not more though in another way united to the Head and one to another than Christ and Christians are in this which may be called a Mystical union for Christ and Believers are hereupon called One Christ 1 Cor. 12. 12. As the Body is one and hath many Members even so is Christ That is so is the Lord Christ and his Church When therefore he says That Christ is called a Head and the Church his Body a Husband and the Church his Spouse which two Metaphors signifie the same thing and are both of them Names of Power and Authority It is something of the Truth but not the whole Truth nor nothing else but the Truth Something of truth there is in it Christs Headship denotes Authority But then it 's not the entire Truth Christs Headship denotes more than bare Authority And then there 's something more than the Truth Those two Metaphors do not denote the same thing That of the Husband over the Wife denotes Power mixed and sweetly tempered with Love and Pity But that of the Head over the Members denotes a continual Influx of all saving Grace into his Members I wish therefore he would leave Trifling with his Hackney Fallacy That because Christ is a Head of Authority He is not an Head of Influence For he that can assert that the Union and Relation between Christ and Christians has no Spiritual correspondency with a Natural Union which yet is Explicated by it may when he sees his own time deny That the Union between Christ and Christians has any Analogiâ—…with a Political union though he has Pro hâc vice Explicated the Union by it There is one thing more wherein our Author shows himself a great Divine and a mighty Statesman for the very sound of Political Union is enough to Inspire a Man that is prepared for such Impulses Our Union to Christ says he consists in our Belief of his Revelations Obedience to his Laws and Subjection to his Authority As Obedience to our Prince is the strongest Bond of a Political Union which is Dissolved and Broken by Rebellion and Disobedience But this is neither truly Asserted nor wisely Explained 1. Not truly asserted For our Union to Christ does not consist in that Obedience which we give him as our Lord our Shepheard our Husband but in that Act of Obedience whereby at first we take him for our Lord Shepheard and Husband and give up our selves sincerely to him again to be his Sheep Subjects Spouse 2. Nor wisely Explicated For if Relation to a Prince does formally consist in Obedience and that Union be dissolved by Rebellion then whenever a Rebel shakes hands with Actual subjection he absolves himself from the duty to Obey which would save the horrible Charges of the Popes Bull. Our Author has acquainted the World with a very fine way how to live a Traytor Twenty years and yet never commit but one single sin at first but all the after acts will be Regular For if Rebellion dissolve and break in pieces the Union between Prince and Subject then he ceases any longer to be a Subject and by consequence whatever sins he commits must be called by other Names for it can be no Rebellion When the Relation ceases Duty ceases Obedience is a conserving cause of Union but the Union lies not in it He that does not perform his Duty yet is under an Obligation to perform his Duty the Union continues though many acts unsuitable to the Union are committed But should we be so charitable as to grant him all this he will be weary on 't in a while as little Children that make a heavy and piteous moan for a Gewgaw and when they have it throw it away Thus after all his Rodomontade That this Union is a Political union such as is between Prince and Subjects as if his Book could never have been Licensed if he had talk'd of any thing below Crowns and Diadems and the Roman Empire Yet pag. 162. he tells us That God has laid aside in a great Measure that severe Name of a King and calls himself our Father to signifie that Liberty we enjoy under the Gospel in Opposition to the Bondage and Servitude of the Law of Moses Well whatever opinion he has of Monarchy the severity of it's Name the Bondage and Servitude that it brings Men under I know many who if they might choose had rather come under that severe Name of King as to their Religious concerns than feel the more smooth and Debonair Treatment of some Spiritual Fathers It 's very Tiresome to Travel out of the way for the further we go on the further we have to come back and yet thus has our Author seduced his Reader but now we shall come to a vein of Matter for having reduced all the benefit Believers have from Christ as their Head to Political Government there is but one thing more which if he can cleverly compass the day is his own and this is to strip Christ of that little Power and Authority he had left him To this end we must observe further That though Christ be our Lord and Governour he does not Govern us immediately by Himself for he is Ascended into Heaven where he powerfully Intercedes for his Church and by a Vigilent Providence superintends the affairs of it but he has left the Visible and External conduct and Government of it to Bishops and Pastors who preside in his Name and by his Authority To which I answer 1. That Christs committing the External conduct of his Churches to his own Officers may very well consist with his own Internal and Invisible conduct of his Peoples Souls and their Spiritual concerns 2. Whatever Authority Christ has vested his Officers with he has Devested himself of none he continues sole Head of the Church still All Power is committed to him in Heaven and in Earth And though there are some that would ease him of the Trouble yet I have not heard that he has laid down his Commission nor taken any into joynt Commission with himself 3. Christ has given an Authority in the Churches to all his own Officers but he has not given to any of them his Authority And indeed unless he could Communicate to them his Power as well as his Authority it would signifie little But I hope they know their places better than so they are Servants of Jesus Christ tied up to their Instructions as all Ambassadors are though they come in the Name of their Prince and their Commission runs to teach us to Observe whatsoever Christ has Commanded in the Scripture 4. As to the External Conduct of the Church Christ has left it as much to Princes as to Bishops and more for several Reasons that I know of but one is this That every Supreme Magistrate is next and immediately under Christ Supreme Head and Governour of the Church within his own Dominions Well but what Reason does he favour us with Why Christ doth not immediately Govern us
in Christ be improved for Obedience That his Love to us may so powerfully constrain our hearts that we may wholly live to him that dyed for us and rose again who is also at the right hand of God making Intercession for us To him be Glory Amen CHAP. IV. Sect. 1. Of our Union to Christ and Communion with him OUR Author will not in Courtesie or cannot for Shame deny that the Scripture does mention such a Relation between Christ and Christians as may be express'd by an Union and that these Phrases of Being in Christ and Abiding in Christ can signifie no less Now this Union to Christ being a very suspicious Phrase he is deeply concern'd to mollifie it with some such Healing Explication that it may not prejudice or however not utterly destroy his main design To interpret it according to the sound of words is to blow up himsels with his whole Cause and therefore it is judg'd a safer way to accommodate the Expression if it will be tractable or to force it if it proves obstinate to a Complyance with his own espoused Notions and preconceived Opinions And now we see that the True Reason why he so zealously declaimed against that way of Interpreting Scripture in the last Section was that he might without suspition serve himself of it in this Some do not like his Tottering and Staggering way of wording his Matters It may be express'd by an Union and it can signifie no less than an Union A form of speech invented doubtless to let us know how unable he is to deny and yet how loath he is to confess the plainest Truth I have not forgot that he told us p. 108. That the Scripture describes the Profession of Christianity a sincere Belief and Obedience to the Gospel by Having Christ and Being in Christ but now he is graciously pleased to Mount them a little higher and is gently content that they should signifie no less than an Union with Christ. Four Notable Observations he makes to us in this one Section 1 That those Metaphors which describe the Relation between Christ and Christians do primarily referre to the Christian Church and not to every Individual Christian. I am sorry that it must still be my great unhappiness to dissent from him but seeing all Accommodation is desperate we must bear the shock of his Reasonings as well as we can Christ says he is called a Head but he is the Head of his Church which is his Body as the Husband is the Head of his Wife No particular Christian is the Body of Christ but onely a Member in this Body This indeed would do pretty well but that it wants two small Circumstances Truth and Pertinency which being so inconsiderable we may well spare in any of His Writings And 1. Methinks I want that sorry circumstance of Truth in his Argument Christ is the Head of his Church as the Husband is Head of his Wife but the Headship of the Husband over the Wife will not exactly measure the Headship of Christ over Believers we must call in assistance from another Similitude that of the Head in the Natural Body over the Members Christ is a Head of Influence as well as Authority he communicates Grace to Obey as well as commands Obedience And this is that the Apostle would teach us Eph. 4. 