Spirit of God Inclining Drawing Perswading Causing the heart beleeve are real strangers to this grace whatever great Enduements Gifts or ordinary effects of the Spirit they may be possessed of The author of a Discourse of the two Covenants a book recommended to us by Mr. Baxter in his preface prefixed thereunto as a Treatise which will give us much light into the Nature of the Gospel pag. 24. tels us that man himself is not wholly passive in this change or what goes to the making of it but is so far active in it as to denominate what he doth by God's assistance to be his own act Whereby he sufficiently discovereth an Arminian designe yet so qualifieth his expressions as may abundantly show he intendeth to evade For he will not say that man is not at all passive in this change but only that he is not wholly passive and yet he dar not say this confidently but must adde or what goes to the making of it and how much he may comprehend under this who can tell But if man be not passive he must be active How far then is he active So far saith he as to denominate what he doth by God's assistance to be his own act That the act of Faith is mans act is most certain for it is he that beleeveth but the question is what change is wrought in the soul by the Spirit of God before the act of faith be exerted and what hand mans labours and endeavours have in the infusion of the new Principle the Divine Nature Is not the man purely passive in the receiving of the effect of that creating act or in the work of Regeneration That the Lord prescribeth the use of ordinary means wherein the man is to waite for the free gracious working of the Spirit is true but there is no connexion made by the Lord by any Law or Constitution betwixt the use of these meanes and the gracious work of faith nor betwixt ordinary Light Conviction and the like common effects of these meanes and Saving Grace Yet he tels us afterward that if man do but what he can do through the assistance of God's common providente in whom we live move have our being God is most ready through his good pleasure or out of the goodness of his will pleasure to work in him both to will to do savingly to carry the work quite thorow But what Scripture doth teach us this Sure I am that Phil. 2 12 13. with which he ushereth in this discourse giveth no ground for this for that is spoken to such in whom the work of Salvation is already begun and who are commanded to work it out to say that the case is the same is to overturne the whole Gospel and present us with pure Pelagianisme is there as sure certane a connexion betwixt mans work of nature God's gracious works of Grace as is betwixt the work of grace Begun Carried on His adducing afterward p. 25. the commands to make ourselves a new heart to repent c. to enforce this is but the old Pelagian argument brought againe upon the stage to which I have said what I hope will befound Consonant to the Scripture in my book against the Quakers But this man discovereth himself more plainly afterward pag. 28 where after mentioning some acts of men which cannot be called acts of super-natural grace he tels us if men will but go thus far as they can out of a real-desire to â—e happy I should make no question but that the Spirit of God would yeeld them his assistance to carry them quite through in the work of conversion Beside that connexion whereof he maketh no question though the orthodox have hithertill denied it writting against Pelagians Iesuites Arminians we may observe this here That nature can carry the work of conversion quite through having only the assistance of the Spirit of God and what difference is there then betwixt Nature Begun Grace for begun Grace needeth the assistance of the Spirit of God to work Salvation quite thorow and Nature needeth no more where are then the Infused Habites Is Regeneration only brought about by assistance Need they who are dead no more but Assistance If this Author help us to clearness in the doctrine of the Gospel it must be the Gospel that only Pelagians Iesuites Arminians Quakers owne but not the Gospel of the Grace of God revealed to us in the Word which telleth us of something more requisite unto the Conversion of a sinner to the bringing of him to Beleeve Repent than the Cooperation of God's assistance as he speaketh pag. 25. mans endeavours He tels us pag. 26. that there is a promise of divine assistance to Man using his â—ndeavours in doing what he may can do towards the performing the condition of the Covenant But he showeth us not where that promise is to be found and pag. 17. he talks of an implicit promise and this he very wonderfully inferreth from the Gospel that was preached to Abraham for thus he speaketh for God in promising blessedness to the Nations through Abrahams seed therein promised all that was absolutly necessary for him to vouch safe to make them blessed without which they could not be blessed And if so then he therein implicitly promised to assist the endeavours of men to perform the condition of the promise without the assistance of whose grace they cannot savingly beleeve repent obey Whence it would seem 1 that all men are comprehended within this promise and 2 That no more is promised in reference to the Elect than to the Reprobat 3 That the promise of faith Repentance is but a promise of of Assistance 4 And this promise of Assistance is not to assist Grace but to assist Nature 5 That the promise of Faith Repentance was but an implicite promise This is a sufficient taste of this Authors Pelagian-Gospel 4. We proceed This work of the Spirit upon the soul whereby the man is brought to a closing with and to a resting upon Christ is ordinarily wrought by the word for faith cometh by hearing hearing by the word of God Rom. 10 17. The Lord hath established that great Ordinance of Preaching for this end and for this end he blesseth it unto his chosen ones we meane not this exclusivly as iâ— the word could no other way be-blessed for he blesseth as he seeth good for this end the Reading of Meditation on the word also though the grand special mean be the Preaching as we see Act. 2 37 41. 8 26-30 26 18. The Lord it is true may send wakenings by his Judgments by other like Occasions may blesse the private Endeavours of Parents friends by their private Instructions Admonitions yet all these are no way prejudicial unto but rather contribute to the confirming of the privilege of the word as the Principal Mean
this that there is nothing in Scripture giving the least countenance hereunto even as to words or expressions 7. If Repentance have such an interest in Justification as Faith hath then this must either be true of Repentance as begun or as perfected I meane as to pâ—rts But of neither it can be true not of begun Repentance for questionless there are some beginnings of Repentance before Faith taking Repentance largly as it is here taken as the womans change of her minde from other Suitors is before her closeing a Marriage Covenant with this man then it would follow that a man were Justified before Faith which I suppose will not be said Not of compleeted Repentance for that followeth faith for thus it followeth godly sorrow 2. Cor. 7 10. and is expressed by that Carefulness Clearing of ourselves Indignation Fear Vehement desire Zeal Revenge mentioned 2. Cor. 7 11. all which must follow Faith And repenting Ephraim Ier. 31 19. said after I was turned I repented after I was instructed I smote upon my thigh I was ashamed yea even confounded c. This being instructed being turned includeth Faith the rest that followed upon it are expressions of Repentance and hence it would follow if only compleeted Repentance be that Repentance that hath the Interest in justification that Faith hath a man cannot be said to be justified upon his beleeving no not untill Repentance be brought to this Perfection And then Faith cannot be the consenting act whereupon the bargane is closed 8. Repentance can bring nothing in that can stay or prove a support unto an awakened soul pursued with the sense of wrath for the breach of the Law nor can it present any thing unto God as a ground whereupon to be delivered from guilt wrath as Faith can do doth by laying hold on Christ his Righteousness an only sufficient ground whereupon the poor soul can have hope and with confidence can expect Absolution Therefore it cannot have the same interest in justification The antecedent is clear undeniable the Consequence is also manifest because this interest in the matter of justification must be estimate according to the ground of Hope that is yeelded thereby unto the poor vexed tossed soul the ground of Confidence that is had thereby of Acceptance of God 9. To say that Repentance hath the same interest in justification that Faith hath will prove I judge dangerous doctrine to many poor wakened sinners prove a meane to keep them off the Rock of ages and at least a meane to hinder or retard their motion Christ-ward in order to Peace Reconciliation with God for experience teacheth such as deale with wakened Consciences that the most of their work oft times is to keep them from resting on someting within themselves in order to Peace and particularly from relying resting upon some sort of Griefe Sorrow or Repentance which they conceive to be in themselves to bâ—ing them unto a cleanly resting upon Christ his Righteousness forsaking all other things And when now they hear that Repentance hath the same interest in justification that Faith hath how will they be fortified in their Resolutions so that all the labour paines of Ministers or other Christians may prove much fruitless unless the Lord come in a wonderful manner many others may perish in their presumptuous thoughts founded on their inward Sorrow Repentance as they supposed because they would never go out of themselves to leane to Christ his Righteousness It is true These of the contrary minde presse not Repentance alone but Faith Repentance together Yet by their way I finde not the right Gospel-exercise of Faith-pressed that is faith bringing in an imputed Righteousness or laying hold on Christ for Righteousness refuging the Soul in Him resting upon that as the only absolutly surest ground of Confident appearing before God and of expecting Pardon Peace but only such or such an act of faith pressed as being now under the New Covenant in the same place that Perfect Obedience had in the Old whereby as the Old Covenant is but renewed so the wakened or alarmed sinner is but taught to look after lean to something within himself as his immediat Righteousness upon which he must be justified 10. If the Surety-Righteousness of Christ imputed by God received by Faith be only that Righteousness upon the account of which the poor sinner is to be accepted of God as Righteous to be absolved from the Curse of the Law As we have above proved it to be then Repentance cannot have the same interest in justification that Faith hath because it neither doth nor can so lay hold upon this Cautionary-Righteousness as Faith doth Or we might frame the argument thus If Repentance have the same interest in justification that Faith hath Christ's Cautionary-Righteousness shall not be the only Righteousness with which the soul that is to be justified must be clothed because Repentance cannot put on Christ his Righteousness as faith doth But this last cannot be said for reasons given already 11. If Repentance hath the same interest in justification that faith hath then even by Gospel justification there should be ground left to man to boast to glory before men the reward should not be of grace but of debt contrary to Rom. 3. 4. The Consequence is clear because Repentance acteth not on a Righteousness without us and can be considered no other way then as an act of Obedience in man and so as a work and Faith by this way goeth under the same Consideration is not considered as bringing-in the Surety-Righteousness of Christ and laying hold on it alone as it is by our way for both are looked upon as dispositive causes and as parts therefore of the material cause and as proper potestative conditions just as perfect obedience was under the Old Covenant And whatever difference be acknowledged to be betwixt them as to their Essence Aptitude whereby Faith is said to be an acceptance of the gift formally Repentance not so in its averting act as Mr. Baxter is speaking Cath. Theol. ubi supra Sect. XII n. 201. whatever it may be as to other acts yet they are both made formal Potestative conditions as is said so solely considered as works done by us and all such as was evidenced above make the reward of debt give ground of boasting because being our formal works they are made the immediat formal legal ground of our Justification being made our immediat formal perfect Gospel-Righteousness as was seen above 12. Adde to these That if Repentance have the same Interest in Justification that Faith hath God cannot be beleeved on as the justifier of the ungodly contrare to Rom. 4 5. for Faith Repentance are hereby made the mans personal Righteousness and Mr. Baxter tels us Confess p. 46. n. 38. that there is no such thing
truth we lay down these grounds both from Scripture Reason as 1. The words of the Text whereupon we are do evince this for it is said the just liveth by Faith And as was cleared at the beginning of our discourse the words as used by the Prophet Habbakuk from whom they are cited are spoken of such as were already Beleevers Justified and pointed out the way how they were to have a life in an evil time and how they were to continue or be keeped in that State of Favoure with God whereinto they were brought to wit by Faith for the just shall live by his Faith and accordingly the same words are cited by the Apostle Heb. 10 38 39. Now the just shall live by faith but if any man draw back my soul shall have no pleasure in him But we are not of them that draw back unto perdition but of them that beleeve to the saving of the soul. Where living by Faith is opposed to drawing back to wit through unbeleefe and as drawing back is unto perdition so beleeving is to the saving of the soul therefore the Continuation of this life of justification unto the end even unto the final Salvation of the soul is by Faith This life of justification as it is begun by Faith as the Apostle evinceth Rom. 1 17. and in our present Text citing in both places these same words for that end so it is continued by Faith as the only condition thereof And to say that the particle only is not here added therefore other Works of Obedience must be or may be adjoyned here in this matter notwithstanding it be said the just liveth by Faith were in effect to destroy the Apostles Argument in our Text where he useth this same expression without the addition of only to prove that we are not justified by the works of the Law Therefore as this assertion that the just liveth by faith proveth justification by faith without the works of the Law so the same proveth the Continuation of Justification without the works of the Law as the Condition thereof 2. The Grounds Causes of Justification mentioned by the Apostle Rom. 3 22 24 25 26. hold good al 's well in the Continuation as in the first beginning of justification for there as well as here the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that beleeve for there is no difference Justification first lastly is free by his grace through the Redemption that is in Iesus Christ whom God hath set fort to be a Propitiation through faith in his blood And there is not the least hint given that the matter is altered in the Continuation of justification 3. As the beginning of justification is so contrived as all boasting is taken away so must the Continnance thereof be conceived to be But if works be admitted as Conditions of the Continuance of Instification though they be denied to be the Condition of the Beginning thereof all boasting shall not be excluded contrary to Rom. 3 27. for if a sinner after that he is Iustified by the merite of Christ at first should have it to say that for the Continuance of his justification he were beholden to his own Works he should surely have matter of boasting in himself in so far at least Papists think to evite this Argument against their Second Iustification by works by saving that all these good works are not of themselves but of the Father of Lights But this shift will not help for all these works are not the Righteousness of Christ but are works of Righteousness which we do are excluded in this matter as occasioning boasting or giving ground thereunto as the next Argument will more fully cleare 4. Abraham is said to have Righteousness imputed unto him Faith imputed unto Righteousness and so to be justified by faith not only when he was first justified but many yeers after even when he offered up Isaac his son Rom. 4. Iam. 2 21 23. So was he justified first last as to have no ground of glorying and therefore not by works Rom. 4 1 3 4. But it will be said that the Apostle Iames saith expresly in the place cited that our father Abraham was justified by works when he had offered his Son Isaac on the Altar I Ans. Not to engage in the whole explication vindication of that Passage of Scripture here which is of late to good purpose most satisfyingly done by the learned Doctor Owen I only say that Abraham's being justified by works was such as thereby the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed unto him for Righteousness c. vers 23. Now if Abraham had been justified by works properly so taken the Scripture had not been fulfilled which said he was justified by Faith but the contrary had been made good to wit that works were imputed to him he was justified by them as by his Righteousness But the meaning is that Abraham was justified by faith a true faith that proved itself such in time of a trial by works of obedience particularly by obedience to that command whereby the Lord tried or tempted him Gen. 22 1 2. and by such a Faith as wrought with his works was perfected or discovered manifested to be real after the trial of the fire Iam. 2 22. It is a good direction that the learned Camero giveth here Op. fol. pag. 83. That we should hóld fast the scope of the Apostle Iames to this end that we should take notice of the Apostles Proposition and of the Conclusion thereof The Proposition is set down vers 14. What doth it profite my brethren though a man say he hath faith have not works can faith or that faith save him Whereby we see that the Apostles scope is to prove that that Faith which the man supposeth he hath who hath no works is not that Faith by which we are Justified saved that because it is unprofitable to poor indigent brethren in necessity vers 15. 16. is dead vers 17. 20 it can not be shown by works vers 18. it is a Faith that devils have vers 19. All which what followeth is cleared from the Conclusion vers 26. for as the body without the Spirit is dead so faith with works is dead also 5. It will alwayes hold true that God is he who justifieth the ungodly so justifieth him that worketh not but him to whom saith is counted for Righteousness Rom. 4 5. But if the Continuance of Justification were by works works were counted for Righteoulness in order to the continuance of justification God should not continue to be the justifier of the ungodly but should justifie the ungodly at first thereafter justifie the Godly whereof the Text giveth not the least hint 6. The Instance of David cleareth this also
those who are under the Law that every mouth may be stopped all the world become guilty before God Rom. 3 19. 8. The Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ is as much without the Law or the works of the Law done by Regenerat persons as without the Works of the Law done before Regeneration And justification by these works after Regeneration is as much inconsistent with justification by faith without the works of the Law as justification by the works of the Law done before regeneration as is manifest from the true sense of justification by faith 9. Paul excludeth all works of the Law from justification that giveth any ground of boasting and of glorying as we see Rom. 3 27. 4 2. But if justification were by works of the Law done after Faith Regeneration all boasting glorying should not be excluded Ephes. 2 9. Not of works lest any many should boast And what these works were the next Argument will shew 10. Even works are excluded unto which we are created which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them Ephes. 2 8 9 10. for by grace are ye saved through Faith that not of yourselves it is the gift of God Not of works lest any man should boast for we are his workmanship created in Christ Iesus unto good works which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them Now these works are works done after regeneration as is manifest 11. All works are excluded in this matter which make justification not be of mercy or of grace Rom. 3 24. Ephes. 2 8. Tit. 3 5 7. But this do works after Regeneration as well as before as Paul cleareth Ephes. 2 8 9 10. works grace cannot consist in being the ground of justification no more than in being the ground of Election Rom. 11 6. 12. Works done after regeneration belong to that Righteousness which is of the Law which Paul describeth Rom. 10 5. from Levit. 18 5. to be that the man which doth those things shall live in them But the Righteousness of the Law the Righteousness of Faith are opposite inconsistent as the Apostle cleareth there Rom. 10. 13. Works done after regeneration if made the ground of justification will made the reward of debt not of grace Rom. 4 4. as well as works done before regeneration for the Scripture holdeth forth no ground of difference in this matter 14. If works done by Faith and after Regeneration be admitted as the ground of justification God should not be said to justifie the ungodly for a Regenerat beleever working works of Righteousness is no where in Scripture called an ungodly man But the Scripture speaketh this expresly Rom. 4 5. 15. Paul tels us Rom. 4 16. that the promise was of Faith that it might be by grace to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed not to that only which is of the Law but to that also which is of the Faith of Abraham who is the Father of ut all Now this seed which is of the Faith of Abraham are beleevers or Regenerat persons And yet as to these the Law is excluded the works thereof because if they which are of the Law be heirs Faith is made void the promise made of none effect vers 14. 16. If Justification were by the works of the Law done after Regeneration we could not upon first beleeving be justified have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ nor could we rejoice in hope of the glory of God glory in tribulation c. And yet this the Apostle expresly affirmeth Rom. 5 1 2 3. c. If justification did depend upon our after works we could not as yet have peace reconciliation or assurance or joy c. because of the uncertainty of our obedience 17. If Paul had not excluded works done after Faith Regeneration from being the Cause ground of our justification what seeming ground or occasion had there been for that objection Rom. 6 1. What shall we say then Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound What ground could any have to say We are justified by our works done after Regeneration therefore we may continue in sin that grace may abound Any might see at first how ridiculous this was 18. And if we are justified by works done after Regeneration is it not strange that in all Paul's answers unto this objection he never once sayeth nor hinteth that by these works we shall be justified no other way and yet this had been the shortest clearest solution of the objection if it been according to the doctrine of justification delivered by Paul 19. The false Apostles who were corrupting the doctrine of the Gospel of Justification did not urge works done before Faith in the Gospel as the ground of justification for they were corrupting such as had already embraced the Gospel beleeved in Christ as is clear out of the Epistle to the Galatians Therefore when Paul is confuting their errour opposing himself unto them he must deny that we are justified by works done after Faith in Christ. 20. Justification by works done after regeneration is as opposite to faith to living the life of justification by faith as justification by works done before Regeneration for the Law is never of faith so reasoneth Paul Gal. 3. 11 12. But that no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God it is evident For the just shall live by Faith And the Law is not of Faith 21. All the works of the Law are excluded But works wrought after beleeving after Regeneration are works of the Law being required thereby Psal. 119 35. Rom. 7 22. Therefore even these works are excluded 22. When the Apostle excludeth works from being causes of justification he must meane good works for no man was ever so mad as to imagine that he could be justified by bad works But no works can be called good works but such as flow from faith from the Spirit of grace granted in Regeneration Therefore while good works are excluded these done after Regeneration are excluded What is said by Bellarmine in confirmation of his sense of these works of the Law which are excluded from justification is abundantly answered by all that write against him therefore we need not take any notice thereof There is another Evasion found out by our Adversaries in this matter another glosse put upon these works By the works of the Law there shall no flesh be justified For some say that hereby the Apostle only excludeth those works that are perfect which were required by the Law in Innocency This Evasion granteth that the Law here spoken of is not the Ceremonial Law for that was not required in Innocency but the Moral Law The end why they invent this Evasion is not to exclude works in the matter of justification but to establish their own fancie
If this had been all which the Apostle had intended his saying with Christ. Luk. 17 10. So lilkewise ye when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you say we are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to do had sufficiently confuted that mistake But the long series of Arguments with their variety which the Apostle here useth manifestly declare there was some other thing in his eye and he levelled at some other mark even that which he plainly declareth in his repeated conclusions viz. That we are justified by faith in Jesus Christ without the works of the Law 10. Gospel Justification is of Grace And therefore is not of works Rom. 4 4. Ephes. 2 9 10. And the Apostle cleareth the consequence because all works have a ground of merite with them make the reward of debt give ground to the worker to boast to glory before men thought not before God for upon these grounds doth the Apostle reject all works in this affaire as we see Rom. 3 27. 4 2. Now to say that the Apostle rejecteth only such works as men conceite to be meritorious for their intrinsick worth not other works that merite only ex pacto is to destroy the Apostles Arguments to enervat all his discourse for even works meritorious ex congruo or ex pacto will give ground of boasting before men make the reward of debt as we know it would have been if Adam's Covenant had stood But whatever works lay the foundation of due debt they stand in opposition to the way of grace for grace debt are not compatible 11. If any were puffed up with this conceite of the meritoriousness of their works ex condigno it could be none beside the proud fantastick Pharisees nor is there any ground to suspect any other And if so why may we suppose would the Apostle state a needless controversie a controversie concerning all both Iewes Gentiles when none of the Gentiles and few if any of the Iewes were concerned therein And why may we enquire would the Apostle so laboriously prove both Iewes Gentiles to be guilty of sin and why doth he speak of them all without exception seing the question did only concerne a few a very few such as are never once named in all the dispute These things look not very probable like 12. Can we think that the Galatians who were seduced by false Teachers to adjoine to their Christianity the practice of some jewish Ceremonies were also carried away with this absurd Phancie that there was a meritoriousness ex condigno in all their works Though there be ground to imagine such a thing Yet we see the Apostle followeth the same disput against them that he did in writting to the Romans of which no reason could be assigned if this merite was all he disputed down 13. We finde it said of the Jewes Rom. 9 31. that they followed after the Law of Righteousness and yet by so doing did not attaine unto the Law of Righteousness because vers 32. it was not by Faith but as it were by the works of the Law Now neither were these works of the Law nor that Law of Righteousness which they were following after a meer irrational conceite groundless fancie of a merite in what they did or of an intrinsick worth meriting ex condigno the reward they expected But a groundless apprehension that their works themselves was the way of their attaining unto life therefore they followed that way of works would not take the way of faith but stumbled at that stumbling stone 14. Then according to this interpretation works performed without this conceite of merite must be God's Righteousness as works together with this conceite of merite must be our owne for these two are opposite Rom. 10 3. But there is no ground to imagine that our works performed without this fonde conceit of merite in them are the Righteousness for these are not Christ or his Righteousness And it is there added vers 4. for explication of the Righteousdess of God for Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness to every one that beleeveth 15. The Righteousness of the Law is that the man which doth these things shall live by them Rom. 10 5. Gal. 3 12. Levit. 18 5. So that this Righteousness consisteth in mans own doing and not in a meer irrational apprehension of a merite in what he doth So that it is not this groundless phancie that the Apostle is disputing against but this Righteousness which is of the Law because he is labouring to establish by his doctrine the Righteousness of Faith which is opposite to inconsistent with the Righteousness of the Law And this Righteousness of Faith is not our own personal Righteousness or obedience performed to the Law without this apprehension conceite of merite as is clear from vers 8 9 10 11. following from the whole Gospel 16. If this be all that the Apostle is disputing down to wit justification by works which we conceite to be meritorious not all justification hy works why did the Apostle adduce the Instance of Abraham insist so much upon it as he doth Rom. 4 Shall we think that Abraham that holy Patriarch friend of God did obey with any such conceite of intrinsick worth in his obedience Was he infected with that leaven of Pharisaical pride And if not where is the consequence of the Apostles argueing from his practice Is it a good consequence to say Abraham was not justified by works performed in sincerity without pharisaical pride conceite of merites therefore we cannot be justified by works which we conceite to have merite in them but by such works we can must be justified when we conceite no merite in them but a simple merite ex congruo or ex pacto The like may be said of David who had no conceite of merite in his works yet expected not to be justified by them but looked for free pardon for justification through imputed Righteousness Rom. 4 6 7 8. 17. If the Apostle had been establishing justification by works performed without such a fonde conceite of merite in them what ground was there for that objection which he preoccupieth Rom. 6 1. saying Shall we sin that grace may abound The urging of justification by works could give no shew or apparent ground for this Neither can any such purpose be in the least seen observed in all the answere at large prosecuted Chapters 6. 7. which is given hereunto There is not the least hint given of his rectifying of the misapprehensions that any might have about works as if they were or could be supposed to be meritorious ex condigno Nor is there the least ground of surmise laid down of their being meritorious of justification or of life eternal ex congruo or ex pacto but all things sound the contrary way life eternal is
to offer up his son was no promise and to did not call for faith but for ready obedience though upon another account he beleeved that God was able to raise him up from the dead Heb. 11 17 18 19. But Gen. 15. promises were made unto him he is said to have beleeved upon this Righteousness was imputed unto him So that Gen. 15. he was justified by faith only as the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. for thereby he confirmeth his Conclusion set down Rom. 3 28. that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law And from that other place Gen. 22. Iames could not inferre that Justification is by faith works together for then he could not inferre therefrom that the Scripture was fulfilled which said Abraham beleeved God it was imputed unto him for Righteousness because Paul doth hence inferre Rom. 4. that justification is by faith without works And what is a ground for justification by faith without works cannot also be a ground for justification by works not by faith only And thus the Apostles are made in plaine termes to contradict other by inferring contrary or contradictory conclusions from the same premises which ought not to be thought let be said But it will be said that Paul speaketh of the beginning of justification which is by faith without works but Iames speaketh of justification as continued which is by works and not by faith only This cannot satisfie for beside what is said it must first be granted hereby that this faith which Iames mentioneth when he saith not by saith only must be the same faith that Paul faith we are justified by without the deeds of the Law but this cannot be for the faith that Iames speaketh of is as we saw above a dead useless fruitless carcass no saving Faith as that is whereof Paul speaketh and whereby we are justified But now taking justification for its manifestation declaration the words of Iames are most clear carry no appearance of contradiction unto what Paul taught For his meaning is ye see then how that by works a man evidenceth proveth declareth his Justification or maketh it manifâ—st that he is a justified person not by that faith only which is but a naked fruitless dead profession 11 The same may be said of the other Instance of Rahab vers 25. She was justified by works when â—he had received the messengers not that she was brought into a justified state by that act for she received the Spies by faith Heb. 11 31. declared her faith unto them Ios. 2 10 11. And so was a beleever consequently justified before she received the Spies or they came to her Yet by this deed accompanied with so much hazard unto her self all her families she proved evidenced her faith justification 12 The Conclusion of his discourse vers 26. for as the body without the Spirit is dead fo faith without works is dead also declareth manitestly what he would be at to wit to shew that works can only demonstrate trew faith consequently prove justification for a naked profession of faith that wanteth works is dead and like a body wanting breath soul which is but a dead carcass This cannot be said of that faith whereby Paul saith and proveth that we are justified for it is true lively flowing from the Spirit of life although it be not as yet proved by outward works of obedience whereof there may be as yet no opportunity or call What is brought against this sense of the word justifie justification which we have now confirmed by the Socinian Author of the book intituled Consensus Paulâ— Iacobi c. pag. 2. c. and by the Remonstrants in their Apologie Cap. 10. is of no great weight When they say That the proposition set down vers 14. is subordinat to what is said vers 12. where the judgment of God is spoken of therefore saving justification must be here understood Ans. We grant that It is saving justification but yet it is justification that is distinct from Final Salvation We grant that Iames speaketh here of saving justification Yet he handleth not that question how by what Causes this justification is brought about but how it is evidenced proven to be true and not a meer presumptuous conjecture They say next It is said vers 25. that the Scripture was fulfilled not that it was shown to be fulfilled Aâ—s That saying of Scripture was a truth before this time even when Abraham first beleeved which was before he was circumcised as we see Gen. 15. comp with Gen. 17. Rom. 4 9 10 11. And therefore was not now first fulfilled or verified And to talk of the increase of imputation according to the increase of Faith and to measure the excellencie of faith by the excellencie of that obedience which it produceth as that Socinian Author doth is to give us nothing but the Popish justification for Relations of which Nature we hold Justification to be are not intended remitted in themselves but only as to their evidence We esteem it a Socinian dream to say that the first Narration of Faith Justification which is Gen. 15. was but a rude draught of that which was afterward Gen. 22. Abraham's faith was afterward said to be perfected by that special work of offering up his son noâ— in it self for he had a strong faith before Rom. 4 19 20 21. but in its manifestation after that signal trial It is said further Mans justification cannot be here understood for that is not necessary to salvation nor universally true seing men may justifie other upon vaine grounds Ans. Noâ— do we understand any such justification pronunced by men here but a true justification before God yet as evidenced proven declared by effects unto all that will judge understandingly spiritually so that works here are mentioned as the Effects and yet as the Causes of justification But then they object further Thas as the Apostle from that Faith which the vaine man boasted of denieth the man to be justified so from works he proveth justification that as antecedent Ans. The Apostle sheweth that the vaine man who had no more but a vaine dead empty faith had no ground to conclude himself a justified Man for this is no Cause or Condition of Justification And hence it will not follow that works by which both the reality of saâ—ing Faith of Justification thereupon may be evidenced are antecedent Causes or Conditions of Justification It is objected againe by the foresaid Socinian Author That if the meaning of these words the Scripture was fulfilled be that the Scripture was showne to be fulfilled then the meaning should be that it was demonstrated to Abraham's two servants who went with him to the mountaine by them to others But then it must be supposed that before this time that which passed Gen. 15. was known unto them it
can it be supposed that he looketh on such whose proud conceits he was here depressing as already justified as to the beginning of justification seing a dead faith which was all the faith they had is no Condition of justification at all And as to consummation of justification as he speaketh Abraham's saith was not yet perfected neither could be before his death He addeth finally That obedience perfecteth faith as it is part of that necessary matter not necessary at the first moment of beleeving but necessary afterward when he is called to it whereby he is to be justified against the charge of non-performance of the New Covenants Condition even against the Accusation of being an unbeleever or hypocrite Ans. If obedience perfect faith thus it is only as evidenceing proving the man a true beleever no hypocrite or one that hath only a meer profession which is the thing we say if it be looked on as the Condition of the Covenant so as the ground of justifying the man from the charge of non-performance of that Condition it standeth only for itself for its own part cannot not be said upon that account to perfect faith as when both abstaining from murther and from stealing is called for the absteaning from stealing cannot be said to perfect the other though it ground a Mans justification from the charge of stealing And therefor by this assertion faith can as well be said to perfect works as works be said to perfect faith Mr. Baxter giveth this ground of Agreement betwixt Paul Iames that Paul is about this question What is the Righteousness which we must pload against the Accusation of the Law or by which we are justified as the proper Righteousness of that Law And this he well concludeth is neither works nor faith But the Righteousness which is by faith that is Christ's Righteousness Ans. Paul speaketh to this question how sinners come to be justified before God therefore cleareth up the matter of justification in all its causes and not only sheweth what that Righteousness is which must be pleaded against the accusation of the Law but also what way we come to be partakers of that Righteousness in order to our being justified before God to wit by faith without the deeds of the Law If faith be not that Righteousness why did Mr. Baxter say that Rom. 4. where it is said that faith is imputed unto Righteousness faith is taken for our act not for the object of faith or Christ's Righteousness laid hold on by faith But now what question handleth Iames His question is saith he What is the Condition of our â—ustification by this Righteousness of Christ whether faith only or works also Ans. And doth not Paul also speak to this question when he saith We are justified by faith Will not Mr. Baxter grant that faith is the Condition of our justification by this Righteousness If Iames then handle this question there shall be no agreement betwixt him Paul but a manifest contradiction for Paul saith that we are justified by faith without the deeds of the Law that is upon Condition of Faith as Mr. Baxter will grant Iames saith that we are justified not by faith only but by works as the Condition here is a perfect contradiction both speaking ad idem the one saying we are justified by faith without works the other saying by faith works What the true question is whereof Iames speaketh we have shown above the â—eby manifested a cleare harmonie betwixt the Apostles left no ground of suspicion of any contradiction He saith next that Paul doth either in express words or in the sense scope of his speach exclude only the works of the Law that is the fulfilling of the Conditions of the Law ourselves But never the fulfilling of the Gospel Conditions that we may have part in Christ. Ans. Whether the works of the Law which Paul excludeth be so to be understood or not we have seen above only I say now that both speak of the same Law that is the Moral Law both consequently speak of the same obedience that is obedience to the same Law And nothing can be alledged to prove that Paul meaneth works as taken for the fulfilling of the Conditions of the Law ourselves Iames meaneth the same works as taken for the fulfilling of the Conditions of the Gospel ourselves And further the faith that Iames speaketh so much of is none of the Gospel Conditions of justification for it is but a dead carcass an unprofitable thing But his following words saying Indeed if a man should obey the commands of the Gospel with a legal intent that obedience should be but legal shew that by the works of the Law he meaneth some thing in opposition to the commands of the Gospel wherein he joineth with Socinians But we owne no commands of the Gospel but such as are enjoined by the Law of God even the Moral Law of which Iames speaketh expresly vers 10 11. He tels us 3. for clearing of this agreement That Paul doth by the word Faith especially direct our thoughts to Christ beleeved in for to be justified by Christ to be justified by receiving Christ is with him all one Ans. This is all very true sure he must also say that to be justified by Christ to be justified by works is not all one for all obedience or works is not receiving of Christ. But now what doth Iames direct us to by the word Faith which he mentioneth doth he not direct our thoughts to Christ beleeved in If not it cannot be justifying Faith he speaketh of as Mr. Baxter supposeth If yea why doth he adde works more than Paul doth Shall Paul's directing our thoughts to Christ beleeved in exclude works and Iames's directing our thoughts the same way include them Where is then the agreement But 4. he addeth that when Paul doth mentione Faith as the Condition he alwayes implieth obedience to Christ. Ans. It is denied that he implieth obedience as the Condition of Justification And Mr. Baxter himself will grant this I suppose as to justification begun or as to our fiâ—st justification as he speaketh in replying to Mr. Cartwright which is enough for us for we know no second justification distinct from the first whereof either of the Apostles do speak And I like not that which he addeth saying He i.e. Paul implieth obedience in requiring Faith as truely as he that subjecteth himself to a Prince doth imply future obedience in his engagement to obey for this maketh justifying faith a plaine engagment to obey And thus to be justified by faith is to be justified by a formal engagment to obey a formal engagment to obey is a receiving of Christ for to be justified by faith to be justified by receiving Christ is all one Mr. Baxter in his Catholick Theol. part 2. n. 365. giveth us five particulars of justification by works
