to find out the truth in it so it cannot be said of the Fathers in your List mentioned and Nil tam certum quam quod ex dubio certum The Fathers that wrote before Pelagius have not been thought of that account nor so meet Judges in the point of Grace and Freewill having no adversary and therefore spake more loosly as Austin Prosper Fulgentius and those that followed who were by the adversary put upon the study of it Quid opus est ut eorum scrutemur opuscula qui priusquam ista haeresis oriretur non haebuerunt necessitatem in hâc aifficili ad solvendum quaestione versari quod proculdubio facerent si respondere talibus cogerentur The greatest Doctors at some times saith Dr. Fr. White Treat of the Sabb. p. 89. before Errors and Heresies are openly defended are not neither can be so circumspect in their writing as to avoid all forms and expressions all sentences and propositions all and every tenet which in after times may yield advantage to the adversaries of truth Quoting Austin de Praed Sanct. cap. 14. To what purpose should we search into their works which before this heresie arose had not need to busie themselves in the answer of this difficult question which doubtless they had done if they had been put to deal with such adversaries This we may fitly apply to this point of justification we are beholding the opposites of it for a more industrious fifting of it and more cleer light in it Paul had never spoke so much to assert a resurrection had there been none in that age that had denyed it Hâ—d not Popish School-men perverted the doctrine of justification Protestant Divines had never appeared with that zeal and fervor of Spirit in it And the Fathers doubtless had been more exact in their Treatises of this point had they seen it as we have done perverted and abused 7. If Fathers and all Antiquity were so abhorrent from the instrumentality of faith in justification How is it probable that any singularly verst in Antiquity so as to have few parallels and no way affected to the Protestant doctrine in the point of justification but averse from it and siding with the adversary should own the instrumentality of faith and argue for it if Antiquity were so averse from it he that takes it up is sure either ignorant in Antiquity or much engaged in his affections to the Protestant party But such there have been that can neither be challenged as ignorant nor suspected for partiall engagement that yet assert the instrumentality of faith witness Bp. Montague In whatsoever he hath otherwise been thought defective and detected by Bp. Carleton Dr. Featley and others yet he hath ever been of eminent name for an Antiquary For his averseness to the Protestant Doctrine of justication let not onely his adversaries speak that have appeared against him but Sanct. Clara our adversary who Problem 26. quotes Montagues Appeal Chap. 6. to prove the justification of a sinner consists in the inward work of grace inherent agreeable as he sayes with the holy definition of the Councill of Trent Now that this great Antiquary and friend of our adversaries appears for the instrumentality of faith in the work of justification see his Appeal cap. 9. part 2. putting it into his title that God doth justifie originally and faith instrumentall and reasoneth for it in the Chapter it self These things being prâ—mised as to the first concerning the Instrumentality of Faith Proofs from antiquity for the instrumentality of faith I thus argue They that are for justification alone by faith without limit or distinction as excluding all whatsoever else in man they are for that which we call the instrumentality of faith in justification But Antiquity is very large for justification alone by faith without limit or distinction as excluding all in man except faith in this work Therefore Antiquity is for that which we call the instrumentality of faith in justification Here the Proposition is first to be proved and then the Assumption The Proposition I â—hus prove To be justified by faith alone plainly holds forth somewhat peculiar to faith which is not found in any other grace this none can deny and you confess pag. 96. of your Confession Conclus 29. But nothing else can be faiths peculiar work distinct from other graces but to be an instrument in this work This is cleer This peculiar work or office of faith must be either to be an instrument in this work or else a Conditio cum quâ or causa sine quâ non or else somewhat more noble then all of these as the formal meritorious cause c. But it s peculiar office cannot be meerly to be Conditio cum quâ or causa sine quâ non both these equally belong to the works of Sanctification Though they be all present together saith our Book of homilies yet they do not justifie together pag. 15. At the same instant that God justifies saith Davenant he infuses inhaerent grace which yet he denies to be any cause but an Appendix to our justification de Justit habit cap. 23. pag. 315. Bellarmine sayes That Protestants agree in this
oppose it to works and not to other sects giving clear instances 2. They object That in the use of this particle sole the Fathers exclude all works going before Faith and Regeneration and denying only that the works of Infidels and unregenerate do justifie This Rule Franc. à Sanctae â— Clara doth produce out of Casalius but plainely enough signifies that it will not satisfie This Chemnitius also overthrowes by severall cleare testimonies out Origen and Ambrose 3. They object That by the particle sole the Fathers do exclude ceremoniall works and not all works which indeed is unworthy of answere the Law of Ceremonies being antiquated before their daies 4. Seeing none of these will hold Franc. à Sancta Clara produceth another Rule out of Aquinas Quando aliquod commune multis tribuitur specialiter alicui illud provenit aut quia in illo excellentissimè reperitur aut quia primò reperitur in Quaest de veritate Quaest 14. artic 5. ad 12. When any thing that is common to many is attributed specially to one that comes to passe either because it is most eminent or because it is first in it which Rule might serve with some reason as applyed to this purpose for answer both to Scripture-texts and testimonies of Fathers in case they only said that we are Justified by Faith But when the Scripture doth not barely give it to Faith but denies it to works and the Fathers do not only say that Faith Justifies but that Faith only Justifies and particularly exclude works this Rule therefore can do nothing here So that I conclude that Faith hath its office in Justification which other graces have not which is not by you denied And that this office is ascribed to Faith in words implying an instrumentality as in Scriptures so in the Fathers an no other office peculiar can be found for it according to your Confession therefore according to Scriptures and Fathers it Justifies as an instrument Before I go off this head let me mind you of that of Dr. Prideaux which you may find Lect. 5. de Justific Pag. 146. * Arminio minimè placuit ait ejus inter pres Corvinus quod fides dicitur instrumentalis Justificationis nostrae causa Bonâ igitur fide dic Armini pro tuo acumine qua ratione fides Justificat It did not saith he please Arminius as his interpreter Corvinus says that Faith should be called the instrumentall cause of our Justification Whereupon he addresses himself to him Tell us in good earnest O Arminius how it Justifies May not I put the same question to you He speaks for Arminius oâ—t of an Epistle of his to Hippolitus à Collibus the Palsgrave's Ambassadour The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere hoe est actum fidei dicit imputari in justitiam idque proprio sensu non Metonymicè quatenus objectum apprehendit in Ep. ad Hippolitum à Collibus principis Palatini legatum i. e. the act of Faith is imputed for Righteousnesse and that in a proper not a Metonymicall sense as it apprehends the object which he there refutes But it will not serve you to answer thus For with you works justifie and yet you confesse that Faith hath its peculiar way and prerogative which agrees not to works in Justification We must either then yeeld that it Justifies as an instrument or shut it quite out from the office of Justification or plainely confesse we know not what office it hath in this work notwithstanding Scripture speaks so much of it and still in those words which in mens common Language denote an instrument The second That Faith in Christ quâ Lord is not the Justifying act is with you as the former a notorious novelty and comes within the same Challenge And if the Contention be alone about the termes in case it be yeelded what would you be advantaged Seeing I doubt not but we may say that it was never in Terminis by the Ancients put to the question and so you in affirming that Faith in Christ quâ Lord is the Justifying act are in as notorious a novelty as we on the other hand in denying it you can no more find the one in the Ancients then your adversaries can find the other But if the question be about the thing it self I doubt not but many testimonies may be easily produced In order to which the state of the question as it is laid down between Protestants and their adversaries is to be looked into which is Whether the whole word of God be the object of Justifying Faith or the speciall promises of mercy in Christ Thus Bellarmine states it Lib. 1. de Justificatione cap. 4. and saith that the Heretiques restrain it to the promise of speciall mercy but Catholiques will have the object of Faith to be as large as the whole word of God Here Protestants yield somewhat to Bellarmine somewhat they deny They yield that the Faith which Justifies looks upon the whole word of God as its object that it believes the History of the Creation the narrative of the years of Mathusaleh the floud of Noah that it acknowledges the equity of all Gods Commands and a necessity of obedience but not as Justifying We willingly grant that Justifying Faith is an obedientiall affiance yet it is the affiance and noâ— the obedience nor yet the assent to truths formerly mentioned or the like that acts in Justification Your self say that obedience is only the modification of Faith in the first act of Justification and the reforming party of Protestant Divines say the same in the consummation of it Now that these promises of speciall mercy or the blood of Christ held out in the free promises is the speciall object of Faith in this act of Justification and that it justifies as it applies such promises and doth interest the Soul in this blood may I suppose be made good by diverse testimonies Let that of Ambrose be consulted Lib. 1. Cap. 6. de Jacobo vitâ beatâ Non habeo unde gloriari in operibus meis possum non habeo unde me jactem ideo gloriabor in Christro Non gloriabor quia justus sum sed gloriabor quia redemptus sum Gloriabor non quia vacuus peccati sum sed quia remissa sunt peccata Non gloriabor quia profui neque quia profuit mihi quisquam sed quia pro me advocatus apud patrem Christus est sed quia pro me Christi sanguis effusus est Facta est mihi culpa mea merces redemptionis per quam mihi Christus advenit Propter me Christus mortem gustavit fructuosior culpa quam innocentia Innocentia arrogantem me fecerat culpa subjectum reddidit And that of Gregory in Ezek. Hom. 7. Justus igitur advocatus noster justos nos defendet in judicio quia nos ispos cognoscimus accusamus injustos Non ergo infletibus non in actibus nostris
to make use of some one according to their own will when this assertion of his is as inconsistent with his own doctrine as Austins can be that upon a manifold account as might be shewen 1. He scarce knowes how to make it out that Circumcision was any remedy at all against Original sin seeing that Sacrament did not conferre grace by the work done but by the merit or disposition of the doer which is not found in infants 2. He himself confesses that many infants dye in their mothers wombe and yet have no remedy provided either in the law of nature or the old Law or Law of grace that is neither before the Law under the Law or in Gospel-times 3. Water is not alwayes at hand as he not absurdly hints though a Minister with them is scarce wanting who set up Midwives for the work and then the infant dyes remedilesse All this he thinks to help with a distinction c Quanquam enim non de singulis in particulari provideret ut eis efficaciter applicaretur romedium generaliter omnibus provisum tamen quantum in ipso est omnibus providet Though saith he God hath not provided for each one in particular that the remedy provided in general for all should be applyed to them yet he hath provided such a remedy as far as in him lyes But foreseeing that there would be some impediment to hinder the application of this Sacramental remedy to some this he permits This is a speech beseeming a Jesuit that God provided quantum in se a remedy as though it had been above him to have avoyded these impediments If the Jesuites position must stand that God is so tyed up with these limits that he cannot take away Original sin from infants without application of somewhat that is sensible He could have made such provision as he forbade Sampsons mother whilest with child the drinking of wine or strong drink or eating any unclean thing and that respective to the infant because he should be a Nazarite to God from the wombe to the day of his death Judg. 13.7 so he could have enjoyned the mother to have taken that which might through grace annext have had that efficacy in the infant in the wombe to take away Original sin as they conceive water hath on an infant new-born yea God is so far from doing what in him lyes respective to many infants for provision of a remedy of this nature that he orders that such a supposed remedy shall not be applyed He with much ado makes Circumcision a remedy to deliver from Original sin Pag. 51. Yet God took order in his Law that it should not be administred before the eighth day and in that interim between the birth and the eighth day it must needs be that many dyed and so by the law of Heaven they were debarred of a remedy through grace provided But here he is opposed by divers of his own party who hold that the faith of the Parent is sufficient to take away Original sin from the infant for which opinion he quotes Bonaventure Dist 1. Art 2. Quest 2. Rich. art 1. 5. 9. 1. 2. And Chamier lib. 1. cap. 8. de Sacramentis in genere Sect. 6. quotes also Vasquez for the same opinion These place merit in the Parents faith to work to the justification of the infant a merit not ex condiguo but ex congruo and for merit of this nature a faith informed void of Charity is sufficient say they Here our Author takes two exceptions against his friends 1. saith he d Sed hi authores in hoc falsum supponunt quia revera ad meritum de congruo non sufficit fides informis praesertim ad merendam alteri gratiam sanctitatem praeterea non satis explicant vim radicem hujus remedii quia ut esset infallibile quod necessarium est ut esset verum remedium non satis erat meritum de congruo quia non semper infallibiliter effectum habet sed necessaria erat divina promiscio hanc oportet ostendere They argue from a false ground for faith informed will not serve for this kind of merits especially to merit grace for another And secondly they do not as he saith sufficiently set forth the force and efficacy of this remedy To make it infallible as it must be if it be a true remedy merit de congruo is not sufficient seeing it hath not alwayes infallibly its effects But a Divine promise is necessary and this promise saith he they ought to shew that maintain it So that one part gives too much to the application of a sensible sign to the infant and the other over much to the merit of the Parent Abuleusis on Matth. 25. Quest 677. comes nearer to Bonaventure Richard Vasquez then to Suarez holding that infants before Circumcision were delivered from Original sin in that they were born of believers not requiring as Rivet observes Exer. 88. in Genes any application of faith in the Parents to the infants in any Sacrament for that work who might be dead before the Sacrament was administred to them The same opinion is undertaken of late in behalf of the infants of Christians to prove the infallibility of their salvation whether dying before or after Baptisme I have enough on my hands already and am not willing to launch out into this controversie I onely say 1. I find infants of believers not onely of the faith of the Elect but of visible profession in Covenant the Scripture is cleare for a Covenant in this latitude 2. That salvation according to Scripture wayes is within the verge of the Covenant and doth not go beyond it The Scripture leaves men out of Covenant in an hopeless condition 3. As there is salvation for all sorts and degrees of persons of age in Covenant but not to be extended to all of those sorts and degrees to reach every individual person so in a parallell way we may think of infants I know no text giving us universal assurance of their happiness in case there were I suppose there were much mare cause for believers to begge of God their infants death then with David in prayer to seek their life there being full assurance of their happiness dying and so much fear of their condemnation living to see the temptations to which in their growth they are subject We find salvation entailed upon qualifications of grace but not upon any age or period of life 4. There is as much found in Scripture giving us hopes of the salvation of the infants of all in Covenant as to their infant-state as to the infants of those that are most exact in keeping of Covenant As much is said for the honour of infants of Parents of a faith barely dogmatical as of the infants of those that are actually in grace and justified by faith The infants of all such yea of the worst of such are the servants of God
in ignorance being so far knowing Christians SECT IX The seventh Proposition enlarged AS for those that are of years Admission of men of years examined though we are not much concerned scarce one unbaptized Person in an age being tendred to us yet it is not meet wholly to omit it when any in the Primitive times upon the Preaching of the Apostles was ready to professe and willing to engage in a way of Christianity he was streight according to the order of Christ to be admitted by Baptisme the Commission it self speaks thus much Disciple all Nations baptizing them is the charge being discipled there needs no further enquiry and accordingly was the practice the Eunuch upon profession of faith and water at hand was presently baptized by Philip Act. 8. and the Jaylour the self same hour that he was converted was baptized by Paul and Silas Act. 16. Those that limit Baptisme to years of discretion appear to be wholly of this mind Mr. Tombes Examen Pag. 159. is clear that profession of faith and holinesse is sufficient warrant to baptize And for their practice let their Proselytes wheresoever they prevail speak when such as we see are admitted we may well conclude that in their judgement none are to be refused There are others that set up a new Church-door having discipled any in their way they do not as Christ enjoyned concerning unbaptized Heathens or as others concerning baptized Christians baptize them but they tender a Covenant of Church-fellowship unto them and that is their way of Church entrance when yet their infants keep the old rode of Baptisme These at least some of them are exceeding strict and will have none admitted but those that the quickest sighthed Admission unto a Church-Covenant and membership looked into Eagle-eyed Christians judge so farre as they are able to apprehend to have both name and thing of Christianity And to add honour to this way the world must be born in hand and that with attestation of no mean ones that the conversion of the Gentiles and Jewes in that infinite number as we read in the Acts of the Apostles was all in reality and that the whole Church of Hierusalem consisting at least of eight thousand members was an homogeneal body under the same light conscience and tendernesse Of a more noble homogeneity and more pure constitution sure then ever came into Christs thoughts to see his Kingdom attain unto upon earth He compares it to a field made up of a mixture of Tares and Wheat Matth. 13.24 to a Draw-net cast into the Sea which taketh fishes of all kinds both good and bad Matth. 13.47 And in the close o◠two other Parables inferres that many are called but few are chosen Matth. 20.16 Matth. 22.14 This he spake in the ears of his Disciples and we may wonder if they should live to see it contradicted He tells his hearers Luk. 9.27 Matth. 16.18 There be some standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the Kingdom of God And can we think that he understood a Kingdom in that resplendent glory which he had ever denyed when he made it his business to decipher and hold it forth unto them When they heare of it they hear of a field with tares and wheat of a draw-net with fish of all sorts They live to see flourishing fields of pure wheat full nets of fishes that are onely good being told that many are called but few chosen they yet see myriads of thousands called and all chosen Yea Paul after he had seen the contrary and gained fellowship according to these men in such an homogeneal pure body still symbolizes in like Parables of a great house that had vessels some to honour and some to dishonour 2 Tim. 2.20 applying it to the Elect and Reprobate in the Church of God We are told that the complexion of a visible Church under the Gospel is conversion the constituted matter converted ones and that this soul-complexion is the same in the whole body members having received the same Spirit of Adoption owning and experiencing the same grace of God But it is plain that Christ did neither see nor foresee any such purity of complexion nor can they that look upon Primitive Churches in the glasse of Scriptures see any more then Christ did discover Those words of Luke Act. 15.3 And being brought on their way by the Church they passed through Phenice and Samaria declaring the conversion of the Gentiles and they caused great joy unto all the brethren is made a fundamental ground-work of this building of such glory as though all conversion by the Word were attended by the changing work of the Spirit which happy glosse in case it would hold would turne all the grounds in the parable into good ground and a cōnvert or proselyte in an historical narrative would ever be the same with elect or regenerate But the words going before and following these if they may be but taken in will serve to spoil all this supposed glory and purity A sect riseth up and teacheth the Brethren that except they be circumcised after the manner of Moses they cannot be saved and what manner of men they were and how their Doctrine took we may read in Pauls Epistles to the Philippians Colossians and especially in that to the Churches of Galatia it almost wrought to the apostatizing of those Churches from the faith of Christ to another Gospel If ever these were one homogeneal body respective to soul complexion an abundant proof is given in against the Saints perseverance and for their falling from grace Paul was not so enamoured with their beauty when he tells them that he is afraid of them and travells again in birth of them And whether he had such high thoughts of the Corinthians let sundry passages in his Epistles to them witnesse Great complexion spots may be seen 1 Cor. Chap. 3.3 Chap. 6.8 Chap. 11.18 19 21. Chap. 15.12 34. 2 Cor. 12.20 21. So that it is plain that in primitive times Jewes and Pagans being wrought upon by the Word heard and miracles seen to make profession of and engage to a Christian faith and life were upon that account received of which as some had hearts sincere towards Christ so many were otherwise Through the whole Scripture there is no demurre put to the Baptisme of any who made profession of the Name of Christ save Saul concerning whom Ananias being warned of God to go to him and conferre sight upon him being struck blind objects the evil that he had done to the Saints at Hierusalem and that he had at present authority from the Chief Priests to bind all that called on the Name of Christ Acts 9.13 14. And when he afterwards assayed to joyn himself to the disciples that were at Hierusalem they were all upon that account afraid of him Neither Ananias at Damascus nor the Church at Hierusalem did put his sincerity in grace to the question upon that account they might
baptized the Reader can scarce imagine this I impute to haste or passion preventing or obstructing the use of reason He must then blot out Christian nomine tenus and insert instead of it an Heathen Jew or Pagan otherwise he is already a baptized person and in incapacity for baptisme by the power of the Word preached brought to renounce his way of Paganisme Judaisme and to professe and engage to a Christian faith and conversation These are the men that I would have baptized and if we must account them to be dogs and swine all Scripture-baptizers are within the lash they have given baptisme to them That repentance as well as faith was required in baptisme appeares saith he by the ages following the Apostles yea and in the Apostles time likewise A profession of both was indeed required they that renounced heathen worship renounced heathen conversation with it They engaged to a Christian faith and they engaged to a Christian conversation Mr. F. addes For those who would live in their lusts they deferred their baptisme knowing what that required I have read of the deferring of baptisme in those times and the reasons assigned why they put it off But I have not met with this reason Mr. Marshall in his defence of Infant-Baptisme hath given many reasons why some put off baptisme Some to be baptized at the age that Christ was baptized Some to be baptized in the river where he was baptized Some to be baptized by some special Bishop of eminent place Some which it seems was most common because they conceived that it takes away all sin and therefore they would have it delayed till sin was well over for which he quotes many authorities Tertullian it appears would have it delayed upon this ground seeing he would not have unmarried persons baptized but to stay till lust were extinguished and disswading from baptisme in younger years he hath these words Quid festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum de baptis cap. 18. Yet perhaps some might delay it upon the account that he mentions though he quotes no authority for it but that Tertullian and Nazianzen intimate it one of whom was for delaying of baptisme in the place quoted the other against it as I find him cited But in case any did delay it upon the grounds by him mentioned might it not be their fault that did administer it in keeping the door too narrow as well as their sin who put off the time of it seeing Mr. F. himself complains of the rigour of some in New-England in holding men off from entrance into Church-fellowship by that door which is set up in the room and place of baptisme Mr. Firmin as well in his Serious question stated as in his Appendix against me vouches many authorities first Presbyterians instancing in his margine Lond. Min. Jus Div pag. 115. But in my book that page hath no such thing Gillespies Aarons Rod quoting many pages I can recompence him in setting up some of the Congregational way against him Mr. Gillesp will not have a known unregenerate man baptized But Mr. Cobbet saith John did and might lawfully baptize those multitudes albeit in the general he knew that many yea most of them would prove false and frothy And makes visibility of interest in the Covenant the Churches guide in application of Baptisme pag. 52. And how large a visibility of interest is is cleer and I have already shewen Let his words before quoted be considered and to these adde that which he hath pag. 54 55. The initiatory seal is not primarily and properly the seal of mans faith or repentance or obedience but of Gods Covenant rather The seal is to the Covenant even Abrahams Circumcision was not primarily a seal to his faith of righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of faith exhibited and offered in the Covenant yea to the Covenant it self or promise which he had believed unto righteousnesse hence the Covenant of grace is called the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. Hence Acts 2.38 39. the seal of baptisme is put to the promise as the choyce matter and foundation in view and as that was a ground of repentance it self Repent and be baptized for the promise is to you Not for you have repented as if that were the thing to be firstly sealed by baptisme but the promise rather Appendix pag. 57. Mr. Firmin quotes in the Lump the Fathers Councels School-men out of Gregory de Val. as if all were of that mind In his Serious question he quotes Austin Alexander Hales Aquinas Gregory de Valen. In his appendix Justin Martyr Concil Naeocesar Concil Nic. Concil Elib as strict in admission of their Catechumeni concerning which I might have much to say First How would he like it in other things to leave the clear rode and track of Scriptures to hunt after humane authorities If we can but say From the beginning it was not so In case the authorities were more in number more eminent in honour we have sufficient The Scripture-way taking in those that the Word had brought to a profession of Christianity upon engagement to it is as clear as though it were written with a ray of the Sun Secondly For Fathers and Schoolmen their opinion about Baptisme on which they ground the necessity of praerequisites to it is known and as he may quote them against me so I can quote them against him and those of his party They maintain and as unanimously as they do the thing in debate that Sacraments confer grace on the receiver in case he put no obstacle on which account they expect not grace in the person for baptisme which they believe not to be possible seeing the Sacrament is to work it but a convenient disposition to grace which they call merit ex congruo Let Suarez speak in the name of the rest having laid down this Proposition d Ut alicui digne detur baptismus praeter voluntatem suscipiendi Sacramentum necessaria est dispositio conveniens sanctitati Sacramenti That Baptisme may be worthily administred besides a willingnesse to receive the Sacrament a disposition suitable to the holinesse of the Sacrament is required And then answering the question What this disposition is he answers e Resp Eam sufficere necessariam esse quae ad consequendum effectum Baptismi fuerit sufficiens ac necessaria quia cum per baptismum detur gratia si aliquis est recte dispositus ad effectum baptismi consequendum in instanti quo receperit baptismum perfectum recipiet gratiam Ergo cum sufficienti dignitate sanctitate recipit Sacramentum Quia cum hoc sit Sacramentum mortuorum non est ad illud digne suscipiâ—ndum prae exigenda gratia ad quam conferendam ipsum est constitutum Ergo sufficiet illa dispositio cum qua Sacramentum conferet talem effectum That is necessary and sufficient which is necessary and sufficient to attain the effect of the Sacrament and gives