15 16. The head even Christ from whom all the Body fitly joyned together and compact by that which every joynt supplyeth according to the effectual working in the measure of every part maketh increase of the Body to the edifying of it selâ—… in love Here 's an effectual Operation in every part the Growth and Increase of every individual Member by virtue of that Influence which the Head communicates to it And now to make the Husbands headship over the Wife to represent the whole of Christs Headship is craftily to seduce us from the Consideration of that Grace which from Christ we receive to help us in time of need The Holy Ghost has singled out the most per and perspicuous Metaphors that outward things would afford to instruct us in the Nature of that Union and Relation that Believers have to Christ the Priviledges and Advantages which they receive thereby and those Duties which indispensably arise from thence and yet such is the incorrigible and untractable Nature of all outward things such is their shortness poverty and narrowness that they do not yield a Similitude that will adaequately and commensurately express the total of Christs Grace Mercy and Authority or of our mutual Obligations and Duty Much of the Poverty and Beggarliness of the Mosaical Types lay in this those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. 4. 9. that they could not represent Jesus Christ to the life whom yet it was their design in some measure to shadow out And when I have named a shadow I have given a sufficient Reason of my Assertion for though a shadow may describe the general Lineaments of its Body yet it will not paraphrase upon the Complexion To supply this defect it has pleased the Wisdom of God to institute that numerous train of Types that so what could not be express'd by any one might yet in parcels be described by Another Hence is it that one Type represents the Death of Christ as a Sacrifice for Sin as the Goat of the Sin-offering Lev. 16. 15. Another the Intercession of Christ at the right hand of the Father as Aarons appearing in the Most Holy place upon the Feast of Expiation The same Wisdom has it pleased the Spirit of God to exeâ—…cise in describing to us the Union and Relation betwixt Christ and Believers for seeing that no one single Metaphor however borrowed from the nearest and most intimous Relation upon Earth could possibly convey to our understandings all that Mercy Grace and Love which from Christ issues to all that are in Covenant with him nor all that Reverence Love and Duty which from Believers is due to a Redeemer therefore has he chosen out many that so by putting together the Mercy and Duty which is comprehended in each we might spell out the Meaning of what is wrapt up in that Relation wherein we stand to him But 2. It wants Pertinency as well as Truth For what if no particular Christian be the Body of Christ. yet is he a Member of that Body and Christ as Head of that Body is related in particular to him without the Intervention of the Body A Body is nothing else but the result of all the Integral parts put together in their due Scite and proper Order and the Church is nothing else but the aggregate of many Christians united under their proper Pastor And as the Head in the Natural Body is immediately related to all the parts so is Christ immediately related to every true Christian. If then he will argue thus No particular Christian is the Body therefore Christ is primarily related to the Body any one with as much honesty may inferre
Every particular Christian is a Member of Christ therefore Christ is primarily related to every particular Christian And thus the Conclusion will be as far to seek as ever Whether this Metaphor of a Head does primarily referre to the whole Body or particular Members But let us go on Christ is called a Husband says he but then the whole Church not every particular Christian is his Spouse as St. Paul tells the Church of Corinth 2 Cor. 11. 2. I have espoused you to one Husband that I may present you a chaste Virgin to Christ. To which renowned Argument I have many things to oppose 1. If the Church of Corinth was the Spouse of Christ then the Church of Ephesus that of Coloss that at Philippi and to be sure the Church of Rome will put in their claims with equal right to that Title and then what becomes of what he asserts p. 14â—… Christ is a great Enemy to Poligamy and has but one Spouse Is it not great pity a Conceit so ingenious should have its Neck broken at the first Encounter And 2. If Christ hath but one Spouse and yet every particular Church be his Spouse it s but crumbling the Metaphor into more minute particles and then he may be a Husband to every individual Believer 3. The Text proves not that Christ has but one Spouse but that the Church hath but one Husband I have espoused you to one Husband 4. Though the Metaphor may perhaps more fitly express Christs Relation to particular Churches than particular Believers yet this hinders not but that Christ may be primarily related to particular Believers For the Metaphor does not express the Order of Christs Relation but the Relation it self The word Church is onely a Term of Art which expresses the same Persons collectively who distributively taken are each immediately related to Christ. Again Christ says he is a Shepheard and the Christian Church is his Flock for the Relation between Shepheard and Sheep doth primarily concern the whole Flock This is but one Doctors opinion at most and will hardly mount it up to the Credit of Probability For 1. A Shepheard may be related to one single Sheep and that one is enough to keep alive and maintain the Relation one Sheep will denominate him a Shepheard though there must be more than one to constitute a Flock As there was a first Man related to God as a Creature to his Creator before there was A Church so there was a first Disciple a first Believer or Convert and that one under the Pastoral Charge and care of Christ the great Shepheard ipso facto as a sincere Convert and sound Believer and yet that Individual would not make a Society under Bishops or Pastors 2. A Flock is made up of many Sheep now that which constitutes is at least in order of Nature before the thing constituted The whole is made up of parts and I have been taught to presume that the parts are in order of Nature before the whole A Shepheard does not muster a company of howling Wolves and roaring Lyons and then by that Collection make them a Flock of Sheep but he gathers particular Sheep together unites them into one Fold and thereby they become a Flock The way of Christ is not to amass a Medley of debauched Varlets and Scoundrels and by making them a Church make them Christians but he seeks out for his own Service particular Christians and out of these Materials he forms his Church Again Christ says he is the Rock upon which his Church is built and the Christian Church is a Holy Temple Let him take it â—…or granted if it will do him any service but is this Rock this Foundation this Corner-stone related primarily to the Building or to the particular Stones The Apostle Peter who was a wise Master-builder in Church-work understood the Method much better 1 Pet. 2. 5. To whom coming as to a Living Stone ye also as lively Stones are built up a spiritual House Hence ordinary understandings would conclude that the building did not make the materials but the materials made the building the Spiritual House did not make the Lively Stones but the Lively Stones made the Spiritual House Such Language the Apostle durst use these lively Stones were first united to the living Corner-stone and the product of all was a beautifull Fabrick And thus was Solomon's Temple built the materials were exactly fitted and squared for their respective uses and places and there was nothing to doe but to joyn them together and out of those after seven years Labour there grew up a Holy Temple Had He built of Bricks the Edifice would never have converted them into hewen Stones and had he used onely Sycamores they had never been turned into Cedars by being Sleepers in the wall I must therefore abate him an Ace or two of his general Conclusion All these Metaphors in their first and most proper use referre to the whole Society of Christians In Isa. 9. 6. Christ is called the Everlasting Father which Metaphor if it be a Metaphor does primarily express the Relation of Christ to every adopted child and not the Relation of Christ to Children in gross and in the Lump A Father is as really so to one child as to Twenty he may be a Father to more but not more a Father It will sound harshly in the Ears of any that have not lost them under the Cataracts of Nilus to say That Father does not primarily describe the Relation of Philip v. g. to Alexander Iohn c. but to children in the first place and then at second hand and through a remove or two to Alexander and Iohn Thus is the Everlasting Father primarily related to every childe by virtue of his Adoption and Regeneration and secondarily to them all as brethren related to one another living under the same Discipline and Laws of the Family 2 He observes further to us for our Learning That the Union of particular Christians to Christ is by Means of their Union to the Christian Church Which he as Learnedly proves from 1 Cor. 12. 27. Ye are the Body of Christ and Members in Particular Where the strength of this Argument lies I confess I see not That the Church of Corinth was the Body of Christ That I plainly see That every particular Member of that Church was a Member of Christ I think I see that too But that it was therefore a Member of Christ because it was United to that Body of the Church of Corinth I own my Dulness that I cannot see And I have some scruples that makes me Halt and not so Nimbly go on both Feet into our Authors Opinion For 1. If particular Christians by being United to the Body become the Members of Christ then what Medium of Union have these particular Churches to Unite them to Christ We poor Folks of the Laity have an Expedient found out to Unite us to Christ namely by Uniting us to the Church under the