is with Him alone that the poor convinced wakened Sinner hath to do And this is the justification that we are most concerned to know the nature of to understand what way it is brought about or to be had This is the justification which the Apostle alwayes denieth to be by works asserteth alwayes to be by faith in opposition to works As for a justification of our selves against the false Accusations of Satan the unjust Surmises of our own treacherous Hearts mis-informed Consciences the groundless Alleigances of men judging not according to truth but according to their owne mis-apprehensions whereof Iob's friends were guilty in an high measure It is not that justification whereof the Apostle treateth And whatever Interest good works may have herein as real fruites of an upright working faith consequenly as evidences of our Interest in Christ of our being in a state of justification Yet they are utterly excluded from having an Interest in that justification which is before God in His sight here Christ's Righteousness Laid hold on by faith only taketh place The Argument whereby the Apostle disproveth this justification by the works of Law in the sight of God is in the following words where he ushereth-in the argument with an It is Manifest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to shew That the Argument was irrefragable that the truth thereby was certaine beyond Contradiction Now the Argument is taken from the opposition that is betwixt Faith the Law or the works of the Law in the matter of justification A ground whereupon the Apostle goeth in his whole Disput upon this matter as we see Rom. 3 27 28. 4 1 2 3 4 5. 9 32. Gal. 2 16. and therefore it must be a certaine truth That if justification before God be by faith it can not be by works consequently whoever assert justification by works destroy Gospel-justification by faith and hence it is also Manifest That justification cannot be by both together Faith works conjoined because what is of faith cannot be of works these two being here inconsistent Rom. 11 6. That Gospel-justification is by faith the Apostle proveth from that known sentence the just shall live by faith a sentence which the Apostle adduced first of all when he was to handle this question in his Epistle to the Romans Chap. 1. vers 17. saying for therein i.e. in the Gospel is the Righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith as it is written the just shall live by faith Where we see that this Sentence confirmeth the whole nature contents of the Gospel that is That the Righteousness of God i.e. the Righteousness which only will stand in Gods Court be accepted of him in order to the justifying of sinners which is the Righteousness of one who is God is revealed from faith to saith that is to say is hold forth to be embraced bysinners through faith first last this Righteousness thus embraced laid hold on by faith is the onely ground of the life of justification so that beleevers their living by faith saith their faith laith hold on the Righteousness of God revealed in the Gospel as the onely ground of their life As to the passage it self it is cited our of Habakuk chap. 2. vers 4. where the Prophet being told vers 3. that howbeit sometime would passe ere the promised delivery should come Yet it would come that therefore he all the People of God should waite for it live in the certaine expectation thereof addeth these words as being told him of the Lord that his Soul which is lifted up is not upright in him how variously these words are rendered by diverse we need not mentione the meaning is this That such as will not in faith patience waite with confidence upon the Lords promise that shall be made good in His good time but in their pride impatience of heart will think to anticipate their delivery by sinistrous sinful meanes declare that their heart is not upright that they are void of true faith Upon the other hand it is said the just shall live by his faith that is Such as are real true beleevers will waite in the exercise of faith till God's time come by this faith trusting leaning to the faithful promise of God through the Messiah in whom all the promises are yea amen 2 Cor. 1 20. they shall have a life of it they shall be carried thorow supported strengthened comâ—orted And much to this same Purpose is this passage cited by the Apostle Hebr. 10 37 38. For yet a little while he that shall come will come will not tarry now the just shall live by faith c. of which we have spoken elsewhere in all these places the Apostle leaveth out the pronoun his which the Prophet useth but that maketh no great alteration the matter being clear that sufficiently understood The Septuagints make a great alteration when they render the words thus The just shall live by my faith The great difficulty is how these words of the Prophet spoken of such as were already justified beleevers his saying of them that they shall live by their faith for we need not owne that sense of the words which some think may not improbably be given to wit That he who is by his faith just or justified shall live can be applicable to the Apostl'es purpose to prove justification by faith Not to mentione what others say to this nor judging it very necessary to enquire anxiously into this matter seing the Spirit of the Lord 's moving inspireing of Paul to alleige apply this passage of Old Testament truth for confirmation of what he was about to prove may fully satisfie us as to its pertinency though we should not satisfie all by proprosing our thoughts concernin it â— Conceive the ground may be this That this being a general truth universally true that even beleevers who are already changed have a life begun in them must all their life long make use of faith gripping to the promises as yea amen in Christ promised come who is the Substance Kirnel of them all to the end they may be supported Strengthened Upheld carried thorow Difficulties Distresses Darknesses Temptations the like without fainting or doing what is unbeseeming a living Beleever in the day of trial so that their whole life even unto the end is kept-in continued by faith bringing new supplies influences from the head through the promises it will hence follow that without faith no man can at first attaine to this life change from death yea that in this case faith is much more necessarily requisite yea faith only without works is must be the only way to justification of life for if the progress continuance of this life or renewing of it after decayes be had by faith drawing
sap life influence from the head much more must this be the way of getting the first change made from death to life And this way or not much different of argueing in this same debate we see the Apostle followeth Rom. 4. where from what was said of Abraham a considerable time after he was a beleever he proveth justification by faith without works or that Abraham was justified by faith not by works The Import then of the Testimony is that this life whereof beleevers are made partakers is begun continued carried on by faith therefore it is not by the works of the Law but by faith that they are justified brought into a state of life If it be true that without faith even belevers cannot be supported nor in case to live as becometh to the glory of God to their own peace Comforth in new Trials Difficulties much more is it true that without faith those who are in nature in state of Enmity to God cannot live the life of justification with it alone they can shall Before we come to speak particularly to any Truthes deducable from the words we shall premise some few things considerable CHAP. II. Naturally we are inclined to cry up Selff in Justification THe Apostle as we see in all his writtings about this matter is very carefull to cleare the question of justification so as Man may have no cause of boasting or of glorying in himself upon the account of any thing he hath or he hath done in order to justification that hereby he might cast a copie unto all such as would approve themselves faithful unto the Lord in being co-workers with Him in the Gospel that he might so much the more set himself against that innatelusting of heart that is in all naturally unto an exalting crying up of Self in the matter of their justification before Acceptance with God and especially we finde how zealously how frequently with what strength multitude of Arguments he setteth himself against cryeth down that which men do so naturally with such a vehement byasse incline unto to wit justification by their own works or by their own obedience to the Law to the end their innate pride may have ground of venting it self in boasting glorying before men From this we may premit in short the consideration of these Three things to prepare our way unto the clearing-up of the Gospel-Doctrine in this matter First That there is a corrupt byasse in the heart of men by nature a strong Inclination to reject the Gospel-Doctrine of free justification through faith in Christ to ascribe too much to themselves in that affaire as if they would hold the life of justification not purely of the free grace rich mercy of God through Jesus Christ but of themselves either in whole or in part in one measure or another Secondly That it is the duty of all who would be found faithful Ambassadours for Christ after the example of the Apostle so to preach forth the Grace of God in this mystery to explaine the same as corrupt Nature within such without as are byassed with mistakes about this matter are led away with proud carnal self conceits may have no apparent or seeming ground of boasting nor be confirmed in their natural prejudices Mistakes therein Thirdly That in very deed free Gospel-justification is so contrived ordered as that none have any real ground of boasting or of glorying in themselves or of ascribing any part of the glory thereof unto themselves as if they by their deeds works did contribute any thing to the procuring thereof It will not be necessary to speak to these at any length but only briefly to touch upon them to make way unto what followeth to be said on this weighty subject which is of so much concernment to us all As to the First of these to which we shall speak little in this Chapter thereafter of the rest in their due order it is too too apparent to be a truth from these grounds following I. This is most manifest from the many Errours false opinions that are Vented Owned Maintained with so much Violence corrupt zeal all to cry-up Self in less or in more to cry down Grace Hence so many do plead with great confidence for an Interest of our works in our justification Such as Papists who quite mistake the nature of true justification Socinians Arminians Others who side with these in less or in more will plead for a justification by our inherent Righteousnoss or works of Righteousness which we do Others that will not plead for such an early Interest of our works in this matter will plead for faith as our Gospel-Righteousness affirme that the very act of our Obedience in us is imputed for a Righteousness to us is accounted such by God so hath the same place in the New Covenant that compleet perfect obedience had in the Old Covenant of works made with Adam which as shall hereafter appear driveth us upon the same rock II. It is manifest likewise from the large frequent Disputes about this matter that we have in Paul's Epistles If there had not been a great pronness in man by nature to cry-up himself to set up his own Righteousness in matter of justification why would the Spirit of the Lord have been at so much paines to speak so to cry down Self our works in this matter as He is in these Epistles of Paul if He had not seen the great necessity thereof by reason of this strong Inclination that men Naturally have hereunto We must not think that any thing is there spoken in vaine or that the Spirit of the Lord would have left that Doctrine so fully cleared wherein our works are so expresly excluded if there had not been a necessity for it if it had not been as necessary in all after ages of the Church as at that time when first written Whatever the truth be that is so frequently pungently inculcated in the Scriptures we may saifly suppose that as the faith practice of that truth is necessary so there must be much reluctancy of Soul in us to receive the same to close with it and a strong Inclination to beleeve practise the contrary III. In the Infancy of Christianity we see what a strong Inclination there was to cry-up works what we do the Law as the only ground of justification or at least to have a share with Christ in that Interest which gave occasion to the penning of these Epistles of Paul where this matter is so fully clearly handled particularly that to the Romans that to the Galatias unto the speaking less or more hereunto in almost all his other Epistles And this Inclination to the crying up of works the Law in Opposition to the pure Gospel-way of
to their justification before acceptance with God was in Christ that it would be a robbing of Christ of His due honour to seek for a righteousnes else where So Chap. 33 14 15. it is promised that the Lord will cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David that hereby Iudah should be saved Israel should dwell saifely And it is further said that His spouse should wear her husbands name be called after Him the Lord our righteousness thereby professing her adherence to Him as her Husband her owning of Him as all her righteousness glorying in that that He and He alone is her righteousness In compliance herewith we should beware of expressing our conceptions about the matter of justification so as may give proud man ground of boasting of robbing Christ of His Crown Title Glory in less or in more and these expressions following seem to me justly chargable herewith I. To say That all works are not excluded in justification but such only as are done by the meer Power Strength of Nature not the works of Grace wrought by the Spirit But who seeth not how this is to set up proud Man whom Paul would have debased kept down And doth not Paul expresly tell us that neither Abraham nor David were so justified Rom. 4 And that if our father Abraham were justified by works he should have had whereof to glory though not before God vers 2 And doth he not also tell us that this would make the reward to be reckoned not of grace but of debt vers 4 would exclude faith its operations in reference to justification take away that blessed refreshful stile of God that He justifieth the ungodly vers 5 Should we not thus be saved by works of righteousness which we do not according to His mercy expresly contrary to Tit. 3 5. 2. In like manner to say That we are not justified by the works of the Ceremonial Law but by obedience to the Moral Law is peccant here also for the works of the moral Law are works of righteousness which we do such as obey this Law are considered as such cannot be called ungodly Neither doth the Apostle thus distinguish that proud man might have any Interest Nor doth he exclude only such works when he saith that Abraham was not justified by works for his works were not works of the Ceremonial Law but of the Moral which will as well give ground of boasting make the reward of debt not of grace as works of the Ceremonial Law if not more And it is manifest that Paul speaketh of that Law of obedience to it or of works commanded by it which convinceth of sin discovereth it Rom. 3 20. 7 7. maketh all the world guilty Rom. 3 19. bringeth them under the curse Gal. 3 10. is established by faith Rom. 3 31. hath the promise of life annexed to it Rom. 10 5. Gal. 3 12. Nor doth he exclude only such works when he speaketh of himself Phil. 3 9. 3. Likewise to say That all works are not excluded but only Outward works which are done out of Principle of fear not out of love faith are not inward works of grace is to adde Fewel to this fire of pride to please proud Self proud Man for who can think that only such works would lay the ground of boasting of glorying before men or that only such would make the reward of debt or that any in these daies were pleading for justification upon the account only of such works or that such works were to be understood by the Law as if the Law did command no other or that such were Abraham's works or that Paul thought of none other when he desired not to be found in his own righteousness Phil. 3 9 4. They are guilty of the same crime who say That Paul only excludeth the jewish Law for if thereby they meane only the Ceremonial Law it is manifest from what is said that hereby Self Man shal be much exalted when justification is made to be by according to the works of the Moral Law If they meane thereby the Judicial Law then justification should be by obedience to the Moral Law yea by obedience to the Ceremonial Law as well as by obedience to the Moral Law quite contrary to the whole discourse of the Apostle And if they meane all the Law that was given to the jewes then the Moral Law is included so all works are excluded which are done in obedience to any Law of God 5. It is no less injurious to truth favourable to proud Self to say with Socinus That Paul onely excludeth perfect works done in full conformity to the perfect Law of God but not our Imperfect works which through grace are accepted accounted our righteousness for even these works being works of righteouness which we do would not exclude boasting but give ground of glorying before men Neither did Abraham or Paul or any other Saint suppose that their works were perfect Nor is it Imaginable that any in these dayes did plead for justification by their own works upon the account that they were perfect wholly commensurat unto the Law Nor doth Paul insinuate in all his discourse any such Distinction or give any ground to think that Imperfect works should be the ground of justification when Perfect works are not And all this is grounded upon this gross mistake That by faith which the Apostle opposeth to works is meaned our Imperfect Obedience unto the Commands of God 6. It is injurious upon the same account to say That Paul onely excludeth such works as are accompanied with a conceite of merite none else for he excludeth all works without any such Distinction even the works of Abraham who doubtless was far from any such fonde conceite to think that his works were meritorious all such works as give ground of boasting before men though not before God And who will say that even Adam's works performed in Innocency had any proportion in the ballance of commutative justice or would merite at God's hand ex condigno And yet sure such works would have made the reward of debt according to the Compact Yea the Apostle in his way of argueing supposeth that works cannot be mentioned in this case without merites so that merite is inseparable from them And shall we think that Paul Phil. 3 9. meaned by his own righteouness only such works as he expresly accounted meritorious Or that he could or did account any of his works such 7. It runneth far in the same guilt to say That faith it self which is our work considered as our act of obedience is Imputed to us for righteousness is that righteousness upon which we are justified for how easily might proud Self lift up its head boast say it was justified because of some thing
within it or because of one work of righteouness done by it so glory in it self not in the Lord for though it were granted that faith were the gift 〈◊〉 God yet that would not sufficiently keep down pride seing such as plead for justification by good works will also grant that these good works come from the Grace of God are wrought by the Spirit yet such a justification would lay a foundation of boasting of glorying before men some would have more ground of boasting than others because of their stronger faith And justification by this way would as well be opposite to justification through Christ His Imputed righteousness by Grace as justification by good works for faith here would not be considered as bringing-in laying hold on a Righteousness without the Righteousness of Christ imputed but as a commanded duty as a piece of obedience to the Law would as well make the reward of debt ex congruo ex pacto as if justification were by works 8. It is of the same Nature to say That Paul excludeth the works of the Law but not the works of the Gospel for the same ground of pride boasting glorying should be laid that would be laid by pleading for the works of the Law because these are still works of righteousness which we do so opposite in this matter unto mercy Tit. 3 5. And Paul to exclude all boasting glorying before Men opposeth faith not considered in it Self but as laying hold on the Righteousness of Christ as carrying the Man out of himself to Christ for Righteousness unto works not Gospel-works unto works of the Law And sure we cannot say that none of Abraham's works were Gospel-works or works required in the New Covenant seing even then he was a beleever when the object of his faith or that which he laid hold on by faith in the Gospel which was preached unto him was said to be imputed unto him for righteousness And is it not plaine that if justification were upon the account of Gospel works that God should not then be said to justifie the ungodly seing he who is clothed with a Gospel righteousness cannot be called or accounted an ungodly person And yet faith looks out unto laith hold upon a God that justifieth the ungodly Rom. 4 5. In a word the asserting of this would be the same upon the matter with asserting of justification by the works of the Law for what ever is required in the Gospel is injoined by the Law so is an act of obedience to the Law which is our perfect Rule of Righteousness all our obedience must be in conformity thereunto 9. It must also be accounted dangerous for puffing-up of Self to say That we are justified by our Inherent Righteousness for then the Man could not say that all his righteousnesses were as filthy rags Esai 64 6. Nor could that be true which is Psal. 143 3. for in they sight no man living should be justified to wit if God should enter into Iudgment with him Why should Iob have abhorred himself Chap. 42 6. if he had a righteousness within him had been justified by the Lord upon the account of that inherent righteousness And had not Paul as good ground as any to assert his justification by his personal inherent holiness righteousness Yet we hear of no such thing out of his mouth but on the contrary his accounting all things but less dung that he might gaine Christ be found in His Righteousness hath a far different import How proud might man be if he had it to say that he was justified in the sight of God by works of Righteousness which he had done or by his own inherent righteousness 10. Nor will it much help the matter to say That this Inherent Righteousness is not the price laid down but onely the Condition or Causa sine qua non or the like for still man would hereby have some thing to be proud of to glory of before men because he would have it to say that his own Inherent Holiness was as well the ground of his justification the Condition thereof as Adam's obedience would have been the ground of his justification And who knoweth not that Self can wax proud be puffed up upon a smaller occasion than is this And is it not strange that Paul never once made mention of this distinction Shall we think that Paul denied Abraham to have been justified by works because Abraham looked upon them as the meritorious cause not as the Condition only of his justification or that Abraham indeed did so or that Paul included them as the condition of his justification when he said he desired not to be found in his own Righteousness meaning not his own righteousness as a price or as the Meritorious cause of his acceptance Why should David have spoken so absolutely said Psal. 143 2. enter not into judgment with thy Servant for in thy sight shall no man living be justified seing even though God should enter into judgment with His servants they should be justified as having fulfilled the condition And why should he have said Psal. 130 3. If thou Lord shouldest mark iniquities ô Lord who shall stand seing though the Lord should mark iniquities yet where the Person hath fulfilled the Condition hath a Personal Inherent Righteousness to hold up as the fulfilling of the condition required he is in case to stand in judgment to plead for his justification absolution upon the account of his performing all the condition required And would not vaine man have great ground of boasting here 11. Neither yet will it prevent this boasting to say That this Inherent Righteousness is but a Subordinat Righteousness whereby we have right unto the Merites of Christ which are the Principal Righteousness answering the demandes of the Law for if man have any thing in himself that can be called a Righteousness though but a Subordinat Righteouness yet such a Righteousness as giveth right ground to justification though that justification be also called only a subordinat justification conforme to the New Covenant the Condition thereof he will soon boast account his justification not of free grace but of due debt conforme to the covenant And though this be called only a Subordinat Righteousness yet proud Self will account it the Principal because upon it dependeth all his justification for thereby not onely hath he a right unto Christ's Merites but unto justification it self this being called the proper condition of the New Covenant wherein justification Adoption c. are promised as they say upon this condition And will not proud Man see that he hath a price in his hand a complâ—â—â— Righteousness conforme to the Covenant to presente unto God where-upon to seek expect the reward of debt according to the covenant And so much the rather should we abstaine from
first to convince them of their Sin and Misery by setting home the Law wekening their Consciences as Paul doth Doctrinally follow this method when he is about to cleare-up explaine the truth about Gospel-justification in his Epistle to the Romans where in the first place he convinceth all of Sin both jewes Gentiles Chap. 1. 2. 3. concluding vers 23. That all have sinned come short of the glory of God vers 9. he giveth an account of his foregoing Discourse saying we have before proved both jewes Gentiles that they are all under sin And againe vers 19. that every mouth may be stopped all the world may become guilty before God Now this work of Conviction layeth the sinner low before God for thereby the Man is discovered to himself to be undone in himself to be under Sin Wrath under the Sentence of the Law having his mouth stopped having nothing to plead for himself neither by way of Extenuation nor of Apology having nothing in himself wherewith he can come before the Lord to make Atonement for his Transgressions to make Satisfaction to justice And thus the man is made to despare in himself as being irremediably gone undone if free grace prevent him not II. Whereupon the man is made to renounce all his former grounds of Hop Confidence all his former Duties good works civility Negative Holiness what else he placed his Confidence in formerly Yea all his Righteousnesses are as filthy rags accounted as loss dung So that he hath nothing within himself as a Righteousness that he can expect to be justified by before God but on the contrary he findeth himself under the Curse that what he thought before to be his Righteousness is now by the light of the Law the discovery he hath of his natural condition founde to be sin iniquity before God therefore to be so far from bringing any reliefe unto him that thereby his anxiety is made greater his case more desperat III. The way of Gospel-justification is so contrived the wakened man whom God is about to justifie is now convinced of it that Man must be abased for he is now made to see that he is empty poor hath nothing to commend him to God no Righteousness of his own to produce nothing within him or without him except the alone Righteousness of Christ the Mediator Cautioner that can stand him in stead Nothing of his own must here come in reckoning neither alone nor in conjunction with the Righteousness of Christ for what is of Grace must not be of works otherwise Grace is no more Grace Rom. 11 6. Christ must have all the glory he who glorieth must glory alone in the Lord. And therefore is Christ made Righteousness unto us 2. Cor. 1 30. is become the Lord our Righteousness Ier. 23 6. And all His must say That in the Lord they have righteousness Esai 45 24. IV. Nothing that preceedeth faith no motions or workings of the Law no legal Repentance the like have any infallible connexion with justification nor are they any congruous disposition thereunto or a Condition thereof there being no promise made that all such as are convinced awakened have some legal terrours works of the Law upon their Spirites shall certainely be justified experience proving that several who have had deep convictions Humiliations have with the dog returned to their vomite become afterward worse than ever doth also confirme this So that after the deepest legal Humiliations works of Terrour outward Changes the like Effects of the Law though when they are wrought by the Lord intending bringing about the Elect sinner's Conversion justification they have this kindly work upon the heart to cause the Soul more readily willingly listen to the offers of Salvation Mercy in the Gospel to submit to the termes Method which God hath in His great wisdom mercy condescended unto as to the actual Conferring bestowing of the blessings purchased by Christ for His own chosen ones justification is an Act purely of God's free Grace undeserved of them on any account an act of His meer mercy Love So that they are justified freely by His grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Rom. 3 24. V. Unto this justification their good Works are not required upon what somever account for good works must follow justification not preceed it They must be first accepted through Christ before their works of holiness can be accepted The whole Gospel doth most plainely exclude works of the Law under whatsoever Notion Qualification or Restriction as we manifested above shall more manifest hereafter Yea all works upon what somever account are excluded as opposite to justification by faith through Jesus Christ. The man who had no more to say but God be merciful to me a sinner went home justified when he who said God I thank thee I am not as other men nor as this Publican c. did miss that Privilege Paul hath so directly plentifully proved that no man is justified by works that we need say no more of it and therefore in this matter of justification man hath no ground of boasting but must glory in the Lord alone VI. As without a Righteousness no man can be justified before God because His judgment is alwayes according to truth He will pronunce no man Righteous who is not so or who hath no Righteousness And as no man hath a Righteousness of his own in himself that will abide the trial of God's judgment for if He should enter into judgment with any that liveth they should not be able to stand before His judgment seat be justified but all who are justified are in themselves ungodly void of all Righteousness that can ground a sentence of absolution from the Condemnation of the Law So it is the Righteousness of Christ as Mediator Cautioner which is to them the only ground of their absolution justification this Surety-Righteousness of Christ is imputed to them by God they are clothed therewith being considered as clothed there with are pronounced Righteous by the Lord the righteous judge dealt with as such So that all the Righteousness which is the ground of their absolution from the Condemnation of the Law is without them in another who was appointed their Cautioner therefore all appearance of any ground of boasting in themselves is quite taken away by the Law of faith Rom. 3 27. the reward is now wholly of grace not of debt Rom. 4 4. VII Though faith faith only be required of us in order to our having Interest in Christ His Righteousness to justification therethrough Yet this leaveth no ground of boasting unto man or of glorying in himself for it is in it self a plaine solemne Declaration of the Beleevers Sense
Conviction Acknowledgment of his own Beggarliness Poverty Nakedness of his being a dyvoure non-solvendo haiving no Righteousness of his own renounceing all that is in him in order to his own justification as it were a swearing of himself bare a laying hold upon a Righteousness without him even the Righteousness of Christ who is the End of the Law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10 3 4. resting upon it a producing of it as the ground of his Absolution in face of court to his own shame to the glory of his Cautioner So. far is it from being the mans Righteousness that it is a plaine open declaration that he hath no Righteousness but must go to Christ for a Righteousness And so far is the beleever from reflecting on it as his Righteousness from darring to present it to God as his Righteousness plead for absolution upon the ground thereof as if it were perfect a full Righteousness according to the Gospel that he only thereby saith in the Lord have I Righteousness he looks upon it as most weak imperfect being encouraged by the free promise of God he laith hold on Christ with the trembling weak hand of faith which he hath ostentimes so far is he from having any confidence in his faith that with much doubting hesitation he as almost despairing of being the better thereby seeing no other outgate or remedie ventureth with a peradventure he may be saved so that how ever he can but perish How far such a soul that is fleing to Christ for refuge is from conceiveing any ground of boasting in himself is sufficiently plaine the sense experience of all so exercised can declare VIII Even this Act of the soul looking out going to gripping laying hold upon Jesus Christ His Righteousness held forth offered in the Gospel to all self condemned sinners despairing in themselves is not of themselves it is the gift of God Ephes. 2 8. The Spirit of Jesus boweth inclineth the soul hereunto determineth the doubting man unto this choice maketh him willing whether it be in a lesser or in a greater degree to flee to Christ for shelter from the storme of wrath to be saved from the Curse And though the soul in the meane while be not in case to observe take notice of the powerful workings of grace herein Yet afterward he is in better case to see it to celebrate the rich free grace of God who hath visited him in his low condition began à work in him never left him untill he landed him in Christ in whom was all fulness he found he was compleat through whom he obtained that delivery from wrath which he was seeking after meerly out of his wonderful free grace mercy CHAP. V. In Justification there is a State of life HAving premised these three particulars not unworthy of our consideration serving to prepare the way unto what followeth to be spoken unto we come more particularly to handle the words to see what may be drawn out of them for our Information Edification that we may be instructed concerning the nature of this noble Privilege concerning the way how it is brought about persons may be made partakers thereof as also stirred up unto a right Improvement of the truth herein whether we be already made partakers thereof or are yet strangers thereunto We Intend not as we hinted at the beginning to touch upon far less to discuss at lenghth all the many perplexed controversies that are moved both of old of late by men of different Principles perswasions Nor do we intend to handle the several Arguments which the Apostle adduceth for confirmation of the Truth in this matter But our purpose only being to touch upon at least to endeavoure the clearing of some of the Principal Questions moved in this matter in reference to the forementioned ends we shall satisfie our selves at present with speaking to such particulars as the Text will give ground for The words having been cleared the Scope of the Apostle declared which cannot be hid from the eyes of any who will read the purpose there are only two things which call for our Consideration First The Conclusion which the Apostle is disproving confuting with a manifesto to wit That no man is justified in the sight of God by the Law or by the works of the Law Next The argument which the Apostle maketh use of to this end for the just shall live by faith The Apostles way of argueing here elsewhere with the same or the like Argument whereby he stateth an Inconsistency yea an Opposition betwixt justification by the Law justification by faith saith that it will not be very necessary to speak much to that which is here the Apostles Conclusion that is to cleare that justification is not by the works of the Law for the clearing of justification by faith will enforce that of it self We shall not therefore insist upon that howbeit we may in end consider what is said by some for justification by works what way such think to shun the odium of manifestly contradicting the Apostle of maintaining that Errour which he setteth himself so perempâ—orily against as acted by the Spirit of God The Principal thing then which we have here to do is to consider the Import of the Apostles argument for the just shall live by faith yet we are not to consider these words in their just length breadth nor particularly in reference to the use which the Prophet Habbakuk maketh of them Hab. 2 4. this same Apostle Heb. 10 38. of this we have spoken elsewhere But only in reference to the use which the Apostle here maketh of them in clearing up the way how justification is brought about And considering them in this respect we will have two things only to take notice of First The assertion of justification by faith Next The Influence that this assertion hath into the Apostles Conclusion to wit That therefore justification is not by the Law nor by the works of the Law In speaking to the First we will have occasion to speak both to the beginning the nature ground of this change made in justification as also to the continuance of that state of justification And then we will have occasion to show how both the beginning Continuance of justification is by faith for as the sinner at first becometh just or is brought into a justified state by faith so is he carried on continueth in that state of life to the end this being alwayes true that first last the just liveth by faith faith beginneth faith carrieth on this life untill the justified man be glorified The Apostle that we may come to speak something to cleare the nature of this State of justification is asserting
Law but by the Gospel not by the Covenant of works but by the Covenant of Grace The Adversaries to Imputation alleige that we by asserting the same do establish justification by the works of the Law because the obedience of Christ was obedience to the Law and so legal Righteousness and if that be imputed to us so as we are accounted to have done what he did we must be justified by Law-righteousness consequently by the Law which is contrary to the Scriptures But in answere to this I say 1. They advert not that some of themselves do expresly call Christ's Righteousness our legal or prolegal righteousness therefore it must be a righteousness answering the Law also made ours 2. Nor do they observe that justification by the Law or by the works of the Law which the Scriptures speak so much against is not to be understood in their sense the obvious plaine and only meaning thereof being this that no man can be justified by his own personal obedience to the Law for by the Law the doers only of the Law are justified Rom. 2 13. The plaine tenor of the Law is Set down Rom. 10 5. Where Moses is mentioned as describing the Righteousness of the Law to be this that the man who doth those things shall live by them Levis 18 5. When therefore the Law saith that the man that doth these things shall live by them not the man that either doth those himself or getteth a cautioner to do them for him shall be justified it is manifest that we are not justified by the Law seing we do not these things ourselves in our oun persons but by the Gospel which only provideth this Surety proposeth justification through His Righteousness imputed received by faith Thus we see That justification through the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness doth quite annull destroy our Justification by the Law all Imputation being inconsistent with Law-justification repugnant thereunto because it is of grace what is of Grace neither is not can be of works Rom. 11 6. 3. We assert not Imputation in this sense to wit That we are accounted reputed to have done what Christ did for that cannot be God cannot judge amisse but He should judge amisse if He should judge that we did what Christ did Our meaning is this that the Beleever being now united unto Christ hath an Interest in Christ's Righteousness upon the account thereof now reckoned upon his Score by Imputation he is freed from all that the Law could charge upon him and that as fully to all ends as if he had performed that Righteousness himself 17. It is likewise here considerable That we are justified upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ imputed and yet this Righteousness of Christ is the proper meritorious cause of our justification of all that followeth there upon Some who oppose this Imputation imagine an opposition here But mistakingly they think that the Righteousness of Christ must be made the meritorious cause of it self or of that Righteousness which is imputed whileas we only say That Christ's Rightteousness is the meritorious cause of our justification Adoption c. and that it is also imputed to us for this end that we may be thereby formally righteous juridically in Law sense and so justified c. And who seeth not that it must be so seing we can be justified by no Righteousness which is not a proper meritorious cause of our justification consequently that we cannot be justified by any other Righteousness than the Righteousness of Christ so not by our own Gospel-righteousness nor by faith as suchs a Righteousness for that cannot be a meritorious cause of our justification 18. This is also a considerable part of this mystery which carnal eyes cannot see and which men carried away with prejudice at the pure doctrine of the Grace of God in the Gospel cannot sweetly comply with to wit That our justification is Solely upon the account of the Imputed Righteousness of Christ and not upon the account or because of any thing wrought in us or done by us yet our obligation to holiness conformity to the Law of God in all points is not hereby in the least weakened Paul's frequent preoccupying of this Objection in his Epistles may let us see how ready carnal hearts are to abuse the doctrine of the Grace of God revealed in the Gospel to carnal liberty and what a propensity there is in us to look for justification upon the account of our works only so that if we hear of any thing to put us of this apprehension we presently are ready to conclude that all study of and endeavour after holiness is wholly useless unnecessary and that we need not wonder much at Socinians others who do thus reasone against the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. But Paul doth cleare to us a sweet consistency betwixt free justification upon the account of Christ's Righteousness imputed and the serious study of holiness He saw no Inconsistency betwixt the study of obedience to the Law in all points and the expectation of justification by faith in Christ alone whatever men who would seem sharp-sighted zealous for the study of holiness do suppose they cannot but see And albeit men in those dayes were ready enough to except against free justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ and to pretend that the asserting thereof did take away all study of holiness yet this is very remarkable the Apostle to remove that objection never giveth the least hint of the necessity of our works of obedience in order to our justification And though He doth frequently press to holiness yet he never maketh use of any argument thereunto which might so much as insinuat that we were justified by works in one measure or other Nay we will finde that He draweth arguments pressing unto holiness from the very nature of their Gospel-justification of their State by vertue thereof And experience proveth this day that the most effectual Medium to holiness is taken from free justification through faith in Christ alone and that the holiness and obedience of such as practise the orthodox doctrine concerning justification hath another heavenly lustre as it floweth from another fountaine standeth upon another ground and looketh more like true holiness universal sincere obedience than what is to be seen among such as lay most weight upon their own duties whether we speak of Papists Socinians Arminians or of others And whatever inconsistency men may imagine to be betwixt free justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ and the Universal Sincere Acceptable study of holiness yet the Gospel knoweth no such thing but presseth holiness though not for this end that we may thereby be put into a state of justification or might sweat foile run work for the prize as the hire wayes of our work yet upon more Spiritual
