Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	punishment_n	sin_n	transgression_n	4,361	5	10.4522	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45147	Pacification touching the doctrinal dissent among our united brethren in London being an answer to Mr. Williams and Mr. Lobb both, who have appealed in one point (collected for an error) to this author, for his determination about it : together with some other more necessary points falling in, as also that case of non-resistance, which hath always been a case of that grand concern to the state, and now more especially, in regard to our loyalty to King William, and association to him, resolved, on that occasion / by Mr. John Humfrey.	Humfrey, John, 1621-1719.	1696 (1696)	Wing H3697; ESTC R16468	49,303	49

PACIFICATION Touching the Doctrinal Dissent Among our United Brethren in LONDON BEING An Answer to Mr. Williams and Mr. Lobb both who have appealed in one Point collected for an Error to this Author for his Determination about it TOGETHER With some other more necessary Points falling in As also that Case of Non-resistance which hath always been a Case of that Grand Concern to the State and now more especially in regard to our Loyalty to King William and Association for him Resolved on the Occasion By Mr. JOHN HUMFREY They were wont to speak in old time saying They will surely ask counsel at Abel and so they ended the matter 2 Sam. 20.18 LONDON Printed for T. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside 1696. PACIFICATION PART I. THERE having been so little Reason for the Interruption of that Union which was made between the Nonconformist Ministers in London without distinguishing Presbyterian and Independent the Government of both over their particular gathered Congregations being as the case stands coincident as to the main And our Expectations of some more general Meeting of both for Reconciliation suffering hitherto Disappointment it does seem even necessary to me for stirring up the Brethren to this Work that the Difference between them which is not healed but sleeps should be awakened and must be awakened and brought again to Agitation till the matter be composed Must I say not in regard to the setting a few righter in their Judgments whom I think out which yet is also intended but in regard to this more general end of composing the Nonconformist Body For which Composure then there must be now either an Agreement of All in the same Points which can never be for the Understanding of diverse Men will be diverse as their Faces are diverse and I cannot approve of any Man 's going about a weak and vain obtaining that Or else an Agreement only in Practise and Love leaving every Brother Free to abound in his own Sense as to these Points wherein we differ so long as they indanger not the Foundation This is that I count is to be done to which end Having printed one Sheet with some Animadversions on certain Exceptions against Mr. Williams's Books Mr. W. thought good to answer these Exceptions himself in another Sheet directed to me and Mr. Lobb hath answered his Sheet in four or five There is one Point as appears there collected for an Error wherein they have both appealed to me and I have said something to it But having not then by me Mr. W's Books I referred the Matter to the Brethren when they meet and to his Books with this Adjustment That if that Error upon Examination was not found in them Mr. Lobb should ask his Pardon if it was then did Mr. W. deserve rebuke not because he erred as all do in some things but because he denies the Error to be there and should very honestly confess it that so all might be made up By this means one of them shall get Love in such an ingenuous Acknowledgment and the other Victory I have since been accommodated with Mr. W's Books and have looked into them and find it harder than I thought to tell unto whose share the Love and Ingenuity must fall In the Preface of Mr. W. to his Book of Gospel-Truth in the third Leaf are these words The Gospel hath another Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law than the Covenant of Works had This change of the Sanction supposeth the Death of Christ and his honouring the Law by his perfect Obedience Upon these words Mr. Lobb collects that Mr. W. holds that there is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law which we count an Error These are Mr. W's words and lye together in the same Page and as to the Construction thereof I being appealed unto do premise this That the Gospel hath another Sanction than we Covenant of Works is a Truth on Mr. W's side and Mr. Lobb will grant it That there is no Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law is a Truth on Mr. Lobb's side and Mr. W. will grant it But whether the Gospel hath another Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law and There is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law be the same is the Question Unto the Decision hereof thus much I have said in Mr. Lobb's Sheets before I examined Mr. W's Books that a Change of the