Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	law_n	moral_a	precept_n	2,880	5	9.5945	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

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

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

sorry for Mr. Williams that he printed his Sheet when mine alone as a Third Person to let the World know how little they had against him how curious the Difference what need of bearing with one another had been enough because he must be forced to agree with me when he should have differ'd and is put upon the Defence of a Denial of that which I take to have been advantageous and the credit of his Books to have owned It is objected against him that he holds the Penal Sanction of the Law of Works to be changed What if he had owned this for his Opinion and said it is no Error but stood to it As Mr. Baxter hath his and I my State of the Point Mr. W. might have his and we never fall out Suppose then the Point stated only with two Distinctions 1. As to the Law between the Law it self and its Sanction 2. As to the Subjects of this Law between the Believer and Unbeliever Let him then say the Law it self is unchangeable but its Sanction is changed and that change to be understood as to Believers for he every where says the Unbeliever is under Condemnation And let me see who he is will be his Opponent I say let me see whether any of our Brethren out of whose Books Mr. Lobb does bring some opposite Sayings to Mr. W. and thereby shifts himself off from being Accuser or Opponent so as it is not he but they are engaged to make them good that will undertake to Oppose and Mr. W. be Respondent I suppose the Question to be Whether the Sanction of the Law be changed and held affirmatively being but thus stated This I take to be the very ordinarily preached Doctrine by our most Judicious Divines for to be more exact in Preaching may but amuse and hurt the People and Mr. Lobb does know and I think Mr. W. too that trite Determination I mentioned in my Letter to him which is co-incident with what is here said The Law is to be considered qua Foedas and qua Regula Qua Regula it binds us to perfect Obedience Qua Foedus it binds us to it as the Condition of Life Qua Regula then it remains Obligatory Qua Foedus it does not Christ hath freed us from it Let us suppose this to be Mr. W's Opinion and then bring Mr. Lobb's Objection There is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Law of Works Very well he grants it The Gospel doth not denounce Death for the same Sins and every Sin as the Law doth Very true the one follows undeniably from the other Let us bring then Mr. W's Explanation Comment or Confirmation of this Opinion Though nothing be abated in the Rule of Sin and Duty yet Blessings are promised to lower degrees of Duty and a continuance in a State of Death with a bar to the Blessing are not threatned against every degree of Sin as the Covenant of Works did Can any doubt this to be the Grace of the Gospel-Promise Doth it promise Life to all Men however Vile and Impenitent they be or Doth it threaten Damnation or a continuance of it on any True Penitent Believing Godly Man because he is imperfect This change of the Sanction supposeth the Death of Christ and his honouring the Law by his perfect Obedience wherein God hath provided for his own Glory while he promises Life by Forgiveness to imperfect Man and yet insists on some degree of Obedience to which of his Grace he enableth us What can be spoken more appositely more judiciously more roundly to the purpose and more sufficiently supposing Mr. W. had but held and stood to this Opinion It is all exactly true according to the Point thus stated I cannot blame Mr. Lobb though I had a mind to do it to think that this was indeed Mr. W's Opinion because his Discourse loses its current upon a contrary Supposition Mr. Lobb shews himself a more piercing Man than I thought upon that account I will turn therefore to another place Gospel Truth p. 115. Dr. Crisp oft tells us that the Sanction of the Law of Works is removed and the Curse gone as to the Elect This is true if he mean that sinless Obedience is not now the way of Life and all bellow it shall not bind Death upon us so as to hinder our Relief by the Gospel Here Mr. Lobb shews me in a Letter that Mr. W. grants expresly that the Sanction of the Law is removed It is true that is he confesses it Very good all consonant to himself It is true in this meaning which he sets forth just in the Sense I say the Point is stated By the way let Mr. Lobb note that when Mr. W. says It is true in 〈◊〉 meaning it implies that if it be meant otherwise It is 〈◊〉 true which answers the Quotation By this it appears how well throughly well all would have been if he had maintained not denied the Charge of his Brethren Hear therefore a little more amply Mr. George Lawson with whom neither Mr. W. Mr. Lobb nor I are to be compared for a Conclusion There is one great Change in respect to the Law Perfect Obedience to it was first made the Condition of Life but afterwards that Promise of Life upon those strict Terms and that severe Commination of Death upon Sin were abolished and Faith was made the only Condition of Life So that it may be truly said that the Law of Works is abrogated but not the Moral Law considered by it self I