Selected quad for the lemma: head_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
head_n body_n member_n mystical_a 10,421 5 11.0632 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A97227 Vnbeleevers no subjects of iustification, nor of mystical vnion to Christ, being the sum of a sermon preached at New Sarum, with a vindication of it from the objections, and calumniations cast upon it by Mr. William Eyre, in his VindiciƦ justificationis. Together with animadversions upon the said book, and a refutation of that anti-sidian, and anti-evangelical errour asserted therein: viz. the justification of infidels, or the justification of a sinner before, and without faith. Wherein also the conditional necessity, and instrumentality of faith unto justification, together with the consistency of it, with the freness of Gods grace, is explained, confirmed, and vindicated from the exceptions of the said Mr. Eyre, his arguments answertd [sic], his authorities examined, and brought in against himself. By T. Warren minister of the Gospel at Houghton in Hampshire. Warren, Thomas, 1616 or 17-1694. 1654 (1654) Wing W980; Thomason E733_10; ESTC R206901 226,180 282

There are 12 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

description of our conference by introducing interlocutours as if I were ad incitas redactus and that they did interpose to helpe me for it seemeth to me to be his end in that relation hath made me willing to wipe off that obloquie by entring the lists once more with him whereas the true cause of that interruption was his popular appeales his usuall artifice to evade the force of an argument to enthrone himselfe as victor in the hearts of the in-judicious multitude In a word the ensuing reasons were no small motive to inforce me to this work The bridge of justification by which men must passe over from death to life is very narrow and one step awry may be the losse of many pretious soules and all gospel truth is a pretious depositum concredited to us ministers of the gospel and is a part of that * 2 Tim. 1.14 Jude 3. good thing committed to us and we are commanded earnestly to * contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints Aug ad Lauren cap. 64. and this doctrine of justification is articulus stantis vel cadentis Ecclesiae as Luther saith the Church standeth or falleth according as this truth is beleeved or violated and what Augustine saith of remission of sins that I may say of faith by which remission of sins is received per hanc stat Ecclesia quae in terris est per hanc non perit quod perierat et inventum est And therefore there is a necessity of keeping this doctrine pure and every minister is bound to preserve this truth and to keep the Philistins from throwing dirt into this well And if Shamma be recorded in Sacred writ for defending a field of lentills against the Philistins surely it cannot but be acceptable to God and man to defend that doctrine which is the summe of the gospel confirmed with the blood of Christ And if it were Pauls Eulogium to preach that faith which he did once destroy it cannot be Mr. Eyres encomium to destroy that faith he ought to preach And seeing God himself taketh care of the very haires of our head and numbers them all we have much more reason to make a precious esteeme of that truth which is worth all our heads and by which our very soules must be saved And no lesse care ought we to have of the honour of Christ and of his mysticall body For who is he that is a living member of Christ that is not sensible of the dishonour done to Christ our head and what dishonour is done to Christ by this doctrine by making an unbeleever a subject of justification and a member of Christs body let him that is least in the Church judge The Apostle could not without an absit thinke of it that a member of Christ should be joyned to a harlot shall I take the members of Christ and make them the member of a harlot God forbid and is it not an annoynted truth of the same authority 1 Cor. 6.15 that I must not take a harlot so remaining and make it the member of Christ If Mezentius was condemned for a wicked tyrant for tying a dead man to a living person can he be esteemed a good Christian and friend to Christ not to say a good minister that shall joyne an unbeleever dead in sins and trespasses as a member unto Christ the Lord give him the sight of this evill and God forbid I should cease to pray for him and I hereby beg a Collection of praiers for him from all that know him for I beleeve his owne principles will not suffer him to pray for the pardon of sin which in his opinion is pardoned long before it is committed And now that I might not trouble the Reader any further I will but mention a passage or two in his Epistle dedicatory and another in his booke and I will not hold him from the discourse it selfe Mr. Eyre hath in his second page of that Epistle perfumed his brethren opposite to his errours to render them acceptable to the magistrate It is remarkable saith he that they who ascribed unto magistrates a definitive and coercive power in spirituals have when magistrates would not serve their turns denied the power which they have in temporals refusing contrary to the rules of Christ to own them pray for them or to yeeld obedience to their lawfull commands as if none must hold the sword but such as will use it to fight their quarrel and to effect that by force of arms which they themselves cannot doe by strength of argument But is this an irrefragable argument to prove eternall justification or a lively demonstration of a man parboiled in his passion is this the effect of charity or the foame of a passionate man was he sick of a fever or troubled with the scurvy when this passage fell from him I am sure there is neither charity nor verity in it if it be examined by the law of God or the knowne lawes of the land if he be able let him produce any proofe of our disobedience to authority least the world say he hath linguam mentiri doctam But nothing is more usuall then for the nocent to accuse the innocent * 1 K. 18.17 4 Eph. 3. Ahab accused Elijah for troubling of Israel when himselfe was the person that troubled Israel * Athaliah crye's treason treason when her selfe was the traitor 2 K. 11.14 * 4 Act. 5. Tertullus accused Paul that he was a pestilent fellow and a mover of sedition when himselfe was the ring-leader of a notorious faction And were I minded to recriminate and did seeke rather to d sparage his person then to weaken his case I might more justly retort the charge upon himself for his bold attempt in indeavouring to affright the chiefe magistrate of the city of N. Sarum from or for his proclaiming the Lord Protectour fearing it seems that I may use his own words that he would not serve his turne and therefore he would not have him hold the sword because he would not use it to fight his quarrel But in this suggillation of his to make his brethren odious and obnoxious to authority the reader may observe how closely be followeth Lysanders Counsel vbi leonina pellis non sufficit assumenda est vulpina that where the lions skin will not serve he will eeke it out with a fox skin he would stop our mouths or pull out our tongues because he cannot answer our arguments as Herod dealt with Iohn Baptist cutting off his head because he would not hold his peace but reprove him for Herodias so he would silence us by power who he cannot overcome by reason To whom I will say as Hieron in his Apol. 3. ad Ruff talibus institutus es disciplinis ut cui respondere non poteris caput auferas et linguam quae tacere non potest secas In his third page of the same epistle he would have the magistrate punish
disallowed and rejected of God and though he call them not reprobates as opposed to the Elect because as * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rejectanci sic eos vocat Apostolus hoc loco non qui sunt divinitus ad vitam aeternam electis oppositi nec enim censendi sunt statim irae vasa quicunque vel in suis peccatis adhuc manent nondum efficaciter vocati Bez. in locum Beza observes they are not presently to be judged vessels of wrath that yet abide in their sins yet as to their present estate they are such as God approves not of nor are they in a capacity of salvation Rom. 8.1 There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Now in Scripture-sense it is all one to be in Christ or Christ to be in us and there is nothing but condemnation to them that are out of Christ So the m John 15.5 15th of John If any man abide not in me he is cast forth as a branch and withereth that is if any man be in Christ only by external profession and outward Baptisme and is not truly united to him and abide in him by faith so as to partake of spiritual life from Christ As the living branch liveth in the Vine you shall be cut off as a dead branch and cast into the fire So in n Joh. 6.56 57. John 6.56 57. