with them he is Bone of their Bone and is not ashamed to call them Brethren Heb. 2.11 12. Psal 22.22 2. It presuppones a Legal Union between Christ and them that God made the Debtor and Surety one in Law and the Sum one so far as he laid our Debts on Christ Isa 53.6 2 Cor. 6.21 3. It presuppones an Union Federal God making Christ our Surety and to Assume not only our Nature in a Personal Union but also our State Condition and made our Cause his Cause our Sins his Sins not to defend them but to suffer Punishment for them and our Faith makes the fourth Union betwixt Christ and us whether Natural as betwixt Head and Members the Branches and Vine-tree or Mystical as that of the Spouse and Beloved Wife or Artificial as the Foundation and Building or mixed as that of the Imp and Tree or Legal between the Surety and Debtor Advocate and Client or rather a Union above all hard to determine for these are but Comparisons and this Christ prays for John 2.23 I in them and thou in me that they may be made perfect in one And something to this purpose Mr. Norton Norton p. 292. speaks The Efficacy of this Relation springs from its Foundation which is first by the Absolute Grace of God in Election and thence flowing down in the Promise according to the Merit of Christ by the Effectual Operation of the Spirit Needs must the River of Life be full ever overflowing and quickning that ariseth from and is maintained by such Fountains Norton p. 287. And he shews the form of this Union 1. In the Tertium wherein it is 2. The Bands on Christ's part and the Believers 3. The manner as to the Tertium's 1. Sameness of Spirit He that 's joined to the Lord is one Spirit 1 John 4.13 Rom. 8.9 2 Pet. 1.4 2. One Mystical Body 1 Cor. 12.12 13. The third A Spiritual Marryed Estate Eph. 5.32 Isa 54.5 Ch 62.4 4th A State of Glory John 17.22 23. See more But you will see all along how he makes Christ first in this Personal Union to Christ by the Spirit and Faith Dr. Ames Ames Med. lib. 1. c. 26. Receptio respectu hominuÌ„ est vel Passiva vel Activa Phil. 3.11 The Passive is the Reception of Christ whereby the Spiritual Principle of Grace is Ingenerate in the Will of Man Ephes 2.5 This Grace is the Foundation of that Relation whereby a Man is united unto Christ John 3.5 Neonom I 'll tell you what I take to be Truth in these Points Every Man is without Christ or not united to Christ until he be Effectually called but when by this call the Spirit of God enclineth and enableth him willingly to accept of Christ as a Head and Saviour a Man becomes united to him and partaker of those Influences and Priviledges which are peculiar to the Members of Jesus Christ D. W. p. 90. Antinom I except against what you have asserted in these Particulars 1. You say a Man is not united to Christ before Effectual Calling thereby I understand you that he is not united to Christ in any sence whereas I affirm he is united to Christ before Effectual Calling in the Senses which Mâ—â— Râ—therford doth assert before mentioned 2. I understand you mean that in Effectual Calling a Man is not united to Christ till he doth Actually accept of Christ the Head by an Act of Faith whereas the Head unites the Members to it self before they can reach up to the Head 3. You make Union to be the same with Communion and to consist in a participation of Priviledges Now as to the second thing That in Effectual Calling there is a compleat Union with Christ before the Act of Faith I do affirm upon these Reasons 1. From the utter Impotency of the Soul without and before Union with Christ to any good Act for Union standeth in indivisibili it 's a conjunction of two in one an half one is none if we put forth an Act of Faith to lay hold on Christ before we be compleatly united to him we put forth a good Act and bring forth good Fruit before we be in him and before we be good Trees but we cannot bring forth good Fruit before we be good Trees and we cannot be good Trees before we be in Christ Mat. 7.18 John 15.4 5. Therefore we do not put forth an Act of Faith before we be so compleatly united to Christ so united to Christ as to live by him John 11.26 Whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never dye c. Arg. 2. In our Regeneration we are meerly Passive our Faith is not then Active but in our Regeneration we are compleatly united to Christ Ergo we are compleatly united to Christ before the Act of Faith The major is proved from Eph. 2.1 2 3. Dead Men are Passive to Regeneration and Dead Men we are till we are Regenerated The Minor is proved from the joint concurrence of Regeneration Conversion and Union with Christ which are all wrought together simul semel Arg. 3. If we be united first to Christ by an Active Faith then an Active Faith is the cause of our Union with Christ but an Active Faith is not the cause of our Union with Christ therefore by an Active Faith we are not first united to Christ Min. If Active Faith were not the cause of the Union of the Humane Nature of Christ with the Divine then it is not the cause of our Union with Christ but Active Faith is not the cause of the Union of the Humane Nature of Christ with the Divine Ergo Maj. No other cause can be assigned of our true Union with Christ than of the Union of our Nature with the Second Person viz. Divine Assumption Isa 42.1 6. As the Divine Nature assumed ours John 1. so the Person of Christ takes us to Mystical Union with him Arg. 4. If our Union with Christ be first by an Act of Faith then it is by a Work of ours though a Work of Grace but it is not by a Work of ours Ergo Min. If it be by a Work of ours it is not of Grace but it 's of Grace Ergo Maj. Rom. 11.6 These are Mr. Cotton's Arguments Neonom I 'll answer your Arguments another time pray hear mine now to confirm the Truth 1. The Scriptures expresly affirm Vncalled Vnconverted ones to be ununited to Christ Eph. 2.12 Rom. 16.7 Rom. 11.17 Antinom It 's true in respect of the Union in Effectual Calling but yet not in respect of their Hidden Federal and Relative Union which Mr. Rutherford speaks of Neonom 2. The Spirit of Christ and Faith in him are the things whereby God hath ordained us to be Vnited with Christ 1 Cor. 12.12 13. Ephes 3.17 Antinom We grant it in respect of our Union to Christ in Effectual Calling Neonom I see you will throw off all my Arguments by Mr. Rutherford 's unhappy distinction of Vnions therefore