he calls the great question between him and me is no question at all It were madnesse to affirm that which with these limits he thus denyes Yet still I say that the Covenant which Baptisme seales is made with the unregenerate as well as regenerate persons which as we have heard he makes Mr. Tombe's error to deny And because the Covenant belongs to them Baptisme in like sort belongs to them and as upon that account we must baptize them so in foro Dei according to the mind of Jesus Christ they have right to Baptisme Which in case Mr. Baxter shall deny I shall desire him to reflect upon the afore-cited passages of his own together with that which pag. 65 of this Treatise he delivers If it be the whole matter of Christianity that is professed but dissembledly then as he is equivocally or analogically a believer or Christian so I yield he is a member of the Church visible And Church-membership is one of his own mediums to prove a right to Church-entrance by Baptisme and here is a Faith not above dogmatical At least short of that which is justifying and yet such a faith as is real having reall fruits and effects and sometimes reall miracles If the argument hold when it is thus enfeebled how much more when it is put in its full strength Such an one is univocally in Covenant whose dissimulation is no other then necessarily attends an unregenerate estate in case there be any thing in Scripture above equivocation They remembred that God is their Rock the high God their Redeemer Psal 78.34 And whereas I stand charg'd in this discourse by Mr. Baxter with several uncouth if not wild opinions and assertions about the Covenant and Mr. Baxter despairs as we have heard of understanding of my meaning I shall here endeavour as to vindicate so to explain my self in like manner that the Reader if not Mr. Baxter may be brought to a right understanding avoiding as much as may be both nicety and multiplicity 1. It is said that I suppose certain Promises to go before the great Law of Grace Those that suppose such saith he are of two sorts 1. The Arminians and Jesuites 2. Such as Mr. Bl. about Church-Ordinances And having spent many lines upon the Arminians to shew his dissent and assent so that the Reader may well have forgotten both me and my charge he saith 2. The Author vindicated from a fiction imposed The second part of promises before the great Covenant of Grace is feigned by Mr. Bl. and if there be any other that go that way as some do and that with some difference amongst themselves and that is a promise of Church-priviledges upon condition of a faith not justifying nor saving One that Mr. Baxter will not deny to be eminently learned and I think as well vers'd in his Writings and mine as any man alive Far better I believe then he in mine or I in his upon observation of this passage replyed as by addresse to him You rather feign this of Mr. Bl. then find it in him And I professe I know no man whose brain ever either hatch'd or vented such a crotchet Neither do I know how this mistake was ever entertained for I believe it was a mistake unlesse it be that taking for granted that there is no Covenant of grace entred with any out of the state of grace and finding that I assert that Church-Ordinances appertain to unregenerate Christians and those that are short of faith that is justifying he here fancies a promise of these made to a faith of this kind Whereas that which I say is That every acceptation of a Gospel-tender which tenders a man a Christian outwardly actually vests him in right to these Ordinances as it did the Jew outwardly Rom. 3.1 And that these Ordinances are necessarily requisite to bring men up to the fruition of those happy priviledges of Pardon Justification Adoption Glorification So that I conceit no promise of these Ordinances made to such a faith but an actual investiture of every such believer in them Neither do I know any promises preceding the Covenant of Grace Such must be made to meer Heathens or those that are in a parallel estate aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel Unlesse perhaps some such promise to some such upon some particular account may be found Yet if he can work me to be of his mind that Election Regeneration and the Covenant of Grace are commensurate so that no non-elect man is in Covenant then shall I say that there are Promises made before the Covenant The Apostle speaking of the Jews that for the generality of them were neither elect nor regenerate saith To them appertained the Covenants I may therefore charge it upon him with better reason then he upon me Those stand vested in promises that he sayes are out of Covenant The Promise is said to belong to those Jews Rom. 9.4 on whom yet the Word took no saving effect verse 6. Hence by opposition to the Gentiles they were those that were not strangers to the Church but of it They were not strangers to the Covenant of Promise but in the same Eph. 2.11 12. Hence God saith he maketh his Covenant with them all Deut. 29.10 12 13 14 15. speaking there of that solemn renewal of the Covenant of Grace as Deut. 30.6 10 12 13 14. compared with Rom. 10.6 7 8. evinceth So Ezek. 16.8 he made a Covenant with that Church and people many whereof proved very base as that Chapter sheweth Cobbet just vindicat pag. 46. Where much more to this purpose from many Texts of Scripture may be seen The Authour further vindicated I am farther charged that my common phrase is That they namely unregenerate men are in the outward Covenant with this note upon it what that is I cannot tell Who would not now think but that here were a phrase peculiarly mine Upon which the same learned hand as before expresseth himself in these words I do not see that that phrase is common with Mr. Bl. He rather useth it as from others which any may evidently see if they consult pag. 189 190. of my Treatise of the Covenant But of this I have spoke before and therefore his guesses upon it that he believes that it is called outward by reason of outward blessings annexed to it might have been spared They that use it expresse their own meaning The Covenant they say is but one and the same but all are not in the Covenant after one and the same manner Some are onely in it by outward profession to the present participation of outward priviledges but some by cordial acceptance to the enjoyment of saving benefits by means of these priviledges He sayes in the place quoted I should have thought it but reasonable for Mr. Bl. 1. To have told us what those outward blessings are that this Covenant promiseth But what need I to tell him when pag. 61. he hath told me that it is a
the Disciples of Christ for discovery of a Disciple in the former sense by their affections to him and suffering of affliction for him are of singular use Christ himself hath gone before us in it But upon the notation of the word because Christ gave the Bread and Cup to Disciples to make the subject of that Sacrament to be onely those that reach these markes is besides the holy Ghosts intention All outward Ordinances are for the Church in fieri and not onely in facto for the bringing of it on to Christ I should desire to know where any outward sensible Ordinance is made or how in reason and according to Scripture it can be made the proper peculiar right of invisible members SECT XI Proposition 9 THe Sacrament of the Supper no more then other Ordinances is not limited to those that have received a new life in Christ by the Spirit that are actually regenerate and in grace The Lords Supper is not limited to those that have received a new life by the Spirit others as they may be admitted without sin so they are in a capacity and possbility to receive benefit from it This I am not ignorant that some will question But let these consider before they censure First That it is an external Ordinance as hath been said Arguments a priviledge of the Church as visible put into the hands of those for edification that are not able to discern men of spiritual life and invisible interest And though there be characteristicall differnces whereby a man in grace and he that is short of it may be distinguished whereby all bad ground at the best may be differenced from that which is good yet they are such whereby a man is to make trial of himself onely they are Spirit-works and none knowes them in any man save the Spirit that is in him and therefore no marks for any others cognizance For a Minister of Christ to dispence by command the Sacrament to many when he knowes that it is of possible use and benefit to some few unto these it is food and nourishment unto life unto the others as Rats-bane Poyson and onely for death is such a snare that may hold him in his administration in all horror and amazement A fad dilemma either to lay aside an Ordinance of Christ and so never come up in his place to the whole of his duty or else to deliver to them that which will inevitably be the ruine and destruction of so many of them I know no possible way that can be supposed or so much as pretended for avoidance but in the Name of Christ to give warning to all in whom this new life by the Spirit is not to abstain every man and woman not actually regenerate on their peril to keep off Let them say some know their danger in the highest terms that can be uttered and then if they come their blood is on their own heads and the Minister of Christ hath by this means delivered his soul But to this I have three things to say 1. That it is as I suppose without all Scripture-precedent to warn men upon account of want of a new life by the Spirit wholly to keep off from this or any other Ordinance of Christ I know we must warn men of their sin and the judgement hanging over their heads for sin in which let it be our prayer that we may be more faithful but that we should warn men upon this account upon this very ground to hold off from all addresse to Ordinances I have not learnt 2. I say this doth presuppose that which is wont to be denyed unregenerate men to be in a capacity to examine themselves respective to this Ordinance How can we warn them upon want of justifying faith and the saving work of repentance to hold back when they are in an incapacity upon trial to find themselves thus wanting 3. Shall we not hereby pluck the thorne out of our own sides and as much as in us lyes thrust it into the sides of many of our hungry thirsty and poor in spirit people How many may we suppose are in grace through a work happily begun on their souls yet for several reasons are not able to see this grace or reach to any discovery of it Sometimes by reason of the infancy of the work upon their hearts being yet babes or rather embryo's in grace The first that appears upon light received is an army of lusts and potent corruptions as we know Paul sets it out This cloudes for present any other weak work that as yet in present is wrought In this time Satan is not wanting he did not shew so much artifice before to lessen their sin but he now makes use of as much to aggravate it and as he was industrious before to seduce now he is as busie to accuse He led the incestuous man to incontinency 1 Cor. 7.4 And we know Paul feares least upon continuance of the Church-censure he would gain advantage to swallow him up in overmuch sorrow 2 Cor. 2.8 11. These perhaps as yet are not able to give an account of the nature of faith and repentance or their genuine fruits much lesse are they able by a reflex act to conclude the truth of them in their souls Sometimes by reason of some sharpe conflict of temptation being under the shock and assault of it and therefore whatsoever they have seen of grace heretofore or the favour of God now it is under a cloud which I believe was Pauls case when a messenger of Satan was sent to buffet him and a thorne in the flesh given him seeing it is put in opposition to the abundance of revelations that he had being taken up into the third heavens 2 Cor. 12. and therefore had need of Ordinances for support Sometimes on a soyle received by temptation of which his own heart and not the Church is witnesse and therefore is at a losse of the joy of his salvation and stands in need of strength for recovery Sometimes by over-much sloath and rust contracted on his graces through negligence which is supposed to be the case of the spouse indulging her self too much in carnal ease Cant. 5.2 I have put off my coat how shall I put it on I have washed my feet how shall I defile them Sometimes God out of prerogative withdrawing the rayes of his Spirit and refusing to testifie with our spirits in which case the soul that is most upright with God and sincere in his feare walks in darknesse and sees no light in which there is need of all communications from God and attendance upon him in Ordinances When these shall hear all in whom the work of grace is not in truth thus warned to keep back and told of the high danger of approaching to this Table in such away aggravated will not they put in their name and say their souls are now spoke to They must therefore absent themselves and so the smoaking flax is quenched
in whom by faith remission of sins may be obtained I know but that it is a signe either that we do believe or that we have remission of sin otherwise then upon our believing to which this engages but not presupposes I know not Simon Magus had not Baptisme to signifie that all his sins were forgiven but that by faith in the Name of Christ he might be forgiven Mr. Cobbet sayes well Vindication pag. 54. The initiatory seal which holds true of the other seal is not primarily and properly the seal of mans faith or repentance or obedience but of Gods Covenant rather the seal is to the Covenant even Abrahams Circumsion was not primarily a seal to Abrahams faith of righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of faith exhibited and effected in the Covenant yea to the Crvenant it self or promise which had believed unto righteousnesse hence the Covenant of grace is called the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. I confesse it is a symbole of our profession of faith but this is not the faith spoken to neither is remission of sins annext unto it Secondly That which necessarily supposeth conversion and faith doth not work conversion and faith But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper supposeth conversion and faith The Minor is proved Mar. 16.16 Act. 2.38 Act. 8.36 37. ver 41. Act. 10.4.7 All which texts are spoken of Baptisme and not of the Lords Supper To that text Mar. 16.16 I have spoken fully Treatise of the Covenant pag. 243. To that Act. 8.36 37. I have spoken pag. 244. To that of Act. 2.38 I have spoken pag. 396. and ther is no need that I should repeat what I have said For Act. 2.41 They that gladly received his Word were baptized It speaks no more then ready acceptation of the tender of the Gospel and whether this necessarily implyes saving faith let Ezek. 33.31 Matth. 13.20 21. Gal. 4.15 be consulted For Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the holy Ghost as well as we it proves that men of gifts from the Spirit have title such gifts gave Judas a title not onely to baptisme but Apostleship such a faith may be had and sanctification wanting Thirdly That which gives us new food supposeth that we have the new birth and Spiritul life and that we are not still dead in trespasses and sins But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper gives us new food Ergo. Ans 1. Metaphors are ill materials to make up into syllogismes 2. A difference may be put between ordinary food and living and quickening food It may be true of the former but not of the latter 3. The Word as well as the Sacrament gives us new food 1. Pet. 2.2 and yet presupposeth not new life If any reply that the Word is more then food it is seed as well as food and it gives not new life as food but as seed I answer that the Sacrament is more then food There is a Sacramental work preceding our taking and eating which some say may be done to edification and profit by those that are not admitted to be partakers where they divide I may distinguish and there Christ is set forth to the aggravation of sin to carry on the work of contrition and compunction Fourthly That Ordinance which is instituted onely for believers and justified persons is no converting but a sealing Ordinance But this Sacrament is instituted onely for believers and justified persons The Minor is proved Circumcision was a seal of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4.17 much more then Baptisme and if Baptisme much more the Lords Supper Ans Upon this account it must needs follow that as Abraham was a justified man so Ishmael was justified also who according to the mind of God and in obedience to his commands was circumcised Gen. 17.23 yea every Proselyte that joyned himself to Israel and every male in Israel according to this Interpretation must be justified 2. Howsoever Abraham was a justified person yet his Circumcision in that place is not made a proof of his justification but a distinct text of Scripture Gen. 15.16 quoted by the Apostle ver 3. And that Scripture setting out his justification to be by faith and not by works the Apostles words onely shew that the Sacrament of Circumcision sealed the Covenant not of works but of faith so that Mr. Cobbets words quoted in answer to the first argument are a full answer here Fifthly The Apostle argues that Abraham the Father of the faithful and whose justification is a pattern of ours was not justified by Circumcision Circumcision was not the cause but the sign of his justification Therefore no Sacrament is a cause of our justication Ans Though animadversions might be made on these words yet if any will put them into form I shall grant the conclusion when I say the Sacrament as an Appendix to the Word may have its influence with the word upon a professor offaith to work him to the truth of faith I am far from saying it is any cause of justification I look on faith no otherwise then as an instrument in the work and the Sacrament as an help and not the principal to the work of faith Sixthly There is an argument drawn from the necessity of examination which before hath received an answer Seventhly That Ordinance unto which none may come without a wedding garment is no converting Ordinance But the Supper of the Lord the marriage feast of the Kings Son is an Ordinance unto which a man may not come without a wedding argument Ans 1. Arguments drawn from parables must be used with all tendernesse But in this Argument here is much boldnesse to make this Ordinance that marriage-feast 2. We shall find if we look to the scope of it that this feast is the fruition of Christ in his Kingdom as appears by those words that give occasion to the Parable of the Supper Luk. 14.15 And when one of them that sate at meat with him heard these things he said unto him Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God Now those that pretend a forwardnesse towards it and are not prepared and fitted for it according to the scope of the Parable shall be cast out from it This therefore may fairly prove that none that appear in Ordinances and yet remaine in their sins shall come to heaven But it no more proves that a man cannot get saving good by this Ordinance then it proves that a man cannot get saving good by the Word The VVord may lay as fair a claime to this wedding feast as the Lords Supper Eighthly That Ordinance which is not appointed to work faith is no converting Ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not appointed to work faith Ergo. The Assumption is proved Rom. 10.14 Faith cometh by hearing hearing by the Word of God then not by seeing if by the Word then not by the Sacrament Ans If faith comes by hearing will
it therefore follow that hearing can receive no help from but must exclude seeing Did the Bereans when they had heard the Apostles yet nothing towards faith by their search of the Scriptures Act. 17.11.12 or did they not make use of their eyes in the search that they made When Christ had Preached to the Jewes not yet in the faith and commended to them the search of the Scriptures Joh. 5.39 can we think that this search could be no step in their way of believing Why were miracles wrought if they were of no use to the work of faith f What comment shall we make on those words Joh. 2.23 Many believed in his Name when they saw the miracles that were done If the Word do work faith it will by no means follow but that it may take in assistance by miracles and Sacraments by signes extraordinary and ordinary That consequence if by the Word then not by the Sacrament will never hold till the VVord and Sacrament are proved to be opposite and not subordinate Ninthly That Ordinance which hath neither the promise of the grace of conversion annext unto it or any example in the Word of God of any converted by it is no converting Ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper hath no such promise of the grace of conversion neither is there such an example Ergo. Answ For Examples though we could give instances of men being converted by receiving of the Lords Supper yet it would still be denyed to have any possible influence towards conversion as the last Argument is an evident witnesse We bring Examples of men that have been brought to the faith by seeing and yet it is still denyed that fight can be any help towards it And though we could bring a promise of such grace annext yet we should have little hopes to be heard or heeded seeing we can bring a Promise of blessednesse to reading which is by sight as to hearing Rev. 3. Blessed is he that readeth and they that hear the words of this Prophecy 2. We have as many examples of mens conversion by the Sacrament as we have of their receiving strength and nourishment If one may be asserted without an example then then other likewise 3. We have no particular precedents by name except at first institution of any that were Communicants and therefore we cannot expect examples of conversion or receiving of strength by communicating 4. The examples of conversion by the Word perhaps well examined would prove short of such conversion as here is intended The conversion in Gospel narratives is to a Christian profession A man may evince calling thence but not elctdion and this is the work of the Word without the Sacrament seeing it must precede the receiving of the Sacrament As to that of no promise made to it 1. When the adversary shall bring a promise made to the Sacrament for Spiritual strength it will happily be found of an equal force to the giving of a new life 2. Though we have no promise explicite and expresse yet we have promises implicite and virtual Every promise made to the Word is made to the Sacrament The Sacrament being not opposite but subordinate to it an appendant that receives strength from it Tenthly That Ordinance whereof Christ would have no unworthy person to partake is not a converting Ordinance But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance whereof Christ would have no unworthy person to partake Ergo. The Minor is proved 1 Cor. 11.27 Answ This Argument well followed will take off every Ordinance from that honour of conversion as well as this of the Lords Supper seeing many Texts may be produced equally calling for qualifications for them as for this equally shewing the danger of unworthy addresses As to this for hearing the Word see 1 Pet. 2.1 2. Wherefore laying aside all malice and all guile and hypocrisies and envies and all evill speakings as new-burn babes desire the sincere milk of the Word that ye may grow thereby Jam. 1.21 Wherefore lay apart all filthinesse and superfluity of naughtinesse and receive with meeknesse the engraffed Word which is able to save your soules Is not the Word a favour of death unto death to such 2 Cor. 2.14 15 16. Shall i. not be more tolerable for Tyre and Zidon then for them Matth. 11.24 For prayer to God see James 1.6 7. But let him ask in faith nothing wavering for he that wavereth is like a wave of the Sea driven with the wind and tossed for let not that man think he shall receive any thing of the Lord 1 Tim. 2.8 I will therefore that men pray every where lifting up holy hands without wrath and doubting Good will never be had by such mens prayers Esay 1.15 And when ye spread forth your hands I will hide mine eyes from you when ye make many prayers I will not hear your hands are full of blood Zach. 7.13 Therefore it is come to passe that he cryed and they would not hear so they cryed and I would not hear saith the Lord of Hosts Shall we now say that neither Word nor prayer is a converting Ordinance But perhaps it will be said Men unworthy must hear must pray to be made worthy must come in unconversion to be converted But they must bring worthinesse hither or else this can have no hand in making worthy they must bring conversion or else this cannot convert This is a begging of the question And as to prayer there is no more ground or colour to make it a converting Ordinance then the Supper we must pray in faith before we can pray with acceptance of our persons and so must the Word be mixt with faith when we hear it Heb. 4.2 Eleventhly That Ordinance which is eucharisticall and consolatory supposeth such that partake of it to have part and portion in that thing for which thanks is given and are such as are fit to be comforted But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance eucharisticall and consolatory Ergo. Answ And might not the Assumption as well have been That the Word and Prayer are Ordinances eucharistical and consolatory I hope none will deny the Gospel our good tydings to be eucharistical and consolatory nor yet thanksgiving which is a branch of prayer And then in case the Proposition be of universal truth both Word Prayer and Lords Supper are excluded from any power of conversion The Proposition then must be understood with limit and restriction That Ordinance which in whole and in part is eucharistical and consolatory can have no hand in conversion and then though perhaps exception might be taken at it it had colour in it But then the Assumption That this Ordinance is in whole and in part eucharisticall and consolatory must be denyed It is for humbling heart-breaking as it is comforting There we shew forth Christs death and see him broken for sin and it is no matter of consolation but humiliation and horrour to see our soules under that guilt that brought upon Christ a
almost forgotten and looked upon as a Ceremony antiquated and obsolete Christian prudence should interpose and discern a mean between both To quicken and put us on against this last of which the most had need instead of a Book of Canons Directions for our guidance about it or compulsory Lawes Let us 1. Affect our soules with an ardent love of Christ and then we shall not be so slack in celebration of this memorial of him We will keep up the memory of an endeared friend this way Christ hath commended to endear his memory to us If love be such as it ought we shall not desire that it be seldome if it may be possibly often Peter had it three times in charge from Christ to feed his Lambs to feed his sheep how often he must preach Christ he is not told that is left to his love If thou lovest me feed my sheep Love would not let him be slothfull 2. Let us take into consideration our own necessities of which here we may have supplyes first our want of humiliation and heart-breaking how slight and overly is all our feeling and sense of sin if let alone are we not in danger to grow past feeling which was the case of the Heathen when they had arrived at the greatest height of wickednesse Ephes 4.19 Here is an hammer for that purpose when once the Law hath discovered by the light that is given that we have sinned No way to this for the aggravation of it Here we see Gods detestation of sin that would not spare it in his onely Son as he spared not the Angels that sinned but having no Mediatour to bear it for them they bore the punishment of it in their own persons so he spared not his own Son when he had taken upon him our sin Here we see the desert of sin in all those torments which Christ bore for us If we would know sin and be sensible of wrath study the Sacrament the dead soul may be here awakened Secondly our spiritual weaknesses and wants which I shall set out in Mr. Pembles words Let them look inward and see how great need they have of many and often confirmations of their faith renovations of their repentance of stirring up the graces of God in their soules to adde an edge an eagernesse to all spiritual affections after holinesse to get unto themselves the most powerfull provocations unto obedience Every one that hath grace knowes how frequently the power thereof is impaired by temptations weakened by wordly distractions even of our lawful employment and over-mastered by the force of sinful lusts so that they must needs discover a great deal of ignorance in their spiritual estate that feel not in their own soules a pronenesse to astonishment as well in their soules as in their bodies at least they bewray intolerable carelesnesse that finding the emptinesse and leannesse of their soules yet neglect to repair often to this holy Table whereon is set forth the bread of life whereof when they have eaten their spirit may come again 1 Sam. 31.12 their hearts may be strengthened their soules may be replenished as with marrow and fatnesse These considerations may quicken our appetites after this spiritual food And such a meal extraordinary with the help of our ordinary refreshments in hearing prayer and meditation may carry us on more then 40 dayes towards our heavenly Mansion That we hasten not too fast on the other hand Let us take into consideration our inabilities for a suitable preparation and fitnesse for addresse to this Ordinance we have fasted so long in course that we have scarce known what humiliation of our soules in fasting is yea some would be every day at â—t as we can rise in our spirits to the extraordinary weight of it and fit our soules with suitable preparations for it These that I have named are the best gages that I know to regulate us in it that in over-eager haste in duties extraordinary we do not run our selves out of breath nor in over-much sloth give our selves over to faintnesse and leannesse SECT III. A Corollary from the former Doctrine Men called to the Sacrament may not othewise then upon weighty reasons absent themselves from it THen it will follow by way of necessary inference from this consideration of the necessity of Sacraments that When Sacraments are dispensed Christians should see weighty reasons such in which they may have confidence that they will bear them out at the day of Judgment for their omission of them This duty is in the number of affirmative precepts which alwayes bind A man is never from under the obligation of that Precept Do this in remembrance of me though it doth not bind to all times A man is not to be ever in the doing of it and he is never to be found in the neglect of it Loco tempore debitis in due time and place they must be done A journey would have dispensed with a man for absence from the Passeover so it will when necessity of a mans calling makes it necessary from the Lords Supper so also will sicknesses imprisonments or like providences But when the servant comes and calls and sayes All things are made ready then take thou heed how thou makest excuses They that were called to the wedding Feast might have pleaded that other businesses lay upon them that they could not alwayes attend weddings But when the King sends and sayes All is ready come there is no time for other occasions td be lookt after It were an endlesse work to find out the reasons that men frame for absenting themselves Excuses for absence from the Lords Table removed Some see that it is a duty above them neither their knowledge nor their life doth answer to that which is required in a Communicant and so despair of coming up to it and therefore keep off lest they should as they fear encrease their judgment In case these speak out of a serious consideration of the work with a sad reflexion on themselves upon a diligent scrutiny into their hearts and wayes and so take a day over for it and in the mean time digge for knowledge as for hid treasures and do strengthen their resolutions to withstand all temptations to sin they are by all meanes to be encouraged and holpen every Christian of strength should commiserate these weak soules But in case they clearly see all to be so as we have said and resolve to let all alone as a man that sees himself near to a bankrupt regards not whether end goes forward This is then a sad and saddening reason It lyes upon these to take their state and condition into further consideration that by the good hand of God it may be better with them To provoke these to further care of their eternal state I shall put to them these questions First What is it that thou dost respective to other duties The excuse of unfitnesse examined the duty of
are likewise seals where there are like Sacramental expressions notwithstanding they have no such name in Scripture And as the Apostle infers from the institution of Circumcision and Abrahams acceptation of it that Circumcision was a seal so may we infer in like manner that other Sacraments are signs and seals Compare that which the Apostle here deduceth from Gen. 17. concerning Abrahams Circumcision with that which may be deduced from Acts 8.34 35. concerning the Eunuchs Baptisme Abraham believed and was justified upon believing and then received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the righteousnesse of faith which he had being uncircumcised And the Eunuch did believe on Philips preaching and afterwards received Baptisme May we not well then say He received the sign of Baptisme a seal of the righteousnesse that he had being yet unbaptized so we may say of Pauls Baptisme and the Jaylours upon their miraculous conversion to the faith they received the sign of Baptisme for the same reason Secondly It is demanded whether the Covenant of grace and promises of salvation be compleat valid and firm in themselves Object without these things annexed to them or whether they be meerly void and null in Law as Kings and mens Deeds and Charters without a seal to confirm them If incompleat infirm and invalid this is extreamly derogatory to the Covenant and therefore they are not properly seals Answ 1. Sol. If there be some dissimilitude between civill seals used by men in Charters and conveyances and seals of God put to his Covenant will it then follow that upon that account they are no seals There are dissimilitudes between the Ambassadors of Princes and the Ministers of Christ respective to their functions are Ministers then no Ambassadors There is difference between servants of men and servants of God are Christians then no servants Sacraments are seals by way of metaphor because they do the office that seals do among men and if they do not per omnia quadrare as no metaphors do yet in case they agree in the main for which that serves from whence the metaphor is borrowed it is sufficient Ministers are fitly called Ambassadors being sent of God to treat from him with a people as Ambassadors are sent of Princes notwithstanding that those to whom Ambassadours come may treat or not treat at pleasure may give in Propositions as well as receive them when they to whom Gods Ministers are sent must give audience must take the Propositions delivered and not stand to Capitulate If Sacraments ratifie to us the promises of the Covenant That is enough to denominate them seales though wit could devise twenty differences And yet I read some differences assigned which I confesse I do not understand to be any differences at all 2. I know not that it is absolutely true in Law that mens grants are void altogether without a seal I have heard of Leases parol and Wills nuncupative which I am sure have no seal And seales sometimes by the injury of time are utterly broke and lost and in this case I suppose the Covenant may yet stand 3. What is objected against this office of Sacraments as seales may also be objected against the oath of God made to Abraham for confirmation of his Word That will admit the dilemma Either his Word of Promise was true and firm without it or else which I am loath to speak subject to change The application is easie The same thing was revealed to Pharaoh in a dream for seven years plenty and seven years famine by a double sign If there was truth in one we may argue the second needs not if untrue neither have cause to be heeded or regarded If we will undertake such kind of reasonings we should make no end 4. The Covenant is compleat full firm and valid in case we should never more then once hear it or never have any seal put to it nor any oath for confirmation yet our unbelief and distrust is such that we need ingeminations inculcations oaths seals and all from God to uphold us Object Thirdly It is yet demanded whether these seales are inseparably annexed to the Covenant and promises of grace in the Old or New Testament as parts or parcels of them as seales are annexed To the Charter If yea then shew us to what Covenants and Promises and in and by what Texts they are thus inseparably annexed and how any can be saved or made partakers of the benefit of the Covenant and promises of grace who do not actually receive these seales of grace when as your selves with all Orthodox Divines must grant that many who were never baptized and infinite who never received the Lords Supper are and may be saved and are made partakers of the Covenant and promises of grace without receiving or enjoying these seales of grace If no then how can these be termed seales of the Covenant and promises of grace which are not inseparably affixed to them as seales are to Charters since many receive the Covenant and promises of grace without these seales and other receive these seales without the Covenant or promises the benefit whereof they never enjoy Answ They are inseparably joyned respectu praecepti Sol. as being enjoyned of God and here all the Texts brought to prove the Sacraments not arbitrary but necessary may be brought in to witnesse though not so respectu medii The Covenant may have its effect without them The Covenant is intire in it self without them They are not inseparable quoad esse yet they have their necessity though not simple and absolute quoad operari for the Covenant to have its due work on our hearts God saw them necessary helpful and useful and therefore gave them in charge as many Scriptures witnesse and we of necessity must submit to them in order to obtain the end to which they serve and for which they are designed and appointed SECT II. Rules for a right understanding of Sacramental Seales FIrst These are outward visible seales Explicatory Propositions touching the sealing of Sacraments and priviledges of visible Churches and Church-membership committed to the Stewards of God in his house to dispense and apply to their people And so different from that other seal of God frequently mentioned the seal of the Spirit which is internal invisible proper onely to the elect regenerate reserved in the hand of God according to prerogative to give That these are external and visible needs no more then our eyes and that they are the priviledg of visible Churches and Church-members sufficient hath been spoken And therefore they both agree in the general nature of a seal both are for ratification and confirmation of the truth of Gods promises yet in a different way and different latitude They have the former that never reacht the latter and the former is serviceable to attain to the latter Secondly They are seales not to confirm any truth of God in it self or to work in us any assent to general Scripture-Propositions But