Gospel like grounds and by Arguments more sutable to the state of the justified who only are in case to performe acts of obedience and duties of holiness acceptably unto God Such as the Image of God proposed for our Imitation the perpetual obligation of His Law the Relation they stand into the holy appointment of God the engagments they stand under the Spiritual help furniture which is at hand the Nature of holiness it self the genius kindly inclination of the new Nature whereof they are partakers and the many advantages thereof here and hereafter too many here to be mentioned Let any consider the Arguments used to this purpose by Paul Rom. 6. 7. 8. Chapters and in many places elsewhere he shall finde this true CHAP. VII Justification through the Imputed Righteousness of Christ cleared out of the Old Testament the Passages Vindicated from the exceptions of JOHN GOODWINE WE shall now proced unto another use mentione another way how this Truth That belevers in Christ attaine unto a life in justification ought to be improved to wit Secondly That we may hence take notice of a loud call herein to all Persons not yet justified to beware of a cheate in this matter not fix upon a wrong bottom in Justification nor lay their weight on any thing within themselves or on any thing else whatever except upon the Imputed Righteousness of Christ alone which they are to embrace to leane to by faith If they leane to their own works and make them the condition ground of their justification they will be disappointed for by the works of the Lawâ—an no man be justified in the sight of God as the Apostle asserteth proveth in our Text irresragably concludeth Rom. 3 20 28. in several other places Yea if they leane unto faith it self which is called for only to interesse us in the Righteousness of Christ that free grace may be exalted proud man abased they deceive themselves not only disappoint themselves of what they are expecting but even destroy the very Nature Ends of true Gospel-justifying faith for its native proper work is to carry the man out of him self wholly unto Christ for Righteousness Life Salvation for faith is the Mans looking to Christ as the stung Israelite in the wilderness did look unto the brazen serpent Ioh. 3 14 15. and saying as it is Esai 45 24. In the Lord have I righteousness and it is the beleevers putting-on of the Lord Jesus that he may be found in Him clothed with His Righteousness Phil. 3 9. It is the Man's receiving of Christ Ioh. 1 12 and receiving of the Atonement in Him through Him Rom. 5 11. and of aboundance of grace of the gift of Righteousness Rom. 5 17. Therefore it is called a beleeving on His name Ioh. 1 12. on Him whom the Father hath sent c. Ioh. 6 29 7 35. 17 20. Act. 16 31. 19 25. And because faith laid hold on this Righteousness of Christ therefore is this Righteousness called the Righteousness of faith Rom. 4 11. the righteousness which is of faith Rom. 9 30. that which is through the faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by faith Phil. 3 9. Now if this be the native work of justifying faith as we shall more fully cleare afterward to receive Christ and His Righteousness consequently to carry the Man out of himself that he may finde partake of that al sufficient Righteousness of Christ to the end he may with confidence stand before God and expect pardon and Acceptance It cannot be said without destroying the Native work of justifying faith that faith is that Gospel-Righteousness unto which they may leane upon the account of which they may expect justification Faith in this matter is as the eye of the Soulâ— that seeth not it self but looketh out to another Beside this would overturne the whole Nature of the Covenant of Grace and is irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Apostle Paul about justification as shall be manifested hereafter Therefore all who would live the life of justification must betake themselves to Jesus Christ leane to Him to His Righteousness for with the rob of His Righteousness must they alone be cloathed in Christ alone must they be found they must think of standing before God having on His Righteousness that God imputeth unto Beleevers which they receive by faith in order to their justification I know this doctrine is not favourie to many now adaies as Papists Socinians Arminians do oppose themselves with all their Industrie learning unto this doctrine of the Imputation of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ so there are now a dayes and have been of late who would not willingly be reckoned among either of these mentioned and yet do oppose this foundamental truth the sure ground of our Hop Peace Comfort As the Principles whereupon these mentioned go are different so are the grounds upon which they plead against this truth yet they do unanimous enough joine in this 〈◊〉 arguâ— against this Imputation which the Orthodox have owned and do owne Before I come to consider the chiefe at least of their Arguments against the Truth which hath been now asserted I shall with what brevity plainness I can lay down vindicate the Grounds and Reasons of our Assertion and then take notice of their contrary Objections that this Truth may be made plaine clear to such as are concerned therein As to our Grounds I shall first beginne with Scripture Authority here propose our Reasons from the Old Testament First The First passage to this purpose which I shall take notice of is Esai 45 24. Surely shall one say in the Lord have I righteousness or in the Lord is all righteousnesses to wit for me and this following upon what was said vers 22. look unto me be ye saved all the ends of the earth which was an Invitation call to them to act faith upon Him in order to their Salvation as the stung Israelites did look unto the brazen serpent in order to their recovery this looking being clearly explained by coming vers 24. Even to Him shall men come and we know how frequently faith is held forth expressed by coming in the Gospel saith that hereby is pointed forth the rich Advantage that such shall have who look come to Him by faith submit unto Him heartily cheerfully imported by bowing of the knee swearing with the tongue to wit That they shall have a righteousness in Him this they shall avow profess and this being exclusive of all others as the Context cleareth saith that they should be brought to that that they should renounce all other righteousness what somever rest on this God alone who is the only God vers 22. on His righteousness for in Him they shall
be made to look for it that in rich aboundance And upon this followeth their justification glorying in the Lord alone vers 25. In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified shall glory This passage therefore doth clearly hold forth a justification through the righteousness of the Messiah of the true living God laid hold upon applied by faith or owned embraced as their only righteousness this righteousness is not a righteousness wrought in them for such a righteousness is aboundantly hold forth by the word strength but a righteousness made over over Beleevers which they owne as theirs and rest upon It is too narrow scanty an Interpretation to limite this justification to the Lords vindicating of His peoples sincerity Innocency in respect of their Enemies at whose hands they suffered great things and that unjustly not to take in their Spiritual justification delivery from the guilt of sin through faith in the Messiah especially seing there is an Invitation going before to them to lay hold on the Lord Messias by faith according to the Gospel Methode and upon this followeth their glorying in the Lord conforme to what the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 1 30 31. that the Lord Jesus is made of God Righteousness to His people that he that glorieth may glory in the Lord. Nor is there any weight in that which Io 〈◊〉 in this Treatise of justification Par◠2. pag. 129. 130. alleigeth to Infringe the authority of this Testimony to wit That the meaning only is this that they receive these favoures of the free grace and donation of God by Iesus Christ. For as the expressions are more emphatick so all the circumstances of the Text pointe out their eyeing of the Lord and coming to Him and that in order to their justification and Salvation together with their profession of owneing the Lord's Righteousness alone for their Righteousness renouncing all other Righteousness in themselves or in others in order to justification and thereby declaring that they look upon it as necessary for them to have a Righteousness and that this is onely the Righteousness of Jehovah or of the Messiah where with they desire to be clothed and rest satisfied All which import the Lords bestowing of this Righteousness upon them that is imputing of it unto them for without this they cannot have it nor glory in it as their owne Secondly it is faid Esai 61 10. I will greatly rejoice in the Lord My Soul shall be joyful in my God for He hath clothed me with garments of Salvation He hath covered me with the rob of Righteousness c. And this coming in upon the back of what was said in the beginning of the Chapter concerning Christ's furniture for His work of Mediation His Call thereto and His special work or the End for which He was sent to wit to binde up the broken-hearted to proclame liberty to the Captives c. pointeth forth the sweet welcome and hearty acceptance that the anointed Messiah should have among His own chosen ones for these words hold forth their expression of their sense of what they had received from Him and of their joy upon the account thereof They professe openly their joy rejoiceing in the Lord because He had clothed and covered them with the garments of Salvation and with the rob of Righteousness Now this rob could not be a rob of their owne making nor can it be understood of their Inherent holiness for it is a Garment put on and wherewith they are covered Thus are we said to put on the Lord Jesus Rom. 13 14. Gal. 3 27. And Iohn Rev. 19 8. helpeth us to understand the meaning of this Expression when he saith And to her was granted that the should be arayed in white Linen clean and white for the fine Linen is the Righteousness of Saints Against this Testimony the fore-named Author Io. Goodwin pag. 130. c. maketh some Exceptions as 1 These Expressions sai's he concerne the jewes onely and are meaned of their deliverance out of Babylon if not out of their present Condition which is an effect of God's faithfulness and truth or of his goodness and graciousness Ans. 1. To limite this to the jewes and to their outward and temporal delivery is but a part of their Socinian fiction without any apparent ground in the Text. Nay the first part of the Chapter which Christ applieth to Himself Luk. 4. and the several particulars there mentioned may shame this out of countenance unless we minde to make Christ only a temporal deliverer◠as the jewes did dream their Messias would be And the Gospel reacheth us Spiritually to expound as pointing forth Spiritual promises even such promises as savoure more of temporal things as to the letter that what are here mentioned do 2. it is but ground-less to imagine and a piece of the ordinary course of Socinians in evading clear Testimonies of Scripture brought against them that Righteousness here doth signify God's faithfulness for though somewhere where mention is made of God's Righteousness and other circumstances of the Text make it evident this sense might be admitted yet it cannot be so understood here where the Righteousness is said to be granted to the people as a rob and a garment to cover them and the very following words of the verse show that this is meaned of Some thing bestowed upon them for it is added as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments and as a bride adorneth her self with her jewels or as Some render the words He hath decked me with ornaments as a bridegroom and with jewels as a bride 2. He excepteth If these words be taken in a Spiritual sense the promise which is contained in them cannot suite the Church because the Church is at all times and alwayes clothed with Christ's Righteousness being justified in Him Ans. This one answere will destroy all the Spiritual promises hold forth by the prophets as the fruits effects of Christ's coming for the Church of true and faithful beleevers was really in some measure answerable to that more dark dispensation made partaker of these Saving and Spiritual benefites both at that time and before even from the beginning and thus there shall be no promises in all the old Testam of Spiritual things touching pardon of Sin Justification Grace and Sanctification and the like made unto the Church but all of them must be interpreted of carnal things though the New Test. teacheth us the contrary as might be evinced by multitudes of places But the matter is clear to wit That this is mentioned as the open profession of the Church with joy and thankfulness of what she was blessed with and made partaker of in Christ and had as a fruit and effect of His performing His Mediatory work that is That she was clothed with a rob of Righteousness and that by Him which was and would be to her a ground of perpetual joy and rejoiceing in
That he is so far from making the Law void through faith that he rather doth establish the same as was shown above 4. He saith The Law may be said to be established by saith in as much as the threatnings of the Law are by the doctrine of faith declared not to be in vaine Christ's sufferings being a full confirmation of the force efficacy and authority of the Curse of the Law Ans. This is so fargood But why shall not also His obedience be a full confirmation of the force efficacy authority of the commanding power of the Law This being principally intended in the Law belongeth as much at least to the establishment thereof as the Sanction We assert not the one with an exclusion of the other but assert the establishment of both by faith and thus the Law is by faith fully established in all its parts demands 5. He saith The best Interpretation is that by the Law here is meant that part of the Old Test. which comprehendeth the writting of Moses with those other books whiâ—h together with the writtings of the Prophets make up the entire body thereof as it was used vers 21. and in this sense the Law may most properly be said to be established by Paul teaching the Doctrine of faith because it is fully consonant agreable to those things that are written there Ans. But this sense is not the same with the sense of the word Law v. 21. for the Law there is mentioned as distinct from the Prophets And if that part of the Old Test. be meaned which is different from the book of the Prophets what ground was there to think that the doctrine of faith did more seem to cross what was con ained in the one than what was contained in the other especially seing he had said v. 21. that the Righteousness he spoke of was witnessed both by the Law and the Prophets And if both should be here understood seing the Apostle did fully enough declare his mind as to that v. 21 what ground is there to think that he was called to remove that objection here againe And what imaginable colour can be from any thing that the Apostle spoke in the foregoing words for such an objection as this This manifestly is nothing but a groundless invention of men that know not else what to say Thirdly Rom. 4 6. where mention is made of a Righteousness imputed without works that as the ground of a mans blessedness justification for it is of the blessedness of justification that the Apostle is there speaking and he showeth that this is attained not by the works of the Law but by an imputed Righteousness which can be none else that the Righteousness of God spoken of in the preceeding Chapter or of Christ who wrought the Redemption and was set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood Against this He excepteth pag. 140. saying 1. If weâ—will needs here understand a positive legal Righteousness it is much more probable He should meane a Righteousness consisting of such or of such an obedience to the Law as hath an absolute perfect agreableness to every mans condition calling respectively than the Righteousness of Christ which hath no such property in it Ans. The Apostle speaketh of a Righteousness and of a Righteousness imputed and all Righteousness must consist in obedience to the Law and in full conformity thereto and seing it is said to be imputed and not by our works it must of necessity follow that the Apostle is to be understood as speaking of the Surety-righteousness of Christ. And if the Righteousness of Christ who gave perfect obedience to the Law and was constituted Mediator and Surety by the Father and as such did give full Satisfaction both in obeying the Law and in paying the penalty be not such an obedience to the Law as will serve every Beleevers turne where else will the beleever finde a more adequat Righteousness Shall we think that his act of saith which is but one act of obedience to the Law or an act of obedience to one command of the Law hath a more perfect absolute agreablness to every mans condition respectively than the perfect obedience Righteousness of Christ Let such beleeve this as can 2. He saith The Righteousness which God is said here to impute is placed in Remission of Sins Ans. That Imputation of Righteousness and pardon of sinnes do inseparably go together is true and that the one proveth the other is also clear from these words But it is not proved nor can it be proved that Imputed Righteousness and Remission of Sins are the same seing it is obvious enough that Righteousness is one thing and pardon of sinnes is another distinct thing No man will say that a pardoned thiefe is a Righteous man for that were as much as to say He was never a thiefe It is true by pardon He is no more obnoxious to the penalty the obligation to underlye that being now taken away yet that will not evince that He is a Righteous man and there is still a difference betwixt him and one that never was chargable with that guilt this man as to this is indeed a Righteous man but not the other 3. He saith The phrase of imputing Righteousness is best understood by the contrary expression of imputing sin this signifieth either to look upon a person as justly liable to punishment or to inflict punishment upon him in consideration of sin Therefore doubtless to impute Righteousness importeth nothing else but either to look upon a man as righteous or to conferre upon him the privileges belonging to persons truely righteous Ans. This is true if we speak of a person who is truely Righteous antecedently unto this Imputation as the sinner is supposed to be truely a sinner antecedently unto this Imputation But when sin is imputed to a Righteous person or to one who before the imputation was not guilty nor looked upon as a Sinner as Sin was imputed to Christ the Holy and Righteous one who knew no sin and as Sin through injustice was imputed to Naboth who was not guilty of what was laid to his charge Imputation in this case must import some thing else than either of these two mentioned and that antecedently to an holding of that person liable to punishment or to a punishing of him with consideration to that sin thus before Christ could be looked upon as a person liable to punishment or could be punished for sin by the Righteous God sin must first have been imputed to Him and reckoned upon His Score and that Righteously because of His undertaking and willingly submitting to the debt as Surety as when Iezabel would have Noboth killed as a Malefactor she first by injustice and indirect meanes made him guilty of sin then held him liable to punishment and dealt with him accordingly So upon the other hand when Righteousness is imputed to a sinner as we all are
of Christ is Subjectively and inherently in Himself only nor are we the workers of this righteousness Ans. Though the Righteousness of Christ be subjected in Him only wrought by Him alone yet the same being imputed unto Beleevers the Righteousness of the Law may be said to be fulfilled in them because by faith they are in Christ Christ is in them and in them is as much as for them or upon them or on their account as this same person hereafter granteth in a like case so it is accepted of God for all ends as if it were performed by them so it is fulfilled in our nature for for this end He came in the likeness of sinful flesh 3. He saith If by Righteousness of the Law we understand that entire obedience which every beleever according to the great variety of their several conditions callings relations stand bound to performe it cannot be said to be fulfilled in them by the imputation of Christ's righteousness for every beleever is bound to many moe particular acts than can be found in all that golden Catalogue of works of Righteousness performed by Christ. Ans. If the works of Righteousness performed by Christ shall not be a compleat Righteousness that can Satisfie the demandes of the Law where shall beleevers get a compleet Righteousness Shall their poor imperfect obedience wherewith themselves are not satisfied but complaine much of and mourne for be a more perfect compleat fulfilling of the Righteousness of the Law than was the perfect obedience of Christ with which the Father was well pleased Or shall the single weak act of their Faith as this Author saith be a more entire fulfilling of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Law than the Catalogue of the works of Righteousness performed by Christ What probable ground is there for this imagination 2. Christ's obedience was perfect the Law-giver was satisfied there with accepted of it in the behalfe of all the chosen ones all their defects sinnes in their various conditions callings Relations were done away by the Satisfaction made by Christ so that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Law was perfectly fulfilled in their behalf this being imputed unto them received by faith no more is requisite unto a stateing of them into a state of pardon right to glory 5. He saith The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not obedience to or conformity with the Law but rather that justification which was the end and intent of the Law or rather that jus or right or Law as it were of the Law Ans. But all this will not weaken our Argument for that right jus or demand of the Law was as to us now sinners both Satisfaction for transgressions committed and full and compleat obedience till both were done performed there could be no justification of sinners and so this rather establisheth than hurteth the doctrine of Imputation whatever he may imagine 6. He saith By the word Law cannot necessarily be understood the Moral Law for 1. The weakness of the Law extends also to the judicial and Ceremonial 2. The jewes to whom he specially addresseth himself in all this disputatiâ—n built as much on the observation of the Ceremonial Law 3. The Moral Law though perfectly observed could not have justified all men at least not the jewes who were obliged to the observation of other Lawes 4. The Imputation of the observation of the Moral Law would not have served for the justification of the jewes who were under the transgression of other Lawes Ans. It wiâ—â— satisfie us if by the Law here be understood that universal Rule of Righteousness which God prescribed unto men that certainely is the Moral Law whereof as to the jewes the Ceremonial judicial were a part or were reduced unto particularly the Ceremonial Law being God's instituted worship they were obliged to observe it by vertue of the Second command And thus both the Exception all the Reasons confirming it evanish for 1. we take not the Law here so narrowly as to exclude the other lawes which God gave to the jewes seing they are all reduced there unto comprehended thereunder 2. Paul is here mainly writting for Information of the Gentiles the Church of Rome though there might be some jewes among them what he saith may be also for their use yet this will not prove that by the Law he understandeth any other than that perfect rule of Righteousness which God gave unto them comprehending these other Lawes as appendices thereof 3. The Moral Law thus taken if observed could have justified even jewes if we suppose they had not been born sinners 4. Christ having fulfilled all Righteousness His Righteousness was an observation of this Universal Law therefore the Imputation thereof can serve for the justification both of jewes Gentiles Lastly He saith The clear meaning of the place seemeth to be this That that justification or way of making men Righteous which the writings of Moses prophefied of long since to wit by faith in the Messiah might be accomplished made good and fully manifested in us or upon us viz in our justification who by an eminency of holiness in our lives above the straine and pitch of men under the Law give testimony unto the world that the Messiah the great justifier is indeed come into the world and having suffered for sin and overcome death hath poured out the Spirit of Grace aboundantly upon those that beleeve Ans. 1. To take the Law here for the meer writtings of Moses then to Interpret the fulfilling thereof as is here done is to exclude the witnessing of the Prophets which Paul expresly mentioneth Rom. 3 21. 2. What could this contribute to prove that there was now no condemnation to such as were in Christ Jesus among the Gentiles 3. How can this be a proof of what was said vers 3. foregoing 4. How can this be the end of Christ's condemning sin in the flesh as himself said it was Except 2 5. He told us before that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did properly Signifie jus right or Law of the Law now I pray what is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this jus right of Moses's writtings And how is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oâ— Righteousness fulfilled 6. What then can be meant by the weakness of Moses's writtings or how could they be said to be weak through the flesh 7. And how could God be said by this Interpretation to send His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh because Moses's writtings were weak through the flesh 8. I see then in us may import the same that upon us importeth though it was excepted against formerly as we heard 9. It seemeth by this Interpretation that there was no Eminency of holiness or walking after the Spirit among those who were under the Law which is utterly false 10. Christ by His coming did not only fulfill Moses's writtings
this satisfie But the matter is plaine Their fault was that they sought after a righteousness by their owne obedience to the law neglected that righteousness which the Gentils attained by faith viz. the Righteousness of Christ at whom they stumbled vers 32. 33. And the Righteousness of God of which they were wholly ignorant Rom. 10 3. This was not a simple endeavour of keeping the law as he hinteth in the following words where he would preoccupy this objection and then tell us that this study could be no cause of their coming short of righteousness as Christians are never further off from justification by keeping the commands of God but a proposeing of that designe of attaining a Righteousness by their own works whereby alone they might be justified And when Christians endeavour after holiness but not from Gospel-principles nor upon gospel-Gospel-grounds but to the end they may attaine unto a Righteousness of their owne by their works of obedience they prejudge themselves of justification for thus they do not lay hold on Christ but reject Him and stumble at that stumbling stone that is at Christ who is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10 4. 2. He faith neither Calvine nor any other restaine the law to the Moral law Ans. Nor do we so restraine it to that law strikly so taken but comprehend thereby all that God prescribed for a righteousness and this is the Moral law in its full sense the ceremonial judicial being parts thereof appendices thereto 3. He saith There is no reason to limite this to the Moral law only for the jewes sought righteousness by the Ceremonial also Ans. This is but the same with the former and we have told him that the Ceremonial law was then enjoined by the Moral law so the Moral law did comprehend it so long as the Ceremonial law was unrepealed And whatever law it was their seeking of righteousness by it and their refusing of Christ and his Righteousness went together and they so pursued after it that they sought Righteousness by their obedience to it and did not seek by faith after Christs Righteousness nor would they submit thereunto 4. He saith The righteousness of the Moral law alone suppose they should have attained to it by beleeving could have stood them in no stead they being bound also to the observation of the Ceremonial law Ans. This hath been answered before Christ fulfilled all righteousness and satisfied that law of righteousness which was an Universal Rule of righteousness so comprehended the ceremonial lawes so long as they were in force so that if they had forsaken their own righteousness and embraced by faith the righteousness of Christ they had been certainely saved the Imputation of this Righteousness had made them up Lastly he saith The clear sense is that the law of righteousness is justification it self or righteousness simply and indefinitely taken which the jewes seeking to attaine to by the works of the law that is by themselves the merites of their own doings and not by faith in Iesus Christs lost Gods favour and perished in their sinnes Ans. 1 That the jewes sought after justification by the merites of their own works otherwise than merites are included in all works is not manifest in this place 2 Otherwayes this may passe for part of the sense for by faith he understands the act of faith it self as our righteousness not the Righteousness of Christ which faith laith hold on or faith as laying hold on receiving a Surety-righteousness which is here imported when the contrary is expressed of the jewes of them it is said that they stumbled at that stumbling stone in the next chapter it is said they would not submit themselves unto the righteousness of God What he addeth as a confirmation of this interpretation is to no purpose for he speaketh nothing to cleare the maine thing in doubt but all is to prove that by the law of righteousness Righteousness is meaned which is not denied withall he taketh for granted what is not proved hath been denied viz. That Righteousness and Justification are one the same thing Seventhly Rom. 10 3 4. A passage cleat pregnant for our purpose where the Apostle is but prosecuting the same purpose as to the jewes and shewing whence their disappointement missing of that came which they so earnestly endeavoured after viz. A righteousnss by which they might be justified before God for saith the Apostle they being ignorant of Gods Righteousness and going about to establish their own righteousness have not submitted themselves unto the Righteousness of God for Christ is the end of the law for righteousnes to every one that beleeveth There is a Righteousness here called Gods Righteousness which is opposite to inconsistent with mens owne righteousness that is all that is done by them in conformity to the law of God as a righteousness whereupon to be justified yea so great is this opposition that who ever laboures most to establish set on foot his own Righteousness or to seek after a Righteousness by his own performances is furthest from the Righteousness of God as being both ignorant thereof and in pride refuising to submit thereunto This Righteousness of God is explained vers 4. to be the end of the law that is the full righteousness which the law in its primitive institution called for which is the accomplishment of the lawes designe as proposed to be a Rule of Righteousness and the condition of life promised upon the performance thereof And Christ is said to be this end of the law for righteousness He by yeelding perfect obedience hath brought forth a righteousness in which the law hath its End And Christ is this to every one that beleeveth the righteousness being made over unto them who beleeve and by faith lay hold on him which because the Gentiles did they therefore attained to this righteousness Rom. 9 30. Mr. Goodwine pag. 137. c. excepteth several wayes 1 There is saith he no coloure of Reason that by the law here should be meaned precisely determinatly the Moral law because the jewes never dreamed of justification by this law only but chiefly by the Ceremonial law Besides vers 5. he citeth that description which Moses giveth of the righteousness of the law not out of any passage of the Moral law but out of the heart as is were of the ceremonial law Lev. 18 5. Ans. The first part of this Exception hath been often answered we take not the Moral law so precisely determinatly as not to include as parts or appendices all other lawes given by God And the last part of this Exception will say nothing unless he think this law is precisely determinatly to be understood of the Ceremonial law excluding all others especially the Moral law taken as distinct from judicial and ceremonial But why doth he say that this description
it accompanying it with other things as to the Nation of the jewes because for this end was the law as a law given by the law-giver that Subjects might walk according to the same and that they might become thereby righteous and have a right to the reward promised by fulfilling this condition of the Covenant Now when these ends or this end putting these together as one were onely attained by what Christ did and suffered the jewes who stumbled at this stumbling stone rejected this righteousness of God could never be justified by all their own acts of obedience to the law how zealously so ever they should have sougt after a rigteousness thereby Except 6. The 5. we passe because he laith no weight on it him self The plaine direct meaning is that the law that is the whole Mosaical dispensation was for that end given by God to the jewes that whilst it did continue it might instruct and teach them concerning the Messiah who was yet to come and by his death to make atonement for their sinnes that so they might beleeve in Him accordingly and be justified and further that in time that Nation might be trained up prepared for the Messiah himself and that Oeconomy perfection of worship service which He should bring with him establish in the world at his coming Ans. What was said to the two foregoing Exceptions may serve for an answere to this for what ever truth may be in this yet it is no true sense exposition of the place because Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth so to the Gentiles as well as to the jewes whereas this gloss limiteth restricketh all to the jewes 2 There is nothing here keeping correspondence with what is said vers 3. touching their going about to establish their own righteousness and refuising to submit unto the righteousness of God 3. The righteousness of the law described by Moses here cited vers 5. hath no interest in the Mosaical Oeconomy as given for the mentioned end to the jewes 4 If Christ made an atonement for sins was to be beleâ—ved in accordingly by such as would be justified then that atonement was to be made over unto them reckoned upon their score to the end they might be justified upon the account thereof 5 The Text saith that Christ was the end of the law for righteousness so was to bring in everlasting Righteousness as well as to make atonement for sins Dan. 9 24. 6 The perfection of that service worship which Christ was to establish at His coming was a clearer manifestation of the Gospel of the Grace of God whereby the Righteousness of God or the Surety-righteousness of Christ was imputed unto Beleevers received by faith in order to justification as the whole Gospel declareth He laboureth to confirme this gloss with two reasons 1. Because the jewes sought Righteousness self justification as well from the observation of the Ceremonial as of the Moral law 2. Because Christ is held forth as the end of this dispensation 2 Cor. 3 13. Gal. 3 24. Ans. As to the first of the reasons we have often replied to it already And the second will not prove that there is no other interpretation of this passage that can have place And beside That whole Oeconomy did pointe out and lead them to the Messiah that in Him they might find that which they were seeking after by their own works all in vaine even the Righteousness of God which will sufficiently cloth all beleevers and both keep them from wrath due for sin give them a right to glory So that even this sense if rightly understood doth rather strengthen than hurt imputed Righteousness Eightly 1 Cor. 1 30. Is excepted against by him pag. 162. c. To which we may adde vers 29. 31. Which will help to cleare the matter That no flesh should glory in His presence but of Him are ye in Christ Iesus who of God is made unto us Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification Redemption That according at it is written he that glorieth let him glory in the Lord. All the work of God in and about His chosen ones is so contrived that no flesh should have ground to glory in the presence of God but that he who glorieth should glory in the Lord and therefore He hath made Christ to be all things to them that they stand in need of in order to their everlasting enjoyment of Himself and particulary Christ is said to be made of God to us among other things which our necessity calleth for Righteousness answering His Name the LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS Ier. 23 6. And a Righteousness he cannot be made unto us any other way than by clothing us who are naked and have no righteousness of our own with a Righteousness that is by Imputing to us His Righteousness that we may thereby become Righteous be looked upon as such and so be accepted of God justified Except 1. Christ is no other way said to be made righteousness then He is said to be made Wisdom c. Therefore we may as well plead for the Imputation of His Wisdom or His Sanctification there is no more intimation made of the Imputation of the one then of the other Ans. This is but the old exception of Socinus part 4. de Servant Cap. 5. And of Volkel De vera Relig. Cap. 21. p. 566. And it standeth upon this onely ground That Christ is made all these particulars to us here mentioned after one the same manner and what that manner is should be declared of necessity it must be a very general one otherwise it shall not agree to all these particulars Therefore Socinus hath devised a very general manner of way saying in the place cited That all this signifieth nothing else than that we have attained to that by Gods providence through Christ that we are become wise holy redeemed before Gods that therefore Christ is said to be righteousness to us because through the providence of God by Christ we have attained to be just before God But this general way maketh us not one white wiser Volkelius in the place cited giveth us no relief but only tels us That Christ is said to be made all these to us because he was the cause of all these because God by his meanes made us wise holy will at length redeem us Bellarm. condescendeth to tell us that He is said to be our Righâ—eousness because He is the efficient cause thereof But how that is he doth not explaine But Bellarm. next answere is to some better purpose Christ saith he is said to be our Righteousness because He satisfied the Father for us and doth so give and communicat that Satisfaction to us when he justifieth us that it may be called our Satisfaction Righteousness 2 Such as oppose us here do must necessarily so do
as a cause so is our Righteousness Justification inseparable as the full Effect CHAP. IX Other passages of the N. T. briefly mentioned which plead for this Imputation of Christs Righteousness THere are other passages of Scripture beside these mentioned in the preceeding chapter and against which I finde no Exceptions made by Mr. Goodwine in the forecited Book which yet do with no small clearness and fulness of evidence plead for the truth which we owne to wit The Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto Beleevers in order to their Justification These we shall not insist upon but only mentione in short seing the full insisting upon them will not be necessary after what is said in the Explication Vindication of foregoing passages 1 Rom. 1 17. For therein is the Righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith as it is written the just shall live by faith The Apostle is here giving a reason proving the Gospel whereof he was not ashamed to be a preacher of to be the power of God unto Salvation that to every one that beleeveth be he jew or be he Gentile viz. Because there is a Righteousness revealed therein which sinners only stand in need of that Righteousness of God that is not only a Righteousness which is devised by God and is accepted in His sight but an excellent Righteousness even the Righteousness of one who is God and a Righteousness revealed for faith to lay hold on receive that which faith leaneth to first and last when it is weakest and when it is strongest that thereby the poor sinner who formerly was dead by law may live as one reconciled to God So that hence we see Sinners have need of a Righteousness and this Righteousness is the Righteousness of God is revealed in the Gospel that it may be received by faith and so Imputed made over to the poor sinner in order to his Justification and acceptance with God 2 Rom. 4 11. And he i. e. Abraham received the signe of circumcision a seal of the Righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised that righteousness might be imputed to them also Here is a Righteousness and a Righteousness called the Righteousness of faith because received applied only by faith and a Righteousness whereof circumsion was appointed a seal granted to Abraham as such and a Righteousness which was imputed to Abraham that he might be the Father of all them that beleeve for it is added that Righteousness might be Imputed to them also And this must be the same Righteousness that was Imputed to Abraham the same way Imputed the same way received that there migt be no essential difference betwixt the way of justification of Father and Children The Aethiopick Version may serve for a commentary and he had circumsion a signe of his righteousness which He gave him and the signe thereof that this might be made known unto him that God justified Abraham by faith when he was not at that time circumcised that they may know that they also are justified by faith 3. Rom. 4 24 25. But for us also to whom it shall be Imputed if we beleeve on Him who raised up tesus our Lord from the dead who was delivered for our offences was raised againe for our justification Here is some thing said to be Imputed this must be in order to justification And this that is Imputed cannot be faith it self or our act of beleeving for what is said to be Imputed is promised to be Imputed upon condition of faith or our beleeving on Him who raised up Iesus our Lord. So that it must be the Righteousness of Christ consisting in His Mediatory work which He undertook performed for His owne for it is added that He was delivered for their offences that is He was delivered unto the death to make satisfaction for their sinnes He rose againe that He might declare He had given full Satisfaction that He might apply this Surety-righteousness of His to the end they might be justified Socinus doth not understand this therefore de Servat part 4. p. 333 saith It is most certaine that the Apostle doth not speak of any Imputation of the righteousness of Christ but assert that the faith or credite we give God because He hath called Iesus Christ our Head from death to eternal life shall be accounted unto us in the place of righteousness just as faith whereby Abraham gave credite to the words of God was Imputed to him for righteousness But the Text hereby is manifestly perverted for it saith that some thing shall be imputed if we beleeve which can not be faith but something distinct from faith which is to be Imputed upon condition of faith And what can this be else than the Surety-righteousness of Christ who is here mentioned as dying riseing in the place and for 〈◊〉 good of His people that they might be justified And further if it were faith it self that were here said to be Imputed in order to justification the justified man should not be one that is in himself ungodly because he hath a Righteousness in himself and he who hath a Righteousness in himself is not ungodly yet it is said Rom. 4 5. That God justifieth the ungodly Againe That which is Imputed must be a Righteousness without works vers 6. but if faith it self be Imputed a work is Imputed and not a Righteousness without works and this would also lay down a ground of boasting make the reward of debt not of grace v. 14. 4. Rom. 10 10. For with the heart man beleeveth unto Righteousness with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation The Apostle had been before vers 4. telling us That Christ was the end of the law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth thereafter he discriminateth the way of justification by the law and by the Gospel under the Notion of a Righteousness which is of the law and a Righteousness which is of faith then more particularly he describeth the Righteousness of faith or a Righteousness is had unto Salvation in through faith vers 9. If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Iesus shalt beleeve in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved which he proveth in the 10. vers now cited therein sheweth how by this beleeving that God hath raised the Lord Jesus from the dead Salvation is brought about viz. That by beleeving with the heart a Righteousness is obtained received and this righteousness must be Christs even His Surety-righteousness for faith looketh on Him as raised from the dead that by God as having now received full Satisfaction from Him thereupon bringing Him as it were out of prison And in the Text cited we see that by faith a Righteousness is received or faith is the way unto the possession of a Righteousness as Confession is the