Difficulties of being in Christs Person and yet at the same time Christs Person being in us of the depending of our Fruitfulness upon that Union with whatever other Incongruities a strong Fancy may impute to it And then 3. If the Person of Christ be intended in the Question then his last and tedious Argument from Iohn 15. 1. which he has managed with so much Industry upon which he has bestowed so much Cost and in which he places so much Confidence concludes something very near to Nothing For the Abstract of his Medium is this that Christians are in the Church which will never conclude that therefore our Union to a particular Church is the Means of our Union to Christ much less that our Union to Christ consists in it From the Scriptures we are posted over to the Ancient Fathers who if we may believe him Interpret all those Metaphors which decypher the Union between Christ and Christians to signifie the Love and Unity of Christians among themselves He that will reproach his own Mother will not much Reverence the Fathers They do indeed argue from the Unity between Christ and Christians to an absolute Necessity of Unity between Christians themselves they are members of one body under one common Head and therefore it presses sore upon them that there be no intestine Broyls among themselves they are Sheep of the same Fold under one Shepheard and it were unnatural for Sheep to devour one another which is the Province of Wolves they are subjects in the same spiritual Kingdom under Christ the Sovereign Monarch of the Church and therefore all heats and animosities all seuds and broyls are alien from that place and Relation they fill up towards Christ and each other So the Fathers so the Scriptures argue Mal. 2. 10. Have we not all one Father hath not one God created us why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother The Process of the Argument is very clear if we be Children of one Father we ought to love our Brethren but to conclude from thence that A Childs Relation to his Father consists in the Love and Unity of the Children among themselves is somewhat more than ridiculous Thus from the Union between Christ and Christians there is an unanswerable Argument drawn for the Unity of Christians amongst themselves but that the Union of Christians with Christ does formally consist in their mutual Agreement and Concord each with other is a piece of Logick for which we are indebted to our Author but thus Chrysostom expounds Eph. 2. 19 20 21. where the Apostle speaks of that spiritual building which is erected on the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Iesus Christ himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being the chief Corner-stone to signifie the Unity of the Church in all Ages that both the Iewish and the Christian Church are united in Christ as the several parts of the building are kept together by the Corner-stone Now though Chrysostom be little beholden to our Author for traducing his honest meaning yet we are all beholden to Chrysostom For then 1. There have not been so many sorts of Churches in the World as he would perswade us but both Iews and Christians constitute one universal catholick Church though differing in the Oeconomy and some variety of Administration both the Jewish and Christian Church are the several parts of one and the same Building And then 2. The Iews we may presume knew something at least of Christ what he was to be to them what he was to doe for them if they and we Jews and Gentiles in all Ages are United in him To the same purpose St. Ambrose Yes I believe it as little to our Authors purpose as St. Chrysostom Duos Populos in se suscepit Christus Salvator fecit unum in Domino sicut Lapis Angularis duas parietes continet in Unitate Domûs firmatas which our Author Englishes thus Christ united two People in himself and made them one in the Lord as the Corner-stone unites two Walls in a building and makes it but one house Now if we cannot agree about the Construing a piece of familiar Latine we shall strangely differ in the Interpretation of its design and tendency And here Ambrose is less beholden to our Author than Chrysostom for that he may not cross our Authors sence he is made to speak Non-sence Christ united two people and made them one That is he made them one and made them one or he united them and united them for what uniting should be but making one I cannot divine But Ambrose his Latine runs thus Duos populos in se suscepit fecit unum in Domino He took two people upon himself and so made them one in the Lord He bore their Iniquities carryed their sins in his body upon the Cross and thereby reconciled them to God and then their reconciliation to one Another would be easie but our Author who is never wanting to his Concerns was not at leisure to take notice of that However says he this is the plain design of the place to prove that Christ hath taken away the enmity which was between Iew and Gentile and hath reconciled them both to God Well I can be content it should be the Plain design but not the Main design not the whole design of the place Some men think themselves wondrous witty in the Contrivance that they have found out some Reconciling work for Christs Death But then it must not be to reconcile God and Sinners but to remove an old grudge between Iew and Gentile which is an Invention of the latter dayes utterly unknown to the Ancient Fathers and the whole Catholick Church that they might not seem to say there 's no Reconciliation by the Blood of Christ I would turn over our Author for satisfaction in this point to the Reason not the Authority of Dr. E. Stillingfl against Crellius p. 558. A Difference being supposed between God and Man on the account of sin no reconciliation can be imagined but what is mutual For did Man only fall out with God and had not God just reason to be displeased with Men for their Apostacy from him If not what made him so severely punish the Old World for their Impieties by a Deluge what made him leave such Monuments of his Anger against the Sins of the World in succeeding Ages c Well then supposing God to be averse from men by reason of their sins shall this displeasure alwayes continue or not If it alwayes continues men must certainly suffer the desert of their sin If it doth not alwayes continue then God may be said to be reconciled in the same sence that an offended party is capable of being reconciled to him who hath provoked him Now there are two wayes whereby a party justly offended may be said to be reconciled to him that hath offended him First when he is not onely willing to admit of Terms of Agreement but doth declare his Acceptance
two words Influence and Sake are like two Rackets that Toss the Ball from one to another to the end of the Game However Rebus sic stantibus under our present Circumstances I would gladly know What that Influence is Why He thinks no man will deny that God was very highly pleased with the perfect Obedience of our Saviours Life Truly I think so too and perhaps it may be the last time that we shall be both of a mind But yet to put it upon thinking is a more cunning way of Tempting our unbelief to appear against it Had it been a truth wherein our Authors affections had been bespoke I doubt not but we should have had better Proof than his thinking or standing to the Courtesie of mens denyal But still still the Difficulty presses us Why God should be ever the more pleased with our Obedience because He was pleased with Christs For if no consideration be had of Christs Obedience in the Justification of a sinner as that which God accepts for our Non-obedience I do not see but God had been as well pleased with our Obedience without Christs Obedience as with it The Obedience of Christ was a Transient thing it 's past and gone long since and how it should come in remembrance before God at this day that for the sake of it we should find savour in his Eyes is without the Doctrine of Imputation very unaccountable Why that is the thing wherein our Author will at length Resolve us We know says he how many Blessings God bestowed upon the Children of Israel for the sake of their Fathers Abraham Isaac and Iacob who were great Examples of Faith and Obedience which made them very dear to God and there is no doubt but God was more pleased with the Obedience of Christ than with the faith of Abraham and therefore we ought not to think that we receive no Benefit by the Righteousness of Christ when Abrahams Posterity was so blessed for his sake I have several humble Propositions to make upon this Discourse 1. We ought not to think that we have no benefit But how shall we do to know what that Benefit is Great or Small Spiritual or Temporal Must we content our selves with thinking Surely we have some benefit if we could but tell what it was It may be we may want that benefit and may have it for asking for his sake and yet still we must not know what it is or it may be some small benefit that cannot be seen without a Microscope such it may be and yet answer all the necessary Import of his words 2. We ought not to think that we have no benefit But have we the benefit of acceptation with God For that was the Question if I have not forgotten as well as our Author So that though we should be so charitably credulous as to take it upon one of our Authors Say-soes and Thinkings that we have some benefit by it yet if it be not the very benefit under Dispute it 's monstrously Impertinent 3. We ought not to think But what if we do think so With what argument will he compel us to alter our Judgments For I see this is his Device when he has no mind to a Truth to lay the Proof of it upon thinking and a well fortified fancy 4. Let us now examine his Similitude God says