conclusion with me is de fide when it is concluded 4. He saies I must have better proof before I can believe that it is assurance of our own sincerity or actual justification which the Apostle calls the full assurance of faith Heb. 10.22 And I think he is the first man amongst orthodox Divines that hath doubted that assurance of acceptance is meant in that place Faith is that grace say the last Annotations whereby we either do or may approach unto God with full assurance of acceptance Is not that boldnesse in our addresses mentioned ver 19. an evident symptome of it And is not sincerity fet forth in those words having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water as the basis or bottome of it not of our acceptance but of our assurance I must hear somewhat more before I can question it There followes 5. And as hardly can I discern assurance of our sincerity in the description of faith Heb. 11.1 unlesse you mean that hope is part of faith and assurance the same with hope both which need more proof Hope may be without assurance and when it is joyned with it yet is not the same thing onely such assurance is a singular help to the exercise of hope And can you not discern a double encomium of faith in those words The first with respect to things past and present as well as things to come where it is said to be The evidence of things not seen Faith makes that evident which otherwise would not be known The other respective to things to come and that not evil but onely good not things feared but hoped expressed in these words Faith is the substance of things hoped for both of them rather expressing what faith does then what faith is and I know not why that speech of hope should be brought in here when it is onely said that the good things hoped for are that which faith realizes to the soul It is said further 6. It is true that faith may be said as you speak to realize salvation to the soul that is when the soul doubteth whether there be indeed such a glory and salvation to be expected and enjoyed by believers as Christ hath promised ere faith apprehendeth it as real or certain and so resolves the doubt And is this all that faith can possibly do and for which this high praise is here given unto it Against this I say First This was expressed in the former branch the evidence of things not seen faith believes a heaven as well as a creation Secondly a faith short of justifying may do this an historical faith assents to the highest dogmatical truthes Thirdly will you have the full assurance of hope Heb. 6.11 to be no other then to get assurance that there is a heaven though we shall never come to heaven which would be a contradiction for hope hath possession in expectation Fourthly doth not our hope enter into that within the vail whither our forerunner is gone before us Heb. 6.19 and are we not saved by hope Rom. 8.24 Faith then being said to be the substance of things hoped for it doth not barely tell us that there is a heaven that is too lank and lean a commendation of it but the office of it is to realize the possession of it to us It followes But when the doubt is whether I be a true believer saith resolves it not Faith hath its hand in the resolving of this doubt in believing from the Scriptures what are the Symptomes or cognizances of true believing and gathering them up by reflex upon it self It followes And when the doubt is whether this certain glory and salvation shall be mine faith onely cooperateth to the resolve of it by affording us one of the propositions but not both and not wholly the conclusion If faith affords us one of the propositions and findes the other in the Scriptures that is to me sufficient It followes 7. I am of Dr. Amesius his mind that it is one of faiths most eminent acts by which it is there described But undoubtedly you were not so in your sixth animadversion when you left it so low as we have heard and made it no more then the faith of wicked men may reach There is added But so think not they that tell us that is none of the instrumental justifying act which is there described But doubtlesse they may very well think so This here mentioned is a more eminent work of faith then that of justifying as a child on a Giants head is further removed from the earth and nearer the clouds then the Giant himself Faith that gives assurance presupposeth the justifying act already done by it self and addes more to it when a man believes savingly there is Certitudo objecti he that believes shall be saved but this here mentioned is Certitudo subjecti when the good hoped for is assured to the soul If there be any other promise made of God for good this work of faith I confesse takes it in and I do not believe that the Apostle doth limit this work of faith to the hope of salvation but I am sure he doth not exclude it that being the chiefest thing in our hope that is undoubtedly chiefly intended and might well by me be mentioned It followes 8. This which you took to be a good answer is that great mistake which hath so hardened the Papists against us and were it not for this point I should not have desired much to have said any thing to you of the rest about conditional sealing as being confident that we mean the same thing in the main If that be that great mistake I am still in the mistake and you are the first man that ever went about to rectifie it but you herein fail that you shew not wherein the mistake lies Those Divines that deny faith to be assurance that were as much as to define a man by such excellencies that are to be found in few men and so to exclude the common pitch of men from the species of mankind do not yet deny but that faith may attain to assurance It followes 9. You forsake them that use to give this answer when you confine it to those onely that with assured grounds and infallible demonstrations can make it good to themselves that they believe i. e. savingly I think that they as well as I confine it to those that you here mention It followes I doubt that answer then will hold but to very few if you mean by assured grounds c. such as they are actually assured are good and demonstrative I believe that strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth to life and few there be that find it There are not many we may fear that do savingly believe and many of those are not yet assured that they do believe and to this Mr. Baxter hath spoke abundantly sufficient in his Saints rest It followes 10. Demonstrations
his businesse to take off Christians from their resort to the Idols temples to eat there of that which had been offered in sacrifice which they judged to be within the verge of their liberty An Idol being nothing in the world tells them that as joyning with Jewes in their sacrifice offered on the Altar did declare them to be one body with the Jewes and eating of the Sacramental bread did make them one body Christian so also going to the Heathens sacrifices did evidence them to be one body Heathen The Apostle as we see Rom. 1.5 thought no understanding man would question it we must therefore readily yeeld it which holds true of the Passeover seeing onely the circumcised who were in saith Jewes were to be admitted do it Exod. 12.48 And this I suppose is that which Reverend Gataker means opposing that tenent that the Sacraments conferre grace by the work done where there is no barre put and having quoted testimonies of Bishop Abbot Calvin and Whitaker sharpely enough declaring themselves against it adds That for the axiome it self I will not contend about it if that effect of the Sacraments be understood for which they were instituted of God and the Word be taken in a more large sense for all that whatsoever it be that may be any impediment that the Sacraments cannot have their effect Though perhaps in these words of his he had some other intentions It were an endlesse labour to lanch out into the controversie and to gather up the various opinions of those of a contrary judgment and their different thoughts to make good their tenents whether of those that deny Sacraments to be Seales as generally the Papists whom Anabaptists in this follow at the heels as in most other things both about the Covenant and Sacraments Or Lutherans who yeelding them to be seales as well as signes yet affirim that these are lesse principal offices and uses of Sacraments the chief end is to be instruments of conveyance of grace to the soul Or dissenting brethren among Protestants some of them falling in with Popish Schoolmen wholly closing with their tenent that Sacraments conferre grace where no bar is put to hinder their working or others that hold it with limit onely to Baptisme and that to elect children not daring to put reprobates into a state of regeneration or remission of sin nor yet to assert that the elect are alwayes thus regenerate in Baptisme But that it holds so in ordinary Or of some that I have met with in discourse that suppose that Baptisme hath his work in those elect infants where God foresees that death will prevent their regeneration by the Word or others that say that God works by Baptisme to regeneration and forgivenesse of sin but according to pleasure they dare not assign to whom Some of these I judge to be more evidently opposite to the Scripture then others yet I confesse I see not foundation in the Word for any of them These that are thus agreed that the Sacraments as instruments conferre grace without respect had to the receivers faith yet are at odds among themselves what manner of instruments they are He that pleases may read in Suarez disput 9. quaest 62. art 4. Sect. 2. six several opinions about it some will have them to be no efficient but material causes onely as a dish conveying a medicine is no cause of health but a material instrument onely of conveyance Others hold that they conferre grace per modum impetrationis because the Minister and the Church obtaines of God by prayer grace by them Others say that they are conditions without which God gives not grace Others yet say that the Sacraments are causes of grace because when they are applyed they move God to conferre it As we say they work by way of sign on our understanding so they say they work by way of sign with God moving him to remember his promise Others say they conferre grace because God in a more special manner appears in them as a principal agent or efficient which my Authour complaines is very obscure But he that will consult the Authour of this opinion which is Henricus à Gandavo Quod. quart quaest 37. may find much against any power in the Sacraments to conferre or to speak in his language to create grace in the soul creation being solely the prerogative of God and above the power of any creature to be assistent in it yet lest he should run upon an heresy against the determination of the Catholick Church in making them no more then signs and seals he is put upon it to come off thus blewly that Suarez with all his high wit cannot find out his meaning Suarez himself concludes that they are Physical instruments in the conveyance of grace and that they are causes of grace because by a true Physical action they concur to the sanctification of men Having with much adoe endeavoured to prove a possibility of their working of grace in a Physicall way he concludes that this is their way of working and that not barely in working some disposition towards grace not reaching grace it self nor yet in working an union only of grace with the soul But in the most proper and rigorous sense Sacraments Physically work grace the very Physicall action by which Grace is wrought and drawn out of the obediential power of the soul truly really and Physically depending on the Sacraments which he judges to be most agreeable to the dignity of the Sacraments the phrases of Scripture and Councels and Fathers about them But it might pitty the Reader to see how miserably he comes off with this assertion of his only telling us that the Scripture sayes we are cleansed sanctified or regenerate of water or the laver of regeneration and washing of water in the Word of life without the least light given us to let us understand that these phrases must be taken in his Physical sense meaning adding some sentences of Fathers who ordinarily give that in their writings to the sign which is proper to the thing signified finding yet opposite sentences in them that much troubles him in which in an orthodox way they explain themselves sufficiently against his position In case in this position of his of the Physicall working of Sacraments he had only understood that they work according to the nature of the office and place assigned unto them there might have been just cause to have subscribed to his judgment It is of the nature of a sign to hold forth to us the thing signified of a relative symbole to ingage to the filling up of such a relation It is of the nature of a seal to confirm every grant past in Covenant but to give a Physicall power to those elementary substances to create Grace in or confer grace upon the soul is a monstrous tenent A little Philosophy will accquaint us with the natural properties of water and as applyed in washing experience will soon discover it The
with the washing of water by the Word that he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing but that it should be holy without blemish Ephe. 5.25 26 27. As the spot is taken off by his Spirit in working new principles in us and working us up to new obedience so the guilt is removed by his sufferings He blots out their transgressions for his Names sake He remembers them no more He hides his face from them He casts them into the bottom of the sea removes them as far as the East is from the West He doth not one of these to leave the other undone He vouchsafes purifying and he vouchsafes pacifying grace He delivers from the wrath to come and he makes meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light He conferres habitual graces and he honours with relative priviledges Fifthly These may be distinguished Blood and Spirit may be distinguished but must not be divided but they must by no means be divided Christ doth not impart his merit where he doth deny his Spirit We account it a great presumption in men of years to talke of justification and want sanctification and we can say to such If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his God writes his Law in the heart and puts it into the inward parts where he remembers sin no more Jer. 31.33 They are quickened together with Christ that have their trespasses forgiven them Col. 2.13 And it is an unwarrantable conceit to imagine that relative priviledges of adoption and pardon of sin are conferred on infants in Baptisme or otherwise when their natures remain still the same and unchanged who can think that God fits all of age for glory that he takes into glory and yet takes infants into glory their impurity and birth-defilement continuing Seeing that we have instances as of Gods love of infants Rom. 9.13 of Christs blessing of them Matth. 19.16 so also of the gift of his Spirit Jer. 1.5 Luk. 1.15 In case the former may be avoided yet certainly the later is above exception The reason given by Christ of that sentence of his holding forth an absolute necessity of regeneration Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God is the pollution of the first birth as appears by his own words ver 6. inferred immediately upon the repetition of the former That which is born of the flesh is flesh and this is of equal concernment to infants and men of years uncleannesse of birth as well as uncleannesse of life stands as a barre to our entrance into heaven and no unclean person must enter there Sixthly The Sacraments especially those of initiation whether in the old or new Covenant about which concerning this in question there is most dispute The Sacraments especially those of initiation have respeâ—t to both of these havo respect to this whole work both of the change of our nature and the removal of our guilt As the have respect to the one so also to the other and that the whole of their work and the way how it is wrought may be better understood we are to consider that First Somewhat is hinted and implyed in those respective signs of Circumcision and Baptisme and that is our uncleannesse in nature and guilt contracted upon it Why should either infant or man of years have the foreskin of his flesh in that way by Divine appointment cut off but to let us understand the propagation of corruption and derivation of it from man to posterity Why should water be applyed which is of an abstersive cleansing faculty but to let us know that there is uncleannesse to be removed Cleansing for that which is clean is vain and needlesse As Sacrifices for atonement did imply wrath so this cleansing implyes filth and consequently guilt filth and guilt being inseparable Secondly Somewhat is signified and taught us in them somewhat the bare signs themselves are apt to signifie viz. That the taking off of the staine and the removal of our guilt is to be done by anothers power Why is this applyed by another hand but to let us know that it is above our strength Somewhat not the signes of themselves but the Word of the Covenant that is annext teaches and that is That the blood of Christ removes this guilt and that the Spirit of Christ takes away this stain This the signes of themselves could never shew but the words of the Covenant abundantly do demonstrate that remission of guilt is the work of the blood of Christ and Regeneration or Sanctification the work of the Spirit That the water in Baptisme holds out the Spirit unto us for Sanctification and change of our wayes is that I know denyed by none and in the Scripture it is plain I will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed Deut. 30.6 Circumcision is that of the heart Rom. 2.29 which by the Apostle Col. 2.11 is interpreted the putting off the body of the sins of the flesh Baptisme is the same as to the signification as we see in the same place from the Apostle Col. 2.11 12 13. In whom ye are also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ buried with him in Baptisme wherein ye are also risen with him through the faith of the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead and you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickned together with him having forgiven all your trespasses And this death to sin and life in grace are both from the Spirit Rom. 8.11 12 13. and both of these Baptisme holds out to us Rom. 6.4 We are buried with him by Baptisme into his death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father even so we also should walk in newnesse of life But whether the blood of Christ be at all signified by this element of water some have questioned Sticking so rigidly to that phrase of the Apostle Tit. 3.5 that they will not alone have it understood of Baptisme but they will have nothing else looked after in Baptisme but the work of regeneration But this doubtlesse is a clear mistake The blood that was shed in circumcision gave the circumcised to understand that the guilt propagated could not without blood be remitted And if any think that this is too dark and obscure a proof of a Mystery of this weight let them compare with it the text under hand and the Apostles scope and aime in it which as we have heard is to shew that Abrahams circumcision was not his justification seeing he was justified by faith in his state of uncircumcision and that he received circumcision as a sign and seal of it justification is by blood Rom. 3.25 Circumcision is a sign and seal of justification Righteousnesse of
faith is not Sanctification Sanctification is inherent the righteousnesse of faith is imputed but circumcision is a sign and seal of the righteousnesse of faith And that Baptisme signifies and seals the same thing we find expressely in Peters words Ast. 2.38 Be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins Remission of sins is by blood Heb. 9.22 Without shedding of blood there is no remission Baptisme is for remission of sins and therefore the water in Baptisme holds out the blood of Christ And I doubt not but Ananias had respect to this in his speech to Paul Act. 22.16 Rise and be baptized and wash away thy sins Somewhat it is to which these signs engage and that is all unto which a Christian in duty as duty stands engaged whether for his change in heart or life or in order to the pardon of his sin Baptisme engages to the first work of regeneration and to the first work of making all new within To this circumcision did tye as it signified it so it engaged to it Deut. 10.16 Circumcise the foreskin of your hearts and be no more stiffenecked If by vertue of their circumcision in the flesh God did not require it why is the want of it charged on Judah as their sin or how could it lay them open with other Nations to punishment Jer. 9.25 26. Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will punish all them that are circumcised with the uncircumcised Egypt and Judah and Edom and the children of Ammon and Moab and all that are in the uttermost corners that dwell in the wildernesse for all these Nations are uncircumcised and all the house of Israel are uncicumcised in the heart And that the first work is required as well as a further degree and progresse both in circumcision and baptisme is clear In baptisme we are explicitly dedicated as the Jewes were implicitly in circumcision to Father Son and holy Ghost and therefore engaged to be sincerely his in Covenant But this cannot be till a change be wrought and we be born again from above To this therefore we are engaged We are engaged to love the Lord with all our heart with all our strength but this cannot be while our hearts are in an unchanged condition and therefore the circumcision of the heart Deut. 30.6 is mentioned in order to this of the love of the Lord The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart and the heart of thy seed to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul what is it but the first work that is called for in that of the Prophet Make ye a new heart and a new spirit Ezek. 10.31 And in those texts of the Apostle Awake thou that sleepest and stand up from the dead Ephes 5.14 Be ye transformed by the renewing of your minds Rom. 12.2 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man And be renewed in the spirit of your minds Ephes 4.22 23. Howsoever some of these Scriptures may be conceived to be directed to men in a state of Regeneration and therefore that they call not for the first work but for a further progresse in grace yet all of them cannot be so Interpreted And there is not any of them but implyes that where the first work is not done it must be done where the old man is not put off it must be put off and where the new man is not put on it must be put on where the spirit is not renewed it must be renewed Neither is it of force against this to say that the first work is out of our power and that in it we are wholly passive and therefore we do not in baptisme engage to it but God rather engages for it To which I answer Though it be out of our power yet it is within the command of God and is matter of our duty Gods command is no rule of our strength neither is it brought down to answer our weaknesse so a carnall man should be under no spiritual command but it is a rule of our duty what we once were and still ought to be it commands us for to be And though we be passive in the first work yet we are alwaies concerned to be active and assoon as we do receive power we are to act Dead Lazarus was commanded to rise and having power communicated from God he did actually rise and come out of the grave There is not any promise of God for inherent Grace nor any work of Grace but it comes within our duty and a command lies on us as instance might be given and consequently there is an obligation and engagement to it Gods command and his promises stand not in opposition but in subordination and to say that God is engaged and not man is dangerous then all that are baptized must be regenerate or else God fails in his engagement Somewhat it is that these signs seal and in sealing ratify and confirm and that is as the text shewes the righteousnesse of Faith and consequently all other priviledges whatsoever of like nature that are annexed to it Remission Justification Adoption Glorification Sacraments as seals have not as I conceive at least immediately and directly reference to graces or inherent habits but priviledges They are as Mr. Baxter hath well observed seales of the conditional Covenant and so they must seal whatsoever they do seal on Gods terms and conditions they ratifie mercies promised on those termes that the Covenant doth promise now graces are the conditions and termes of the Covenant and mercies are promised upon those termes and therefore the Covenant requires them but the Sacraments do not ratifie and seal them The Sacraments as signs shew us our wants of or wants in grace by the help of the Word and light received from it they point us out where supply may be found they engage us to this change to the whole of duty required from the people of God and upon answer of our conscience in this work they seal and confirm all promised priviledges to us The nature efficacy and operation of Sacraments would be better understood if that which is proper to each part or the particular office in each relation were better known The seal in a Lease as from the Lessor doth not ratifie the homage that is to be done by the Lessee or the service from him due but the inheritance or benefit whatsoever which upon condition of such homage or service is conveyed Graces are the homage and priviledges are the benefit or the inheritance the priviledges then and not the graces are directly in Sacraments sealed to us It is not sealed up to us either in Baptisme or the Lords Supper that we do believe or repent but that believing and repenting we have forgivenesse of sin and salvation But some say that the Sacraments seal all that the Covenant promises but the Covenant promises Grace and therefore the Sacraments
that this place should be interpreted of baptisme on which words of his Mr. Gataker pag. 123. very well comments l Quasi aliam potius quorundam expositionem probaturus ni aliorum importunitas aliò impelleret Verba sunt enim alii concedentis aliquid potius quam animi sui sensum enuntiantis As though he would rather saith he allow another interpretation if the importunity of others did not lead him that way They are words of one granting or rather yielding somewhat to another man then speaking his own mind as he further observes And Mr. Burges Spiritual Refining Part 1. pag. 214. speaking of Baptisme saith it is called the laver of regeneration Titus 3.5 as some expound it giving us to understand that it is no exposition universally agreed upon and sufficiently hinting that it is the more inconsiderable part that do interpret it this way Fifthly Though we should yield that these places were to be understood of the Sacrament of Baptisme as Calvin saith he could be content to do yet all this while nothing is gained seeing it still rests to be proved that this is meant any otherwise then by way of sign and seal they conclude no abolute work but onely as they have their influence upon the understanding and faith of the receivers And therefore Calvin when he was prevailed withall to yield so farre as we have heard presently addes m Non quod in externo aquae symbolo inclusa sit salus sed quia partam à Christo salutem Baptismus nobis obsignat Not that salvation is included in the outward symbole of water but because Baptisme seales it to us when Christ hath obtained it for us And Danaeus speaking to that Argument of Bellarmine that the Scripture witnesseth that the words of the Sacrament are active instruments of our justification and not seales of the promise giving instance in these and the like Scriptures for this purpose answers n Instrumenta signa etiam mere obsignantia testantia dicuntur per tropum metonymiam id facere quod obsignant nam annulus sponsalium qui solus est signum eorum dicitur conjun gere obligare sponsos contractus instrumentum quod solum consensus signum obstringere contrahentes Doctoratus sigillum literae creasse effecisse n. Doctoâ—em quaeenim nos juvant efficere ea ipsa dicuntur propter finem in quem spectant in quibus ab eis juvamur Verum vitanda est verborum hujusmodi quae ut causis vel signis vel instrumentis actionem tribuunt homonymia ne propterea censcamus ea signa vel instrumenta esse causas istâ—us actionis vel effecti vel fructus efficientes efficiunt enim aut efficere di cuntur illa effecta suo tantum modo nempe per modum duntaxat signi quatenus obsignant certificant eam actionem vel effectionem aut per modum instrumenti quoniam ad effectionem ad hibentur multum enim signa vera instrumenta inter se proprie differunt signa vero nihil plane ad effectio nem conferunt qualia sunt Sacramenta sed affectionem Sp. S. opus illius in nobis duntaxat vâ—rissime certissime testantur consignant Instruments and signs meerly testifying and sealing are said by a trope and metonymy to do that which they seal for even a ring used in espousals which onely is a sign is said to joyn and bind the espoused an instrument of contract which is onely a token of agreement is said to bind the contractors and the letters and seal of a Doctor to create a Doctor for those things that are helpful to us are said to effect those things as to such an end in which they are helpful But the homonymy of words of this nature is to be shunned which attributes actions to signes or instruments as to causes lest upon that account we may think that such signes or instruments are causes of such actions or efficients of such fruits and effects For they effect or are said to do such a work alone after their manner that is onely by way of sign as they seal or certify such an act or work or by way of instrument because they are used in the work For signes and instruments properly so called do very much differ For signes contribute nothing to the work of which sort are Sacraments but onely truely and certainly testifie and seal the work of the Spirit of God wrought Danaeus Contra Bellarmi Tom. Contro 2. Cap. 14. ad Arg. 2. Abundance more might be added to clear these Texts and take them out of their hands that urge them for this purpose though they were meant of the Sacraments which is not to be granted And what we have said of these Texts may be affirmed of that also Deut. 30.6 I will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed Circumcision which was a Sacrament is indeed there named but the speech is onely borrowed by way of metaphor from the circumcision of the flesh and applyed to the heart as is clear Deut. 10.16 where that work is given in command to the Jewes and they were not commanded to circumcise themselves but were already in Circumsion A second sort of Scriptures are such in which baptisme is mentioned but faith evidently required to the attainment of the effects of it A second sort of Scriptures are such where Baptisme is indeed mentioned and the Sacrament of Baptisme intended but faith is evidently required for the attainment of the effect specified These especially are Acts 2.38 Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins Acts 22.16 Rise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the Name of the Lord. I shall referre the Reader for a full vindication of these Scriptures to Mr. Gatakers disceptation pag. 9 10 c. pag. 56 57. and shall onely adde that that phrase in the Name of the Lord utterly destroies all that they would build on these words seeing it implies faith in his Name as Acts 3.16 may be seen And howsoever Infants that are in Covenant upon their parents profession of faith are baptized into this Name yet those of yeares as these were to whom this speech is directed are in their own persons not onely to make profession of faith but in sincerity to believe in order to attainment to the pardon of their sins or any other spiritual priviledge of the Covenant whatsoever Yea that which these men would draw from these Texts stands not with their principles that urge them The Sacraments work grace say they as instruments I shall then desire to know whether positive infidelity be not such a barre that will hinder If it be a barre in men of yeares then the Sacrament works not without actual faith in the baptized It is the priviledge of faith to obtain forgivenesse of sin Act. 13.39 Rom. 3.25 It is the work then