would have therefore Mr. W. methinks here ask the Brethren to give him his hand in again or if he thinks good he may take it If not let us come to the Question waved hitherto Is a Change of the Penal Sanction of the Moral Law the same as The Gospel hath another Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law For answering which Question by the Sanction of the Law I understand the Penalty under which the Duty is required and so does Mr. Lobb because when Mr. W. says Sanction he cites Penal Sanction supposing as here spoken nothing else by it but the Penalty Now then when Mr. W. says The Gospel hath another Sanction or a Change of the Sanction to the Preceptive part of the Law Mr. Lobb accounts he must be understood to mean That the Precepts of the Law being taken into the Gospel are not required under that Penalty as they were in the Covenant of Works and thereupon does collect this as his Error The Collection is Rational but Mr. W. denies this to be his meaning Every Sin out of doubt does deserve Death even in the Believer and therefore the perfect Duty of the Law is required by the Gospel under the same Penalty though that Penalty is remitted being not remediless as under the Law it was upon the other Terms of it Christ's Law comprehends I have said the Law of Nature and the Remedying Law both When the Law of Nature therefore remaineth it must

this ground is it that he opposes Grace and Works so often as he does in the business of Justification By Grace are ye saved not of Works Eph. 2.8 9. Who hath saved us not according to our Works but his Grace 1 Tim. 1.9 If by Grace then not of Works Rom. 11.6 Not by Works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his Mercy he saved us and yet by Regeneration it follows and renewing of the Holy Ghost Tit. 3.5 How is that Are we saved by at least not without Works wrought in us by the Spirit or Grace which regenerates us and yet Not of Works Again Not of Works least any Man should boast Eph. 2.9 10. yet it follows we are created in Christ Jesus to good Works To answer this St. Austine and from him the Schools distinguish of Opera Naturae and Opera Gratiae We are not saved by Works or according to Works done in our own strength but by Works done by Grace But is this the Apostles meaning No I have shewn in my Book of Justification that one thing of three wherein Austine was out and hath mislead the Schools is this Notion of Grace By grace he understands still this inherent Grace or Operation of God's Spirit in us when Paul understands it of that without us his Favour or Condescention to us Not of Works but of Grace is all one as not of Desert but of Favour only Grace is Mercy without or contrary to Merit Now when the Papist receives the Solution mentioned the Protestant generally will have all Works though of the Regneerate to be but Rags and Christ's Righteousness alone to save us But they are both out for Paul's meaning is plainer than they think Not by Works of Righteousness we have done The Righteousness which the Jew hath done is living according to the Law of Moses The Righteousness which the Gentile hath done is his living according to the Law of Nature There is neither one or the other that fulfil that Righteousness as answers God's Law so as it should be able to save him and therefore it is of Grace or Mercy that any are saved By this Key must that hard Text also be opened Rom. 9.16 So then it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth Mercy What Is there any that find Mercy or are saved but they that will and run I answer No but there is none of them that will and run do will and run so as would save them if God did not pardon their Failings and accept their Endeavours through the Merits of Christ The meaning is that seeing no Man hath those Works the Law requires to Salvation it is of Grace or of Mercy that we are accepted to Life on Another Condition Well now it being of Grace that we are Saved or Justified in opposition to Work 's and it being necessary that those Works be understood of such as the Law requires to Justifie us that is Perfect Works Meritorious Works which if we had we might boast and expect the Reward as of Debt and the reason why we are not justified by Works being because we have them not it follows that there is another Righteousness which is to be had short of that the Law requires to Justification not Perfect not Meritorious not such as would make the Reward due of Justice but such as needs Grace for the Acceptance Therefore it is of Faith that it might be of Grace and that I say which we must have for God cannot account a Man Righteous which is to justifie him that is not Righteous his Judgment being according to Truth And what Righteousness then is that a Man must have and be found in but that we call our Evangelical Righteousness the Righteousness of Faith The Just shall live by Faith Note it he is Just Righteous that lives or is Justified But how Righteous Not according to the Law but the Gospel Hence is the Gospel called the Ministration of Righteousness Hence do we read of a Righteousness brought in by the Messiah slain in Daniel Hence that we are chosen in Christ to be Holy That he hath redeemed us from Iniquity That the end or one end of his Death or Redemption is to make us Righteous as our Divines still say but I never found