Sanction and Another Sanction is all one And so far I am right because so much is intended by Mr. W. as appears by the words conjoyn'd and urg'd by Mr. Lobb But whether a Change of the Sanction or Another Sanction being all one to the Preceptive part of the Law as taken into the Gospel in Mr. W's Sense be a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law in Mr. Lobb's Sense is still the Question Before I come to the passing Judgment it will be most to Edification in the first place to understand and state the Point it self Some Worthy Divines says Mr. Baxter say All the Law of Innocency is ceased Precept Promise and Threatning Cessante capacitate subjecti Lex cessat Others say that all are still in force Himself saith the Precept and Threat is but the Promise only through our Incapacity does cease Now let these Worthy Divines that say the whole ceases explain their Tenent and let us see what they draw from it and if there be nothing in the Matter explain'd but what we can approve in ours let them in God's name enjoy their Scheme of Thoughts and we our own God hath abolished the Covenant of Works by substituting a new one in room of it says Dr. Owen as Mr. W. hath quoted him Def. Gosp P. 44. Mr. Lobb does not must not say that none but Socinians are of that Opinion There is something now here accordingly that Mr. W. holds and Mr. Lobb thinks to be an Error But what does Mr. W. say upon it Is there any thing he deduces from thence that is dangerous or of evil Consequence to be reproved Is there any thing delivered in his Explication but what Mr. Lobb approves and does himself and his Brethren deliver and preach if he preach at all or preach the Gospel If the Deductions he makes from his Truth and the Deductions Mr. W. makes from that Error be the same Doctrine and that which is sound and necessary to Salvation what reason is there for all such to be Chid that cannot bear one with another Mr. Lawson that Judicious Divine of whom Mr. Baxter says somewhere that he learned more of him than any one living does say that They who hold that the Law remains the same and that God as Rector by Substitution transferring the Punishment merited by Transgressions upon Christ and in consideration of Satisfaction made by him remits Sin so that here is nothing but a Relaxation or Interpretation of it do Err. In another place he says likewise To think that the

Promise Threat and Obligation of the Law of Works continue under the Gospel is an Error He concludes that the Law of Works not Moral Law is abrogated This Resolution I rest not upon as something dark and too short for how solidly soever he speaks of the Obligation of the Law yet hath he not fully ventured to determined this Point and I think could not do it Mr. Baxter therefore tying not himself to Mr. Lawson's Opinion is singular in his own The Precept and Threat says he is of force but the Promise only ceases This is his brief State of the Point and I think it rare so piercing a Man should take up with it Did Christ come from Heaven to Earth to take on him our Nature and put himself under the Law to obey it perfectly and suffer the Penalty to Redeem us from it and is this all that Freedom that Deliverance we have from it that the Promisa●y part ceases What benefit is there in that We are uncapable to perform the Condition of the Law says he and therefore the Promise is void But neither what this excellent Man says here is true nor is it the thing which should be said It is not the Thing because the delivery of us from the Law which the Scripture speaks of as the Purchase of Christ is the freeing us from the Curse and Condemnation of it To be freed from the Promise what good I say is that And it is not true because the Lord Jesus a Man as we are did perform the Condition and made the Reward thereby due to him of Debt or Merit and accordingly entred into Glory The Man Christ I said in my Sheet was obliged to an Obedience of the Moral Law that he might himself have Right Jure merito foederis operum to Life Eternal Well then you may say if I be not lead by neither of these what is Mr. Humfrey's own Opinion and State of the Point I answer The second Opinion which Mr. Baxter counts Extream and Mr. Lawson says is an Error I take to be Truth and own that the Law of Nature or Works continues wholly as to us in his Precepts Promise and Threat unabolished Do we make void the Law through Faith God forbid yea we establish it I have formerly thus explained and stated my Judgment The Moral Law or Law of Nature is a Law or Rule of Life or Manners in it self consider'd I count without the Sanction that is not Essential to it The Duty which it requires arising from God's Nature and Ours in owing to God if he had made no Promise of Reward or threatned no Punishment for the breach of it and God's putting a Sanction to it makes that Law a Covenant Now in a Covenant there are two Parties and consequently there is Our part and God's part in this Covenant On our part the Law I count being the Law and Covenant of Nature does and must continue