respect to his Son p. 180. Now as there was an Abhorrence of Sin charged on Christ yet and accordingly a Separation or forsaking upon that Account so far as he bore Sin in his Humane Nature yet God did retain that Love and Respect to him as his Son Neither do I say that Christ in his Humane Nature was separated from the Divine by a Dissolution of his Hypostatical Union And therefore it 's a false Charge to say I said God abhorrtd the Person of his Son or that there was a Separation between the Divine and Humane Natures of Christ D.W. p. 33. Neonom You say Christ was separated from God which you affirm and I deny Answ If you understand me according to the Language of the Scripture and Analogy of Faith I say so i. e. As Sin brings inevitably the Punishment of Loss as the Curse and the greatest part of it which is a Judicial Separation of God from the Creature this I affirm Christ suffered this Punishment in his Soul But if you will wrest my meaning to be this that he was separated by a Dissolution of the Hypostatical Union I deny it I say Should Iniquity be laid on the Humane Nature and the Divine Nature not support it it would have sunk under Sin as a meer Humane Creature D. Cr. p. 378. Therefore it 's apparent I intended no such Separation as also by my whole Discourse it appears that you would impose upon me Neonom The Question is Whether Christ was at any time under God's Abhorrency or odious to him because under the Loathsomness of Sin This you affirm and I deny Antinom That I affirm it in your Sence is false for you know I said in express Terms that God retained his Love and Respect to his Son For it 's not inconsistent that God should retain his Love to his Son in respect of his Divine Nature and yet lay him in respect of his Humane Nature under his manifest Displeasure being now under the Charge of all the Sins of his Elect and so Sin on Christ was the Object of God's Abhorrency Neonom Whether Christ was thus on the Account of the Filthiness of Sin c. This you affirm and I deny Antinom When you can clear Sin from being Filthiness in the sight of God upon any account and that Guilt of Sin reatus culpae I mean not liableness to Punishment that 's not Sin but the Effect of it is not the greatest Filth of Sin I shall tell you I do not think Sin as to it's Filthiness was not laid on Christ But this hath been argued before You think you have a great Claw at me here but I am sorry you understand the Nature of Sin no better as to think it in the Law relation to be so clean as not to be Filth in the sight of God Calvin I pray Mr. Neonomian lead us into the Truth of this Point that we may not be mistaken We are willing to receive Light in these Truths but we think it of dangerous Consequence to part with them or darken them Neonom Truth Though God testified his threatned Indignation against Sin in the awful Sufferings of Christ Soul and Body in his Agony and suspended those delightful Communications of the Divine Nature to the Humane Nature of Christ as to their wonted Degrees yet God was never separated from Christ much less during his Body's lying in the Grave neither was the Father ever displeased with Christ and far less did he abhorr him because of the Filthiness of Sin upon him D. W. p. 31. Antinom This is a marvellous Aphorism indeed 1. Did God testifie his threatned Indignation against Sin in the awful Sufferings of Christ Soul and Body What is this less than what you would condemn for Error in me 2. Did God suspend his Delightful Communications to the Humane Nature What was this but the Separation I always shewed that I intended 3. That God was never separated from Christ in the Hypostatick Union I always affirm No not during his lying in the Grave 4. But 4ly I never said the Father was displeased with Christ as his Son or in relation to him as Son by Eternal Generation but in relation to him as our Surety and as a Sacrifice to bear Sin he was displeased with him or else you give your self the Lie in the same Paragraph where you say he testified his threatned Indignation against sin in the Sufferings of his Body and Soul and how could this be without Displeasure 5. What have we been doing all this while Have you not been arguing against Christ's bearing sin And now you say God testified his Wrath against sin in the Sufferings of Christ If sin was not imputed to him could he bear Indignation for it 6. And was not the Father as Judge displeased with Christ as Debtor and bearing our sins How could he deal with him else in a way of testifying his Indignation as you say 7. You say He did not abhorr him so say we not his Person nor in such a way of Abhorrence that is in Man's Affections God is not as Man in natural Appetite or Aversion but he exerted such an Abhorrence or Aversion as was proper to his Nature we desire to term it but as you do a manifestation of threatned Indignation to Sin condemning Sin in the Flesh of Christ Rom. 8.8 As Christ was made sin doth not the Spirit of God say he was made a Curse Is not Sin a cursed thing that which is odious and abhorred Suppose then we use not those Words Odious Abhorred and we say God testified his threatned Indignation against sin in Christ even to the making him a Curse for us What greater and higher Expression can be used And how could God's Indignation be shewed against sin on a person upon all Accounts innocent no way chargeable Sin can't suffer Indignation but the Sinner may Sin in the Abstract is not capable of Suffering it must be sin bringing some Person under a Law-Condemnation so that he have the Denomination of a Sinner 9. And whereas you will not have sin filthy where is it the Spirit of God represents it any otherwise and the efficacy of Christ's Sacrifice as to the Purgation of Filth therefore it 's said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 1.3 But of this elsewhere Neonom This Separation was impossible because of the Vnion between the Divine and Humane Nature of Christ c. D. W. p. 33. Antinom This Argument affects us not for we never thought of of any such Separation as I have told you and it 's your Impudence to charge it Neonom 2. The Father hath promised constant Supports to Christ in the whole of his Vndertakings and Sufferings Isa 42.1 4 6. Isa 50 7 8 9. Antinom Shot beside me still I said Should Iniquity been laid on the Humane Nature and the Divine Nature not support it it would have sunk under sin and you own that I say so Dr. Cr. p. 378. Neonom
transferring of Sin from us to Christ and this being done before Christ made Atonement we are discharged not for the Atonement of Christ nor by any Act of Forgiveness for the sake of this Atonement I need not add that by this Notion Heathens may be in a pardoned State and there 's no need of the Gospel or Knowledge of Christ to bring them out of a state of Wrath. Antinom I hope by this time you have pretty well spent your Powder and Ball. I told you before when we spake of laying Sins on Christ we understand his offer to bear them the Charge and Imputation laid on him and the payment he made of our Debt all which is the Atonement for bearing of our Sins was an Essential part of it as shedding his Blood was of the Payment this payment and bearing Sin was in the Eye of God from Eternity as if already done hence the Patriarchs were Actually and Personally Justified by it and doth it follow that they were Justified without Christ's Atonement And whereas you talk of God's Acts of Forgiveness you should tell us what you mean if Immanent there 's but one Act of Forgiveness there 's no new Acts arise in God and it was the Promise of Eternal Life before the World began Tit. 1. If you mean a Transient Act it 's but one viz. the performance of that Promise to Christ our Surety and Head and to us in him Virtually and Fundamentally 1 John 5.11 This is the Record that he hath given us Eternal Life and this Life is in his Son and from him derived to us terminates in and upon us by the same Effectual Grace of God in Christ towards us so that the same Forgiving Act of God terminates in Christ and in us and therefore