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him As the living Father hath sent me I live by the Father So he that eateth me shall live by me that is as the body is preserved by meat and drink and our meat and drink turne into the substance of the body and become one with it So he that spiritually feeds upon my flesh and blood upon my death and suffering by faith he shall be inseparably united to me and I will become one with him And by this he shall live as I who am Mediatour am sent by the Father to this end to bring men to life so that I might be able to give life I have received life from the Father and live by his Spirit communicated to me And so as sure as God lives and as I live by influence of the life and Spirit of God so he that eateth me and so becometh one with me by faith as the meat with the body he shall live by me Ver. 53. And in Ver. 53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you that is unlesse you become one with Christ by faith you have no life in you So the o 1 John 3.24 Rom. 8.9 1 John 3.24 and compared with Rom. 8.9 Hereby we know that he abideth in us because of his Spirit which he hath given us Where observe 1. That Christ dwelleth in his people Hereby we know that he abideth in us This is not a fancy or a conjecturall ungrounded hope but it is an infallible truth of eternal verity Hereby we know he abideth in us 2. Observe the means by which he dwelleth in us and how this may be known It is by his Spirit and this is a sure evidence of Christ dwelling in us because he hath given us his Spirit Now compare this with Rom. 8 ● If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he it none of Christs He that hath not the Spirit of Christ dwelling in him he hath no Christ dwelling in him and so is none of Christs none of his members and so can never be saved so long as he lives without Christ so that you see the truth cleared That to be without Christ is to be without Hope Now the reasons why a Christlesse estate is a Hopelesse estate are Reason 1 Reason 1. Because there is no p Act. 4.12 name given under heaven whereby we may be saved God hath taken up an immutable purpose never to be reconciled unto man but in and through Christ so that there is not the least sounding of the bowels of God towards a sinner but in Christ Hence Christ is called our q 1 Tim. 1.1 Hope that is he is the object of our Hope in whom alone we are begotten unto a lively hope of eternal life Such is the distance and difference between God and the souls of men that none is found worthy or able in heaven or earth to umpire this difference but Christ and were he not a person of infinit worth he could never make any satisfaction nor work a reconciliation We are dead in sins and trespasses and none but Christ that is the Lord of Life can quicken us we are spiritually blinde and were not Christ God he could not cure our blindnesse for it was never r John 9.32 known from the beginning of the world that any but God could open the eyes of the blinde None but Christ who is the ſ Heb. 1.3 brightnesse of his Fathers Glory and the expresse Character of his Image is able to restore Gods Image in us without which we shall never see the face of God nor can God take us for his children nor delight in us unlesse this were restored such is the opposition made against our salvation by Satan and all the powers of darknesse that none but Christ is able to deliver us from this strong man So great is the mystery of godlinesse that none but Christ who hath lien in the bosome of the Father and knowes all things could reveal the Father to us whom to t John 1. 18. John 17.3 know in Christ is eternal life nor could he give us the Spirit u Eph. 1.17 of wisdome and revelation to know God and the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the Saints nor translate us out of darkness into marvellous light Such is that perfect righteousnesse God requires to cloath us that we may be presented without x Eph. 5.26 spot or wrinkle in Gods sight that none but God in our nature is able to furnish us with such a righteousnesse Reason 2. As none but Christ can save so none but such as Reason 2 are united to Christ can have any communion with Christ for union is the ground of communion Now this will appear by induction if you consider all the unions in the world there is no communion between those where there is not an antecedent union In the marriage-union there is no communion as man and wife till the marriage-union be made in the naturall communion between the soul and body the head and the members the graft and the stock dissolve the union and the communion is destroyed In the Politick communion between a people unlesse united under one government So in all others and why not in the mystical union between Christ and us Hence saith Paul z 2 Cor. 6.15 What concord hath Christ with Belial Thus in the a Eph. 1.3 Ephesians 1.3 God is said to have blessed us with all spiritual blessings
mystical union to be apprehended not made by faith Secondly Mr. Eyre excepteth against it as propounded universally that there is no manner of union between Christ and the Elect before they do believe 1. They are his own words not mine for there is a unity of natures in which they agree and a certain relative respect or union very improperly so called between Christ and his Elect but a mystical union I know none till faith and were there any real union before yet Mr. Eyre might have known that rule Analogum quando per se positum stat pro famosiori Analogato and so it ought to have been taken for this famous union or implantation by faith Thirdly He acknowledgeth that That conjugal union between them which consists in the mutuall consent of parties is not before faith And is not this to yield the cause Eph. 5.23 32. is not this the mystical union spoken of in Scripture and so called in relation to the similitude it beareth to the marriage-union and is there any more mystical unions then one and that made by faith hath the wife any right or property to the body name goods of the man till she be married to her husband So till this conjugal marriage-union between Christ and a Believer he hath no actual right or property to the Body Name Goods and Purchases of Christ Fourthly And yet he addeth There is a true and real union that by means thereof their sins do become Christs and Christs righteousnesse is made theirs Shall we not need any more proof of this but your bare word where is it written there is such a union before faith by whom is it besides your self so called and by what name is that union distinguished from the mystical union by faith But let us hear this proof God from everlasting constituted and ordained Christ to be as it were one heap or lumpe one vine one body or spirituall corporation wherein Christ is the Head and they the Members Christ the Root and they the Branches Christ the first fruits and they the residue of the heap in respect of this union it is that they are said to be given unto Christ and Christ to them to be in Christ Ephes 1. That they are called his sheep his seed his children his brethren before they are Believers and by vertue of this union it is that the obedience and satisfaction of Christ descends particularly to them and not the rest of mankinde Oh rare invention Oh mysterious union hidden from all ages but now revealed and discovered by Mr. William Eyre a discovery as far excelling that of Columbus as heaven exceeds earth This is such a mystical union as that it is not only not to be apprehended by sense and reason because against both but not to be comprehended by faith neither because it is no where written but let us weigh the strength of his words which carry this sense Because God from everlasting constituted and ordained Christ to be a Head and Believers to be Members therefore there was such a union from eternity As good consequence as this your Book is in print therefore it is all true But I take this to be a grosse errour that the Elect and Christ were united from eternity For 1. Gods decree ordaining Christ to be a Head is terminus diminuens and doth not signifie that Christ was actually a Head having members united to him but it signifies Gods purpose what he did decree to be done in time and it is the continuall panalogizing of Mr. Eyre and the Antinomians to confound the decree and the execution of the decree God decreed to send Christ into the world was he therefore actually sent No not till the fulnesse of time came Gods decree ordaining Christ to be a Head and they to be Members doth not actually constitute Christ a Head and they his Members 2. That that is not cannot be united for union requires necessarily the pre-existence of the persons or things united But now Believers did not exist much lesse exist as Believers from eternity Christ had not a mystical body from etern●ty Therefore he was not a Head from eternity 3. This union to Christ is reciprocal whereby Christ is united to a Believer and a Believer to Christ and requires ligaments and bonds to make this union the Sp●rit on Christs part Faith on ours But they that exist not are not subjects capable of receiving the Spirit or of Faith without which this union cannot be made 4. The Scripture no where speaks of an eternall union therefore there was no such union and as he telleth us We must pardon him if he believe not our unwritten verities * A●●d he must pardon us if we believe not his written vanities And therefore when it is said that God chose us in Christ Ephes 1. This is not to be understood as if we were then existing and had a being in Christ but it shewes the way and order how God would save us he ordained to save us in and through Christ and for his sake not that Christs merits were the cause quoad actum eligentis in respect of the act of Election but quoad terminum sive salutem ad quam eligimur but in respect of the end or salvation unto which we are elected or ordained And so Dr. Twisse a man of eminent worth and accurate judgement in his Vindiciae * Interca non dicimus Christum in negotie Electionis babere rationem causae meritoriae respectu actûs eligentis sed duntaxat respectutermini salutis videlicet aut vitae aeternae ad quam eligimur Nam Deum eligere nos in Christo ad vitam aeternam nihil aliud est qu●m Deum constituisse nos ad obtinendam salutem per Jesum Christum Doctor Twist Vind. l. 2. digress 10. sect 2. pag. 74. c. 1. Perinde est ac si dixisset elegit nos ad salutem c. Ibid. In the mean while we do not say that Christ in the businesse of Election hath the consideration of a meritorious cause in respect of the act of God choosing but only in respect of the terme or end to wit of the salvation or life eternal unto which we are chosen for that God should choose us unto life eternal in Christ is nothing else then that God hath ordained us to obtain salvation by Jesus Christ and as he addeth Perinde est c. Even as if he should have said He hath chosen us to obtain salvation by Christ Hither also appertaineth the next verse wherein is taught that God predestinated us that we should be his sons by Christ Jesus implanted into Christ by faith Hinc enim nos filios Dei fieri profitetur Apostolus Gal. 3.26 Omnes est is filii Dei per fidem in Christo Jesu For from hence the Apostle professeth that we are made the Sons of God Gal. 3.26 Ye are all the sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus and therefore are not