dying riseing from their Interst in His dying and riseing their union with Him in all that as being one person in law with Him so as virtually riseing with Him and now sitting with Him who is their common Head Representative All which doth abundantly confirme the Doctrine of Imputation which we plead for He addeth finally But on the other hand as there is no such expression in Scripture as this we have fulfilled the law with Christ so neitherâ— if there were would it make any thing at all to salve the truth of the proposition under question for what if we should be said either to profess such a fulfilling of the law as holds proportion with Christ's fulfilling it or really personally to fulfill the law after such a manner Ans. The expressions already mentioned do sufficiently evince this union and communion that beleevers have with Christ in His mediatory work which is a solide ground of Imputation of the same unto them as the foundation of their partaking of the benefites flowing therefrom for there cannot any shew of reason be given for the one which will not hold good for the other also And it is said but not proved that these the like expressions hold forth no more but one or both of these two things alleiged yea the scope of the places and the Import of the words hold forth much more as is said Arg. 12. Whosoever is a sinner so continueth whil'st he liveth cannot be justified other wayes than by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness But every man Christ excepted is a sinner c. Therefore c. He excepteth pag. 219. c. If there be no other meanes of justifying the condition of the whole world is hopless for there is no such Imputation Ans. The contrary hath been shown shall be more demonstrated hereafter He addeth Without Imputation there is another door opened What is this Those that truely beleeve in Iesus Christ being not under the law but under grace are not liable to condemnation for their daily sinns 1 Ioh. 2 1 2. Ans. True but what then How come they to be under grace not under the law Is is not by vertue of the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto them unto their Justification because of their Interest in Christ as Mediator as their Head Husband Surety Interessour Advocat He addeth So that for the dissolving taking away of all guilt there needs no Imputation of the active obedience of Christ. The propitiation which He is unto them by His blood Intercession hath done this service to them before this Imputation is supposed to come at them Ans. We plead for the Imputation of His whole Surety Mediatory work say that it is wholly imputed that at once not one part now and another at another time Nor do we say that Christs death did procurâ— one thing His obedience another thing but that in by both He as Surety performed what the law required of us thereby procured all to us that we stand in need of to make us happy Thus have we vindicated the Arguments which this Author thought good to make any answere unto others might be mentioned but we shall forbear mentioning of them till some other occasion CHAP. XI Objections taken out of Scripture by Mr. Goodwine against the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ unto Justification Answered HAving in the foregoing Chapters proved both from Scripture Reason That Christs Righteousness is imputed unto Beleevers unto justification having vindicated such of them as were excepted against by Mr. Goodwine we shall now come examine the Arguments by which he oppugneth the Doctrine of Imputation in the first part of his Treatise of justification Where he marshalleth his Arguments under two heads viz. of Scripture Reason He beginneth with his supposed Scripture proofs Chap. 2. c. As to the first of which largely prosecuted Chap. 2. we shall speak to it afterward when we come to speak of the Interest of faith in Justification for thereunto it doth more properly belong being rather a proof of the Imputation of faith in a proper sense as our Righteousness unto justification than of the Non-Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ. Leaving therefore the examination of this to its proper place we come to see what other Scriptures adduced by him against the Truth hitherto asserted do say in this question under debate that the more willingly because Mr. Baxter in his late book against D. Tully referreth us to this man for Arguments First he adduceth such passages as absolutely exclude the works of the law from justification as Rom. 3 28. Gal. 2 16. Rom. 3 20. We spoke something to this matter while we were mentioning the Mysteries remarkable in justification yet we shall here consider what he saith He thus reasoneth pag. 55. If a man be justified by the Righteousness of Christ imputed unto him he shall be justified by the works of the law because that Righteousness of Christ we now speak of consists of these works Ans. The vainity falshood of the Consequence is obvious nor doth the reason added make any supply It is true the Righteousness of Christ did consist in works of obedience required by the law yet though this be imputed to us it doth not follow that we are justified by the works of the law â—â—ccording to the Scripture sense of that expression for the Scripture meaneth works of the law which we do in our own persons Tit. 3 5. And the whole Scope Drift purpose of the Spirit of the Lord in all these places cited in all others evinceth this and all the Arguments mentioned in Scripture against justification by the works of the law demonstrat this to be the true and only impoâ—â— of that expression as cannot but be plaine to any considering person Yet he hath 4. answers and he addeth several other things which we must examine He saith I. Where the Holy Ghost delivereth a truth simply indefinitly in a way of a General Universal conclusion without imposeing any necessity there or else where to limite or distinguish upon it for men to interpose by distinctions limitations to overrule the express meaning of the words is to usurpe authority over the Scriptures Ans. I grant to adhibite distinctions or limitations which the Scripture giveth no warrand for to over rule the express meaning of the words of the Holy Ghost is to exercise an unlawful authority over the Scriptures savoureth of audacious profanity And I judge that there are not afew of such distinctions limitations to be found in his Book making him fall under the lash of this censure But to assert such a general and universal sense of a Scripture expression as neither will agree with other Scriptures nor with common Sense Reason yea which so directly crosseth the whole Gospel and destroyeth the Scope Cohesion
obvious Sense of the whole purpose and of every sentence used by the Spirit of the Lord in that matter is to usurpe a Supra-papal power and Authority over the Scriptures of truth and a most ready way to render them wholly useless 2 As for our sense of this Expression who that will willingly be ruled by the Scriptures cannot submit unto it Let us but look to the very first place cited by himself Rom. 3. consider the whole preceeding discourse of the Apostle from Chap. I 18. forward particularly Chap. 3 19. Where the Apostle closeth his discourse tending to evince both jewes Gentils to be under the Curse by saying Now we know that what things so ever the law saith it saith to them who are under the law that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become guilty before God Is not this to be understood in respect of their own personal deeds works See then his conclusion vers 20. Therefore by the deeds of of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight Can any man that hath not renounced common sense understand this otherwise than that no man shall be justified in the sight of God by his own personal works seing this is the only native conclusion that floweth from the premisses seing by their own personal works they can be justified before men seing the following words for by the law is the knowledge of sin that is the law proveth evinceth all that we do to be short sinful enforce this likewise Is not this also enforced by these words vers 23. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God Is it imaginable that justification through the Imputed obedience of Christ to the law can evince that we are not justified freely by His grace through the Redemption that is in Jesus Christ vers 24 If this general sense were the true meaning what ground was there for that vers 27. Where is boasting then It is excluded By what law of works no by the law of faith Would Justification by Christs obedience give ground of boasting And what ground were there for that objection vers 31. Do we then make void the law c. in the following Chapter when speaking of Abraham doth he or can any man imagine that the Apostle doth mean any other works when be denieth that Abraham was justified by works than Abraham's own personal works And meaneth he or can he meane any other works when he saith vers 4. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt But it were tedious to prosecute this matter further that is so clear in it self to every ordinary Reader that it must needs argue a desperat designe together with unpasrallel'd boldness thus with confidence peremptoriness to assert the contrary He saith 2. If the Apostles charge had been in delivering of this doctrine either to have made or to have given allowance for any such distinction certainly he should have been unfaithful in his trust in giving the honour due to the works of Christ unto a thing of a far inferiour nature viz to faith as he doth Gal. 2 16. Where he saith not but by the works of Jesus Christ but by faith Ans. This answere is in a great measure sick of the same distemper of presumption with the former We must not think that the Apostle is still to be blamed for unfaithfulness when he speaketh not as we would have him speak Christian sobrâ—ety should reach us to search for Gods mind in the expressions He hath thought good to use for signifying of His mind These against whom the Apostle here wrote whose errour in the matter of justification he was confuting never had a thought of such a general groundless sense as we have here obtruded upon us nor can it come into the thought of any rational man when then should we suppose that the Apoâ—â—le should have spoken to such a thing 2 Paul giveth not the honour due to the works of Christs unto any thing of an Inferiour Nature no not to faith whatever this Author misunderstanding the Apostle's mind perverting his words would make his Reader beleeve as we shall have occasion to shew hereafter This Author setreth Christ and Faith at variance whileas the Apostle every where sheweth their agreement indissoluble union 3 Taking faith in this Authors sense we see That by his own Confession the ascribing of that unto faith which he doth ascribe to it in the matter of â—ustification is a giving of that honour unto it which we say is due to Christs obedience So that the question betwixt him and us is whether Christ and His obedience or Faith of a far inferiour Nature must have that honour We see no ground to imagine that Paul would give the honour that Universal obedience might call for unto one act of obedience or think that he would cry up one act of obedience that is faith cry down all other acts of obedience far less that he would cry up faith in prejudice of the full perfect obedience of Jesus Christ the Redeemer and Surety He saith 3. If Paul's intent had been to have reserved a place in Iustification for the works of the law as performed by Christ his indefinite expression would have been as a snare upon men to cause them passe over the great things of their Iustification Ans. Paul's indefinite expression neither was nor could have been a snare unto any nor came such an imagination ever in the head of any man but such an one as can stumble in the most even path being blinded with prejudice at the truth drunk with love to his own Inventions which he cannot otherwise maintaine but by new and unheard-of fictions What great things of justification could I pray Paul's expressions cause any passe over Why are not some of these great things mentioned He saith 4. If this had been Paul's meaning it cannot be once imagined but that he would have made use of such a distinction or reservation would have been glad if without trenching upon some Gospel-truth he could have come over so neer unto the jewes who where chiefly incensed against Paul for passing over the law in justification Now had he said that be did not exclude the righteousness of the law by faith but advance it rather only he preached that they could not be justified by their own observation of it who seeth not how this would have taken off great part of their opposition Ans. It is a wonder to see how some men can shut their eyes that they should not see what is most obvious and what is in plaine termes asserted in the Scriptures Did not Paul say expresly enough Rom. 3. ult That he did not make void the law through faith but did establish it doth he not also plainly tell us where the difference lay betwixt him the jewes what it was especially
at which they stumbled when he said Rom. 9 31 32. But Israel which followed after the law of Righteousness hath not attained to the law of Righteousness wherefore Because they sought it not by faith but as it were by the works of the law for they stumbled at that stumbling stone And againe Rom. 10 3 4. But they being ignorant of God's Righteousness going about to establish their own Righteousness have not submitted themselves unto the Righteousness of God for Christ is the end of the law for righteousness c. Is it not hence clear that they rejected Christ and would not owne Him as the end of the law for Righteousness that they stumbled at Him seeking after justification life by their own personal following after the law of Righteousness by seeking to establish their own righteousness How then can this man say pag. 61. That Paul was as far from holding justification by the works of the law as performed by Christ as the jewes were who would have nothing to do with Christ but stumbled at Him while as Paul sought only to be found in Him not having his owne Righteousness which is of the law but that which is through the faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by faith Phil. 3 9. And proclamed Christ to be the end of the law for Righteousnes to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10 4. Against Fit 3 5. where mention is made of the works of righteousness which we have done a sufficient ground laid for the distinction mentioned to prevent the stumbling of such as love to walk in the light he advanceth several answers pag. 62. c. As I. He never said that the active righteousness of Christ should be made a stander-by but that it hath a blessed influence into justification as it issueth into His passive obedience which together may be called a Righteousness for which but not with which we are justified except it can be proved to be either the Material or formal or instrumental cause of justification whoever attempt to do this will wholly dissolve the merite of it Ans. 1 All this maketh nothing to the purpose now in hand which is to show that Paul by this expression cleareth sufficiently what he meaneth by the works of the law which he excludeth from having any interest in justification viz. The works of the law performed by us in our own persons 2 What influence the active obedience of Christ hath in justication when he will not admit it to be any part of that Surety-righteousness which is imputed unto us he showeth not nor what way it issueth in to His passive obedience If all this influence be to make Him fit to be a Sacrifice we have shown above that the personal Union did that and consequently His active obedience if it had no other influence is made a meer stander by 3. A Righteousness for which a Righteousness with which is a distinction in our case without a difference for the one doth no way oppugne or exclude the other because the meritorious cause imputed made over to and reckoned upon the score of beleevers can be also that Righteousness with which they are justified 4 Whether it may be called the Material or Formal cause of justification that any ever called it the instrumental cause is more than I know is no great matter seing it may be either as the termes shall be explained which men are at freedom to do according to their own minde when they apply them unto this matter which hath so little affinity with Effects meerly Natural unto the causes of which these termes are properly applied though I should choose rather to call it the formal objective cause if necessitated to use here philosophik termes 3 That to call Christ's whole Righteousness either the Material or Formal cause of justification is to overthrow the merite of it is said but not proved It is not these philosophical termes themselves but the explication of them by such as use them in this matter that is to be regarded and none shall ever show that either of these termes as explained by the orthodox doth overthrow the merite of Christ's Righteousness both doth rather establish it He saith 2. The H. Ghost may reject the works of men from being the cause of such or such a thing yet no wayes intimat that the works of any other should be the cause thereof If the words had gone thus not by the works of Righteousness which we our selves had done this had been some what an higher ground to have inferred the opposite member of the distinction upon viz. by the works of another or of Christ. Ans. This exception is as little to the purpose as the former for these words were here brought only to show what the Apostle meant by the works of the law which he excluded from justification viz. the works which we do and not to prove immediatly that the works of any other were understood hereby 2 It is foolish thing to imagine a distinction betwixt works which we do works which we our selves do the same word in the original which vers 5. is rendered we is rendered we our selves vers 3. What poor shifts are these which men take to support a desperat cause He saith 3. To put the matter out of all question that excluding the works of the law which we had done he had no intent to imply the works which another might do he expresseth the opposition thus according to His mercy Ans. The mistake is still continued in By these words we onely cleare what the works are which are excluded viz. our personal works or works which we do or have done whose works else are accepted other places prove expresly this by consequence unless the worke of a third could be alleiged 2 The opposition here made destroyeth not the opposition which we make for when we are justified Saved by the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ we are justified saved according to His mercy as well as we are justified freely by His grace when justified through the Redemption that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 3 24. He saith 4. thereby seemeth to reply to what is last said The Apostle delivereth himself distinctly of that wherein this Mercy of God be speaks of consisteth viz. regenerating us c. Ans. But I hope the Apostles mentioning of Regeneration doth not exclude the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness the ground thereof nor can he suppose this unless he plead with Papists for justification by our good works done after Regeneration the new birth He saith 5. Such an inference is neither probable nor pertinent to the purpose because the Apostle rejecteth the works of righteousness which he nameth from being any cause antecedaneously moving God to save us not from being the formal cause of justification and we our selves saith he will not say that the works of the law which Christ hath
if it were necessary but we said enough of this in answere to the foregoing objection He saith 3. The works of the law are never the less the works of the law because performed by Christ. Ans. Yet when performed by Christ they are not the works of the law done by us who did lye under the obligation and by the Imputation of such an obedience as was performed by Christ we have no ground of boasting or of glorying either before God or Man and it is against such an obedience to the law as the ground of justification as doth not exclude glorying or boasting and such as consisteth in works of Righteousness which we have done is exclusive offree grace that the Apostle disputeth He saith 4. This righteousness is said to receive testimony from the law that is from that part of Scripture which is often called the law and from the Propheâ—â— Now neither of these give any testimony to such a Righteousness but to a Righteousness procured or derived upon a man by faith Gen. 15 6. Hab. 2 4. Ans. It is true this Righteousness receiveth testimony from the law and from the writtings of the Prophets we plead for no other Righteousness but such as is so testified of hath the concurrent consent both of the O. and of the N. Testament Both law Prophets that spoke of the seed of the Woman of the Messiah of His being the Lord our Righteousness or spoke of the peoples duty in reference to Him as such did bear witness to this Truth 2 What is that Righteousness which is here said to be procured or derived upon a Man by faith Is it the Righteousness of Christ Then the cause is yeelded Is it the Righteousness of men themselves Then justification by works is established the whole Gospel is overthrown And how I pray can this besaid to be procured or derived upon a man by faith The places cited speak of no such thing but have a far contrary Import as may hereafter appear He saith 5. This Righteousness of God is said to be unto all upon all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or through faith by way of opposition to the works of the law Now between Faith the works of the law there is a constant opposition but between the law and the works of righteousness of Christ there is no opposition Ans. 1 If this Righteousness be unto and upon all by or through faith it must of necessity be the Righteousness of another in bringing home and applying of which faith is an Instrument to this way of bringing in the Righteousness of God by faith from without is the seeking of Righteousness by our own works or by our own acts of obedience to the law manifestly opposite irreconcilable this is the opposition which the Scripture alwayes maketh betwixt justification by the law by faith as the very Scriptures cited by himself make manifest to wit Rom. 3 27 28. 4 13 14. 9 32. 10 5 6. Gal. 2 16. 3 5 11 12. c. 2 This argument all the steps of its prosecution make against himself who will have our act of faith to be the Righteousness of God though it be no where so called cannot be that which is by or through faith for faith is not by or through faith nor doth faith become a Righteousness by or through faith nor is faith as our act against the law otherwise it should be no act of obedience but a piece of willworship and consequently no righteousness at all but an unrighteousness a plaine disobedience or a work of Supererogation nor do the law or Prophets any where testify to this as our Righteousness Thirdly Chap. 5. pag. 73. He reasoneth from Rom. 5 16 17. thus The gift of righteousness as it is called vers 17. which is by Christ in the Gospel is said vers 16. to be a free gift of many offences unto justification that is the forgiveness of many offences cannot be a perfect legal righteousnes imputed unto vs or made ours by Imputation but the righteousness which is by Christ in the Gospel is the gift of many offences Ergo c. The Major he thus confirmeth That righteousness which extends unto a mans justification by the forginess of sins can be no perfect legal righteousness imputed But the righteousness of Christ in the Gospel by which we are justified extendeth unto a mans justification by the forgiveness of sins Ergo c. The Major of this he thus proveth Because a legal or perfect righteousness doth not proceed to justifie a mans person by way of forgiveness of sinnes but is of it self intrinsecally essenâ—ially a man's justification â—t yea such a justification with which forgiveness of sins is not competible for what need hath he that is legally righteous or hath a legal righteousness imputed to him of forgiveness of sins when as such a rightousness excluded all sin all guilt of sin from his person To all which I ans 1 The Major propos of the two Syllogisâ—es is true only of a perfect righteousness wrought by our selves in conformity to the law and not of the Righteousness of another imputed to us which though it may be called legal as to Christ as consisting in perfect obedience conformity to the law yet is rather to be called Evangelical as to us upon the account of its discovery and revelation and manner of communication unto us 2 The confirmation of the Major is likewise only true of a righteousness performed by our selves for that indeed excludeth all Remission and therefore if our faith be accounted our righteousness as he faith it must be our justification so inconsistent with free forgiveness 3 As to the Scripture where upon all this founded I say The text saith not that our righteousness is only free forgiveness but that in reference to pardon free forgiveness there is a gift bestowed that this gift by grace which aboundeth unto many is attended with free forgiveness as a necessary consequent It is the free gift that cometh upon all men unto justification vers 18. that by which many are made righteous vers 19. therefore is called the gift of righteousness vers 17. He objecteth against himself thus A man's sins are first forgiven him and then this perfect righteousness of Christ is imputed unto him and so he is justified But this is not the thing we would say but on the contrary That first the perfect Righteousness of Christ is imputed whereupon the beleever is justified pardoned Let us hear his answer 1. He saith If we will needs distinguish the effects of the active passive obedience of Christ so as from the active part to fetch a perfect righteousness for Imputation from the passive remission of sins yet whether it be any wayes reasonable to invert the order I leave to sober consideration Christ did not first die after
him in that Right as justification properly is no Meane to or Cause of pardon and Acceptation of Sinners but rather the solemne bringing of them into or placeing of them in that state of peace Pardon and Reconciliation who beleeve in Jesus and lay hold on His Righteousness What he speaketh of the opposition betwixt the Law and the promise in giving of life from Gal. 3 21. is most Impertinent so also is that which he saith from Gal. 2 21. for though it be an abrogating and making void of the ordinances of God when another thing that is contrary expresly excluded by the Lord from that office work is set up with it to bring the same end to passe or to serve in the same place and office yet is there not the least coloure of ground to say That if our Right Title to heaven be by Imputation of Christ's Righteousness then doth God give the grace of Adoption in vaine for the Righteousness of Christ is the Meritorious procuring Cause of this Right and Title to heaven and when this is Imputed made over to the beleever he receiveth the Effect and Fruit of that purchase viz. an Actual Right to glory is solemnely infeofed as it were thereof What ignorance folly would it discover in a man to say That the legal installing of a man by publick seasing Infeofment in the legal Right to possession of such a Land or House is that which giveth the man Right and therefore the price he hath laid down to purchase that Land or house hath no Interest or Consideration in that purchase for these two cannot consist the one must necessarily render the other useless if he hath made a purchase of the Land house by his money he needeth no Charter or Infeofment thereof or if his Charter Infeofment giveth him Right to possesse the same the price laid down is of no use would not every one smile at such Non-sense And yet so reasoneth this learned Adversary who will have the Righteousness of Christ laid by which is the only price and purchasing Merite of our Right to Heaven or the Grace of Adoption whereby the beleever becometh legally as it were infeofed of the Inheritance It is vaine if he should think to escape by saying That he acknowledgeth the price of Christ's Righteousness but speaketh of the Imputation of that Righteousness in order to this Right For the Imputation of this Righteousness is but the Interessing of the beleever in that price as the price of such a purchase to the end he may receive the legal infeofment of the Inheritance purchased in Adoption Obj. 5. Chap. 13. pag. 145. He that hath a perfect compleat Righteousness of the Law imputed to him standeth in need of no Repentance Ans. This Consequence is utterly false as was shewed above Chap. 6. Mystery 13. Repentance is not prescribed in the Gospel for any such use or end for which the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is called for If Adam saith he had kept the Law he had needed no Repentance more than Christ himself needed those that kept the Law in him as exactly perfectly as he did what more neâ—d of Repentance have they than he had Ans Adam it is true had needed no Repentance if he had kept the Law But the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness obedience to us though thereby we come to enjoy the Effects purchase thereof as really as if we had Fulfilled the Law ourselves yet it maketh us not to have been no sinners nor doth it exeem us from the Law in time coming nor put us out of case of sinning any more and consequently prejudgeth not the true lively exercise of that grace of Repentance He addeth He that is as righteous as Christ is which those must needs be who are righteous with His righteousness needeth no more Repentance than He needed Ans. We do not love to say that beleevers through this Imputation are as Righteous as Christ was for that expression might import that thereby they become as Righteous inherently as He was which is false But that thereby they are legally accounted Righteous to all ends purposes as if they themselves in their own persons had Fulfilled the Law And therefore though thereby they become in Law-sense Righteous yet they are inherently ungodly unrighteous till sanctifying grace make a change here therefore stand in need of Repentance To that That Beleevers need Repentance for their daily personal failings he saith But they that have an entire perfect Law-righteousness Imputed to them have no such need in any respect because in the Imputation of a perfect Righteousness there is an universal non-Imputation of sin apparently included Besides if God doth Impute a perfect Law-righteousness it must be supposed that the rights privileges belonging to such righteousness do accompany it in the Imputation Now one maine privilege hereof is to invest with a full entire right unto life out of its own intrinsecal inherent dignity worth which is a privilege wholly inconsistent with the least tincture of sin in the person that stands possessed of it Ans. Where there is an Imputation of a perfect Righteousness there there is an universal Non-Imputation of sin in reference to actual condemnation or to the prejudging of the person partaker of this Imputation of the reward of life but as this Imputation of Righteousness maketh not a sinner to have been no sinner so neither doth it make their future sinnes to be no sinnes or them to be no sinners in time coming because it is imputed for no such end 2 It is true the Rights privileges belonging to this Righteousness do accompany the Imputation thereof that thereby beleevers become invested with a full entire Right to life because of its intrinsecal inherent dignity but it is utterly false to say That this full entire Right to life is inconsistent with the least tincture of sin in the person possessed of it hereby he must say one of these two either that there is no full Right had to life while persons are in this life or that there is a full and sinless perfection attainable and had by all beleevers so that they sinne no more Both which are most false But what will he say of Faith which he will have imputed for Righteousness seing this must bring alongs with it the same privileges so exclude Repentance too To this he saith The meaning is not as if God either Imputed or accepted or accounted faith for the self same thing which the Righteousness of the Law is intrinsecally formally or as if God in this Imputation either gave or accounted unto faith any power or privilege to justifie out of any inherent worth of it But the meaning only is that God upon Man's faith will as fully justify him as if he had perfectly fulfilled the Lawâ— He that fulfilled the Law thereby
is justified is justified out of the inherent dignity of that which justifieth him but he that is justified by faith is justified by the free gracious acceptation of it by God for that which is justifying in its own Nature by vertue of its inherent worth dignity Ans. What God Imputeth reputeth to be a Righteousness in order to justification must be accounted such or a man shall be justified without all consideration of a Righteousness and so be pronounced declared Righteous though he be not Righteous upon any account or in any manner of way And if faith be not accounted for the self same thing or for the equivalent with the Righteousness of the Law how shall it be accounted a Righteousness in order to the justification of a sinner who is under the Curse of the Law who because of the breach of the Law hath no right to life wherefore faith must have that inherent worth that the Righteousness of the Law should have had else it cannot be a Righteousness whereupon a sinner can be justified before God who is Just and Righteous and will not pronounce such to be Righteous as are not Righteous 2 If God upon a man's faith will as fully justify a man as if he had fulfilled the Law either that faith must be a Righteousness and so accounted which he here denieth or the man must be declared Righteous who hath no Righteousness and so the judgment of God should not be according to truth or upon his beleeving he must be justified as being Righteous by an Imputed Righteousness which is the thing he peremptorily denieth 3 When one is justified by faith by God's free gracious Acceptation of it this act of grace must either import that faith is accepted as a Righteousness so accounted of God or still the beleever shall be declared and pronounced Righteous though he hath no Righteousness or the meaning of this Acceptation must be that God hath graciously condescended to appoint this mean way of sinners having an Interest in the Righteousness of Christ whereby he may be accounted Righteous justified as really as is he had performed that Righteousness himself in his own person in this sense it is most true but utterly destructive of his designe 4 If faith be accepted for that which is justifying in its own Nature by vertue of its Inherent worth dignity it must either be that which is of such inherent worth or it must be accepted for that which it is not so a man must be judged by God to have that which he hath not He concludeth thus Wherefore the Imputation of faith for righteousness may well stand with personal sins in him to whom this Imputation is made in respect of which sins he remaines obliged to repent but the Imputation of a perfect legal Righteousness makes a man perfectly righteous in the letter formality of it Ans. Then it seemeth that by the Imputation of faith for Righteousness a man standeth not invested possessed of a full entire right unto life for that he said before was a privilege wholly inconsistent with the least tincture of sin 2 If by a perfect legal Righteousness he meane a Righteousness required of the Law performed by us personally we plead not for the Imputation of any such but if he mean a Righteousness consisting in full conformity to the Law performed by Christ graciously imputed to us received by faith that is well consistent with inherent personal sins What he meaneth by making a man perfectly righteous in the letter formality of it I know not till some be pleased to explaine it Obj. 6. Another argum he prosecuteth pag. 149. c. thus If men be as Righteous as Christ himself was in his life there was no more necessity of His death for them than for himself then the just should not have died for the unjust but for the just Ans. If we had not transgressed the Law there had been no necessity that either we or any for us should have died but having transgressed the Law thereby fallen under the Curse wanting all right to life we must have a Surety-righteousness whereby not only the Curse shall be taken away but the blessing of Abraham may come upon us we may have a full right to life therefore both the Active passive Righteousness of Christ is necessary 2 Christ died for the unjust because His death which was the period terminating act of His obedience and Surety righteousness which He undertook to performe in our room and Law-place was for sinners lying under the Curse void of all right title to life He imagineth that first Christ's Active Righteousness is imputed thereby the person is constituted Righteous then inferreth the nonâ— necessity of Christ's death By we say that Christ's whole Surety-righteousness consisting in what He did suffered in His state of Humiliation in our room and as Cautioner is at once imputed and not in parts that so the necessity of sinners may be answered in all points He thinks to prove this consequence by these words Gal. 2 21. If righteousness be by the Law then Christ died in vaine rejecting the sense of the word Law viz. as importing the works of the Law as performed by us in our own person thereby doing violence to the whole Scope of the place to the constant acceptation of the expression supposing that the Consequence will be strong though the works of the Law as performed by Christ be here understood that meerly upon this false ground Because the Righteousness of Christ's life imputed had been a Sufficient every wayes a compleat Righteousness for us Nor need we say as he saith in our name That there was a Necessity that Cbrist should did that so the righteousness of His life might be imputed to 〈◊〉 For the necessity of His death arose from our transgressing of the Law being under the Curse Obj. 7. Chap. 14. pag. 151. He alleigeth that this Imputation evaniateth Remission of Sins saying for if men be righteous with the same righteousness wherewith Christ was righteous they have no more need of pardon than He had Ans. We spoke to this above Chap. 6. Mystery 11. therefore need say no more here then that the Consequence is null that the probation is insufficient for though we be constituted Righteous through the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness it is but a Surety-righteousness not our own inherently the Surety not being of our appointing or fitting furnishing our pardon is a Consequent Effect of this Imputation 2 The consequence is no more valide from the Imputation of the Active Righteousness of Christ than from His passive and Satisfaction and so with Sociâ—ians he must also hereby deny Christ's Satisfaction that he may establish his free Remission But Gospel free forgiveness is rather established than any
of justice truth in God in reference to Christ yet as to us it is of free grace so much the more of free grace that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us for that end And such as understand not this are more principled with Socinian abominations than with the doctrine of the Gospel of the grace of God Obj. 18. pag. 173. If men be formally just by God's act imputing Christ's righteousness then do men become formally sinful by the like act of God imputing Adam's sin But this is not true for then an Act of God should be as the life soul of that sin which is in men Ergo Ans. As this argument concludeth nothing against the truth now asserted this conclusion being different from the question now in hand so it is but a meer exhaling of vapores out of the fog of philosophical termes notions that thereby the truth may be more darkened We are not obliged by any Law of God to explaine or interpret these mysteries of Salvation according to these Notions which men explaine after their own pleasure knowing no Law constraining them to follow either one man or other in the arbitrary sense which they put upon these termes But as to the present â—rgument no answer can be given untill it be known what is the true meaning of these words formally just Possibly he will understand hereby the same that others meane by Inherently just so indeed do all the Papists And if so we can answere by saying That no orthodox man thinketh or saith that in this sense we are made formally just by God's act imputing Christ ' righteousness but by Holiness wrought in us by His Spirit And as to that righteousness which is imputed whether it be called the Formal or the Material cause of our justification it is but a nominal debate having no ground or occasion in the Word of God by which alone we should be ruled in our thoughts expressions in this matter Nor do they who say we are formally just by Christ's righteousness say we are formally just by God's Act imputing that righteousness But by the righteousness it self imputed by God received by faith Nor do they say that men become formally sinful by the like act of God imputing Adam's sin unto his posterity but by Adam's sin imputed though God's Act be the cause of this effect it is not the effect it self Adam's sin imputed doth constitute the posterity sinners that is guilty obnoxious to wrath so Christ's righteousness imputed doth constitute beleevers Righteous Obj. 19. pag. 175. If justification consists in the Imputation of Christ's righteousness partly in Remission of sins then must there be a double formal cause of justification that made up compounded of two several natures really differing the one from the other But this is impossible Ergo. Ans. 1. This Argument is founded upon another School-nicety or notion viz the Simplicity Indivisibility of Natural formes this Philosophical Notion is here adduced to darken the mystery we are treating of It were a sufficient answere then to say That the Minor though it be true in natural formes Yet will not necessarily hold in the privileges of Saints which may be single or compounded as the Lord thinketh meet to make them And can any reason evince that the Lord cannot conferre bestow in the grand privilege of justification moe particular favoures than one Can He not both pardon sins accept as declare to be Righteous Can He not both free the beleever from the condemnation of hell adjudge him to the life of glory or cannot these two be conceived as two things formally distinct though inseparable 2. But I shall not say That Imputation of Christ's righteousness is a part of justification But rather that it is the ground thereof necessarily presupposed thereunto Nor shall I say that Remission of sins is the forme or formal cause of justification a pardoned man as such not being a justified man It is true pardon of sins doth inseparably follow upon is a necessary effect of our justification a certaine consequent of God's accepting of us as righteous in His sight upon the account of the righteousness of Christ imputed to us received by faith I grant also that justification may be so described or defined as to take in that Effect without making it thereby a formal part thereof when strickly considered 3. But he will have Remission of sins to be the whole of justification nothing more included therein or conferred thereby abusing to this end as we heard above Rom. 4 6 7 8. Where the Apostle is citing the words of the Psalmist is not giving us a formal definition of justification nor saying that justification is the same with Remission nor that Remission's the formal cause of justification but only is proving that justification is not by our works as the ground thereof that by this reason Because that would utterly destroy free Remission which is a necessary Effect consequent of Gospel-justification cannot be had without it in order to which justification he there asserteth expresly an Imputation of righteousness Now an Imputation of righteousness is not formally one the same thing with Remission of sins nor can Remission of sins be-called a righteousness or the Righteousness of God or of Christ yet the Man is a blessed man whose sins are covered because that man is necessarily covered with the righteousness of Christ whose sins are covered for Imputation of righteousness free pardon do inseparably attend one another Nor is it to the purpose to say That pardon is a passive righteousness though not an Active righteousness for all righteousness rightly so called is conformity to the Law that is not a passive or Negative righteousness which may be in a beast that transgresseth no Law consequenly hath no unrighteousness Obj. 20. pag. 176. If such Imputation be necessary in justification this necessity must be found either in respect of the justice of God or in respect of His Mercy or for the salving or advancing of some other attribute But there is no necessity in respect of any of these Ergo. Ans. 1 This same man tels us that there is a necessity for the Imputation of faith as our Righteousness not withstanding of all that Christ hath done and why may he not grant the same necessity for the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ will it satisfie him that we found the necessity of Imputation of Christ's Righteoufness on the same ground 2 Though we should not be in case to assigne the real just ground of this necessity yet I judge it should satisfie us that the Lord in His wisdom Goodness hath thought fit to appointe and ordaine this methode manner of justification so far should we be from disputing against this Truth with such Arguments from rejecting of it untill we be satisfied as to