you must allow our Life of Forgiveness first in Christ and then bestowed upon us in and through him whereby we are as Sinners brought in to him and receive of his fulness both for Justifying and Sanctifying Grace Whereas you say Heathens by this Notion may be in a pardoned state you foist in another term to impose upon us as if we had said that immediately upon laying Sins on Christ all the Elect were in a pardoned state there 's none can be in a pardoned state before a being natural nor before a being Spiritual at least beginning but what hinders but that the Eternal Life which is given me should be in Christ before I was Born and inferrs not that therefore when I come into the World there will be no need of Gospel or Knowledge of Christ to bring me out of my Natural Estate into Christ See Colos 1.25 26 27. Ephes 3.3 4 5 6. And are not Gentiles as well as Jews pardoned through Christ Neonom The Assemblies at Westminster and the Savoy are both against you Antinom They say in a manner but as we do if you distinguish between a Forgiveness in Christ and Forgiveness bestowed between Impetration and Application Justification and Justified Neonom I will shew you your mistake Mr. Antinomian because it was God's Act to appoint Christ to suffer for our Sins that we might in his way and time be discharged therefore you think we are immediately discharged by that Act. Antinom You take greatly upon you to tell what I think and makes me think contrary to what I have exprest you take upon you to make me speak what you please and to think what you please I take you to be a fit Man to be a Guide was there nothing but God's appointing Christ to suffer for our Sins was there not God's accepting of his Sufferings for us Was not Christ Justified from the Sins of the Elect for when he rose was there not a Radical Justification of all the Elect in Christ If there had not been so they could never have been personally Justified but you would have Christ only purchase our Justification by something else but I must believe and say that he wrought out our Justification which being in him is the same that we do partake of and that our Discharge is begun and carried on in Christ and is compleated in him and received by Faith in his Blood Neonom Because Christ's Atonement is the Sole Meritorious Cause of Forgiveness therefore he thinks God suspends not Forgiveness till he works any thing else in the Soul which he made requisite to our being Forgiven though not as a Meritorious Cause Antinom No you mean Christ shall have the Honour of being the Meritorious Cause but it is that way of Justification intended that Christ hath merited that though we have broken the Law and cannot be Justified by it that a new way of Justification should be set up not through his Blood but by something else a peculiar qualification that shall make us meet to be forgiven that there may be some reason found in the Sinner why he should be forgiven this is now the new Divinity to sham off the Satisfaction of Christ from the Justification of a Sinner and you think you have been very kind to Christ to say this new Qualifications are not Meritorious Causes but Christ's Suffering was though they must stand afar off and look on upon a Justification by something else Calvinist I think as you said Mr. Antinomian's Ambiguity lyes in the word Discharge concerning which you must distinguish there 's liberatio in Christo liberatio à Christo though Mr. Antinomian hath abundantly cleared himself as to his Intention and Meaning but you Mr. Neonomian are so harsh in your Censures that nothing but the worst Interpretation of his words can be admitted by you My Opinion is that as Christ bore our Sins by Imputation so he made full payment of our Debt and had a Discharge so far as concerned himself and us represented by him and in him and hence through this Discharge and the perfection of the New Nature in freedom from all Original and Actual Sin and perfection of all Righteousness our Eternal Life which God hash given us is fully and compleatly in him both for Grace and Glory I say fully Fundamentally Originally and as in a Fountain or Root and of this fulness we do receive even Faith the first Vital Act and by Faith all discharge in Justification and all conformity to him in Sanctification through the operation of the Spirit of Holiness so that it was impossible but Christ must be discharged bearing our common Nature and standing in our stead and that we were in our measure discharged in him but it is also as impossible that we should be discharged personally and in ours till we had our Personal Beings and were first in that State and under that Wrath in some regard from which we were to be delivered and brought into the New Nature by Reconciliation and Actual Union on our part and till then we are Prisoners of the Law without God without Hope Aliens to the Covenant of Promise This account I trust may give both
him P. 47. Antinom It would take up deservedly some Paper to shew the Error and Sophistry of what you have spoken The Summ is that you deny Christ to be a publick Person and that all that Grace and Fulness that is in him by reason of the Hypostatical Union of both Natures and that Unction without measure which he received was only to qualify him singly and for himself as an Individual Person and not to be conveyed and communicated unto us and therefore none of his Fulness is received by us that the Spirit not his Spirit Neither do we live by vertue of our Union to him as a Root Head Fountain but if we partake of the Divine Nature as the Apostle Peter Eph. 2. ch 1. saith We are made Gods If we partake of the Vertues of Christ we rob him and they are no more in him You abuse the Similitude of Husband and Wife used by the Apostle Eph. 5. and would make it run on Four Feet You consider not that Adam and Eve at first was the true Type the Apostle aims at to represent Christ and his Church by Eve being taken out of Adam had her Nature in him first and was created out of him and so was Flesh of his Flesh and Bone of his Bone You must distinguish between the Individual Person and Qualification of the first Adam and his publick Capacity Headship and common Nature he had a peculiar distinct Person and Habits belonging to it as such but he had also a common Nature communicable to his Wife and to his Posterity by Propagation not only Eve's Nature but ours was in him radically And therefore the Prophet Malachy saith that God made but one at first Mal. 2.15 though he had the residue of the Spirit and could have made more as he did in the Creation of Angels but therefore one that he might seek a Seed of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now this Seed of God was found in the Seed of the Woman that was made out of Man and was but one as Adam was made but one common Person so Christ and the Church his Wife is made out of him created in him as Eve was and have a Nature common in Christ And doth it follow that because Adam had the common Nature to Eve and his Posterity 1. That his Individual Qualities were communicated taken from him and given to Eve Was Adam turned into Eve Was Adam's Wisdom Holiness his Natural or Moral Vertues taken from Adam and given to