afterwards perish through unbelief and impenitence Therefore faith charity and other Spiritual qualities wrought by the Spirit in the regenerate are sometimes lost And having delivered himself thus in the negative that Baptisme works not these graces or habits in infants His first proposition in the affirmative tending to shew what Baptisme does work is w Omnes infantes baptizati ab Originalis peccati reatu absolvuntur That all baptized infants are acquitted from the guilt of original sin for which opinion many Fathers and Schoolmen are quoted by him as they were for the former So that I think the first part of my position is fully made good that the most eminent that ever have appeared for this power of Sacraments to conferre grace on the receivers either utterly deny or else doubtfully hold that Baptisme works any real change in infants but onely that which is relative and that it conferres not habits but onely priviledges on Infants baptized For the other part of the position that the Scriptures which these bring for proof of this power of Baptisme almost all speak of such a change that is real not relative of habits and not of priviledges The proof is easy What those Scriptures are which by them are produced in this Controversy may be seen in the former position and that almost all of them speak of a real change not barely that which is relative is evident The alone Old Testament text that I can find is Deut. 30.6 with Jer. 9.25 where circumcision of the heart is mentioned which texts as they can hardly be interpreted to speak at all of the Sacrament of Circumcision in the outward rite so it is certain that a real change is spoken to by Moses in Deuteronomy and by the Prophet also complained of to be wanting Reverend Dr. Ward yields that Spiritual Circumcision of the heart is there meant but he saith that by this Spiritual Circumcision the remission of original guilt is understood To which x Cordis circumcisione peccatorum remissionem denotari ut credam nihil adhuc quod suadeat video quod cogat multo minus Certe si quis verba illa Deut. 10.16 Circumcidite ergo praeputium cordis vestri aut illâ—d etiam Jer. 44. Circumcidimini sive circumcidite vos Jehovae exposuerit Remittite vobis peccata vestra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pute 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr. Gataker replies that he sees nothing that can perswade much lesse force him to believe any such thing Adding that If any should expound Deut. 10.16 Circumcise the forskin of your heart or Jer. 44. Circumcise your selves to the Lord to be as much as forgive your own sins it would be thought strange Disceptatio pag. 147. yea he makes the contrary plainly to appear As for those texts Titus 3.5 1 Corinthians 6.11 Ephesians 5.25 26. they speak all to the same thing In every one of them a real habitual change is mentioned Acts 2.38 Remission of sinnes is indeed mentioned and very probably Acts. 22.16 But in what sense to be understood I have shewed in the last place so that I think there is so much yielded and so little proved by the eminent advocates in this cause that according to Scripture there is any such causality in Baptisme for the pardon of sinne in every Infant that is presented to that ordinance and received that even upon this account it is justly to be susspected Besides that the blood of Christ and his Spirit are not onely distinguished by them but divided The vertue of his blood is ascribed to those that have no portion in his Spirit as though that Christ came both by water and blood unto some and by blood onely unto others SECT III. Objections against the former doctrine Obj. 1 HEre it is objected Where the blood of Christ on Gods part is offered and applyed for pardon of the guilt of sin and no impediment put on his part that receives it there the guilt of sin is remitted But in the Baptism of Infants the blood of Christ on Gods part is offered and applyed and no impediment put by him that receives it Ergo in the Baptisme of Infants the guilt of sin is remitted Answ 1 Answ 1. This Argument will hold with equal strength for proof of that which these deny as for that which they would assert Where the Spirit of Christ is offered on Gods part and applyed for regeneration and true sanctification and no impediment put by him that doth receive it there regeneration sanctification and all other gracious habits are wrought But in the Baptisme of Infants the Spirit of Christ is thus offered and applyed and no impediment is put Ergo. The Major in this syllogisme can be no more denyed then in the former The Spirit of Christ is as efficacious for regeneration as his blood for pardon It were over-much boldnesse to put any difference between them And for the Assumption none can deny but the Spirit is as well applyed in Baptisme as blood either then both must hold or both must be denyed 2. I utterly deny that the blood and Spirit of Christ that either Answ 2 blood or Spirit are thus applyed in Baptisme In case of such application they would produce their effects above and against all resistance there is no vain application of either of these to any person If the Spirit of Christ had been in Baptisme applyed to Simon Magus it would so have seazed upon him and wrought in him that Peter would not have addressed himself to him in that language which he heard from him and so I may say of the blood of Christ such an application of it to his soul would have had that effect that Peter would have said to him in the words of the Seraphim to Isaiah when he had applyed the coal from the Altar to his mouth Thine iniquity is taken away and thy sin is purged and not as he did that thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of iniquity The blood of Christ upon the soul of an Infant or man of years must needs be as efficacious as a coal from the Altar on Isaiah's lips Universal redemption we know is asserted by these Authors though it be with such limits as not to close with Arminians but to remain their opposite If now there be not onely impetration of the merit of Christ but also application in that latitude as Baptisme is administred I know nothing that can stand in the way of salvation of all those that are baptized He that would see the consent of modern Writers of the most eminent note in the denyal of this proposition let him consult learned Mr. Gataker Discep pap 6 c. whereby his industrious pains after his manner many are multiplied Danaeus leads the way He is deceived saith he that thinks that Christ and his benefits are applyed by the sign of water which is onely the seal of such application 3. According to these principles laid by these
visible people of God and those that are strangers to him work no otherwise as to vitall and saving grace than hath been spoke let us take heed lest these dissimilitudes do not draw us to imbrace a cloud instead of Juno when it shall appear that they have not so much of elegancy but are answered with equal incongruity If they be such marks as these instances seem to hold out to us how are they then conditional means to communicate these blessings Upon what condition I marvel was it that Moses knew that God was in the bush Or the Inhabitants of Jerusalem that the Angel was in the water Or the Apostles that the Spirit was come down upon them These were undoubtedly to be lookt upon as unconditionate communications of the respective presence of God his Angel and his Spirit And how this stands with that which presently after we find in our Authour I know not unlesse many grains be allowed to abate the height of them that Sacraments are not Physical but moral instruments of salvation duties of service and worship which unlesse we perform as the Authour of grace requireth they are unprofitable For all receive not the grace of God which receive the Sacraments of his grace Moses undoubtedly did enjoy the presence of the Angel and the Apostles the presence of the Holy Ghost Let us then learn to use them as the Authour of grace requireth and that is as signs and seales as his chosen vessel to convey his grace here teaches I shall onely adde in this place If Sacraments work as signes and seales then they must be allowed to have that whole work on all that are Communicants which as signes and seales they can possibly effect either for the bettering of their understanding or farther engagements in wayes of godlinesse and that by the help of the Word they may help the understanding even of unregenerate persons and make discovery of strong engagements to wayes of godlinesse can scarce be questioned If the Word can teach the unregenerate by hearing then the Sacraments being appointed for visible teaching-signes by the help of the Word may also teach them by seeing and unregenerate men making profession of their relation to God may here see further engagements and provocations to godlinesse This effect cannot be denyed to be possible in Sacraments as signs at least upon some persons in unregeneration and when they further see all the glorious priviledges of the Covenant upon the terms propounded of God to be attainable may they not be of singular use as seales to put them on and stirre them up in all consciencious use of means to rise up to the answer of conscience And so as the Word as an instrument in Gods hand by instructions motives exhortations and other provocations is a means for conversion so may the Sacraments as appendents to the Word and by the help of it be herein serviceable likewise which is the whole that I do or ever did attribute to Sacraments so much as in a possible way of conversion CHAP. XII SECT I. The thing signified and sealed in Sacraments THe whole use and office of Sacraments we have seen Sacraments are suitable to Covenants which is to seal the gift and grant of God in Covenant as well as to signifie The thing sealed in them here comes to be spoken to which is the righteousnesse of faith There being a double Covenant given of God to man one in mans integrity whilest he was in spiritual life for preservation in life the other in mans fallen condition when dead for restitution to life There is a double righteousnesse answering to this double Covenant The one inherent in man to be wrought by himself and called our own righteousnesse The other wrought by a Mediatour in our stead and made ours by Faith and therefore called the righteousnesse of faith and sometimes the righteousnesse of God being wrought by Christ who is God And answerably to this double Covenant and double righteousnesse Sacraments of a double kind were instituted The first without respect had to any Mediatour confirming Gods engagements on the terms of perfect obedience The other with respect to a Mediatour and Faith in him confirming happinesse to believers The Sacraments of the Covenant of grace are of this latter sort They are signs and seales as were the trees of life and of the knowledge of good and evil and seales of righteousnesse as they were also but of righteousnesse of another kind The former were seales of the righteousnesse of works These are seales of the righteousnesse of faith Those were seales to assure a reward to our own righteousnesse These are seales to assure us of anothers righteousnesse made ours by faith From hence these two Observations follow one implyed the other in the words exprest The first which is implyed in the words is The righteousnesse of Faith is the great Promise of the Covenant of Grace The Apostle tells us of blindnesse that in part happened to Israel Rom. 11.25 and the blindnesse was this that they would not be brought to an acknowledgment of this righteousnesse But in an high zeal made it their businesse to establish their own righteousnesse Rom. 10.2 3. It do's not appear that they wholly denyed the concurrence of all grace for the work of this righteousnesse in which they confided The Pharisee who is brought in to personate those of this opinion saith God I thank thee I am not like other men He therefore did acknowledge some kind of discriminating grace But it was his own act thorow grace a righteousnesse inherent and not through grace imputed wrought by himself and not by another in his stead in which he confided This observation might have been pertinently and properly spoken to in this place being that on which the Sacraments are bottomed A flaw here must needs be the undoing of all The Jew mistaking here was at losse of all his pains in sacrifices Sacraments and all other personal performances When he had carried on this with the greatest vigour and alacrity he was still too short and this held him back that he look't not after any other righteousnesse and so perished without any such righteousnesse as was able to justifie I should not therefore have wholly past this by but that a long expected and greatly desir'd Treatise on this subject is sent to the Presse and will for a good space of time prevent this piece where the Reader I doubt not will find full satisfaction I shall therefore wholly passe it by and come to the Observation which the words expresly hold out The righteousnesse of faith is sealed in the Sacraments of the Covenant of grace This enters we see the definition a Sacra-ment Propositions holding forth this righteousnesse and is expressely laid down in the text of the Apostle and for a right understanding of this great priviledge here sealed some Positions or explicatory Propositions must be laid Proposition 1 down 1. This is called the
righteousnesse of faith as before was hinted in opposition to and to distinguish it from the righteousnesse of works required in the Covenant entered with man in his integrity and which the Jewes for a great part conceited they were bound to answer acccording to the letter of the precepts of the Law for the attainment of salvation That of works is called by the name of our righteousnesse Rom. 10.3 Phil. 3.18 being to be done by our selves in our own persons as also by the name of the righteousnesse of the Law being required at our hands by the Law so that salvation gained this way is of our selves of works Ephes 2.8 9. This other is called the righteousnesse of faith in this text as also Phil. 3.9 Heb. 11.7 Faith being the hand that receives it of Gods free gift by grace it is called also the righteousnsse of God Rom. 10.3 Phil. 3.9 Either as being the gift of God which that phrase seems to imply the righteousnesse which is of God by faith or else as being the work of Christ that is God So that salvation this way gained is of grace and the gift of God Ephes 2.8 These two are still opposed one to the other when one is followed the other is quit and left Rom. 10.3 They being ignorant of Gods righteousnesse and going about to establish their own righteousnesse have not submitted themselves unto the righteousnesse of God so also Rom. 10.5 6. Moses describeth the righteousnesse which is of the Law that the man which doth these things shall live by them but the righteousnesse which is of faith speaketh on this wise c. Phil. 3.9 Not having mine own righteousnesse which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the rigteousnesse which is of God by faith 2. This righteousnesse is synechdochically put for the whole Proposition 2 of the Covenant of grace that interests us in this righteousnesse and so it must be taken in those words of the Apostle forequoted The righteousnesse which is of faith speaketh on this wise that is the Covenant which interests us in the righteousnesse of faith speaketh this language so that Sacraments sealing this righteousnesse they seal the whole of this Covenant 3. All the blessings and priviledges following upon and following Proposition 3 from this Covenant unto true and full blessednesse are here by the like figure comprized as appears by the Apostles words v. 9. Commeth this blessednesse then upon the circumcision onely or upon the uncircumcision also For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousnesse This righteousnesse and blessednesse is made one and the same in those words of the Apostle Proposition 4 4. Christ the Mediatour of the Covenant that brings man into Covenant with God is the fountain from whence all this blessednesse comes in that by him this righteousnesse is wrought so that he is the whole of all that good that is comprized in the Covenant and sealed in the Sacraments This is plain in that of the Apostle Rom. 10.4 speaking of the error of the Jewes in going about to establish their own righteousnesse and their non-submission of themselves unto the righteousnesse of God he saith that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that believeth that is finie consummans as Gomarus saith not consumens The end at which the Law aimed and not putting an end and period to it One Christ assumes to himself It becometh us to fulfil all righteousnesse Matth. 3.15 The other he disclaimes Matth. 5.17 Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfil The Law calls us to righteousnesse but is not able to work it in us Christ hath done it for us and in our stead He is therefore called our righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1.30 Jehovah our righteousnesse Jer. 23.6 so that wheresoever we prove that Christ is sealed to us in the Sacrament or any other benefit flowing from Christ as Mediatour there is a sufficient proof of this observation Proposition 5 5. Faith is here considered as an instrument receiving this righteousnesse and interesting us in this Covenant-promise They that will not allow that faith should be called an instrument of justification yet are not much troubled that it should be called an instrument that receives Christ that doth justifie And if either may be allowed as I do not doubt but that both will hold current this will hold that faith is considered here as an instrument and not as a work neither yet as an instrument of the soul producing any act beyond its self as the hand is the instrument to the soul in labour but as receiving and taking in a gift from God This the Phrase of the Apostle Phil. 3.9 doth clear The righteousness of God by faith otherwise it might be stiled the righteousnesse of works yea when the words are the righteousnesse of faith the meaning must still be the righteousnesse of works as a man when he receives pay for threshing or digging receives pay for working But these are made directly opposite one to the other and not confounded one with the other Rom. 10.5 6. Faith therefore is considered not as a work or habitual grace in the soul So considered it is a branch of our own righteousnesse but as an instrument applying Christ and interesting us in his righteousnesse These Positions being premised The Point proved the Observation may be easily proved that the righteousnesse of faith or the righteousnesse of God by faith is sealed in the Sacraments of the Covenant of grace and may be made good in an induction of particulars Circumcision the leading Sacrament of the old Covenant is expresly here spoken to and here we see what is the thing signified in it and sealed by it And in case we saw no more in it then the most carnal amongst the Jewes saw that it was a note of distinction between them and others that had no visible relation to God in Covenant yet we know that this distinction was grounded and founded in Christ By Scriptures The one stood in a visible relation to him and the other were strangers from him And the Apostle Col. 2.11 12. is full in the proof of it Having said that we are compleat in Christ enjoying him we want nothing it might be objected that we want the very leading Ordinance which receives a people into visible Communion with God which was Circumcision The Apostle answers that in him we are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ This Circumcision did figure Deut. 30.6 Jer. 9.26 Rom. 2.28 29. And this is the work of Christ as we see in the Apostles words and therefore circumcision led to him For the following Sacrament of the Passeover if we look to the letter of the institution together with the explication given we shall find it
sets himself professedly against this use of Sacraments and will not have them to serve by way of seal for confirmation of our faith in particular And this he endeavours with five several Arguments SECT II. Objections against the former doctrine 1. IF Sacraments confirm our faith by way of seal or after the Object 1 manner of miracles then Sacraments must be better known and more efficacious to perswade to Faith than the Word But nothing can be more efficacious for perswasion than the Word of God and experience tells us that words are better understood than dumb signes and Sacraments compared to the Word are as dumb signes Answ 1. The assumption here should have been Nohting is Answ 1 either more easily known or more eminently efficacious than the Word But the former is left out lest it should give check to their doctrine of obscurity of Scriptures and instead of making the Word easily intelligible he contents himself to say that it is more intelligible than nods or dumb shews when yet dumb signs or such nods are better known and more easily understood as we have experience sufficient than the Word of God or any other word whatsoever in an unknown language 2. If this Argument be of force then nothing else in the Answ 2 world but the bare Word of promise revealed in Scripture is any way serviceable for more full assurance of the thing given in promise Not onely Gideons Ezekiah's and Ahaz his signs but the oath also made to Abraham was superfluous All these had the Word of God and unlesse the signs given them and the oath made to them were more efficacious then the Word which as he sayes nothing is according to him they are all superfluous 3. Comparison is not to be made between the Word and Answ 3 Sacraments whether of those considered apart is more efficacious Then the preheminence is to be given to the Word as Bellarmine sayes Luther acknowledgeth but enquiry is to be made whether the Word together with Sacraments annext to it be not more efficacious by reason of our weaknesse and inclinations to diffidence than the Word without any such visible ratification Nothing can be more firm than the promise of God seeing God cannot lye Tit. 1.2 His Oath is no more valid then his Word yet God willing more abundantly to shew unto the heires of promise the immutability of his counsel confirm'd it by an oath That by two immutable things in which it was impossible for God to lye we might have strong consolation Object 2 2. The nature of Sacraments cannot any where be better understood than from his words that is the authour of them But in the Holy Scriptures they are no where called seales of Promises but instruments of Justification Ergo. Answ 1 Answ 1. If this Proposition stand then some at least of the Sacraments of Rome and most of their Sacramentals must fall seeing by Thomas Aquinas his acknowledgment they are not to be found in Scriptures Answ 2 2. There is nothing more false then this assumption as abundantly hath been declared and the Text in hand is a sufficient witnesse Object 3 3. If Sacraments be onely seales of the promise of grace then either they are superfluous or else of very slender use and benefit for we have more Testimonies far more efficacious Good works are better signes and testimonies of righteousnesse obtained then washing with water or taking of the Eucharist which may be received Hypocritically Answ 1 Answ 1. If this Argument be of any force then wheresoever there is one witnesse to speak in any cause all the other are vain and superfluous and so that of the Apostle will fall to the ground At the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established Answ 2 2. It is well that works are made a witnesse of assurance then this way at least assurance may be had which he and his party are wont to deny Answ 3 3. Works are not Testimonies instituted of God for this end as Amesius observes but of their own nature they evidence our fitnesse for glory and as fruits of our faith as Whitaker speaks And those which Bellarmine uses to make the best of works Almes Fasting and Prayer may be hypocritically performed likewise Answ 4 4. This witnesse or seal of Sacraments is not a distinct witnesse or seal from that which the Jesuit here produces but stands in co-ordination with it or rather in subordination to it It is upon the answer of a good conscience not otherwise that Sacraments give this witnesse 4. If Sacraments seal by way of particular application for support Object 4 Faith then it is in vain to baptize Infants But Lutherans are wholly for Infant-baptisme Ans 1. We may learn of Bellarmine that Protestants at least Answ 1 think that this doctrine and Infant-baptisme will well stand together 2. The Apostle was certainly able to have given a satisfying Answ 2 answer to this Objection seeing he tells us that Circumcision was a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith and yet himself was circumcised the eighth day Phil. 3.5 It is of equal strength against Infant-circumcision as against baptisme 5. If Sacraments be seales of grace which in particular is conferred Object 5 upon any then oftentimes they are false viz. when the Sacrament is given to a man who pretends to believe and indeed doth not believe and so it were unlawful to baptize any lest we should cause God to give witnesse to a lye for we certainly know of none whether they believe truly or onely pretend it Ans Our Adversary here prevents us Answ and puts an answer into our mouthes Perhaps saith he they will say That the Sacrament is a seal or testimony of grace not absolutely but if he that doth receive the Sacrament do believe the promise And this indeed is their Answer as out of Amesius Whitaker Vorstius Pareus Dr. Reynolds Mr. Rutherford I have shewn to which may be added that full Testimony out of Dr. Slater before mentioned As for those that will have the Covenant to be absolute and the seales to be put without any respect had to any condition against the full stream of Protestant Writers I shall desire them to help us to any other satisfying answer to this Argument I must confesse that in case I be once convinced that the work of Sacraments is to ratifie Gods promise in an absolute way as the Rainbowe do's that God will no more destroy the World by water without respect had to any condition at all And that a seal is put to a blank in case any unregenerate person be baptized or admitted to the Lords Table I must either be holpen with further light than I can yet see or else I think I shall never more adventure upon Baptisme or the Lords Supper And Bellarmine supposing that this will be our answer can bring nothing more to avoid 〈◊〉 then two speeches of Luther and one of Melancton nothing at all to
of Christ but also the supererogation of the Saints which as they perswade themselves is satisfactory not onely for the Saints themselves but for others The Church of Rome makes it her care to take in the whole of all these branches of righteousnesse and in all of them they place their justification Here we had need of the clew of Scriptures to lead us That righteousnesse which according to the precept of the Law is to be wrought by our selves as to sanctification or qualification of the soul in the way of salvation we must vigorously pursue and not disclaim As Christ when he was accused by the Pharisees to destroy the law and to be an enemy to righteousnesse to take off this calumny he tells his Disciples Matth. 5.20 I say unto you that except your righteousnesse shall exceed the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdome of Heaven So we may say to these adversaries that charge us to be enemies of good works except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of these superstitious ones ye can by no means enter into the Kingdome of heaven The righteousnesse of a Papist being of the self same stamp with that of the Pharisees for tradition the Trent Councel makes known their zeal Concil Triden Sess quart p. 11. With the same degree of reverence and esteem we receive the Traditions of our Fathers as we do the bookes of the Old and New Testament and how defective both of them were touching the righteousnesse of the law their agreement in the glosse which they put upon the law is a sufficient witnesse The Pharisees glosse on the law we may read in Christs refutation Matth. 5. and the several precepts which Christ there delivers transcending the Pharisees dictates Papists will have to be no branches of the law but Evangelical Counsels added to it So that B. Hall quotes a speech of Serrarius the Jesuite that the Pharisees may not unfitly be compared to Catholiques adding as his own that one egge is not liker to an other then the Tridentine Fathers to these Jesuites Supererogating righteousnesse and that which is bottom'd on tradition we must wholly shun It is enough that we can bring it up to the rule in the parts of it it must not exceed It is hard to determine whether a man that casts off all regard of righteousnesse or a man of such righteousnesse be more hatefull in Gods presence one utterly sleights the soveraignty of God and the other corrects his wisdome one refuses to serve at all the other serves onely according to his own pleasure As to the other branch of righteousnesse wrought by others The supposed satisfaction of the Saints must be left and the Lord Christs alone chosen That speech of Christ in the Prophet Isai 63.3 spoken of the conquest of his enemies I have trod the Wine-presse alone and of the people there were none with me holds true when it is applied as by many it hath been though not according to the letter of the text to his satisfaction By one offering he hath perfected for ever those that are sanctified Heb. 10.14 yea the righteousnesse of Christ in the matter of justification must stand alone in opposition to all righteousnesse in the world whether of others imaginarily to be applyed out of any publique treasury by way of indulgence or wrought by our selves either by the strength of natural abilities without grace which the Papists confesse to be too weak or in grace and these works how great an honour soever of late is put upon them come short of perfection to justification likewise as plainly appears by the Apostles argumentation Rom. 3.20 By the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight giving this in for his reason for by the Law is the knowledg of sin The argument runs thus Where the Law discovers sin the works commanded by it cannot justifie This proposition is the Apostles But the law discovers sinne even in those in whom grace here hath its most perfect work This needs not to be proved Therefore works commanded in the law and done by assistance of grace in the regenerate cannot justifie And that the Apostle disclaims all righteousnesse any other way his own then by free imputation from God in the work of justification is clear 1 Cor. 4.4 I know nothing by my self yet am I not hereby justified Though he had the witnesse of a good conscience as his rejoycing 2 Cor. 1.12 Yet this is not his justification when the Rhemists on the place and Bellarmine de justificat urge this text against assurance of salvation Mr. Ball Treat of Faith pag. 107. saith This text makes strongly against justification by works but against certainty of salvation it makes nothing And Pareus upon the words saith Hence it is most firmly concluded that by the works of the law no man is justified If so great an Apostle cannot be justified by works then much lesse others His works were certainly done by the power of grace and upon new-Covenant-engagements That of Mr. Baxter Aphor. of justif pag. 307. must stand as an eternal truth who after that he had laid down the Socinians tenent that they acknowledg not that Christ hath satisfied the Law for us and consequently is none of our legal righteousnesse but onely hath set us a coppy to write after and is become our pattern and that we are justified by following him as a captain and guide to heaven and so all our proper righteousnesse is in this obedience And having mark'd it with this just brand Most cursed doctrine he addes So far am I from this that I say The righteousnesse which we must plead against the lawes accusations is not one grain of it in our faith or works but all out of us in Christs satisfaction As this righteousnesse which is no otherwise ours but by imputation being neither inherent in us Faith the alone grace that interests us in this righteousnesse nor wrought by us must stand entire and sole in our justification so faith must be acknowledged to be the alone grace which interests us in it and attains to our reconciliation to God in Christ otherwise why is it that not onely the denomination is still from faith onely as we see in the text and alwaies when it is named it is called the righteousnesse of faith and not of hope love obedience or repentance But that justification is evermore in Scripture ascribed to this grace The Apostle speaking of Christ who is confessed to be our righteousnesse saith Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood In him God who otherwise through wrath stands at the greatest distance is propitious and this through Faith on which Diodate hath these words All this hath been done by vertue of Gods appointment who of his meer will and full power hath from everlasting appointed Christ to be the onely means of expiation and