sons antecedently to faith as Mr. Eyre would have it for though we are so called this is to be understood consequenter and not antecedenter because they shall be made such and whereas the Scripture saith he died for enemies and the ungodly therefore in these places where they are called his sheep children his brethren before faith this is to limit and restrain the death of Christ to such as shall be so made not that they are so de facto already but are so called in respect of certainty and what they shall be But to returne to that of Master Eyre that God hath chosen us in Christ as if we then existed in him Let the Reader observe how unhappily he joyneth with Arminius who seemeth such an enemy to him Arminius * Exam. p. 3● saith Apostolus ait nos in Christo electos esse The Apostle saith we are elected in Christ And as something is put out of the Text by Arminius so something is put in God chose us before the world in Christ our Head this Arminius plainly asserts Exam. p. 158. and accordingly Mr. Eyre saith God constituted from everlasting Christ a Head and saith he in this respect we are chosen in Christ that is as in a Head the Text saith no such matter and as Arminius leaves out those words that we should be holy by which meanes the sense of our being in Christ is made obscure which if added would make it plain in what sense these words in Christ should be taken that is these words shew to what we were chosen to wit to obtaine holinesse and how to wit in Christ that is for Christs sake like as it is said vers 3. God hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly things in Christ Jesus that is for Christs sake So Dr. Twisse in his answer to Mr. Cotton upon these words of his that he saith God chose us before the world in Christ our Head p. 9. where because it 's very material to this passage I shall recite what he further saith Mark I pray you saith he speaking to Master Cotton of Arminius how he works upon each to be elect in Christ is with him to be elect being in Christ for nos in Christo with him is nos existentes in Christo and seeing we are not in Christ but by faith where let the Reader observe the Doctors judgement that we are not in Christ but by faith which is contradictory to Mr. Eyre Hereupon he maketh the object of Election to be fideles the faithful or in Christum credentes such as believe in Christ We answer first we may take as great liberty to interpret it for explication sake by supplying a participle of the future tense thus Elegit nos futuros in Christo He chose us hereafter to be in Christ like as it followes who hath predestinated us to be adopted Now we are adopted by faith Gal. 3.26 as he takes liberty to supplie a participle of the present tense especially considering that when we were Elect to wit before the foundation of the world we were not at all and consequently not fideles Believers Secondly we answer that the compleat sentence considered at full doth manifest in what sense this phrase in Christ is taken He chose us in Christ that we should be holy this shewes to what we were chosen to wit to obtain holinesse and how to wit in Christ that is for Christs sake like as ver 3. 't is laid God hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly things in Christ Jesus that is for Christ his sake and like as 1 Thes 5.9 't is said God hath ordained us to obtain salvation through Jesus Christ so here in conformable exposition 1 Thess 5 9 when it is said God hath chosen us in Christ that we should be holy a fair meaning may be this God hath ordained us to obtaine holinesse through Christ Jesus To this I will super-adde the testimony of Dr. Twisse and the rather because you alledge him for your defence in the Doctrine of eternal Justification Christus fateor caput est Electorum praedestinatorum sed non formaliter consideratorum Neque enim praedestinati quà praedestinati sunt membra corporis Christi sed potius futuri sunt membra ejus nam quod est membrum Christi procul dubio existit Neque enim membrum Christi est terminus diminuens existentiam at praedestinati quà praedestinati non existunt nam predestinatio fuit ab aeterno sed praedestinati non extiterunt simpliciter ab eterno hodie multi sunt Electi qui procul dubio adhuc non nascuntur Rursus unio illa per quam fimus ejus membra fit per fidem Ergo quotquot Christi membra sunt oportet esse fideles at non omnes praedestinati ex qùo primùm praedestinati sunt èvestigio fideles evadunt Adhaec cùm caput non potiùs fiat aliquorum quàm illi aliqui fiant membra corporis ejus sequitur Christum non ab aeterno fuisse caput cùm non ab aeterno corpus habuerit mysticum aut membra cujus ratione propriè dicitur caput Ecclesiae suae Membra verò corporis cùm fiant per vocationem unde dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ídque per vocationem efficacem consequenter per fidem apparet Christum non priùs dici posse caput quàm sint aliqui qui credant in ipsum loquor de Christo Mediatore Redemptore Dr. Twisse Vind. li. b 2. digress 10. page 74. Col. 2. I confesse Christ is the Head of the Elect and predestinate but not formally considered For neither the predestinate as predestinate are members of Christs body but rather shall be members of it for what is a member of Christ without all doubt existeth For neither is a member of Christ a term diminishing existence But the predestinate as predestinate do not exist for predestination was from eternity but the predestinate do not simply exist from eternity This day there are many that are Elect which undoubtedly are not yet borne Again that union by which we are made his members is made by faith therefore it is needful that all that are his members should be Believers but all the predestinate do not prove Beli vers as soon as they are predestinate Moreover seeing a Head cannot sooner be a Head of any then they can be members of his body it followeth that Christ was not a Head from eternity because he was not a mysticall body from eternity or members in which respect he may properly be called the Head of his Church But seeing they are made members of his body by calling from whence it is called the Chu ch and that by effectual vocation and consequently by faith it appeareth that Christ cannot first be called a Head before there are some who believe in him I speak of Christ the Mediatour and Redeemer Now 1. That we were not united unto Christ
be understood in respect of imputation to wit that God for the merit of Christs passion forgiveth our sins upon believing as if we had suffered and made satisfaction I willingly grant it but then we were not in him as one person making satisfaction for the person of him that suffered for us is distinguished from them for whom he suffered and by Mr. Eyre's opinion that we were really one in him and with him before our birth and faith can be understood no other way as I conceive 5. That to make us to be one with Christ antecedently to our birth when he suffered for us destroyes the ground of imputation of Christs righteousnesse for those which were truly in Christ in all his obedience and sufferings to them that obedience and sufferings cannot be made over by imputation for what need is there of imputation or what place is left for it when those to whom it should be imputed because of their union with Christ did themselves performe it wherefore either there was no such union or that imputation must be denied But the obedience and sufferings of Christ are evidently by Scripture declared to be ours by imputation Rom. 4.5 Hence our faith is said to be imputed to us for righteousnesse And Christ was made sin for us that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him we are made righteousnesse as he was made sin that was by imputation therefore we were made righteous by imputation 2 Cor. 5.21 hence that union Mr. Eyre contends for I cannot say mole ruit suâ but for want of weight falls to the ground The next thing that we have undertaken to prove is that there is not any mystical union between Christ and us intecedently to faith which I demonstrate from Scripture-grounds thus First if Christ prayeth for those for whom he died that they may believe and that believing they may be united to him then before faith such for whom Christ died are not united to him But Christ prayeth for those for whom he died that they might believe and that believing they might be one with him The consequence of the Major is as evident as reason can make it unlesse we make Christ to pray in vaine to pray for that which was already done if therefore they were not one in Christ and the Father as the Father was in Christ and Christ in the Father before as this prayer intimates they were not then this union was not antecedent to faith The Minor are the words of Christ John 17.20 21. and need not a graine of allowance Christ in this place prayes for those for whom he was to die that after his death they might believe the instrumentall cause of that faith is set down to be the word of the Apostles the finall cause of that believing is that they might be one that is that they might be as members of the