her or them The common Nature of a Genus is communicated and propagated by Individuals without robbing the Individual Mankind is propagated daily by Individuals yet those Individuals lose nothing of their proper Adjuncts If Men were not Strangers to Logick and Natural Philosophy and ordinary Terms of Law they would not make so much ado about this common Nature of Christ which in him is Mystical and Transcendent I shall not here enlarge but enquire what is the Opinion of the Protestant Divines Calv. Dr. Davenant I pray speak in this matter what your Sense is Dr. Davenant on Col. 1.19 1. There was in Christ a fulness of habitual Grace neither take we this to be Infinite seeing it was a created Qualitas and inhered in the mind of Christ which also was a Creature it could not be infinite but by fulness of Grace we understand all those Perfections to which the Nature of Grace doth extend it self 2. We consider why Christ ought to have a fulness of Grace 1. E Debito congruitatis it was due to him in a way of meetness by reason of his Union to the Word 2. It was meet that which was nearest to the influencing Cause should partake most of the Influx 3. There was Debitum necessitatis It was necessarily due from the Supposition of the End by reason of the Habitude or relation of Christ himself to the Humane Nature for Grace was conferred upon him not as a private Person but as an universal Principle from whom it is transfused into other Men you say it 's not by Transfusion p. 47. All things ought to be full and in an oneness The Evangelist shews that Grace is diffused to us Eph. 4.7 And on Colos 2.10 1. To be compleat in Christ 1. Is spoken from the Effect Christ is not only perfect in whom dwells all the Fulness of the Godhead but he makes us perfect and compleat we having all things in him and his Doctrine necessary to Salvation 2. The Second Reason is taken from his Office Christ is the Head As to the first We have perfect Wisdom right Knowledge of the Doctrine of the Gospel John 17.13 1 Cor. 2.2 2. We have compleat Righteousness for Satisfaction to the Law of God and for our Sins 3. In Christ we have Sanctification or inherent Righteousness For what is Sanctification other than the washing away of our Errours and Vices whereby we are set at a distance from God and the Susception of Gifts and Graces whereby we may draw nigh to God in his Service And this is done as we stand united to Christ by his Spirit Rom. 1.4 ch 8. 9. In eo non ex eo aut per eum solummodo In him not from him or by him only but he saith We are compleat in him to give us to understand that we have that foresaid Wisdom Righteousness and Holiness not as we behold Christ as existing far from us but as we are incorporated in Christ as we have Christ abiding and dwelling in us and we have this Grace from Christ not the Stream from the head Fountain for it 's not needful that he that will drink of a Fountain should go into the Fountain But it 's otherwise here for we cannot receive of Christ's Fulness unless we are in him As the Old Adam is in us as the cause of Corruption and Death so the New Adam dwells in us as the Cause of Righteousness and Salvation So we are said to be in Christ to dwell in him to abide in him John 15.4 5. Whatever therefore Men hope or please themselves with of Grace Righteousness Sanctification or Glorification it will prove a meer Mock and Dream if they be not in Christ and Christ in them And now Christ is in us and we in him when we are united to our Head and grafted as Branches into the Vine by the Bond of the Spirit and Faith wrought by the Spirit in our Hearts Rom. 8.9 John 3.36 Calv. Speak to this Point Dr. Horton In that Text Rom. 8.2 There are three Terms before us There 's Life the Spirit of Life there 's the Law of the Spirit of Life 1. By Life we are to understand the Grace of Holiness and Sanctification not that which is inherent in our Nature being regenerate but the full and perfect Holiness which is in the Humane Nature of Christ as the proper Subject of it this is the Fountain from which there is a continual flowing of Grace to all that are truly
insisted so much upon the Conditionality of Works and wherein it 's said they continued not viz. In the Mount Sinai Covenant which God gave them when he brought them out of Egypt Heb. 8.9 4. In regard of that sort of Promises which they stood encouraged by to the performance of this External Obedience they were usually Temporal Blessings only and the Threats and Curses denounced against Disobedience was usually in rsepect of outward things though under all this Cloudiness and Conditionality the Covenant of Promise was applied in its Absolute Nature as at first revealed to Adam and Abraham which was to all the Elect living before Christ the Ministry of the quickning Spirit and a Savour of Life 15. The Original Contract of this Covenant before the World was is by some called the Covenant of Redemption and distinguisht from the Covenant of Grace but such do greatly mistake for both the Original Contract and the Manifestation thereof are one and the same Covenant there 's no Specifick Difference that which is is but secundum adjuncta Ordinis Manifestationis Neonom Next to the Doctrine of Imputation which I think I have sufficiently cleared up according to my Scheme and fully and rightly stated Truths and Errours in those Points Let us now Debate the Conditionality of the Covenant of Grace This being a Point of Great Concern I shall premise an Enquiry nto some particulars for the explaining this Subject Q. 1. What is the Covenant of Grace D. W. C. 8. p. 53. A. 1. It is not the Covenant of Redemption between the Father and Spirit as one Party and the Eternal Word the Lord Jesus as the other Party Antinom Who ever put the Father and Spirit on one Party in the Covenant of Grace it's New Divinity and secondly you are very Magisterial in this Negative Position Quadam confidentia non est Virtus ut audacia Methinks the Judgment of the Reverend Divines should have weighed so much with you as not to have blowed it off at one Puff In the Larger Catechism Q. 30. Doth God leave Mankind to perish in a state of Sin and Misery A. God doth not leave all Mankind to perish in the Estate of Sin and Misery into which they fell by the Breach of the first Covenant commonly called the Covenant of Works but of his meer Love and Mercy delivereth his Elect out of it and bringeth them into a state of Salvation by the second Covenant commonly called a Covenant of Grace Q. 31. VVith whom was the Covenant of Grace made A. The Covenant of Grace was made with Christ as the second Adam and in him with all the Elect as his Seed You say That the Covenant Agreement made with Christ was not the Covenant of Grace You call it a Covenant of Redemption as another thing from the Covenant of Grace I acknowledge the Covenant of Grace is a Covenant of Redemption and the Covenant you call the Covenant of Redemption is the Covenant of Grace and therefore shall not incumber our Discourse with a Debate about Names but shall affirm that there is no such thing as an Essential Difference between the Covenant of Grace and Redemption the distinction made between them is but Novel at least that it was but lately so