any satisfactory account of it by them The matter in short is you may see it fuller in my mentioned Book p. 43. that by Christ's Death a Law of Grace is obtained upon which our Faith and Repentance is accepted to Life or imputed for Righteousness or we made Righteous so when by the Law of Works there is none no not one Righteous or ever could be in the World Hence is this Righteousness called the Righteousness of God as being ordained and accepted by him instead of that I even now called the Righteousness of Man And which is of God by Faith instead of such Works which the Law required to Justification Hence lastly are we said to be Justified by Faith the most single and plain reason whereof is because that Faith to a true Believer is imputed for Righteousness Rom. 4.22 23 24. And Faith is said to be imputed to him for Righteousness because God does account such a one Righteous and deals with him as such in freeing him from Punishment and accepting him to Salvation through the Death and Obedience of our Redeemer Justification in which sense also he calls him the God of his Righteousness When as for any acceptance of him through the Righteousness of the Messiah to come a Righteousness without him made his by Faith which could abide God's district Justice I find not the Footstep of one such Thought To rely therefore I will say on Christ's Righteousness as ours without regard to any thing within or without regard to the Condition is self-deceiving But to rely on God's Mercy and on Christ's Merits for acceptance of what we do and Pardon for the Failings is Substantial Religion and of Justification by Faith in Christ's Blood a good Exposition I have now something more to be farther pondered on this Point The chief is That what I have said before about the Commutation of Persons that it is to be held in regard to the Impetration not Application of our Redemption I would offer over again likewise in regard to the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness I have said and say it over that this Phrase is not found in Scripture but I will acknowledge the thing in the true sense of it which is this Christ Jesus did really obey the Law and suffer its Penalty for us which is in our place or stead To do a thing now in my stead is for another to do it so as to save me the doing it Christ's Suffering and Obeying was to save us that Suffering and Obeying No says Mr. W. somewhere Christ suffered indeed in our stead that we might not suffer but not obeyed that we might not obey But if Christ

Conscience of it also is hereby so resolved that under King James we would not be Papists under those that succeed We will not be Slaves * Having said this for the People I must say one thing also for the King out of the same Principle There is the Positive and Negative Power of Rulers According to our English Government it is true and to be held that the King can Positively do nothing but according to Law But it being true also and to be considered that the Supreme Law in all Polities is the Common Good if a Prince in the use of his Power only which is Negative should upon occasion do something otherwise than Law for the Benefit of the Subject Bona fide and not his private Ends I do believe both Politically and as a Divine that he may have a good Conscience in it and when he has that he is not to account he acts then against the Law but according to it seeing he does Govern in such a Case by the Supreme Law unto which all others are Subordinate Not long before King Charles's Death the Justices were sending Mr. Baxter to Prison for Conventicling but he hearing of it and being told it might kill the ill good Man out of his kind Nature sends word immediately he would have him forborne To have controul'd the Law to a Man's hurt it had been Tyranny but when it was only for Good without detriment to any who could open his Mouth against it It is to be supposed no Law-givers can foresee all Cases that may happen and when Equity and a good Conscience is against the Letter of the Law thus much I think Justifiable by the Old Covenant Oath where the King Sware to execute the Laws Cum Justitia Miserecordia If not it will be by that Power our Kings have of granting a Nolle Profequi in some cases to Offenders and much more by that of Pardoning All ad libitum which a Majore ad Minus cannot but warrant more than this It is fit that Kings before they Swear do understand their Oath to have this Construction and to know that which is much more to the purpose that any Law which is against God or Nature that is which is against the Law of Nature or Word of God or the Common Good is really in foro Conscientiae No Law so that in the Non-Prosecution thereof they are not to be condemned Nay if a Prince by Malversation even Positive or Privative shall render himself Obnoxious to God and the People it is good yet for the Subject to bear with him as we do with Storms so long as we can but if the Case comes to that once as the Nation is in danger of Ruin by it the Doctrine of Non-resistance any longer than we can help our selves is perfect Ignorance of our State or raving Obstinacy Salus Populi Suprema lex esto Habetüs Sententiam meam in Causa hac gravissima J. H. The Postscript to the Reader THERE are several Pieces that at several Times upon several Subjects I have written called