Many such particular duties might here be mentioned but I shall only pointe at a few to which others may be reduced 1. Such as live this life of Gospel Justification should beware of intertaining thoughts of pride or of boasting of any thing they have freely and graciously received and particularly they should guard against boasting in this matter that they are preferred to others and brought out of a state of death when others are left yet to lye thereinto This whole matter is so contrived and so wisely framed that no ground of boasting either before God or man may be left unto Man but that every one may celebrate the praise of Free Grace Therefore Justification is not by works or by our obedience to the Law for then the justified man being justified upon the account of his own works or of the works of righteousness which he hath done should have ground of glorying though not before God yet before Men as having by his own sweating working doing obtained that which others by their laziness negligence not doing have come short of Paul tels us this expresly Rom. 4 2. If Abraham were justified by works he hath to glory but not before God and this is further confirmed vers 4. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt So that if Justification were by works Justification it self all the Consequences thereof should be due debt unto the worker and his reward and so as the hireling may boast of his labour when he gets his hire reward so the justified man if justification were by the works of the Law might boast of his own paines diligence as having received but his reward and that which was due to him of debt and not of grace But now that all mouthes may be stopped no flesh might glory or have ground of boasting in themselves and before others the Lord hath contrived a far other way of justification to wit by Faith alone whereby the Man goeth out of himself renunceth all his own Righteousness prosesseth himself poor naked miserable a plaine dyvour and utterly non-solvendo layeth hold on a compleet alsufficient Righteousness in Jesus Christ and so hath no ground of boasting or glorying even before men for it is nothing that is in him or that he doth that is that Righteousness upon the account of which he is Justified but only the Righteousness of Christ without him It is not his faith not his works nor his Righteousness but Christ's Righteousness is equally imputed to all beleevers to the weakest beleever as well as to the strongest and so the strongest beleever hath no ground of boasting before the weakest Where is boasting-then saith the Apostle Rom. 3 27. It is excluded by what Law Of works nay but by the Law of faith 2. Upon the other hand let all such glory in the Lord and in his free grace gracious workings Let them say when they reflect on this matter not unto us Lord not unto us but unto thee be glory seing the matter is so contrived as that all the justified may see that God may only have the glory of all that none ought to share with him that he alone should weare the crown all his glorified ones should most cheerfully cast their crownes down at his feet But of him saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 1 30 31. are ye in Christ Iesus who of God is made unto us Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification Redemption that according as it is written he that glorieth Let him glory in the Lord. Christ is made all things unto for his people they have all of God through him that no flesh should glory in his presence as it is said vers 29. Let all such therefore as are made partaker of this rich honourable Privilege comply sweetly cheerfully with this designe of God to have God alone exalted and the mouth of all flesh stopped that he who glorieth may alone glory in the Lord. 3. Let such as are thus advanced minde the great duty of holiness and of growing in grace and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ The way of faith is not to make void the Law but it doth establish it Rom. 3 31. as Christ is made of God unto is Righteousness so is he made Sanctification As he is Priest to reconcile us to God and become Righteousness to us so is he a King to cause us walk in the Lord to subdue our spiritual enemies and so become Sanctification to us It is the language of the flesh of corruption to argue from this Change advancement unto a liberty to sinne Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound will the flesh object But the Apostle answereth Rom. 6 2. c. God forbid how shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein It is repugnant to the nature of that state whereinto now they are broâ—ght to give way to sin Therefore the justified should minde what they are called to what new grounds new advantages new helps new encouragements they have unto holiness that they had not before all plainly fully set down by Paul Rom. 6. eise where 4. How should they commend cry up the free grace of God and that love that visited them when they were lying in their blood and no eye pityed them They were ungodly without strength yet Christ died for them Rom. 5 6. and the Lord did justifie the ungodly even them who had no righteousness of their owne nor nothing to commend them unto him Rom. 4 5. Yea where sin abounded grace did much more abound Rom. 5 20. Not only had they nothing more then others to commend them unto God but even they had less and â—et God through free grace set his Love upon the less worthy for saith Paul 1 Cor. 1 26 27 28. ye see your calling Brethren how that not many wise men after the flesh not many mighty not many noble but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise God hath chosen the weak things of the world and things which are despised hath God chosen and things which are not to bring to naught things which are That no flesh should glory in his presence Should not the thoughts of this raise their wondering cause them speak to the commendation of the rich and free grace of God 5. Let such as are brought into this state of life wherein they have peace with God and are reconciled to Him through Jesus Christ carry as persones no more strangers unto him as forraigners but as now madenigh by the blood of Jesus therefore let such remember that through him they have an access by one Spirit unto the Farher being now fellow-citisens with the Saints and of the houshold of God Ephes. 2 13 14 18 19. Rom. 5 2. Therefore should improve this advantage both for their own good and for
third yea multiplied Regeneration whereof the Scripture is silent nay it clearly depones the contrary 10. And if it be enquired how it cometh to passe that after sins may not at least gradually impaire the State of Justification as sins do impaire and weaken Sanctification I answere and this may further help to clear the business under hand The reason is manifest from the difference that is betwixt these two blessing and benefites Iustification is an act of God changing the Relative-state of a man and so is done and perfected in a moment Sanctification is a progressive work of God making a real physical change in the man whence sin may tetard this or put it back but cannot do so with the other which is but one single act once done and never recalled the gifts and calling of God being without repentance Rom. 11 29. In justification we are meerly passive it being a sentence of God pronunced in our Favours in Sanctification as we are in some respect patients so are we also Agents and Actors and thus sin may retard us in our motion and as it evidenceth our weakness for acting so it produceth more weakness Moreover Sin and Holiness are opposite to other as light and darkness therefore as the one prevaileth the other must go under and as the one increaseth the other must decress But there is no such Opposition betwixt sin pardon which is granted in Justification And whereas it may be said that sin expelleth also grace Meritoriously yet that prejudgeth not the truth in hand for it can expell grace meritoriously no further than the free constitution of God hath limited and so though it can and oft doth expell many degrees of Sanctification yet it cannot expell make null the grace of Regeneration or the Seed of God so no more can it expell or annul Justification because the good pleasure of God hath secured the one the other made them both unalterable By these particulars we see how the first doubt is removed out of the way we shall next speak to the Second which is concerning afflictions Punishments which are the fruits and deserts of sin and seem to be part of the curse or penalty threatned in the first Covenant To which we need not say much to show that notwithstanding hereof the State of Justification remains firme and unaltered These few things will suffice to cleare the truth 1. Though all affliction and suffering be the fruite consequent of the breach of the Covenant by Adam the head of mankind for if he had stood and the Covenant had not been violated there had been no Misery affliction Death or Suffering and though in all who are afflicted in this world there is sin to be found And though it cannot be instanced that God ever brought an afflicting or destroying stroke upon a Land or Nation but for the provocations of the People yet the Lord may some rimes afflict outwardly or inwardly or both a particular Person in some particular manner though not as provoled thereunto by that persons sin or without a special reference to their sin as the procuring Cause thereof as we see in Iob and as Christ's answer concerning the blinde man Ioh. 9 3. Neither hath this man sinned nor his parents that he was born blinde but that the works of God should be made manifest in him giveth ground to think 2. Though it doth oftner fall out that God doth afflict Punish and Châ—sten his people even because of their sinnes as well as other wicked persons yet the difference betwixt the two is great though the outward Camitie may be materially the same To the godly they flow from Love are designed for good are sanctified and made to do good they are covenanted mercies but nothing so to the wicked They are mercies to the one but curses to the other They speak out love to the one but hatred to the other They are blessed to the one but blasted cursed to the other They work together for good to the one but for evil to the other and all this notwithstanding that the outward affliction calamity that is on the godly may be double or treeble to that which is upon the wicked Yea there is mercy and love in the afflictions of the Godly when the prosperity of the wicked is cursed Whence we see that all these afflictions cannot endanger or dammage their Justified state 3. Though the Lord may be wroth smite in anger his own people chasten punish them in displeasure yet this wrath anger is but the wrath and anger of a Father and is consistent with fatherly Affection in God and therefore cannot be repugnant to a state of Sonshipe in them Prov. 3 11 12. Heb. 12 5-8 Psal. 89 30 33 34. Revel 3 19. 4. In all these afflictions that seem to smell most of the Curse and of the death threatned and are most inevitable such as death c. there is nothing of pure vinâ—ictive justice to be found in them when Justified persons are exercised with them for Christ did bear all that being made a curse for them and as to this the Lord caused all their iniquities to meet together upon him He drunk out the cup of Vindictive anger and left not one drop of the liquor of the Curse of the Law for any of his own to drink He alone did bear the weight of revenging justice and there is nothing of this in all that doth come upon beleevers So that the very sting of death is taken away the sting of all these Afflictions is sucked out and now they are changed into Mercies Blessings 1 Cor. 3 21 22. Therefore we must not think that they contribute the least mite unto that Satisfaction which justice required for sins Christ payed down to the full justice was fully satisfied with what he paid down nor must we think that God will exact a new satisfaction for sins or any part thereof of the hands of beleevers after he hath received a full satisfaction from the Mediator Christ did rest satisfied therewith The afflictions and Punishments then that the godly meet with being no parts of the Curse nor of that Satisfaction that justice requireth for sin nor flowing from vindictive justice but being rather fatherly chastisments mercies meanes of God can do no hurt unto their state of justification nor can any thing be hence inferred to the prejudice of that glorious state 5. But it is said Pardon and Justification is one thing and a man is no more Justified than he is Pardoned and Pardon is but the taking off of the obligation to punishment and consequently of punishment it self and seing punishment is not wholly taken off but there remaineth some part of the curse or of the evil threatned for sin and will remaine untill the resurrection it is cleare that pardon is not fully compleet not consequently Justification so long as we live But
Salvation But the meaning of the Assembly is plaine enough against that which is the opinion of Socinians Arminians as the words of the Answer to quest 73. of the larger Catech. make manifest where it is said in answere to that Question How doth faith justifie a sinner in the sight of God Faith justifies a sinner in the sight of God not because of these other graces which do alwayes accompany it or of good works that are the fruit of it nor aâ— if the grace of faith or any act thereof were imputed to him for his justification this is confirmed from Rom. 4 5. comp with Rom. 10 10. but only as it is an instrument by which he receiveth applyeth Christ his Righteousness And in the Confess of Faith Ch. 11. f. 1. nor by imputing faith it self the act of beleeving nor any other evangelical obedience to them as their Righteousness Nor is this a determining of a point expresly against the words of God as he supposeth for it is not the bare words as Hereticks interpret them that is the minde of God but the true sense meaning of his words And in Confessions Catechismes I judge that matters should be made plaine and that it were not plaine ingenuous dealing to set down the truth in these expressions that hereticks can subscribe unto when it is known they have an exposition of these words contrary to truth It seemeth that Mr. Baxter will not say in the explication of the Sacrament of the Lords supper that the bread is not changed into the body of Christ lest he seem to contradict expresse Scripture which saith that Christ said of the bread this is my body But now as to the matter I assert with our Confess Catechis and with all the orthodox against Socinians Arminians That faith considered as our act of obedience is not that which is accounted our Righteousness in order to Justification nor that which is properly imputed to us for that end Nor is that the meaning of the Apostle Rom. 4. And of this I give these reasons 1. The Apostle in his whole Disput about Justification opposeth Faith Works as inconsistent with yea as repugnant to other as is notoure But this could not be if Faith as our act of obedience were imputed to us as our Righteousness for faith as our act of obedience is a work and a work commanded by the Law of God otherwayes it should be unlawful or a work of supererogation The meaning then of the Apostles Conclusion Rom. 3 28. should be this a man is justified by one dead of the Law without all works or deeds of the Law which were a contradiction And it is certaine that when the Apostle excludeth the works of the Law he excludeth their from being looked upon as our Imputed Righteousness for Adversaries did plead for their interest in justification as a Righteousness to be imputed to the doers where upon they might be justified if then faith as our work were imputed as our Righteousness Pauls disput should be whether all works should be imputed for Righteousness or one work of faith only Nor can it be said that by the Law here the Apostle understandeth only the Law of Moses as such for he is speaking this even of the Gentiles who never were under the Law of Moses and instanceth Chap. 4 in Abraham who was justified long before the Law of Moses as such had a being And he is speaking of the Law by which is the knowledge of sin Rom. 3 20. which worketh wrath Rom. 4 15. which cannot agree to the Law of Moses only 2. By asserting that Faith properly taken is accounted our Righteousness the whole scope all the Arguments which the Apostle useth in this matter should be enervated and contradicted as a very light view of them might make manifest and the following Arguments will evince 3. Faith considered as our act of obedience and as a work of ours is not that Righteousness of God without the Law which is witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Nor is it that Righteousness of God which is by the Faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that beleeve Rom. 3 21 22. Neither Law nor Prophets did bear witness that faith as our act work was accounted all the Righteousness that was to be imputed to the beleever Nor said that our act of faith was the Righteousness of God without the works of the Law Nor is it imaginable how faith can be that Righteousness of God which by Faith is imputed unto all and put upon all that beleeve Shall we think that the Apostles words have but this sense That faith is unto upon them that have faith or that faith is imputed by faith Sure the Apostles words must be so understood as to import that the beleever hath by his faith something imputed to him which is distinct from faith as is obvious 4. If faith as our work were imputed as Righteousness how could the Righteousness of God be declared in the justification of sinners God be just when he was the justifier of him which beleeveth in Jesus as the Apostle saith Rom. 3 26 Is our Beleeving such a perfect compleat Righteousness that God cannot but account us Righteous because of it so justifie us as Righteous upon the account of it Is it not sick of the same discemper of weakness with other graces 5. If Faith as our act work were imputed to us as our Righteousness how should boasting be excluded all occasion of glorying though not before God before whom even Adam though he had continued in his state of innocency unto the end could not have gloried yet before Men taken away as it is in the matter of justification Rom. 3 27. 4 2. The Law of works will not exclude boaâ—ing faith as our work belongeth to the Law of works and if we were justified by Faith as our imputed Righteousness we should certainly have ground of glorying before Men as well as Adam should have had if he had stood in his integrity obtained the crown by his doing 6. If Faith as our work were imputed to us for our Righteousness Justification the reward should not be of grace but of debt as the Apostle expresly affirmeth Rom. 4 4 5. Now to him that worketh he who beleeveth in this which he now opposeth worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that worketh not but beleeveth beleeving then here is opposite to working therefore cannot be considered as a work of obedience in us but as carrying us out of our selves to seek lay hold on the Righteousness of Christ without us on him that justifieth the ungodly his Faith is counted for Righteousness that is the Righteousness of Christ which Faith laith hold on is counted for Righteousness 7. If Faith as our act of obedience were accounted our Righteousness
we were justified upon the account of it as our Righteousness God should not be he who justifieth the ungodly as he is expresly stiled Rom. 4 5. And the reason is because he cannot be called an ungodly person who hath a Righteousness inherent in him which is his own which the Lord accounteth to him for a Righteousness he is not unrighteous whom God accounteth Righteous he whom God accounteth Righteous cannot be called ungodly so that if God account Faith to us for our Righteousness putting it up upon our score as our Righteousness when God justifieth us as Righteous by vertue of our faith or as clothed with faith as a compleet Righteousness he cannot be said to justifie such as are ungodly But now the Scripture tels us that God is one that justifieth the ungodly that is one who hath no Righteousness inherent in him upon the account of which the just righteous God can justify him but one that must have a Righteousness from without Imputed to him upon the account of which he is Justified and accounted Righteous in Christ though unrighteous ungodly in himself our Faith cannot be said to be imputed to us as our Righteousness 8. If Faith as our act of obedience were imputed to us as our Righteousness Paul could not say as he doth Rom. 4 6. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputed righteousness without works for then Righteousness should not be imputed without works but a prime special principal comprehensive work for with our Adversaries here faith is in a manner all works or comprehendeth them as we heard towards the end of the foregoing Chapter should be imputed as our Righteousness not a Righteousness without works 9. Free pardon of sins will never prove the man blessed unto whom God imputeth Faith in a proper sense for his Righteousness as it doth prove him blessed unto whom God imputeth Christ's Righteousness or a Righteousness without works And the reason is because faith is no satisfaction to the justice of God therefore can not be our Righteousness upon which we are pardoned justified Now the Apostle argueth thus Rom. 4 6 7 8. Even a David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works saying blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven whose sins are covered blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin 10. The Righteousness imputed is something distinct from our Faith is not our faith it self for the Apostle saith Rom. 4 23 24. Now it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him but for us also to whom it shall be imputed if we beleeve on him c. If Faith it self were the Righteousness imputed these words could make no good sense Shall we think that the meaning of the Apostles words is nothing but this Faith shall be imputed if we have faith or our Beleeving shall be imputed to us if we Beleeve This looks not like one of the discourses of the Apostle 11. The imputation of our Beleeving as our Righteousness cannot ground our Peace with God not have we by it access into this grace wherein we stand nor can we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God nor glory in Tribulation for it is obvious how weak a ground that were for such a great building But the Righteousness of Christ laid hold on by Faith can be a sufficient basis for all this Rom. 5 1 2 3. 12. Faith as our work of obedience is not the grace of God and the gift by grace which must be imputed to us as our Righteousness upon the account of which we are to be justified as the offence transgression of Adam was imputed to his posterity as the ground of death passing upon them and of judgment or guilt to condemnation But is only our receiving of that abundance of grace and of the gift of Righteousness Rom. 5 17. But that which is imputed as the ground of Justification as Adam's disobedience was imputed as the ground of their Condemnation is the Righteousness of the Second Adam of whom the first was a figure vers 14 15 18 19. 13. When the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 5 21. for he made him sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him his meaning cannot be that our Faith is the Righteousness of God or that we are made the Righteousness of God upon that account of having faith for the Apostle is holding forth here a comfortable commutation which God maketh betwixt Christ us as the ground of that ministrie of Reconciliation to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself not imputing their trespasses unto them mentioned vers 18 19. And therefore as Christ hath some thing that was properly ours imputed to him by God that is Sin or Guilt which he had not in himself so we must have something as the native fruit effect of that that is properly Christ's imputed to us of God that is his Righteousness which we have not in ourselves And beside this Righteousness of God is that whereupon Reconciliation is founded as is manifest comparing vers 19. with 21. But who will say that our Reconciliation unto God is founded upon our Faith as if that were our Peacemaker our Atonement Satisfaction as if that were Christ in whom God was reconciling the world unto himself Was Christ made sin that the imperfect grace of faith might be made a compleet Righteousness become our compleet Righteousness 14. When the Apostle saith Rom. 9 31 32. That Israel hath not attained to the Law of righteousness because they sought it not by faith he must meane a Righteousness that is distinct from Faith and therefore he cannot meane Faith it self for if he meaned faith it self as our work the words should have this sense they sought not Faith by Faith and therefore they did not attaine to Faith Shall we impute such jejune insipide expressions to Paul or rather to the Spirit of God speaking in by Paul 15. The same Apostle tels us Rom. 10 3 4. That the jewes being ignorant of God's righteousness going about to establish their own righteousness have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God And by this Righteousness of God he cannot meane Faith for their faith had been their own so their own Righteousness if Faith had been Righteousness but he must meane the Righteousness of Christ which faith laith hold on for he addeth for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that beleeveth So that it is the Righteousness of him who is the end of the Law that is that Righteousness unto which they should have submitted themselves by Faith it is not Faith it self but a Righteousness which is had from Christ who is the end of the Law a Righteousness
Righteousness by upon the account of which we might be justified Saith not the Apostle Rom. 4 4. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt inferring debt so merite from all works that we do whereby to patch up a Righteousness in order to Iustification He doth not distinguish betwixt works that are by way of merite other works but meaneth even such works as were performed by Abraham who was far from imagineing any merite is his works 3. And sure if any work be accounted meritorius in this case that must be so accounted which is made the whole of our Righteousness upon which we are justified is said to be the only Righteousness that is imputed to us for that end that we may be Justified Is not that beleeving made our Righteousness thereby declared to be no less meritorious than Adam's perfect Obedience would have been Argum. 3. That which maketh justification not to be of grace cannot stand with the truth of the Gospel But the imputation of Faith for Righteousness maketh Justification not to be of Grace He excepteth The Scripture still maketh a perfect consistency of free grace with the condition of saith Eph. 2 8. Rom. 3 24 25. Nay the work of beleeving is purposely required that the freeness of his grace might have place Rom. 4 16. How can a gift be conceived to be more freely given than when nothing more is required than that it be received now beleeving is nothing else but a receiving of that righteousness or justification which God giveth in with his Son Iesus Christ Iob. 1 12. Ans. Here are good words but nothing to loose the argument for Faith receiving a Righteousness or the gift of Righteousness or the Atonement or Christ his Righteousness is but the instrument as it were of the soul laying hold on in law presenting to speak so the fidejussorie-righteousness of the Surety Christ as the Righteousness upon the account of which for which alone he is to be justified But beleeving considered in it self as our work made to be our Righteousness all our Righteousness said to be imputed for our Righteousness is not considered as a receiving of a gift of Righteousness which is distinct from Justification howbeit he confound them but really is made a price in our hand wherewith to purchase the gift of Justification the reckoning of this work to us which is our work as our Righteousness in order to justification maketh Justification not of grace but of debt as the Apostle argueth Rom. 4 4. maketh our Justification to be of works if it be of works it is no more of grace as the Apostle asserteth Rom. 11 6. The consideration of Faith as the act of the soul receiving laying hold upon a Righteousness or on Christ his Righteousness establisheth the Imputation of Christs Righteousness but the Imputation of Faith properly taken doth quite extrude it these two are made incompatible by our adversaries the one is asserted that the other may be denied for which there were no necessity if Faith were considered in the Scripture sense as it ought to be that is an Instrument laying hold on bringing in a Righteousness from without even the Surety-Righteousness of Christ. So that this exception if it be ingenuous must overthrow the Position maintained Arg. 4. That which ministereth occasion to the flesh of boasting in it self is not consonant to the tenor of the Gospel But the imputation of Faith for Righteousness doth minister occasion to the flesh of boasting Therefore c. He excepteth Suppose the act of beleeving which is so imputed for righteousness be a mans own work yet it is so by the meer gift of God Ephes. 2 8. Phil. 1 29. 1 Cor. 2 12. 3 6. and this cuttech off all groud of boasting 1. Cor. 4 7. Ans. 1 Though there be no true ground of boasting of that which is freely given yet the flesh can take occasion therefrom to boast as the Pharisee did Luk. 18. when yet he acknowledged all to be gives for he thanked God for what he was not for what he did so acknowledged all to be given and all to be given freely 2 The Apostle saith expresly that boasting is not excluded by the Law of works Rom. 3 27. and yet all works are given are not absolutely of from our selves 3 Saith not the Apostle expresly Rom. 4 2. If Abraham were justified by works he hath to glory And yet I hope Abraham did acknowledge that all these works of his were of grace of God's free gift and not absolutly every way his own 4 The works required in the old Covenant of works were not absolutely Adam's own but were in some sense also given of God yet by that way of Justification there had been ground of boasting 5 Though now there should be no ground of boasting before God as neither would there have been ground of boasting before him by the way of works for the Apostle addeth Rom. 4 2. but not before God yet there is ground laid for boasting before men when our Beleeving is made our Righteousness upon the account of which we are justified pronunced righteous in order to Absolution from what was brought in against us 6 Therefore is the way of Justification now so contrived that man should have ground or coloure of ground of boasting even before men for all that Righteousness which is required unto Justification as that Righteousness upon the account of which they are to be justified and by which only they are to be declared pronunced Righteous is not in them but in another and imputed unto them it is the Righteousness of Christ made over unto them of God's free grace received by Faith which receiving hand is also given so that the Righteousness upon which all are justified is one the same is a Righteousness without them therefore the flesh hath no seeming occasion of boasting in this matter He excepteth 2. Suppose the act of beleeving were from a mans self yet there were no cause of boasting because that weight of glory is not given to faith for any worth in it but by the most free gracious good pleasure of God If a King for taking a Pin of a Mans sleeve should raise his house make him honourable in the State were it not a ridiculous thing for such a man to brag of the Pin of his sleeve c. Ans. 1 Can we think that those against whom the Apostle disputed in this matter did think that there was worth excellency in all their works to merite the exceeding great eternal weight of glory did Abraham think so And yet though we cannot say that he thought so Paul not withstanding denieth that he was justified by his works 2 If the act of Beleeving were from a Mans self made all that Righteousness which he
of nature if not also in order of time And if matters be thus sins are first forgiven and then Faith is imputed 2 If the supposing of a righteousness will follow to wit Remission of sins then there is no answere to the argument for the argument speaketh of a Righteousness anterior to Justification and in order there unto 3 It is againe said but was never proved that to forgive sins is to give a Righteousness And I would ask what for a Righteousness this pardon of sins is is it a Righteousness perperly so called But that cannot be for all such Righteousness consisteth in obedience to the Law therefore it must be a Righteousness improperly so called if so it cannot be called our formal righteousness as he said it was 4 When he saith we are made righteous in justification yet will not grant an Imputed Righteousness and his Remission of sins is not yet found to be a proper Righteousness the sense must either be Popish or none at all I shall not here adde other reasons against this Assertion whereby it might be made manifest how dangerous this Opinion is if it be put in practice how it tendeth to alter the Nature of the Covenant of Grace It may suffice at present that we have vindicated these few reasons against it that we have found it in the foregoing Chapter inconsistent with the doctrine of grace in the New Testament repugnant to the Nature of Justification as declared explained to us by the Apostle and that we shall finde it in the next Chapter without any footing in the Apostles discourse Rom. 4. which is the only place adduced for its confirmation CHAP. XXIV The imputation of Faith it self is not Proved from Rom. IV. THe maine if not only ground whereupon our Adversaries build their Assertion of the Imputation of our act of Beleeving is Rom. 4. where they tell us the Apostle doth frequently expresly say that Faith is imputed unto Righteousness We must therefore in order the vindication of truth vindicate this place from their corrupt glosses to this end we shall first show that that can not be the meaning of the Apostle in this place which our Adversaries contend for next we shall examine what they say to enforce their Exposition of the place That the meaning of the Apostle Rom. 4. where it is said Abraham beleeved God and it was counted unto him for righteousness afterward his faith is counted for righteousness and faith was counted to Abraham for righteousness c. is not that Abraham's act of beleeving was accounted the Righteousness whereupon he was accepted was imputed unto him as a Righteousness in order to his justification and consequently that the act of Beleeving is now imputed to Beleevers for their Righteousness as said Servetus Socinus his followers Arminius his followers Papists others that I say this is not the true meaning of the place may appear from these particulars 1. If the act of Beleeving be accounted a Righteousness it must either be accounted a Perfect Righteousness or an Imperfect Righteousness If it be accounted for an Imperfect Righteousness no man can be thereupon Justified But Paul is speaking of a righteousness that was accounted to Abraham the father of the faithful in order to Justification that behoved to be a perfect righteousness for all his works wherein was an Imperfect Righteousness were rejected It cannot be accounted for a perfect righteousness because then it should be accounted to be what it is not and this accounting being an act of God's judgment it would follow that the judgment of God were not according to truth contrare to Rom. 2 2. The reason is because our faith is not perfect in it self there being much drosse admixed many degrees wanting in it far lesse can it be a Perfect Righteousness seing a Perfect Righteousness must comprehend full Obedience to the whole Law of God 2. The Imputation whereof the Apostle speaketh is of some thing to be made the Beleevers by the Imputation of God which the Beleever had not before But this cannot be Faith or the work of Beleeving because Faith is ours before this Imputation for Abraham beleeved God then followed this Imputation and vers 24. it is said that it to wit some other thing than the act of beleeving shall be imputed to us if we beleeve therefore it is not the act of Beleeving properly taken that is imputed or accounted here 3. Faith being antecedent to this Imputation if the act of Beleeving be imputed the word impute or account here must not signifie to Bestow Grant or Reckon upon their score but simply to Esteem Judge or Repute and thus Faith or the act of beleeving shall be in a beleever and yet not be a Righteousness till God repute it to be so But when God esteemeth judgeth or reputeth any thing to be in us he doth not change it nor make it something that it was not before but judgeth it to be what it is indeed for his judgment is according to truth Rom. 2 2. 4. This sense glosse is quite opposite unto and inconsistent with the Apostles maine scope in the first part of that Epistle which is to prove that Righteousness is now revealed from faith to faith Rom. 1 17. and that we are not Justified by the works of the Law but freely by grace through the Redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3 24 25. And therefore not through the Imputation of Faith the act of Beleeving or any work of Righteousness which we have done for that should not exclude boasting or glorying but through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ received by Faith 5. That which was accounted to Abraham for righteousness did exclude all works and that to the end that all ground of boasting even before men might be take away vers 2. 3. Therefore Faith as a work or the act of beleeving can not be it which is here said to be reckoned or accounted to Abraham for righteousness for this is a work and being made the Ground Formal Objective Cause of justification can not but give ground of glorving before men 6. This glosse maketh the Apostles discourse wholly incoherent for he saith vers 4 5. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned ef grace but of debt but to him that worketh not but beleeveth on him that justifieth tht ungodly his faith is counted for Righteousnese Now if Faith properly taken be imputed the reckoning shall be of just debt for to reckon a men righteous who is righteous antecedent to that act of accounting is no act of grace but of just debt but Faiths being accounted for Righteousness is an act of grace and therefore it must be the Object of Faith or the Righteousness that Faith laith hold on that is here said to be counted upon
than Justification c. And though it be true that in this case what is inconditione non est in obligatione as to the actual possession yet we cannot think but the holy Just God having received satisfaction from the Mediator in behalfe of such for whom it was laid down is under an obligation as we may conceive and speake unto the Mediator to cause him see of the travel of his soul to give him his seed and those he purchased and in due time to call them effectually work Faith in them then Justifie c. Adopt them c. thus bestow all the benefites purchased upon then in the time methode wisely determined But if Mr. Baxter understand by this jus actuale that is constituted upon the performance of the condition a plaine and simple Right unto the benefite we can acknowledge no such Condition lest we render the death of Christ void for in him alone have we all our Law-title Right to all the blessings of the Covenant to Faith all that follow upon it That we may put an end to this we shall first shew in what sense we cannot admit Faith to be a Condition then shew in what sense we do admit the denomination As to the first we say 1. We cannot admit it to be a Condition in their sense who will have Justification so to depend upon it as on a Procuring Cause some way or other meriting at least ex pacto or ex congruo as Bellarm saith that benefite as a Reward for this destroyeth the Freedome of Grace that shineth forth in our Justification overturneth the whole nature of the Covenant of Grace spoileth Christ of his glory and doth man to come in as a sharer in the glory of that purchase 2. We cannot admit it to be a Condition in their sense who take a new Obedience with it for this taketh away the special Use of Faith and its special End in laying hold on refuging the soul under the wings of the Surety-Righteousness of Jesus Christ This changeth the nature of the Covenant of Grace maketh it a new Covenant of Works giveth ground of boasting of glorying before men yea maketh the reward of Justification and what followeth thereupon to be of debt not of grace And such a Condition in the Covenant of Grace we cannot owne 3. We cannot admit it to be a Condition in their sense who make it strickly a Potestative Condition placeing it in the power free will of man to beleeve or not as he will for as this overturneth the whole Covenant of Grace and exalteth proud man so it parteth at least the glory of Redemption betwixt Christ Man giveth man ground to sing to the praise of his own Lord free will to say he hath made himself to differ he oweth but halfe thanks hardly so much to Jesus Chaist for all that he hath done and suffered in order to the purchasing of Salvation 4. We cannot own it for a Condition in their sense who make it or it our new obedience together our Gospel-Righteoâ—sness that Righteousness which only is properly Imputed to us Reckoned upon our score as the Righteousness upon the account of which we are Justified for thus the nature of the Covenant of Grace is changed God is made to estimate that for a Righteousness which is no fulfilling of the Law Christ is made to have procured that it should be so that his own Surety-Righteousness should no otherwayes be imputed 5. We cannot account Faith a Condition in their sense who ascribe to it or to it with works the same Place Use Efficacie in the new Covenant that Perfect Obedience had in the old Covenant of Works for this maketh the New Covenant nothing but a new Edition of the old and shooteth Christ the Lord our Righteousness far away who is should be our immediat Righteousness that in him we might be found hid secured from the dint of the Law-Curse and with all giveth proud man too palpable ground of boasting contrare to the whole Contrivance of the Gospel-Covenant 6. We cannot owne it for a Condition in their sense who reject it and disowne it for an Instrument or an Instrumental Meane in our Justification because they deny that particular and special Use which it hath in our Justification so pervert its whole Gospel-Nature It s special use work in Justification being to lay hold on the Lord Jesus his side jussorie-Righteousness to carry the Man out of himself as renuncing his own Righteousness every thing that is not Christ his Righteousness that as poor empty naked he may lay hold on rest upon the Surety-Righteousness of the publick person Cautioner Jesus Christ for thus Christ his Righteousness are put by and he getteth not that rent of glory that is only due to him the soul is made to leane upon something beside this Rock of ages 7. We cannot admit it for a Condition in their sense who will have us hereby to have gotten a legal Title or Right unto Justification other benefites according ... following the same seing this puts the crown upon Mans head as having by his deed acquired a jus Law-right unto these blessings which become hereby a reward not of grace but of just debt We acknowledge all our Right Title to all the blessings of the Covenant to be from Christ the only purchaser of him must we hold all that all may be of free grace he even he alone may have all the Glory having redeemed us with his precious bloud purchased the whole Inheritance of grace glory for us 8. We cannot account it a Condition in their sense who plead for Universal Redemption because thereby Christ is only made to have purchased something to all alike that Conditionally no more grace glory for Peter than for Iudas but Peter by his own Paines Industrie by his Faith New Obedience did purchase the whole personal and immediat Right unto the blessings which he enjoyeth and hath received no more from Christ than what Iudas had so hath no more ground of exalting him for Redeemer than those have who perish seing what he purchased was common to all no more for one in particulur than for another for this setteth the crown upon mans head who hath saved himself by his sweating paines labour and spoileth our Lord Redeemer of his glory 9. Nor can we account it a condition in their sense who will have the whole or principal part of what Christ purchased to be the New Covenant the Termes Conditions thereof as if Christ had been a Cautioner for none in particular but had so far redeemed all as to have brought them into such an estate wherein they might now work won for themselves run fight for the prize according to
the new Conditions purchased and so if they run well sacrifice to their own net and burn incense to their own drag because by their own industrie care in performing the Conditions now made easier than they were to Adam in the first Covenant their portion is fat their meat plenteous 10. Nor yet can we call it a Condition in their sense who will have us look upon it in the work of Justification purely as a work of ours as an act of Obedience to a command as such a work as comprehendeth in it all the works of new Obedience for thus its peculiar Use of applying Christ of apprehending his Surety-Righteousness is taken from it the whole nature of the new Covenant is changed into the old Covenant of works Christ's â—idejussorie-Righteousness is not made our immediat Gospel-Righteousness yea when we are thus justified by Faith we are justified by works whereby the whole of the Apostâ—l's disput is overturned we are taught to leane to lay our weight upon a Righteousness within ourselves contrare to the whole scope of the Gospel Upon the other hand we say Faith may be looked upon and called a Condition of the Covenant and of Justification in this sense That Christ having purchased all the good things of the Covenant all the sure Mercies of David all Grace and all Glory unto the chosen ones and the Father having promised the actual collation bestowing of all and every one of these mercies blessings so purchased and procured and Jehovah the Mediator both in the counsel of their will condescending on such a methode way of making the ransomed ones the owners of the Blessings purchased that is first to give the New Heart and the heart of fless and in effectuall calling worke them up to Faith in and Union with Christ and so draw them to the mediator and cause them accept of him wait upon him and rest there for life salvation and then to Justifie Accepte of as Righteous Adopte them and then worke the works of holiness by his Spirit more in their soul and so carrie on the work unto Perfection till grace be crowned with glory matters I say being thus wisely ordered in the councel of heaven there is a Priority of order Faith receiving Christ and resting on his Surety-righteousness going before and Justification following and a firme connexion made betwixt the two that who so ever beleeveth thus shall be justified and none shall be justified who beleeveth not thus Now when by vertue of this constitute order Method explained revealed in the Gospel the Ambassadours of Christ in obedience to their Injunctions call upon all who heare the Gospel to receive Christ and refuge themselves under his wings and receive the atonement through his Righteousness and promise them thereupon in their Masters name Pardon Peace with God Reconciliation and acceptance c. nothing more is here insinuated than that such a Methode Order is wisely determined and that there is a fixed connexion made betwixt Faith Justification so that who ever would be saved from the wrath to come would enjoy God for ever must come unto God in this way and according to this methode and must receive his blessings and Favoures in this order first beleeve and lay hold on Christ and his Righteousness and then receive Justification c. Thus we see faith is no legal Antecedent Condition no Proper or Potestative Condition but only a consequent or Evangelick Condition or a Condition denoting a fixed and prescribed Order and Method of receiving of the blessings purchased by Christ with a firme and fixed connexion betwixt the performance of the condition and the granting of the thing promised thereupon Thus Christ hath the whole glory of the work Man is abased and hath nothing to glory of in himself The reward is not of debt but purely of grace The wisdom and love of God is wonderful and remarkable All ground of carnal security and self confidence is removed A plaine and powerful ground is laid for ministers to press exhort aud obtest to Faith in the first place with all seriousness and zeal Full security and ground of confidence of being Justified and Accepted of God upon our beleeving is given The difference betwixt the Covenant of works and the Covenant of Grace is distinctly observed The Antinomian mistakes saying we are Justified from Eternity or at the death of Christ or at any time before faith are manifestly obviated And all grounds of excepting against or dissatisfaction with this way are removed from all such as will willingly comply with the designe of free grace in the Gospel CHAP. XXVIII How faith is and may be called an Instrument in Justification COncerning the Instrumentality of faith in Justification much needeth not be said howbeit too much hath been written about it that to very little edification so I judge I am sure to little use as to the clearing up of that concerning pointe of Justification the true interest of Faith therein We heard in the beginning of the proceeding Chapter how both Socinians Arminians did disowne faith its being an Instrument and Papists also before them did plead against it On the other hand the orthodox writting against Papists Socinians Arminians did unanimously assert Faith to be an Instrument or to be considered as an Instrument in the matter of Justification And few or none can be instanced of those who hold with the orthodox in all chiefe Controversies about Justification that did impugne or so much as deny Faith to be an Instrument in justification Yea Iohn Goodwine in his book of justification doth expresly call it an Instrument in justification It is true the Scripture no where calleth faith an instrument the same being no Scripture expression there needeth not be much strife about it nor will there be among such as are unanimous in the maine principal Questions about Justification or to that which is only designed intended by that expression And though the Scripture doth not use that expression interminis yet no man can hence inferre that all use of it and of the like should be laid aside nor can such be supposed to adde to the Scripture as Mr. Baxter hinteth Apol. against Mr. Blake p. 40. who call Faith an Instrument more then he can suppose that himself addeth to the Scripture when he calleth faith a Condition or a causa sine qua non for these are as little to be found expresly in the Scriptures as the other Nor do they who say Faith is an Instrument so much plead for the name as for the thing intended thereby All expressions that are not in Scripture must not be laid aside in our speaking of divine things for then we must lay aside the word Trinity Sacrament Satisfaction several others far less must the truth which we conceive can be intelligibly usefully expressed by those borrowed