same body by faith nearly united to one another the manner how is declared by the near conjunction between the Father and Christ Secondly he prayes not only that they may be one or at unity among themselves Diodat in Lecum 171. John 21. but also that they may be one in us that is as Diodat upon the place in the communion of the Holy Ghost by which they may be mystically united to me and by me to thee and truly this latter union to Christ is the ground of the former of being united to one another now if they were mystically united before this would make Christ either ignorant of this union or his prayer to be in vain to pray for that that was done long before from eternity as Mr. Eyre saith but either of these were fearful impiety to imagine therefore this union is not till faith A second Argument I frame from the same place is this They that are not really united as members of the invisible Church to the rest of the members and mysticall body of Christ are not united to Christ But before faith no man is a true member of the invisible Church and so united to the rest of the members of the mystical body Therefore not to Christ The Major will not be denied by any but such as are baptized into a spirit of errour the Reason is plaine because the union between the members is a fruit of our union to the same Head but no man is united to the company of Believers to have a true fellowship and union with them but a true Believer For what communion hath a Believer with an Infide and Christ prayes that they might believe that they might be one that is that they might be mutually united as by one faith as members one of another and the same body So Piscator upon the place Pisca in ●oc 17. Job 21. in Anal. Vt per unam fidem inter se devincti tanquam membra unius corporis cujus caput est Christus mutuo amore sese complectantur That being knit together by one faith as members of one body whereof Christ is Head they may with a mutuall love embrace each other now a true communion of love cannot be between true Believers and those that are yet unbelievers therefore neither between them and Christ And hence I argue 3. Christ and Belial are not united Every unbeliever is a son of Belial Therefore they are not united 2 Cor. 6.15 The word Belial is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an uncalled man nequàm a very wicked man a man that will profit none but is hurtful to all in Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Hebricians agree not from whence it is derived but the signification given is either a man that will profit none or good for nothing or one that will be subject to no yoke I deny not but Interpreters do think many of them that Satan is in this place understood and Beza saith it very well agrees to him though he take it for a wicked man and Bullinger and Calvin take it for the Devil the head of all wicked men but I see not why it may not be taken here for a wicked man and not for Satan for it 's ordinary in Scripture by this word to understand very wicked men so in Deuteronomy it 's taken for an Idolater Deut. 13.13 and of such is the Apostles discoursing here that Believers should have no communion with Idolaters and so Elies sons being very wicked 1 Sam. 2.12 are called sons of Belial And it 's very agreeable to the scope for in the verse before he exhorteth them not to be unequally yoaked together with unbelievers he blames them for having too much familiarity with Heathens whether in marriages or in their feasts eating things sacrificed to Idols he would not have them draw in the same yoke by which Metaphor he would disswade them from keeping company with them and so partaking with them in their sins His Argument is drawn à contrario Your condition and profession is as
pray tell me now what reall difference you make between the duties of an Elect unregenerate person and of a Regenerate person Let not the ignorant Reader mistake me here I affirme not that any duties of an unregenerate person are acceptable to God or that the want of faith hope and love maketh but a failing only in the manner and circumstances of the dutie but I have only presented the Reader with a glasse to let him see that Mr. Eyre for all the seeming difference he maketh between the actions of the Elect Regenerate and unregenerate yet indeed maketh none and according to him it cannot be found Pag. 18. Thus the Reader may see that one truth of Mr. Eyre verified where he saith We may no more judge of Books by their Title then of strumpets by their foreheads and although his Tittle-Page hold forth the Gospel-language of free Justification yet if thou read the Book thou shalt finde Esaus hands though thou sometimes hearest Jacobs voice And therefore the Reader that is judicious will not be like a silly fish taken with the bait though it swallow the hook I have given thee a few Animadversions but a judicious Reader will observe more This is enough to give the Reader warning to preserve him from the infection of this aire And I hope sufficient to reduce them that are led captive by him into the same Errour CHAP. VI. Proving that we are not justified from Eternity HERE I shall premise these few things First That as we hold Justification to be a transient act done in time so there is no transient act but it presupposeth necessarily an immanent act in God And therefore secondly I acknowledge there was an eternal and an immutable act of Gods will decreeing to justifie his Elect in time through faith in Christ Thirdly As for that conditionate decree which Arminians make in God making the condition antecedent to the act of Gods will I no way acknowledge and judge it absolutely inconsistent with Gods Nature and Essence but such a conditional decree as is so called subsequently not in respect of God willing but in respect of the thing willed sive objecti voliti is not repugnant to him especially in such contingent effects as come to passe by vertue of his decree ordaining them Thus God willeth salvation to the Elect which salvation they shall be brought unto by faith in Christ not that faith is the cause of the act of Election or God willing their salvation yet it may be the cause of the thing willed a subsequent condition wrought by God for the execution of his decree And therefore when the Orthodox acknowledge Election to be absolute they understand it not exclusively to the means which God hath ordained for the obtaining of salvation for God in the same eternall act did ordain the end and the meanes hence Paul telleth the Thessalonians that God hath from the beginning chosen them to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit 2 Thess 2.13 1 Pet. 1.2 and belief of the truth and Peter saith The strangers he wrote unto according to the foreknowledge of God the Father through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ And as I acknowledge this to be an eternall decree Because he chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy so I willingly grant it to be immutable for he that changeth his purpose doth it for want of wisdome in deliberating or for want of power to execute it neither of which can be ascribed to God without blasphemy And hence the Scripture saith The foundation of God standeth sure having this seal The Lord knoweth who are his Fourthly I grant that Christ was elected and constituted to be a Head and all the Elect were predestinated to be his members and in this sense we were chosen in him not existing but only we were pre-ordained unto salvation by him And that this act was one in God in respect of whole Christ mystical although I deny that the Elect were by this act of God mystically united unto Christ which is done upon believing yet I grant a certain relative respect and mutual relation between them In which sense the Elect are called his people before he saved them from their sins and while they were not yet converted and his sheep for which he laid down his life although not yet brought home to him yet was not Christ the meritorious cause of their Election much lesse their foreseen faith or good works although he be the cause of the effects of their Election as therefore this salvation unto which we are predestinated is the act of God so Christ is the effect of Gods love of Election and the means of salvation and our salvation is the end in respect of us but as this salvation is our good so Christ is the cause of it Fifthly Though Christ were thus predestinated to be a Head and the Elect his Members yet was not he a Head actually from eternity nor the Elect actual members because he had not a mystical body from eternity and although God decreed from eternity to justifie the Elect through faith in Christ yet were not they actually justified For * Praedestinatio enim an●e applicationemgratiae nihil ponit in praedestinatis sed latet solùm in praedestinante Ames Medul Theol. cap. 25. sect 2. Predestination maketh no internall difference between the Elect and Reprobate untill actuall grace be given for applying the things intended in Election nor doth Predestination necessarily presuppose the existence of its terme * Praedestinatio enim nec terminum nec objectum suum necessariò praesupponit ut existens sed ponit ut existat ità ut vi praedestinationis ordinetur ut sit Amesii Medul c. 25. s 8. nor object but the futurity of both Having premised these things which I have the rather more fully done because he representeth me and such as differ from him as Arminians and Papists I shall now prove that we were not justified from eternity 1. Gods decree to justifie is terminus diminuens is a terme of diminution and therefore is not actuall Justification 't is amor ordinativus but it is not amor collativus it is a love ordaining and preparing good things for us but not an actuall bestowing them Justification is an actual bestowing of some special mercy a discharge from the guilt of sin and death a passing us from an estate of death into an estate of life this may be intended but is not actually performed by Predestination for it 's a known rule Praedestinatio nihil ponit in Praedestinato but I will not strangle the question so by the prejudice of a word or two therefore I argue 2. The Scripture no where speaketh of an eternal Justification Therefore we were not justified from eternity The Antecedent is acknowledged and made use of by Mr. Eyre and a negative argument in matters of great