unchangeable and Man not performing perfect Obedience and yet bound to it is in the Hand of his Judge otherwise above the Law to dispose of him as he pleases Every Sin against it though the least maketh Punishment due the Threat declares and constitutes a Debitam though not Eventum that is deserves it But as to God's part the Case is alter'd Here is the business We are by this Law or Covenant through our Sin we and all the World in God's hand lyable to Wrath and Condemnation and God as Rector and Judge does stand engaged to deal with us according to it But upon a voluntary and allowed Mediation of his Son and Satisfaction given in our behalf which he might accept to the fulfilling the Ends of the Law better than by Man's Punishment he executes not the Law upon him There are two Reasons upon which when they meet a Law-giver who is also Rector may forbear the Punishing a Criminal One is when the Case is Pittiable and requires Commiseration And the other when his Justice and Honour can be saved also though he spare the Person Such is the Case here If God deal with Man according to this Law all Mankind must Perish which is Pittiable indeed and it pleased him in his Wisdom to find out and in his Goodness to permit and appoint that the Lord Jesus his Son should interpose so as by fulfilling the Law exactly for himself and bearing the Punishment of it also in our stead here is no Dishonour can be cast on himself or Law by his dealing otherwise on his part with us than the Covenant required By this means did God pay its due Respect to his Law seeing as he required at first the Performance of it as the Condition of Life and when it was broke would have his Son re-honour it and fulfil it so he would not pardon the Sinner in point of Justice without an Hostage and Satisfaction But now amends being made him amply by such a Mediator he dispenses with the Penalty as to us so that the Law here becomes not Abrogated nor Ceased but properly Relaxed It is not an Abrogation or Cessation or an Interpretation an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but whatever the Skilful Mr. Lawson says otherwise is a Relaxation or Dispensation so as we shall not be condemned by it The separating between God's part and our part in this Covenant never came into Mr. Lawson's Mind to see this We are not on our part I say freed from the Law that we should no longer obey it or not be liable to Punishment but we are delivered from it by our Redeemer so as to obtain the Mercy that God will not deal with us on his part according to it How then will you say does or will he deal with us I answer by another Law which by the Merit of that Satisfaction he also purchased a Remedying Law the Law of Grace the Covenant of Forgiveness the Law of Faith in opposition to the Law of Works The Lord Jesus hath redeeemed us his Poor Lost Creatures from the Sentence of the Law by which every Mortal else must have perished but he takes the Redeemed into his hands and both the Remedying Law and Law of Nature into his Law the Law of Christ so that they shall not be Lawless for all that They have the Law still as in the Redeemer's hands to live by as well as they can and as far as Humane Frailty will permit but they shall be dealt with in regard to Acceptation according to the Grace of the Gospel The Law then remains in the Precept and Threat as a Rule to Live by but not as the Rule we shall be Judged by a Rule of Life but not of Judgment It is by the Law of Liberty we shall be Judged says St. James and St. Paul expresly According to my Gospel Blessed be God for this Truth What Mr. W. and Mr. Lobb will say of this Determination I may know if they write again but I am not sollicitous about that I am methinks

make the Punishment due but the Pardoning Law being conjunct with it makes the Impunity due also In primo instanti the Punishment in secundo Impunity It is necessary therefore I judge for Mr. W. to explain his Term Sanction and try if he can make his words so intelligible as one may say he gave no occasion of Mis-construction But seeing by this Phrase of his as I call it in Mr. Lobbs Sheets and much more by that Mr. Lobb hath added from another place The Gospel doth not denounce Death for the same and every Sin as Adam 's Law did there is occasion given to Mr. Lobb to believe him herein in an Error if it be one and the contrary be not and rationally to do so I must in my Judgment on the case so far excuse Mr. Lobb Let us consider again The words of Mr. W. may be construed either with Application of his Readers Thoughts to the Law alone or to the Gospel alone or to the Law and Gospel both together If the Readers Thoughts be applied to the Law alone then Another Sanction being the same with a Change of the Sanction and that upon Christ's Satisfaction too he must needs understand the meaning to be that the Penal Sanction of the Law is by the Gospel or by Christ's Death and Obedience made void for the same Law cannot have two Sanctions and if its own be changed it is abolished If the Readers Thoughts be applied to