generally received for it appears by what is here spoken in this Answer of the Assembly so plainly and positively that they owned but two Covenants that of Works and that of Grace They are only distinguished between the making and manifesting this Covenant of Grace A Covenant hidden or secret and manifest is but distributio ex adjunctis therefore after they had told us that this Covenant of Grace was made with Christ the second Adam and with all the Elect as his Seed They enquire next Q. 32. How is the Grace of God manifest in the second Covenant A. The Grace of God is manifested in the second Covenant in that he freely provideth and offereth to Sinners a Mediator and Life and Salvation by him c. So that the Covenant of Grace contains all Grace and Mercy Redemption and the offer and application thereof Neonom Were this Covenant understood I think many well meaning People would be undeceived In that Covenant i. e. of Redemption all the Causes of Man's Salvation are adjusted and secured all Satisfaction and Merit are on Christ as his undertaking c. Antinom It seems then this well-meaning Assembly was deceived and many Able Divines besides who have not admitted of this Novel Distinction between the Covenant of Redemption and that of Grace 2. You talk at least very improperly that the causes of Man's Salvation are adjusted and secured in the Covenant of Redemption which placeth it before Election for I take the Grace of Election to be the first adjusting and securing cause of Mens Salvation and not so only but of the Covenant it self made with Christ I thought all the causes were sufficiently adjusted in the Councel of God's Will and that by the purpose of Grace they were secured to us and Redemption too Christ's Undertaking the charge of Satisfaction and Merit is a cause of our Salvation not adjusting and securing it they were adjusted and secured before Neonom Yea it 's provided there that the Elect shall obey the terms of Life and certainly possess Salvation Antinom 1. It 's manifest that you esteem not Redemption one of the Terms of Life but some other Terms distinct from it I had thought that Christ's Righteousness had been the great condition of our Life and Salvation but it seems it 's but provision for the performing the Terms of Life 2. I thought it had been provided in Election that all the Elect should certainly believe and obey the Gospel but it seems by what you say here they were only conditionally Elected and provision made in the Covenant of Redemption that they should perform the Condition and obey the Term very improper it's to perform the Terms Now what is in such a Covenant of Grace more than Adam's would have had if he had stood for God must have provided that he should obey or perform the Terms of Life which were to him very small and easie no more than giving a Pepper-corn or not so much only to forbear plucking and eating an Apple when he had enough besides There 's no Essential Difference in your Opinion for where-ever the Creature performs a Condition of a Covenant of God's making God must provide for that performance by Grace given and confirmed Neonom Yea as that Covenant was not made with the Elect though for the Elect so they have nothing to do as a Condition of this Covenant Antinom Rare Divinity Mens tua sublimis supra genus eminet ipsum 1. You say that Covenant was not made with the Elect. The Assembly say it was made with the second Adam and his Seed but you I suppose deny Christ to be a second Adam a publick Person and a Spiritual or Mystical Root 2. I would fain
is a false Conclusion that Christ is mine before he is so and must the great Terms of Life be a Lie We are to examine our selves whether we are in the Faith or not 2 Cor. 13.5 Where hath God made this Proposition My sins are laid on Christ Vnless you are for general Redemption the Word of Grace promiseth Pardon to none but a Believer and the Spirit speaks to none but a Believer Antinom In all things we receive of Gift there must be a right of Donation first if we take before it 's given it 's Theft and unless I am perswaded that the giving Hand is reached out I can't receive We have our first Earnest for Blessedness in the Perswasion of Faith in the very Act of it and it 's Non sence to talk any way of partaking of Christ but by the Spirit and Faith And he that in an Act of believing at first finds Christ in the true Perswasion of Faith doth not nor cannot say of Christ he is his before he is so The Soul cannot be too nimble for Christ and if he that believeth not makes God a Liar what are those that perswade to Unbelief That Faith in it's very Act is an Evidence is no hinderance to the Trial and Examination of our selves by the Fruit of Faith besides And though the Proposition in the Gospel be an indefinite Proposition yet the Application by Faith in a Sinner ought to be particular and fiducial or else the Faith of Believers will be no more than that of others that believe only that Christ came to save Sinners and if the Promise of Pardon were not to Sinners as such it were not Pardon and if a Man upon Trial must first find by Signs that he doth believe before he lay claim to Pardon Sinners would be in a sad condition But this is the comfort that as the Promise of Pardon is the great Encouragement to believing so believing it self is the receiving and perceiving of it And the Soul saith or should by Faith He loved me and gave himself for me At the sight of Christ it saith My Lord and my God If the Lord speak to a Believer in believing by his Word and Spirit Thy Sins are forgiven it 's not said so to one that is a Believer first Relata are simul naturâ The Promise of Paternity is not a Promise or Gift to one that 's a Father first nor Sonship to one that is a Son first God promiseth himself to be a Father to them that are Loammi And how gross is that Assertion That the Spirit speaks it to none but to a Believer as a Believer Doth not the Spirit speak Peace before we receive it by an Act of Faith Doth not this cause us to believe it 's the Light causeth the Eye to see It 's the Light shining into the dark Unbelieving Heart that perswades the Heart it 's God that saith to the Soul I am thy Salvation before we can believe it Neonom The Second thing that I will prove is that Saving Faith hath the Essentials expressed in the above-mentioned Truth as Assent Trust Consenting Acceptance of Christ Reliance c. Antinom You said before that Inward Perswasion of the Pardon of Sin was no Part of Saving Faith And said in the next that it contained Assent to the Word Fiducial Consent and Acceptance of Christ A Man therefore may understand you that tho it contained it yet it was not of it's Essence Now you seem to say these are Essentials if you do not you hide your self again in the Word Include If you say These be Essentials which you name we say so too but allow not yours c. and all these Essentials are in the Word Perswasion Assent is the Perswasion of the Understanding Consent the Perswasion of the Will to the Truths and good things propounded the Promise whereby the Soul relies upon Christ therein for himself particularizeth Christ and all Blessings to himself as his and now go on and prove all that you said before