propriè dicitur caput Ecclesiae suae Membra verò corporis cùm fiant per vocationem unde dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ídque per vocationem efficacem consequenter per fidem apparet ergo Christum non prius posse dici caput quàm sint aliqui qui credunt in ipsum loquor de Christo Mediatore Redemptore I confesse saith he Christ is the Head of the Elect and of those that are predestinated but not formally of the predestinated For neither are the predestinated as predestinated members of his body wherein he differeth from Mr. Eyre toto coelo Vide Mr. Eyre page 8. but they shall be his members for whosoever is a member of Christ without doubt existeth Nor is a member of Christ a term of diminution lessening his existence but the predestinate as predestinate do not exist for predestination was from eternity but the predestinate did not simply exist from eternity This day there are many Elect without doubt which are not yet borne Again That union by which we are made the members of Christ is made by faith Therefore as many as are Christs members it is needful that they be Believers but not all the predestinate as soon as they are predestinate do presently prove Believers Moreover seeing a head cannot be a head in respect of others before they are made members of his body it followeth that Christ was not a head from eternity seeing he had not a mystical body from eternity or members in which respect he is properly called the head of his Church seeing therefore men are made members of his body by calling whence the Church is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a company of persons called out from the rest of the world by the ministery of the word and that is by effectual vocation and consequently by faith it appeareth that Christ cannot first be called a head before there are some that believe in him I speak of Christ as Mediatour and Redeemer Where let the Reader observe that he plainly affirmeth a predestinate person is not a member of Christs body and that the mysticall union is made by faith and surely none are properly justified or saved before they are members and therefore before faith there is no Justification nor Salvation His next Author is Learned and Holy Mr. Parker who saith in his Book de descensu Christi ad inferos that Christ was justified in his Resurrection and we in him c. I acknowledge the testimony rightly cited but he understandeth no more then that we were meritoriously causally justified in the Justification of Christ but this is also a terme of diminution in respect to a formal and actual Justification till it be extra causas it doth not exist And that this Reverend man means no otherwise then we that untill faith we are not justified or saved Parker de descens Christ ad inferos lib. 3. sect 49. may appear from another passage in the same Book Nullâ siquidem ratione aliâ salutem ad suos derivare poterat quàm quâ ipsam damnationem transfudit Adam nempe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illâ quâ omnes homines qui ei per fidem coadunantur in eo satisfecisse quemadmodum per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similem omnes Adami successores in eo peccâsse reputantur Christ could no other way derive salvation to his then that wherein Adam transmitted damnation to wit that communion wherein all men who are united to him by faith are said to satisfie in him as by the like communion all Adams successors are reputed to have sinned in him Where you may observe 1. That as Adam derived condemnation to none but such as were in him so Christ communicateth salvation to none but such as are in him And 2. That this union to Christ is made by Faith hence by necessary consequence none are saved and justified until faith and he sheweth plainly that we are not in Christ in a natural way as we were in Adam therefore he setteth down faith as the means and none satisfied in Christ but Believers therefore none are justified but such for Christ cannot derive salvation to any but such as are in him and before faith they are not in him His next Author is judicious Mr. Calvin * Fides porro ita justificationem praecedit ut tamen dei respectu sequatur Calvin Antid conc trid sess 6 p. 282. who saith that our Justification in respect of God doth precede our faith to which I adde you might have had the ingenuity to let your Reader know that he saith immediately fides ipsa nos in possessionem justitiae mittit that faith sends us into the possession of righteousnesse And he meaneth nothing but this that seeing God doth offer forgivenesse in Christ and we receive and accept it by faith that in this respect Justification precede faith but we are not actually justified untill faith where I will by the way minde you of a passage of learned Rivet Rivet Advers Baily Jesuit Tom. 2. p 245. against Baily the Jesu●t Ne quidem dicimus Christi justitiam esse causam formalem justificationis diximus eam consistere in relatione inter dantem accipientem sive inter condonantem eum cui condonatur uno verbo imputatione à parte dei receptione ex parte nostri Truly we do not say that Christs righteousnesse is the formal cause of Justification we have said that it consists in the relation between the giver and the receiver or between him that pardoneth and him that is pardoned in one word in imputation on Gods part and receiving it on our part so that now it is true God offering pardon his act precede our part of receiving but yet we are not in the judgement of this Learned man justified formally till we receive it And this is Calvins minde and many passages in the same discourse make against you I will take but one which Mr. Baxter hath observed to my hand Nos autem meminerimus fidei notuum à Christo estimandam esse quia quod nobis offert Deus in Christo non nisi fide recipimus proinde quicquid nobis est Christus id ad fidem transfertur quae nos compotes est Christi omnium ejus bonorum facit neque aliter verum esset illud Johannis fidem nostrum esse victoriam quâ mandus vincitur nisi nos in Christum inserereret qui solus est mundi victor But we have remembered before that the nature of Faith is to be estimated from Christ because what God offers us in Christ we receive it not but by faith whatsoever therefore Christ is to us that is imputed to faith which maketh us partakers of Christ and of all his good things Neither otherwise can that of John be true that faith is our victory whereby we overcome the world unlesse it did ingraf us into Christ who is the Victor of the world And the truth is
sins be imputed then that first transgression why should the sins of any other parents be imputed And the reason is not alike for none but Adam could be a publick person representing all mankinde and that sin was not only personal and proper to Adam but common to the whole nature and that by the will of God ordaining him a publick person For it is a mixt act in God when he doth impute Adams sin partly arising from his Sovereignty and partly from his Justice grounded upon that naturall relation although I deny not upon other considerations the sins of the immediate parents sometimes are and may be imputed to the children And whereas he saith Unlesse they can shew any proviso or restriction in the second Covenant more then in the first why life should not as immediately flow from Christs obedience to the Elect as death did from Adams disobedience the Argument will stand in force I answer here needs no other proviso or restriction but only to shew that we are not in Christ in a natural way as we are in Adam and therefore the benefits of his death cannot immediately follow our birth or be antecedent to it but is limited to the time of our ingraffing into Christ and the parallel holds firme for as in Adam we all virtually sinned and so were virtually condemned so we grant Christ hath meritoriously redeemed us and we are virtually justified in him and as sinne is not actually imputed unto any of Adams posterity till they have an actuall being and are actually members of Adam so are not we actually justified till we be actual members of Christ by faith As for the Logical Axiom Non entis nulla sunt accidentia it was used in my next Argument and therefore I shall consider it in its proper place CHAP. III. Containing an answer to M. Eyre's exceptions against my Argument deduced from our union with Christ shewing that where there is no union there can be no communion his unjust charge refuted and the nature of our union with Christ further declared MY next Argument against which Mr. Eyre is risen up to offer violence was drawn from our union to Christ Where there is no union there can be no communion for union is the ground of all communion which I made evident by an induction of the severall unions in the world and that there was no communion where there was not a preceding union But we are not united unto Christ untill faith Therefore we had no communion with him in his death to an actual justification And in the further prosecuting of the Argument I shewed that this union is such a union whereby the person of a Believer is united to the person of Christ therefore it did presuppose the pre-existence of the person before he could be united and