Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
nature_n assume_v divine_a union_n 2,494 5 9.4017 5 false
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
A59809 A defence and continuation of the discourse concerning the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and our union and communion with Him with a particular respect to the doctrine of the Church of England, and the charge of socinianism and pelagianism / by the same author. Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707. 1675 (1675) Wing S3281; ESTC R4375 236,106 546

There are 15 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

this That I deny the supernatural assistances of Grace from Christ to make men holy and therefore that Holiness and Obedience which alone I make necessary to our Union to Christ is not true Gospel-holiness as not being owing to an infused Principle derived from Iesus by the effectual operation of the Holy Ghost And that it is impossible for any Persons though compleatly and perfectly united to Christ to attain true Holiness for the future because Christ is not considered as a quickning Head and a vital root of influences to us Now though I suppose Mr. Ferguson and I shall hardly agree about the manner of the Holy Spirits working in us which he affirms to be by a real and Physical operation yet I never denied but have expresly owned the Divine Influences of Grace from Christ as will appear plainly before I conclude this Chapter But suppose for once that I had denied this and had affirmed that men might be holy without it would it hence follow that I rejected the necessity of holiness or made it impossible to Mankind because though falsely I should assert that men are and may be holy without such supernatural strength and power Yes for this is not a Gospel-Holiness which is wholly owing to the Divine Grace But does the efficient cause then constitute the nature of things Suppose two men one immediately created by God another begotten in the ordinary course of nature but both perfectly alike as to all the Essentials of Humane Nature does this make such a difference between them that one must not be called a man as well as the other because one was created and the other begotten Thus in the same manner suppose one man immediately created by God perfectly righteous and holy as Adam was Another who is renewed and sanctified by infused Principles of Grace and by the Physical operation of the Spirit And a third who by diligence and industry by reason and discourse and the wise improvement of his natural faculties hath arrived to the same temper of mind to the same Principles and Habits of Action which were immediately created in the first and Physically infused into the second If there were such a man as this I would willingly understand why he should not be accounted as truly and properly holy as either of the former by the same reason that he is as true a man who is begotten by the strength of nature as Adam was who was immediately created or as Christ was who was formed in the Virgins Womb by the overshadowing of the Holy Ghost The original Holiness of God is the Pattern of all Holiness and the holiness of Creatures consists in a conformity to the Divine Image not in being produced by a Divine Power The sanctifying operation of the Holy Spirit is necessary to the Being not to the Nature of Holiness Could that which we call Holiness be produced by the strength of natural Reason and our natural Faculties it would be nevertheless Holiness for that And therefore unless Mr. Ferguson can prove that that Holiness which I make essential to our Union to Christ is defective in something which constitutes the nature of Holiness though he could prove that I attributed Holiness to the strength and power of Nature he will only make himself ridiculous by charging my Notion with destroying the necessity of Gospel-holiness But this whole charge was the effect only of a weak and contemptible revenge because I had charged them and made good my charge with placing our Union to Christ before holiness of life What defence can Mr. Ferguson make against this Truly none at all but according to his old way he denies it without attempting to answer any thing which I alleadged in the proof of it And yet which argues him to be a man of much greater courage than wit at the very same time he denies and owns it or which comes much to one professes that it is very indifferent to him whether it be so or not He tells us All that we plead for is this That as previously to our Union with Christ we are polluted and unholy so by that very act whereby he unites us to himself he infuses those Principles into us whereby our natures are cleansed and we come to be denominated holy and pure Here he expresly acknowledges that before our Union to Christ we are polluted and unholy and therefore we must be united to him while we are unholy for every minute before our Union is previous to it Well but then by the same act that he assumes us into Union with himself he transforms our natures Suppose that yet we are unholy till we are united for we are made holy by vertue of our Union and our Author tells us That it is a needless enquiry whether our Renovation in order of nature precede our Union with Christ or whether our Union go before our Renovation seeing in order of time they are not only inseparable but that which is the new Creature the Seed of God and Divine Nature in us is the very bond of our Cohaesion Say you so Sir Is this a needless enquiry Then it seems it is indifferent whether we be considered as united to Christ before or after we are holy and why then should he pretend so much to abhor the thoughts of our being united to Christ while we are unholy And yet how this agrees with making the New Creature the bond of Cohaesion I cannot understand since in order of nature we can have no notion of any Union before or without its bond But to consider this a little whether it be so indifferent to place our Union to Christ in order of nature before or after our Renovation For I never charged them with saying that those who are in Christ may continue unholy because they as well as the Antinomians do affirm That Holiness is a necessary and Physical effect of our Union to Christ though their Principles overthrow the necessary Obligations to it whoever is considered as united to Christ must be considered in a state of favour and acceptation with God as cloathed with the perfect Righteousness of Christ as pardoned through his Bloud and so an actual Heir to Eternal Life and Glory now if a man may be considered as pardoned and justified and an Heir of Glory in order of nature before he is holy before he repents of his sins or loves God or so much as resolves and purposes to obey him this I am sure overthrows the whole Christian Religion which denounces the wrath of God against every man who is wicked to the very last minute wherein he may be considered as wicked and promises Pardon and Eternal Life only to those who actually repent and love God If we may be considered in order of nature as united to Christ before we are holy then there is nothing in Sin contrary to the nature of our Union and then we may as well be united to Christ in order
Human Nature was fitted for Glory might have exempted him from the Obligation of any outward Law whatever What he means by outward Laws I cannot tell for the Laws of Creation are intrinsick and essential to human Nature and if the Hypostatical Union do not destroy the Human Nature it cannot exempt it from those natural and necessary Obligations He might as well say that the Hypostatical Union exempts the Human Nature of Christ from the Laws of Reasoning as from the Rules of Life both which are equally the Glory and Perfection of a Reasonable Nature And though we should suppose the Human Nature in Christ in the very first instant of its Union to the Divine Nature to be fitted for Glory yet I cannot see how this exempts the Human Nature from the Obligation of those Laws which are essential to Human Nature unless he thinks that Human Nature in Glory is under no Obligations Had Christ been immediately translated to Heaven he had not been obliged to those particular instances of Obedience which are proper to an earthly state for glorified Saints themselves are not but while Christ is a perfect Man as well as God it will always become him in whatever state he be to live agreeably to Human Nature For though he be advanced to the Right Hand of God he is still as man inferiour to his Father and therefore can never as man be exempted from the necessary Laws of Human Nature But to proceed to the Ceremonial Law The Doctor proves that Christ as an innocent man under the Covenant of Works could not be obliged by this Law which came upon us by reason of Sin especially not to such institutions as signified the washing away of sin and repentance from sin as the Baptism of Iohn did and therefore he fulfilled this Righteousness for us To this I answered in my former Discourse That though it were granted that these Laws at first were commanded upon occasion of sin yet an innocent man may observe them to good and wise purposes as publick and solemn acts of Worship or external and visible expressions of Devotion as a publick Profession of Righteousness and a vertuous Life to which purposes among others the Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the Law and the Baptism of Iohn served c. To which the Doctor returns no answer but makes me say what I never thought and abuses his credulous Readers with an apprehension that I had talked like himself at such a rate of Nonsense as any one in his Wits must needs despise to borrow some of his own Elegancies For thus he reports my sense or words or both as he would perswade his Readers that I say that an Innocent Person such as Christ was absolutely may be obliged for his own sake to the observation of such Laws and Institutions as were introduced by the occasion of sin and respected all of them the personal sins of them that were obliged by them And now he desires to be left to his liberty nay to the necessity of his mind not to believe Contradictions I wish he had been under this necessity a little sooner or were yet under a necessity of not making contradictions for what he believes no man can tell I plainly acknowledged that Christ being an Innocent Person could not observe any of these Judaical Ceremonies with respect to personal sins but I say as they had other significations so he might observe them to other purposes Circumcision in its first Institution was a seal of that Covenant which God made with Abraham and therefore did very well become him who was not only of the Seed and Posterity of Abraham but that very Seed which was promised in the Covenant whereof Circumcision was the Seal The Baptism of Iohn was a publick Profession of a vertuous Life which becomes the most innocent man but it was a profession of Repentance and signified the washing away of sin only when the baptized Person had been a Sinner and yet the Baptism of our Saviour was designed for a nobler purpose as a Publick Inauguration of him to his Prophetical Office The Passover was an Eucharistical Sacrifice in commemoration of the Deliverance of their Fore-fathers out of Aegypt and therefore might be observed by the most innocent man but I challenge the Doctor or any of his Friends to prove that Christ offered any Sin or Trespass-Offering which respect only personal Offences or that he observed any Ceremony which could signifie nothing else but personal guilt and till he can prove this his Argument is worth nothing His second Argument to prove that what Christ did as Mediator that is the actual Obedience of his Life he did for us and in our stead I represented thus That there can be no other reason assigned of Christs Obedience to the Law but only this that he did it in our stead Here the Doctor according to his usual way charges me with mis-representing his Argument for his words are That the end of the active Obedience of Christ cannot be assigned to be that he might be fit for his Death and Oblation These I acknowledge to be his words but not his Argument for the force of his Argument consists in the dis-junction as I expresly observed that either Christ fulfilled all Righteousness to fit him for his Death and Oblation or he did it for us and in our stead because otherwise as he himself expresses it if the Obedience Christ performed be not reckoned to us and done upon our account there is no just cause to be assigned why he should live here in the World so long as he did in perfect Obedience to all the Laws of God and therefore in answer to this I made it appear that though the Righteousness of Christ were supposed not necessary to qualifie him for his Death which he can never prove yet there were other great and necessary Reasons why he should live so long in the World in a perfect Obedience to the Divine Will His third Argument to prove that Christ performed all Righteousness for us is the absolute necessity of it for this is the term of the Covenant Do this and live so that we being unable to yield that compleat perfect Obedience which the Law requires as the condition of Life and Happiness it is necessary that Christ our Mediator and Surety should fulfil the Law for us The sum of which Argument as I told him before is this That there never was nor ever can be a Covenant of Grace that God still exacts the rigorous perfection of the Law from us and that we must not appear before him without a compleat and perfect Righteousness of our own or of another Now this is the thing in question whether we must be made righteous with the perfect Righteousness of Christ imputed to us or whether God will for the sake of Christ dispense with the rigor of the Law and accept a sincere and Evangelical Obedience instead of a