to be false Neonom You are mistaken I will prove my Position true and then see where your Errour will be 1. Faith can be no less than the Souls Answer to the Call of God c. Antinom We say it is so and he bids us believe but it 's not Faith as such for all Obedience is an answer to the Call of God Neonom The Scripture describes Saving Faith by all these Acts it 's the evidence of things not seen Substance of things hoped for Heb. 11.1 Receiving of Christ John 1.12 Isa 55.4 Acts 13.26 Rom. 15.12 Isa 44.5 Antinom This we say it is Evidence and Substance of things at a distance is a full Perswasion of them according to the Nature of them such a Perswasion as carries the whole Soul forth to God to rest and rely upon him having Union with Christ thereby bringing him in all his Excellencies into our Souls and taking him for our own Doth a Man believe any good thing promised and doth not he catch at it for himself if he have any savour of it If the Promise of Pardon present it self to us doth a Man believe till he appropriate it to himself saying It is mine though an unworthy Sinner If a condemned Prisoner hears a Pardon is come out for some he may believe that but till he believes he is one it 's no Comfort to him tho there may be hopes at least he is in it Neonom Christ can't be received as a Saviour without these Antinom It 's very true he is never received as such till I receive him as my Saviour and believe him to be so in some measure and this I am bound to do to receive him by confident Perswasion and resting upon him Neonom A Faith without these Essentials could never produce those great Effects as are ascribed to Faith to purifie the Heart Acts 15.9 to be a shield against Temptations Eph. 6.16 works by Love Gal. 5.6 sanctifies us Acts 26.18 By Faith we are risen with Christ Col. 2.12 Antinom It 's certain that no Faith can do it but such as makes a particular Application by a perswasion of the Love of God or Interest in Christ Pardon of Sins and Reconciliation to God through him that can produce the Effects spoken of this will purifie the Heart from an evil guilty Conscience to serve the Living God this will be a Shield against the most Mortal Darts of Satan that he shoots at our state by bringing in Law Condemnations Hereby Love to God is produced in the Soul and we Act towards God and our Neighbours in Love hereby we are brought to true Obedience such as the Law required at first for the Principle to Love the Lord our God with all our Hearts Soul and Strength and therefore the Apostle saith Love is the Sum of all Obedience as our Saviour said It 's the fulfilling of the Law through this Grace of the Spirit for by receiving Forgiveness of Sin we
it But seeing that after all hopeful endeavours yea Articles and Subscriptions for Truth and Peace our Debates by these Methods are revived and condemned to be continued nam pro supplicio est non potuisse mori I shall conclude concerning this Book of Strife finding my Sense must be known of it and that middle way Hypothesis if any advanced by it as the judicious and learned Turretine after long tryal of it and the consequences that followed it hath published We don't think a a different mode of Expression should be cause of litigation with any Person Turret Theol. part 1. p. 438 439. provided the sound Doctrin be preserved but if this Matter be a little more seriously weighed it will easily appear it 's not a Controversie about Method but under the Pretext of a new Method a new Doctrin is introduced Although this new invented Method would appear most accommodated to the Ears and Humours of them that hear it c. yet there are many Absurdities in it and inextricable Difficulties c. therefore long ago condemned and rejected by the Churches which was not done without weighty Reasons as he there shews To whose Judgment in this Matter I subscribe John Nesbit The Heads of Debate contained in the second and third Parts of the foregoing Treatise I. OF the State of the Elect before effectual Calling II. Of God's laying Sin on Christ. III. Of the discharge of the Elect from Sins upon their being laid on Christ. IV. Of the Elects ceasing to be Sinners from the time their Sins were laid on Christ. V. Of the time when our Sins were laid on Christ. VI. Of Separation from and Abhorrence of Christ while our Sins lay upon him VII Of the change of Person between Christ and the Elect and of imputed Righteousness VIII Of the conditionality of the Covenant of Grace IX Of the nature of saving Faith X. Of the free Offer of Christ to Sinners and of preparatory Qualifications XI Of Vnion with Christ before Faith XII Of Justification by Faith with a digression about Repentance XIII Of the necessity and benefit of Holiness XIV Of intending our Souls good by Duties we perform XV. Of the way to attain Assurance XVI Of God's seeing Sin in Believers and their Guilt by it XVII Of the hurt that Sin may do to Believers XVIII Of God's Displeasure for Sin in the Afflictions of his People XIX Of the Beauty of Sincere Holiness XX. Of Gospel and Legal Preaching To these are Annex'd The Substance of certain Minister's Exceptions against Mr. Daniel Williams's Book Mr. J. Nesbit's Reply to what Mr. Dan. Williams charged him with in his Preface to his Reply to Dr. C. N. B. That the first Edition only of Mr. D. Williams his Book was made use of in the foregoing Treatise Books written by Dr. Isaac Chauncy de Col. Med. Lon. 1. THE Catholick Hierarchy or the divine right of a sacred Dominion in Church and Conscience truly stated asserted and pleaded London Printed for the Author sold by S. Crouch at the Princes Arms in Popes head-alley in Cornhill and Tho. Fox at the Angel in Westminster-hall A. D. 1681. 2. A Theological Dialogue containing the Defence and Justification of Dr. J. Owen from the 42 Errors charged upon him by Mr. Rich. Baxter Printed for the Author 1684. 3. The second part of the Theological Dialogue being a Rejoynder to Mr. Rich. Baxter Printed for Edward Reyner 1684. 4. The unreasonableness of compelling Men to the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper wherein it 's shewed that such compulsion is contrary to the whole Tenor of the Gospel the Common Prayer Articles of the Church of England and the Homily concerning the Sacrament in which is answered a Pamphlet Entituled The Case of compelling to the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper c. vindicated by the Rules of the Gospel Printed for the Author 5. Ecclesia Enucleatà The Temple opened or a clear Demonstration of the true Gospel-Church in it's Nature and Constitution according to the Doctrin and Practice of Christ and his Apostles Printed for the Author 1684. 6. The Interest of Churches or a Scripture plea for Stedfastness in Gospel order Printed for the Author 1690. 7. Ecclesiasticum or a plain and familiar Christian Conference concerning Gospel Churches and Order Sold by W. Marshall at the Bible in Newgate-street 1690. 