The Middle Way One is the Middle Way of Justification which I printed in the year 71 or 72 and reprinted lately 95 upon the account of our Brethrens Difference about that Point In that second Edition I have gathered up all Passages that concern that Subject out of the rest of those Papers to put them to it and took advantage from certain Exceptions against Mr. Williams to add something that I thought wanting in a single Sheet and have here supplied what was yet in my Mind to say farther upon this Occasion Now if the Reader shall bid the Bookseller stitch these six Sheets that one Sheet so called and those eight or nine together and then shall take time to read them and notice of what he reads unless he thinks this Point of Justification be such as is not worthy his Time or Thoughts which was an Article of so great Concern to our first Reformers and does not meet with something or other in them and that as an Original which may serve at least Vice cotis to whet his own Understanding upon them then is it not I my self only but two of our most eminent Brethren while alive as appears by their hands put to one of my Papers are deceived I will add that if Mr. W. therefore shall not now set himself to peruse them and finding any such Matter which he can improve or make out better for me than I have done if he does it not then am I farther disappointed in one End of this present Work as also of my believed Estimation of Mr. Williams For according to what a Man's Mind is most upon in such Disputes as these the Investigation of Truth or the Defence of ones self such is his value more or less Having yet room the fear of the want whereof made me put those two Paragraphs p. 29. into a Marginal Note that should else have been part of the Book I will use it to supply one thing lacking in the single Sheet mentioned The Sacrifice and Righteousness of Christ's Death and Life is that which hath procured Pardon and Salvation to every Believing Sinner upon the account of that Satisfaction God as Rector hath received by it so that being Legislator also and above Law he might with Demonstration too of his Righteousness relax and hath relaxed or dispensed with his Law of Works requiring another Condition to those Benefits in a new one the Law of Grace or the Gospel This Pardon now and Life or Grant thereof upon Condition being the Grand Fruits of our Redemption it is a Question between Mr. W. and I whether the Condition it self also be a Fruit of Christ's Purchase which if it be not derives not yet from our Free Will but the Grace of Election It is not agreeable to my Genius to make Christ's Redemption which I would have One thing and Universal to be differently insluxive on the Elect and others I have opened this Apprehension of mine in that single Sheet mentioned and there are two Considerations moreover offered against the received Opinion which I desire Mr. W. to weigh Honestly and if he can to solve me the Difficulty or if he cannot to come with me to this Composition The Lord Christ by Redeeming the World and consequently by his Death hath obtained a Right of Dominion over it and by that Right does give that Condition to whom he will Acts 5.31 But though Faith therefore and Repentance in this remote way about may be said to be obtained by Christ's Death as he hath obtained thereby a Power or Right of giving it I deny it to be the immediate Purchase or direct Fruit of it I deny that Faith is a Fruit of Christ's Death in the same manner as Pardon and Life is upon Condition of Faith I deny that it proceeds from Satisfaction given to God's Justice which Christ's Death was though it may from his Merit or Redundancy of it as all other Good does seeing in his Name it is or through his Merits that we ask all things at the Hands of God as Health and Wealth and the like Blessings which we cannot say yet Christ died that we should have Again Christ came and died to Save Man by restoring him to Righteousness from whence he is fallen Now the Righteousness of Nature we never can be in this Life restored to and there is therefore a Righteousness of Grace which God hath ordained in room of that to Save us revealed in the Gospel and it is called the Righteousness of God because of this his Ordination By the Obedience of Christ we are said to be made Righteous and the Righteousness of God in him or by the Means of him as one has it But how by the Means of him Why by his Death but this way about still Christ died to procure for us a Covenant with another Condition than that of the Old which performing we become Righteous that never could be so else but mark it when the Condition is purchased the Performance comes not from thence but from the Free Gift of God In the mean time this Mercy that God hath ordained and doth accept of such a Condition as we do or can perform must not pass without Resentment Blessed be the God of Heaven for some Sense and Knowledge of this in these Sheets Blessed be God that it is not a Righteousness of the Law required of us but a Righteousness of the Gospel Blessed be God it is not by a Righteousness of Works that we are Saved but a Righteousness the Failings whereof are pardoned and the little Done accepted through the alone Merits of Christ Jesus Which when they had read they rejoyced for the Consolation Deo Gloria mihi Condonatio J. H. FINIS