he bestowed many Blessings upon Israel for the sake of their Fathers But 1. VVere they accepted of God Pardoned Iustified for their Fathers sake If not How will it follow that we are Accepted Pardoned Iustified for the sake of Christs Obedience because they received some common Favours for the sake of Abraham 2. VVould God give them any blessings for their Fathers sake unless they walked in their steps If not then they were not accepted for their Fathers obedience-sake but for their own For why should they need the sake of their Fathers Obedience to procure them Blessings for their Obedience more than their Fathers needed the sake of another to procure them Blessings for their Obedience But if so that God did give them many blessings for their Fathers sakes though they walked not in the steps of their Faith and Exemplary Obedience That is indeed to the purpose but then it will be in danger of proving that God may give us Gospel blessings for Christs sake though we walk not in his steps Indeed we read that when Israel was most unworthy and had provoked God most that God did remember his Covenant made with Abraham Isaac and Iacob and God may have special Favours too for sinners who personally considered are unworthy of the least Mercy which some will call the Imputation of Christs Obedience 3. The true account of those Favours which God bestowed upon Israel for Abrahams saké is this God had made a Promise to Abraham that in his Seed all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed That is That in the Messiah which should come of his Line by Isaac there should be a Blessedness or Happiness provided for the miserable undone VVorld This Promise was afterwards clear'd up to Iudah that the Messiah should be conveyed to the VVorld by his Tribe this being an absolute irrevocable Promise that God would out of that People that Tribe deliver a Saviour to the VVorld It was necessary that God should preserve that Tribe that People out of which the Messiah was to come and as it was necessary for the truth of the Promise that that Tribe should be continued in being so was it necessary for the evidencing of the fulfilling of the Promise that that Tribe should be continued in some considerable state of Visibility in the VVorld that so the Promise might not only be made good in it self but that it might be made out that it was made good to the Conviction of Gain-sayers This was the Reason why when Iudah had sinned and God Corrected them yet still He remembred this Covenant he left his People a Lamp for Davids sake on this account that People escaped utter Extirpation when they were upon the borders of Desolation To this Zachary imputes the giving of the Messiah Luke 1. 72. To perform the Mercy promised to our Fathers and to remember His holy Covenant The Oath which he Sware to our Father Abraham 4. Perhaps this may be some account of it The Covenant which God made with Abraham he made with his Seed also Gen. 17. 7. I will be thy God and the God of thy Seed Abraham therefore and his Seed were but one of the Parties to that Gracious Covenant and therefore God in his Providential Dispensations dealing with them as one Body the Obedience Holiness of Abraham the Head was considered as the Obedience and Holiness of the Body so far at least as to turn away temporal Evils and procure temporal Mercies And if this be so we may consider Christ and Believers as one Mystical Body and God in Covenant with Christ their Head and in him with them
and then our Authors Argument will hold though his Cause break If God for the sake of Abrahams imperfect Obedience yet as he was the Head of the League gave so many temporal Mercie to Israel surely then God for the sake of Christ the Head of all that the Father hath given him will bestow Spiritual and Eternal Mercies for the Head and Members making but one Body the Obedience of the Head is reputed the Obedience of the Members And as the Blessings which God bestows for Christs sake are Transcendently gâ—…eater than those bestowed on Israel for Abrahams sake so is the Obedience which Christ performed upon it's own account and the Dignity of the Person infinitely beyond the imperfect Obedience of Abraham and the Union which Faith makes with Christ is a stricter Union than any Natural Civil Political Union that could possibly be between Abraham and his Posterity Thus I have endeavoured to Vindicate our Authors Argument but I am sure he had rather it should perish than be thus justified But is it not strange our Author should tell us That he knows how many Blessings God bestowed upon the Children of Israel for their Fathers sakes and yet not acquaint us with one single Blessing that God bestows on us for Christs sake For the sake of Christs Personal Obedience I wish I had so much Interest in any Friend of his that had that Interest in him to perswade him to acquaint us freely and open-heartedly what those blessings are and how procured Why just now he comes to it The Righteousness of his Life and the Sacrifice of his Death both serve to the same end to establish and confirm the Gospel-Covenant God was so well pleased with what Christ did and suffered with the obedience of his Life and Death that for his sake he entred into a Covenant of Grace with Mankind Very good what needed all this Circumlocution and Periphrase To beat about and about the Bush Had it not been more Civil to have given us our doom in plain English than to Tantalize us with sugared hopes and expectations of some great matter from Abraham Isaac and Iacob Some would say 1. That this ascribes more Influence to Abrahams Obedience than thus to Christs for God for the sake of Abraham's Active Obedience entred into a Covenant with Israel and chose them to be his peculiar People without the Death of Abraham but the Obedience of Christs Life and Death must both concur to procure this Covenant and yet it is such a one as I suppose God would not refuse upon as small an account as the sake of Abraham 2. Some will say this is not to Answer the Question but perplex it The Question at first was what influence the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Sacrifice of his Death have upon our acceptation with God He Answers They serve to establish the Covenant they confirm to us that God will pardon and save us if we believe and Obey but what if I Obey without such confirmation shall my Obedience be rejected without it be performed upon that Confirmation Ay but God entred into this Covenant of Grace for Christs sake Still I say that 's not an answer but the bandying the Question upon us again a hundred times over Why should his Life and Death have such an influence upon God to make that Covenant Why should they Operate that way What connexion is there between Christs active and passive Obedience and such a Covenant But sure we forget our selves for we are enquiring into the influence of Christs Active Obedience And 1. For Confirming a Covenant let any rational Man satisfie me how The Obedience of a Person perfectly holy pure spotless sinless being accepted of God should prove this promise That therefore God will accept them whos 's best Obedience is imperfect and defective This is so far from confirming it that God will accept me who am a Sinner that it leads to utter dispair of acceptance with him seeing I came so infinitely short of my pattern What hope can a sinner have of acceptance from a consideration that God has accepted Christ who was no sinner If Faith was ready to believe that God would accept him that believes and obeys yet had it seen Christs Faith and Obedience and his acceptance thereon it might have stagger'd him that ever such pitiful things as his Faith and Obedience should find favour with God And if Faith was so strong as to overcome that difficulty as to believe the Promise notwithstanding this staggering Example yet it 's far enough from Truth that a sinner should believe the promise ever the more that his imperfect Service should be accepted and rewarded because Christs entire obedience was so Nay without question it had been a greater confirmation of that promise to have had assurance that God had pardoned some hainous Offender some flagitious wretch who deserved Condemnation than to behold him accepting a Person not obnoxious to Condemnation So says the Apostle 1 Tim. 1. 16. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy that in me first Iesus Christ might shew forth all long-suffering for a pattern to them who hereafter should believe on him to Life everlasting The Pardon of a Blasphemer one injurious a Persecutor is a stronger confirmation that God will pardon a sinner than the acceptance of Him that had done no wrong neither was guile found in his mouth 2. But now for Gods making such a promise for Christs sake or entring into a Covenant to pardon accept for Christs sake this answers not the Question in the least for 1. It onely asserts that God has declared openly that he will do it Now a Declaration of Pardon is not a Pardon a promise of acceptance is not acceptance and therefore a Reason of or Motive to such a Promise such a Declaration is not a Reason of or Motive to Pardon and acceptance Christs Obedience was so well pleasing to God that for his sake he made such a Promise Well but if my Obedience be little Christs Obedience will not make it accepted as if it were great if imperfect it will not render it accepted as if it were perfect 2. That God has made such a promise for Christs sake answers not the Question for it s but turning the Question into an Assertion As if we should enquire what Reason is there that God should accept me for Christs obedience And he should Answer there is a Reason why God should accept me for it but never shew the Reason Or thus What Cause is Christs Obedience of the Acceptance of our Obedience And he should say it is a Cause but not shew the Cause But then further The Obedience and Righteousness of Christs Life was one thing which made his Sacrifice so Meritorious I confess I question the Truth of the Proposition had Christ Sacrificed himself as soon as he came into the World his Sacrifice had been as Meritorious being the Sacrifice of him that as Priest was God and