8. The first second and third Parts of Neonomianism unmaskt in Answer to Mr. Williams's Gospel-truth stated and vindicated A Rejoynder to Mr. Williams's Reply to this first Part. 9. Examen Confectionis Pacificae or Examination of the Pacifick Paper The three last sold by H. Barnard at the Bible in the Poultry 1693. FINIS Errata's in the third Part. PAge 10. Line 29. r. or his Faith was not true p. 13. l. 4. r. you need not p. 19. l. 13. f. forgotten r. pardoned p. 24. l. 19. r. as a sin p. 28. l. 27. r. where it is not as well as where it is p. 45. l. 38. r. as they are Elect. p. 48. l. 4. r. or many of them p. 57. l. 32. f. Posit 1. r. 4. p. 58. l. 3. f. 3. r. 5. p. 59. l. 5. dele of p. 73. l. 32. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 76. l. 15. r. in that he p. 79. l. 39. dele in and. r. to be the hand p. 80. l. 4â— r. of the Promises which p. 81. l. ult r. curvo p. 83. l. 30. r. we can rejoyce p 90. l. 40. r. defendâ— â—â— p. 92. l. 2â— r. insiâ—â—â— oâ— f. 〈◊〉 p. 93. l. 37. r. and you say that the 〈◊〉 c. Errata's in the Rejoynder PAge 6. Line 20. read non-elect p. 7. l. 29. r. their congruity p. 12. l. 14. r. the Letter deny p. 15. l. 50. r. Impurity p. 16. l. 47. dele Comma and r. of Christ imputed p. 17. l. 32. dele do p. 30. marg r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 30. l. 44. r. tribuere p. 33. marg r. Judicialâ— p. 34. l. 7. r. Teâ—â—â—e state sine Com. p. 35. marg l. 3. corde elect p. 36. marg l. 10. 〈◊〉 natura ibid 13. l. r. adjunctis efficacia p. 33. l. 3. r. Is it reasoâ—â—ble p. 38. marg l. 2. r. manifeste p. 39. l. 11. dele now p. 43. l. 17. r. this name ibid l. 35. r. Therefore c. The. p. 46. l. 31. r. He hath these p. 47. l. 8. and became and Assertor ibid. l. 22. r. The Arminians
know whether Christ in his Humane Nature was not Elect and the Head of all the Elect therefore if we consider him but singly whether he was not the Principal Elect one and I pray was the Covenant made with him or for him I say it was made with him and for him and so it was made with the Elect in him both with them and for them or else how comes God's Purpose and Grace to be given us in Christ Jesus before the World began 2 Tim. 2.9 But you tell us that the Elect have nothing to do as a condition of this Covenant you reckon you highly honour Christ in giving all the Conditionality of this Covenant to him and what 's that It 's that he provided for our performing the condition of another Covenant and why might he not have prepared us by that condition for another Covenant condition after that But it seems your Covenant of Redemption is but a subordinate Covenant to that of Grace and its Righteousness subordinate to our Righteousness which you make the condition of the Covenant of Grace Neonom And to this Covenant of Redemption all absolute Promises and Prophesies of Grace are reducible they being a transcript hereof D. W. p. 54. Antinom What is your meaning in this it 's hard to guess whether Absolute Promises are made in the Covenant of Redemption And 2. If so whom in that Covenant they are made to to Christ You must mean so for you say we are not in it Then the Promise of giving a new Heart is made to Christ and not to us Or 3. If you mean they are reducible to it as being the Covenant of Promise and so Christ and all his Benefits are given absolutely and unconditionally to us in it this makes us concerned as a Party in the Covenant for to whom the Promise of the Covenant belongs to them the Covenant belongs as a Party concerned Neonom This Dr. Owen makes to be a distinct Covenant from the Covenant of Grace P. 268 269. Antinom It is true Dr. Owen and other Learned Divines have spoken of a Covenant of Redemption as in some respect distinct from the Covenant of Grace but make not such an ill Use of that Notion as you do The Dr. says He doth not call these Foederaal Transactions the Covenant of Grace absolutely Nor is it so called in Scripture And it may well be so for we find not the Term Covenant of Grace mentioned in Scripture and some will not distinguish between a Covenant of a Mediator and the Covenant of Grace because the Promises of the Covenant are absolutely said to be made to Christ Gal. 3.16 of which some its plain the Assembly at Westminster was And therefore it appears there have been different Apprehensions in this matter I reverence and honour both Parties as Orthodox and sound in what they intended and meant in this Point but I must adhere to the Word of God as the most infallible Guide in this and other things according to what Light I receive All the difference that I find they make is no more than respectu adjunctorum that is Hiddenness and Declaration or at most to Execution And indeed all I understand by Dr. Owen is two things 1. To shew us under how many Considerations the New Covenant comes And 2. Which of these Considerations it is the Spirit of God seems mostly to point at when it speaks of this New Covenant as a Promise Covenant of Grace or Peace And he saith It 's variously represented 1. In the Designation and Preparation of its Terms and Benefits in the Councel of God which although it have the nature of an eternal Decree yet is it not the same with the Decree of Election c. 2. It may be considered with respect of the Foederal Transactions between the Father and the Son 3. In respect of Declaration of it by Special Revelation 1 By way of Absolute Promise 2 By way of Additional Prescription of the way and means whereby it is the Will of God that we should enter into a Covenant-state with him c. 4. The Covenant may be considered as to the actual Application of the Grace Benefit and Priviledges unto any Persons c. Now all this while he makes not two Covenants a Covenant of Redemption and of Grace but gives divers Considerations of the New Covenant in it's Dispensation and under which Consideration it may most usually and properly be termed by us a Covenant of Grace And the ground of this Discourse is to disprove your Notion That the Covenant of Redemption or Surety ship is the procuring Cause of the Covenant of Grace And he shews that it is no where said in the Scripture That Christ by his Death merited procured obtained the New Covenant Dr. O. p. 266 267. or that God should enter into a new Covenant with Mankind yea that which is contrary to it and inconsistent with it is frequrnrly asserted Now he comes to shew what respect the Covenant of Grace hath unto the Death of Christ and what Influence it hath thereunto A. Supposing what is spoken of his being a Surety thereof it hath a three-fold respect thereunto 1. In that the Covenant Dr. O. p. 271 272. as to the Grace and Glory of it were prepared in the Councel of God as the Terms of it was fixed in the Covenant of the Mediator and as it were declared in the Promise was confirmed ratified and made it revocable thereby This the Apostle insists on at large Heb. 9.15 16 17 18 19 20. 2. He thereby underwent and performed all that which in the Righteousness and Wisdom of God was required that the Effects Fruits Benefits and Grace intended and designed and prepared in the New Covenant might be effectually accomplished and communicated unto Sinners 3. All the Benefits were procured by him c. Now saith he The Sum of these things is Whereas it 's affirmed the New Covenant was procured by the Death of Christ Dr. O. p. 273. if it be understood with respect unto the Actual Communication of all Grace and Glory prepared in the Covenant and proposed unto us in the Promises of it it is most true all the Grace and Glory promised in the Covenant was purchased for the Church by Jesus Christ In this fence by his Death he procured the New Covenant but as to the New Covenant it self it 's not procured All this is rather a Confirmation than a Denial of the Truth of what the Assembly affirms concerning the Covenant of Grace Neonom I say that the Covenant of Grace is not the Covenant of Redemption between the Father and the Son Antinom You should have told what the Covenant of Grace is Neonom The Covenant of Grace is the way that God hath ordained to apply to Sinners that Salvation which is prepared by Christ and which he will inable the Elect to comply with Antinom This Definition or Description I except against For first it