faith Ans. It may be so but their meaning is not I conceive to give an equal share of Interest Power Office in about justification unto Repentance with that which they acknowledge Faith to have but either their purpose is hereby to show the inseperable connexion that is betwixt faith Repentance or to show that they speak of that faith which is attended with this necessary Grace of Repentance doth effectually work the same or both rather So that their true meaning is to give the due privilege interest unto that saith which can prove it self to be real true justifying faith by effectuating Repentance never to be repented of and thus they withall satisfie an Objection or question that might be made if they had mentioned faith alone for it might be enquired How shall we know whether our faith be of the right kind or not Now their joining of Repentance with faith doth shortly answere this question Repentance being a concomitant and a fruit of true faith more sensiblie felt obvious to their perception might be to them a vive perceptible expression of true justifying faith Obj. 12. But seing faith by some is called that which doth morally qualifie the subject to be a fit patient so be justified why may not Repentance have an equal share in this moral Qualification with Faith I Ans. If we should make faith to have no other Interest in justification than Repentance hath or may be yeelded to have we may easily grant that Repentance hath the same equall Interest with faith but it is denied that faith hath no other Interest but as that which doth morally qualifie c. drieness in wood may qualifie it for the fire yet the wood may be long so before it become the subject of fire so may it be with moral qualifications many a man may be morally qualified to be a fit match for such a woman or a woman for such a man yet the marriage Relation never be made up betwixt them But this cannot be said of faith whereby the marriage is made the person is actually justified not a bare fit patient to be justified CHAP. XXX Whether Love purpose of Obedience or perseverance be Conditions of Justification BY what is said in our foregoing discourse we may know what is to be answered unto these Questions so that we need not insist long in the discussing of them Some of late lay downe for a ground and hereby give occasion to discuss these and such like questions that whatever is or may be called aâ— the Covenant of Grace is upon that account may be called the Condition of Justification thus confounding the whole order of the Gospel making all duties required of such as are in Covenant ordained of God for other ends uses to be required as Conditions of entering in Covenant and to have the same use and end in unto justification which faith hath contrary to express Scripture saying that we are justified by faith not by works of Righteousness which we do and contrary to the whole methode of the Gospel grounds laid down therein for an acceptable performance of obedience As to Love Papisit's make it the forme as they speak of faith not in it self simply considered but in order to Justification Salvation thereby saying that faith without Love is dead And it is true that true saving faith worketh by Love and that faith cannot be called Saving or Justifying which doth not excite unto acts of Love and many may deceive themselves with a faith that will not be found when tried to be of the right stamp as the Apostles Iames teacheth But yet they put no specifick difference commonly betwixt this dead faith faith informed for both as to what is essential intrinsik to faith which they hold to be an assent unto all things revealed by the Lord unto men upon the account of the Veracity and Authority of the Revealer are one the same so as one and the same faith may be sometime dead when to wit not working by Love sometime lively when formed with Love But of these things we need not here speak only we see that with them Love is in a manner more necessary unto Justification than faith must be looked on as a necessary condition thereunto even as that without which faith can do nothing And to confute this here is but vaine seing it shall serve nothing to our purpose because with them justification is the very same we call Sanctification But others who have more sound and distinct apprehensions of justification tell us That love is the condition of justification because a condition of the Covenant of Grace as if all the duties of such as are in Marriage Relations were conditions of making up the marriage Relation Others who distinguish betwixt Faith Evangelick Obedience as betwixt consent to a mans Soveraignity obeying him as Soveraigne as doth Mr. Baxter Confess p. 89 90. Yet say that Love is comprized in Faith and is some degree of Justifying Faith not properly a fruite of it because the wills apprehension of a thing good or earnest willing accepting it is the fame with Love so is the wills Consenting Electing accepting all this being in Faith Love must be comprehended in it Yea they say that as Love Faith are propounded in the Gospel as of the same necessity so they are necessary in Justification concurrent in apprehending Christ. So spoke Mr. Baxter in his Aphorismes And in his Confess p. 34 35. he saith Though Charitie as it respecteth other objects is no part of faith yet as it respecteth an offered Saviour it is as much essential to faith to receive Christ with Love as it is essential to a Saviour the object of faith to be good for us for good as good is received by love Nor was it ever the Intent of the Holy Ghost to take faith in Christ in so narrow a sense as includeth not Love to him when it is saving Faith that is spoken of In reference to all which we need say but those few following things 1. The Scriptures do plainly enough distinguish betwixt Faith Love They are reckoned as distinct fruits of the Spirit Gal. 5 22. Love joy-faith yea Faith is said to worke by love Gal. 5 6. we heare of the work of faith and labour of love 1. Thes. 1 3. we heare of Charitie out of a pure heart of faith unfaigned 1. Tim. 1 5. And the grace of our Lord saith Paul 1. Tim. 1 14 was exceeding abundant with Faith Love which is in Christ Iesus We hear of the brestplate of Faith Love 1. Thes. 5 8. 2. The Scriptures do plainly tell us that we are Justified by Faith as we heard but never saith that we are justified by love And sure as it is best for us to regulate our expressions according to the Lord's
finde no where required in order to Justification This is no where called a Condition of Justification We are no where said to be Justified by this Resolution This is inconsistent with the frame of a poor wakened soul seeking Justification This would in part make the gift of Justification not free of free grace but to be of works or of a Resolution for works and so would give ground in part at least of boasting of glorying contrare to the whole frame of the Gospel And so this would lessen the difference betwixt the Old Covenant of works and the New Covenant of Grace Having thus dispatched the second particular we come unto the Third to wit to enquire whether perseverance be a Condition of Justification And of this we need not speak much seing by what is already said it is apparent how false this is Every thing that is required of such as are Beleevers cannot be called a Condition of Justification It is said that a Condition suspendeth the obligation to bestow the benefite promised upon Condition untill it be performed And so it will hence follow that if Perseverance to the end be the Condition of Justification no man can be justified untill he have persevered to the end so no man shall be justified in this life whereby an end is put to all our present debate the subject thereof being taken out of the way If it be said That faith is the Condition of Justification as it endureth to the end I Ans. That that faith which will endure to the end is the Condition I grant But I deny That Faith is the Condition of Justification as it endureth to the end we no where read of Faiths being the Condition under this reduplication as enduring to the end for then it would follow that no lively faith how strong so ever could unite a soul to Christ untill it had endured to the end and so man upon his first Beleeving 〈…〉 be never so livly strong can be said to be justified to have passed from death to life contrare to all the Scriptures And this would too much assimilate the New Covenant unto the Old wherein Adam was to work out his dayes work to the end ere he had Right to his wages Yea hence it would follow that in this life there were none of the fruites of justification to be had such as Peace with God Accesse to God Glorying in tribulations Joy Comfort contrare to experience the Scriptures Rom. 5 1 2 3 4 5 11. 8 35. to the end Luk. 7 50. Mat. 9 2. 2. Thes. 2 16. Heb. 6 18 19. 1. Pet. 1 4. So that in a word from what hath bein said it is evident how little ground M. Br. hath to glory in this way of his and though to an inadvertent person it may appeare Plausible what is adduced for a reason yet when considered it will be found fioath and a florish of words for be it so that justifieing faith receive whole Christ which we doe not deny for Christ is not divided for as there is but one faith so but one Christ. And I will have occasion to speake more fully to this matter afterward Yet what doth Mr. Baxter gain hath he gained his Pepper-corne of Faith or Gospel-obedience to be imputed unto us for Righteousness according to the new law he should say the new edition of the Old Covenant or rather the Old Covenant newly established no by no means for be it grainted That Iustifieing Faith as such respected Christ equally as King and Prophet as it doth him as Priest which yet I deny and shall without divideing Christ make it appeare I aske him how doth it receive Christ Jesus the Lord Surely he cannot but say as he is offerred in the Gospel well then the Lord who knoweth what we are offereth him to us and makes him to us wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and redemption so that God in the offer of his Christ as a King lookes upon the sinner in the same capacitie to obey him as in the offer of him as a Priest he is to pay his debt and that is not onely in no capacitie but as opposit to such a thing of himself Hence it as evident that Faith receives Christ as a King not by promiseing or purposeing to obey him but from a Conviction of its own aversion to purpose to please God that he by his Kingly Power shall kill the enmity Conquer the soul bring it to purpose as well as practise work in it to will as well as to doe cast down imaginations that exalt themselves against the knowledge of God and bring every thought in captivitie to his obedience so when Faith acts on him as a Prophet there is in this act neither purpose nor promise to obey him as a teacher c. But from a Conviction that the mind is not onely void of light but it is prepossessed with corrupt principles so that the man that hath nothing but the soul of a man takes up the whole Gospel Mysterie as foolishness And it is impossible for him to know these things since they must be spiritually discerned I say from this Conviction he receives Christ as his wisdom as he that shall give him an understanding to know him that is true and to make him who is not onely as a beast but so much worse that his light is darkenesse of a quick understanding in the feare of the Lord and wise to salvation Now this exactly answereth the sinners need and hath all his wants made up by Jesus Christ according to his riches in glory and God's end in makeing his Christ to poor sinners wisdom Righteousness c. That so he who glorieth may glory in the Lord. Now if Mr. Baxter will Consider this he will even lay aside his Pepper-Corne as of no Price for here all is without money and without Price to the poor soul c. and he is considered as a receiver of all from Christ. CHAP. XXXI Gospel-obedience is not the Condition of Justification THough as we heard Mr. Baxter himself will not say that Gospel-obedience is the Condition of Justification yet he recommendeth a book to us to peruse to the end we may receive much light in the knowledge of the Gospel I meane the discourse of the two Covenants formerly mentioned wherein this is asserted with great confidence And though this be sufficiently confuted by what is said yet we shall in short take some notice of the grounds of this Mans Confidence give some remarks upon what he saith He tels us pag. 132. That the sense in which the Apostles did assert it i.e. Justification by Faith without the works of the Law was that faith Iustifieth without works antecedent to beleeving This is what Bellarmin other Papist's say without works as the works of a literal observation of Moses law which was opposed by the jewes to faith This is but his fiction and its grounds may come
to be considered afterward But what is this Faith It is a Faith saith he that hath Repentance Regeneration sincere Obedience in a holy life for its inseparable effects Then 1 this Faith is not fruite of Regeneration because Regeneration is an effect of it 2 Then upon a mans sincere Beleeving he cannot be said to have passed from death to life be freed from Condemnation nay not untill all the effects of faith be produced And this he expresseth more clearly within a line or two calling Regeneration new obedience parts of the Condition thus making men able to Regenerat themselves with some help of the Spirit according to his former doctrine Passing his inveighing pag. 134. forward against the orthodox doctrine concerning Justification by faith alone and loading it with Socinian reproaches wherein he bewrayeth more acquaintance with Popish Socinian Arminian Principles Consequences than with the Gosp. I doctrine either in Theorie or practâ—ce I proceed to examine his grounds which he laieth down Chap. 7. pag. 140 141. and prosecuteth to the end of that Chapter His grounds are Ten in number The first is That works of Evangelical obedience are never in Scripture opposed to God's grace in reference to Iustification Salvation Ans. 1 Here we have the fundamental errour of his whole discourse hinted to us when he putteth Justification Salvation together making all that is antecedently required unto Salvation to be also antecedently required unto Justification or he must acknowledge no justification untill Salvation come 2 A perfect contradiction to this ground of his we have Ephes. 2 8 9 10. for by grace are ye saved through faith not of works lest any man should boast for we are his workmanshipe created in Christ Iesus unto good works which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them Here grace is opposed to works to good works unto which we are created in Christ Jesus in which we are to walk and that in reference to the Salvation that is in justification The man was so wise for his own unhallowed ends as never once to take notice of this place He cannot but grant that Works Grace are opposed to other but he giveth us a very sceptick evasion telling us that then by works we are to understand either works antecedent to conversion or as they are denyed I think he would have said deemed or some such thing to merite at the hands of God or the works of the Law of Moses as erroneously contended for by the jewes or the works of the Law as Typical as opposed to things typified or the works of the Law as the Law is in its rigour opposed to the milder oeconomie of the Gospel And yet all this will not helpe the matter for Paul tels us that even Abraham was not justified by his works but by faith in opposition to works Rom. 4 1 2 3. And Abraham's works here excluded from Justification can be reduced to none of these heads of works here mentioned They were not works antecedent to Conversion for in opposition to these it is said his Faith was reckoned unto him for Righteousness long after his Conversion Nor did the holy father dreame of any merite in his works nor were these the works of the Law in any of the senses mentioned for Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness even when he was in uncircumcision Rom. 4 9 10 11. c. He taketh notice of Tit. 3 5. not by works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he sâ—ved us but giveth us p. 143. this glosse This change of their condition was not effected or so much as begun among them by any reformation of their own till the Gospel came to work it which is meant by the appearing of the kindness Love of God vers 4. is of like import with Ch. 2 11 12. Ans. By what either Law or Reason he restraineth that appearing of the kindness Love of God mentioned vers 4. to the Gospel I know not 2 And though the Gospel were here understood that would not help the matter for the Text saith that after this did appear he saved them that is Justified in the first place as we see vers 7. according to his mercy not by work of Righteousness 3 These works are called works of Righteousness But no works of their own before Conversion can be so called can the works of such as are foolish disobedient deceived serving diverse lasts pleasures living in malice envie hateful hating one another be called works of Righteousness and yet such were these before the kindness Love of God reached them as vers 3. showeth He thinks the same answere may be given to 2. Tim. 1 9. And so we think the same reply may suffice His 2. ground is p. 114. That Paul in speaking agaist Iustification by works giveth sufficient caution not to be understood thereby to speak against Evangelick obedience in the case That is not to speak against justification by Evangelick works which were to say he took much paines for nothing for if he had but said that the Ceremonial Law was abrogate he had sufficiently confuted justification by the Ceremonies if that had been all the Law he meaned But how proveth this man what he here alledgeth He adduceth Rom. 3 31. But I wonder how did the Apostle by his doctrine establish the Ceremonial Law In the Spirit of it saith he in as much as in preaching Iustification in the Gospel way he preached in plaine precepts the necessity of that spiritual purity unto Salvation which was but darkly taught by the Ceremonial Law Ans. 1 Then this man supposeth that he is establishing the Ceremonial Law by his doctrine in this book for he thinks that therein he is preaching up Justification in the Gospel way 2 Neither did the Ceremonial Law more darkly nor doth the Gospel in more plaine termes preach the necessity of spiritual purity as the Condition of Justification So that this Author beggeth what he cannot prove 3 But that this is the Moral Law hath been frequently shown above as also it hath been shown how what way it was established by the doctrine of justâ—fication without works so that we need not regaird his saying that by the doctrine of justification by faith they established the moral Law both in the letter Spirit of it in teaching the necessity of Evangelical obedience to it after a more spiritual forcible manner than had been taught before For this saith nothing for their pleading for obedience to this Law as a Condition of Justification which is the thing he should have said And if he know not how Justification without the works of the moral Law can consist with necessity of Obedience to the Moral Law upon Gospel grounds he is ignorant of the Gospel and hath been more educate in Socinus his School than in the orthodox Church He citeth to the
lest any man should boast manifestly declaring that all works were laid aside in this matter that for this end that no man should have any occasion of boasting this is not spoken as every one may see to qualifie or specifie the works that are excluded these words carry nothing of a restriction in them The same is cleare also Rom. 4 2. If Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory shalll the meaning be Abraham was not justified by such works as give ground of gloriation then the meaning lyeth not in the words but the words do expresly crosse contradict that sense unless we shall suppose them to have no sense to speak nothing of the following vers 3. where beleeving is mentioned not another sort of works to wit such as give no ground or occasion of boasting which in this case of justification no man can describe unto us or tell us what they are He tels us p. 122. that the meaning of these words Rom. 3 28. Therefore we conclude c. is no more but this viz. That a man is justified in the Gospel way But not only is that in the general included but that Gospel-way is particularly expressed to be by faith without the deeds of the Law And consequently his Popish Socinian way is diametrically opposite to the Gospel-way He goeth about to explaine to us p. 124. c. what is meaned by their own Righteousness that is so frequently set in opposition to the Righteousness of God tels us that it was so called upon a threefold account 1. Because they sought the pardon of their sins by their own Sacrifices Ans. And why not also by their works of Obedience Sure neither Abraham nor David sought for pardon upon any such accout they renunced other works than these Is that all the Righteousness that Paul renunceth Phil. 3 9 Was he then occupied about Sacrifices Some thing else sure is understood 1. Cor. 4 4. 2. Because saith he they did not think Regeneration or Supernatural grace necessary to the obtaining of it Ans. And truely all the Regeneration Supernatural grace which he thinks necessary is but that a Pelagian Iesuite Arminian will think necessary no more as we saw above But doth he think that Abraham or David had any such apprehensions yet even their works are excluded from justification Was that the Righteousness that Paul called his owne Phil. 3 9 I think for shame he will not say it And what meaneth Paul to say 1. Cor. 4 4. I know nothing by my self yet am I not hereby justified This sure must include works done by supernatural Grace after Regeneration 3. Saith he Because it was a way of seeking to be justified of their own devising not of God's appointing Ans. This is very true but it is not the whole truth in this matter And his way is of the same Nature no more consistent with the Gospel methode of justification through the Righteousness of God by faith than theirs is for the Imputed Righteousness of Christ he rejecteth with contempt True justification he is ignorant of He knoweth no Faith but what is Popish Socinian His New Covenant is but a new edition of the old His Regeneration is Pelagian His Good Works are but works flowing from a Principle of Nature aided with a common divine assistance Let us now in end hear what is the result of all his discourse It is to shew That they were the works ef the Law as exclusive of Faith in Christ his death Not those which are the immediat effects of Faith in Christ in his death in his doctrine But the Gospel tels us that in the matter of Justification all the works of the Law are exclusive of faith in Christ even Abraham's works David's works Paul's works therefore they were all laid aside justification was only looked for through Faith Thus we have seen what a Gospel this is which Mr. Baxter recommendeth to us the consideration whereof may move some to say Noscitur ex socio qui non dignoscitur ex se. CHAP. XXXII Of the object of justifying Faith THough something of the Object of Faith was hinted before Chap. XX. when we were speaking of the Nature of Faith yet it will not be amisse to speak a little more of it here both in reference to what followeth and also more particularly in order to the better understanding of what it is to Live by Faith In order therefore to the explaining of this Object we would premit these few things 1. As was mentioned in the forecited place there is presupposed unto the right exercise actual exerting of Faith accepting the offered Saviour Salvation through him a Conviction of sin misery in one measure or other whereby the Sinner is brought to a desparing in himself seing he can finde no remedie or reliefe for himself within himself and to a concluding that he is an undone man if there be no other remedie than what he is able to do for himself for after all meanes assayed and a soul in that case is ready to turn to many hands to seek reliefe until preventing grace come will embrace close with any promising way how chargable troublesome so ever it be ere it sweetly comply with the only Man-abasing Grace-exalting way of Salvation through Faith in Christ revealed in the Gospel he findeth himself disappointed And further it is presupposed as necessarily requisite hereunto some knowledge of the grounds of Religion particularly of the Gospel of Christ of his offices Work c. all revealed in the Gospel 2. When we speak here of the Object of Faith we mean that Faith by which a Soul is united unto Christ closeth with Him as offered in the Gospel improveth Him to all ends uses which their case necessitie in all time coming calleth for So that it is one the same Faith whether it be called Uniting Faith Saving Faith Justifying Faith Sanctifying heart-purifying Faith or the like It is one the same radical grace receiving these or the like various denominations from the effects brought about by it or the several ends uses it hath is appointed for And the same Faith bringeth all these effects about in its way according to the Order Methode measure ordained of God the same Faith whereby the beleever is Married to Christ Covenanteth with Him as Head Husband Lord Saviour by the same is he justified adopted brought into a state of Peace Reconciliation with God By the same Faith also doth the man get his heart Purified he liveth the life of Sanctification By the same also he getteth Strength Reviving Comfort Support in times of Temptation Trial. So that the Beleevers life first last is by Faith the beginning progress all the steps of it final Salvation is by Faith whence it is called Saving
4 When he saith that to be justified constitutively is nothing else but to be made such as are personally themselves just he speaketh very indistinctly not only as confounding being made just being justified as if they were formally the same but also as not giving us to understand what he meaneth by these words personally thâ—mselves just Hereby he would seem to say that only by something inherent in our persons we are constituted Righteous are justified and not by any thing imputed to us And if so the ground of all Anti-evangelick boasting glorying in ourselves is laid 5 Pardon of sin as such is neither a making a just nor a justifying and the same we say of Right to Christ to Glory 6 Christ's Righteousness according to Mr. Baxter can not be called the meritorious cause of our pardon justification Right to Glory c. because it is only made by him the meritorious cause of the New Covenant wherein pardon Right to Christ to Glory are promised upon New Conditions so is made the meritorious Cause of the connection betwixt the performance of these New Conditions the obtaining of Pardon that Right so that by vertue of Christ's Merites these New Conditions are made the proper immediat meritorious cause ex pacto of these favours And by this way Man can not but boast glory in himself immediatly and give Christ only some remote far-off thanks for procuring the New termes 7 Christ's Righteousness cannot be called our Material Righteousness any other way than as it hath purchased the New Covenant according to Mr. Baxter this being equally for all Christ's Righteousness shall be the Material Righteousness of the Reprobat as well as of Beleevers And how can that be called ours which is not ours nor our own nor are we by it made personally just ourselves as he spoke before 8 According to this doctrine Christ Righteousness meriteth to us another Righteousness which is our own on ourselves by this we are formally justified that is according to what went before to what followeth we are formally justified by our own personal inherent holiness for of this he is speaking only and yet that which he here mentioneth as the Righteousness which formally justifieth us is said to be pardon of sin a Right to Christ to Glory which formally is no Righteousness at all nor no where so called in Scripture is but a consequent of that which elsewhere he calleth our Gospel Righteousness and the Condition of Justification He goeth on n. 182. He that is no cause of any good work is no Christian but a damnable wretch worfe than any wicked man I know in the world And he that is a cause of it must not be denyed falsly to be a cause of it Nor a Saint denied to be a Saint upon a false pretence of self-denyal Ans. Of such a cause of any good work he knoweth the objection speaketh that should have the glory praise thereof and of good works as the ground formal Cause of justification which these against whom Mr. Baxter here disputeth do deny But we may see here what Mr. Baxter accounteth good works even such as the most damnable wretch and possiblie the devil himself may do that is a work materially good though far different from the good works described to us in Scripture And thus the Justification upon good works which Mr. Baxter here meaneth must be a Justification that all Heathens damnable wretches yea devils themselves are capable of But this is not the justification we speak of of which who ever are partakers shall be glorified Rom. 8 30. We say nothing that giveth him ground to think that our thoughts are that a Saint should be denyed to be a Saint upon pretence of Self-denyal Only we say that such as are Saints indeed will be loth to rob God of his glory or take any of that to themselves which is due to him alone in so far as they act as Saints And they should not because Saints glory boast as if their justification before God were by their Sanctity good works not of meer grace through the imputation of the Surety-Righteousness of Christ. One thing I would ask Doth Mr. Baxter think that Christ's Righteousness hath merited that justification which those damnable wretches devils may partake of by any good work which they do himself told us in the foregoing n. 81. that all Righteousnuss which formally iustifieth is our own that to be made just to be justified are the same or equipollent and to be Justified constitutively is nothing else then to be made such as are personally themselves just Now when devils damnable wretches may be the causes of some good work that good work cannot but formally justifie them and they thereby become constitutively justified I would enquire whether this Justification be purchased by Christ or not And againe I would enquire whether this Justification be accompanied with pardon of sin with Right to Christ to glory or not If not how can it be called a justification if it be not a justification how can they be hereby formally justified constitutively justified He tels us next n. 183 As God is seen here in the glass of his works so he is to be loved praised as so appearing This is say I good reasonable What then Therefore saith he he that dishonoureth his work dishonoureth God hindereth his due love and praise This consequence I grant is good but what is it to the point in hand And his most lovely honourable work saith he on earth is his holy image on his Saints as Christ will come to be admired glorified in them at last so God must be seen glorified in them here in some degree Neither say I is any thing of this to the purpose in hand He addeth And to deny the glory of his image is the malignants way of injuring him that in which the worst will serve you And what then He that will praise God saith he further as Creator Redeemer must praise his works of Creation Redemption And is it the way of praising him as our Sanctifier to dispraise his work of Sanctification Ans. What maketh all this to the purpose Must all such be guilty of this malignant wickedness who tell men that no part of their Righteousness is in themselves by which they are to be justified but that it is all in Christ only or that say that God must have all the glory of what good action they do This is hard that either we must be wicked Malignants or Sacrilegious robbers of God of the Glory due unto him But I see no connexion and Mr. Baxter hath not yet demonstrated the same He must then prove the Consequence of this argueing He addeth n. 184. Those poor sinners of my acquantance who lived in the grossest sins against
Pauli Iacobi c. printed An. 1620. But this opinion doth not correspond with truth as may be manifest from these particulars 1. If Paul disput only against Justification by Ceremonial Observances he had a far shorter cut to confute that conceite than the way he took to wit to tell them that shortly that Law with all its observances was to be laid aside no more to be observed by vertue of the Gospel Administration because the end of all these observances He who was typified thereby was come and had put an end to that dispensation But we finde not the Apostle making any use of this One Onely Argument which had sured that purpose but on the contrary he useth such Mediums Arguments as suite no less if not more other Lawes beside the Ceremonial 2. Yea before the writting of these Epistles wherein the Apostle did disput against Justification by the Law at least before he wrote that to the Galatians he had by his preaching practice opposed the observation of the Ceremonial Law as himself telleth us Gal. 2. And in that same Epistle Chap. 3. 4. he condemneth the observation of that Law in most peremptory termes as being no less than a falling from grace And yet when he is treating of Justification not by the works of the Law Chap. 3. he mentioneth not this ground which would have taken away the very subject of the debate Shall we think that the Apostle would have disproved Justification only by the works of the Ceremonial Law by such Arguments and Tipicks out of Scripture when he was within a little by forcible reasons to remove the very Law itself and condemne all observation thereof 3. It is strange that Paul in writting to the Gentils should deny Justification to be by the works of the Law meaning the Ceremonial Law only and Iames writting to the Jewes should cry up the observation of that Law and plead for justification thereby This would say that Jewes Gentiles were not both to be justified one way or that Iames Paul do clearly contradict other neither of which must be said That Iames speaketh of another Law than Paul speaketh of cannot be made good And therefore when our Adversaries will prove from Iames that we are justified by works their meaning is that we are justified by the Observation of the Ceremonial Law 4. The several things mentioned of this Law whereof the Apostle speaketh sheweth that he is not speaking of the Ceremonial Law only as 1 Rom. 3 19. It is a Law that stoppeth all mouthes whereby all the world becometh guilty before God But this is not the Ceremonial Law or the jewish or Moses Law under which the Gentiles were not nor yet are 2 Rom. 3 20. It is that Law by which is the knowledge of sin but this is not by the meer Ceremonial Law as we see Paul himself professing Rom. 7 7 3 Rom. 2 13. It is that Law the döers whereof shall be justified But this can not be asserted of the meer Ceremonial Law or of Moses's Law 4 Rom. 3 27. It is that Law which doth not exclude boasting but it cannot be said that the Law of Moses is only that Law 5 Rom. 3 31. It is that Law that is not made void through Faith But this is not the Ceremonial Law The Ceremonial Law is not established by Faith 6 Rom. 3 28. It is that Law justification by which is inconsistent with opposit to justification by Faith but this is not the Ceremonial Law only 7 Rom. 4 1 2. It is that Law by the works whereof Abraham was not justified But the Apostles argument from the Instance of Abraham had not been pertinent if no Law had here been understood but Moses's Law which was not in being in Abraham's dayes 8 Rom. 4 2. It is that Law works of obedience to it that would give ground to man of glorying But this is not true only of the Ceremonial Law 9 Rom. 4 4. It is that Law obedience to which is a working and maketh the reward of debt But this cannot be said only of the Ceremonial Law 10 Rom. 4 15. It is that Law that worketh wrath But other Lawes do this than the Ceremonial Law 11 Rom. 8 3 4. It is that Law that was weak through the flesh and the Righteousness of which was to be fulfilled in us but this cannot be applied to the Ceremonial Law only 12 Gal. 3 10. It is that Law◠of the works of which as many as are are under the Curse and of which it is said cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Law to do them But this agreeth not to the Ceremonial Law only 13 Gal. 3 12. It is that Law by the doing of which man should live But by perfect obedience to the Law of Moses alone life was not to be had 14 It is that Law that cursed all transgressours under the Curse whereof all thoselay for whom Christ died Gal. 3 13. But that is not the Ceremonial Law which laid no Curse upon the Gentiles 15 Ephes. 2 9 10. It is that Law that enjoineth those good works which God hath before ordained that we even Gentiles should walk in them But that is not the Ceremonial Law 16. It is that Law the works whereof are inconsistent with grace as the ground of Election Rom. 11 6. But this is not Ceremonial Law only else we must say that Election is for works of the Moral Law and yet is for grace 17 Phil. 3 9. It is that Law obedience to which can be called our Righteousness But this is not the Ceremonial Law only 5. If Paul's minde had been only to disput against Justification by Mosaical Observances after he had stated the question and proposed the Truth he was minded to confirme Rom. 1 17. to what purpose did he insist so much to shew how guilty the Gentiles were who were never under Moses's precepts and thereby clear what need they had of a justification by free grace through faith without the works of the Law This seemeth not to have a clear tendency unto the clearing of justification to be by Faith not by Mosaical Observances for what had the Gentiles to do with these 6. We finde like wise the Apostle to convince the Jewes themselves to be under sin in order to the necessity they had of being justified by faith holding forth their breaches of the Moral Law Rom. 2 21 22. and speaketh of a Law distinct from that to which Circumcision belonged saying vers 25. c. for Circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the Law but if thou be a breaker of the Law thy Circumcision is made uncircumcision And this Law is a Law that he by supposition saith one not circumcised might observe and so could not be the Law of Ceremonies See also Rom. 3 9 19. 7. The Arguments which the Apostle adduceth to disprove
all who work well keep the Law of Moses shall have free Pardon Right to life And thus they were as well justified by the works of the Law as by faith for faith was also required of them And then the meaning of the Apostles Conclusion Rom. 3 28. is therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith and by the deeds of the Law for both faith works with Mr. Baxter belong to this Subservient Righteousness as he calleth it If this be consonant to the Apostles doctrine which doth so contradict it let the Reader judge 3. Saith he That therefore it appeareth that the Jewes did so fondly admire the Law their National Privileges under it that they thought the exact keeping of it was necessary sufficient to Iustification Salvation And they thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness as a Sacrifice for sin meriter of free Pardon the Gift of life but only a great King Deliver to redeem them by Power from all their Enemies Bondage Ans. This mistake of the Jewes concerning the Messiah speaketh nothing to the point whereupon we are that is that Paul denieth justification to be by the Law And their errour mistake about the Law is not to be limited restricted to the Ceremonial Law so the thing that we say is confirmed hereby 2 They thought the Messiah was not to be their Righteousness And Mr. Baxter will not have him to be our Righteousness save only in that he hath purchased the New Covenant wherein our faith obedience to the Law is to be looked upon as all our proper immediat Righteousness upon the account of which we are to receive Pardon Right to life 4. He saith That is was not Adam's Covenant of Innocencie or persection which the Jewes thus trusted to or Paul doth speak against as to justification though a minore ad majus that is also excluded for the Jewes knew that they were sinners that God pardoned sin as a Merciful God that their Law had Sacrifices for Pardon Expiation with Confessions c. But they thought that so far as God had made that Law sufficient to Political ends to Temporal Rewards Punishments it had been sufficient to Eternal Rewards Punishments that of it self not in meer subordination to the typified Messiah Ans. Though the jewes knew that they were sinners yet they did also suppose that by their works of obedience to the Law Moral as well as Ceremonial they might make amends so think to be justified pardoned thereby and that God would accept of them grant them life for their own Righteousness sake therefore did they laboure so much to establish their own Righteousness followed after the Law of Righteousness sought Righteousness as it were by the works of the Law What Mr. Baxter talks here of the jewes not using of that Law in subordination to the Typified Messiah hath need of Explication for as to his sense of it we see no ground thereof in all the Apostles discourse 5. He saith That the thing which Paul disproveth them by is 1. That the Law was never made for such an End Ans. Yet he said that the man which doth those things shall live by them Rom. 10 5. Levit. 18 5. Gal. 3 12. that the doers of the Law are justified Rom. 2 13. And therefore speaketh of that Law which according to its primitive institution was made for such an end 2. saith he That even then it stood in subordination to Redemption free given life Ans. This we cannot yeeld to in Mr. Baxters sense often mentioned for Paul no where giveth us to understand that their obedience to this was their immediat Righteousness Condition of Justification the meritorious cause ex pacto of their Right to Christ to life c. 3. saith he That the free Gift or Covenant of Grace containing the promise of the Messiah and Pardon life by him was before the Law and justified Abraham others without it Ans. It is true this Argument did particularly militate against the Ceremonial Law Yet this not being the Apostles onely Argument other Arguments reaching the Moral Law as well as the Ceremonial we must not limite the Apostles disput only to the Ceremonial Law 4. saith he That their Law was so strick that no man could perfectly keep it all Ans. Adde also that they could not perfectly keep any one command thereof 5. saith he That every sin deserveth death indeed though their Law punished not every sin with death by the Magistrate Ans. And this holdeth true of the Moral as of the Ceremonial Law 6. saith he That their Law was never obligatory to the Gentile world who had a Law written in their hearts therefore not the common way of justification Ans. The Apostle maketh no such conclusion that therefore it was not the common way of justification for this would suppose that it were the way of justification unto them which is directly against the Apostles disput 7. saith he That their Law as such discovered sin but gave not the Spirit of Grace to overcome it in so much as though he himself desired perfectly to fulfill it without sin yet he could not but was under a Captivity that is a moral necessity of Imperfection or sins of infirmity from which only the grace of Christ could as to guilt power deliver him Ans. Therefore the Moral Law is as well here to be understood as the Ceremonial as is manifest 8. saith he That no man ever come to heaven by that way of merite which they dreamed of but all by the way of Redemption Grace free Gift Pardoning Mercy Ans. But that way of merite attendeth all works in the matter of justification as the Apostle assureth us Rom. 4 4. Ephes. 2 8 9. is opposed to the way of Redemption Grace free Gift Pardoning Mercy Rom. 11 6. 3 21 24. Tit. 3 5 7. From these things Mr. Baxter draweth this Conclusion Therefore their conceite that they were just in the maine forgiven their sins so justifiable by the meer dignity of Moses Law which they keept by the works of the Law not by the free Gift Pardon Grace of a Redeemer by the Faith Practical Beleife of that Gift and acceptance of it with thankful penitent obedient hearts was a Pernicioue Errour Ans. 1. Nothing is here said to ground a restriction of this erroneous conceite of theirs unto the Ceremonial Law for this conceite of being justifiable by the Law and the works thereof in opposition to the free Gift Pardon Grace of a Redeemer is as applicable to the Moral as to the Ceremonial Law 2 The Apostle doth not ground his disput upon the Iewes their express rejecting of a free Gift of Pardon c. But from justification by Faith laying hold on the free Grace