the Church his Spouse a Shepherd and the Church his Flock a Rock whereon his Church is built the chief corner Stone and the Church a holy Temple But as for particular Christians their Union to Christ is by means of their Union to the Christian Church that is no man can be united to Christ till he be a Christian and no man is in the Scripture account a Christian till he make a public profession of his Faith and be solemnly admitted into the Christian Church which is the Body of Christ for which he died and to which all the Promises of the Gospel are made A secret and private Faith in Christ is not ordinarily enough to make any man a Christian but Faith in the Heart and the Confession of the Mouth are both necessary Rom. x. 9 10. Christ himself hath appointed the publick Sacrament of our Initiation and our Church teacheth her Children that in their Baptism which is their solemn admission into the Christian Church They are made Members of Christ the Children of God and Inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven But I have abundantly confirmed this Notion in my former Discourse and those who would be more fully satisfied in it may have recourse thither The next thing to be considered is what is the true nature of this Union betwixt Christ and his Church and the most general and comprehensive notion is that it is a Political not a natural Union the Union between Christ and his Church consists in their mutual Relations to each other now those Relations whereby the Scripture represents this Union signifie Power and Authority on Christs part and Inferiority and Subjection in the Church Christ is the Head and Husband which signifies Rule and Government and the Church is his Spouse and Body and therefore as the Wife is subject to the Husband and the Body to the Head so the Church must be subject to Christ and the like may be said of all those other Relations whereby this Union is described Only when I call it a Political Union you must not imagine that it is only such an external Relation as is between a Prince and his Subjects because Christ is a spiritual King and his Authority reaches to the Heart and Spirit which no Humane Power can no man is in a proper sence a Subject of Christs Kingdom but he who governs his Heart and Spirit as well as his external Actions by the Laws of the Gospel and though an external and visible profession of the Gospel entitles men to an external Communion with the Christian Church because the external Government of the Church is committed to men who cannot discern hearts and thoughts yet whoever does not heartily obey Christ is not really united to him for the subjection of the Mind and Spirit is the principal thing which denominates us the Subjects of a spiritual King and therefore this may be called a Spiritual-Political Union which principally respects the Subjection of our Minds and Spirits to Christ and does necessarily include a participation of the same nature with him and a mutual reciprocal love It is a Political Union because it consists in the Authority and Government of Christ as a Head and Husband and in the Subjection and Obedience of the Church as his Body and Spouse and it is Spiritual because the Authority of Christ does not only reach our Outward Actions as the Government of Earthly Princes does but extends it self to our Minds and Spirits and if you will put it into other words our Union to Christ consists in a hearty belief of his Revelations in obedience to his Laws and subjection to his Authority this makes us the Church the Temple of God wherein he dwells as he formerly did in the Temple at Ierusalem this is that which the Scripture calls having Fellowship and Communion with God and Christ which signifies being of that Society which puts us into a peculiar relation to God that God is our Father and we his Children that Christ is our Head and Husband our Lord and Master we his Disciples and Followers his Spouse and his Body this entitles us to his Merits and Righteousness to his peculiar Care and Providence to the Influences of his Grace to the Power of his Intercession to all those blessings which he hath purchased for and promised to his Church Now besides that this Notion is plain and intelligible and very aptly agrees with all those Metaphors and Forms of Speech whereby the Scripture represents our Union to Christ there are these two great advantages we gain by it first that this is a plain demonstration of the evil and danger of Schism a sin which very few men have any sense of in these days for if our Union to Christ as our Head necessarily requires our Union to the Christian Church which is his Body then to divide from the Christian Church or any true and sound part of it does not only make a Rent in the Body of Christ which is a very great evil but divides us from Christ as a Member which is separated from the Body is separated from the Head too this makes the Sentence of Excommunication so dreadful because it cuts us off from the Body of Christ and this Sentence every Schismatick executes upon himself and that more infallibly too than Church-Governours can for they may be mistaken in the Justice of the Cause and may separate those from the external Communion of the Church who are spiritually united to Christ and then their Sentence is reverst by a superior Tribunal But whoever causlesly separates from the Christian Church or any part of it does infallibly divide himself from Christ unless it be through such invincible mistakes as may mitigate the crime and plead his excuse for Schism is a work of the flesh the effect of Pride and Passion or Interest or some other carnal Lust and it concerns those men who make so light of Schism to consider how they expect to be saved by Christ who is only the Saviour of the Body when they have divided themselves from his Body and are no longer any part or member of it A second advantage which we gain by this notion is this that it gives a plain account of the necessity of Holiness and Obedience to entitle us to the Merits of Christ and Justification by him and to all those Promises which Christ hath made to his Body and Members whoever is in Christ and united to him shall certainly be saved by him for he is the Saviour of the Body and our Justification is not owing to our own Merits and Deserts but to the Merits of Christ for whose sake alone God hath promised to justifie and reward those who are united to him but since our Union to Christ consists in the subjection of our Souls and Bodies to him Holiness and Obedience is as necessary a condition of our Justification by Christ as it is essential to our Union to him We cannot be justified
by Christ till we are united to him and we are not united to him till we obey him this gives the glory of all to Christ because we are justified for his sake by vertue of our Union to him and yet vindicates the necessity of a holy Life because this is essential to our Union to Christ. And this is the sum of whatever I asserted concerning the Necessity of Good Works to our Justification not that they can merit any thing of God but that they are the necessary conditions of the Covenant of Grace which was purchased and sealed by the Blood of Christ or in other words that they are necessary to our Union with Christ and thereby to give us an interest in all those Promises of Pardon and Grace and Eternal Life which Christ hath made to his Church The Righteousness of Christ is our Righteousness when we speak of the Foundation of the Covenant by which we are accepted but if we speak of the terms of the Covenant then we must have a Righteousness of our own not to merit Justification or Eternal Life but to entitle us to the Grace and Mercy of the New Covenant or which is all one to unite us to Christ by whom and for whose sake we are justified to say that Obedience to the Laws of the Gospel a new Nature and Holiness of Life are the necessary conditions of our Justification by Christ and to say that they are essential to our Union to Christ by whom we are justified are different forms of Speech but signifie the same thing because Christ justifies none but those who are united to him and none are united to him but by Faith and Obedience and so e converso those who believe and obey the Gospel are in so doing united to Christ and they and none else shall be justified by him which gives a plain account how the Virtue and Merit of all is due to Christ because we are justified by our relation to him and explains the meaning of those phrases of receiving Christ and coming to him for Life and Salvation and believing in him which signifies our being united to him by a sincere Faith and Obedience which is necessarily required of all those who would be justified by him In the last Chapter I give a short account of the nature of Christs love to us and of our love to Christ that no man might mistake the love of Christ for a fond and easie passion nor think to please him with some heats and raptures of Fancy instead of the substantial Returns of Duty and Obedience the sum of which in short is this that Christ expressed a wonderful and stupendious Love in dying for us especially in dying for us while we were his Enemies upon which account the Scripture every where magnifies the love of Christ but though this were the greatest yet it is not the only expression of his love but he manifests the same good will in all the methods of his Grace and Providence he is an easie and gentle Governour who rules with the natural tenderness and compassion of a Shepherd a Husband a Head a Friend He pities our weaknesses and infirmities and is ready to help and succour us he is now ascended up to Heaven where he personally intercedes for us and with his own hand dispences all those Blessings to us which we want and pray for in his Name And he who loved Sinners so as to die for them must needs take pleasure in good men and dwell with them as one Friend dwells with another Iohn xiv 21 23. Christ will in a more especial manner be present with such good men who are careful in all things to obey him and will give very sensible demonstrations of his presence with them will manifest himself unto them and make his abode with them And now in return to this we must consider that Christ is our Superiour our Lord and Master and therefore our love to Christ must not express it self in a fond and familiar passion such as we have for our Friends and Equals but in a great Reverence and Devotion Superiors must be treated with Honour and Respect and therefore our love to our Parents and Superiors in the Fifth Commandment is called Honour and the same religious Affection to God which is sometimes called Love is at other times called Fear which signifies a Reverential Love or a Love of Honour Reverence and Devotion and therefore the external Expressions of our love to our Saviour are as various as the Expressions of Honour and must bear some respect to the nature and condition of the Person and that relation we stand in to him Christ being the only begotten Son of