that this union was a thing accidental as to the nature of man and it being attributed to us as the subjects of this union it must require our existence for an accident cannot subsist without its subject because * Where I take accidens pro omni quod de pendenter habe esse ab alio qu● tenus opponit sub stantiae ne strictè pro om● quod inhaesive solùm existit in alio Accidentis esse est in esse vel dependenter esse and unlesse the subject exist nothing can be truly predicated of it for Non entis nullae sunt affectiones and that this union was the formal effect of faith Now let us see what Mr. Eyre saith to the Argument First he saith that I called our union with Christ a personall union which seems to fav ur that absurd notion that a Believer loseth not only his own proper life but his personali●y also and is taken up into the nature and person of the Son of God I am sorry that I must confute him as the fellow did Bellarmine in one word and his shamelesse dealing in this respect is the more injuriously evident in that I did not only tell him in our conference in publick before a great multitude of witnesses that I neither said nor did own any such thing but did decla●e that I said and meant that it was such a union whereby the person of Christ is united to the person of a Bel ever yet is he a man of that face and fore-head to print and declare that to the world which he hath God Angels and men if not his own conscience to witnesse against him but this he hath done to render me odious to the world the Lord forgive him and let him see the evil of these and the like slanders against me and others of his brethren that differ from him And let him now know that I utterly abhor that Familistical notion that there should be an hypostaticall union between Christ and a Believer for Christ is one person and a Believer another Apage Theologiam hanc erco relegandam I forced my self publickly to oppose it as you may see in the Epistle before my Sermon and whether your Doctrine or mine do most favour that absurd notion that the Reverend Doctor doth condemne Dr. Chambers that a Believer loseth not only his own proper life but his personality also and is taken up into the person into the nature and person of the Son of God I desire no better Umpire to determine I affirme that the union made between us and Christ by faith is such a union whereby the person of a Believer is united to the person of Christ What is here that savours of such a notion yea Mr. Hooker Souls union pag 7 8. what is there which our Reverend Divines have not said before me Reverend Mr. Hooker in a Treatise called the Soules Exaltation and in the Sermon called the Souls Vnion with Christ expressing what this union is and how it is made by faith hath this passage he saith It is a totall union the whole nature of a Saviour and the whole nature of a Believer are knit together and page 8. Christ is the Head of the Church not only according as he is God but as he is God and man and a Believer is a member not only according to his body but according to his body and soul whole Christ being the Head and the whole Believer being a Member therefore a whole Christ and a whole believer must be joyned together Perkins 2. Vol. in Com. upon Gal. 2.20 p. 216. and so 1 Vol p. 36.78 The whole person of every faithful man is verily conjoyned with the whole person of our Saviour Christ God and man And the like testimony we have from Reverend Mr. Perkins Of this conjunction saith he two things may be noted The first that it is a substantial union in that the person of him that believeth is united to the person of Christ but Master Eyre makes all the Elect to be one person with Christ antecedent to their faith Because saith he they are given to Christ and Christ to them
at the time of his passion when our sins were laid upon him as our surety And 2. That we are not united antecedently to our faith I prove by these ensuing reasons Although it be willingly acknowledged that Christ was a common person in his death and a surety for all the Elect and what he did was for them yet this constitutes not the mystical union between Christ and us this only rendred him capable of having our sins imputed to h●m and served to lay a foundation for our partaking in his righteousnesse when we should be implanted into him by mysticall union through faith 1. Christ is united to us as he is a Head and we his members but the consideration of Christ as dying for us Ratio capitis non est ratio causae meritoriae Dr. Twiss in answ to Mr. Cotton p. 10. and so becoming a meritorious cause of our salvation is different from the consideration of Christ as a Head for in his death as he is our Mediatour purchasing salvation by the merit of it he is an efficient moral cause of salvation and in this channel runnes the meritorious cause but Christ as he is a Head is an efficient physicall and naturall cause of salvation and thus only he is a Head by actual pouring out his Spirit upon the Elect in the appointed time for their conversion whereby they are brought to faith and so united to Christ Now the moral cause may exist long before the effect follow and therefore doth not necessarily require the existence of the subject but the efficient natural cause hath its effect immediately following a●d therefore when Christ will as a Head unite any to him the person must exist for that that is not cannot be united and then as the Head diffuseth nerves to the several members and conveighs animal spirits by which the members are quickened and live so Christ conveigheth his Spirit into their hearts to work faith by which they are united to Christ and so partake of righteousnesse and spiritual life from Christ 2. To make a mysticall union between Christ and the Elect before their birth or faith be it when it will whether from eternity or Christs death Mr. Eyre p. 8. will necessarily establish that Familisticall notion that Mr. Eyre fasteneth upon us That the personality of a Believer or Elect person is taken up into the nature and person of the Son of God for it makes them and Christ to be but one person for as yet they have no being therefore if they be they must be in him and subsist in his person and so this childe is fairely laid at his own door that he would father upon us but we say no such thing for this union being by faith and not till we exist Christ is one person Peter another Paul a third and so as many distinct persons as are mystically united 3. If they were truly in Christ before their personall being and union to Christ by faith then they and Christ being but one p●rson all and the singular parts of Christs obedience and sufferings together with all and singular the effect thereof and benefits may be attributed to them because they being one with him personally are said to do it in him as we that were all one in Adam united to him by a natural union tanquam in rad●ce humani generis as in the root and common parent of all mankinde are said to do what Adam did but all and every part of Christs obedience and sufferings with all the singular eff●cts and benefits cannot be attributed to any sinner believing in him for of whom with any shew of truth and without horrible blasphemy may it be said that He gave himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour unto God Eph 5.2 That by the eternall Spirit of God he offered up himself without spot to God that the chastisement of our peace was upon him H●b 9 14. Isa 53.5 and that by his stripes we are healed For this can agree to none but Christ personally Isa 63.3 not mystically considered And Christ is said to tread the Wine-presse of his Fathers anger alone but if they were then truly in him then all the Elect of God did tread this Wine-presse with him and mysticall Christ was crucified not Christ alone that was the Son of God And therefore we see most absurdly Mr. Eyre p. 9. that Mr. Eyre applies that to Christ mystically considered which is peculiar personally to Christ the Son of God Matth 3.17 This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased What if this were spoken to Christ as a publick Person and Mediatour for the Elect doth it therefore follow it was meant of Christ mysticall certainly the consequence will never be granted upon his bare word 4. If we were in Christ when he died and suffered for us antecedently to our birth so as to be mystically united having no subsistence but in the person of the Mediatour then we were punished in him and gave satisfaction in him and so no place is left for pardon of sin in our justification for if we were punished in Christ and suffered in him then what place is left for pardon for pardon and punishment are contrary He that suffereth the full weight of punishment is not pardoned and to this purpose Polanus in his Comment upon the 9th Dani. the 8th Quest Polanus in Dan. c. 9. ver 24. quaest 8. Neutiquam propriè loquendo sumus puniti in Christo cùm Scriptura disertè doceat nos esse justificatos in Christo quòd si sumus in Christo justificati absoluti non igitur damnati puniti Ephes 1. v. 6. Ait Paulus de Deo nos gratìs sibi acceptos fecit in illo dilecto nos ergò Deus non punivit sed omnium nostrum poenam Christo imp●suit Isa 53 6. sicut dicitur Isa 53. v. 6. Jehova facit ut incurrat in eum iniquitas omniûm nostrûm Christus torcular calcavit solus nos non calcavimus Neque vero idem est nos esse punitos in Christo Christum esse punitum pro nobis seu nostro loco Nam si Christus est punitus nostro loco sequitur nos non esse punitos sed poenam nobis esse remissam quid quaeso est aliud remissio peccatorum quàm condonatio culpae poenae Quomodo igitur haec consentient Deum nobis remisisse peccata tamen punivisse nos propter eadem Proinde sic ex Scriptura statuendum Deum Christo paenam nostrorum peccatorum imposuisse ut nobis illam remitteret proprio filio suo non pepercisse ut nobis parceret If any man object that Polanus doth not absolutely deny that we were punished in Christ but that we cannot properly be said to be punished in him I answer Nor do I absolutely deny it if that Doctrine that we were punished in Christ