a learned Papist joynes with Protestants in the doctrine of Justification and many others This great wit of the Popish party reading Mr. Calvin to confute him in the point of justification was confuted by him and wrote with us against his own party as is not onely affirmed by men of our party as Davenant de just habit cap. 29. pag. 382. Albertus Pighius saith he in his controversies largely explains and confirms our opinion 1. He excludes inherent righteousnesse from any efficacy in justification 2. He manifestly approves the imputation of Christs righteousnesse Lastly He gives his reason why the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed to us for justification And then addes Many more things are found in the same author who though in other controversies he maintains a fierce warre with Protestants yet being overcome with the clear light of truth in this of Justification he fell off from the Papists and came over to our party And Capel in his preface to Mr. Pembles tract of justification Pighius saith he though of a peevish spirit enough yet reading Calvin to confute Calvin in the very doctrine of justification was confuted himself and wrote with us but also acknowledged by our adversaries Albertus Pighius is checkt by Bellarmine saith Dr. Prideaux lect 5. Pag. 165. for that in reading our authors himself at last became a Lutheran in this article And that Pighius may not stand alone on our parts among Romanists Davenant in the place quoted produces many others 1. The whole covent of Canons at Cullen in their book which they entituled Antididagma Who acknowledge the imputed righteousnesse of Christ to be the chief cause of our justification Titu de justific 2. The Romish party in the Conference of Ratisbone Who saith he gave their vote the same way pag. 47. 3. Isidore Clacius orat 40. in Luc. 4. Naclantus Episcopus Clodiensis cap. 1. ad Ephes pag. 59 72. The two first of these authorities are quoted by Dr. Prideaux likewise Adding that Cassander Stapulensis Peraldus Ferus Arius Montanus did tread in the same path and therefore miserably suffer by the Index Expurgatorius Cardinal Contarenus is likewise frequently quoted by Amesius as on our party And Dr. Prideaux saith that almost four yeares before the Councel of Trent he had so asserted the orthodox doctrine of Justification that being as is thought taken away by poyson he did not long survive And for the whole space between Gregory and the reformation our author pronounces it that authors generally for the most part were more sound in their commentaries then in their disputations and in their meditations soliloquies and conflict of temptations then in their polemicks Bringing in Chemnitius instancing in Bonaventure and others So that in case they have one of eminence amongst us we have one of theirs as eminent and in case he should prove too light we have many more into the bargain to make up weight There followes Now to the thing it self Your Arguments for faiths instrumentality to Justification I will consider when I can find them And his Reader will consider no more of his jeeres when he can look into his books and his eyes miffe of them Some of those of whom he hath made boast as his converts in this controversy have professed themselves satisfied with that which I have written though Mr. Baxter cannot find it I am told that I begin and say more for faiths Instrumentality in receiving Christ than for the instrumentality of it in Justification And the truth is I know not how to distinguish them If it be an instrument to receive Christ that doth justifie it is with me an instrument in Justification If mine eye be an instrument by which I receive in light for sight then mine eye is the organ or instrument of sight If I prove the one I think I cannot be denyed the other The Instrumentality of faith for receiving Christ is thus reasoned against If Faith be the instrument of receiving Christ then it is either the act or the habit of Faith that is the Instrument I am well aware that if I shall affirm either of these that then either some text of Scripture will be called for specifying such habit or act of faith in justification or a needlesse stirre will be made about these Logical notions The safest way then is to say with Scripture that faith is the grace that receives Christ and that interests us in propitiation in his blood and the grace by which upon that account we are justified without limitation of it to either the act or habit Neither can any answer as I suppose be thus given but such as will coincidere If I say the habit justifies it is as it puts forth it self into act Whether the act of faith or the habit doth justifie If I say the act justifies it must be as it comes from the habit and so both habit and act justifie Neither doth a mans justification cease when the habit of Faith in sleep ceaseth acting seeing justification denotes a state which is remaining and abiding It is further said Receiving strictly taken is ever passive A reason then may be seen why Divines have called faith a passive instrument in justification and Mr. Baxter may see a fair answer to the high and indeed scornful censure that he gives to the most learned as himself stiles them in his preface to this apology The most learned saith he in the upshot flie to this that credere is not agere but pati and is but Actio Grammatica or the name of action but Physically or Hyperphysically a suffering Is not here a curious doctrine of faith and Justification If Aristotle had been a Christian he could not have comprehended it But I confesse I see no reason to make receiving Neither receiving not believing are in the Authors thoughts meerly passive and consequently believing to be at least meerly passive There is alwaies an act of the will in rational agents in receiving properly so called and often of the hand The receivers of custome are agents for the States and in their receipt are active Receiving in a civil ethical lesse proper sense as is further said is but the act of accepting what is offered But is not this accepting properly receiving or is not receiving properly so called at least necessarily joyned with it in such civil ethical reception When I give a beggar an almes does not he in as strict a sense receive it as I do give it and this is either his act of acceptance or that which accompanies it If I put water into a vessel the vessel rather contains it then receives it If I give a child a lash he rather suffers then receives â—t So that receiving strictly taken is as well active as passive and rather active then passive There is added When it is onely a relation or a jus ad rem that is offered consent or acceptance is an act so necessary ordinarily to the possession
or proper passive reception that it is therefore called receiving it self and it is therefore as I think called so because it is so and that it hath its concurrence and way of efficacy for possession I think few except Mr. Baxter will deny It followes Yet still I say if any will please to call it an instrument in this sense I will not quarrel with him for the impropriety of a phrase especially if some men had the same ingenuity that others have that say it is but Instrumentum Metaphoricum There is not I hope so much ingenuity desired as to smother or blind their reason If it be a metaphorical instrument there must be some real analogy between it and an instrument properly so called in doing that which is done by an instrument and when an instrument is as is affirmed an efficient An instrument without any efficiency at all is a strange kind of Metaphor It had been better to have held to the old dialect of Equivocal There followes But to say saith he that the act of Faith is the instrument of Ethical active reception which is that which I argued against is to say receiving Christ is the instrument of it self It will sure rather follow that Faith is the instrument of the soul in receiving Christ We say faith receives as we say the hand takes Faith is the instrument of the soul and not of it self in receiving Christ That faith is the eye and hand of the soul are Scripture Metaphors or the sword kills but we mean the man receives by the hand and the hand kills by the sword and so we mean the soul receives Christ by faith I explained my self in giving instance in mens usual language concerning faith which is rejected with no little disdain affirming that these speeches Faith is the eye of the soul the hand of the soul are Metaphors of meere humane use forgetting it seems that ever the Scripture said that Moses by faith endured as seeing him that is invisible or that the promise of the Spirit is received by faith If I had added that faith is the foot of the soul they had all been Metaphors of Divine use I urge Scripture texts We receive remission of sins by faith and an inheritance amongst them that are sanctified is received by faith Act. 26.18 To which is replyed If by signifie an instrumental cause it is either alwayes or sometimes You would not sure have your Reader believe that it is alwayes if but sometimes why do you take it for granted that so it signifies here This I might well retort If it signifie and an instumental cause sometimes why is it not made appear that it does not so signifie here But I confesse that by hath not alwayes such signification Bartimeus sate by the high-way-side begging in which place by is no instrument but when the particle by hath reference to that which hath immediate reference to a principal cause and sometimes is put to the principal cause it self I suppose nothing else but an instrument can be intended when Christ is said to be set forth a propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3.25 and that we are justified by his blood Rom. 5.9 I know not how the blood of Christ can be a principal cause and faith not denote an instrument I said why else is this righteousnesse sometimes called the righteousnesse of faith sometimes the righteousnesse of God by faith but that it is a righteousnesse which faith receives To this is replyed It is properer to say Credens recipit credendo the believer by believing receives it then to say faith especially the act receives it Here is an egregious subtilety It is more proper to say I receieve a gift by my hand then to say my hand receives it of the same stamp with another where it is said that Scripture sayes That we are justified by faith yet denyed that Scripture sayes that faith justifies But be it so that is properer does not Scripture speak as improperly Eye hath not seen Eare hath not heard It had been as much properer to have said No man hath seen with his eye or heard with his ear I quote Ephes 3.17 Christ dwells in us by faith and Gal. 3.14 We receive the promise of the Spirit through faith There I say Scripture speaks of faith as the souls instrument to receive Christ Jesus and to receive the Spirit from Christ Jesus and I am answered You odly change the question we are speaking of faiths instrumentality in receiving a right to Christ or Christ in relation and you go about to prove the reception of his Spirit or graces really or himself objectively and so we have a large discourse of Christs dwelling in us But is it not to the purpose to shew that the phrase by faith notes instrumentality which these texts make good and does not Christ dwell in us to more purposes then one Is it not to all purposes that by faith we receive him And then our receiving right to him is not here excluded I said the instrumentality of it in the work of justification is denyed because the nature of an instrument as considered in Physical operations doth not exactly belong to it which if it must be alwayes rigidly followed will often put us to a stand in the assignation of causes of any kind in moral actions To this is replyed I said 1. The action of the principal cause and of the instrument is but one action is not this true of moral operation as well as Physical To this I answer I think here some demurre might be put and scarce believe that it will be fully made good that the action of the principal agent and the instruments which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are alwayes exactly one though the act of the instrument may be in such cases Interpretatively called the act of the principal agent as David is said to have slain Vriah with the sword of the Ammonites Saul I am sure was of an other mind when intending the death of David he said Let not my hand be upon him but the hand of the Philistines 1 Sam. 18.17 But in case it be granted what hath he gained He adds 2. I say the instrument must have influx to the producing of the effect of the principal cause by a proper causality that is in suo geneâ—e Demanding Is not this true of moral operations as well as Physical Then yeelding that it is true Moral causes may be said to have a lesse proper causation then Physical c. And this lesse proper causation I doubt not but may be found in faith and as proper a causation as an instrument of this nature will bear I say The material and formal causes in justification are scarce agreed upon and no marvel then in case men mind to contend about it that some question is raised about the instrument c. To this there is much spoke telling me what he would have me to have concluded
of further operation Instruments of meer reception and further operation distinguished that which is objected holds of instruments wholly operative not of those that are meerly receptive A man receives a gift with his hand as the lame man was ready to do when he expected something from Peter and John Act. 3.5 and he earnes his living with his hand as Paul did when in some exigents his hands ministred to his necessities Act. 20.34 In the former mans hand concurres to his enriching but he enriches not himself as in the later The denomination is from the fountaine whence all flowes not from the hand that accepts or the cistern that doth receive There is added In my judgement this doctrine should not be made part of our Religion nor much stresse laid on it if it were true because it is so obscure It seems then that not I but our Religion is the author of this so high a contradiction so that I cannot defend Religion but I am put upon it to assert such contradictions and who layes greatest stresse upon that which is not obscure and dark I leave to the Reader of Mr. Baxters Aphorismes and Apology to determine It followes That man concurres as a ready agent who doubts but doth that prove him or his faith the efficient cause of his own pardon and justification Do I or doth our Religion make man or faith the efficient cause of his own pardon and justification Quote some words of mine or some Article of faith in any of the Protestant Confessions that affirmes it were some others in my stead they would highly rhetoricate and tell the world what would be said when they are dead But this is my comfort when I am dead Religion will stand up for its own defence that the concurrence of a ready agent hath somewhat of efficiency in it I think none can deny and that such concurrence that I have mentioned can rise to be the efficient I think Faith is the instrument both of God and man in the work of justification very few will affirm And to bring my self into that which he before hand charges to be so absurd I said And because it is the instrument of man in a work of this nature it is also the instrument of God As some have observed a communication of titles between Christ and his Church the Church being called by his name so there is a communication of actions in these relative works Christ dwells in our hearts by faith Ephes 3.17 We believe and not Christ and yet faith there is Christs instrument whereby he takes up his abode God purifies the hearts of the Gentiles by faith Act. 15.17 They believed and not God yet faith is Gods instrument in the work of their purification So on the other side the Spirit is Gods work yet we by the Spirit do mortifie the deeds of the flesh Rom. 8.13 Here Mr. Baxter first takes in hand the thing that I assert and when he hath done falls upon the proof which is first to quarrel with the conclusion and then to take the premises into consideration 1. It is said If this be indeed true God and man are not coordinate causes in Justification that it is mans instrument of justification and Gods both then both God and man are causae principales partiales by coordination making up one principall cause This he thinks I will not affirm and this indeed I do deny upon the reasons afore laid down it is mans instrument for concurrence in it but not of principall efficiency to produce it In case I had affirmed he gives in his reason of denyal of it in a Similitude of an absolute donor in which I grant the conclusion and therefore shall not trouble the Reader with it As to the proof that I bring he first excepts against that which I say others have observed and say This communication of titles 1. is very rare 2. uncertain whether ever and goeth about to take off that text 1. Cor. 12.12 But this being Heterogeneous to the work in hand I shall let his exceptions alone only pointing him out one another text with which if he please he may take like pains Jer. 23.6 Jer. 33.16 Compared After much ado to find out my meaning he resolves But it is like you intended to have said that there is a common or mutuall attribution of each others actions or one is intitled to the actions of the other and so mean only a communication of the name quoad modum producendi and not of the actions themselves And who but he that would seek a knot in a Bul-rush could have thought of any other but as the titles of one are observed by some to be attributed to another so the actions proper to one are attributed to the other Then a Dilemma is brought against me either this is in an improper figurative way of speech or it is proper and grounded in the nature of the thing and either of both is excepted against I say the action of one is said interpretative to be the action of the other because he makes use of it to do his own work or bring about his own purpose To the instance that I gave that Christ dwells in our hearts by faith he saies there is not a word to prove that there is a relative indwelling But Mr. Br. very well knowes that I did not oppose relative in this place to reall as intending to hold forth any effect wrought by Christs indwelling but the opposition is so absolute as I exprest my self I do not say that justification is directly spoke to in that place yet there is a proof I think sufficient that Christ makes use of our act to effect his own work which is as much as I intended elsewhere Mr. Br. is so free as to yield that faith is an instrument to receive Christ How Christ is said to dwell in us by faith but here he stickles hard to deny it but let us take notice of his concessions Christ saith he is said to dwell in us by faith 1. Formaliter Faith being the principal part of that grace which dwelleth in us And so we might say he dwells by Love Hope Meeknesse Patience which I think no Scripture or Orthodox Writer sayes 2. Conditionaliter Faith being a condition of our right to the Spirit abode But it is so a condition as it is withall an instrumentall condition It is not barely said if you believe I will give you my Spirit which might imply barely a condition as it is said turn at my reproof and I will pour out my Spirit upon you but it is said we receive the promise of the Spirit by faith 3. Efficienter As the act of faith doth directly cause the encrease and so the abode of the habit And is it may we think a principal or is it an instrumental efficient If an instrumental I have what I desire and I am sure he will not say it is
in the first gives interest in all All the promises of God in Christ being Yea and Amen 2 Cor. 1.19 6. It must be remembred saith he that the thing that faith receives naturally and properly is not Christ himself or his righteousnesse but the species of what is represented as its object And that faiths reception of Christ himself and his righteousnesse or of right to him is but receptio metaphorica vel actio ad receptionem propriam necessaria and that the true reception which is pati non agere doth follow faith And therefore Christ himself is received onely Receptione fide ethicâ activâ metaphoricâ species Christi praedicati recipitur receptione naturali intelligendo Jus ad Christum recipitur receptione naturali passivâ propriâ Mr. Baxters friend let him know that he understood not his former I would I had acquaintance with him to help me in this for if he had not understood him here he would likely have said as much as before unlesse perhaps his modesty would not suffer him to be so much on the excepting hand That which I think I do understand I know not how to make to agree who would not here think but it were the natural property or act of faith to receive the species of Christ yet Sect. 10. pag. 2. he saith that every other grace that hath Christ for his object is thus far an instrument of receiving him that is the species of him as he expresses himselfe as well as faith but none so properly as knowledge which also he here as we see repeates species Christi praedicati recipitur receptione naturali intelligendo So that faith lesse properly and not so naturally receives him Knowledge in this hath the preeminence who would not think from these words that it were proper and peculiar to believers thus to receive Christ yet in the place quoted pag. 22. it is said that he thus dwells in every wicâ—ed man that thus thinketh of him It seemes then that Judas in his thoughts to betray Christ did as much to this receiving of him if not more then others in believing of him It is there said that doubtlesse he doth not dwell in that deep and special manner as in his chosen yet if it be most properly by knowledge that he thus dwells then they that know most have the most deep indwelling and that is more in devils then in some if not any chosen ones The reception of Christ himself his righteousnesse or of right to Christ is here confest to be an act of saith and who but Mr. Baxter would look for a more true reception yet the true reception which is pati non agere doth follow faith and though the believer receive the actual efficacious gift yet it is not his faith that receiveth it as we have in the close of the Paragraph In his English he sayes that faiths reception of Christ himself or of right to Christ is but receptio metaphorica and opposed to true reception which is pati non agere In his Latine he saith Jus ad Christum recipitur receptione naturali passiva propria faith with him is an acceptance of a freely given Christ and life in him yet a believer receives the efficacious giving but his faith doth not receive it I would mind Mr. Baxter of that rule of his own Vbi lex non distinguit c. and where he meets with these distinctions in the Word of God I know not and he goes not about to make known Scripture speaks of receiving Christ and not the species of Christ onely Scripture tells us of receiving Christ by faith and not of the species onely which an unsanctified knowledge without faith may reach The Species of Christ can neither justifie us nor purifie us nor yet give victory over the world nor make resistance against Satan yet all this through faith Christ doth and therefore faith doth not receive the bare species if we could be content with Gospel-simplicity truth might stand and these distinction be laid aside 7. The great thing therefore that I would desire to be observed is this that though faith were an instrument of the aforesaid objective or of the ethical metaphorical reception of Christ which yet is not properly being ipsa receptio yet it is not therefore the insturmental cause of the passive proper reception of right to Christ or righteousnesse Whether we have not that again here denyed which before was asserted let the Reader judge However Reasons are given of it Faith is an instrument of the proper reception of Christ 1. In the negative Of this saith he it is onely the condition and not the proper instrument with an objection prevented in a parenthesis I shall shew hereafter that it is impossible to be both I shall wait therefore till this be shewen for I despair I confesse ever to see such impossibility I know an instrument quâ instrument differs from a condition quâ a condition but that one and the same thing is in an utter incapacity to be both an instrument and an instrumental condition I do not believe I may give a man a piece of money with a proviso that he take it in a sawcer or a pair of tonges this now is the condition yet the tonges or sawcers are his instruments to receive it Faith doth more then morally qualifie the subject to be a fit patient to be justified 2. We have a positive reason It doth morally qualifie the subject to be a fit patient to be justified as Mr. Benjamin Woodbridge saith truly in his excellent Sermon of Justification I have not this Sermon though I know that he hath often applauded it but how excellent soever I had rather have had a quotation out of John's Gospel or Paul's Peters or Johns Epistles And if he affirm that which is here quoted out of him as I do not question I hope to dye in a different opinion from him This subject that is onely morally qualified to be a fit patient to be justified is not yet in possession of Christ of life by Christ Mr. Baxter is morally qualified for the degree of Doctor and yet he is no Doctor was morally qualified to be called by the State for consultation about Religion when as yet he was not called and might have dyed and never have been called but faith puts into an actual possession of Christ and Justification by him By him all that believer are justified from all things I should rather take Humiliation Conviction Compunction soul-emptinesse to be such moral qualification as is here mentioned and this I have learnt from our Saviour Matth. 11.28 Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy-laden and I will give you rest Such are morally qualified for the justified mans rest â—nd peace And more fully in the Parable Luk. 18. the Publ cane that came not with a list of vertues as the Pharisee did but was so clogged with sin that he stood afar off from
mentioned in Scripture which is not ascribed also to faith The Spirit mortifies the deeds of the flesh so doth faith Acts 15.9 Devils are cast out by the Spirit of God so they are cast out by faith Mar. 9 The Spirit is our strength in the inward man Ephes 3.16 and faith is our strength 1 Pet. 5.9 Rom. 4.20 All things are possible to the Spirit of God And all things are possible to him that beleeves Mar. 9.23 The Spirits method laid down in the Word is not to work in us respective to salvation after the grace of faith is implanted without us what is ascribed to the one as the efficient is ordinary ascribed to the other as the instrument But these answers he confesses are besides the point This simile might therefore have escaped this quarrel in the two next he will sure then be so punctual that all Readers shall say Rem acu tetigisti 5. It is added When you have laid down one proposition Man cannot justifie himself by believing without God how fairly do you lay down this as the disjunct proposition And God will not justifie an unbelieving man who would have thought but you would rather have said Nor will God justify man unlesse his faith be the instrument of it and do you not seem to imply that man without God doth justifie himself when you say man cannot justifie himself by believing without God No nor with him neither for none can forgive sins but God onely even to another but who can forgive himself I think all is laid down so fairly that were I to lay it down again I should not lay it down in Mr. Baxters words Nor will God justifie a man unlesse faith be the instrument he would then soon have challenged it as a petitio principii seeing it is that which is in question I might have said that God will not justify a man except he disclaim his own righteousnesse and accept of Christs righteousnesse to justification but that which I did say is the same with any friend or fair adversary and so it is a disjunct proposition fairly laid down and I imply that which I speak and if any will have it further expressed God will not justifie man without the concurrence of his faith There followes In deed I have thought what a sad case the Pope is in that is the onely man on earth that hath no visible pardoner of his sin he can forgive others but who shall forgive him It seems by this jest that Mr. Baxter is willing to put off that he is not so good a proficient in Popish mysteries as by Mr Crandon he stands charged otherwise he could not but know that the Pope hath his pardoner as well as others The Pope hath his visible pardoner as well as receivers He gives power for the pardon of sin as the supposed head of the Church by application of the supererogated merits of the Saints together with the merits of Christ out of the treasure of the Church of which he hath the keys Now he sinnes as a man and receives pardon as a Church-member and to that purpose hath his confessor A man as visible as other men And speaking of his sad condition on this supposition he seems to lay farre more stresse on the pardons of Rome then they themselves as though he stood in some eminent danger of hell upon the want of such a pardon when he might know that according to their principles all his danger is an abode some longer time in Purgatory which is their trimming place in the way to heaven For if the pardon find him in a mortal sinne which alone is deserving of hell it is altogether inefficacious mortall sinne puts a barre to the working of it It is the temporal punishment which this pardon remits and not the eternal and in case it were true that this could not be done to the Pope there being none above him his successor with a wet finger can do it for him As to that which was forgotten it had been to his honour if it had never been remembred I forgot saith he that every believer forgiveth himself for I did not believe it Such sarcasmes befit not grave Writers especially when all Reformers to speak in his own language must bear a share in the contumely when they had it in their thoughts in this way to imitate the Apostle in giving all to grace and taking all from man that one would rise out of themselves to make this sport with it It followes 6. How nakedly is it again affirmed without the least proof that our faith is Gods instrument in justifying doth God effect our Justification by the instrumental efficient causation of our faith If this were my fault yet Mr. Baxter of all men is most unfit to give it in charge other men must have a proof for every word but he himself may heap up distinctions propositions conclusions without any colour of proof at all where is his proof of that which in the last Section number 6. must be remembred and of that great thing num 7. he would desire should be observed I suppose he will have ten to remember and observe before one to believe it Others can see proof and send their Reader hither for proof though he cannot find it My work was to shew that though it be mans act yet God may make use of it as instrumentally serviceable in this work and whether this hath been nakedly said or proved let the dis-interested Reader give his sentence if that which I have said will not satisfie let Mr. Burges be consulted in his late Treatise of Justifica Part 2. I conclude That which is here spoken by way of exception against faith as an instrument holds of efficients and instruments sole and absolute in their work and causality but where there is a concurrence of agents and one makes use of the act of another to produce the effect that in such causality is wrought it will not hold To this is answered He that will or can make him a Religion of words or syllables that either signifie nothing or are never like to be understood by the learner let him make this an article of his faith what you mean by absolute I cannot certainly ariolate Bona verba bono viro desunt Seeing I find the man in this mood I say no more but seeing he knowes not how to ariolate what I mean by this or that I have no mind to help him in this art of soothsaying and shall let the words stand for their use that bring a mind to understand rather then to exercise their wit to carp at what they read Of the sole sufficiency of the grant of the new Covenant as an instrument in justification I shall now leave to the Readers consideration whether Mr. Baxters exceptions against the instrumentality of faith in justification be of that validity as to overthrow it and whether his doctrine of this subject be of that