God we must have regard to the Greatness and Excellency of his Person Since he became Man and died for us we must admire and praise his Goodness He being our Mediator and Advocate we must trust and confide in him and expect the returns of our Prayers and all other Blessings from the prevalency of his Intercession He being our Prophet and Law-giver we must express our Love to him in a belief of his Gospel and a sincere Obedience to his Laws as Christ requires of his Disciples If you love me keep my Commandments And when we consider our Saviour as our Guide and Example the truest expression of our Love and Honour is to imitate him to live as he lived in the World And that which perfects our Love is an undaunted Courage and Resolution in professing the Faith of Christ whatever Dangers and Miseries it may expose us to in this world For there is no fear in love but perfect love casteth out fear These are the proper expressions of our love to Christ which are summarily comprehended in believing his Gospel and obeying it for to be a true Lover of Christ signifies neither more nor less than to be a good Christian. This is a faithful account of the Design and Doctrine of my Book which hath raised so much Noise and Clamour and hath sharpened the Pens and Tongues of so many against me but it is a vain attempt to think to out-face the Sun these are such bright and glorious Truths as will out-shine all the New Lights of present or former Ages and command belief from all honest and inquisitive Minds by their own natural Evidence The Doctrines which I designedly opposed in that Discourse are such as contradict these great Truths or at least such as I apprehended to do so either expresly or in their immediate consequences and because this is the principal thing which has anger'd so many men whose Cause and Reputation are concerned in the quarrel I shall give some brief account what those Doctrines are and in what sence I reject them which I hope may silence those scandalous reports as if I had struck at the very foundations of Christianity And first whereas I observed that to know Christ signifies the belief and knowledge of those Revelations which Christ
it is some question whether the Doctor smiled at the Argument or at his own Answer however I had rather he would smile still than admire which would be the more effectual Confutation of the two But his Answer is worth considering That the Grace of Duty and Obedience in all Relations is the same the Relations only administring an external occasion unto its peculiar exercise And what our Lord Iesus Christ did in the fulfilling of all Righteousness in the Circumstances and Relations wherein he stood may be imputed to us for our Righteousness in all our Relations every act of Duty and Sin in them respecting the same Law and Principle The meaning of which Answer is this That Christ is said to fulfil all Righteousness for us not because he did fulfil all Righteousness but because he would have done it had he been in such Circumstances and Relations as had required it and thus he has found out a way how Christ may fulfil all Righteousness without doing any thing at all for by the same Reason that he may be said to fulfil the Righteousness of any particular Duties and Relations without doing it he may be said to fulfil the Righteousness of all Duties and Relations without doing any thing for the Grace of Duty and Obedience is the same in all and that does not consist in external Actions for then it will equally oblige to every particular act of Righteousness as to any but in an inward Principle and thus the Doctor must return to what he had before expresly rejected That the habitual Righteousness of Christ as Mediator in his Human Nature is the only Righteousness which can be imputed to us Christ did not fulfil all the particular Duties of Righteousness in his actions because he was not in such circumstances and relations as required it and therefore those at least who are in any condition or relation in which Christ never was as the generality of Mankind upon one account or other are must of necessity be justified not by the imputation of Christs actual but habitual Righteousness And now let me reason a little with the Doctor in his own way Why should Christ live here in the World so long as he did in perfect Obedience to all the Laws of God Had he died before as soon as he had been born there had been perfect Innocency and perfect Holiness by his habitual Grace and thismade him fit to be a Sacrifice to expiate our sins and would as well serve for a perfect Righteousness to cover them and should he have lived to the end of the World unless he could have run through all the several Relations and Conditions of Life he could never actually fulfil all that Righteousness which is required of all Mankind and therefore the perfect habitual Righteousness of his Nature may as well serve for the whole as for a part The Doctor in the place to which I now alluded can find no other reason why Christ should live so long in the World in a perfect Obedience to the Laws of God but only a necessity of an actual fulfilling all Righteousness for us which supposes that an habitual Grace is not enough and yet when he is told that Christ could not and did not fulfil all Righteousness for us because he could not discharge the Duties of our several Relations for us when he never was in most of these Relations could not possibly be in all he answers that there is no need of it because the Grace of Duty and Obedience is the same in all and now how the Doctor can reconcile these two that it is necessary actually to fulfil all Righteousness and that it is not necessary actually to fulfil all Righteousness let him consider for I am sure there must be the same necessity of fulfilling all Righteousness that there is of fulfilling any and he himself describes that Righteousness which Christ was to fulfil for us as our Mediator to be whatever was required of us by vertue of any Law though I suppose when he thus stated it he had not met with this Socinian Objection which he will never be able to answer otherwise than by smiling or admiring In the next place I considered those Arguments whereby the Doctor proves that Christ fulfilled all Righteousness for us as our Mediator And the first is That Christ was under no Obligation to obey those Laws himself and he instances both in the Law of Creation and in the Ceremonial Law given to the Jews First to begin with the Law of Creation that is all those Duties which necessarily result from the frame and constitution of Human Nature and because the Doctor in his Vindication hath represented the force of his Argument in fewer and plainer words I shall quit the advantages which his perplext and intricate arguings in his Book of Communion give an Adversary which I dare venture any man to make sense of without a comment and deal with him at the fairest Weapon He proves then that Christs Obedience to the Law of Creation was designedly for us by two Arguments First because the way whereby the Lord Christ in his own Person became obnoxious and obedient to the Law of Creation was by his own voluntary antecedent choice otherwise than it is with those who are inevitably subject unto it by natural generation under it The meaning of which is that he considers Christ antecedently to his Incarnation when it was in his choice whether he would become Man or no and so consequently whether he would be subject to the Laws of Human Nature and I say still the force of this Argument is no more but this That Christ had not been bound to live like a man had he not voluntarily chose to become man and the reason of that is this that he could not have lived like a man had he not been a man It was in his choice whether he would become Man but when he had chose this it was not at his liberty to choose whether he would submit to the Laws of Human Nature and it is a new way of reasoning to argue that Christ was not bound to obey those Laws for himself because he voluntarily chose such a state which necessarily and without any further choice brought him under those Obligations Which is just as if I should prove that no man is bound upon his own account to discharge the Duties of a Husband because it was at his own choice whether he would have entered into that Relation which when he is in it necessarily exacts such Duties from him The discharge of his Mediatory Office necessarily required that he should become man that he might be our Prophet and Example and Guide our Priest and our Sacrifice our King and Governour and when he was Man his Nature required that he should obey the Laws of Creation and live like a reasonable Creature But the Doctor adds That the Hypostatical Union in the first instant whereof the
Wisdom as he has reveled those hidden Treasures of the Divine Wisdom which were conceled from former ages but we must not go immediately to the Person of Christ for this Wisdom but we must search for it in the Gospel where it is reveled and beg those divine Assistances which are necessary to enlighten our minds and to bless our Studies and Enquiries Thus we must receive all supernatural Aids and Assistances from Christ to renew and sanctifie our Natures and to make us holy as God is Christ hath by his Death purchast the Gift of the Holy Spirit for those who believe but we must not expect to receive these vital Influences from Christ by such a natural conveyance as water flows out of a fountain or as the animal Spirits are communicated to the Members of the natural Body but we must consider and meditate and affect our minds with all the Motives and Arguments of our Religion and derive strength and power from the consideration of Christs Death and Sufferings and Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven and Intercession for us at Gods right hand c. to mortifie our Lusts and to transform us into a Divine Nature We must read and pray and watch and fast and communicate at the Lords Table and by these means put our selves under the guidance and conduct of the Divine Spirit who will never fail to do his part when we are so diligent in doing ours But a bare trust and reliance on the Person of Christ will not entitle us to his Divine Aids no more than a presumptuous Dependence on the Providence of God will secure a slothful man from want and beggery Christ is the fountain of all spiritual life but we must not look on this as a personal Grace in Christ which must be immediately derived from his Person but as an act of Goodness and Power in the Administration of his spiritual Kingdom which is therefore dispensed in such regular ways that every one that pleases may certainly know how to obtain it and that no man must expect it any other way But now those Persons whom I oppose if we may judge of their meaning by their words send sinners immediately to Christ for Life and Righteousness for Wisdom and Power c. and make all these personal Graces which must be derived immediately from the Person of Christ when indeed they are no other than the effects of his Prophetical Priestly or Regal Offices in publishing the Will of God to us or in expiating our Sins or in governing his Church and dispensing his Grace in such ways and methods as he has prescribed in the Gospel And therefore as I observed in my former Discourse they have either found out a new Person for Christ distinct from his Godhead and Manhood or which comes to the same thing have drest up the Person of Christ with such personal Graces as do not belong to his Person as God-Man but are the effects of his Mediation And here the Doctor and Mr. Ferguson and the rest of my Opponents raise a great cry and tell the world that what I charge them with as a Fault that they have found out a Person for Christ distinct from his Godhead and Manhood they think not to have done it would have been as far from Wit as Truth because the Person of Christ is of a distinct consideration from his Godhead and Manhood And here they Philosophize at large concerning the Notion of Suppositum and Persona and Hypostasis and are glad with all their hearts to find an occasion to avoid the true Question Now I readily grant that this was not warily exprest to prevent the cavilling humor of those men who have no other way to escape but by taking Sanctuary in such Retreats though what I immediately add was sufficient to inform them what I meant by it had they any mind to understand it that they