rewards of Acceptation as righteous when they are not righteous and this for Christs sake then either there will be some immediate proper effect found ouâ—… for the Obedience of Christs Life and Death or else all comes to no more than this That God will Accept us righteous or unrighteous that is right or wrong 3. I would observe also That he supposes God to have dispensed with the Moral Law Which is News to me and I confess I doe not believe it nor shall I till I hear it confirmed Some Errors though speculative are daâ—…ble and such may this prove For if we like Fools goggled in with the Rhetorical Divinity of this Age should Trust to Gods Abatements of his Law and at last it should prove that God loved Righteousness and hated Iniquity as such we were in a most wretched miserable and undone Condition merely by Trusting to Indulgence I demand therefore good Counter security of our Author That God will deal with me as righteous though I be not so in the Account of his Law unless I be considered as found in Christ not having my own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is by the Faith of Christ the righteousness of God by Faith The Moral Law is the Image of Gods Mind his Nature transcribed into his Law and one jot nor tittle of this Law shall ever pass away How much of this Law God will dispense with what part of it or what degrees of the violation of it is to me unknown and if with any whether he may not possibly dispense with the whole by the same Reason is more than our Authors Principles can inform me he that may dispense with one part of it may with another and so of the rest For where to stop or put bounds to such a Dispensation as comes from the Grace of God is very impossible to determine unless we knew the true bounds of Gods Grace And whereas our Author talks of the rigour of the Law there 's nothing of it rigorous in its own Nature and the least particle of it would be impossible to be observed according to its exact demands if it were made the Law of our Iustification He that breaks the Law in one point is guilty of all and the Curse is denounced against him that confirms not all that is written therein to doe it 4. The Difficulty remains to this day Why God should be so pleased with the Righteousness and Obedience of Christ that he should allow the Disobedience of Another And it will remain for ever a Difficulty both why God should inflict Evils upon the Posterity of Adam for his sake or deal with them as righteous who in the Account of his Holy Law are not righteous for Christs till we understand the true Nature of the Two Covenants the one made with Adam and all his Natural seed the other with Christ and all his spiritual seed both which Seeds were to stand or fall according as their respective Heads and Representatives should acquit themselves in point of Obedience and Disobedience towards God and his most holy and righteous Law The same liberty that he has taken I question not but he will give and I shall be very modest in a few Enquiries 1. May we enquire Whether what he allows of Influence to Adams Sin upon his Posterity will satisfie the Apostles Intendment The Apostle asserts v. 18. That by the offence of one judgement came upon all to Condemnation v. 19. That by one mans Offence many were made Sinners And there are these things considerable 1. That Adams Sin had this Influence upon Posterity that they were made Sinners also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transgressors of a Law for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deviate from a Rule to come short of a Mark that is set us to aim at as Suidas observes 2. That the Posterity of Adam were so made sinners that they were lyable to condemnation Iudgment came upon them to Condemnation This I Observe because some talk as if they were Sinners in jest but God lets the Sons of men know that they are obnoxious to Condemnation for the Offence of that one Man 3. The Apostle shews how they were made sinners and how they were liable to Condemnation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were so by a Constitution God did not infuse sin into them and make them sinners Inherently but they were made so by a Law-constitution And it was needful that the Apostle should clear that Point because the Vindication of Gods Iustice called for it For how could God deal with them as sinners in respect of Condemnation who were not first sinners in respect of Guilt Guilt and Condemnation do Reciprocally prove each other To assert them to be sinners proves them liable to Condemnation and to assert them liable to Condemnation presupposes them to be sinners for what is Condemnation but the evil of Punishment inflicted for the evil of sin committed Nor can it consist with the Righteousness of the Iudge of the whole Earth to treat them as sinners as to Punishment who were not first so as to Guilt contracted To clear therefore the Righteousness of God that he may be Iust when he Condemns we must understand that the sin of Adam is one way or other made the sin of his Posterity Several ways there are Contrived to Salve this Difficulty some say as was noted before that Adams sin being Imitated by his Posterity they become sinners and so liable to Condemnation A dull Contrivance which our Author himself will not allow who asserts that God was so displeased with Adams Disobedience that for his sake he Entailed many Evils upon his Posterity but if there be nothing more but the Infection and Contagion of his Example then it 's not for Adams Sin Fault or Offence that they are made sinners but for their own In Defiance of the Apostle and his way of Reasoning the very truth is God made a Covenant with Adam and in him with all his Natural Posterity Adam was not only the Natural Parent but the Moral Head and Representative of all his Seed and therefore according to this Righteous Law of God his Offence was theirs what he forfeited they forfeited what he lost they lost he sinned they sinned he came under the Condemnation they came under it also And this does fully satisfie the Apostles Reasoning By one Mans offence many were made sinners by one Mans offence Iudgment came upon all to Condemnation And God has given us pregnant Instances of his Righteous procedure in Punishing the Members of Political Bodies for the Offences of their Political Heads 2 Sam. 24. Thus he Punisht Davids sin in Numbering the People upon the People who were Innocent in his Transgression personally and to say as some have ventured to say That the People had sins of their own for which God might Righteously punish them is to say a great Impertinent truth For whatever sins
sanctissimâque ejus Disciplinâ corporaliter h. e. reipsa non umbratili quadam ratione ut in Lege habitantem opponit Unto these Rudiments of the World the Apostle opposeth all the fulness of the Divinity which dwelt Bodily that is Really not after a Typical faction as in the Law in Christ and his most holy Discipline And yet this crafty Knave had a reach far beyond what I hope our Author is guilty of namely to cut in sunder the Nâ—…rves and Sinews of this Text as it asserts the Deity of Christ and therefore very subtlely he turns Deity into Divinity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And that we may see how Eagerly and Zealously he is Concerned for such a signification of Christ as much as our Author can be for the heart of him Consult 3 Lib. dé verâ Relig. cap. 5. p. 47. Quâ de causâ Divinis monitis incitamur ut omnibus aliis Disciplinis Posthabitis uni Christo adhaereamus in quo id est in cujus Doctrinâ omnis Divinitatis plenitudo continetur For with Reason we are call'd upon by the Counsel of the Scripturâ—… to leave all other Religions and to cleave to Christ alone in whom that is in whose Doctrine all the Fulness of the Divinity is contain'd And so perfect a Mime is our Author of this Volk that he borrows his very id ests of him But to these things I return 1. That the opposition lies Visibly in the first place between Men and Christ secondly between Mens Tarditions and Christs Institutions 2. That the Person of Christ as the only Law-giver of the Church is directly oppos'd to the Traditions of Men For as the Popes Laws if set on foot in England would not only cross the Laws of the Land but strike at our Sovereign Lord the King his Crown and Dignity so the Traditions of Men do not only thwart Christs Institutions but mainly and chiefly Christ himself who is the Author of them 3. From the All fulness of the Deity which dwells in Christ it 's Obvious to an ordinary Capacity to inferre that there is a Perfection in his Doctrine a compleatness in his Institutions that there needs no Supply from Mens Traditions no Relief from Philosophy or Rudiments of the World but if because the Perfection of his Doctrine may be concluded from the Excellency of his Person he will conclude that his Person signifies his Doctrine we must desire to be excused for no such thing will thence follow His last place is Ephes. 4. 