our heart the grace of justification and so also the Ministers of the Church and others which teach us the way of salvation Dan. 12.3 Gomarus Matth 5.4 pag. 46. denying any affections or work of man preceding faith to be the procuring cause of justification and affirming that faith it self is no such cause but an instrument onely gives this reason e Nullae hominum affectiones ac praeparationes nullaque opera fidem antecedentia justificationis causae nedum proreantes esse possunt imo nec fides ipsa causa illius est procreans cum ealaus soli gratiae Dei ac merito Christi efficaciae Spiritus sancti comperat Rom. 3.24 28. Ephes 2 8. sed tantum instrumentalis That honour belongs onely to the grace of God and merit of Christ and efficacy of the holy Ghost so far are these Divines from excluding the Spirit from having any hand in this work such a Gospel instrumeâ—â—ality as that it should do nothing at all on the souls of men I have not before read or heard of As it tenders conditions so it is employed to work the conditions that it tenders It makes known the mind of God that men believing have right to Christ and in him to justification and it works faith for justification onely believers saved by it and it is the power of God and not nudè signùm voluntatis divinae to salvation And as the Simile brought by Mr. Baxter of a Fathers bequeathing by his testament an hundred pound a peece to each of his sons To one on condition he will aske it of his elder Brother and thanke him for it to a second and third upon conditions at pleasure with this demand upon it Do any of these conditions give power to the testament No yet the testament doth not efficaciter agere till they are performed why is that saith he because all such instruments work morally onely by expressing ut signa the will of the agent and therefore they work both when and how he will and it is his will that they shall not work till such a time and but upon such termes c. He might easily see how little this serves to our present purpose 1. That which he speaks of is a bare testament and no more but the Gospel as elsewhere I have shewed is a Covenant truly so called and not barely a testament 2. Those Legacies are such gifts that each son would be apt to imbrace being ready to put a sufficiently high estimate upon them But this Gospel-gift if nothing further be done will for ever lye contemned and neglected 3. The will is a meer instrument of donation leaving the Legatee to himself to accept or refuse The Gospel is the instrument of Gods power by the Spirit to change the heart and work upon the will for acceptance 4. These testament-legacies presuppose the condition not yet performed and so the Legatee without all right upon Testament-termes But Mr. Baxters Gospel-donation supposes the conditions already done and the soul upon that account in full possession before this Gospel-donation comes It conveyes right to a believer and if he be a believer as hath been abundantly shewed he is in present possest of Christ his righteousnesse and justification by him And whether or no I have acquit my self from the double charge brought against me I shall leave to the Readers consideration 1. If there be an instrumental efficiency ascribed to faith in Scripture in a work in which there is as much of God and as little of man seen as in the work of justification then there is no reason but that faith also hath an instrumental efficacy in the work of justification This is clear The reason given why faith should have no instrumental efficacy is because this takes from God who alone is the efficient and ascribes to man who is justified and doth not justifie himself But an instrumental efficiency is ascribed in Scripture to faith in a work on which there is as much of God and as little of man as in the work of justification This is clear in miraculous cures wrought upon diseased persons The work upon them was Gods not mans They were cured and did not cure themselves yet an instrumentall efficiency is ascribed to their faith If those words spoke to the two blind men Matth. 9.29 According to your faith be it unto you nor that of Paul concerning the creeple at Lystra That he had faith to be healed Act. 14.9 nor yet that of Christ to the Canaanitish woman Matth. 15.28 O woman great is thy faith be it unto thee as thou wilt will not hold it out which yet seem to speak very much this way other graces were qualifications yet none but this is taken notice of yet that to the woman with the bloody issue is full Matth. 9.22 Mark 5.34 Thy faith hath made thee whole not onely made whole by faith which is an exception against faiths justifying but faith made her whole Quemadmodum fidei ascribit Christus quod mulier soluta est à morbo corporis ita certum est fide nos consequi remissionem peccatorum adoptionem filiorum Dei juxta doctrinam Evangelii words speaking as much of instrumental efficacy as may be The conclusion then followes That faith hath its instrumental efficiency in justification likewise Pareus his notes upon the words are worthy observation As Christ ascribes it to faith that the woman is healed of the disease of her body so it is certain that by faith we obtain remission of sins and adoption of children of God according to the doctrine of the Gospel 2. If there be an instrumental efficiency ascribed to faith in Scripture respective to salvation then there is an instrumental efficacy ascribed to faith respective to justification This is plain nothing can instrumentally work to salvation that takes not in justification But an instrumental efficacy is ascribed to faith respective to salvation Luk. 7.59 He said to the woman Thy faith hath saved thee In the context there is a full proof of the Major The great priviledge which she of grace received there is the forgivenesse of her many sins and this is acribed to her faith The Minor is fully proved Her great love is mentioned as a consequent of this grace received But it is ascribed to her faith as that which had its alone efficacy Thy faith hath saved thee As we are saved by faith or through faith Ephes 2.8 so faith saves The conclusion then followes that faith hath its instrumental efficacy in justification 3. That which puts a man into possession of that from which justification necessarily and inevitably followes that is either a principal efficient or an instrument in justification This cannot be denyed He that puts me into a place to which a plentiful livelihood is necessarily annexed is either the efficient or an instrument of my livelihood But faith puts into possession of Christ from whom justification necessarily followes
as signum voluntatis divinae being a manifestation of Gods pleasure concerning the justification of a sinner is sufficient So farre I shall willingly grant That which is to be asserted is 1. That this manifestation of Gods pleasure or signum voluntatis divinae before mentioned is the first ground work on which the whole work of justification is bottomed and goes before those graces but now mentioned which Mr. Baxter makes antecedent to justification This is plain The termes on which God will justifie must be understood before men can be brought to accept and come up to them 2. This manifestation of Gods will thus made knowne and by the power of the Spirit applyed to the soul in an unjustified condition works to humiliation regeneration faith and by faith to justification 3. This manifestation of Gods pleasure being applyed to a man already humbled regenerate and in faith finds him as we have heard before in a justified posture Though Faith in nature goes before justification as the cause before the effect yet they are in that manner simul tempore that none can conceive a believing man in an unjustified condition that so there should any intervall or time passe for conveyance of right by Gospel-grant to justification 4. This Gospel-grant or manifestation of Gods mind being thus tendred as before to a regenerate believing soul serves for ratification and confirmation of his justified condition to make good to such a believing son or daughter that their sinnes are forgiven To apply these assertions to our present purpose This manifestation of Gods pleasure Gospel-grant or signum voluntatis divinae or whatsoever else we call it in the first consideration justifies not Going before that which is antecedent to Justification as we see it does it cannot justify In the second consideration it works indeed to justification But if we yield this to Mr. Baxter he will not accept of it for he saies he does not thus speak of it and in this consideration it justifies not without faith but works faith in order to Justification By this man is preached forgivenesse of sins and by him all that believe are justified In the third consideration it justifies not seeing it finds the work done to its hands and onely serves for the work of assurance as in the last place is asserted So that all that can be said of this Gospel-grant donation or conveyance of right so often by Mr. Baxter mentioned in this work is 1. To make known Gods mind on what termes justification may be attained 2 By the power of the Spirit through faith to work it and finally to assure ratify and confirm it I shall the refore close this dispute if I may be allowed so to stile it in the words of Chemnitius in his Common place de justificat mihi pag. 797. octavo Having spoken to the causes of justification he saith It is altogether necessary that there be application made of these causes to the person to be justified Omnino verò necesse est fieri applicationem harum causarum ad personam justificandam Nam quotquot receperunt eum his fecit potestatem filios Dei fieri Joan. 1.12 3.33 Et Modus seu medium applicationis seu apprehensionis docendi gratiâ vocatur causa instrumentalis Duplex autem est causa instrumentalis 1. Docens Patefaciens Offerens et Exhibens beneficia justificationis per quam Deus nobis communicat illa bona et haec est vox Evangelii et usus sacramentorum vel sicut veteres loquntur verbum vocale et visibile For as many as received him to them he gave power to be made the Sons of God John 1.12 and 3. v. 33. And this manner or medium of application or apprehension speaking to mens capacity is called a cause instrumental And this instrumentall cause is twofold 1. Teaching Opening Offering and Exibiting the benefits of justification by which God doth communicate unto us those gifts And this is the Word of the Gospel and use of Sacraments or as the Ancients speak the Word vocal and visible 2. Receiving or apprehending 2. Recipiens seu apprehendens quâ nobis applicamus illa bona quae in Evangelio offeruntur ita ut eorum participes reddamur Est igitur quasi manus Dei traders et hominis manus suscipiens id quod traditur Supra autem testimonia et annotata et explicata sunt solam fidem non ulias alias vel qualitates vel opera in nobis esse medium applicationis whereby we apply those gifts to our selves which are offered in the Gospel that we may be made partakers of them There is therefore the hand of God as it were delivering and the hand of man receiving that which is delivered And testimonies are both observed and above explained that onely faith sand no other qualities or works in us is the medium of application SECT VI. A fourth Corollary from the former Doctrine AS Christians must see that they be aright principled in this Gospel-doctrine of the righteousnesse of faith Christians must get assurance that they do act according to these principles so also they must get assurance that they act according to these principles which I might urge respective to all that which is required of a man of Gospel-righteousnesse But having already spoke to that purpose in pressing the necessity of the answer of conscience unto Sacramental engagements I shall here onely urge it respectively to that grace which immediately interests us in this righteousnesse which is the grace of faith as we see in the Text which is confest to be the grace that receives Christ even by those that deny the instrumentality of it in our Justification If this righteousnesse which is our Justification be the righteousnesse of Faith then those that are void of faith must needs be wanting in this righteousnesse and Christ being the end of the Law for righteousnesse to those that believe those that persist in unbelief never attain to this end And howsoever zealous they may otherwise appear yet they come short of righteousnesse for life and salvation Giving assent to all Gospel-truths perhaps upon the principles of their education they may not onely have the repute but also enjoy all outward priviledges of believers yet wanting that work upon their will or if you please in their affections to receive Christ and close with him they yet have not Christ nor life in him and therefore upon this account there is all reason to hearken to that of the Apostle Especially to see to their faith 2 Cor. 13.5 Examine your selves whether ye be in the faith prove your own selves Know ye not your own selves how that Jesus Christ is in you except ye be Reprobates In which words we see the Apostles exhortation and his reason annext The exhortation calls us to self-examination to a self-tryal an inquisitive experimental tryal The question to be put or thing to be proved or brought to upon
tryal is our faith not barely the doctrine of faith as some would have it whereby we may conclude that we are of such a Church in which Christ is visibly resident in Ordinances but the grace of faith whereby he makes his abode in our soules The reason annexed is put by way of interrogation or question Know ye not your own selves how that Jesus Christ is in you except ye be reprobates which doth not imply that all are Reprobates that know not in present that Christ is in them but this is all that is implyed or can be gathered that Jesus Christ is in all that are not reprobates where reprobate is not yet opposed to the Elect as though all such were everlastingly cast-awayes in whom Christ is not in present But as the word is used Jer. 6.30 reprobate silver that is unfit for use or service so it is here taken such in present are not in a saving but in a lost condition and therefore it much concerns us to put this upon the tryal Motives to perswade to get assurance of this grace 1. Necessity of Faith For Motives to put men upon this work consider First the necessity of this grace and that upon a several account 1. Without Faith as you have heard we are without this righteousnesse None in unbelief can say of Christ Jehovah our righteousnesse All the good that Christ does unbelief loses so much good that Christ can do thee of so much unbelief strips thee The Apostle tells us of unsearchable riches in Christ Ephes 3.8 Such that none can summe up nor he that is highest in skill in Arithmetique calculate Christ is the Fathers Store-house Magazine or rich Exchequer The Father hath not a gift for any of his but he layes it up in Christ and a faith receives it from Christ Noah by faith was heir of this righteousnesse Heb. 11.7 The rest of the world wanting this grace went without this inheritance The rest of Canaan was lost by unbelief Heb. 3.18 The rest of heaven will be thus lost in like manner God hath chosen the poor of this world rich in faith heires of the Kingdome which he hath prepared for those that love him Jam. 2.5 The rich of this world destitute of this Faith make forfeiture of this Kingdome Is Christ a gift Faith receives him and unbelief is wanting Is Christ food Faith feeds upon him and unbelief is hunger-starved Is Christ rayment Faith puts him on and unbelief is naked Is Christ a Medicine Faith applyes him and unbelief languisheth Is Christ a laver Faith drencheth and douzeth it self in him and unbelief is filthy and defiled Is Christ a pardon Faith sues it out and unbelief lyeth under guilt Is Christ satisfaction Faith makes the plea and attains a discharge and unbelief remains indebted 2. Without Faith the soul is under the wrath of God and his ireful displeasure This is a necessary result from the former The man of unbelief wants that which might be interposed as an atonement and might stand as a skreen or shield for his guard And it is also fully laid down in Christ's words Joh. 3.36 He that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him What Zophar saith of the wicked man Job 20.29 This is his portion from God and the heritage appointed him of God that Christ sayes of unbelievers so long as they remain in unbelief so long wrath abides on them All by nature are the children of wrath having no other inheritance and the man of unbelief never gets from under wrath to attain any other portion This is an aggregate of all miseries when all is reckoned up that can be named to make miserable wrath comprizeth it all to the uttermost to infinitenesse As is the man so is his strength say Zeba and Zalmunna Judg. 8.21 As is God so is his wrath with this motive the Psalmist presseth to faith Psal 2.12 Thy sin hath merit enough to damne and thou hast not any interest in Christ to save or deliver He that is void of Faith and yet under no such feares it is not because there is no cause of feares but that such a soul is not awakened to see his fearful deplored and desperate condition If the rich glutton had seen Hell gaping for him and the Devil ready to hale and drag him he could not then have had any list to his every-dayes Gorgeous apparrel nor yet any appetite to his delicate fare That is the condition of secure sensual ones till Hell-fire flame about them they think they are sure of heaven 3. Without faith there is no benefit to be had or good to be found in any Ordinances No Ordinance is useful but either as it is improved by Faith already seated in the soul or as it is serviceable to the plantation of it No duty of any kind works to acceptance from an unbelievers hand Abel's sacrifice was accepted when Cain's could not gain acceptance Gen. 4.4 5. The Apostle shews us the reason of this difference Heb. 11.4 By faith Abel offered a more excellent sacrifice then Cain The Parable of the sower tells us how few profitable hearers of the Word there can be found and the Apostle gives the reason Heb. 4.2 The Word is not mixt with faith in those that hear it It is effectual alone in believers 1 Thess 2.13 and no more have audience in prayer then those that profit in hearing and there is one and the same reason of both Jam. 1.6 7. And that man is doubtlesse under an heavy Judgment that never gets good when he hears from God nor obtains his request when he seeks to God At the Lords Table they eat bread but feed not on Christ they take the Cup but have no interest in the blood of the new Covenant 4. Without faith nothing is done that God accepts The man and the work both displease Heb. 11.6 There must be a concurrence of all requisites to render a work good and acceptable But in an unbelievers work the matter of the work excepted all requisites are wanting The rise is from a fountain that is unclean and the unbelieving soul cannot go so high as to make the glory of God the end And the rule is above him in the work to look after 5. Without Faith the whole of man head breast and bowels are all open to Satan Faith is a Christians shield Ephes 6.16 and a shield is the defence not of one part but the guard of the whole A man without faith is a Souldier without armes and destitute of all power to make any manner of resistance Satan leads such an one at pleasure There is nothing of Christ nothing of grace nothing of the Spirit to stand up in opposition Some devils are not resisted without strength of faith Mark 9.29 No devil without faith can be vanquished or overcome Mot. 2 Secondly Consider the benefits of faith the glory that doth accompany it The benefits that
put in their lives about their health their estates the nature of their grounds or how to carry on their Trades besides those multiplyed ones of meer vanity and inconsiderable concernment they never had it in their thoughts to move a question of any concernment to their soules The young mans question the Jaylours question Peters hearers question never came into their heads I have seen little evidence of good in these and I see little ground to believe any thing of faith in their soules You may speak of some of these as of men of good dispositions of a fair nature and harmlesse life and course these may grow up in nature moralized and regulated when yet faith is far from them they may grow up high in profession but growing in the blade or leaf onely and not in the root they may justly be suspected Every tree that bears a fair leaf doth not bear good fruit and every apple of a fair colour is not to be desired for food Such fruit as this may take where faith will not grow The Prophets words then should be heeded Break up your fallow ground and sowe not amongst thornes this way must be taken for soul-humbling that men may be brought to believing The nature of faith wherein it consists A necessary prerequisite in faith 2. The next way of discovery is to take notice of the proper and true kind the genuine nature of this grace And here I hope the Christian Reader may reape a double advantage First to understand what faith is and the requisites in it Secondly helps for proof of themselves whether they be in the faith And here we may observe First a necessary prerequisite of faith Secondly the essential parts of it The prerequisite to it is knowledge which some indeed make a part of faith but faith I suppose rather presupposeth it then is made up of it The essential parts are either in the understanding or in the will or affections for faith is an act of the soul and the whole soul is implyed in it First then of that which I make a prerequisite Knowledge is in that way required to the making up of faith that is often put for faith as Isai 53.11 And when God works to faith he is said to open the eyes or to work to knowledge or light Heb. 10.32 Act. 26.18 We come to faith by hearing we must therefore hear and know before we can believe Knowledge is the first act or work of the soul that conducerh towards faith in the heart Now knowledge is threefold First of sense we know what we see Thomas knew Christ that is the person of Christ when he had seen his wounds and put his finger into them This knowledg is not necessarily required in faith Christ there saith Blessed is he that seeth not and believeth John 20.23 And the Apostle saith that faith is the evidence of things not seen Secondly of reason we know those things which our reason is able to reach This knowledge runs through all sciences in which we attain knowledge by discourse and the clearer head the better Artist and the more of knowledge This we do not require to the being of faith though faith be not alwaies against yet it is oft above all our reasonings yea our reasonings and hammering out conclusions are oftentimes against faith The word of faith beats down imaginations and every high thing that exalteth it self against the knowledg of God and brings into captivity every thought 2. Cor. 10.5 Our Notionalists are indeed men of sublimated understandings in case they can alwaies reach unto that which according to the Gospell they are to believe Thirdly of authority we judge our selves to know a thing which men worthy of credit do make known and if we receive the witnesse of men saith the Apostle the witnesse of God is greater 1. John 5.9 The testimony of man gives a morall certainty and such that we will not question The multiplication of witnesses renders our knowledge grounded on such authority more firm and therefore the proverb in a well qualified sense is at least near to truth Vox populi vox Dei The voice of the peopâ—â— unanimously witnessing is as the voice of God We do no mâ—re doubt that there was a massacre of Protestants in Ireland about the year 41. then we do that there was one resolved upon at Shushan in the reign of Ahashuerus Esth 3. The testimony of God is alwaies of infallible truth as to the substance so to every circumstance of it many passages about that massacre we may justly question so we must not any thing which divine verity hath made known This knowledge we require in faith and know it to be necessary to the being of faith we must know that God hath revealed in his Word a Trinity of Persons or else we shall believe no such thing as three distinct subsistences in God that the holy Ghost is God that Christ is God and man in one person or else we shall believe no such doctrine We must know the creation from the Scriptures or else we shall not believe a creation but run into that opinion that all things have ever been as they are We must know the offices of Christ or else we shall not believe that any such office was undertaken by him The same we may say of every doctrine of faith perhaps without Scripture we might have known somewhat confusedly of some of them as that there is a God and that the world had a beginning but we should have known nothing at all of many of them and nothing distinctly of any of them These we must know and from the Scriptures of God know or else we cannot believe we may as easily see where nothing is to be seen as believe where that is not known which is to be believed Ignorant persons therefore that know not the right hand from the left in religion and are to seek in the very first principles of the Oracles of God in the very beginnings of the doctrine of Christ that either come not to hear that they may learn or that learn nothing at all by hearing ever learning and never coming to the knowledge of the truth are in an incapacity of faith Men weak in knowledg can hardly make proof of their faith they do not well know the nature or lively workings of it so want the comfort but not the thing Men without knowledge are without faith have not gone the first step towards it The essential parts of faith The essentiall parts of it are as we have said in the understanding will and affections In the understanding there is an assent to that which is revealed upon the authority of him that doth reveal it 1. In the understanding An assent When we believe any thing upon that account that we suppose we see a reason of it as that the middle region of the ayr is coldest or that the Sun is in many degrees
for life and power and so the life that we live in the flesh is by faith in Christ Jesus So that faith I suppose may be fitly defined to be A firm assent of mind to the whole truth of God in the way that he doth reveal it with an acceptation of all that good which God confers by Christ in the way that he doth tender it I know this grace is diversly held out and is so comprehensive that the full nature of it is not easily laid open A common definition of it is that it is A resting upon Christ alone for salvation purposely given to correct their mistake that have made assurance or a full perswasion that what Christ hath done I shall enjoy in particular to be of the nature and essence of faith But though this may vertually comprize all that is required in this grace yet it is no full and explicite definition of it for unlesse the understanding give its assent that salvation is alone by Christ the will cannot rest upon him for it This assent in that definition is presupposed But it is convenient that it should be expert Other things besides salvation are received by faith from Christ but salvation is the most eminent and principall and all other as by consequent depend upon it This that I have delivered is more explicitely full not onely virtually but expresly holds out all that faith compriseth And as all of those are here as we have heard convinced of unbelief that know not those necessary truths that God hath made known and upon that account can give no assent together with those that believe even in necessary and fundamentall doctrines otherwise then God hath revealed that pick and choose in doctrines of faith assenting or denying assent at pleasure So also all those that give other things the preheminence above Christ or at least take them in in coordination with him When Christ is offered in the Gospel to the soul and men are urged by his Ministers to receive him for life and happinesse the things of the world are still ready to make tender of themselves The lust of the eyes the lust of the flesh the pride of life that is profits pleasures honours When these are hugged prosecuted and followed Christ is refused and slighted A covetous man will make sail of Christ for a piece of silver he will lay out more strength of affection to compasse earth in the way of a calling then to compasse Christ in Ordinances The man of pleasures will sell Christ for his cups for his sports for his wantonnesse the like we may say of the man of honours He that for the cause of Christ can forsake and abjure all is the onely man in whom Christ by faith makes his residence The necessary nourishment of faith Thus we have seen the two first wayes for the tryal of faith the third followes which is The means appointed for the nourishment and strength of it It cannot live unlesse in the use of means it be kept up Declensions are apt to appear in soul as well as in body He observes little about his spiritual estate that does not see his faith oftentimes apt to languish as well as his health And though we be kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation yet it is in the use of means and not otherwise He therefore that lives in faith is careful in the use of means to keep faith alive The means appointed of God for this end are especially the Word Sacraments and Prayer The Word 1. The Word is food as well as seed as it plants so it waters as it begins so it perfects the work of grace When Paul left the Ephesians whom he had begotten to the faith through the Gospel he leaves them this Legacy Act. 20.32 We are born again of the immortal seed of the Word 1 Pet. 1.23 and as new born babes we must desire the sincere milk of the Word that we may grow thereby 1 Pet. 2.2 No man ever knew a child live without the breast or other suitable means for nourishment Nor men of strength without answerable sustenance no more can a man in grace live without the Word of grace Our imaginations and carnal reasonings will be stirring and working and faith hath not a more deadly enemie The Word which is the sword of the Spirit must beat those down and hold them under 2 Cor. 10.5 The word of promise underproppes our faith and must be frequently heard diligently heeded or else it cannot be upheld Those therefore that prize the Word as a child the dug esteeming it with Job as their ordinary food Job 23.12 and to this end to keep life in their souls faith in their hearts here is a sign both of life and growth but when it is with men as with Israel in the wildernesse their soul loatheth this heavenly Manna as light bread having their appetite far better pleased with other things their ear being of the temper of Jeremies hearers The Word of the Lord is a reproach to them they have no delight in it Jer. 6.10 these never had faith in the power and life And all they that lose in their love to the Word lose also in their faith Many here might be convinced to be wanting in this righteousnesse upon their want of faith to intrest themselves in it 1. Those that take themselves to be above any necessity of hearing having learnt as they think so much that they may now well lay aside their teachers God vouchsafing of grace those gifts for the perfecting of the Saints having gained as they think perfection they matter no more intermedling with them If these could shew us any Scripture-Saint that ever reached to this height or ever set upon any such resolution or if they could give such experience to all that know them that they might know that they want nothing of the highest top of perfection then they said something But when the highest of Saints that we read of in the Word highly prized the Word and the more high they were the more high prize they put upon it and these that upon this pretence reject it proclaime to the vvorld many vvants in their souls even in that vvhich lyeth at the very bottome of faith and is of greatest necessity to the being of it their knovvledge being but in part in most of these very lovv and little or nothing vvhere most should be knovvn vve may vvell conclude that all this talke of perfection is vain Take tvvo persons the one of them talking and boasting of vvealth the other labouring hard in tillage or trade to gain vvealth and if you can tell whether of these the talker or the labourer is like to encrease in substance then you have determined the question whether these unruly talkers that boast of faith or those that diligently attend on Ordinances for gaining of it are more richly stored with it 2. Those that neglect to hear or
hear onely at their idle leisure judging a businesse that may be done but see little necessity of doing of it would pretend not to despise it yet put a very sleight esteem upon it Doth the child judge so of the dug Or do these judge so of their ordinary and necessary food A life of nature is kept up in the use of meanes as long as it can be patcht up if Physick be neglected so is not food The Word is food and physick for the life of grace and this is let alone 3. Those that carelesly negligently superciliously and disdainfully hear as though their businesse were not to feed but judge not to learn or be minded of any thing but onely to censure According as the way of their fancy works so the Word takes Some are pleased onely with Kickshawes like such dishes on a table that have shew without substance words that are quaint and strained not to help but to exceed their understandings Others with choyce notions onely how wholesome soever it is not worth heeding if not curious Others take up all according to the person that delivers it with children they are pleased with every thing from one hand with nothing from another Lastly Those that let go all truths as soon as they are heard There is no more heard of the Sermon when once it is done They that go to a feast will talk of the dishes and they that go to a Fair or Market will talk of the Commodities but when they go to the Congregation there is not a syllable heard of the Word after they return When meat goes out of the stomach as it comes in it neither strengtheneth nor nourisheth and the Word slipt as soon as it is heard can be no more effectual Sacraments 2. Sacraments are visible signs and seals That of Baptisme enters us into the Church visible and seals all the promises made to members on Gods terms and propositions And the Supper of the Lord is for confirmation of those that are visibly Church-members on the same terms likewise Baptisme is past in the act but still present in the use As a Souldier by oath taken and colours given was tied to his General so we are hereby tyed unto God and God is tyed unto us and hereby we know our duty and Gods promise As a lease binds to duty and assures a benefit so it is with the Sacrament of Baptisme The Apostle 1 Pet. 3.21 compares it to the Ark of Noah he was there tost up and down in the deep considering his present state he might well have feared shiprack but the Ark being of Gods apointment and he put into it by Gods command he might well confide in him for safety If we look to the temptations and assaults wherewith our souls are on all hands battered we have just cause of fears but when we call to mind that we entered the Church as Noah the Ark by Baptisme and make it our businesse that conscience may answer unto what Baptisme requires what objection soever our heart makes Baptisme may raise our souls in confident assurance The Lords Supper is to the eye as the promises are to the eare Whilest we are in the body spiritual things under corporal signs are ordained for our help and strength Our Saviour tells us his flesh is meat indeed and his blood is drink indeed John 6.55 And here under the signs of that which is our ordinary meat and drink the flesh and blood of Christ is tendered and as our food is offered unto us Where these Sacraments have their due esteem and men baptized in infancy do not passe by the thoughts of it in their growth but well consider their engagements and bonds that lye upon them to presse them to duty and the engagements of God for support of their faith they then make use of this ordinance to uphold faith and keep life in it in their souls when they frequent the Lords Table and conscienciously communicate for the ends for which it was instituted to be laid low in themselves to see sin aggravated and pardon tendred there is like hopes But when all thoughts of Baptisme is laid aside and the Lords Supper either neglected or prophaned these may well look that as a child through want of food so their faith upon the same account may languish Prayer 3. Prayer is the daughter of faith and also the nurse or foster-mother Faith breathes out it self in prayer and prayer obtains a more ample measure of faith to pray Lord I believe help my unbelief was the prayer of the father of the Lunatick Mark 9.24 and Lord encrease our faith was the prayer of the Apostles Luk. 17.5 When we have done all to stand prayer in the Spirit Ephes 6.18 must second This Communion with God keeps up faith in God They that make it their work to pray alwayes ever holding it up in the season of it joyning with the Congregation in publique in the family in a way more private and after Christs counsel in their closet sending forth holy ejaculations in their beds their walks and on all occasions These take care of their faith But in case that may be truly said of them which was falsly laid to the charge of Job that they restrain prayer before God Job 15.4 their faith may justly be suspected I may speak concerning this grace in the words of the Apostle these have not because they ask not these starve their faith and let it dye through want of nourishment and support We hear of Camelions that live in the ayr and Salamanders in the fire A Wonder was not long since noysed out of Germany of a Maid that lived onely on the smell of flowers An impostor lately went from place to place that fed on stones these that would passe for believers are some such Monsters Thus we have lookt into faith according to the three first rules the last followes which is the fruit that it beares or the effects that it produceth The fruits which faith bears and the effects which it produces These might be reduced into two heads First such as all faith if true produceth Secondly such as onely a strong and grown faith obtaineth But calling men to the tryal whether they be in the faith and not whether they be high and transcendent in believing I shall wave the latter and speak onely to the former These fruits which every faith which is such in truth produceth are either in the understanding or affections For that which it produceth in the understanding 1. In the Understanding take this rule Faith puts that high prize on Christ and priviledges through Christ that all earthly things are comparatively of the meanest value and most low esteem This we might make good in divers instances 1. In Moses If we read the beginning Chapters of Exodus we may there see the sad afflicted estate of the people of God in that time together with the honour to which Moses