distinguish the Person of Christ as Mediator from his Person as God-Man and cloath this Person with such personal Graces as belong neither to his Divine nor Human Nature nor to the Union of both Thus they talk of the Fulness and Riches and Beauty and Loveliness and Righteousness and Wisdom and Power and Grace and Mercy of Christ as personal Graces inherent in him and derived immediately from his Person to us whereas I made it appear by a particular examination of those Scripture-phrases that all this is attributed to Christ either with respect to his Doctrin or Sacrifice or Mediation and Intercession for us that they are the effects of his several Offices not properly the Graces of his Person unless they will make his Mediatory Office a distinct Person And therefore we must expect to receive the Communications of his Fulness or Riches or Righteousness or Grace or Wisdom not from a bare Union to his Person but by believing and obeying his Gospel and in the conscientious use of such means as God hath appointed for the conveyance of Grace and the Communication of all Spiritual Blessings to us This I called dressing up the Person of the Mediator with all those Personal Graces and Excellencies which may make him a fit Saviour that those who are thus united to his Person need not fear missing of Salvation This the Doctor thinks prophane because the Preparation of the Person of Christ to be a fit and meet Saviour for Sinners which I prophanely compare to the dressing up of of what good Sir Speak out and let us know the worst is the greatest most glorious and admirable effect that ever infinite Wisdom Goodness Power and Love wrought and produced or will do so to eternity Very right God's fitting Christ to be a meet Saviour for Sinners was an admirable effect of Wisdom and Power but this new Dress they have put our Saviour into contains the greatest Mystery of Iniquity and Antinomianism that ever was invented and I hope it is no Prophaneness to reprove such an uncouth Metamorphosis of our Saviours Person And here once for all I shall desire my Readers to taken notice of their great Artifice in perverting my Words either into Prophaneness or Non-sense that whatever I speak against that odd and Phantastical Representation which they make of the Person of Christ they interpret as spoken against Christ himself God-Man which is just as if a man who argues against a false and absurd Notion of a Deity should be charged with Atheism or with Blasphemy against God And that no man may any longer think that this Religion of Christs Person as it is distinguisht from the Religion of his Gospel is a peculiar Conceit and Invention of my own as the Doctor would fain persuade his Readers it is I shall now make it appear that this Distinction between the Person and Gospel of our Saviour is so far from being imaginary that it is the very foundation of Antinomianism Thus the Antinomians lay the foundation of their Religion in winning and wooing People unto
now to proceed to the consideration of our Union to Christ in which Argument Mr. Ferguson has put out his whole strength such as it is which consists only in some Childish Cavils false Representations and insolent and foolish Triumphs Though I wonder he has no more craft than to tell such improbable Stories as confute themselves As for instance he charges my Notion of Union to Christ with disserving holiness Why what is my Notion of Union That I expressed in few words That Christ is a spiritual King and all Christians are his Subjects and our Union to Christ consists in our belief of his Revelations obedience to his Laws and subjection to his Authority How can this disserve Holiness which makes Holiness and Obedience Essential to our Union This is a very improbable Story and I doubt he will find few Vouchers for it And yet to see the power of wit he has two or three as plain proofs of it as heart can wish For first he observes that I acknowledge that in one sense we must be united to Christ before we can be holy But then he ought to have been so honest as to have told what sense that is I shall transcribe that passage and leave men to judge what they please of our Author Our Union to Christ is more or less perfect according to our attainments in true Piety and Vertue The first and lowest degree of our Union to Christ is a belief of his Gospel which in order of nature must go before Obedience to it but yet it includes a purpose and resolution of obeying it and in this sense we must be united to Christ before we can be holy because this belief of the Gospel is the great Principle of Obedience But then our Union is not perfected without actual Obedience this makes us the true Disciples of Christ when we are fruitful in good Works So that all I affirm is that we must first believe the Gospel before we can obey it and that a sincere belief of the Gospel and a hearty resolution of obeying it does begin our union to Christ before we may have the opportunities of External Obedience The Internal acts of the mind as Faith and Repentance and the love of God and the sincere purposes of a new Life are antecedently necessary to our Union to Christ but External Holiness and Obedience which requires time and opportunities of action which are not always in our power may not always go before but must always follow to complete and perfect our Union Which I thus explained in the same place Christ receives bad men as soon as they believe his Gospel and resolve to be good but their Reward is suspended upon the performance of these Vows and this is no reproach to his Holiness But still Mr. Ferguson can prove that I make our Union to Christ to be perfected without actual obedience though I expresly affirm the contrary because I say That to be in Christ signifies no more than being members of his visible Church which is made up of Hypocrites as well as sincere Christians And so I say still That where Christ speaks of such branches in him as bear no fruit Joh. 15. 2. By being in him he can intend no more than being Members of his visible Church by a publick profession of Faith in him for otherwise this Phrase of being in him cannot be applied to hypocrites who bear no fruit But how does it hence follow that our Union to Christ is compleated without Obedience For did I ever assert that an External Union to the visible Church did complete and perfect our Union to Christ And if it does not then I hope we may safely assert that to be in Christ is sometimes taken in that Latitude of sense as to include Hypocrites as well as sincere Christians and yet not assert a complete and perfect Union to Christ without Obedience But it is very pretty to observe our Authors Criticism upon our Saviours words Every branch in me that beareth not fruit which he says may as well be read Every branch that beareth not fruit in me he taketh away Now suppose we should be so civil as to grant him this What will he gain by it Why then the true import of it is this That unless we be in Christ we can bring forth no fruit to God and that what shew of being branches we make by an External Membership in the Church yet that shall be no obex to Christs disclaiming and renouncing our works His design is to prove that every branch in me does not signifie those branches which are in Christ and therefore he will not joyn In me with branch but with beareth fruit which being a very dull observation may pass for his own For I would fain learn of Mr. Ferguson in what this branch is It is certain de fide that it is a branch unless he can find some new reading to avoid that too Of what then is it a branch There is nothing in the Context to which this branch can refer but only the Vine which is Christ and therefore if it be a branch do what he can it must be a branch in the Vine a branch in Christ. And then I have a farther scruple still supposing we did allow his reading how a branch which is not in Christ the Vine can bear fruit in Christ the Vine And therefore if it be acknowledged that God expects from such branches that they should bear fruit in Christ it must be confessed that in one sense or other they are in him for they can in no sense be said to bear fruit in him till in some sense they may be said to be in him And there is still one little difficulty behind what is meant by God's taking away those branches which bear not fruit in Christ This is a plain Allusion to the Husbandman's cutting dead and fruitless branches off from the Vine and so signifies the Excision of such fruitless branches from the body of Christ and how can they be cut off and taken away from Christ if they were never in him And yet after all our Author is forced to return to what he designed to confute and by a Branch to understand one who lives in External Membership with the Church and by so doing makes a shew of being a branch in Christ that is as he must mean if he means any thing of being vitally united to him when he is not which is as much as ever I asserted in this matter only he will by no means allow that these branches may be said to be in Christ though he owns them to be members of the visible Church of Christ and yet he has no way to prove that a branch in this place signifies a Church member but only because it is called a branch in Christ. A second and third Argument whereby Mr. Ferguson proves my Notion of Union to Christ to be destructive to Holiness are both resolved into
of time as in order of nature before we are holy and then we may if Christ please as well continue united as at first be united to him without holiness For if neither the nature of the Gospel-Covenant nor the nature of God and Christ hinder such a Union between Christ and bad men while they may be considered as bad then nothing can hinder their continuing bad after they are united to Christ but an arbitrary Decree or an irresistible Power Christ may make them good if he pleases by an Almighty Power but there is no reason can be assigned why he may not as well own them while they continue wicked as receive them into Union with himself while they were considered as such Christ may undertake the cure of bad men as Physicians do the cure of the sick this was the great end of his coming into the world not to call the Righteous but Sinners to repentance but to unite them to himself to receive them into a state of favour and reconciliation to interest them in his Righteousness to make them Heirs of Glory while they are considered as bad in order of nature before they are renewed and sanctified is contrary to the holiness of his Nature to the express declarations of his Gospel and perfectly alters the whole frame of the Christian Religion This gives us a little taste what candour and honesty we may expect from our Author in his ensuing Discourse in the examination of which I shall not confine my self to his method but shall content my self to vindicate my own Discourse of our Union to Christ in that order and method wherein it lies which will give me occasion to consider whatever I am concerned to answer in Mr. Ferguson's Chapter of Union and then his scurrilous reflexions and Childish impertinencies will need no answer The two first Propositions which I laid down in order to explain our Union to Christ are these First That those Metaphors which describe the Relation and Union between Christ and Christians do primarily refer to the Christian Church not to every individual Christian. And secondly That the Union of particular Christians to Christ is by means of their Union to the Christian Church Which Mr. Ferguson tells us Are in his opinion things coincident If by Coincident he means that one follows from the other I readily grant it but if he means that the Propositions are the same which have neither the same subject nor predicate he might have spared his reflexions either upon my Logick or accuracy of Writing as being a very incompetent Judge of either But the Propositions are distinct and proved by different Mediums that which proves the first Proposition does not immediately prove the second though Mr. Ferguson would perswade the world that I had argued at that inconsequent rate and charges my Logick with the miscarriages and failures of his own which was the most effectual way he could take to make it ridiculous And yet after he had charged them with being coincident Propositions which signifie the same thing at the very next turn he is so far from owning them coincident that he will not allow one to be so