which Life must be our Union to Christ which according to the most Orthodox is and must be before Faith it self at least Naturâ Neonom He says We partake of the Spirit by vertue of this Vnion Calvin Yes how should Members partake of the Spirit and Life that is in the Head but by vertue of this Union and yet the Spirit unites A Branch engrafted partakes of the Spirits of the Root by vertue of an Union and the Spirits unite and knit it Neonom He saith God did not only decree to put such Qualifications into them but I say farther That God gives Actual Possession of this Christ and that Christ takes Possession of that Person before there be any Qualifications P. 618. Calvin I doubt not but Christ takes Actual Possession of us saltem naturâ before we have any holy Qualifications but as to our Actual Possession of Christ it 's better exprest that we have it by Faith although where there is Possession there is relatum correlatum Neonom The Question is not Whether God hath decreed the Vnion of the Elect Nor whether this Vnion is agreed in the Covenant of Redemption D. W. p. 92. Antinom But it is Whether the Elect have not a Union of Federal Relation in the Covenant as you call of Redemption as being a Seed in him and Covenanted with in him and he as a common Person representing them and undoubtedly is that Root or Head out of which all his Elect Seed or Members do spring Neonom Nor is it any Question whether Christ's giving us the Spirit of Grace do begin this Vnion and the Spirit given in order to Saving Operations produceth this Faith whereby the Vnion is Consummated Calvin Well well if you own so much what do you make a Controversie of this Point it seems you acknowledge the Union is begun with Christ giving his Spirit in order to Saving Operations only you say it 's consummated by our Active cleaving unto Christ by believing and he doth as good as say as much he saith There is no Activeness of this Life of Christ in the Elect till they do believe and in this sence he will say the Elect are not united viz. by Faith till they do believe as for his Notion of the Elect being in Christ before calling it hath been discours'd already and let 's not fetch things over again Antinom There is a Passive Recipiency and there is an Active Recipiency Dr. C. p. 98. there is a Passive receiving of Christ and that is so that Christ is received without any Hands but in an Active receiving of him he is not received without Hands This passive receiving of Christ is just such a receiving of him as when a froward Patient takes a purge or some bitter Physick he shuts his Teeth against it but the Physician forceth his Mouth open and pours it in down his Throat and so it works against his will by the over-ruling power of one over him Neonom For my part I like not such Similitudes and it insinuates that Men are said to receive Christ against their Wills D. W. p. 101. Dr. C. p. 612. And he said too That our first coming to Christ is as a Coach is said to come to Town when it is drawn to Town Calvin You know his meaning by those Similes and they are not to run on four Feet it 's enough they serve to illustrate that part of Truth which they are used for Mr. Antinomian means as you do as to Man's Will There 's nothing more contrary to a rebellious carnal Man than the Graee of God their Hearts are full of Enmity and Hatred to God and Truth but yet he shews you often that God gives Gifts to the Rebellious And here you see how he gives it and what he gives it may be he binds them with the cords of afflictions and opens their Eyes to see their undone condition pours into their Consciences whole Potions of the Guilt of Sin and the Laws Condemnation whereby as undone Creatures through Grace they become willing and ready to receive Christ and he becomes precious to them by the same hand of his Spirit If you should pick up odd Similes out of Sermons which it may be hath done good and God hath blessed you may expose many a good Man's Labours See holy Cranmer's and I think such were were of famous Mr. Rogers of Dedham and consider the Spirit of God allows preaching Christ to be foolishness to the World Therefore be very wary how you despise reproach or redicule in these cases lest in striking pretendedly at Men and their weakness you happen to give a slant Blow at the Spirit of God For he tells you there is such a kind of Recipiency of Christ he instanceth in Ephraim Jer. 31.18 19. And in the like Dialect Elihu speaks to Job chap. 36.8 9. If they be bound in Fetters and held in the Cords of Affliction then he sheweth them their Works and their Transgressions that they have exceeded And in the Metaphor of a Coach or Chariot the Spirit of God speaks in the Sacred Scripture and the Church saith to Christ Draw me and I shall run after thee Neonom The real difference is 1. Whether the Elect are actually united to Christ before they are born 2. Whether the Elect are united to Christ till they are effectually called and truly believe Antinom That though there be not an active Union on our Parts but by Faith so that it can't be said properly to be a Conjugal Union by mutual consent of Parties yet there is a relative Union such as between Father and Child where the Child gives not consent to this relation he is wholly passive in being brought into it God from Eternity constituted and ordained Christ and all the Elect to be as it were one Body one Lump wherein Christ is the Head and they the Members Christ the Root and they the Branches They are given to Christ John 17. To be in Christ Eph. 1. Being they are called his Seed before they are called John 10. His Seed Isa 53.11 12. Heb. 2.14 Brethren Ver. 11. He that sanctifyeth and they they that are sanctifyed are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. as some add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Body or Lump And by vertue of this Union it is that the Obedience and Satisfaction of Christ descends particularly unto them and not to the rest of Mankind Calvin The Learned Mr. Rutherford hath as follows The Faith by which as by an Instrument we are Justified Rutherford of the Covenant P. 208. presupposeth three Unions and maketh a fourth Union It presupposeth a Natural Legal Federal Union 1. Natural That Christ and we are not only both Mankind for Christ and Pharaoh and Judas are one specie naturâ true Men but one in Brotherhood He assuming the Nature of Man with a special Eye to Abraham Heb. 2.16 i. e. to the Elect and Believers for