Head the spirit of every mans own faith is very necessary to all even to Infants For the just shall live by his own faith and not by anothers as neither any man is learned by anothers learning but by that learning which is in himself So also I will adde one Testimony more from Zanchy because Mr. Eyre shelters his opinion of justification from the time of Christs death under Zanchies authority John 6.56 Zanch. De tribus Elo. l. 40. cap. 3. p. 106. Tom. 1. Qui edit meam carnem bibit meum sanguinem in me manet ego in eo Alludit ad illam incorporationem quae fit inter edentem bibentem inter cibos comestos cibus extra nos manens minimè nos nutrit cibus sumptus dum in nobis manet nutrit vivificat c. Idem contingit nobis cum Christo extra nos positus non alit à nobis sumptus nutrit vitam adfert atque conservat He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleeh in me and I in him Up-which words Zanchy saith He alludeth to that incorporation which is made between the eater and the drinker and between the meat eaten meat without us doth not nourish us but inwardly taken while it abideth in us it nourisheth and quickeneth us The same happeneth to us with Christ Christ without us that is not united doth not nourish us but taken by us it nourisheth and bringeth and preserveth life Where you see Zanchy maketh Christ not to justifie and save us while we are disunited but when applied and united by faith then he saveth us I will end all with CAMERO Si quis ergo propriè loqui velit dicet Christum pro solis credentibus satisfecisse Johan Camero in opus● Mise p. 531. col 1. ii enim soli membra illius sunt Sicuti ergò Adam suos tantum peccato infecit ita Christus peccatum in suis tantùm abolevit Christi verò membrum non est ullus qui in Christum non credit Audi quid dicam fides te facit Christi membrum at fides illa te non servàsset nisi Christus pro te satisfecisset If any man therefore will speak properly he will say that Christ satisfied only for Believers for they only are his members Therefore even as Adam infected only his own with sin so Christ hath abolished sin only in his but no man is a member of Christ but he that beleiveth Hear thou what I shall say faith maketh thee a member of Christ but that faith would not save thee unlesse Christ had satisfied for thee To what hath been spoken I shall superadde some considerations about this union to Christ taken from the several similitudes under which this union is set forth in Scripture First It is compared to the Marriage-union Now as before marriage the wife hath no right nor title to the name body goods of the husband so before faith the soul hath nor that right to Christ his Body Name Goods Purchases Therefore this union is not made till faith and in this Mr Eyre yields the cause that the conjugal union is not till faith Secondly It is expressed by a body consisting of divers members Now Rom. 12.4 5. as no member is a true and living member of the body but that which by nearnesse and vital ligatures is united to the head from whence every member receives strength and sensation 1 Cor. 12.12 13. Eph. 1.22 23. so no man is a living member of Christs body untill by faith on his part and by the Spirit as by vital ligatures he is bound and united to Christ whereby he receives the life of justification and santificaction and lives by a life derived from Christ as the Head but no man but a Believer is thus united as an integral part of this body Thirdly It 's compared to a building or house whose stones are closely cemented together and do all lie directly and perpendicularly upon the foundation Eph. 2 2● 21. Now as a stone in the quarry is not united in the building till it be hewen and squared and then by the hand of some Architect laid directly and evenly upon the foundation so a man in his natural estate till he be drawn out of this condition by the Spirit of God 1 Tim. 3.15 and hewed and squared out of the Spirit of bondage and by the same hand of the Spirit as the chief Master-builder brought to faith 1 Pe● 2.5 and built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone he is not a lively stone in this building this is done by the work of the Spirit an unbeliever hath not the Spirit dwelling in him Fourthly it is compared to an ingrafture of a branch in a tree Now a branch may be in a stock two wayes 1. By contiguity or continuity or corporal adherency to the stock and so every branch that is dead may be in the tree but these partake not of the juyce and nourishmnt of the stock and such branches the husbandman will cut off and cast into the fire 2. A branch is in the tree by a reall participation of the sap and influences of the root Thus a man may be in Christ two wayes 1. By external profession of faith for that which maketh us to be in Christ any kinde of way is faith now if our faith be a dead faith such as makes us come to Christ to shelter us from the fire only and it derive not spiritual life and sanctification from Christ this man is a dead branch which the Father will cut off and cast into the fire if it so abide and untill a true faith such as is peculiar to the Elect all are but dead branches yea the very Elect themselves untill effectual vocation and were never truly in him But 2. There is a living operative precious unfeigned faith which so unites the soul to Christ that now it partaketh of the power of his death it is crucified with him and dies to sinne and yet also it lives and is partaker of the quickening Spirit and power of Christs Resurrection whereby it lives and the life it lives in the flesh it lives by the faith of the Son of God Gal. 2. ●0 and it lives unto God as its end as well as from God as the principle of its life this is the true branch that partaketh of the sap and influence of the Root Christ Jesus unto a heavenly life and none are such branches but such as are truly cut off from the stock of Nature and ingraffed by faith into Christ That which Mr. Eyre addeth in the Margin by way of Comment upon Heb. 2.11 He that sanctifieth Mr. Eyre vind pag. 8. and they that are sanctified are all of one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereunto saith he some do make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the substantive and
Mediatour is not sufficient to denominate him to be a Head and the Elect his Members so as to make a mystical uninion between them it may constitute him a publick person and surety but to make him a Head mystically united to any it requireth the existence and faith of the person united Now whereas you say that Mr. Woodbridge did uncivilly interpose and others or else you had urged more it is to make the world believe I could not answer you whereas you could drive on your Argument no further by a new Medium and then you appealed to the people which occasioned that interposition you complain of And here I shall answer to such Arguments as you use p. 124 125. to prove it was terminated to Christ mysticall Your first is drawn from the authorities of Musculus Calvin Beza Pareus None of all which acknowledge no more then that it testifies that great love of God in whom God is well pleased with such as believe shewing the only way of appeasing God and reconciling God to man but none of them do affirme Gods actual well-pleasednesse with any persons before faith but that Christ is he by whom Gods wrath is turned away as the only Mediatour to reconcile God and man but none did afore you dream that this Son in whom God was well pleased was the mystical Christ or that this voice was terminated upon Christ mystical Secondly You say it is against the scope of the words to limit them to the person of Christ they being a solemne declaration of Christs investiture into his office of Mediatorship We grant it is a solemne inauguration or instalme of Christ in this office but deny your consequence that because Christ is here considered as Mediatour therefore what is so spoken to him is terminated to Christ mystical though it might be spoken for th●ir benefit and comfort that shall believe Thirdly You say there is no reason why those words should be terminated to the person of Christ seeing that God was never displeased with him nor had our Saviour any doubt or suspition of it and therefore it was needlesse that God should declare his well-pleasednesse to him in his own person I answer this was spoken for to satisfie us that Christ was a Mediatour well fitted for this work that God was well pleased in him as one endued with sufficient ability to reconcile and God was well pleased with him because he never displeased him and therefore was the more fitting person for this worke and therefore though it be granted Christ needed not this testimony and that it was spoken as an encouragement to us to believe in him Yet it followeth not that therefore God was well pleased with us for his sake before we believe because he is well pleased with Christ and his Mediatory work Fourthly You say the well-pleasednesse of God is to be extended unto them for whom Christ offered up his sacrifice But Christ did not offer up his sacrifice for himself I deny your Major and do say that in this voice God did declare for the benefit and comfort of them that do believe that God was well pleased and satisfied with Christ and his Mediatory work that they may know they believe on him who is a person in whom the Lord taketh infinite delight and therefore he being so dear to God they shall finde favour for his sake that believe but that therefore he is actually