Merites of a Mediator he argueth against justification by the Law the works thereof And according to the Apostle's Methode do we argue 3 To cover Justification by our own inherent Righteousness having the same place in the New Covenant which inherent Righteousness Obedience had in the old by these fine words Faith a Practical beleef of the Gift acceptance of it with thankful penitent obedient hearts is not such ingenuous dealing as the Importance of the matter requireth But this will be clearer by what followeth But saith he the true way of Righteousness was to become true Christians that is with such a penitent thankful accepting practical beleefe or affiance to beleeve in God as the giver of Salvation in Christ as the Redeemer his Spirit as our life Sanctifier and to accept Christ and all his procured Benefites Iustification Life as purchased by his Sacrifice Meritorious Righteousness given in the New Covenant on this Condition and so to give up ourselves to his whole saving work as to the Physician of our souls only Mediator with God This is the summe of Paul's doctrine on this point Ans. Not to speak of this matter here which is elsewhere done I shall only say that we are not enquiring after the true way of Righteousness but after the true way of Justification before God And enquire where the Apostle teacheth that all the Righteousness required unto justification must be within us none at all imputed as this Summe holdeth forth Where he teacheth that this faith including works all obedience is the only meane of justification Where he teacheth that this inherent imperfect Righteousness of ours is the immediat ground and meritorious Cause ex pacto of our justification Salvation Where he teacheth that Christ's Righteousness is no otherwise ours than as purchasing the New Covenant wherein our own personal Righteousness is made the Potestative Condition of our Justification Salvation And yet these and several other Particulars of this alloy doth Mr. Baxter hold forth as taught in Scripture as hath been seen elsewhere CHAP. V. Works excluded in Justification are not works only done before Faith nor perfect works required in the Law of Innocency nor outward works only THe other Evasion which such as plead for the Interest of Works in Justification fall upon to evite the dint of the Apostle's argueing concludings against Works is That by the works of the Law which Paul excludeth from justification works are meant which are done before Conversion Faith by the strength of Nature not the works of grace done after This is the Evasion of Bellarmine others But against this we have these Reasons to propose 1. When the Scripture saith we are justified by faith the meaning is that so soon as a soul beleeveth in Christ by a true Faith he is justified before God But this opinion saith That a man is not justified when he beleeveth in Christ No not untill he performe Works of Righteousness after he hath beleeved And thus we may conceive a man to be a beleever yet not to be justified which is contrary to the Gospel 2. If we were justified by the Works of Regenerat persons we should be justified by works that are imperfect and consequently by an imperfect Righteousness for these works being made our Righteousness if we be justified by them as our Righteousness we must be justified by an imperfect Righteousness for they are not perfect neither as to parts nor as to degrees Esai 64 5. 1. Ioh. 1 8 10. 1. King 8 46. 2. Chron. 6 36. Eceles 7 20. 3. Regenerat persons have renunced their own Righteousness in the matter of justification before God therefore they judged that they were not justified thereby And this is registrate in the word for our Instruction example that we may learne also to renunce our own works in this business The Antecedent is clear from these Instances 1 David saying Psal. 130 3. If thou Lord shouldest mark iniquity o Lord who shall stand And in opposition to this he betakes himself to free Remission saying vers 4. But there is forgiveness with thoe So Psal. 143 2. And enter not into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight shall no man living be justified So that if God should enter in judgment with the best even with his servants they could not expect to be justified by their works even by their best works So when he saith Psal. 32 1 2. Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven whose sin is covered c. he renunceth all justification by the best of his works for Paul Rom. 4 6 7. giveth the meaning hereof to be that David describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth Righteousness without works 2 Paul also renunceth his Righteousness in this matter that several times for he saith 1. Cor. 4 4. for I know nothing by my self yet am I not hereby justified And he speaketh of himself while in the State of Regeneration So Gal. 2 16. Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the Faith of Iesus Christ even we have beleeved in Iesus Christ that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ not by the works of the Law And Phil. 3 9. he desired to be found in Christ not having his own Righteousness which is of the Law No man can think that by his own Righteousness here he meaneth only works done before he was regenerate 4. The Instances whereby Paul proveth Justification by Faith without the works of the Law confirmeth this that works after regeneration are excluded as well as works before for 1 Abraham was a regenerat man when his saith was said to be imputed to him Rom. 4 1 2 3. compared with Gen. 15. for before this time Gen. 12 1. he obeyed the call of God by faith Heb. 11 8. See also Rom. 4 9 10 11. 2 David another Instance of Justification by Faith was also regenerat when he was justified as Paul cleareth Rom. 4 6 7. by the imputation of a Righteousness without the works of the Law 5. The Apostle excludeth simply the works of the Law from being the Righteousness of any in point of justification And we have no warrant to except or distinguish where the Law excepteth not nor distinguisheth The works of Regenerat persons are works works of the Law as well as any other And Paul doth absolutely simply exclude works the works of the Law from being the ground of justification 6. By what reason can it be evinced that the Law or the Works of the Law signifie works before Regeneration or works done before faith more than other works Do these words carry this sense where ever they are used Or can it be demonstrated that they carry this express sense any where 7. Are only regenerat persons said to be under the Law Now the Apostle speaketh of all the works of
of asserting justification by other works than perfect works required by the Covenant of works to wit by imperfect works which they say are required in the Gospel And therefore their meaning is we are not justified by perfect sinless obedience but by imperfect obedience to the Law This is the Evasion of the Socinians who say the Apostle speaketh of the works of the Law to shew that he speaketh of those works which are enjoined by the Law to wit of perpetual perfect obedience required by the Law And they say that by Faith he meaneth that confidence obedience which every one is able to performe and which is endeavoured after studied That this cannot be the meaning of the Apostles conclusion we suppose will be clear from these Considerations 1. This supposeth that they against whom the Apostle is here disputing were of opinion that men could yet be justified must be justified by perfect obedience to the Moral Law But it is hardly imaginable that men in their wits did ever so dreame or think that they were innocent could expect to be justified before God by their own perfection or perfect obedience to the Law in all points for this were to say they never had sinned 2. When the Apostle in the beginning of his disput in his Epistle to the Romans proveth that all have sinned are guilty before God both jew Gentile he thence inferreth that by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified in God's sight Rom. 3 20. Whereby he giveth us to understand that there is no justification by the Law unless it be perfectly keeped And because no meer man did ever keep it perfectly or can so keep it therefore he concludeth that no man can be justified thereby There is no justification by works unless the works be perfect consequently that such as expect justification thereby be wholly sinless 3. If the Apostle had so disputed against justification by perfect works as to have granted or established justification by imperfect works he needed not have used any moe arguments to that end than what was mentioned cleared Rom. 1. 2. in the beginning of the 3. Chapter for his evincing that all had sinned come short of the Glory of God had been sufficient to this end without the addition of any one argument more seing it is impossible that sinners can be perfect obeyers And we must not think that all the Apostles further argueings are meerly superfluous for this would reflect upon the Spirit of God who acted Paul in this 4. How strange is it to imagine that the Apostle should disput against perfect works that he might establish imperfect works in the matter of justification to think that the Apostle is proving that we are not justified by the perfect works of the Law but by the imperfect works thereof that is we are not justified by such works as keep a conformity with the Law but by such works as are violations of the Law as all works are which are not conforme thereunto in all points 5. Imperfect works as to the ground of justification are not that Righteousness of God without the Law which is by Faith of Jesus Christ but opposite theâ—eunto and inconsistent therewith as well as perfect works for as he that perfectly keepeth the Law needeth not another Righteousness in order to his justification so neither needeth he who hath an imperfect obedience if that be made the formal objective merite cause of justification But Gospel-justification is by the Righteousness of God which is without the Law which Faith laith hold on Rom. 3 21 22. 6. Gospel justification is by Faith as the whole Gospel cleareth but faith imperfect works are not one the same Yea they are as repugnant in this affaire as faith perfect works are We are justified by faith without the deeds of the Law Rom. 3 28. Gal. 2 16. Living by faith living by works are opposite Gal. 3 11 12. 7. Justification by imperfect works is not free justification by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood as is manifest But this is the Gospel-justification Rom. 3 24 25. 8. Imperfect works exclude grace are as inconsistent therewith as perfect works are But Gospel-justification is by grace without works Rom. 3 24. Ephes. 2 8 9. Tit. 3 5 6 7. The Major is clear from the places cited as also from Rom. 11 6. If by grace then it is no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace But if it be of works then is it no more grace otherwise work is no more work Now if it be said that perfect works are here understood and not imperfect works it must be said also that Election of which the Apostle here speaketh is upon foresight of imperfect works 9. Imperfect works if made the Cause of Justification can give ground of boasting of glorying as we see in the Pharisee Luk. 18. But Gospel justification removeth all ground of boasting Rom. 3 27 4 2. 10. Imperfect works can not be accounted a perfect Righteousness by the Lord whose judgment is according to truth Rom. 2 2. But there is no justification without a perfect Righteousness either inherent or imputed God will pronounce no man Righteous who is not so nor justifie any as Righteous who is not so indeed But upon the account of an imperfect Righteousness can no man be justified as Righteous 11. Even this imperfect Righteousness when made the ground of justification will make the reward of debt and not of grace As Abraham's works if he had been justified by them would have done for Abraham's works were not perfect works but imperfect works as is manifest 12. If justification were not by perfect works but by imperfect works then through faith or through Gospel justification the Law should be made void contrary to Rom. 3 31. The reason of the consequence is because hereby the Law that requireth perfect obedience is laid aside another Law that requireth imperfect obedience admitted in its place or rather the same Law is pretended but it is made void as to its requireing perfect obedience must now be satisfied with an imperfect obedience But this is not to establish the Law but to destroy it when many Jotes titles are taken away from it Mat. 5 17 18. 13. The Iewes did not imagine that they were perfect without sin but followed after the Law of Righteousness that as it were â—s by the works of the Law Rom. 9 31 32 And this of necessity must have been mixed with much imperfection And yet the Apostle plainly saith in the place cited that they did not attaine to a Righteousness nor to the Law of Righteousness because they sought it not by faith but as it were by the works of the Law so that seeking after Righteousness as it
were by the works of the Law is opposite to a seeking of it by Faith And againe Rom. 10 3. they went about to establish their own Righteousness and did not submit themselves unto the Righteousness of God which two are opposite inconsistent And this their own Righteousness was but an imperfect Righteousness which they were labouring to cause stand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 14. We cannot imagine that when the Apostle did exclude his own Righteousness and desired not to be found therein he only excluded that which was not desired not to be found in that which he had not and which he knew he had not to wit a perfect sinless obedience Rom. 7 24. 1. Tim. 1 13 15. He confessed he had been a blasphemer and the chiefe of sinners and so was far from imagineing that his obedience was perfect sinless This then could not be the Righteousness whereof he speaketh Phil. 3 9. but his imperfect Righteousness being that only which he could call his owne is that only which he desired not to be found in in the day of his appearing before his judge in order to his justification 15. If Paul had disputed only against perfect obedience had yeelded justification by imperfect obedience What ground was there for that objection Rom. 6 1. Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound seing justification by imperfect obedience doth of it self engadge to all endeavoure after obedience against the allowance of sin 16. And the Apostles answere to this objection may fournish us with another Argument against this for if Paul had allowed of or pleaded for justification by our imperfect works he had used this aâ— least as one argument to perswade unto an absteaning from sin by saying there is no justification but by endeavouring after obedience But we hear of no such think in all the Apostles Arguments whereby he presseth unto holiness obedience whether there or elsewhere 17. We are not justified by works done after Faith Regeneration as was proved before Therefore we are not justified by imperfect works for works after faith are imperfect againe they cannot but be so as presupposing sin guilt going before There is yet another Evasion wherewith some satisfie themselves for they say that when Paul saith we are not justified by the works of the Law by these works he meaneth only outward works of the Law performed without an inward Principle of Grace of faith or fear or Love of God But we need not insist in the discovery of the vanity of this Evasion having before at large proved that the works whereof Paul speaketh are not works done before Faith Regeneration For all these works that are done before Faith Regeneration are done without any inward Principle of Grace are only outward works such as Heathens may performe a few reasons will serve heâ—e as 1. When Paul denieth justification to be by the Law or by the works thereof he must mean such works as are enjoined commanded by the Law But the Law commandeth other works than those outward works for it condemneth all works that flow not from a principle of grace because the Law is holy spiritual the first chiefe command thereof is that we Love the Lord our God with all our heart with all our soul with all our strength c. Rom. 7 12 14. Mat. 22 37. Mark 12 30. Luk. 10 27. Deut 13 3. 30 6. If then Paul exclude only such works as flow not from a principle of grace he shall not exclude the works of the Law but works prohibited by the Law his meaning should be we are not justified by works which the Law commandeth not but we are justified by works which the Law commandeth which is contradictory to the whole scope designe of the Apostle 2. The Apostle doth manifestly exclude the works of Abraham Rom. 4 1 2. But the works of Abraham were other than such servile works or such outward works performed from no principle of grace or Love to God Therefore such cannot be here understood 3. Outward works done without any principle of grace could with no face or shew of a pretence lay a ground or be any occasion of boasting or of glorying because they were no other but manifest sins being prohibited condemned by the Law not commanded or approven But the Apostle excludeth such works as could do this Therefore he excludeth good works which were done in conformitie to the Law not such outward lifeless works only as were meer servile works no better 4. Such lifeless servile outward works could give no shew of a ground of making the reward of debt But Paul excludeth such works as would make the reward of debt Rom. 4 4. 5. If Paul had meaned here only such outward servile works which are not conforme to the Law what occasion had there been for Paul's proposeing of that objection Rom. 3 31. Do we then make void the Law through Faith for to lay aside these works which are not conforme to the Law giveth no probable ground of supposal that thereby the Law is made void 6. Israel could not have been said to have followed after the Law of Righteousness by doing of works meerly ourward lifeless And yet this is said of them it is also said that by all their following of the Law of Righteousness they could not be justified Rom. 9 31 32. 7. Meer performance of outward servile works cannot be called a Righteousness But the jewes went about to establish their own Righteousness therefore missed justification Rom. 10 4. 8. There was never any life had by these outward servile works alone But by the works which Paul excludeth there was life to be had if they had been perfect The man which doth those things shall live by them Rom. 2 13. 10 5. Levit. 18 5. Gal. 3 12. 9. These outward servile works are not good works but even good works are here excluded Ephes. 2 9 10. 10. Paul did not meane such works only when he excluded his own Righteousness Phil. 3 9. Nor can such works be called works of Righteousness which yet are expresly excluded in this matter Tit. 3 5. CHAP. VI. By works which Paul excludeth is not meant the Merite of Works THere is one other Evasion thought upon to shift by all the Apostles argueings yet to maintaine the Interest of Works as the Cause ground of justification before God to wit That Paul only disputs against a groundless conceite of merite in works not against the works themselves but against a Pharisaical sense of merite worth in their works whereby they conceived conceited that thereby they could satisfie for their sins buy purchase to themselves Justification Salvation But against this Evasion we have these things to say 1. By merite here must either be understood that which is called meritum ex condigno that is that merite
expresly said to be the free gift of God 18. Then all that Paul meaned when he desired to be found of his judge not having his own Righteousness which is of the Law was that he desired not to be found puft up with a pharisaical conceite of the perfection meritoriousness of his works as meriteing his justification life ex condigno by their intrinsick value worth But no such thing appeareth Phil. 3. 9. where he utterly renunceth his own Righteousness which is of the Law that is a Righteousness consisting in his obedience conformity to the Law for in opposition to this he desireth to be found in that Righteousness which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by faith this is some other thing than his own works performed without that pharisaical opinion 19. We are saved by grace through faith not of works lest any man should boast Ephes. 2 8 9. consequently not of any works seing all works give ground of boasting And he meaneth such works unto which we are created in Christ Jesus as his workmanship and which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them vers 10. Now these works are certainly works done without any vaine conceite of merite and yet we see that by these works we are not brought into a state of Salvation 20. The Apostle excludeth works of Righteousness which we have done as opposed to Mercy grace Tit. 3 5 7. Now grace standeth in opposition to all works even to works performed without this conceite of merite as we see Rom. 11 6. else we must say that the Apostle there granteth Election to be for foreseen works performed without a conceite of merite and nothing must be called works but what is done with a Pharisaical conceite of merite intrinsick worth in them which is absurd CHAP. VII James 2 14. c. cleared Vindicated ALI who have been of old and are this day Adversaries to the way of justification before God which the Orthodox owne from the Scriptures have thought to shelter themselves under the wings of of some expressions of the Apostle Iames have therefore laboured so to explaine streatch forth the same expressions as they with their corrupt Notions about justification may seem at least to have some countenance therefrom yea and warrandise to hold fast the same And for this cause they have laboured so much and do still laboure so to expound the words of Paul as that they may carry no seeming difference unto the words of Iames for it is received as a known truth and it is willingly granted that there is no real Contradiction betwixt the two Apostles but what ever apparent or seeming disagreement there be betwixt their words yet all that difficulty is removable their words how contradictory soever they seem to be are yet capable of such an interpretation as shall manifest their harmonious agreement in the truth so that Iames saying Ch. 2 24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified not by faith only dot not contradict the Apostle Paul who saith concludeth that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law Rom. 3 28. But a question is here made whether we should interpret Iames's words by Paul's or Paul's by Iames's Our Adversaries are much for this later to wit that we must interpret Paul's words by the words of Iames because as they alledge Paul is obscure in his doctrine many were beginning to misinterpret pervert the same that therefore Iames was necessitate to clear up that doctrine of justification so as Paul's words might be better understood But how unreasonable this is the leamed D. Owen hath lately manifested his grounds are indeed irrefragable for 1 It is a received way of interpreting Scriptures that when two places seem to be repugnant unto other that place which treateth of the matter directly designedly expresly largely is to regulate our interpretation of the other place where the matter is only touched obiter on the bye and upon some other occasion and in order to some other ends And that therefore accordingly we must interpret Iames by Paul and not Paul by Iames seing it is undenible that Paul wrote of this Subject of Justification directly on purpose to cleare up the same and that with all expresness fulness on severall occasions disputing the same in a clear formal manner with all sorts of Arguments Artificial Inartificial and answereth objections that might be moved against the same at large and with a special accuracie But on the other hand it is as certaine that Iames hath not this for his scope to open up the Nature of Justification but only toucheth there-upon in order to the other end which he was prosecuting 2 There is no ground to suppose that it was the designe of Iames to explaine the meaning of Paul no footstep of any such purpose appeareth For then his maine business should be to explaine clear up the doctrine of justification which neither is apparent from this part of the Epistle nor from any part of it at all his designe being quite another thing as is obvious 3 Nor was there any necessitie for Iames to Vindicate the doctrine of Paul from such corrupt inferences as Adversaries suppose were made therefrom for as to any such as might be made to wit as if he had given any countenance unto such as were willing to lay aside good works he himself did fully sufficiently Vindicate his owne doctrine by showing on all occasions the necessity of good works and particularly when he is speaking of Justification not only in his Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians where he largly professedly treateth of that matter but even when he is but mentioning the same on other occasions as we see Ephes. 2 8 9 10. Phil. 3 9 10 11 c. Tit. 3 5 6 7 8. So that to imagine that Iames asserteth another interest of works in our justification than Paul doth and that to explaine Paul's meaning is not to reconcile these Apostles but to set them at further varience enmity And it cannot comport with sobriety to think or say that Iames to cleare the Apostle Paul's doctrine and to vindicate it from objections should speak to the same objections which Paul himself had spoken to fully removed and that Iames should give such answers unto these objections as Paul would not give but rather rejected And yet this must be said by our Adversaries here It will be of great use to us here to understand aright what is the plaine scope drift of the Apostle Iames for as for the designe scope of Paul in his discourses of justification it is so obviously manifest unto all that read the same that no doubt can be made thereof to wit To cleare up fully plainely the Nature Causes of this great privilege of
this though it be the sure way to this seing all who are justified shall be thus saved Thus we see that according to Mr. Baxter the meaning of Iames is the same with Paul's when he saith Heb. 12 14. Follow peace with all men holinoss without which no man shall see the Lord. And then Iames speaketh nothing of that justification whereof Paul treatch this is what we say whence it is manifest that there is no appearance of contradiction betwixt the two holy writers But that we may come to some further clearness in this matter we must see whether Paul Iames mean speak of one the same Faith for if it be found that they speak of diverse Faiths all appearance of Contradiction is removed Now that the Apostle Paul meaneth of a true lively saving Faith which is a saving fruite of the Spirit of God the special Gift of God is easily granted on all hands All the question is of that faith which Iames speaketh of Papist's say that it is true justifying that Iames speaketh of for justifying Faith with them is nothing but a real assent unto the Catholick Doctrine or to divine Revelation And indeed if Justifying Faith be nothing else it can not be well denyed that Iames meaneth here a justifying faith But the folly of this ground is obvious to all that understand the Gospel and we need not here insist in confuting the same That which Iames here saith of this Faith is enough to demonstrate of what Nature it is and the Epithets he giveth it do sufficiently manifest that it is not Faith of the Right stamp nor that true lively Faith by which Paul saith that we are justified and the discovery of this will be enough to our purpose and every verse of his discourse hereanent will help us herein for 1 vers 14. it is a profitless Faith which cannot be said of justifying Faith as the whole Scripture cleareth 2 Ibid. it is a Faith that hath no ground or reality but a mans saying nor no other evidenee or proof What doth it profite my Brethren though a man say he hath Faith There is no other proof adducable but his say so which cannot be justifying Faith 3 Ibidâ—can Faith save him so that it is a Faith that hath no sure connexion with nor tendency to Salvation which cannot be supposed of the true lively justifying Faith as is known 4 vers 15 16. It is no more true Faith than that is true charity which saith to the naked destitute brother depart in peace be thou warmed filled notwithstanding giveth not those things which are needful to the body 5 vers 17. It is expresly called a dead Faith But the precious Faith of God's elect is a lively Faith 6 ibid. It is a Faith without works having no connexion therewith nor being any ground thereunto but the true Faith that justifieth worketh by Love is a living principle and floweth from the infusion of life 7 So vers 18. It is a Faith uncapable of any true evidence or demonstration as to its being from works of holiness and so is not accompanied with any real change of soul But it is not thus with true saving Faith 8 vers 19. It is such a Faith as devils may have But devils are not capable of justifying Faith 9 vers 20. It is the Faith that a Vaine man never humbled in the sense of his own lost Condition nor driven out of himself to seek reliese elsewhere in the free mercy grace of God through Jesus Christ may have But that is not the Faith of the humbled hear broken man that 's sleeing to Christ for refuge 10 vers 21 22 23. It is not such a Faith as Abraham had that made him willing to offer up his son Isaac when commanded so wrought with was evidenced demonstrated by works 11 vers 25. Nor is it like the Faith of Rahab which prompted her to receive the Messengers and send them out another way 12 vers 26. It is such a Faith that is no better than a carcase without breath which is no essential part of a living man But the Faith that justifieth is a far other thing By these particulars it is manifest that this Faith whereof James speaketh so much and which he opposeth unto works denieth justification salvation unto is not the precious faith that Paul speaketh of We have seen that Paul James speak not of one the same faith we shall now enquire whether they speak of One the same Justification And if it be found that therein they differ all ground of imaginable difference will be further removed What that justification is whereof Paul speaketh is manifest needeth not here be declared for it is plaine that he treateth of that justification whereby a poor sinner convinced of his sin misery in lying under guilt under the Curse of God because of sin is absolved before God from the sentence of the Law accepted of Him and brought into an estate of Favour reconciliation having a right unto Salvation through Faith in Jesus Christ. Upon the other hand it is as obvious cleare that James is not treating of this justification whereby a change of state is made in the man But of a justification of a far other nature even such a justification whereby the Mans Faith the reality of his Christianity his justification before God is evidenced or may be evidenced to himself or to others So that whether we take justification here as mentioned by James for the evidence demonstration of justification or for a justification of the truth of the Mans Faith Christianity it cometh all to one for where true faith true Christianity is there is justification and there only so that what demonstrats the one will demonstrat the other and a justification or manifestation of the one will be a justification of the other Nor is this sense of the word justifie or justification alien from the Scriptures as we see Psal. 51 4. Rom. 3 4. for God can not other wayes be justified but by being declared avowed proclamed to be Righteous So Ier. 3 11. Ezek. 16 51 52. Mat. 11 19. Luk. 7 35 29. 1. Tim. 3 16. Now that this is the justification whereof Iames speaketh may be furder cleared by these particulars 1 The scope that Iames here levelleth at being not to clear up the way manner how or the causes by which this change of Relation State is wrought brought about but to discover the groundlesness of the vaine pretenses of such as supposed they were justified in a sure way to be saved who had no more for their ground but a loose verbal outward profession of the preached truth without any real fruit of godliness So that this Enquirie is what can truely evidence a person to be justified indeed before God And he sheweth that an empty fruitless profession
will not do it but works of Faith or Faith proving it self lively by works 2 The very Instance of Abraham which he adduceth cleareth this for he saith vers 21. Was not Abraham our Father justified by works when he had offered his Son upon the altar Now twentie five yeers or as some compute Thirtie yeers or thereby before this time the Scriptures say that Abraham beleeved God it was reckoned to him unto Righteousness Gen. 15. hence Paul proveth Rom. 4. that he was justified by Faith Therefore if now he was justified when he offered his Son he must have been twice justified that in the same sense with the same kind of justification which can not be said Nor will it avail to say That Gen. 15. he was justified by the first justification which was by Faith of which Paul speaketh Rom. 4. But Gen. 22. he was justified with the second justification which is by works of this Iames speaketh for this distinction of justification into First Second is but a meer device of the Papist's having no ground in nor countenance from the Scriptures and beside it would follow that a meer historical dead Faith is sufficient unto the first justification and that Paul understandeth such a faith only when he said Rom. 4. that Abraham beleeved God it was counted to him unto Righteousness the contrary whereof is manifest Nor will it serve here to say that Paul speaketh of justification as begun but Iames speaketh of justification as continued for then it would follow that justification at first or as begun is by a dead faith and by such a kind of faith as devils may have consequently that of such a faith as this Paul speaketh because of such a faith Iames speaketh as we have seen But this cannot be said for it was a true lively faith that Abraham had when he beleeved the promise of the Messiah a dead faith is not the faith that justifieth first or last Yea because Iames maketh an opposition betwixt faith works in reference to justification in the sense wherein he speaketh of it it will follow that faith should not be requisite unto the Continuance of justification 3 Iames said vers 20. that Faith without works was dead and to confirme this he addeth vers 21. was not Abraham our Father justified by works c. As if he had said The faith by which Abraham was brought into an estate of justification life was a lively faith having works of obedience attending it and his obedience declared that his faith was lively and that he was truely justified by faith Ergo a faith that is lifeless and wholly without works of obedience is but dead can give no ground to conclude one justified in the way to life So that what mention he maketh of justification by works is but to prove the reality of lively faith by works true justification by faith is evidenced demonstrated not by a bare idle vaine fruitless profession 4 When Abraham was justified by his works the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeved God it was imputed unto him for Righteousness as is manifest from vers 22 23. Now by this mentioned of Abraham in the Scripture Gen. 15 6. Paul proveth Rom. 4. that he was justified by faith But if Iames were here speaking of the way of our becoming justified before God as Paul doth there could be no connexion here yea the proof should contradict the thing to be proved for to say that Abraham was justified by faith will not prove that he was justified by works nor could his being justified by works be a fulfilling a clearing confirming of that truth that faith he was justified by faith for faith works in the matter of justification are inconsistent perfectly opposite as Paul teacheth us as here Iames also teacheth us But taking justification here for its declaration manifestation it can be by works and a declaration of justification by works can be is a very signal confirmation clearing of that Testimony which saith that Abraham was justified by faith 5 By that work of offering up his son at a the command of God Abraham declared that he was no hypocrite but a true beleever and thus was he justified as Mr. Baxter will have it as we heard lately from any such accusation But a Justification from this accusation is but a justification of the truth sinceritie of faith so a confirmation evidence of justification or justification as evidenced declared and not justification as produced by its causes 6 When Iames saith vers 23. That the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeved God it was imputed to him unto Righteousness when he was justified by offering up his son vers 21. this fulfilling of the Scripture-testimony was either because at that time when he offered up his Son Righteousness was imputed unto him he was justified or because it was then manifest to be a truth that he was justified indeed But the former can not be said because Righteousness was imputed unto him and he was justified long before this Therefore it can be only understood as to its manifestation 7 This is also clear from what the Lord spoke at that time Gen. 22 12. Now I know that thou fearest God seing thou hast not witheld thy Son thine only Son from me No word here of imputing Righteousness unto him or of his being brought into a justified state but only God's solemne declaration that he was a true fearer of God so one that had true faith was really justified 8 Vers. 22. he saith Seest thou how faith wrought with his works by works was faith made perfect But how could this follow upon what he had said vers 21 Justification by works if justification be taken absolutely here not for its declaration manifestation will not prove faith's working with works But if justification be here taken for justification declared manifested the sense is plaine for such works as do evidence declare that a person is justified will manifestly prove that faith is working with these works because justification presupposeth alwayes a true lively faith that will work with works of obedience 9 Far less could it follow from justification taken absolutly by works that faith was made perfect by works but from such a work as will evidence a man to be justified it is manifest to every one that that work is a clear evidence of a true lively faith by it faith is perfected that is declared evidenced demonstrated to be faith indeed as the word perfected is used 2. Cor. 12 9. for my strength is made perfect in weakness 10 That other Inference vers 24. ye see then how that by works a man is justified not by Faith only will not follow from what went before if justification be here taken absolutely for the command so Abraham
must he said that by a work done long afterward men may see that the worker was justified But that should not sutte James's scope seing by this meanes they might think to delay for a long time their good works yet suppose themselves presently justified Ans. All this is but vaine language for it is all one to the scope of Iames whether this come to the actual knowledge of few or of many who they were to whose knowledge it came He is only shewing that such as had but a dead faith that brought forth no works of obedience when called for had no evidence or clear ground to assert their own justification seing Abraham's justification was thus declared by his signal obedience to all that came or ever should come to the knowledge of that act of obedience of his to the end of the world Yea had it been unknown to any yet hereby he had a sure proof to ascertaine his own heart conscience of his justification But say the Arminians Good works cannot be such a proof demonstration because it cannot be known to others whether these good works proceed from faith or not Ans. Nor is any infallible judgment here necessary or requisite nor doth the scope of Iames require any such thing who is only shewing that such as wrought not works of obedience when called for could not conclude themselves justified in a saife estate notwithstanding of all their faire profession Notwithstanding we cannot judge infallibly of principles motives ends of the good works of others yet by what may be seen of these God may be glorified Mat. 5 16. 1. Pet. 2 12. Thus we have seen that neither is that faith whereof Paul speaketh when he saith We are justified by faith without the deeds of the Law whereof Iames speaketh when he saith Ye see then how a man is justified by works not by faith only is not one the same Nor is it the same justification or justification in the same sense consideration that both the Apostles speak of And therefore how ever as to their words they seem to speak contrary to other Yet in their true sense meaning there is nothing but a sweet harmony agreement But now as to works whereof both make mentione the question remaineth whether they be one the same The forenamed Socinian Author saith that both do not speak of the same works and that Paul excludeth from justification only legal works not Evangelical And consequently that Iames must speak of Evangelical works only But sure we are Iames cannot be supposed to speak of Evangelical works in their sense seing they cannot say that Abraham's offering up Isaac or Rahab her receiving sending away the spies were Evangelical works James speaketh of works commanded by the Moral Law which he mentioneth both in general in its particular commands Iam. 2 9 10 11. And all the duties which he presseth them unto the sins which he disswadeth them from relate unto the Moral Law And what these works are whereof Paul speaketh we have seen before Others think that Iames by Works here meaneth a working faith so that his meaning when he saith that by works a man is justified is that by a working faith such as Abraham had a man is justified But though it be a truth that justifying faith is a working lively faith And that we are justified only by such a faith as is lively prompteth to obedience in every duty called for though this truth will follow by consequent from what the Apostle Iames here saith Yet I judge that both Paul Iames understand the same thing by works even duties of obedience performed to the Law of God that by Works here in Iames is not meant a working faith this not being the scope designe of Iames to clear up justification in its Causes or to shew by what meanes it is brought about but only to shew what way it is or may be evidenced proved demonstrated to ourselves or others so as we may not be deceived thereanent And real works of obedience as they evidence a true lively faith so they prove the reality of justification And the Apostles intention being to shew the vanity of that pretence whereby many deceived themselves thinking that their profession of the truth of the Gospel was enough to secure their Salvation to prove them to be in a justified saife state though they indulged themselves a liberty to walk loosly according to the flesh this acception of the word works in a proper sense is most contributive unto that designe no other acception how consonant so ever unto the Analogy of Faith doth so directly clearly contribute assistence thereunto Therefore he opposeth faith works denieth that to faith which he ascribed unto works though by consequence he put hereby a difference betwixt a dead faith a working faith Yet his principale Thesis vers 14. is that by works not by a bare profession of the truth we come to Salvation And the enquirie prosecuted is whether we have that faith that will indeed prove saving this can only be evidenced by works as his whole following discourse evinceth especially when he saith vers 18. shew me thy faith without thy works I will shew my faith by my works And vers 20. when he saith faith without works is dead vers 26. that it is as dead as a body is without breath or Spirit And this he fully confirmeth by the following instances of Abraham Rahab From what is said it is apparent how little ground there is to think that there is any real appearance of contradiction betwixt Paul James how needless it is in order to a reconciliation to say with Papists that Paul speaketh of a first justification Iames of a second or with others that Paul speaketh of justification as begun Iames of justification as continued or with Socinians that Paul denieth justification by the works of the Law James affirmeth justification by the works of the Gospel CHAP. VIII No countenance given to Justification by Works from Jam. 2 14. c. BEcause all who ascribe our justification in one sense or other all are not agreed in one the same sense unto our works seek countenance unto the same from these words of James Chapt. 2 14 forward notwithstanding that what was said concerning this passage in the fore going Chapter might be sufficient to discover the groundlesness of any such pretence where it was showen that the whole face of this place looked towards another airth and had not the least aspect unto any such conclusion Yet for a fuller Vindication of this place from this too ordinarie abuse perversion we shall examine every part thereof see what ground there is for any to alleige the same for confirmation of their particular opinions The Papists generally say that this place speaketh