20 21. But you have not so Learn't Christ if so be you have heard him and been taught by him as the Truth is in Iesus Before our Author can make his best Markets of this Text he found it expedient to bestow a little of his critical Excellency upon us in Correcting the Translation of the Church of England presuming he has equal Authority over it with the Thirty nine Articles And 1. He tells us to our great Illumination that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not as our Translator renders it being Taught but Instructed A blessed Discovery Reserved no doubt for the Glory of these last Ages Poor dull Translators that could not see the difference between being Taught and Instructed But that is the Priviledge only of a Rational Divine as we shall hear anon to discern the Essential differences of things but that none may ever Rob him of the Honour of the Discovery which is equal to that of the Perpetual Motion Squaring the Circle or Doubling the Cube let it be Written on his Tomb Hic jacet primus Author hujus subtilitatis c. 2. He informs us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not by him but in him Well let him make his best of that for I think he has lost Ground by it For whereas his Pinching Question is How could the Ephesians who never saw Christ in the flesh be said to â—…ear him he might have added or to be iâ—…structed by him Now it will be answered witâ—… ease as to the latter clause O yes they may be iâ—…structed in him in his Natures and Person in hiâ—… Offices in the End of his Death and Sufferings iâ—… in the fruits and benefits of his Intercession with 〈◊〉 Father for them Ay and they might be said to heaâ—… him too when they heard the Apostles discourse and preach of Him open to them the excellency of hiâ—… Divine Person the meaning of his holy Preceptiâ—… the Latitude of the precious Promises especially iâ—… the Rest of the Apostles were and no doubt they were of the same mind with Paul who desired tâ—… know nothing but Iesus Christ and him crucified to Preach Christ a crucified Christ and to glorâ—… in nothing but in the Cross of the same Iesus and after all here 's not the least invitation to interpret Christ to signifie Religion Gospel upon this pretended difficulty that they could not hear Him noâ—… be instructed by him It 's the Delight of some meâ—… to make easie things difficult let the place be interpreted of the Person of Christ and it will takâ—… in the Gospel both in its Precepts and Promises anâ—… whatever Discoveries are therein made of his Person Offices Doctrine Laws Government Deatâ—… Resurrection Ascension and sitting at the right hanâ—… of God where he makes intercession for us Fourthly It is acknowledged by All says ouâ—… Author that Christ signifies the Church of Christ And if he would receive it as an Almes pure chaâ—…ity perhaps it would be granted but if he wiâ—… dispute a right and title to the thing in question iâ—… may go the harder with him The union betweeâ—… Christ and his true Church is so near and strict thaâ—… â—…ey both come under one and the same Appellation â—…enominated from the most excellent part the Head â—…f that Body Hence is the Churâ—…h called the body â—…f Christ and his fulness Eph. 1. 23. Not his inâ—…rinsick fulness to supply any personal defects of his â—…ut his outward fulness relatively considered as â—…erving to magnifie his Grace and Mercy As the â—…ultitude of Subjects is the Kings Honour Prov. â—…4 28. As a vertuous Wife is the Crown of her â—…usband Prov. 12. 4. so is the Church the Glory â—…f Iesus Christ and he is pleased not to look upon â—…imself as compleat without Her But that the â—…ame Christ signifies Church exclusive of his Perâ—…on or any otherwayes than as Christ and his â—…hurch make one body I crave leave to 〈◊〉 my â—…issent and wait for his Proof The Inference therefore which he draws from this â—…upposition is weak and feeble And thus must we â—…nderstand those phrases of Being in Christ Enâ—…rafted into Christ and United to Christ which â—…ignifie no more than to be a Christian one whâ—… beâ—…ongs to that Body whereof Christ is the Head and â—…overnour p. 11. We must what necessity I ask â—…gain of that why the very same that I observed â—…efore one that he has
first created to himself and â—…hen pleads against us which is to Lacquey it after â—…olkelius For so he lib. de verâ Relig. cap. 10. p. â—…38 Christum autem saepenumerò non Christi Perâ—…onam aut Naturam sed per Metonymicam dicenâ—…di figuram à liud quippiam vel ad Christum respiâ—…iens vel ab illo profectum designare ex illis locis â—…erspicuum est ubi Christum accepisse Christum diâ—… Christum induere debere aut eundem 〈◊〉 in Christo esse in Christo denique 〈◊〉 dicimur That Christ oftentimes signifies 〈◊〉 the Person or Nature of Christ but something 〈◊〉 either relating to him or proceeding from him 〈◊〉 a Metonymie is plain from those places wheâ—… we are said to have received Christ to have leaâ—… Christ that we ought to put on Christ and 〈◊〉 have put him on to be in Christ and lastly to 〈◊〉 in Christ And at this rate in a while the Persâ—…nality of Christ shall lye at the mercy of these meâ—… there being no place of Scripture left that shall â—…cessarily prove him to be a Person but with oâ—… of these evasions they can enervate and with a 〈◊〉 dash of a wanton pen strike him clear out of 〈◊〉 Writ But let us a little examine his Consequencâ—… Christ sometimes signifies the Church therefore 〈◊〉 be in Christ to be united to Christ must be so â—…derstood From May be in the premises to must 〈◊〉 in the conclusion is a high leap let our Author 〈◊〉 a care he do not break his Neck for my part I 〈◊〉 not be too sollicitous to answer such Inferences But I had almost forgotten that under the 〈◊〉 Head he interpreted In Christ to signifie in 〈◊〉 Doctrine and now to serve the present Turn it 〈◊〉 signifie to be in the Church To which I onely saâ—… If they be one thing this Head is needless and 〈◊〉 they be two they make a contradiction In the mean time our Author is the most unhaâ—…py man I have met withall that having perhaps 〈◊〉 place or two of Scripture where possibly the 〈◊〉 Christ may signifie the Church mystically consideredâ—… as it takes in the Head and Members the Fouâ—…dation and Building the root and branches the 〈◊〉 and Subjects the Husband and Spouse yet shoulâ—… so unhappily fix upon those Texts which would â—…empt a rigid Antagonist to put him to the proof â—…f what in a sober sence will not be denyed Let us â—…hen attend to his Quotations Rom. 12. 5. We beâ—…ng many are one Body in Christ. All true Christiâ—…ns how many soever they be constitute but one Body but how come they to be One what is that Center wherein they meet that common Bond or Ligament which ties them together who is the Corner-stone that couples together the parts of this Building The Apostle tells us t is Christ He is the Head in whom the members are united the corner-stone in whom the sides of the building are joyned â—…he Center in whom as in a point all the Faith of Individual Believers does meet now cannot they be thus One but the Name Christ must needs signifie Church Well let us hear one of his Id ests i. e. saith he We are all but one Christian Society which is the Body of Christ. Very good according to our Authors Fancy it must run thus We are all one Christian Society which is the Body of the Church But whatever truth there is in the Notion it never grew upon this root all the Apostle asserts is this that Particular Christians are compared to the particular members of the natural body the whole Church collectively taken is compared to the natural body and that he might shew how the particular Members of this Mystical Body are united and become One he tells us it is in Christ. Again Col. 1. 2. To the Saints and faithfull Brethren in Christ. Ergo what Why they are Christian Brethren True but how come they to be so That is indeed the Question to which our Author speaks Ne gry quidem His last proof is from 2 Cor. 5. 17. He that is in Christ is a New Creature It seems somewâ—… strange to me that the word Christ should signiâ—… otherwise in this Verse than it had done v. 14. 1â—… and must do again v. 18. Before the Text v. 1â—… The love of Christ constrains us And that 〈◊〉 dyed for all Was it a Person who out of pure Loâ—… dyed for his Church who offered himself a Sacâ—…fice to God for it and is it all o th' sudden groâ—… a Church The Church I had thought was the Oject and not the Subject of that Love mentioneâ—… After the Text v. 18. we read that God hath recoâ—…ciled us to himself by Iesus Christ And how doâ—… our Author wedge in Church instead of Christ in thâ—… 17th verse Must the blessed Apostle be made 〈◊〉 speak Non-sence argue impertinently conclude aâ—…surdly to gratifie one of his forced and wresteâ—… Notions Well for once that we may not purchasâ—… his displeasure let him paraphrase the eighteentâ—… verse thus God hath reconcil'd the Church to hiâ—…self by the Church What remains in this particular is onely that descant which he gives upon hiâ—… Text i. e. Every sincere Christian is a New Creature Agreed To be in Christ and to be a sincere Christian do explain one another But the descanâ—… upon his descant is the Life of all Whoever professeth the Faith of Christ and lives in society with the Christian Church hath obliged himself to live 〈◊〉 new Life Better and better still What is it to be in Christ Ans. To be a sincere Christian. Qu. Anâ—… what is it to be a sincere Christian Ans. To profess the Faith of Christ and live in society with the christian Church Most admirable The clearest fullest and exactest Definition without all peradventure that ever was in the world of a sincere Christian and out-vies all that Mr. Shepheard's Sincere Convert or Sound Believer can afford us The onely fault that I find with it is that the lewdest and vilest Hypocrite that ever was in the world may be one of our Authors Sincere Christians You have heard what a Sincere Christian is to your unspeakable comfort no doubt Will you but hear what the New creature is and you are made for ever Qu. What is it to be a New creature Ans. To oblige himself to live a New life Nay if an Obligation nay a voluntary Obligation to live a New life will render a Man a New Creature I am sure God has obliged all men so to live and most men have superadded a voluntary Obligation of their own so to live and then what a sad rout of New Creatures is the world pester'd withall The Reader has seen by this time that his first Notion of Christ is false his second onely necessarily True his third very questionable and the fourth unproved and if it had been proved would not have done his work and now it 's high time to