much as a just consequent from the other For having recited that Paragraph whereby I proved That the Metaphors which describe the Relation and Union between Christ and Christians do primarily refer to the Christian Church not to every individual Christian He adds To this I answer 1. That were this Discourse of our Author framed into a Syllogism the incongruity between the Conclusion and Premises would easily appear For example Christ is the Head of the Church ergo no particular Believer is united to him but by means of their Union with the Church Let us learn then how he disproves it I deny says he the Consequent I suppose he would have said Consequence had he understood the difference of those Logical terms his Reason is this Surely though the King be immediate Head to the whole Kingdom yet he is immediate head to every Individual Person in it As for that word Immediate I shall let it alone till anon but our Author says very right The King is the Head of every Subject as well as of the whole Kingdom and so is Christ the Head of every particular Christian as well as of the whole Church but this is not the thing in Controversie The question is Whether a King who is Head only of his own Kingdom can be said to be the Head of any single Person who is not of his Kingdom and therefore whether such a Person must not first be incorporated into his Kingdom before he can be related to the King as his Head Thus Christ is primarily stiled a Head with reference to his whole Church which is his body and therefore those who are not of this Church and body cannot be related to him as to their Head the only way to be related to Christ as our Head is to be incorporated into his Church which is his body For no head has relation to any members which are not united to its own body But our Author proceeds 2. The Church and its Individual Members being of an Homogenious nature what soever is praedicated essentially of the whole is equally praedicated of every part If by this he only means that Christ may as well be called the Head of particular Christians as of the whole Christian Church I readily grant it though it be nothing to the purpose but the Proposition is the most absurd and senseless that ever was framed A River is a Homogeneous body and yet every drop of water cannot be called a River The Union of several things of the same nature gives them a new denomination which cannot belong to every particular A Kingdom consists of a great many men who are as much of the same Homogeneous nature as men as Christians are as they are Christians and yet every particular man cannot be called a Kingdom The body of Christ consists of a great many particular Christians and yet every Christian is not the body of Christ And besides this it is fulsomly absurd to say that the Church and its Individual Members are of an Homogeneous nature For the Church is an organized body which consists of several Christians who considered as Members are of as different a nature as the hand and eye and foot which are of different use necessity and honour So the Apostle tells us 1 Cor. 12. 12 13 14 c. For as the body is one and hath many members and all the members of that one body being many are one body so also is Christ. And he particularly mentions the Foot and the Ear and the Eye which no man yet thought to be of an Homogeneous nature till Mr. Ferguson blessed the world with this Discovery His third and fourth Arguments proceed upon the same mistake and indeed are the very same in terminis That every member of the body as well as the
formed according to such a model of Laws and Government Priviledges and Immunities as are described in the Gospel This is no other than what is necessary in the first forming of any Societies upon a publick Charter or Commission He who is first admitted into any Colledge or Corporation is made a member of that Society though as yet there be none but himself for there is the foundation of a Society laid where there is a Head and Governour and publick Laws and Constitutions and Priviledges for the Government of it Thus when our Saviour did converse upon earth and was a visible Head then the way to be united to him was immediately to put themselves under his Government to go directly to him and to profess their Faith and subjection to him Upon which account Faith is called coming to Christ which Phrase is never used to signifie believing but only in the Gospels and with reference to that time while he conversed on earth But since Christ ascended into heaven and left a visible Authority in the Church there is no other way of admission into his Church but by the Ministry of men invested with his Authority nor is there any other way of submitting our selves to the Authority of Christ but by a regular subjection to the Discipline and Government of the Church as you may see more at large in my former Discourse These things being premised it will be a very easie task to answer all Mr. Ferguson's little Cavils As 1. He argues If particular Christians be united to Christ only by virtue of a previous relation to the Church I would then fain know of Mr. Sherlock how the whole Church comes to be united to the Lord Iesus If this will do him any kindness it is quickly answered For the whole Church is united to Christ just as particular Christians are united by Faith and Obedience The only difference is that the Church is united as a body particular Christians as members of that body The foundation of this Objection is That our Author imagined that our Union to the Church and our Union to Christ were two distinct things and that we are united to Christ and to the Church by two different acts and then indeed his Argument would have entangled me in a Circle but I have already broke this Circle in my first and second Propositions For though the Church being an aggregate body of believers can no other ways embrace the Revelations of the Gospel or yield obedience to its commands but in the virtue of what her particular constituent members do yet this may be done in such a manner as to unite them all to Christ not as single Individuals but as formed and cemented into a regular and well-proportioned body His second Argument in short is this That the Christian Church being nothing else but the collective body of Christians it naturally follows that they must in priority of nature be Christians before they can any way belong to the Church But I can imagine no reason for this for it is sufficient if they be made Christians by their Union to the Church for then the Church will still be the collective body of Christians And indeed if every Christian be a member of Christ it is not imaginable how any should be a Christian before he be united to the body of Christ. His third Argument is That the Apostles were immediately united to Christ without any antecedent relation to the Church and therefore every Individual Christian may be so too And this he proves because there was no Christian Church pre-existent to them into whose Fellowship and Society they could be admitted But this I have already answered in my fourth Proposition that we may be said to be admitted into the Church where there is no visible Society of Christians to joyn with If Christ might then be called the Head of the Church I know no reason why the Apostles at that time might not be called the members of it And though the Apostles were immediately under the Government and Instruction of Christ while he was visibly present with them yet I suppose there may be some reason assigned why other Christians cannot be so immediately united to him now he is not present as a visible Head on earth Thus far Mr. Ferguson tells us he has discoursed these things taking the Church for the Universal Catholick visible Church which is the most favourable acceptation to befriend my Notion But I can tell him a more favourable acceptation than this which he durst not touch on The Universal Catholick Church visible or invisible For the visible and invisible is the same Church of Christ and every Christian being a member of Christ's body which is but one every Christian is as truly united to the invisible as to the visible part of it and where there is no visible Church our Union to Christ is secured by our Union to the invisible Church Had Mr. Ferguson thought on this he would not have urged that Argument from the Union of the Apostles and first Believers to Christ without any pre-existent Church to be united to Unless he thinks that Abraham Isaac and Iacob and all the good men who lived before Christ's Incarnation were not of his Church and then I would desire him to tell me how they were saved Whoever is admitted into the Christian Church must of necessity be admitted by the Ministers of some particular Church but yet this makes him a member of the Universal Church which is Christ's body Our relation as we are Christians is to the whole body of Christ and to a particular Church as a branch and member of it our Christianity is not confined to any particular Society of Christians but our obligation to external fellowship with any sound part of the Church of Christ where-ever the Providence of God casts us is our antecedent relation at least in priority of nature to the whole Christian Church Thus I am sure our Church of England in her Office of Baptism declares that she receives the baptized Person into the Fellowship of Christ's Church not of this or that particular Church but of the whole Church of Christ and teaches her Children that in their Baptism they are made the members of Christ which word is of a larger import than the members of a particular Church And St. Paul tells us that as there is but one body so there is but one Baptism which makes us members of that one body This was one Argument whereby the Fathers in the Council of Carthage proved the invalidity of that Baptism which was administred by Hereticks and Schismaticks who separated from the Church because they being out of the Church could not admit any one into the Catholick Church Frustra ille putat se esse baptizatum cùm non sit baptisma nisi in Ecclesia unum verum quia Deus unus fides una Ecclesia una est in qua stat unum baptisma
he adds that men must first be Believers before they be admitted members of the Church is very true but Faith only does not make them Christians as I shewed above His fifth Argument is That it is a Persons submitting himself to the Laws and Authority of Christ which swayeth and influenceth him to submit to Pastors and Teachers and to joyn with others in the fellowship of the Gospel and by consequence our union with a particular Church is so far from being the bond of our Union with the Lord Iesus that on the contrary our Union with him is the motive and inducement of our joyning into fellowship with a particular Church This is so far from being true that on the contrary we have no visible way of submitting to the Authority of Christ but by submitting our selves to that Authority and Government which he hath left in his Church For Christ does not govern us now as a visible head but by the Ministry of men whom he hath invested with authority for that purpose The belief of Christ's Power and Authority is the reason of our subjection to the Church but we do not actually submit to the Authority of Christ on earth but by our actual subjection to the Church as I shewed above in the fourth Proposition As for his proof from the example of the Churches of the Macedonians that they first gave themselves to the Lord and then unto them the Apostles by the will of God 2 Cor. 8. 