well pleased with them whether they believe or not yea when they live under the power of sinne I take it to be no lesse then presumptuous boldnesse to determine and it carries a spirit of contradiction to the whole Gospel And to this end the Apostle saith Without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 To which you say the Apostle speaketh there of mens works and not of their persons I answer it is manifestly false for he speaketh of their persons as well as of their works For 1. He saith by faith the Elders received a good report that is all of them in general but with whom were they thus reported of surely by God himself hence he declared his thoughts of them thus Abraham is called the friend of God and Noah Thee only have I found righteous and David is called a man after Gods own heart 2. In particular Abel he by faith offered a more excellent sacrifice then Cain by which he obtained testimony that he was righteous God did not testifie only that his action was righteous but that he was a righteous person and so Enoch by faith was translated c. and he received this testimony that he pleased God that is that his person pleased God for would God translate him to heaven for a righteous action if his person had not pleased God And the very scope is to prove that he was a Believer and by consequence that his person did please for without faith it is impossible to please God and so Mr. Perkins and all Interpreters that I know speak of it Besides is it possible that mens act●ons can please where their persons please not Surely no God had first respect to the person of Abel then to his offering and he had no respect to Cain and then he regarded not his offering therefore their persons as well as their works did please and both by faith for let their actions be never so conformable to the rule unlesse their persons be accepted their services cannot be accepted and their best actions being mixt with sinne need Christ and must be accepted through Christ as well as their persons And whereas a little after you make an Elect person to be pleasing to God but none of his actions it is altogether against reason to imagine that a tree should be good that never did nor can bring forth good fruit and if all the sins of the Elect be pardoned because they are justified what is there in their actions wherewith God can be displeased when their want of faith and conformity to the rule is pardoned Secondly those Scriptures which are usually alledged by him and others of that opinion for eternal Justification are principally these two Ephes 1.4 2 Tim. 1.9 10. In the first it is said God chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world and in the 6th vers He hath made us accepted in his Beloved I answer It is one thing to say God did chuse us in Christ before the foundation of the world and another to say God justified us and reconciled us Gods Election denotes Gods will of purpose to justifie and reconcile and is terminus diminuens amor ordinativus not collativus it is a terme of diminution and doth not actually collate the things purposed it is true that Justification and Reconciliation is a fruit of Gods Election but it is not coeternal with it and when it is said he chose us in Christ this as I have shewed by the testimony of Dr. Twisse doth not denote any existence that we then
In respect to their exclusion or admittance to the Covenant in the Gospel and thus the Elect Gentiles were once not a people and then made a people to the Covenant of Grace And in this sense I adde all unregenerate though Elect are not Gods people untill faith And hence Zanchy saith thus that whereas the words should have run thus that in the place where it is said ye are not my people there it shall be said ye are my people instead thereof he saith it is said ye are the Sonnes of God and he assigneth three reasons the third is Vt meliùs hâc locutione indicaret rationem quâ justificamur salvamur nempe per fidem verbum Dei apprehensantem si enim filii Dei sumus ergò nati ex Deo si nati ex Deo ergò per semen Dei in nos illapsum à nobis apprehensum in nobis retentum semen Dei est verbum Evangelii in nos illabitur per virtutem Spiritûs sancti à nobis verò fide quae it idem opus est Spiritûs sancti solâ recipitur ergò solâ fide fimus filii Dei He speaketh thus that he may the better declare the manner of our Justification or Salvation ta wit by faith apprehending the Word of God where he taketh faith not objectively but subjectively with connotation to the object for if we be the sons of God we are therefore borne of God if borne of God therefore by the seed of God falling into us and received and retained by us The seed of God is the Word of the Gospel it falleth into us by the power of the Holy Ghost but of us it is only received by faith which again is the work of the Holy Ghost therfore by faith alone we are made the sons of God where you see that Zanchy maketh this great change to be by faith and that such a change is made is evident for before faith they are * Eph. 2.1 2 3. 2 Tim. 2.26 Acts 26 18. Ezek. 44.7 Heb. 2.15 Mark 16.16 dead in sins and trespasses are children of disobedience in whom Satan acts and rules by whom they are led captive at his will and pleasure they are under his power they are unrenewed uncircumcised slaves in bondage to death subject to damnation children of wrath but upon believing are new * 2 Cor. 5 17 2 Pet. 1.4 John 1.12 Eph. 1.5 1 Pet. 1.3 23. creatures partakers of the Divine Nature they are actually instated into the number of children to which they were predestinated are begotten again to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus from the dead are borne again not of corruptible seed but incorruptible the Word of God which liveth and abideth for ever But could this be affirmed of them ever since Christs death surely no th●refore here is a change and that before God wrought in their estate by effectual vocation and therefore they were not justi●●ed before Fifthly If we are exhorted to believe in God for pardon and remission of sins then were not we pardoned from the time of Christs death before faith But we are thus exhorted to believe in God for the pardon of sins Believe and thou shalt be saved Acts 16.31 and the Scripture was written for this end that we might believe and that believing we might have life through his Name John 20.21 The consequence is confirmed because if we were justified already before faith it were a needlesse exhortation to call upon us to believe for pardon when we are pardoned already and therefore we might be called upon to believe to get assurance of our pardon but not to obtain pardon it self it were an exhorting us to seek for that by faith which according to Mr. Eyre is to be evidenced not to be obtained through faith and so were a needlesse and a groundlesse exhortation Sixthly Such as were not mystically united to Christ at his death could not be justified actually by his death But Believets that now live were not then mystically united Therefore The Major Proposition will need no shield and buckler to defend it for Christ justifieth none but such as are in him as the first Adam brings condemnation to none but such as are in him so the second Adam gives life and salvation to none but such as are in him The Minor is proved because that that is not cannot be united Believers were not then existing Besides 2. This union is made by faith They that were not existing were not then believers 3. Christs being a common person is not sufficient to make the mystical union 4. Christ as a publick person is a surety but Christ as united to us is a Head which are different considerations in the one he is a meritorious moral cause of salvation in the other a physical cause or efficient natural cause 5. The mystical union is by a work of the Spirit 1 Cor. 6.17 He that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit but if the mystical union be made by Christs being a publick person that needeth not any new work of the Spirit to joyn Christ and Believers together 6. Those places where it is said Ephes 2.5 6.13 Ephes 2.5.6.13 Col. 2.13 14. Col. 2.13 14. That we were quickened with Christ and are made to sit together in heavenly places And in Christ Jesus we who were sometimes afarre off are now made nigh and that the handwriting of Ordinances was blotted out signifie no more then that in and through him as a meritorious cause we obtain such mercies but they hold not forth Believers to be existing in him before they had a being and our sitting in heavenly places is spoken only in regard of the certain right we have thereunto jus ad rem though not jus in re and in a qualified sense in Christ our Head who is already ascended Seventhly Christ in his death was not mystically but personally considered For though he were a publick person and Mediatour yet as so he was personally not mystically considered in his death and resurrection and the Justification that he received from God Therefore we were not justified actually from the time of Christs death The Antecedent is thus made good because it was not Christ mystical that was crucified but Christ the Son of God and He trod the * Isay 63.3 Wine-presse of his Fathers wrath alone Christ mysticall is not the Saviout of the world then the work of Redemption is to be attributed to every Believer and they are as truly Saviours of the world as Christ but this is blasphemy to imagine and therefore if he were not mystically considered in his death then not in his Resurrection nor in that Justification he received and so by consequence we were not justified by his death nor were in him antecedently to faith Eightly If we were pardoned from the time of Christs death then as Bellarmine objecteth against our Divines that make faith an assurance then it is