of the Second Justification But their opinion of a first second justification is vaine having no ground in the word and the whole of their fabrick is sufficiently demolished by the Reformed writting against them so that we need not insist thereupon Others there are who suppose that James is here shewing how justification is continued therefore say though faith alone be the Condition of Justification as begun Yet unto the continuance thereof works are required as the Condition But all that speak thus think that Iames pointeth forth the Condition of Justification as continued must say that those persons who had this faith whereof James speaketh were really justified that James doth presuppose them to be justified speaketh to them of them as such But then it must be granted that the Popish faith consisting in a meer assent unto the truth revealed is justifying faith and that that faith which is no more true saving faith than that is true Christian Charity which saith to a brother or sister that is naked destitute of daily food depart in peace and giveth not those things which are needful to the body is sufficient to bring one into a justified state and that a dead faith a faith of the same nature kinde with the faith of devils a faith which a vaine man puft up with a vaine conceite a fleshly mind may have a faith that cannot will not worke with works is a justifying faith which if true it would follow that all men who beleeve that God is Devils also who beleeve this should be justified But none who understand the Gospel can think or speak thus And therefore this place carrieth no shew of proof that works are the Condition of Justification as continued Nor can this place give any countenance to such as say that Faith Works together are the Condition of Justification making no difference betwixt justification as begun as continued For 1 James'â— scope as we manifested above is not to cleare up explaine the way how justification is brought about or to shew what are the Causes or Conditions thereof but to discover the vanity of that ground whereupon some professours who indulged their Lusts deceived themselves supposed that they were in a state of justification salvation notwithstanding they neglected all duties of holiness 2 James opposeth a faith here unto works a faith which he called unprofitable dead c. doth not ascribe justification hereunto as to a Condition in whole or in part But such as speak thus include faith works as making up one full compleat Condition 3 The Instances which James here adduceth should not then serve his designe if his purpose was to prove faith works to be the Condition of Justification for Abraham was long justified before that particular act of obedience in offering up his son Isaac was called for And so was Rabâ—â— justified before she sent away the spies 4 This work by which Abraham is said to have been justified was a work that seemed contrary unto the Moral Law And therefore if this be urged as a ground of justification by works it will rather prove justification by other works then by works commanded in the Moral Law of God 5 The works mentioned in both the Instances are outward external works obvious to the eyes eares of others And hence it may as well be proved that only external works are required unto justification and no other And indeed if it had been Iames's designe to prove justification by works he had named other works then meerly external that he might have prevented a mistake But more fully to discover the vanity of this supposition let us see what can be alleiged from the several parts of this passage for justification by works from vers 14. it is said Faith alone cannot save but is unprofitable but yet faith works is profitable will save Ans. This maketh nothing for justification by works because it is denied that whatever is requisite before Salvation is requisite also before justification for if so no man could be said to be justified as long as he lived But next the faith whereof Iames here speaketh availeth not to Salvation because it is not of the right kinde we say also that this faith availeth not to justification because it is but meer empty profession deceiving puffing up it is but a faith that a man saith he hath From vers 15 16 17. It is said As charitable wishes joined with real acts of Love Alms deeds is profitable no other charitable wishes so Faith with works is available to justification but not without them Ans. These charitable wishes not accompanied with Alms deeds as they are not profitable unto the indigent brother sister so they are far from that Christian charity that is called for in the Gospel as that charity is not true Christian saving charity so neither is the Faith which he proveth to be dead true saving or justifying Faith Nor doth the Apostle say that faith with works is available unto justification but that that faith which hath not works is dead not available to prove evidence that the man that hath it is in a saife in a justified state But the maine ground of this apprehension is vers 21 22 23 c. for it is objected that it is expresly said that Abraham was justified by works Ans. That it is so said we grant but the difference is about the sense meaning in which it is said so We have shown that the meaning is That by works Abraham was declared proved manifested to be a justified person and one that had a true lively faith for it is added that hereby the Scripture was fulfilled declaring him to have been justified by faith or that he beleeved God it was accounted to him for Righteousness And this is it which others have called justification before men in opposition to justification before God that is a justification declared manifested to the mans own conscience to others not the justification before God in its causes And this Mr. Baxter seemeth to have mistaken in his Aphorismes when he argued against this justification before men as if it had been meerly a justification from Mens Accusation not the true justification before God as evidenced proved to men And when we speak of justification in this sense we do not make the world lawful judges of our Righteousness before God or in reference to the Law of God or say that they are competent or capable judges But we only say that by works of obedience Faith Justification by Faith is evidenced And where as he saith That works are no certaine medium or evidence whereby the world can know us to be Righteous for there is no outward work which an hypocrite may not performe inward works they cannot discerne nor yet
that Iames standeth for that he accounteth undeniable by any thing but prejudice Ignorance siding peevishness So that it must be unquestionable that Iames speaketh of all those particulars that he speaketh of justification by works in no other sense the contrary whereof we have seen already Yet let us see what these particular respects are wherein as he saith works are not excluded from being Conditions of our justification or the matter of it 1. Saith he That faith itself which is our act an act of obedience to God is the fiducial accepting beleefe in God the Father Son Holy Ghost for the benefites of the Covenant is the Condition of our first Cevenant-Right to these benefites Ans. To speak of Saving Faith in its full latitude or of that faith whereby the Covenant is fiâ—st made up as such is not to the present purpose but of faith only or of its acting in order to justification and as to this himself lately told us that Paul by the word Faith doth especially direct our thoughts to Christ beleeved in so that faith in this matter is not considered as our work or as an act of obedience in us as our personal Righteousness but as the Mean Hand or Instrument laying hold on Christ his Righteousness And if this be the meaning of Iames when he saith we are justified by works that we are justified by faith we shall not contend as to the thing though we conceive Iames handleth another purpose as is said 2. Saith he That this faith is not actual obedience to Christ as Christ at first but only to God as God But it is the souls subjection to Christ as Christ which is our Covenant-consent to our future obedience virtually though not actually containeth our future obedience in it Ans. This upon the matter is but the same with the former needeth no furder answere as to our present question concerning the meaning of Iames when he saith we are justified by works for if this faith be not actual obedience Iames doth not mean actual obedience by the word works but only that Faith which is a consent to future obedience But what the Faith is whereby we are justified what is its peculiar acting in order to justification we have shown elsewhere And to distinguish betwixt obedience to Christ as Christ and to God as God is to be unnecessarily critical by Mr. Baxeer we see that all the after obedience of beleevers is obedience to God as God though their first Faith be said to be a fiducial accepting beleefe in God the Father Son Holy Ghost and this be said virtually to containe after obedience which therefore must be obedience to God Father Son Holy Ghost And their first Faith is no obedience to Christ as Christ though Christ as Christ call invite yea command sinners to come unto him beleeve in him 3. He saith That there is somewhat of Love Consent or willingness of Desire of Hop of Repentance which goeth to make up this Moral work of Faith as it is the Condition even our first Christianity itself Ans. All this somewhat of Love Consent c. which necessarily attendeth Faith for that they make up this moral work of Faith as integral parts thereof I see no ground to assert only shew the true nature genius of that Faith whereby we are justified for it is no where said that we are justified by Love Hop or Repentance as for Consent or willingness desire they are included in Faith But all this yet saith nothing for the Interest of Works as it is pleaded in our justification And if Iames mean no other thing by works he shall give little ground to any to assert justification by works as is done this day by too many 4. He saith That at the making of a Covenant is for the performing of it subjection is for obedience Marriag for conjugal duties so our said first Covenanting-faith is for our future faith Hop Comfort grateful obedience Holiness And these are the secondary parts of the Condition of Salvation And so are the secondary parts of our justifications Condition as continued or not lost consummat For to justifie us is to justifie our Right to Impunity Glory Ans. How different Faith as justifying or in its acting in order to justification is from this Covenant making Subjection Marriage as explained applied to this purpose by Mr. Baxter is elsewhere showne 2 That these graces are required in order to Salvation we grant shall not stand to call them secondary parts of the Condition of Salvation as to its possession But 3 we are here speaking of justification and not of Salvation which two differ as we conceive much more being required to the one in case persons live after their first Faith than to the other 4 We have shown elsewhere that justification as continued hath the same Conditions that justification as begun hath of loseing of justification we read not in the Scriptures nor yet consummat justification these are Mr. Baxters new Notions with which we are not satisfied 5 Our Right to Impunity Glory is had by Christ alone when we are possessed of his Surety-Righteousness through Faith and thus are justified by Faith And how justification is a justification of that Right Mr. Baxter would do well to explaine In the last place he saith That our own performance of the Condition of the free Gift of Impunity Glory by the New Covenant purchased by Christ's Righteousness is the thing to be tried judged in God's judgment And therefore we must so far be then justified from the charge of not performing that Condition of being Infidels unsanctified Impenitent hypocrites Apostats so of having no part in Christ the free gift even by our personal Evangelical Faith Holiness Repentance Sincerity Perseverance Ans. Then it seemeth Iames speaketh only of works in order to final Salvation or our justification at the day of judgment and not in order to our justification here when first brought out of nature into the State of Grace And if so what ground can any hence have to inferre our present justification to be by works unless they think that whatever is required antecedent unto our Final Salvation is required also antecedent to our first justification which I know Mr. Baxter will not say And if this be all that Iames saith why did not Mr. Baxter give this as a ground of reconciling Iames with Paul that Iames speaks of works in order to Final Salvation but Paul excludeth them in reference to justification This would have had greater agreement with what the Orthodox say than to tell us of works being the secondary parts of the Condition of our Justification and that Iames includeth them as such when he saith we are justified by works and not by Faith only CHAP. IX John Forbes his Arguments against the Imputation of Christ's
active obedience examined With a View of Wendelin's reasonings against it John Forbes in his Treatise tending to clear the doctrine of justification Chap. 24. pag. 93. c. cometh to speak of the matter of our Righteousness that is that wherein Christ is made of God Righteousness unto us And tels us that this in one word in the Scripture is said to be his obedience Rom. 5 19. But this obedience he restricteth pag. 94. unto the passive Obedience of Christ only in his death And by this restriction not only excludeth all his obedience to the Law but even all his suffering in his state of humiliation Yea his soul-sufferings also for any thing that appeareth He mentioneth a distinction betwixt those things wherein the Righteousness itself standeth which is imputed to us those things which are requisâ—â—e in Christ to the end that in the other he may be Righteousness unto us And this distinction is good in itself but not rightly applied when he referreth all to this last head which Christ did and suffered except only in his death He granteth pag. 95. that the word obedience is oft times in the Scripture referred to the whole work of Christ's humiliation But we do not take it so largely here as to comprehend even his Incarnation but as comprehending that which belonged to his work of Mediation as our Sponsor in satisfying the Law the Law-giver for what we were owing and were not able to pay Nor can we so restrict it as he doth Let us therefore see his grounds His first ground is this We are not to esteem Christ to be our Righteousness in any thing but in that only wherein God hath purposed according to his purpose ordained according to his ordinance set forth Christ to be our Righteousness Propitiation For the purpose of God he citeth Col. 1 19 20. for the Ordinance 1. Pet. 1 18 19 20. For his setting forth Rom. 3 25. Ans. We are not to esteem Christ to be our Righteousness in any thing but in that only where in the Scriptures hold him forth to be so And in that wherein the Scripture holdeth him forth to be so God purposed ordained set him forth to be so But we must not restrict the whole Seripture to these three or four places cited If the Scriptures elsewhere pointe forth Christ to be our Righteousness in other acts than in his death all this argueing is to no purpose Sure the Scriptures speak of his sufferings in soul of his being made a curse for us of his being obedient even to the death of his being made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law And that what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us See Phil. 2 7 8. Gal. 4 4. Rom. 8 3 4. 2 There is nothing in these texts exclusive of Christ's obedience And it is loose argueing to say Christ's death only is mentioned in three or foure places of Scripture Ergo nothing else is mentioned or to be understood any where else the particle Only is not here to be found neither expresly nor tacitely 3 Beside that in all these passages there is not one word of a Righteousness no expression signifying the matter of imputed Righteousness to consist therein or that Christ was our Righteousness upon the account thereof Nay neither here nor no-where finde we Christ called our Righteousness because he died for us Nor doth the Apostle attribute our Righteousness unto his blood only Rom. 5 9. Ephes. 1 7. Col. 1 14. No such thing appeareth there Neither Pardon nor Justification which only are there spoken of are a Righteousness or our Righteousness but the consequences fruites or effects thereof His argueing That without shedding of bloud there is no remission from Heb. 6. 10. That Christ dieth no more Therefore Christ is appointed our Righteousness peace in nothing but in his death bloud of his crosse is most loose can only conclude against those if there be any such that say By Christ's obedience active only not at all by his death sufferings have we peace remission of sins We willingly grant that without shedding of bloud there is no remission But this saith not that shedding of bloud alone is all our Righteousness We conjoine both his active his passive obedience so we take in his whole Mediatory work which maketh up his compleat Surety-Righteousness and say that this must be imputed to us in order to our Justification Peace Pardon Acceptance He argueth next from Adam as the Type Rom. 5. sayeth that this Type teacheth us foure things 1. That our Righteousness should proceed from one man Iesus Christ. 2. That our Righteousness should consist in the obedience of that one man 3. That our Righteousness should consist in one obedience only of that one man 4. That our Righteousness should consist in the only one obedience of that one man once only performed Ans. 1 If our Righteousness consist in the obedience of Christ that in opposition to Adam's disobedience to the Law then it must not consist in his sufferings alone for sufferings as such are no obedience to the Law And further Christ's obedience is called his Righteousness Rom. 5 18. but suffering dying is no Righteousness 2 There is no ground to assert either of the two last much less both for though Adam's act of disobedience was one and that done at once Yet it will not follow that therein he was a Typ of Christ or that therefore Christ's obedience must be one act only that performed at one time only for Paul hinteth no such comparison and we must not make typical similitudes without warrand And againe one act of disobedience once committed is a violation of the Law enough to constitute one unrighteous but one act of obedience howbeit frequently performed far less once only performed cannot be a compleet Righteousness which requireth conformity to the whole Law in all points that all the dayes of our life Wherefore Christ's obedience being a Righteousness which consisteth in full conformity to the Law must be perfect correspond with the whole Law cannot be one only act once only performed that such an act too is no formal act of obedience to the Law at all His Second ground is taken from the signes seals of the Righteousness which is by faith that is Baptisme the Lord's supper tels us that they signifie represent to us what is the Righteousness it self whereby we are justified seale confirme unto us that that Righteousness is ours Ans. I should rather think that they represent exhibite whole Christ seal to beleevers or the worthy receivers their interest in Him Right to Him
exception upon condition of acceptance as also an offer of Faith Repentance Conversion with all the consequences thereof 7. An Universal will in God to call into this Covenant and unto the Participation of the benefites thereof all every man 8. An Universal execution of this will or promulgation of this Gospel or New Covenant unto all every one by common favours benefites bestowed on all whereby all are called to believe in a merciful pardoning God and all have abundance of Mercies Meanes of Recovery of life for the Lord now governeth the world only on termes of grace 9. Upon this followeth an Universal Command to all men to use certaine duties meanes for their Recovery by Faith Repentance 10. An Universal pardon of the first Sin so far at least that no man shall perish for the meer Original sin of Nature alone unless he adde the rejection of grace 11. Hence followeth an Universal Judgment Sentence on all in the great day only according as they have performed the new Gospel Conditions 12. Some also adde an Universal Subjective Grace whereby all are enabled to performe the conditions of the new Covenant 13. Universal proper Fruits Effects of this death whereby all the outward favours that Heathens enjoy are said to be purchased for them by Christ why not also what Devils enjoy Finally 36. This assertion of Universal Redemption layeth the ground of maketh way to a new frame of the Covenant of Grace quite overturning its Nature and transforming it into a new Covenant of Works making it one the same with that as to kinde only to differ as to the change of Conditions to be performed by man for as in the first Covenant Adam was to obtain right to possession of life promised in by for through and upon the account of his fulfilling the Condition of perfect obedience imposed by the Lord so in the New Covenant man is to obtaine acquire to himself a right to possession of the Life promised in by for through upon the account of his performance of the Condition of Faith new obedience now imposed in the Gospel and all the difference is that in stead of perfect obedience to the Law which was the Condition of the first Covenant now Faith sincere Gospel Obedience is made the Condition And thus we can no less he said to be justified by works of the Law or which we do then Adam should have been said to have been so justified had he stood and this justification giveth as great ground of boasting unto man of making the reward of debt not of grace as justification by the first Covenant would have done for though it be said that Christ hath made satisfaction to justice for the breach of the first Law thereby purchased to all upon Condition Justification Salvation yet this removeth not the difficulty for what is purchased by Christ's death is made Universal Common to all and so can be nothing according to our Adversaries but a putting of all men in statu quo prius in case to run obtaine the prize for themselves as God's absolute free love put Adam in that Condition at first Christ's death though thereby as they say he purchased the New Covenant which with them is the chiefe if not the only effect fruit of his Death Merites can be no more than a very remote ground of Right to Life Salvation unto any person for it is made Universal Common to all so that all have equal share therein advantage thereby man himself by performing the new Conditions only making the difference so that the immediat ground of the Right to life which any have is their own Faith Obedience or performance of the New Covenant-conditions Whereby it is manifest that as to our Particular and Immediat Right to Happiness we are to plead our own works lean to them as our ground whereupon we may stand appear before God's Tribunal and upon the account thereof plead for the crown as our due debt having now run for it performed the Condition agreed upon and so sing praises to our selves in stead of singing praises to our Redeemer Hence the Righteousness wherein we must appear before God is not the Righteousness of Christ but our own for the Righteousness of Christ say they is only imputed in regard of its effects whereof the new Covenant is the All or the Chiefe and so that doth not become the Righteousness of any man nor can be said to be imputed to any man properly which also they assert but his own Faith is only imputed properly which also they plead for as his Righteousness not as a Way Medium or Methode of Gospel-Righteousness especially when Gospel-Obedience is adjoyned The Righteousness of Christ being thereby only accounted to be imputed in that it hath procured that our own Gospel Righteousness Faith new Obedience shall be imputed to us as our Immediat Righteousness the ground of our Right to Glory What accord is betwixt this frame of the Covenant of Grace that way of justification held forth by Socinians Arminians Papists the learned will easily see and how contrary it is to the Covenant of Grace held forth in the Gospel hitherto professed maintained by the orthodox every one acquainted therewith cannot be ignorant it is obvious how opposite this is unto what the Apostle saith Phil. 3 8 9. yea doubtless and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Iesus my Lord for whom I have suffered the loss of all things and do count them but dung that I may win Christ and be found in him not having mine own Righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the Righteousness which is of God by Faith And Tit. 3 5 6 7. Not by works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost which he shed on us abundantly through Iesus Christ our Saviour that being justified by his grace we should be made heâ—rs according to the hope of eternal life And Rom. 3 20 21 22 24. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified but now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifest even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe being justified freely by his grace through the Redemption that is in Iesus Christ. And many other places It is no less clear how hereby the true nature of justifying faith and Gospel Obedience is perverted withall how dangerous this is if put into practice or if men act live accordingly every serious exercised Christian knoweth FINIS The Contents of the Chapters CHAP. I. THE Introduction to the Work and the Text Gal 3.
loath to advise trye whether thereby more of their weight is laid on Christ or on their own faith And on the other hand let any serious exercised Christian be enquired see if their practice agree with this doctrine If it be said That there is no such hazard so long as Faith is not considered here as abstracted from its Object Christ but is considered with a respect thereunto I Ans. 1 We have seen what a poor general respect faith by some of our Adversaries is said to have to Christ whereby it is made nothing but a meer historical faith the Author of the Discourse of the two Covenants p. 31. saith that even that faith that had not the Messias in the promise is imputed for Righteousness 2 As for such as confesse that justifying faith hath a special respect to Christ his Righteousness we would know whether it hath this respect that it peculiarly refugeth the soul there from the storme of wrath and bringeth in thence Christ's Righteousness or cartieth the man out to it that he may lean upon it plead the same as the only ground of his Absolution from the sentence of the Law And if this be granted then it is manifest that the beleever hath no Righteousness but Christ's Surety-righteousness where withall he desireth to appeare before God this is it alone to which he leaneth through which alone he hopeth for Pardon Acceptance without the least reflecting act of soul upon his own Faith 3 But againe if so faith must stand alone as acting thus in a peculiar manner on Christ which no work else is fitted to do therefore Faith Works must not be joyned together nor must Faith be considered in this affaire as comprehending all Obedience in it as we see they say 4 But when Faith is made our Gospel-Righteousness in whole or in part howbeit they say they consider Faith as acting on its object Christ yet it is manifest that it is then considered with relation to its object in a Physical or metaphysical manner as all acts specified from their objects may must be considered but not in a theological sense as required in the Gospel to bring-in the Surety Righteousness of Christ to leane the soul thereupon as its only Righteousness for when it is said to be our whole Gospel Righteousness it is considered as a moral vertâ—e as an act of Obedience in us constituting us Righteous in a formal sense according to the new Law which is hereby fully in all points performed obeyed much more when works are joyned with it doth it with works put on a far other respect than to be the hand receiving the Atonement the gift of Righteousness But saith Mr. Baxter against Mr. Cartwright p. 179. In regaiâ—d of that justification which is from the accusation of the Law of works I say faith is but a condition no otherwise justifieth but because it is made that condition by a New-Law per legem remediantem we must be judged by that Law therefore when the case is whether we have performed the conditions of that new law or not then faith is materially that Righteousness by which we must be justified against all accusations of Non-performance Ans. 1 I doubt if such as never heard a report of Christ shall be judged by the New-Law far lesse by it alone 2 God will not call in question a Beleevers faith nor accuse him of Non-performance Nor will the Gospel or New-Law do it so that the Beleever needs not plead his performance in reference to a Justification at the tribunal of God 3 When Faith is made a Condition by a New-Law thereby become the beleevers Righteousness this Righteousness is the Condition and is therefore a Righteousness because made a condition by that new Law yea elsewhere ibid. pag. 106. this Righteousness is said to be compleet perfect as all Righteousness must be we see what weight is laid upon it And when there is no other Righteousness properly imputed to us for as for that Imputation of Christ's Righteousness which he would yeeld to as the only sound sense it is but what Iesuites Socinians Arminians yeeld to we cannot be satisfied with who seeth not how this matter is framed so as all the weight of the soul must be laid upon this personal Righteousness especially when it is made another Sort of Condition than we can acknowledge it to be as shall be seen afterward and when it is the immediat ground of our Right to Pardon Justification Adoption c. for Christ's purchase was to him general common and no more for one than for another and to all conditionally If it be said What hazard is there so long as Christ's Righteousness is held to be that which satisfieth for the breach of the Covenant of Works is full Satisfaction to justice and which hath purchased the New-Covenant and the new easie termes our Righteousness in performing the new easie termes whereby we come to have Right to life all the benefites purchased by Christ is no way prejudicial unto that nor robbeth not Christ's Satisfaction of the least of the glory due to it I Ans. The hazard still continueth for hereby 〈◊〉 Gospel Righteousness be it Faith alone or Faith Works together is made the immediate sole ground of our Right to the benefites for what Christ did was general common and He by what he did made no particular purchase of any good unto any but procured the New-Covenant and the new grant of life upon the easie termes alike unto all the satisfaction which he made unto the Law giver for the breach of the old Covenant was not as a peculiar Cautioner for any in particular but was equally for all as much for the damned as for the saved So that our Right to the benefites cometh purely wholly from our performance of the New-Termes which Christ is said to have purchased Therefore though our personal Righteousness hath no interest in purchasing the New Covenant or in making satisfaction to Justice unto that end yet Justice being now satisfied equally for all and the New Covenant being purchased alike for all our personal Righteousness is that which must bear the glory of our interest in the benefits the Obligation where in we stand to Christ upon that account is the same that others are under who reap none of the benefites which we reape by our New Righteousness And here it is also manifest that Faith if that should be made the Gospel-Righteousness alone without works in order to the justification of a sinner is not conceived to act upon Christ as the Lord our Righteousness that the soul may put on his Surety-righteousness thereby answere all challenges of the broken Law but is conceived as our Work and as our Performance of the New Conditions and as such is rested upon leaned to Whereby man
hath ground of glorying before men in himself and not in the Lord alone for all have alike ground of glorying upon that account seing what the Lord did was common to all and this new personal Righteousness maketh the difference But it will be said That Christ's Righteousness being acknowledged to be our only legal Righteousness whereby we answere the charge of the Law the asserting of a Gospel-Righteousness whereby we come to have an interest in that legal Righteousness can do no prejudice I Ans. Beside that this maketh two distinct Righteousness as the one a meane to obtean another the one within us a price ex pacto for the other without us and all this in order to Absolution from one charge of the Law brought in against the sinner hereby as to us our personal Righteousness is really made our legal Righteousness because it is made that Righteousness whereupon this man and not the other that wants it is freed from the charge of the Law for according to this way Faith is not imployed to lay hold on Christ's Righteousness that by presenting that Surety-Righteousness unto justice the soul may escape the charge but when the charge of violation of the Law of God is brought in against the sinner his only reliefe is his Gospel-Righteousness which he presenteth whereupon he pleadeth for Pardon Absolution by vertue of the new Covenant which Christ hath purchased for should he alledge the death satisfaction of Christ that should give no reliefe because that was for all alike thereby the New Covenant was purchased where in the Gospel Righteousness whether Faith alone or Faith New Obedience was set down as the Condition and therefore it can stand him in no avail but he must refuge himself from wrath under the wings of his own Gospel-Righteousness for he hath no other and thereupon rest secure be confident of his Absolution from all that the Law could charge against him As for example if the Princes son should by a valuable price given to the Prince procure new Termes and Conditions to be proposed to a company of condemned treatours lying in prison if any one of these were challenged for the old crime threatned with the execution of the sentence past upon that account it would be of no avail to him to say the Princes son hath laid down a valuable price to buy me from death because he knew that he did that for all the rest in purchasing a New Covenant new conditions but the first sure course he would take would be to present his performance of the new conditions say the charge cannot reach me because I have performed the Conditions of the New Covenant procured by the Princes son This I suppose is plaine cleare this in our case would be found to be the only saife course that poor challenged sinners would take if they should act according to the doctrine of our Adversaries to which as I said I should not dar to advise one or other But really the Gospel-way which is opposite to this is plaine saife if we have but so much humility as to complye therewith And a difference may seem small in the debate which yet in practice may prove great of dangerous consequence CHAP. XXVI Christ did not procure by his death the New Covenant or the termes thereof WE heard what the Author of the discourse of the two Covenants what Iohn Goodwine said of this New Covenant As the foundation of their assertion of the imputation of faith properly taken they tell us that the New Covenant wherein this Righteousness is required as the condition thereof is founded wholly in the blood of Christ so that whatever is required of man by way of condition of his acceptation with God becomes accepted to that end upon account of Christ's suffering Mr. Allen p. 16. p. 53. 54. saith Nor doth this that faith accompanied with obedience is imputed for righteousness at all derogate from the obedience sufferings of Christ in reference to the ends for which they serve Because the whole Covenant all the parts termes of it both promises of benefites the Condition on which they are promised are all founded in Christ his undertaking for us and all the benefites of it accrue to us upon our beleeving obeying upon his account for his sake Mr. Baxter also telleth us in his book against D. Tully p. 66. That that which Christ did by his merites was to procure the new Covenant And elsewhere p. 181 that they were the meritorious cause of the forgiving Covenants the like he â—aith elsewhere frequently The Arminians ground the imputation of faith upon the merites obedience of Christ Apol. f. 113. And Arminius himself disp 19. thes 7. that justification is attribute to faith not because it is the very righteousness which may be proposed to God's rigide severe judgment howbeit acceptable to God but because by the judgment of mercy triumphing over judgment it obtaineth pardon of sins is graciously imputed unto righteousness the cause of which is both God righteous merciful Christ by his obedience oblation intercession And in his Epistle ad Hyppolet he tels us that the word imputing signifieth that faith is not the righteousness it self but that it is graciously accounted for righteousness whereby all worth is taken away from faith except that which is by God's gracious estimation that gracious estimation of God is not without Christ but in respect of Christ in Christ for Christ. Christ by his obedience is the impetrating cause or meritorious why God imputeth faith to us unto righteousness And againe in his Artic. perpend de justif What fault is it so say that faith by free gracious acceptation is accounted for righteousness because of Christ's obedience But with this assertion we are not satisfied for these reasons 1. The Arminians who maintaine this so confidently make it the whole of what Christ merited by his death Satisfaction saying that Christ by his death did so satisfie the offended party as he would be favourable to the offender and so say that he acquired to the father a jus a will to enter into a new Covenant with men See their Confess c. 8. § 9. collat cum Apolog. c. 8. § 9. and as the learned Voetius inferreth Select dispp p. 2. p. 233 234. it followeth hence that Christ was not in very deed our Cautioner that he died not in our room stead that he did properly obtaine acquire nothing to us that he did not sustaine the person of the elect while he suffered on the crosse 2. ... that Christ procured no more but a power or liberty unto God of prescribing new Conditions and some go so far as to say that this liberty was such only at the Lord might if he had pleased have appointed the old way of works againe for the condition So said
is his strong opinion that he is confident of it that no justified person shall ever lose his justification that God hath promised to cause them persevere This State then is not to be compared with other States which are losable changeable among men nor can we with such freedome speak of Conditions of not loseing that which is fully secured from all loseing as we may speak of the Conditions of keeping Not-loseing that which may be oft is lost We can not then speak of the State of Justification as we do of Marriage betwixt man woman here there may be are indeed Conditions required of each part in order to the keeping up of the Relation they may be called Conditions of not loseing that Relation or Privilege But as to justification which is not so loseable to speak of Conditions of not loseing it may occasion Apprehensions in the mindes of men of its being losable It were saifer then in my apprehension to enquire how or what way is this State Relation continued or what is required on our part in order thereunto then to enquire what are the Conditions of Not-loseing this State 3. Seing Mr. Baxter granteth Confess p. 109. that no new sin destroyeth their State of Justification nor maketh them cease to be God's reconciled Children seing they are still united unto Christ and have his Spirit and have Faith Repentance at least as to the habit pag. 129. That the habite of Faith Repentance which is ever in them qualifieth them for present Remission of ordinary sins of infirmity at least And it is undeniable that the Lord's Spirit preserveth them from such sins as are inconsistent with a State of Justification or that make an intercision in that State consequently in their Adoption Union with Christ seing I say all this is granted to what purpose is such a question as this here moved and stated anent the Conditions of Not-loseing this state 4. The terme Condition here is taken in the same sense that it was understood in when the question was about the Condition of our first entry into the State of Justification and so they must take it here for a proper legal antecedent Potestative condition for if by condition here were meaned no more than a mere Consequent Evangelick Condition the question only would be What is the Lord's Way Methode Manner how by which he preserveth his own in that State of Justification But according to their acceptation of the word condition the question really cometh to this What that is which beleevers betake themselves unto which they can may should plead with God upon for the continuance of their state that is of their Reconciliation unto Acceptance with God of the Pardon of their sins Right to glory 5. The question is not what is the Condition or what is required on our part for keeping the sense evidence of our justification in our own Consciences many things may be useful herein that yet cannot be called Conditions of the Continuance or Not-loseing of Iustification But the Iustification here spoken of is that which is before God whereby the Beleever is indeed brought into a State of Peace Reconciliation with God hath obtained a Right unto the Inheritance of Life 6. When we speak here of the continuance or Not-loseing of Iustification the Iustification spoken of must be that State or Relation where into the Beleever is already brought for that only can be said to be continued while we are living and that only can be said properly to be losed or Not-losed which a man hath These seeme then to be two distinct questions What is the Condition of our final Absolution in Iudgment what is the Condition of the continuance of our justification here which Mr. Baxter seemeth to confound Confess p. 83. as the Papists do confound their second justification with the last judgment when they are pleading for works being required as the causes thereof 7. Though as we have seen before Iustification importeth more than Remission of sins Yet in this question of the Condition of the Continuance of Justification the matter seemeth to be brought to this issue whether works of Obedience be the Condition of future Remission of sins in the justified And though these may be conceived of as distinct questions yet the clearing of the way of the Remission of future sins may serve much to cleare the present Question for if it befound that the same course is taken for Remission of future sins that was taken at first it will be manifest that justification is continued upon the same termes or in the same manner that it was at first obtained if properly we can speak at all of the Conditions of its Continuance Having premitted these things the Question is Whether faith alone or works alone or faith with works are the condition required on our part for the Continuance or not-loseing of the state of justification And I judge as faith alone was required at first in order to justification so that alone is to be called the Condition of the continuance of justification or that the Condition both of our first installing in that state of justification of the Continuance of the Privilege or of Beleevers continueing in that state is the same grace of Faith Yet these two things would be noted 1. That though the first act of Faith in Christ doth suffice to the entering of a soul into the state of justification Yet we do not meane that that one first solitarie numerical act sufficeth for all time coming albeit it sufficeth for making up of the Relation according to the appointment of God for the same Faith is to continue in its habite Yea in its actings So that we state not the Question so strickly as Mr. Baxter seemeth to do Confess p. 47. when from the Continuance of the habite of Faith from the renewing acts of that Faith required after the first act of Faith he inferreth that much more goeth to the continueing of our justification than doth at first justifie us But our question is about the addition of sincere Obedience which he there mentioneth 2. When we suppose the Continuance of Faith not only as to its habite but as to its renewed actings we do not suppose that the actings Effects or Concomitans of Faith afterward are every way the same with what they were at first so that we may also yeeld to this difference grant that some thing more may be requisite afterward Particularly in order to the Remission of some hainous sin in the acting of Faith or in the Effects or Concomitants thereof at least as to measure or outward significations to wit in Godly sorrow Humiliation Forgiving of others Restitution or the like yet it will still remaine true that justification is continued by Faith not by Works For the proof of what we conceive to be