5. Which he thus expounds That it was by taking upon them the observance of Christs commands that they found themselves obliged to coalesce into Church Societies it is a famous example of our Author's skill or honesty in expounding Scriptures for the Apostle speaks nothing there of Church Societies or the reason of their entring into them which was no dispute in those days when Independency was not yet hatched but he commends the bounty and charity of the Macedonians in contributing to the necessities of the poor Saints and their great forwardness to it that they did not need to be stirred up by the Apostles to so good a work but on the contrary earnestly intreated them to receive the gift and take upon them the fellowship of the ministring to the Saints And the account the Apostle gives of it is this that they first gave up themselves and all they had to the service of Christ and then committed their liberal contributions into their hands to be disposed of for the propgation of the Gospel and the relief of the Saints This was the commendation of their charity that it was not the effect of importunate solicitations but of hearts entirely devoted to Christ and the service of the Church though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signifie that they first gave themselves to the Lord and then to us but they first gave themselves to the Lord and to us his Apostles who are invested with his Authority and then expressed their bounty and liberality to the poor Christians His last Argument is That an imagination of our being united to Christ by the mediation of an Union with the Church seems to have been the foundation of the Papal Vicarious Political Head But pray how so Because I assert that Christ is the Head of the Church which is his body and that he is a head only to his body and therefore that none can be united to Christ as their head without being members of his body therefore there must be a Papal Vicarious Political Head I must now do as M. Ferguson does deny the consequent for I am sure there is no consequence in it He imagines that our Union to Christ and our Union to the Church are two distinct Unions and therefore if we are united to Christ by our Union to the Church there ought to be a Universal Vicarious Head on earth to whom we may be united Whereas we are united to no head but Christ and we are united to this Head as all members are by our Union to his body which is his Church To be united to a Vicarious Head in order to our Union to the Real Head if it be not senseless and ridiculous yet is founded neither on reason nor Scripture nor any analogy or resemblance in nature but to be united to the body that we may be united to the head is necessary in order of nature for no member is any other ways united to the head but by its Union to the body The whole Church is the body of Christ and Apostles and Prophets and Bishops are but members of this body though of greater use dignity and authority than meaner Christians as in the natural body some members are more honourable and useful than the rest But who told Mr. Ferguson that Christ is not the immediate Political Head of his Church and that therefore there must be a Vicarious Head He represents this as my opinion though I never said so nor thought so I have said indeed that particular Christians are not immediately united to the person of Christ but are united to Christ by their Union to his Church But it does not hence follow that Christ is not the immediate Head of every Christian much less that he is not the immediate head of his whole Church except he will say that the Head in the natural body is not the immediate head of the body and of every member in it because the hand and the foot are not immediately joyned to it These are Mr. Ferguson's Arguments to prove that we are not united to Christ by being united to the Christian Church most of which he alleadges also upon another occasion to prove That one living in the Fellowship and Communion of no visible Church may be a Christian which was the avowed Doctrine of Socinus by this we may guess what weight he laid upon them and I am not at leisure to repeat my answers as often as he repeats his Arguments but dare venture them at one proposal against his frequent repetitions And therefore to proceed among other Arguments whereby I confirmed that Notion that our Union to Christ consists in our Union to the Christian Church I argued from the nature of the two Sacraments Baptism and the Lords Supper which our Saviour has appointed as Symbols of our Union with him Our first undertaking of Christianity is represented in our Baptism wherein we make a publick profession of our faith in Christ and solemnly vow obedience to him and it is sufficiently known that Baptism is the Sacrament of our admission into the Christian Church Now in answer to this Mr. Ferguson tells us 1. That Baptism is neither the medium of our Union with the Catholick visible Church nor that whereby we become members of a particular instituted Church I hope our Author will not here too challenge me with contradicting the Church of England which so expresly teaches us that in our Baptism we were made the members of Christ the Children of
discharge the duties which our Profession of Christianity calls us to And it is so by a perpetual Institution Now if we consider the nature of a Covenant which requires sealing on both sides it will appear that this Ceremony is essentially necessary to our admission into the Gospel Covenant or which is all one to our admission into the Christian Church God hath sealed to us in the Death of his Son whereby he has confirmed and ratified the Gospel Covenant but till we seal to him in Baptism no previous faith and consent can give us a title to the benefits of the Covenant In his fourth Proposition he tells us That the Union of the Catholick visible Church consisting in a joynt profession of the same Lord Faith and Baptism there doth therefore upon a persons submitting to the Ordinance of Baptism such a relation to the whole Catholick visible Church emerge as that he is rendered a compleat member of the Church under the notion of Catholick visible And adds So far is our Union with the visible Church by means of Baptism from being the medium of our Union to Christ that it is our dedicating our selves to Christ by this august Ceremony which constitutes us complete members of the Church under the notion of visible He tells us that Baptism makes us members of the Catholick Church so say I But it makes us members of the Catholick Church by dedicating us to Christ so say I too and therefore our Union with the Visible Church by means of Baptism is not the medium of our Union to Christ But how does this follow when Baptism dedicates us to Christ not as single Individuals but as members of his body that is his Church For that which dedicates us to Christ as members of his body unites us to Christ by uniting us to the Church But Baptism makes us compleat members whereby he would insinuate that we were members before though incomplete but this he ought to have proved which he has not yet and never can do And indeed a complete and incomplete member seems to be no very good sense for the same relation admits of no degrees one Child under the notion of a Child is as completely the Fathers Child as any other of his Children are and if we be indeed members of the Church that is united and related to the Church we are complete members for what ever makes us members makes us members and we cannot be more or less members A member may be sound or rotten weak or strong and upon that score may be a perfect or imperfect member but considering only the relation of membership which is the present case every member is as much a member as any other But Baptism makes us complete members of the Church only under the notion of Catholick visible How comes this to pass now When in his first Proposition he would by no means allow that Baptism united us to the Universal visible Church and yet here it makes us complete members of the Church under the notion of visible How will he answer his own Argument That men were baptized before there was any particular visible Church formed and if there were no particular visible Church certainly there could be no Catholick visible Church neither Unless we can imagine that there may be a Kingdom which consists of a great many subordinate Societies and Corporations and Families before there is so much as any one Family Baptism admits us into the Church of Christ under the notion of Christ's body not under the notion of visible or invisible unless we think that the Covenant of Grace and all the Promises of it which are sealed to us in Baptism be made only to the Church under the notion of visible and then I shall not blame the Church of Rome for making Visibility one mark of the true Church But to proceed I argued also from the nature of the Lords Supper which is a Sacrament and Symbol of our Union to Christ and Fellowship with him after we are incorporated into his Church and signifies and represents that near conjunction which is between Christ and the Christian Church and the mutual Fellowship of one Christian with another as members of the same body Which is a plain Argument that Christ owns us not as single Individuals but as members of his body as incorporated into the Christian Church To this Mr. Ferguson answers 1. The Supper of the Lord though a Sacrament of Union yet it cannot be the first medium of our Union to the Church seeing none have a right to it but such as are already Church members Nor did I ever say it was the first medium but that it represents that near conjunction which is between Christ and the Christian Church and every particular Christian as incorporated into the Church For as the Apostle says to use our Authors own words in another place seeing it's one loaf 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which we partake we are therefore one body viz. in Christ who participate of that one loaf 1 Cor. 10. 17. Pichorellus well observes that Paul doth not say we are one loaf or bread though our Translation renders it so but that he argues from the Coalition of the clusters of the small corpuscles of meal surely our Author was taught this bombast by the School master in Sir Philip Sidney of which a Loaf is kneaded and contexed to the identity and oneness that intervenes between Christ and Believers intervening identity and oneness is a great elegancy But our Author seems to have abused Pichorellus not only in a phantastical Translation of his words but in perverting the sense of them whose words as he has set them in the margin are these Non dicit Paulus fideles unum esse panem sed ab uno panc ducit similitudinem Paul does not say that all Believers are one bread but takes a similitude and resemblance from one bread What to do To prove the oneness and identity which intervenes between Christ and single Believers as Mr. Ferguson would represent it no but to prove that near alliance and conjunction which is between the whole body of Believers which are as closely compacted into one body as the several particles of flour are when they are kneaded into one Loaf and so as one body are united to Christ and entertained at his Table Agreeably to St. Chrysostoms account of the words as they are translated also by our Author What is that Loaf It is the body of Christ. What are those who partake of it They are the body of Christ not many bodies but one For as the many grains of which a loaf is formed are so convened into one mass mighty elegant still that the distinction and diversity one from another doth not appear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same manner are we conjoyned to Christ and one another or according to the order of St. Chrysostoms words to one another and to Christ So that