and has therefore raked Mr. Shepheard out of his Grave to shew us that he has some skill in Necromancy We read of one that had his dwelling amongst the Tombs possest with an unclean Spirit but so outragious that none could tame him no Chains would hold him so fierce that none durst pass by the way And as I remember Q. Curtius tells us of the Hyaena That her great delight is to dig up Carcases and insult over them And what was the Character of a great Prince that he never spared Man in his Anger nor Woman in his Lust may be accommodated to him whose Ambition would Triumph over the quick and the dead I know well that a few of our Authors Squibs and Crackers will pass for a Confutation of the clearest Truth with them who are of the same distempered Spleen with himself but with those holy and pious Souls to whose Conversion Consolation and Establishment in the Gospel God has blessed the Labours of that worthy Person their Repute is not to be shaken by the feeble Attempts of grinning Malice and Envy whose onely Reason for their hatred of things excellent is because they are Excellent I think there cannot a more proper defence of wronged Innocency be found out than to repeat the foul-mouth'd language of Detraction Hear therefore what our Author sayes The Reason of all this is very plain from our Acquaintance with Christ for he is our Physician and therefore we must not think of healing our selves but must goe to him with all our diseases and sores about us that he Alone may have the Honour of healing us Mock on He is a Fountain set open for sin and for uncleanness and therefore we must goe to him with all our Filthiness to be cleansed and washed for if we be first clean there 's no need of a Fountain He is all Fulness and therefore it is not fit that we should carry any thing to him as if he needed any thing from us He is our Righteousness and therefore if we have any we must leave all behind us when we goe to him c. So that all we have to doe in this great work is to goe to Christ weary and sick and filthy and naked stript of every thing but our sins and impurities to receive Ease and Health and Fulness and Beauty from him Were we worthy to know how much of this our Author does deny he should soon understand how much of it we own but to serve us up a Medley an Oleo of Truth and Errour reproached Truth and falsely imputed Errour this I must needs say if he were the best Friend I have is Intolerable and yet in this Mist of Aequivocations he hobbles on Will he deny Christ to be a Physician a Fountain that he hath in him a Fulness that he is Righteousness to Believers that it is the Duty and Interest of the weary heavy laden Sinner to make Addresses to him Socinus Volkelius will allow it lawfull to pray to Christ though they indeed deny it to be a Duty so to doe If our Author can heal himself and need not Christ to be his Physician if he can cleanse himself and need not that Fountain which God has set open for Sin and for Uncleanness if he be full and needs not be beholden to Christ for a supply and has a righteousness of his own which will cover his Nakedness he has then a happy turn on 't onely let him not be angry with those poorer sort of Creatures that are willing to take Christs Counsel Rev. 3. 18. I counsel thee to buy of me Gold tryed in the fire that thou mayst be rich and white Rayment that thou mayst be cloathed and that the shame of thy Nakedness do not appear But I cannot sufficiently admire the Contradiction of his Conclusion And thus we must apply Christ to our Souls and then what a blessed Change and Metamorphosis is there presently made in us for though we continue as we were we have all in Christ. A change made in us and yet to continue as we were A change and no change to be as we were and yet not what we were is somewhat surprizing They were just now charged that they went filthy to Christ that they might be cleansed nakâ—…d to Christ that they might be cloathed empty to Christ that they might be filled sick to Christ that they might be healed and yet after all here 's a Metamorphosis a change made in them and still they continue as they were which has out-done I dare say all Ovid who never durst and yet Poets and Painters dare doe almost any thing feign poor Daphne to be changed into a Lawrel and yet to continue fair Daphne still As to my own thoughts I have been taught from the Scriptures to own Christ as my Physician but I never had such a Crotchet in my head That a blind man should have his Eyes open'd and yet his Eyes continue as they were that the dead should be raised the Lepers cleansed the deaf made to hear and yet all be in statu quo as they were Nature is much delighted with Variety and therefore that he may not alwayes scrape upon one string our Author will find or take Occasion to fall upon one Mr. Watson who it seems illustrating Christs entering into Covenant with a Soul by the Manner of making a Marriage-Covenant amongst men has introduced Christ and a Believer thus mutually engaging each to other Christ saith to a Believer With my Body yea with my Blood I endow thee and a Believer saith to Christ With my Soul I thee worship That Christ does really endow Believers with his Body and Blood and all the Benefits procured by his Sacrifice is out of doubt to all that are not Infidels Iohn 6. 51. The Bread that I will give is my flesh that I will give for the life of the World V. 53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood ye have no life in you V. 54. Whose eateth my flesh and drinketh my Blood hath Eternal Life That Believers do enter into a mutual Covenant with Christ to give up themselves in Spirits Souls and Bodies to love serve honour their Redeemer is also evident from Eph. 5. 24. Christ is the head of the Church and the Saviour of the Body and therefore the Church is subject to Christ Now what a a pitifull flam does he return to this As if says he Christ and a Believer were marryed by the Liturgy The form of the Marriage-Covenant in the Liturgy is not so absurd as he would render it but that it may with decency express the Process of Christ and a Believers joyning in Covenant But I fear if we should sift the business a little more narrowly we shall find our Author as far to seek in the Liturgy as he is cross to the Articles of the Church of England for Mr. Watson brings in the Spouse saying to Christ With my Soul I
prevent Objections It 's evident says he from the Chapter that Christ when he speaks in the First Person I and in Me cannot mean this of his own Person but of his Church Doctrine and Religion But where lies the Evidence of this great Demonstration Why Christ says I am the true Vine and ye are the Branches He that abideth in me and I in him bringeth forth much Fruit for without me you can do nothing Well what of all this Why our Author would willingly Learn what sence can be made of all this if we understand it of the Person of Christ And I will as willingly Teach him if he be not too proud to Learn I Iesus Christ the Mediator of the New Covenant am very fitly compared to a Vine and ye my Disciples are as fitly compared to the Branches of a Vine Now he that really abideth in me by a true lively faith and I in him by the Quickening Operations of my Spirit the same bringeth forth much Fruit of holy Obedience for without derivation of Grace from Me your Root you can do nothing that is truly good and acceptable to God Oh! but he has two or three formidable Objections against this Interpretation 1. It 's not very Intelligible How we can be or abide in Christs Person No more it is If we bring Capernaitical understandings along with us who Puzled their Heads with a gross Notion of Carnal eating the Flesh and drinking the Blood of Christ. If by being in Christ were understood a Local Physical or Natural being in Him it were somewhat Unintelligible but when no more is meant by it but that every true Believer is by Constitution of the Covenant of Grace one Person morally with Christ so considered and dealt with by God there 's no more insuperable Difficulty than what unbelief will create in the clearest Truths of the Gospel But 2. It 's more unintelligible still How we can be in the Person of Christ and the Person of Christ at the same time be in us Which is a new piece of Philosophy called Penetration of Dimensions But there 's no great danger in that Christ may dwell in us by his Spirit and we in him by Faith and yet Faith and the Spirit never disturb each other in their Motions but what the Dimensions of the Soul in its actings of Faith or of the Spirit in it's working of Grace are this I confess is to me unintelligible And that a Christian should be in the Church and the Church at the same time be in a Christian had been equally Unintelligible and as much danger of the Penetration of Dimensions But that our Author stumbled upon a happy Expedient that I should signifie a Doctrine and Me a Church to heal the Contradiction 3. That our Fruitfulness should depend on our Union to Christ is as hard to my understanding Truly I cannot help that I have no Medicine to cure Crazed Intellectuals He that cannot understand that Believers do receive Actual assistance from Christ by his Spirit to help them in the way of their Duty and to encourage them against the Difficulties they meet withal in their Duties cannot I presume understand very many Lines in the Gospel 3. Our last Task is to Examine what improvement he has made of this Interpretation and in short it is this That the Union of particular