the Gospel alone they must recur for there is no change of Sanction questionable as to that If his Reader construe him with Application of his Thoughts to Law and Gospel both together then may the meaning indeed be understood that the Gospel Sanction is changed from that which was the Law Sanction so as to be another and not the same without making void one or the other which yet is a perplext Conception Now of these three Applications of a Man's Thoughts to the words if one did not know that the last was the Author's meaning because he says so the first Application I think likest to fall into the Thoughts of another Man as well as Mr. Lobb's rather than either of the other So far is he farther to be excused On the other side when I come to look into Mr. W's Books and see with my Eyes what he hath said I may excuse Mr. Lobb in a mistake of Judgment if he do mistake but do not till farther Scrutiny clear him from wronging Mr. W. I will turn to his last Book first Man made Righteous p. 100. There is hardly a Truth more plain in the Word of God than that the Wrath of God abides still upon Unbelievers notwithstanding Christ's Death Mr. Lobb says he holds the Penal Sanction of the Law abrogated and how does this place stare in Mr. Lobb's Face I will turn next to his middle Book Defence of Gospel Truth p. 2. That Men while they reject the Gospel are not at all under the Curse of the Law I abhor How any should be under the Curse of the Law and the Penal Sanction of it be not of Force I never yet had one thought Let us look then last into his first Book from whence the Exception was gathered Gospel Truth p. 5. That the Elect while Dead in Sin and Unbelief are Children of Wrath and condemned by the Law I affirm Again p. 107. The Gospel denounceth and declareth all condemned till they believe It declares they are so and denounceth they shall be so John 3.36 He that believeth not on the Son shall not see Life but the Wrath of God abideth on him And v. 18. He that believeth not is condemned already Here is the case of all men by the Fall they are condemned and under Wrath Here is the way of Relief a Christ believed on and they that believe their Condemnation is reversed These places at the reading moved me much and made me write to Mr. Lobb but I found him aware of such Passages and not moved answering that for all these words Mr. W. meant them only of the Gospel Denunciation Mr. W's Opinion he accounts was that Christ by his Death hath taken away the Curse of the Law and the Curse the Unbeliever is under is only that of the Gospel He that believeth not shall be Damned To this purpose may be observed those picked Terms of Governing Justice and Governing Grace which Mr. W. uses as equivalent to the two Governments of Mr. Lawson the Creator's Government and the Redeemer's Government which must be supposed to have their two Laws the New vacating the Old As also those Arguments Mr. W. offers to prove a new Law that do notable fit a Judgment so possest What kind of Government can we assign to Christ says he if there be no Sanction to his Law But if he hold the Sanction of the Old Law as taken into Christ's to stand good I pray why such a Necessity of it to the New Nevertheless the words of Mr. W. as I have quoted them are so express for all Men by the Fall to be under the Curse which does imply the Law therefore to be of force that I cannot give Judgment upon any such bare Reasoning Let us therefore see another place Mr. Lobb points me to Defence of Gospel Truth p. 23. Adam's Law must be altered by the Law-giver to admit of Satisfaction Here says Mr. Lobb is plain proof of Mr. W's holding the Law changed But though the word altered be unskilfully said and he should say relaxed that which follows in three lines after to wit The Sentence that condemned Adam seizes on all Men as soon as they have being there needs no other does again turn the Scale for Mr. W. The Truth is the words I am to judge of between these two Brethren are in Mr. W's first Book and it is that alone must shew what was his mind then The Passages for him I have mentioned are not so positively fixt in that Book as in the two other after he was warned And there are two places not mentioned by Mr. Lobb but observed by me in reading the Book afresh quite over that do put me to a stand One is p. 221. where he hath words to this sense We are not to preach the Sanction of the Law of Innocency but may press the Gospel Sanction The other is in the express words Is it the Grace of God to leave his Precepts without any Sanction when he removed the Curse of the Law Here is the Curse of the Law that is the Penal Sanction removed that is changed and another brought into its room as being that it is like he meant which lies on all till they believe There is nothing goes before or after to alieviate this sense P. 242. I must needs say here therefore that I was sorry to see this place because I had come to a Judgment and finished my Sheets and was brought to this pass within my self Mr. Lobb I reasoned does verily believe that Mr.