by a wonder of providence was advanc'd In this honour of his and low ebbe of theirs it came into his heart to visite his brethren the children of Israel Act. 7.23 He could not drink wine in bowls and anoint himself with the chiefest oyntments and not grieve for the afflictions of Joseph and see the the Comment that the Apostle makes upon it Heb. 11.24 25 26. By faith Moses when he was come to years refused to be called the son of Pharaohs daughter choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches then the treasures in Egypt David in the Wildernesse of Judea was persecuted by Saul all his honours at Court were lost yea all livelihood and way of subsistence gone yet penning a Psalm in the midst of those exigents none of these are named on that day that he speaks of the fruition of Christ in Ordinances as Psal 63. may be seen Paul Phil. 3.5 6. layes open the rich priviledges that according to the flesh could be looked after and such that sometimes he himself did admire but these things that were gain to him he counted lesse for Christ yea he professeth himself to account them but dung when they stood in competition with Christ Compare the greatest of things that can be in thy desire and dung together and these will certainly stand in a great disproportion yet such is the disproportion between Christ and the greatest priviledges upon earth in a believers thoughts When the world hath a low and despicable opinion of Christ and men of the world are ready to say He hath no form nor comelinesse and when we shall see him there is no beauty that we should desire him All that is spoke of him in Gospel-Ordinances with them is dull and flat as was said of Sion This is Sion which no man looketh after So it may be said of the King of Sion Men of faith are of another opinion He is to them the chiefest of ten thousand Cant. 5.10 and stands in their thoughts above all comparison As the apple-tree among the trees of the Wood so is my beloved among the sons saith the Spouse Cant. 2.3 If men would now look into their hearts whether Christ and the great things of Christ or the world and the great things of the world have this esteem they might thence draw a strong conjecture whether they be in the Faith or whether their hearts are void of it which estimate of their Judgments may appear in their care and pains to compasse as also in their trouble upon the losse that accrues unto them If their care to compasse the world be great so that they rise up early and eat the bread of carefulnesse the world having all command of their affections to scrue them up to it self and put them on to improve their diligence to the utmost and in the mean time Ordinances are in low esteem and every way that Christ is compassed of mean regard businesses jusling out prayers and the week-dayeâ— employment in servile labours taking up the Sabbath-dayes duties when worldly affaires are followed with eagernesse and holy undertakings are done with earthly thoughts wearisomly as against the hair here is a cause of suspition Troubles in and about losses may be as great a discovery as cares to compasse If they were in Lots Wives case to run away from all and for Christ to leave it to fire plunder confiscation would not they then with a wishly eye look after them and have sad parting thoughts about them instead of joyfully suffering the spoyl of them And upon apprehensions that things go ill upon any emergent occasions at once to the hazard of outward things and the endangering of Ordinances in case they are sensible of the former and are as men senslesse of the latter having more wishes that taxes were taken off then that the Gospel should flourish here 's a true Gadarene that would part with Christ rather then his swine The world and not Christ in Ordinances is the Pearl for which they will make sale of all As to the fruit or effect that Faith produceth in the affections 2. In the Affections take these rules 1. Faith is against all whatsoever that is against Christ As it sets Christ in the highest room so it opposeth all that opposeth him and will not suffer the most desired lust that divides from him As the covetous mans lust carries him to his gold the wantons lust to his Dalilah the drunkards to his cups and breaks through all opposition in their way of fruition of them so a believers Faith carries him to his Christ and will not abide any temptation or lust in his way of interest in him Acts 15.9 We may see that Jewes and Gentiles are either of both of unclean hearts and that it is onely God that cleanseth and purifieth as he makes the heart soft so he makes it clean and saith is the instrument wherewith it is thus cleansed Lust defiles 1 Pet. 2.4 and saith purifies It is Lust that divides from Christ They that are Christ's crucifie the flesh with the lusts thereof Gal. 5.24 and that upon account of eternal fruition of him She that is married careth how she may please her husband 1 Cor. 7.34 she is not to go in any manner of attiâ—e or dresse to please her self but in that which may please him That which he dislikes she must cast off The believer is betrothed to Christ his care then is to walk in all well-pleasing and to cast off all that doth displease him If men can do that for Christ which the Galatians were ready to do for Paul even to pluck out their eyes for his sake rather then lose him then all is well but if they look into their thoughts and see that there is any thing dear unto them which is abhorrent to Christ any thing which they love that he loatheth whether it be inward filthinesse as pride vain-glory earthly-mindednesse c. or outward uncleannesse as drunkennesse whoredomes c. this evidences a total want of grace in their soules A believing drunkard a believing adulterer a believing extorting oppressor as to assent to the doctrine of faith and profession of it may well stand together and reading the Scriptures and looking among Christian professours we may find too many such believers but as to the grace of faith they stand in full opposition to it and in this sense we may justly say there is not a believing drunkard or covetous worldling upon the earth As our Saviour said concerning those devils that had held their haunt in the young man from infancy that his disciples could not cast them out because of their unbelief so I may say of all that cast not out these lusts It was weaknesse in the disciples faith that disabled them that they could not cast devils out of others It is want of faith that disableth
these that they cannot cast them out of themselves 2. Faith makes that resolute choyce of Christ that it suffers all manner of afflictions rather than to be driven and divided from him After ye were illuminated saith the Apostle to the believing Hebrewes ye suffered a great fight of afflictions Heb. 10.32 To save the labour of turning over large Volumes of Martyrologies read over that little book of Martyrs as some have called Heb. 11. especially ver 35 36 37 38. Faith kindles that flame that many waters cannot quench Christ upon earth was a man of sorrowes and acquainted with griefs yet he had those disciples that never left him till he came to the Crosse and then sollicitously enquired after him Where Christ dwells by faith there the Spirit strengthens for sufferings Ephes 3.16 17. If men now look into their hearts and see themselves willing to follow Christ in fair weather and to own his cause whilest it costs them nothing but in worldly respects rather gain by the bargain but when trouble ariseth they are gone These may look into the Parable of the sower whether this be not an evidence of a rocky and stony heart A strong wind is the tryal of the root of the tree of the foundation of the house an hot scorching fire of the truth of the mettal It is true that self-ends sometimes put a man upon sufferings But it is alwayes true that self-ends onely put a man upon profession when he will not stand out in sufferings They whose Religion is the States Religion the Times Religion will not lose an hair by any profession they make Self and not Faith carries on that profession 3. As faith carries the soul up to Christ to be one with him so also it carries it on in every affection and office of love to his brethren In Jesus Christ neither Circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but faith which worketh by love Gal. 5.6 It is not to be of this opinion or of that which men call their faith nor of this Nation nor of that which too oft prescribes all that men in their way of faith believe But to be possest of that faith which works by love which commends us unto God A man may be of this or that faith according to pleasure and yet his faith utterly destitute of that grace Faith carries a man not any further at all towards Christ then his love carries him on towards his brethren An idle faith is a dead faith and a dead faith never reacheth righteousnesse to Justification and life James never disputed against Paul's assertion of Justification by faith onely Writing after him as is generally confest he did not write to contradict any doctrine or correct any errours delivered by him When Paul concludes Justification by faith James concludes that it is by a working faith Where it works not it doth not then justifie and where it works to acceptation it works by love CHAP. XIII SECT I. Of the number of Sacraments AS a result from all that hath been said of the nature and use of Sacraments we may conclude the definite and distinct number of them So many Ordinances that we can find in Old or New Testament-Scriptures that are signs and seales of this nature as here hath been set out from the Apostles words so many Sacraments there are truly so called equally worthy of that honour of Sacraments with this of Circumcision being every way of the same nature and use they are deservedly to have the same esteem But falling short of such they are to have esteem as they are and their dignity may challenge but not to be put into this number The way to find out the number of Sacraments And I know no other way then this to find out the set and definite number of them Those trifling arguments made use of by some that the matter of New Testament-Sacraments viz. Water and Blood came out of the side of Christ and that blood and water as John affirms bear witnesse on earth are not worthy to be mentioned save onely that they are used by some of eminent name And upon diligent search we shall find onely two stated standing Ordinances in Old Testament-Scriptures and onely two in New Testament-Scriptures that are to be thus received We have not indeed any distinct Text in either of both Testaments expresly testifying that there are two and two onely Sacraments as we find it ordinarily in Catechismes Neither is there any distinct Text in the Law or Prophets that as we would that men should do to us so we should do to them Yet our Saviour Matth. 7.12 tells us that that rule is both in the Law and in the Prophets being a clear result from that which the Law and the Prophets have delivered The like may we say concerning the number of Sacraments It is as clear a result from that which is delivered to us both from Old and New Testament-Scriptures so that the conclusion is twofold drawn by way of deduction of this nature 1. Two onely standing Ordinances in the Old Testament of the nature of Sacraments Two onely Sacraments in the New Testament There were in Old Testament-times onely two standing Ordinances of the nature of Sacraments viz. Circumcision and the Passeover 2. There are in New Testament-times onely two Sacraments viz. Baptisme and the Lords Supper We shall begin with Old Testament-times and here our way of discovery is First To find out all those Signes or Ordinances that are set up in competition as Sacraments Secondly To enquire into the nature and use of them Thirdly To find out how nigh they come to the nature of Sacraments and what agreement they have with them Fourthly where it is that they are defective and fall short of Sacraments truly so called SECT II. Rainbowe no Sacrament THe first that offers it self is the Rainbowe of which we might speak First as it is in nature for discovery of the physical being of it Secondly as a sign appointed of God But the first consideration of it is not my businesse but the work of Philosophers who out of Aristotle have defined it to be A Bowe of many colours seated in an hollow and duskish cloud The definition of a Rainbow appearing upon the reflection of the Sun in opposition against it He that pleaseth may read further in Magirus physiol peripat lib. 4. cap. 5. Keckerman Syst Phys lib. 6. ad finem Zanch. de oper Dei lib. 3. cap. 3. Valesius de Sacrâ Philosoph cap. 9. So that the efficient cause is the Sun The subject in which it appeares is a cloud standing in Diametrical opposition The thing it self is the reflex of the Sun The form and shape is a bowe of variety of colours Whereupon it is generally concluded that there were bowes of this nature before the flood the Sun being then in equal vigour to produce it and clouds in which the reflex might be apparent And the cause being then as
Then works do not consummate for Paul casts off all works from this office and he speaks according to you of Justification in toto and if James speaks of it only as consummate and finished why does he instance in Rahab this being the first that was heard of her being in faith or grace The Authors that you follow are wont to say that Paul speaks of the first and James of the second Justification and it had been more for your advantage fully to have followed them then to have said that Paul speaks principally of the first yet speaks of the second likewise Yet you may see how hardly those of that opinion have been put to it Bellarmine that knows as well how to stickle for an opinion as another says that Paul speaking of the first Justication fetches a proof from Abraham which is understood of the second Justification and James speaking of the second Justification fetches a proof from Rahab which is the first Justification which as long since I have observed in the vindication of this text agrees like harp and harrow So that if the Authors that I follow have missed the meaning of these Apostles those that follow you are much lesse like to find it Yet after all this labour for a Reconciliation of this seeming difference between these great Apostles the Reader stands much engaged for that which you have brought to light from Reverend Mr. Gatakers hand in his Letter written to you where we see in what judgement he both liv'd and died taking it up as he saies when he was a novice and persisting in it to his last wholly differing from you and agreeing with me In Paul the question is saith he of sin in generall concerning which when any man shall be therewith charged there is no means whereby he may be justified that is justly assoyled from the otherwise just charge of being a sinner but by his faith in Christs blood Christs blood having made satisfaction to Gods Justice for sin and his faith in it giving him a right to it and interest in it This he understands of all sin through the whole course of a believers life first and last faith is his way of Justification Whereas in James saith he the question is concerning some speciall sin and the questioned persons guilt of it or freedome from it What speciall sin he means he explaines himself to wit Whether a man be a true or counterfeit believer a sound and sincere or a false and feigned professor In which case any person that is so wrongfully charged may plead not guilty and offer himself to be tryed by his works as in some cases Gods Saints have done even with appeal to God himself And what differs this from what I say onely the faith that is not counterfeit but evidenced by works justifies The truth of his faith is questioned whensoever the sincerity of his profession is thus charged This is no more then that which is ordinarily affirmed that faith justifies the person and works justifie faith 4. You say The ordinary exposition of the word faith Jam. 2.24 vindicated If with the named Expositors you understand by works a working fâith either you grant as much as I affirme in sense or else you must utterly nul all the Apostles arguing from v. 13. to the end Answ It were too tedious to follow you through this large discourse and you very well save me the paines when you adde I suppose you will say Faith which Justifies must be working but it Justifies not quâ— operans And so indeed I do say and you answer true nor quà fides i. e. qâ—à apprehendit objectum if the quà speaks the formall reason of its interest in Justification To this I say If it neither Justifies quà operans nor quà apprehendens objectum I would fain know how or under what notion it justifies Do's it justifie nihil agendo I may well say Cedo tertium If you say as I think you will it justifies quà conditio Is it conditio nec operans nec apprehendens A faith neither working nor receiving is certainly as bad as the faith that James speaks of that profits nothing You demand further Why cannot faith Justifie except it be working I answer Because if it be faith to apprehend or receive then it is in life for if not alive it cannot receive If it be alive then it doth work You say The Apostle doth not plead for a meer necessity of signification or discovery but for a necessity ut medii ad Justificationem Even that Justification which he calls imputing of righteousness and that by God I answer He enquires what that faith is that is medium ad Justificationem and determines that it is not a dead but a working faith that is this Justifying medium and this strengthens and not nuls the Apostles argumentation When you have made it your business to overthrow my interpretation you set upon my reason and say As for your single argument here I answer And I may reply 1. That one argument to the purposâ— is to be preferred before 31 which are all besides the qâ—estion 2. That you might have found a double argument but that you industriously leave out one to make it single You say it is a weak ground to maintain that James twelve times in thirteen verses by works means not works and by faith alone which he still opposeth doth not mean faith alone and all this because you cannot see the connexion of one verse to the former or the force of one cited Scripture And I hope I may without offence tell you tht this kind of reasoning or answering adds advantage neither to your cause nor reputation You take it for granted and would perswade your Reader that if I suppose the word is once figurative where the proper acceptation is both destructive to the sense and repugnant to the whole tenor of the Gospel which was my second reason by you omitted that I must therefore so interpret it all along But you have had Scripture instances to the contrary and are directed where you may be further furnished I conclude that when James affirms that faith without works is dead and therefore cannot justifie ad sayes Abraham was justified by works when he offered Isaac which Scripture says was a work of faith of if that do not please was done by faith Heb. 11.17 and further sayes that in his justification by works the Scripture was fulfill'd which sayes he was justified by faith Is it not a fair interpretation to understand a working faith which is alone of possible power to justifie when the Scripture also ascribing this instanced justifying work of Abrham to the faith of Abraham as we see Heb. 11.17 In the close of your ten arguments you speak your sense of the danger which is like to follow upon this tenent which I have thought most meet to reserve to this place What sad effects say you it may produce to
personally righteous And in this sense it is that the faith and duties of believers are said to please God viz. as they are related to the covenant of Grace and not as they are measur'd by the Covenant of works Are not faith and duties here our personall righteousnesse and is not faith a branch of holinesse as well as it is of righteousnesse And hath it not its degrees as well as righteousness Surely the Apostles thought so when they prayed Lord increase our faith Luk. 17.5 And the Lord Christ had no other thoughts when he rebukes his hearers for their little faith Matth. 6.30 And commends the Woman of Canaan for the greatnesse of her faith Matth. 15.28 And as it riseth and falls so do other duties with it they are more intense or remisse in like manner And as for their speeches which you challenge do you think that their ignorance was in that measure intolerable as to believe the righteousnesse of what they spake was a meer non-entity i.e. had nothing of the being of righteousnesse in it They doubtlesse looked upon righteousnesse as a renewed quality as you do upon holinesse and the Apostle both upon holinesse and righteousnesse Eph. 4.24 The new man is so put on that we must be still putting it on It follows that seeing these things are exactioris indigationis understand that the reason of my assertion lyes here The law as it is the rule of obedience doth require perfect obedience in degree and so here is an imperfection in our actions in the degree as being short of what the rule requireth and it being these actions with their habits which we call our holinesse therefore we must needs say our holinesse is imperfect And if our righteousnesse were to be denominated from this law commanding perfection we must say not that such righteousnesse were imperfect because the holinesse or obedience is imperfect but it is none at all because they are imperfect It seems you intend here exactnesse equall to that in which you appeared to the learned brother before mentioned and as you did distinguish before of a metaphysicall and morall perfection so you seem here to distinguish of righteousnesse and holinesse either as a duty performed by men in the Covenant of grace according to rule or else as a condition required by the Covenant of works respective to the attainment of life upon terms there required This seems to be your meaning in your last words in this Paragraph Duty simply as duty and holiness or supernaturall grace as such may be more or less But holiness and duty as the materia requisita vel subjectum proximum justitiae consistit in indivisibili How duty and holiness can be the subject of it self I know not for so they are if they be the subjects of righteousness That righteousness in which we must exceed the righteousness of Scribes and Pharisees is our duty and our holiness as well as of our righteousness but if you carry it thence to make it the righteousness of the covenant of works it is easily granted that the imperfection of it renders it as no righteousness respective to that end of attainment of life by it A Pharisee might as well be justified upon the terms of that covenant as Noah Daniel and Job Zachary and Elizabeth or any other of those that were most perfect and eminent in righteousness But I think no Reader could observe either in your own words or theirs that you censure any such meaning To assert the imperfection of our righteousness I said Isaiah I am sure saith All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags Is 64.6 no greater charge of imperfection can lie against the most imperfect holiness then the Prophet layes upon our righteousness Interpreting the Prophets words as I think the sense of them is generally given by interpreters ancient and modern But seeing you go off to speak of righteousness of another kind I will not contend I there added Neither do I understand how holiness should be imperfect taken materially and righteousness perfect taken formally in reference to a rule After such courteous censure that you please to give you fall to examine what that is that I understand not In which you take one piece of my sentence apart and say How holiness should be imperfect taken materially sure you understand that It is therefore say you no doubt the other branch that you mean How righteousness is perfect taken formally in reference to a rule If the Reader please to consult my words he may see that I put them not divisim but conjunctim giving in my reason why to me it is non-intelligible telling you that we may for ought I know as well make holiness formall and refer it to a rule and righteousness materiall in an absolute consideration without reference to any rule at all This you disjoyn from the rest and fall upon my words apart for what reason is best known to your self And I leave it to the Reader to judge whether that I may not call holiness perfect and righteousness imperfect as well as you may call righteousness perfect and holiness imperfect and whether there is not a materiality and formality not in the one or the other but in the one as well as the other and this was that which I spake to And any man that understands no more then I will I think take this to be a material exception against that which in your Aphorismes was delivered You say if you or any man resolve to use holiness in the same sense as righteousness if I once know your minds I will not contradict you for I find no pleasure in contending about Words but for my self I must use them in the common sense if I will be understood Righteousness and holiness in what sense commonly used But you might have done well to let us know that that is the common sense of the word righteousness taken for personall inherent righteousness which you here use till I see that made good I shall judge it to be your own peculiar acceptation of it I would know what interpreter of Zachary's words Luk. 1.75 of Paul's words Eph. 4.24 of John's words Revel 22.11 do put such a difference as you make between righteousnesse holiness as to make one a renewed quality of the Spirit the other no such thing but a relation in esse formali to what you must explain your self I have read so much difference indeed made as to put holiness for duties of the first Table in immediate reference to God righteousness for duties of the second Table in immediate concernment to man but thus taken they are both equally new qualities from the Spirit and have their intension and remission one as well as the other And I have read a rule given that where they are put together as in the Scriptures quoted they are to be distinguished as before but where the one is put apart it is to be understood as comprehensive of
die in impenitency and unbelief I do not here go about to dispute the thing but only observe that all that Amyraldus hath gone about to set up concerning universall Redemption with such high applause of yours is by this position utterly overthrown For the assertion which in the place mentioned I have laid down that impenitence and unbelief in professed Christians is a breach of Covenant I need say no more then that which I have spoke there having been nothing replyed to that which I have said My argument in the place quoted Arguments evincing that impenitence and unbelief in professed Christians are violation of Covenant in brief was this They that engage in Covenant to believe in Christ and forsake their sin break Covenant by a life in unbelief and sin But all professed Christians engaged by Covenant to believe in Christ and to forsake their sin Therefore all professed Christians by unbelief and sin break Covenant I only here add If unbelief and impenitence be not breaches or violations of Covenant properly so called then finall unbelief and impenitence is no breach or violation of Covenant properly so called This is clear Finall perseverance in unbelief and impenitence is no more then a continuance of the same posture or state of Soul God-ward in which they before stood in impenitence and unbelief As Perseverance in Faith and Repentance is the continuance of Faith and Repentance Explicatory distinctions examined If then finall unbelief and impenitence be a breach of the Covenant of grace then all unbelief and impenitence denominating a man an unbelieving and impenitent person is a breach of Covenant likewise For the clearing of your meaning which is all that you do in this question you distinguish first of the Word Covenant Secondly of the word Violation You say The word Covenant is sometimes taken for Gods Law made to his creature containing precepts promises and threatnings Sometimes for man's promise to Gâ—d Violation You say is taken either rigidly for one that in judgement is esteemed a non-performer of the condition or laxly for one that in judgement is found a true performer of the condition but did neglect or refuse the performance for a time You apply both these distinctions Taking the word Covenant in the latter sense you say that you have affirmed that man breaks many a Covenant with God yea even the Baptismal vow it self is so broken till men do truly repent and believe To which I reply That it is no other then the Baptismall vow or Covenant that we are to enquire into Baptisme is as Circumcision was a seal of the Covenant In Baptisme then we engage to the terms of the Covenant and till we repent and believe by your own confession we break this Covenant But taking the word Covenant say you in the former sense i. e. for Gods precepts promises and threatnings and Violation in the latter sense for one that in Judgment that is at the day of Judgment is esteemed a non performer of the conditions so you say None violate the Covenant but finall Vnbelievers and impenitent that is as you explaine it No other are the proper subject of its peremptory curse or threatning But Good Sir reflect upon this explanation of yours and in a more serious way yet consider of it To help your self out you refer mans violation of Covenant not to his own promise or engagement in which he stands in duty tyed but to Gods engagements containing his promises and threatnings and to violate Gods promise or threatning which you here implye to be done by Covenant-breakers scarce carries sense with it We may incur his threatning or misse of his promise but we do not violate either his promise or threatning Violation of Gods precept is disobedience of which Pharaoh a man never in Covenant was guilty but no violation or breach of Covenant where there is no voluntary engagement Our engagement is necessity to make it up into a Covenant and our violation of our engagements to make it a breach of Covenant Was ever any charged with breach of Covenant in breaking not his own but the condition of the other Conanting party Jsrael was under a Law to let their Hebrew Servants go free the seaventh year Exod. 21.2 In Zedekiah's time they serv'd themselves of them beyond that terme Here was the transgression of a Law but no breach of any particular Covenant But when they entred Covenant with God to do that which Law required and ratified it by cutting a Calfe in twaine passing through the parts of it and again served themselves of them here was a breach of Covenant So that the violation that you speak of if you may call it a violation is no Covenant-violation Every man that breaks a Covenant breaks his own and not anothers part in the Covenant And whereas you will have that to be a violation of Covenant laxly and not rigidly taken Impenitent persons in the most strict and proper sense are Covenant-breakers whâ—n one doth neglâ—ct or refuse the performance for the time but in judgment that is in the day of Judgment is found a true performer of the conditions to me it is very strange upon a severall account First I suppose you mean his own conditions to which he standes engaged which for a time he thus neglectâ— and not Gods And you so spoile all that before you spake of Covenant-violations respective to promises and threatnings Secondly Such a one in the strictest sense is a man guilty of breach of Covenant during such time of his neglect or refusall Was not that younger Son of his Father mentioned Luk. 15. properly and in the most rigid sense a prodigal when he wastâ—d his substance with ritotous living notwithstanding that he was after reclaimed to a more frugall course And was not shee also that was a sinner in the City Luk. 7. truly a sinner or only in a laxe sense because she afterwards repented Was not the penitent Thief as truly and in as rigid a sense a Thief when he stole as he that stole and repented not And so he that lives in breach of promise with God is as truly a breaker of Covenant notwithstanding following Repentance as those that live and die impenitent I know therefore no other way of explanation of your self to your Readers satisfaction but to say that the Covenant of grace is not finally violated unlesse the conditions be finally broke Who ever doubted but when a sinner repents the doom which is passed against him for sin is reverst And that Paul a persecutor not in a laxe but in rigid sense afterwards building the faith that he destroyed shall not appear in Judgment as a persecutor And so he that is as truly and in no laxe sense a Covenant-breaker being by grace brought in to keep Covenant in the day of Judgment shall be reputed and esteemed a man faithful in Covenant SECT VII Faith and Repentance are mans conditions and not Gods in the