Christians to Christ consists in their Union to the Christian Church And now I am abundantly satisfied that our Author is a very Philomel Vox praeterea nihil One whose Volubility of Tongue and Pen supplies the place of Argument and Demonstration I hope our Author will not meet with many Readers who have so far parted with their Memories as not to remember what that was he Propounded to himself to Evince viz. That the Union of particular Christians to Christ is by means of their Union with the Christian Church And yet now when he comes to cast up his Accounts we have gotten another Conclusion That the Union of particular Christians to Christ consists in their Union to the Christian Church Surely the Purblind will espie some small difference Eating is a means to Living yet none but a Swine of Epicurus his Stye will say that Living consists in Eating The High-road is a means to bring the Traveller Home yet it will be hard to perswade us that being at Home consists in Travelling Trading is a mean to Riches yet Riches do not formally consist in Trading The end may possibly be separated from the Means but nothing can be separated from that thing wherein it consists But let that pass If he has proved either the one or the other I am content he be reputed an Artist The thing he has a good will to prove is That the Union of particular Christians to Christ is either by means of their Union to the Christian Church or else that it consists in it Now for the Proof of this He has told us That the Church is the Body of Christ The Church is the Temple of Christ The Church is the Spouse of Christ The Church is the Flock of Christ. And had it been referred to a thousand Persons not one but would have thought that that Christ who is the Head of that Body is a Person He that is the Husband of that Spouse is a Person He that is the Shepheard of the Flock is a Person and He that Dwells in that Temple is a Person But things are not so far gone but our Author shall have his Opinion and choose what he will abide by for my part I am much unconcern'd let him please himself he shall not displease me at all Say then Shall it be Christs Doctrinal or Christs Ecclesiastical that is the Head of this Body The Husband of this Spouse The Shepheard of this Flock I can rest satisfied But then the Sence runs thus A Doctrine or a Church is the Head of the Church A Doctrine or a Church is the Husband of the Church A Doctrine or a Church is the Shepheard of the Church If this does not please him let him try the other way and allow it to be a Person that is all these A Person that is the Head Husband and Shepheard of the Church And now I must plainly acquaint him That he has Entangled his Affairs in such confusion that he will never be able to Extricate them For 1. If the Person of Christ be here intended then it seems at last whatever the means be of that Union yet there is an Union to the Person of Christ and whereinsoever that Union consists yet such an Uunion there is How absurd would it be to enquire whether our Union to Christ's Person consists in our Union with a particular Church If Union to Christs Person be a Non-entity Or Whether our Union with a particular Church be the means to our Union with Christ If there be no such thing And then 2. He is as much concern'd as his poor Neighbours to salve the
of the shell That our Union to Christ consists in our union with the Church And all along I Dream't that that Christ about whom the Question was He that was the Shepheard to whom the Sheep are United the Husband to whom the Spause is United the King of the Church to whom all Christians are United had been a real and very Person and that it had been supposed that Christians are some way or other United to him Only all the Question was Whether they were so United by Means of the Church or no For if we are not united to Christ at all it s a needless Enquiry How or by what means we are United to him Or wherein that Union consists For this takes away the Subject of the Question What is it then wherein this Union with Christ consists Why It consists in a sincere and Spirituall communion with the Christian Church And now the Question must be Trimed over again Whether our Union with the Church consists in a sincere communion with the Church That is this Face of the Question will do best in this place for I always observe our Author Writes just from Hand to Mouth and if he can but make a Rubbing shift for the present Page let the next take care for it self 2 And now let us hear his plain Demonstration Otherwise says he this External communion with the Church could be no visible signification of our Union to Christ. A notable Argument no doubt if any Living-body understood it In the words fore-going he tells us He means by Union with Christ a sincere and Spiritual communion with the Church And then the old question would have stood thus Whether our union with a particular Church be the means of our sincere and spiritual communion with the Church And if he had thus spoke out I am assured he had met with no Opposition But he intended another thing then and entertain'd new Councels upon new Successes and greater hopes from atchieved Victories But still the Reader is Importunate for the Demonstration Then take it and make your best on 't External communion with the Church is a visible signification of our Union to the Church that he means by Christ and therefore our Union to Christ consists in a sincere and Spiritual communion with the Christian Church And if he had told us plainly that there is no such thing as Union with Christ but that the Phrase of Union with Christ is an empty Name and has no more in it than union with a Church it had been easie to have understood the strength of his Will and the weakness of his Reason without half this Circumlocntion 3. His next Observation is That the Union between Christ and the Christian Church is not a Natural but a Political Union That is says he such an union as is between a Prince and his Subjects It was but just now that he told us That our Union with Christ is not an union with his Person and yet now he will explain the Nature of this Union between Christ and the Church And indeed he has so Bewildred himself that it needs a great deal of Explication and I doubt all will be too little to deliver it from Non-sence For his Explication must be this The Union between the Church and the Christian Church is not a Natural but a Political Union such an union as is between a Prince and his Subjects Now this has two Faults in it First That if it were true it would Over-turn his whole Design which I can be very well content withall And Secondly which is the Misery on 't its False and therefore will neither Overthrow nor Support his Design And therefore his Interest will lie in this one â—…hing if he could but see it to Prove his Assertion to be False that there may be some hopes left of his conclusion 1. As it stands it apparently Overthrows his whole Design For if this Politick Union be such a one as is between a Prince and his Subjects Then 1. There is such a thing alive again in the World as Union with and Relation to Christs Person For surely Subjects are Related to and united with the Person of their Prince 2. Then this Union to Christ denotes Primarily a Relation to and Union with the Person of Christ and only Secondarily an Union with and Relation to his Laws and Commands and the rest of our fellow Subjects For I think the Reason why Subjects give Obedience to any Laws is because they are the Laws of him who is the Legislator The Reason why the Sheep are subject to Pastoral Orders is because they are the Orders and Instituted by him who is their Shepheard and has a right to Enjoyn them And the Reason why the Wife subjects her self to the Commands of her Husband is because she is united to him upon those Terms in the Marriage-covenant All Duty is founded in Relation It 's impossible to conceive Conjugal Duty without a Preconception of Conjugal Relation If therefore such be our Relation to Christ such our union to Him as of Sheep to Shepheard Wife to Husband Subjects to a Prince then are we first Related to his Person and as far as such Relation will Unite united to his Person and then his Negative is blown up That our Union to Christ is not an union to his Person but consists in our communion with his Church Which is as if he should say Our Relation to our Prince is no Relation to his Person but consists in our Union to the Common-wealth which is a neat Engine to hook in Democracy But 2 It s False which is the worst on 't our uuion to Christ is not fully explain'd by a Political union It 's true It is not a Natural union but yet it 's well Explain'd by and bears a full Analogy with a Natural union The Relation is not Natural but Spiritual and yet it has pleased the Holy Ghost to express the Spiritual Relation by the Natural The Relation between a Prince and his Subjects expresses something of that Relation that is between Christ and Believers but not the whole All the Similitudes used in Scripture to Illustrate the Relation between Christ and Christians have something in common with each other All imply absolute Soveraignty and Authority contempered with tenderness of Affection on Christs part and all imply an absolute Subjection to be given to Him with delight and complacency on our parts yet some of them express a nearer union and more endeared Affections than others That of a Master Lord and King express Authority and Power yet not that Intimacy and union which is expressed by that of Husband and Wife That of a King implies Christ to be a Head of Government but that of the Head in the Natural Body implies the Communications of Grace of Strength Counsel and Power to Obey and withal that there 's such an Intimate union between Christ and true Believers that the Members in the Natural are