and stead of particular persons then those for whom he acted are absolved and justified by the undertaking or actual performance of Christ either from Eternity or from the first moment of their being I might add several other Consequences which necessarily result from this Doctrine and are the peculiar Principles of Antinomianism as that we must not pray for the forgiveness of sins because they are long since removed by the death of Christ but only for the sense of this forgiveness that God sees no sin in his people because their sins are laid on Christ and that therefore we must not lay sin upon our own Consciences neither unless we will make our Conscience a Christ But this is enough to shew how fruitful this Principle is of absurdities and what reason I have to reject our Union to the Person of Christ considered as one who hath done all for us in our name and stead And now I need not insist long on the second thing proposed viz. our immediate Union to the Person of Christ For though all Christians are in some sense immediately united to Christ as I have shewn above yet in the Antinomian sense of an immediate Union I do utterly reject it whereby they understand an Union to the Person of Christ without any intervening Conditions on our part And this they must necessarily do according to their notion of the Person of Christ. They explain this as I observed in my former Discourse by a Conjugal Relation and a Legal Union As for a Conjugal Relation which consists in such a Union of Persons as is between a Man and his Wife which intitles us to all the personal excellencies and perfections Beauty Comeliness Riches and Righteousness of Christ as Marriage intitles a Woman to her Husbands Estate and secures us from the Wrath of God and the Accusations of the Law as a woman under Covert is not liable to any Action or Arrest I perceive Mr. Ferguson gives it over as indefensible for among all the sorts of Unions which he reckons up he takes no notice of this which is the most charming and inviting Union and most acceptable to the Sisterhood the best Friends to Conventicles of any other But I suppose Mr. Vincent will not give it over so and therefore I observe that this must be an immediate Union which requires nothing else but an embracing and clasping Faith which unites their persons to each other This Faith is no condition of Union but only such a consent to have Christ as is necessary to make the Match or rather like joyning hands which is the Ceremony of Marriage Though indeed the Marriage was made before as they say all Marriages are in Heaven Eternal Election marries them to Christ and this consenting Faith gives them only a comfortable sense of their Matrimonial Union as will appear by considering the nature of Legal Union whereby we are united to Christ as to our Surety and Mediator who does all for us in our name and stead Now it is a plain demonstration that this Union to Christ as to our Surety and Mediator is immediate for it is entirely Gods act in electing some particular persons and giving them to Christ to do all for them in their name and stead And therefore Dr. Crisp truly argues that it is God and only God that can lay our sins upon Christ that our Repentance and Faith and new Obedience cannot do it For this work of laying sin on Christ in making him our Surety to do all for us was done long since and is not to be done now Christ hath already died for all that he will die for and if he did not die for us nothing that we can do now can lay our sins upon him For as the Doctor reasons if we could a fresh by our Repentance and Faith lay our sins on Christ as our Surety how should he get rid of them again For there is no getting rid of sin but by dying for it and Christ hath already done that and is not to die again If Christ's Suretiship consists in his dying and performing all righteousness for particular persons elected and chosen by God our Union to Christ as to our Surety must be from Eternity or at least from the time of his appearing in the world for if he did not act as our Surety then he cannot do so since unless we should suppose that he must come into the world again to act over the same part in the name and stead of those who were left out of the first Roll of Election and therefore I do not wonder that these men are so much blundered and talk backward and forward in those directions they give to their hearers how to get into Christ for the truth is if we are not in Christ already there is no getting into Christ now according to their Principles Election alone and Gods giving us to Christ unites us to him not any act of our own neither Faith Repentance or new Obedience these at best can only give us a comfortable sense of our Union to Christ but can contribute nothing at all to our Union it self And therefore Dr. Owen does roundly acknowledge that Christ is reckoned to us in order of nature before we believe and by Gods reckoning Christ to us he means the imputing of Christ unto ungodly unbelieving sinners for whom he died so far as to account him theirs to bestow Faith and Grace upon them for his sake And if God reckon Christ to men before Faith he must reckon him theirs from the time of his giving them to Christ for there can be no other reason of his reckoning Christ to them at all And to shew how free and absolute this gift of Christ is he tells us That there is no condition at all in this stipulation That God should engage upon the death of Christ to make out Grace and Glory Liberty and Beauty unto those for whom he died upon condition they do so or so leaves no proper place for the merit of Christ and is very improperly ascribed unto God And therefore though the Covenant of Grace seem to run conditionally that if we repent and believe we shall be saved yet the Covenant is indeed absolute because these very conditions are part of Christ's Purchase and are promised without any condition and though God will bring us to Heaven in such a way and method as he has thought fit to prescribe to himself for the Glory of the Trinity yet all this in all the parts of it is no less fully procured for us nor less freely bestowed on us for Christ's sake and on his account as part of his Purchase and Merits than if all of us immediately upon his death had been translated into heaven From all this it appears what they mean by an immediate Union to the Person of Christ such an Union to Christ as our Mediator and Surety as is founded only on Electing Grace without any
thing required on our part and in this sense though I deny not particular Election yet I disown our immediate Union to the Person of Christ. Christ is the Surety and Mediator of the Covenant who having with his own bloud made a general Atonement and Propitiation for the sins of the whole world purchased and sealed the Covenant of Grace wherein he promises pardon of sin and Eternal Life to all those who repent and believe the Gospel Such a faith in Christ as makes us members of his Body which is his Church alone entitles us to all the benefits of his Death and Passion and therefore he is said to redeem his Church with his own bloud for though his Sacrifice was general and universal yet none have an actual interest in it but his Church and the particular Members of it This unites us to Christ and applies his Universal grace and mercy particularly to our selves But to imagine that Christ was appointed by God to be a Surety only for particular Persons and to act in their name and stead necessarily precipitates men into the very dregs of Antinomianism which in this loose phantastical and degenerate Age is the only popular and taking frenzy It is time now to proceed to the vindication of my third and fourth Propositions in my Chapter of Union from the misrepresentations of Mr. Ferguson for this is all the skill he has shewn here to pervert my sense and to affix such Doctrines to me as I never dreamt of The third Proposition is this That the Union between Christ and Christians is not a Natural but Political Union that is such an Union as there is between a Prince and his Subjects The fourth is this That Fellowship and Communion with God according to the Scripture notion signifies what we call a Political Union that is that to be in Fellowship with God and Christ signifies to be of that Society which puts us into a peculiar relation to God that God is our Father and we his Children that Christ is our Head and Husband our Lord and Master we his Disciples and Followers his Spouse and his Body These two Propositions our Author tells us are according to the best understanding of enunciations he has coincident and equipollent which is a plain demonstration how little his understanding is in these matters when the third Proposition concerns the nature of our Union and the fourth the explication of a Scripture term which had been perverted to a very different if not contrary sense But to let pass this and a great many other things of this nature as any man must do who would not undertake such a trifling task as to prove that our Author neither understands Logick nor Philosophy nor any other part of good learning of which there are abundant evidences in this very Treatise where he makes a great shew and flourish with that little undigested knowledge he has his great Artifice in what follows is to conceal and misrepresent my notion of Political Union and then to scuffle learnedly and valiantly with his own shadow and dreams Sometimes he represents this Political Union to be only such an External Relation as is between a Prince and his Subjects and ever denies that I own any influences of Grace from Christ as an influential head as he is pleased to call him And therefore all his reasonings proceeding upon such an ignorant or wilful mistake all I have to do is to clear my own notion and to give an account of the reason why I stated it in this manner As for the first By a Political Union I understand such a Union between Christ and Christians as there is between a Prince and his Subjects which consists in our belief of his Revelations obedience to his Laws and subjection to his Authority and that this is the true notion of it I gave sufficient evidence in my former Discourse to which I must refer my Reader But then I observed that this Political Union between Christ and his Church may be either only external and visible and so hypocritical Professors may be said to be united to Christ by the Ligaments of an external Profession or true and real which imports the truth and sincerity of our obedience to our Lord and Master that we really are what we profess to be And herein consists a material difference between that External Union which is between a temporal Prince and his Subjects and the Union between Christ who is a spiritual Head and King and the true Church or true and sincere Christians who are spiritual Subjects For as the Authority of Earthly Princes can reach only the External man because they cannot know our thoughts any other ways than as they are expressed in our outward actions so the Union consists in an external Government and an external Subjection But Christ being a spiritual Prince governs hearts and thoughts too and therefore our subjection to Christ and consequently our Union to him must not be only external and visible but internal and spiritual which consists in the subjection of our hearts and minds of our thoughts and passions to his Government And this real and spiritual Union I explained in four particulars First as I have already observed it consists in the subjection of our minds and spirits to Christ as our spiritual King And secondly this is represented in Scripture by a participation of the same nature which is the necessary effect of the subjection of our minds to him Upon which account I observed that our Union to Christ is described by having the Spirit of Christ Rom. 89. If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his Which as it respects the cause whereby we are transformed into a Divine Nature so it signifies the Holy Spirits dwelling in us as it signifies the effect or that Divine Nature New Creature which Mr. Ferguson himself acknowledges to be the very bond of our cohesion to Christ so it is that same temper and disposition of mind which Christ had which as I expresly observed is called having the Spirit of Christ by an ordinary figure of the cause for the effect for all those vertues and graces wherein our conformity to Christ consists are called the fruits of the Spirit And in the Page before that it is called being born of the Spirit because all Christian Graces and Vertues are in Scripture attributed to the Spirit of God as the Author of them And now I dare trust any man of common ingenuity to judge whether I make our Union to Christ a meer external thing or leave out the consideration of the Spirit of God in our Union to Christ when I assert that that new nature all those Christian graces wherein our conformity and internal Union to Christ consists are owing to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit And whereas Mr. Ferguson is so critical that it will not satisfie him that the Spirit is present in the hearts of Believers in