as from God but reqâ—ired of God from us are not Gods conditions but ours in that Covenant This is cleare Being there expresly required of us and not so much as mentioned as from God they cannot be his engagement but ours to performe But Faith and Repentance are not mentioned as from God in the proper conditionall Covenant but required of God from us This proposition is your own in your answer as we have heard before pag. 45 46. Therefore Faith and Repentance are not God's conditions in the proper conditionall Covenant but ours 2. The conditions of a Covenant are his that performeth and not his that imposeth This Proposition is your own in this Section and clear in reason But we perform and God imposeth Faith and Repentance This is of two parts First that they are performed by us This you confess where you yield that they are our acts For the second that they are imposed on us none can deny See 1 John 3.23 Act. 17.30 They are therefore our conditions and not God's in this Covenant 3. Covenant-conditions are theirs that are charg'd with falshood in case of failing in them and non-performance of them This is plain in all Covenants To make conditions and to fail in them is to be false to them But in case of failing in Faith and Repentance man is charged and not God God fails not but man deals falsly Therefore they are mans conditions and not Gods 4. Covenant-conditions are theirs who upon failing in them and not performance of them suffer as Covenant-breakers This is clear Israel covenanted to dismiss their Hebrew servants and dismissed them not And Israel suffered for it Jer. 34. But upon failing in Faith and Repentance God suffers not so much as in his name He is not charged with mens unbelief and impenitence Men themselves suffer Therefore Faith and Repentance are mans conditions not God's So that though I have not refuted your answer which never was in my eye yet I have answered your Querist's demand and made it good that Faith and Repentance are mans conditions and not God's in the Gospel-covenant SECT VIII The Covenant of Grace requires and accepts sincerity I Have pass'd through those debates in which our judgements stand at difference for in the last you will differ though I had thought there had been a full accord between us Now I must come to that in which we do agree which pag. 144. Sect. 82. you entitle Whether the Covenant of Grace require perfection and accept sincerity In which I take to the negative conceiving that it requires the same that it accepts And in your Aphorismes if I understand any thing you have clearly delivered your self with me pag. 157 158. in these words As when the old Covenant said Thou shalt obey perfectly the Moral Law did partly I think you mean perfectly tell them wherein they should obey So when the new Covenant saith Thou shalt obey sincerely the Moral Law doth perfectly tell us wherein or what we must endeavour to do c. Whereupon Mr. Crandon is herein against you with as great vehemence as in any other of your doctrines Neither do I perceive by any thing that you have said that your mind is changed And I had much rather answer Mr. Crandon in defence of truth which he in you here opposeth then to spend time in my own quarrel Though my Tenent give you not distast yet it seems my arguments do not please But if truth stand it matters less though I fall You answer all my arguments in order as though you judged me to be in the fowlest error when I am yet perswaded that if not onely some but all of my arguments fail which you make your business to impugn the Position it self which with you is truth as well as with me will fall with it After a short Apology and conjecture made who that Divine may be whom with much reverence I mention supposing him the first that manifested himself in the contrary way that the Gospel requires perfection and accepts sincerity You tell me that you conceive this difference is occasioned by the ambiguity of the word Covenant of Grace and tell me that in your judgement I ought to have removed it by distinguishing before I had argued against their opinion And so you fall upon my work for me and give in abundance of acceptations of the word Covenant of Grace And if I may take the boldness to be as free with you as you with me I think you might have done well to have made it appear where and by whom this word is taken in all of these different senses and significations If your Reader knew all this before your Book fell into his hand you have nothing benefited him you have only told him what he knew before If he he knew it not he hath now alone your word for it And I know not where else any Reader may find a great part of it but from your hand I profess my self to be much more amazed then edified in Reading all that you have spoke of it When you have reckoned up very many senses of the word you say Now if the question be whether in any of these senses the Covenant doth command perfect obedience you answer An explication of the Authors meaning All the doubt is of the three latter one of which is Promises Prophecies and Types before Christ's comming And to speak mine own meaning and I had thought no man had doubted of it I take Covenant of grace in this dispute for the whole transaction that passes in a Covenant-way betwixt God and his people in order to Salvation as comprizing all that God requires promises or threats and all that to which man engages himself and which he expects But when I speak of that which the Covenant thus taken promiseth I mean that which it promiseth in the promissory part of it when I speak of what it threatneth I mean in the Minatory part of it and when I speak of what it requires I mean in the preceptive part of it Now this preceptive part must needs have some rule at which men in Covenant must look as distinguished from threats or promises and containing Agenda things to be done and not Credenda Speranda or Timenda things to be Believed Hoped or Feared The rule or Standard here in these things which man in Covenant is called to do is the Moral Law God quits not man of his Subjection He is a subject in this as he was in the former Covenant The Covenant of works called to the keeping of it in the highest fullest and most compleat perfection The Covenant of Gâ—ace cals us to eye it and with sincere endeavour to conform to it When God spake to Abraham the leading man in Covenant respective to all after-Covenanters whether Jewes or Gentiles he saith I am the Almighty God or God al-sufficient walk before me and be thou perfect Gen. 17.1 In which words we have first the
parties in Covenant and the engagement of either party Gods engagement is to be to Abraham Almighty and Al-sufficient for protection for provision so that he need not look else-where to compass good or keep off evill Abrahams Engagement is to walk before God and to be perfect or as it is in the Margent reading upright sincere which walking saith Ainsworth comprehendeth both true faith Heb. 11.5 6. and carefull obedience to God's Commandments That faith is called for in this perfection see 2 Chron. 16.8 9. To rely alone upon God in one verse is to be perfect in the other That this perfection of service of obedience is no other then sincerity all interpreters that I have seen acknowledge See Peter Martyr Vaetablus Paraeus Calvin on the place God Covenants for obedience saith Calvin from his servant and the integrity which is here mentioned is opposed to hypocrisie Rivet closeth with Calvin and in many words expresseth himself that this perfection means nothing else but integrity or sincerity otherwise saith he they that walk and are yet in the way do not attain to a perfection properly so called So that according to him the Covenant requires the same that through grace the Saints here attain and that is a perfection not property so called Dr. Preston on the words is very large to this purpose As for that which you produce as an opinion of an acquaintance friend of mine of extraordinary learning and judgement leaving me to guess whom you mean as indeed I do but with possibility of mistake That the Morall Law is the matter of the new Covenant I cannot well understand at least as you express it How far the word matter may reach I know not I believe that it is their Rule in the New Covenant but otherwise held out then it was in the Covenant of works as I have before expressed my self As a Law it loses nothing of it's ancient strictness for it is ever unchangeably the same the rule of our duty and not of our strength onely the terms of the Covenant of Grace are not for exact observation but sincere endeavour So that the least failing is a sin against the Law but not a breach of Covenant which for ought I discern is the sense that you give As for that which in the second place you urge from him whom you stile Learned Judicious and much Honoured Brother and my friend and acquaintance making these two but one Law quo ad formam I command thee fal'n man perfect obedience and oblige thee to punishment for every sin yet not remedilesly but so as that if thou Believe and Repent this obligation shall be dissolved thou saved else not I should rather take them disjunctim then conjunctim but I know not whether there be any considerable difference I so far subscribe that all that perish by the sentence of the Law to whom the Covenant was ever tendered are by neglect of Covenant left in a remediless condition The Law damns the unbeliever and impenitent unbelief holds him that he is not by the Covenant of Grace delivered from the Law 's sentence When you come to bring all home by application to me with your censure for laying an heavy charge upon them that I oppose and apologizing on their part I do not well know how to understand your words that so I might see my own error You say It is most likely that those Divines that affirm that the Covenant of Grace doth require perfect obedience and accepts sincere do take that Covenant in this last and largest sense and as containing the Moral Law as part of the matter Before you spake of the Moral Law as the matter of the Covenant and now you speak of it as part of the matter And so understood you say No doubt it is true if I understand it of perfection for the future And then doubtless it is an error for I understand perfection for the present And what the Law of God or Covenant do's require it doth in present as I think require And what gave you occasion to suspect otherwise I cannot imagin When you have taken upon you their defence or at least their excuse that hold against you you come to answer my arguments that hold with you I said This opinion Arguments that the Covenant of grace requires onely sincerity vindicated That the Covenant requires perfection establishes the former opinion opposed by Protestants and but now refuted as to the obedience and the degree of it called for in-covenant You answer If you interpret the Papists as meaning that the Law requires true perfection but accepts of sincere then if it be spoken of the Law of works or nature it is false and not the same with theirs whom you oppose Answ I marvail that you will put the case if I do when I tell you expresly that I do not I limit the parallel to the obedience and degree called for in Covenant which these Reverend Divines make to be the same as those that I had spoken to but differ respective to acceptation and so their mistake if it be one is infinitely below the Popish error in the Councill of Trent held forth which I did oppose You further say If you take them as no doubt you do as meaning it of the Law of Christ as the Trent Council express themselves then no doubt but they take the Law of Christ in the same extended sense as was before expressed and then they differ from us but in the fore-mentioned notion Answ I do not understand your distinction between the Law of nature and the Law of Christ as I have before largely told you and given in my reasons You speak somewhat in that which follows that the Papists do not indeed take the Covenant or Law it self to command true perfection but that which they call perfection which is no other then the grace of Sanctification as I expressed out of some of the chief of the writers But it is true perfection that those mean whom I now write against And so you conclude that you see not the least ground for my first charge But you might observe what I further say in words more at large then is here fit to he repeated purposely to prevent this objection that they look upon this which we say is no more then Sanctification as full Perfection and such that answers to the Law in the sense in which it was given Our character of grace inherent is their interpretation of the Law and so they raise up men in a conceit that they answer the Law when they live in a continual breach of it 2. I said If this opinion stand then God accepts of Covenant-breakers of those that deal falsly in it whereas Scripture chargeth it upon the wicked upon those of whom God complains as rebellious Deut. 29.25 Jos 7.15 Jer. 11.10 and 22.8 9. c. You answer This charge proceedeth meerely from the confounding of the duty as such
that good work are not necessary to Salvation but onely by a necessity of presence lib. 4. de justit cap. 7. That necessity by his confession Protestants then acknowledge and he intends justification as is plain by the Subject he hath in hand Here then is nothing peculiar to faith to be meerly conditio cum quâ or causa sine quâ non Nâ—ither can we ascribe any more noble causality as to be a formall or meritorious cause as needs not to be proved The asserting of justification by faith therefore denotes that which we make an instrument in justification Now that the Antients assert that we are justified alone by faith putting in that exclusive particle that Papists are wont to say is not in Scriptures nor Fathers may be made good 1. By manifold authorities asserting it 2. By multitude of quotations Our Book of Homilies having quoted severall Scripture-Texts for justification by faith alone addes And after this-wise to be justified onely by this true and lively faith in Christ speaketh all the old and Antient Authors both Greek and Latine Ser. of Salvation par 2. pag. 16. And the Rhemists charging Protestants to foist the word onely into the Text in Rom. 3.28 Fulk replies You were best to charge all the Antient Fathers which use this term of whom we have received it to be Foysters and excluders of the Sacraments and good works The particle alone by faith in the article of justification was not first devised by us saith Chemnitius but was alwayes used with great consent in all Antiquity as examples out of the writings of the Fathers do demonstrate which sentences of the Fathers saith he are gathered by Robert Barnes Aepinus Bullinger Otho Corberus c. Loc. de justif pag. 772. Octavo And Chamier Panstrat Cathol Tom. 3. lib. 22. c. 5. having quoted Scripture that faith alone justifieth concludes so the Scripture is cleer with us The Fathers in order are to be reckoned up by me before I examine the exceptions of adversaries The induction of quotations yet remaines and I had it in my thoughts to have set down the words themselves which for the most part are very express but I find that that would be tedious to my self and wearisome to the Reader and divers of the Authors quoted to my hands I have not I shall content my self therefore to poynt out the Authors quoting them and the places quoted Ambrose in Roman 1. Rom. 3. Rom. 4. Rom. 20. 1 Cor. 1. Galat. 1. Galat. 3. and Sermon 45. if it be Ambroses is quoted by Chemnitius in the place mentioned who sayes that Ambrose repeats that exlusive particle onely fifteen times By Eckhardus Compend Theol. lib. 2. cap. 3. pag. 391. By Chamier loco citato Hilary lib 6. de Trinit Can. 8. in Matth. 21. is quoted by Chemnitius ibid. Fulk in Rom. 3.28 Chamier ibid. Davenant and Prideaux lect 5. Hieron in Rom. 4. Rom. 10. in Galat. 2. Galat. 3. is quoted by Chamier and Eckhardus ibid. Origen lib. 3. in Rom. cap. 3. and lib. 4. is quoted by Fulk Eckhardus and Chamier ibid. Chrysostome in 1. Cor. 1 Rom. 3. Hom. 7. in Tit. 2. Hom. 3. Rom. 4. Hom. 8. Galat. 3. Serm. de side lege naturae is quoted by Chamier Eckhardus Fulk Davenant de Justit habit cap. 29. pag. 378. and Prideaux Lect. 5. pag. 164. Athanasius Orat. contra Arrianos is quoted by Eckhardus ibid. Basil Hom. de humil 51. is quoted by Fulk Eckhardus Chamier Davenant ibid. Nazianzen Orat. 22.26 is quoted by Fulk Eckhardus Chamier ibid. Theodoret in Rom. 3. Ephes 2. is quoted by Eckhardus as also Therapeuticon Sept. by Chamier Bernard Serm. 22. in Cant. Epist 27. is quoted by Chamier Eckhardut Isychius in Levit. 14. lib. 4. is quoted by Chamier and Eckhardus Theophilact in Galat. 3. is quoted by Chamier and Chemnitius Sedulius in Rom. 3. Rom. 4. is quoted by Chamier and Chemnitius Primasius in Rom. 4. Rom. 8. is quoted by Chamier and Eckhardus Victor Mar. lib. 3. in Gens is quoted by Eckhard Fulk in Rom. 4. Petrus Chrysologus Ser. 34. Prosper Aquitan Epigram 9. are quoted by Chamier Ruffinus is quoted by Fulk Beda in Psal 77. pag. 71. by Davenant and Bp Vsher de statu success Eccles cap. 2. pag. 46. Gennadius in Rom. 3. Haymo in Rom. 1. Lyra in Galat. 3. Gloss Ordinaria in Epist Jac. is quoted by Chemnitius Theodolius in Rom. 3. Fortunatus in Expos Symboli Epiphanius in Ancor Phylast in Catal. Irenaeus adversus Haeres lib. 4. Haeres 5. Maxentius de fide are quoted by Eckhardus And because Papists say that Austin uses not this exclusive particle onely therefore Chemnitius tells us that it is used by him in Serm. Quadrages as also in his exposition of these words Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness which is in his 68. Serm. de tempore lin 1. also Tractat. 8. Tractat. 42. in Johan Contra duas Epistol Petil. lib. 3. Serm. 40. de verbis domini Chamier addes In octoginta tribus quaestionibus Quaest 76. Exposit in Galat. 3. Chemnitius having quoted these testimony that I have mentioned under his name addes we may then truly say with Erasmus that this word sole which is followed with so great clamours in this age in Luther is reverently read and heard in the Fathers So that we see a peculiar interest that faith hath in justification which belongs to no other grace And therefore it is no wonder that you who forsake all the reformed Churches that unanimously make it an instrument in justification are at such a stand as you are in Conclus 29. and 30. of your Confession what office in justification to assign to it you confess you cannot hit upon the true and full difference in the point of Conditionality in this work between saith and obedience which is no marvail seeing you oppose that which is indeed the difference and Faiths peculiar office which is the instrumentall interesting us in Christ by way of acceptation or apprehension as Isychius in the place quoted saith Sola fide apprehenditur non ex operibus The grace viz. of justification is apprehended by faith and not by works which is as plain a testimony as may be for the instrumentality of this grace Chemnitius yet further notes the way that Papists take to evade these testimonies Objecting that the Antients used that particle sole otherwise then we do and returns his answer 1. That they use the word sole or alone to exclude all other sects intending no more but that it is alone the Christian Faith and not the Jewish or Turkish that leads to Justification and Salvation And this rule Franc. à Sancta Clara produces from Vega Pag. 191. with no other approbation but that it is sometimes true and Chemnitius quite overthrowes it making it appear that when the Fathers speak of the application apprehension or acceptation of remission of sins by Faith they still
Moses Baptisme into him what Page 526 N. Names GIven by God not empty titles Page 12 Nature What meant by the times of the Law of nature Page 24 Necessity Of Sacraments asserted Page 285 c. Argumeats evincing it Page 288 c. The kind of degree of the necessity of Sacraments enquired into Page 289 Not absolutely necessary to Salvation Page 289 Objections answered Page 290 Explicatory Rules delivered in it Page 294 c. A greater degree of necessity in the initiatory leading Sacrament then in that which follows Page 298 Arguments evincing it ibid. c. O. Obedience MAns sin disobligeth him not from obedience Page 195 196 197 Obligation Mans Obligation of himself unto God implies Gods mutuall obligation Page 130 Oblige Mans inability for duty doth not disoblige from duty Page 197 Orders Their number in the Church of Rome and their divisions Page 538 Most of this number doubted by themselves whether they be Sacraments ibid. The Matter Page 539 Form Page 539 Effect Page 539 Minister Page 539 Reasons evincing it to be no Sacrament ib. Ordinances All outward Ordinances are for the Church in fieri and not onely in facto Page 189 Sacraments must have the Honour of divine Ordinances Page 68 Originall sin Asserted Page 363 Distinguished into peccatum originans orinatum Page 365 Originall sin not a meer want of primitive integrity but attended with unversall defilement ibid. c. Oyle Anointing with Oyle Jam. 14 15. What it means Page 536 537 Queres put to those that would revive this practice Page 537 P. Parables CHrist speaking in Parables what it meaneth Page â—4 Pardon Closing with God for pardon is not to pardon a mans self Page 452 Passive Neither believing nor receiving are to be judged meerly passive Page 442 In what sense faith passive in justification Page 476 c. Pemble Not sole and singular in asserting the word to be a passive instrument Page 476 He is large in reasons of it Page 475 Penance The parts of it Contrition Page 531 532 Confession Page 531 532 Satisfaction Page 531 532 Papists agree not what that is in Penance that makes up a Sacrament Page 533 Arguments evincing it to be no Sacrament ib. People Allegations for their power examined Page 252 264 Perfection Of the subject and perfection of parts respective to the universality of the object distinguished Page 586 Pighius A learned Papist with divers others joynes with us in the doctrine of justification Page 440 Pope He hath his visible pardoner as well as others Page 464 Prayer A necessary means of faiths nourishment Page 509 Priest The several functions of Christ as Priest King Prophet are to be distinguished but not divided Page 562 Priestly Levitical types lead us unto Christ in his Priestly office Page 566 Privileges A faith short of justifying entitles to visible privileges Page 161 Profession Men of a visible profession truly and really in Covenant with God Page 128 Profession of faith engages to a lively working faith Page 172 c. Promise That which is the condition of the thing promised is not the condition of the Seal Page 173 Exceptions against it examined ibid. Gospell promises are a savour of death unto many Page 469 Protestants Vindicated from four supposed great errors Page 452 The author is confest to appear in the common cause of Protestants ibid. R. Rainbow DEfined Page 516 It had respect to a Covenant improperly so called Page 517 It was an instituted sign ibid. Correspondencies between it and the promise Page 518 How far it was Sacramentall ibid. How far it fals short ibid 519 Reall Covenants may be broke by men in Covenant Page 138 Common grace is reall Page 132 Men of a visible profession really in Covenant with God Page 128 Regenerate Duties of positive institution do not onely bind the regenerate Page 195 Repentance How prerequired in Baptisme Page 108 Repentance and Faith Are mans conditions not Gods in the proper conditionall Covenant Page 626 Right Fundamentall and actuall distinguished Page 88 The distinction cleered In civill immunities Page 88 Ecclesiasticall privileges Page 89 They must be both written Page 90 Right unto a bar to detain from Sacraments not alwayes express Page 91 Righteous Men are so denominated really and not equivocally that imperfectly obey the Law Page 614 Righteousness Non reaâ—us is not righteousness Page 588 Imperfect righteousness is no contradiction Page 589 Righteousness as well as holiness is intended and remitted ib. Righteousness and holiness in what sense commonly used Page 592 Righteousness in an imperfect conformity to the Law asserted Page 595 There is a partiall reparation of in herent righteousness in regeneration Page 611 That righteousness which the Covenant requires the Sacraments appendant to it seal Page 413 Righteousness Christ The naturall righteousness of Christ is not our justification Page 439 Whether the righteousness whereby Christs person was righteous be given to us Page 453 Queries put concerning this gift of righteousness Page 454 Faith being terminated on Christ is terminated on his righteousness Page 455 To receive his righteousness for justification no fancy or delusion Page 456 Righteousness Faith The Righteousness of Faith is the great promise of the Covenant of grace Page 414 This righteousness is sealed in the Sacraments of the Covenant of grace Page 415 Proved by Scriptures Page 417 Confirmed by reasons Page 418 Explained by rules Page 419 420 Bellarmines five objections answered Page 421 c. Propositions explaining the meaning of the righteousness of Faith Page 415 So called in opposition to the righteousness of works required in the Covenant ibid. It is the Synechdochically put for the whole of the Covenant that interests us in this righteousness ibid. c. All blessings and privileges flowing from and following upon this Covenant unto true blessedness are comprized under the righteousness of faith Page 416 Christ the Mediatour of the Covenant is the fountain from whence the blessedness of this righteousness comes ibid. Faith considered as an instrument receiving this righteousness ib. All must see that they be right principled in the doctrine of the righteousness of faith Page 429 Ignorance here was the Jews undoing ib. Papists mistake in this point Page 429 c. Faith the alone grace that interests us in this righteousness Page 432 Rock How it was said to follow Israel Page 524 The Rock it self was not intended as a sign but the water flowing out of it Page 525 Of the nature of a Sacrament ib. No standing Sacrament Page 526 Rule See Law S. Sacrament THe word vindicated Page 2 3 The reason of the word enquired after Page 4 5 The various acceptations of it Page 6 7 8 Whether man enjoyed or was capable of a Sacrament in the state of integrity Page 9 No Sacrament instituted of God during the time called the Law of nature Page 24 c. A Sacrament may be defined Page 32 c. The definition of a Sacrament in generall Page
I desire Mr. Baxter to take into consideration that Text of the Apostle Rom. 8.3 What the Law could not do in that it was weakned through the flesh c. And whether he understand it respective to sanctification which is not agreed upon among Interpreters to give his Reader satisfaction Quomodo patitur Lex in hac debilitatione Quid patitur ut fi at impotens et inefficax Quomodo haec impotentia inefficacia fuit in carne utrum eminenter an formaliter Quomodo agit Caro in hoc influxu debilitativo in legem And I doubt not but I may as easily answer his Queries in order to the vindication of my assertion as he may mine in vindication of that which the Apostle delivers Answering the last all is indeed answered Caro agit injiciendo obices remoras Quo minus Lex operatur in corde hominis Spiritus agit per fidem ut causa removens impedimentum E medio tollens obices remoras istas Incitando potenter inclinando animam in amplexum promissionis divinae I desire also his full Comment on the Apostles words 2 Cor. 3.6 Who hath made us able Ministers of the New Testament not of the Letter but of the Spirit for the Letter killeth but the Spirit giveth life with a satisfying answer to all like Quaeries that thence may be made I suppose he will grant that they are able Ministers of the New Testament no otherwise then in preaching the Gospel and when the bare Scripture as Tremelius reads it is of power onely to kill we may demand how the Gospel suffers in receiving any such quickening power from the Spirit And indeed the Gospel suffers not but the soul in receiving power to answer the Gospels call whether to Justification oâ— sanctification And that the Spirit makes use of faith in this quickening power I think will not be denyed seeing the Apostle tells us The life that I live in the flesh is by faith in the Son of God Faith therefore hath its hand in the Spirits quickening work and he addes Sure you do not take the foregoing words for proof adding What though onely believers are justified by the Covenant doth it follow that faith gives efficacy and power to the Covenant to justifie then either there are no conditions or causae sine quibus non or else they are all efficients and give efficacy and power to other efficients I confesse those words taken by themselves in that sense as he may fancy and the words in themselves may bear will not come up to a full proof Justification may be restrained onely to believers and yet faith have no hand in it but seeing other Scriptures give an efficiency to faith in this work some of them speaking of it as Gods instrument Rom. 3.30 most of them as mans we may well then know that Scripture holds it not out as any such naked condition To others the Gospel-grant lyes dead to these through faith it is effectuall There is added Your terms of faiths giving power through the Spirit tell me that sure you still look at the wrong act of the Gospel not at its moral act of conveyance or donation but at its reall operation on mans heart I do look at the act of the Gospel as its real operation on mans heart and yet I look at the right act of it The Gospel is an instrument to justifie by the intervening act of faith according to Protestants and by the intervening work of sanctification according to Papists and according to both there is a real work on the soul necessary to put into a posture for Justification All know that Divines distinguish between redemption wrought by Christ and the application of it Redemption is the proper work of the Son but Application they ascribe to the Spirit a Hinc Pater Filius mittere dicuntur Spiritum ad applicationem istam perficiendam The Father and the Son are said saith Amesius to send the Spirit to perfect this application Medull Theol. Cap. 24. Sect. 5. And whereas I am told that neither Scripture nor Divines use to say that the Gospel remitteth sin or justifieth by the Spirit nor doth the Spirit otherwise do it then by inditing the Gospel c. Though I own not this phrase that is here put upon me and I might expect so much priviledge as to be Master of my own words yet I would have it taken into further consideration whether Divines use his language or mine or whether they judge not that tâ—â—e the right act of the Gospel for pardon of sin which I mention The Leyden Divines having spoke of the application of the righteousnesse of Christ Disp 33. Sect. 21. have these words Sect 24. b Haec applicatio in nobis fit à Spiritu sancto 1 Cor. 6.11 dono scilicet fidei Ipse enim eam per Ministerium Evangelii Quod Ministerium Spiritûs dicitur 2 Cor. 3.8 ingenerat ac verbo suo ac Sacramentis confirmat auget Phil. 1.29 Gal. 5.5 Unde Spiritus fidei dicitur 2 Cor. 4.13 quâ Deum ut gratiosum Christum ut redemptorem ejusque justitiam ex eâ vitam aeternam apprehendimus Joan. 1.12 Rom. 9.30 This application in us is made by the holy Spirit 1 Cor. 6.11 viz. by the gift of faith For he works it by the Ministery of the Gospel which is called the Ministery of the Spirit 2 Cor. 3.8 and encreases it by his Word and Sacraments Phil. 1.29 Gal. 5 5. From whence it is called the Spirit of faith 2 Cor. 4.13 whereby we apprehend God as gracious Christ as Redeemer and his righteousnesse and from it everlasting life Joh. 1.12 Rom. 9.30 And Sect. 25. This application on our part is made by faith Rom. 5.1 Acts 26.18 A parte nostrâ fide Rom. 5.2 Actor 26.18 ex fide per fidem Ro. 3.30 Justistficamur justificat nos Deus By faith and through faith Rom. 3.30 We are justified and God justified us with much more to that purpose And Ravanellus in verbum justificatio speaking of the instrument of justification saith it is either outward or inward c Causa instrumentalis externa verbum Dei Sâ—cramenta ut patet ex Rom. 4.11 ubi circumcisio appellatur s gillum justitiae fidei nam verbum Dei Sacramenta sunt organa per quae Deus nos vocat per quae operatur conservat ac auget in nobis fidem obsignatque in cordibus nostris gratiam justificationis atque adeo Ministri Ecclesiae alii qui docent nos viam salutis Dan. 12.3 The outward instrumental cause he saith is the Word of God and the Sacraments as appears from Rom. 4.11 where circumcision is called the seal of the righteousnesse of faith for saith he the Word of God and Sacraments are instruments by which God doth call and by which he works preserves and encreases faith in us and seals in