respect of that New Creature Divine Nature and spiritual being which he hath wrought in them but immediately also I would fain learn of him what he means by this immediate presence of the Spirit for if the Holy Spirit be a divine and infinite being which is present every where how can he be more immediately present in one place or in one person than in another but only by a more peculiar manifestation of himself in his effects and operations As God who fills all places with his presence is said to dwell in Heaven because there he manifests his glory in a more peculiar manner But I cannot without some indignation observe how our Author has prophaned this holy Union between Christ and Believers by comparing it with the impure mixtures of a man with a Harlot and representing the Apostle to argue at this rate The Apostle tells us That he who is joyned to the Lord is one spirit 1 Cor. 6. 17. Which I thus explained That herein consists our Union to Christ that we have the same temper of mind which he had wrought in us by the same Holy Spirit which animates both the Head and the Body and every member of it as I acknowledged before for there can be no Union between Souls and Spirits without this that they are acted by the same principles and love and chuse the same things c. Mr. Ferguson disproves this from that opposition which the Apostle as he says makes between the Union of a man to a Harlot and our Union to Christ Know ye not that he which is joyned to a Harlot is one body but he that is joyned to the Lord is one spirit From whence he argues If the Union betwixt a man and a Harlot in the virtue of which they are one body import more than meerly a likeness of temper and moral disposition as surely it doth for asmuch as there may be a similitude in sensual propensions and inclinations where the becoming one flesh through carnal conjunction interposeth not much more doth a Believer's being one spirit with the Lord imply a higher kind of Union than an affinity of dispositions What fine work might a prophane Wit make of this And indeed I would not have defiled my Paper with it but only to have vindicated our Apostle and Christianity together from such sordid and impure abuses And any one who consults the place will easily perceive that this prophane comparison is owing wholly to our Author and that the Apostle has nothing to do with it For in the fifteenth verse he disswades them from Fornication by this Argument Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ shall I take then the members of Christ and make them members of an Harlot God forbid The undecency of this is very evident that the members of Christ should be made the members of an Harlot and therefore the Apostle distinctly proves these two Propositions that our bodies as we are Christians are the members of Christ and that that body which is joyned to the Harlot becomes one flesh and body with her This last he proves from the primitive institution of Marriage Two saith he shall be one flesh For an Harlot is an uxor usuraria who unlawfully supplies the place of Wife and he proves the latter that our bodies also are the members of Christ from that intimate Union of Souls and Spirits betwixt Christ and Believers He that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit and therefore his body too is a member of Christ for that intimate Union between the body and the soul will not admit a separation Christ first takes possession of our souls and then challenges an interest and propriety in our bodies which must be preserved holy and pure as the Temples of God But then thirdly I observed That there is a closer Union still which results from this which consists in a mutual and reciprocal love when we are transformed into the Image of Christ he loves us as being like to him and we love him too as partaking of his nature He loves us as the price of his bloud as his own workmanship created unto good works and we love him as our Redeemer and Saviour for which I produced Ioh. 14. 20. At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father and you in me and I in you Where by day Mr. Ferguson very wisely understands the glorified state this Union being such a Mystery as cannot be understood in this world whereas the Circumstances of the place determine it to our Saviours Resurrection and the descent of the Holy Spirit and he himself explains the meaning of this Union Vers. 21. He that hath my Commandments and keepeth them he it is that loveth me and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father and I will love him and manifest my self to him To the same purpose Christ prays for his Disciples Ioh. 17. 21. That they may be one as thou Father art in me and I in thee that they also may be one in us These Scriptures are alleadged by Mr. Ferguson too but to prove he knows not what He acknowledges That it is not an oneness of Essence betwixt Christ and Believers that is here to be understood nor yet is it meerly an oneness of will and affection between the Father and the Son but it is an Essential Unity here meant Well Is there an Essential Unity then here meant betwixt Christ and Believers No that he rejected before What then Why though we plead not for the same kind of oneness between Christ and Believers as is between the Father and the Son yet we affirm that something more sublime than barely a Political Relation is adumbrated and shadowed forth to us Something more than External-Political Union I believe is intended by them but what sublime thing is that which is adumbrated and shadowed forth to us in these words which expressions argue that our Author is not very clear in it that he tells us that by alluding to that incomprehensible Idendity which is between the persons of the blessed Trinity through a numericalness of nature he would instruct us that the Union between Christ and those that are born of God is intimate great and Mysterious as well as true and real But Mr. Ferguson else-where tells us that all Unions are Mysterious and there are several sorts of intimate and great and true and real Unions so that we are never the wiser for this account of our Union to Christ. But our Saviours plain and obvious meaning is this that as there is a perfect harmony of will and affections and design and a perfect agreement in Doctrine between the Father and himself founded on the unity of nature so he prays that his Disciples may be one also among themselves and with God from their agreement in the same belief and participation of the same nature and a unity and harmony of Affections But then I observed
fourthly that this Union is expressed in Scripture by resembling the Christian Church to Gods Temple wherein he dwells as formerly he did in the Temple at Ierusalem That God now dwells in the Christian Church by his Holy Spirit as he formerly did in the Jewish Temple by Types and Figures and that he does not dwell thus in the Christian Church only as a spiritual Society but in every particular Christian as I explained at large in my former Discourse which is a plain demonstration of our Authors honesty in charging me with rejecting the Inhabitation of the Holy Spirit and making a meer External-Political Union between Christ and Christians This is sufficient to vindicate my own notion from the false representations of this Author and I might honourably enough retreat and leave him to skirmish with his own shadow but to do all the right that may be to my cause and to satisfie all unprejudiced teachable minds I shall give some farther account of the reason why I stated the notion of our Union to Christ in this manner And first the true reason why I did not more particularly discourse of the influences of the Divine Spirit but was contented to give some plain and short intimations of it was because I principally designed to consider what was necessary on our part as matter of duty in order to our Union with Christ For here are the great and dangerous mistakes here it is that my Adversaries have confounded the plain Notions of Religion and lead men into intricate Labyrinths and Meanders What is necessary on Christ's part he will be sure to effect whether we do so clearly and perfectly understand it or not but unless we understand what is necessary on our part it is impossible we should do it unless it be by perfect chance and accident These new Divines cannot to this day direct men how to get into Christ or to be united to him They talk of a Legal and a Mystical Union but what we must do to be thus Legally and Mystically united to Christ they know not we must expect till God gives Christ to us or till Christ unite us to himself or rather till he give us a sense and knowledge that we are united And this is a very hard case that when our Eternal happiness depends on our Union to Christ we should be so perfectly ignorant how to attain to this Union Nay they had so ordered the matter that a very good man who heartily believes the Gospel of Christ and makes conscience of obeying it if he be so weak as to hearken to their preachments may be perplext with Eternal Scruples about his Union to Christ while a bad man who hath a warm and Enthusiastick fancy and can work his imagination into all the various Scenes of the New Birth shall live in the perpetual embraces of Christ and in the Raptures and Extasies of assurance and despise the low attainments of morality and a good life Now my principal design was to rectifie these dangerous mistakes to give men such a notion of our Union to Christ that they may certainly know by what means they may attain this Union and that good men may reap the comfort of it and bad men though never such Seraphical hypocrites may see all their hopes confuted and be forced either to let go all their pretences of Union to Christ or enter upon a new course of life And I could not better do this than by making it appear that to be united to Christ signifies to be his Disciples to be incorporated into his Church by a publick profession of Faith and obedience and to conform our hearts and lives to the Laws of the Gospel And therefore I chose all along to expound those expressions of being one Spirit with Christ of having the Spirit of Christ of Christ's dwelling in us and the like so as to explain what they signified on our part viz. to be transformed into the Image of Christ to be animated by the same love of vertue and goodness to have the same Spirit the same temper of mind which he had than to dispute concerning the manner of the Divine Spirits inhabitation and operation in us which possibly will never be determined as very few modes of things are and is not much material whether it be or not so long as we heartily believe and importunately beg and constantly rely on the assistances of the Divine Grace Secondly There is a further account to be given of this because the gift of the Spirit is consequent to our Union to Christ but does not constitute the formal nature of it That there are some antecedaneous operations of the Holy Spirit whereby we are disposed to believe the Gospel and to list our selves into the number of Christ's Disciples I do not deny but these are of a very different consideration from that gift of the Holy Spirit which is bestowed on those who are actually incorporated into the Christian Church and made the Members of Christ For Christ has promised his Holy Spirit only to those who are actually united to him and indeed in order of nature a member must first be united to the body before it can receive any influences from the Head The gift of the Holy Spirit is an act of Christs Kingly Power and Authority and concerns only his Church and the members of it Just as Temporal Princes can exercise no jurisdiction but over their own Subjects and therefore we must first be united to Christ as members of his Church before we can expect to partake of the benefits and advantages of which the gift of the Holy Spirit is none of the least of his Government God vouchsafes the assistances of the Holy Spirit to all men to whom the Gosspel is preached to work Faith in them but when men do actually believe and give themselves up to Christ in such regular ways as he has appointed then the Holy Spirit is a constant Principle in them upon Covenant and Promise upon which account he is said to dwell in them and to make his abode with them because he is always present as a Principle of a divine life and therefore according to the sense of Scripture of the ancient Church and of the Church of England the Baptism of the Spirit is annexed to our Baptism with water which is the Ceremony of our Initiation into the Christian Church which upon that account in the ancient Church was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or illumination because the Holy Spirit the Spirit of wisdom and knowledge was then bestowed on them And indeed Dr. Owen and all my Adversaries though they differ from me in their Notion of our Union to Christ yet do and according to their Principles must acknowledge that we are first united to Christ before the Holy Spirit is bestowed on us And Dr. Owen proves that Christ is first reckoned unto us before we believe and I can understand no difference between Christs being reckoned